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

[monsterkitty]

Being colorblind is not a disability under the ADA laws. Is Color-Blindness a Disability

I do wonder if the little girl realized the window was open, became frightened, and squirmed her way out of the grandfather's arms. I do believe he feels guilty and is blocking what really happened.

 

[luvsJack]

Nope, you are exagerating and greatly speculating. You used a mirror in your example in relation to seeing things which the grandpa is claiming he has trouble with.
Just going on the info in the news and the interview with the grandpa.
Please don't put words in my mouth in order to state and support your argument.
As far as parents with a handicapp any parent that may have a handicapp recognizes their limitation and works with it. This is no way makes them a bad parent as you have brought up but there is a oersonal responsi ility for the safety of a child, which a parent with a handicapp is very aware of.

What on earth am I exaggerating?

I asked your point of bringing up the handicap. I was simply pointing out that there are several types of color blindness. One of which is caused from cataracts. And in case you didn’t know, for many people, as their eye sight from cataracts worsens, they aren’t always truly aware of it.

I used their example for exactly what I said. How it’s easy to think we “know” something when we are completely wrong. How our mind can discount very obvious clues. I think I know what I meant.

And newsflash—anyone that says ANYTHING that could have happened is speculating. Just because it doesn’t agree with your opinion doesn’t make anyone wrong. You were not there anymore than I was.

 

[luvsJack]

Being colorblind is not a disability under the ADA laws. Is Color-Blindness a Disability

I do wonder if the little girl realized the window was open, became frightened, and squirmed her way out of the grandfather's arms. I do believe he feels guilty and is blocking what really happened.

That is a definite possibility. She may have gotten frightened and started squirming away.

 

[sam_gordon]

She may have gotten frightened and started squirming away.

Frightened, excited, bored, distracted, or just about anything. I think he was holding her so she could stand on the railing to see better, she started squirming and fell out.

 

[Princessclab]

What on earth am I exaggerating?

I asked your point of bringing up the handicap. I was simply pointing out that there are several types of color blindness. One of which is caused from cataracts. And in case you didn’t know, for many people, as their eye sight from cataracts worsens, they aren’t always truly aware of it.

I used their example for exactly what I said. How it’s easy to think we “know” something when we are completely wrong. How our mind can discount very obvious clues. I think I know what I meant.

And newsflash—anyone that says ANYTHING that could have happened is speculating. Just because it doesn’t agree with your opinion doesn’t make anyone wrong. You were not there anymore than I was.

My opinion is based on what is known, nothing more.
Never said you were wrong. Never said I was there.
Bringing extra variables that are not at all related to a discussion is exagerating the information. Cataracts were never mentioned.
Done with this conversation, good luck to you.

 

[LSUmiss]

What on earth am I exaggerating?

I asked your point of bringing up the handicap. I was simply pointing out that there are several types of color blindness. One of which is caused from cataracts. And in case you didn’t know, for many people, as their eye sight from cataracts worsens, they aren’t always truly aware of it.

I used their example for exactly what I said. How it’s easy to think we “know” something when we are completely wrong. How our mind can discount very obvious clues. I think I know what I meant.

And newsflash—anyone that says ANYTHING that could have happened is speculating. Just because it doesn’t agree with your opinion doesn’t make anyone wrong. You were not there anymore than I was.

That’s exactly the point & a good defense attorney can use that to plant enough doubt in the minds of jurors.

 

[luvsJack]

Frightened, excited, bored, distracted, or just about anything. I think he was holding her so she could stand on the railing to see better, she started squirming and fell out.

He said she squirmed and fell or slipped out of his arms and fell, which with a little one could be the same thing. So yeah, anything could have made her do that.

 

[luvsJack]

My opinion is based on what is known, nothing more.
Never said you were wrong. Never said I was there.
Bringing extra variables that are not at all related to a discussion is exagerating the information. Cataracts were never mentioned.
Done with this conversation, good luck to you.

But anyone suggesting what kind of color blindness he has is ok in your mind because it still makes the man a villain? I was simply saying there are many kinds and the one caused by cataracts is entirely possible given his age. Possible, not definitive.

I did not exaggerate anything. I simply gave another option to the question of his being color blind and how it could keep him from seeing that the window was open, since the types that a couple of posters have wouldn’t stop them from seeing it. I am not color blind so I have no idea how it would make someone see those windows.

The whole story about the mirror had nothing to do with the window. It was simply an example of the mind playing tricks on a person.

 

[monsterkitty]

Sorry, but I'm not going to buy the colorblind excuse. Being colorblind is a circumstance and in this case should not be used as an excuse. It is very clear which windows were open and which ones weren't. While I haven't sailed on Freedom of the Seas, I have been on Adventure of the Seas and the windows are the same shade. You can clearly tell which windows were open and which were closed.

He wasn't paying attention. He wasn't thinking. He was distracted. He was careless. Whatever the reason and because of his actions a little girl died.

 

[sam_gordon]

I don’t think 8 seconds is a long time if you’re also preoccupied planting with a toddler.

I went back and looked at the CNN article again. Remember, a reporter got to watch the video. Here's the quote from that reporter (so presumably he shouldn't have bias):

"the grandfather actually looks out the window for about eight seconds. He reaches down, he picks Chloe up, and he holds her over the railing for nearly 25 seconds."

So now we're at about 30 seconds being next to an open window. I think it's going