This is just so sad,,and makes me ask WHY would someone do this?? I don't call it 'playing'??

[barkley]

the grandfather's plea deal with the p.r. court may include that there will be no admission of facts but that won't impact the cruise line's ability to now use that guilty plea to their advantage. the family is suing the cruise line for being at fault for the child's death but the grandfather in taking the plea is saying "i am guilty of negligent homicide" which p.r. defines as "causing the death of another through negligence".

if a person or entity is being sued for causing something to happen and another person or entity takes responsibility for being the cause, esp. to the extent of accepting a criminal conviction-that greatly undercuts the lawsuit. i would think the cruise line's insurer could now go after the grandfather for any existing or future legal expenses they have incurred in defending themselves for a matter he has now taken an plea under penalty of perjury that he was the negligent factor in.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Oh, no. No, no, no, no, no, no, no: "...and fighting for cruise passenger safety by raising awareness about the need for all common carriers to adhere to window fall prevention laws designed to protect children from falling from windows."

No. Parent/passenger awareness okay. But a child can't fall out a window where the bottom sill is four feet off the floor. Atgleast not without adult input (or, okay, maybe a lihtweight but sturdy chair.) Heck, I'm barely five feet tall; I couldn't accidentally fall out that window.

 

[backformore]

I am certain that the guilty plea was because of the videos which clearly showed the guy sticking his head out of the window, and then picking the kid up to show her the view. His entire defense was based on not knowing the window was open, and the video disputes it.

 

[Lynne G]

Go back and read my post. In an earlier interview, she said the prosecution in the criminal case should drop the charges and let the family mourn. She didn't explain how that would help the family, but continuing the civil suit is ok. My point is it's not just the lawyer saying that, it's the family. And yes, there's a difference.

Yeah, I agree with you. Sorry about not really understanding what said before. My mistake.

 

[lanejudy]

In my limited knowledge of the law, I thought a guilty plea must allocute to the charges -- essentially must admit facts of guilt. So I assume this news means the grandfather plans to plead nolo contendre (no contest) or an Alford plea. My understanding is both allow the defendent to essentially say "I accept punishment but admit no wrong-doing." Any lawyers here who can explain the difference between those 2 pleas?

 

[luvsJack]

Not agreeing with their law suit or any of the sort but, these are two different cases here. The lawsuit is the parents vs the cruise line. The criminal case was the grandfather. Same family but not the same. I imagine the lawsuit only names the parents not the grandfather. So its possible that their attorney will be trying to prove that while the grandfather was negligent (because he did plead guilty), the cruise line ALSO holds responsibility due to not making it clear to all passengers that the windows were open.

 

[John VN]

Not agreeing with their law suit or any of the sort but, these are two different cases here. The lawsuit is the parents vs the cruise line. The criminal case was the grandfather. Same family but not the same. I imagine the lawsuit only names the parents not the grandfather. So its possible that their attorney will be trying to prove that while the grandfather was negligent (because he did plead guilty), the cruise line ALSO holds responsibility due to not making it clear to all passengers that the windows were open.

r.e. bold --- DW and I cruise again in a few months and I am expecting every opened window will have an attendant next to it to warn me that it is opened AND every railing throughout the ship to have attendants there to warn me not to get too close.

 

[kaytieeldr]

the cruise line ALSO holds responsibility due to not making it clear to all passengers that the windows were open.

No. You can't fix stupid. A reasonable adult comprehends that a window is (wide) open. A reasonable adult knows not to hold a child even standing on the sill of an open window, never mind any part of the child being outside the window. A reasonable adult undefstands gravity.

 

[Searc]

Not agreeing with their law suit or any of the sort but, these are two different cases here. The lawsuit is the parents vs the cruise line. The criminal case was the grandfather. Same family but not the same. I imagine the lawsuit only names the parents not the grandfather. So its possible that their attorney will be trying to prove that while the grandfather was negligent (because he did plead guilty), the cruise line ALSO holds responsibility due to not making it clear to all passengers that the windows were open.

You've said previously you've never been on a cruise, right? In person, actually standing in front of those windows, there is absolutely no doubt when a window is open.

 

[Lynne G]

I think the difference is that an Alford plea is by a defendant that claims to be innocent (but realizes the evidence may be such he may have been found guilty), while a nolo contendere plea is by a defendant that accepts the punishment (that would be generally the same as if guilty) but does not admit guilt. However, I assume then, both kinds of these pleas still result in a conviction of the crime(s).

Not sure which type of guilty the grandfather is pleading. I really hope it's guilty, I did it, of what accused of, but from the lawyer's comment about not agreeing with the facts, seems to me, he will be using one of the above pleas.

 

[HopperFan]

".... because the plea agreement includes no jail time and no admission of facts, it was decided the plea deal is in the best interests of the family ...."

I don't think it's possible to plead guilty and not take responsibility. There's an Alvord plea, where you can say you're not guilty, but you admit that there's enough evidence to convict you. But when you plead guilty, you have to stand up in court and say what you did, in front of a judge. Since this just happened yesterday, it may be that the grandfather (in his elderly state, ha ha) hasn't fully grasped what will be required of him at allocution.

That said, I'm fine with him getting probation and being able to serve it in Indiana. He's serving a life sentence in his own head, no need to pile on.

In my limited knowledge of the law, I thought a guilty plea must allocute to the charges -- essentially must admit facts of guilt. So I assume this news means the grandfather plans to plead nolo contendre (no contest) or an Alford plea. My understanding is both allow the defendent to essentially say "I accept punishment but admit no wrong-doing." Any lawyers here who can explain the difference between those 2 pleas?

Agree on above .... lawyers???

 

[PollyannaMom]

I'm glad he's taking the plea deal, as I expect it would have gotten much messier if it had gone to trial. And there's no reason for him to be in prison. It's not going to bring Chloe back, and it's not going to make anyone else safer in the future. This isn't the sort of "crime" someone goes out and repeats.

But I see the "no admission of facts" bit as the family not wanting any details in his criminal trial to be able to brought up in their civil one - which, unfortunately, will still be messy and sad.

I can sit here and say they should drop it, but honestly, I can't imagine the guilt they are feeling. - Who knows why Grandpa was in charge of Chloe right then, and I'm sure they are running the "if only she'd been with us" scenarios through their heads over and over. I don't think it's about not blaming Grandpa, I think they're clinging desperately to anything that lets them not blame themselves for as long as they can.

 

[luvsJack]

r.e. bold --- DW and I cruise again in a few months and I am expecting every opened window will have an attendant next to it to warn me that it is opened AND every railing throughout the ship to have attendants there to warn me not to get too close.

I do wonder what they expect. LOL.

 

[wilbret]

They will focus on getting cruise lines to adhere to window fall safety? I'm guessing the only way to prevent dumbassery is to have no open windows, open decks, open balconies at all. Make the ship like an office building, just look thru glass the entire time.

OR MAYBE... you don't hang your precious grandbaby out of a window?

 

[TheIncredibles!]

Not agreeing with their law suit or any of the sort but, these are two different cases here. The lawsuit is the parents vs the cruise line. The criminal case was the grandfather. Same family but not the same. I imagine the lawsuit only names the parents not the grandfather. So its possible that their attorney will be trying to prove that while the grandfather was negligent (because he did plead guilty), the cruise line ALSO holds responsibility due to not making it clear to all passengers that the windows were open.

He didn’t need anybody making it clear the window was open because he leaned half his body out of the opened window before he dangled his granddaughter out the window.

 

[wilbret]

He didn’t need anybody making it clear the window was open because he leaned half his body out of the opened window before he dangled his granddaughter out the window.

Yep. This person/family/lawyer would blame the cruiseline if he had dropped the baby over a balcony railing. It was 100% his fault. It wasn't done in malice, it was done in ignorance. I don't see the difference between this and leaving a baby in a full bathtub. Do you sue the bathtub manufacturer? The baby didn't climb into the window by herself.

 

[Imzadi]

Kudos to the Prosecutor who offered this plea deal to finally end this. They offered one a few months ago, with no prison time, and the grandfather didn't take it. When the grandfather & his lawyer chose to have a judge try the case instead of a jury trial, the Prosecutor had to know the grandfather's lawyer knew they weren't going to win. It was probably a negotiation ploy. And the Prosecution finally offered a plea they did take. It's clear, it was never about sending him to prison, just take responsibility and plead guilty.

 

[fly girl]

I don't think it's possible to plead guilty and not take responsibility. There's an Alvord plea, where you can say you're not guilty, but you admit that there's enough evidence to convict you. But when you plead guilty, you have to stand up in court and say what you did, in front of a judge. Since this just happened yesterday, it may be that the grandfather (in his elderly state, ha ha) hasn't fully grasped what will be required of him at allocution.

That said, I'm fine with him getting probation and being able to serve it in Indiana. He's serving a life sentence in his own head, no need to pile on.

I whole heartedly agree that prison was not necessary. He is living his life sentence everyday for the rest of his life.

However, how I have interpreted this plea deal is that he doesn’t have to say anything about the events. “No admission of facts” which makes me believe he won’t truly be admitting fault. That’s the part I find frustrating. (Maybe I’m interpreting it incorrectly, idk.) It wouldn’t be a big deal to me at all except for the fact of the civil suit. That’s the part I have a hard time with.

I get it. I know why — whatever he would say would be used to crush the parents civil case. I truly wish the parents would end it. But as a PP said weeks ago, maybe if they did end it the legal fees would be too exorbitant. Who knows.

 

[luvsJack]

He didn’t need anybody making it clear the window was open because he leaned half his body out of the opened window before he dangled his granddaughter out the window.

I completely understand that. I am not in any way saying that it would be right but just pointing out that it is two different legal proceedings.

 

[backformore]

No. You can't fix stupid. A reasonable adult comprehends that a window is (wide) open. A reasonable adult knows not to hold a child even standing on the sill of an open window, never mind any part of the child being outside the window. A reasonable adult undefstands gravity.

But he's ELDERLY!!!! Are elderly people capable of reason?
(Joking, because I'm about 13 years older than he is)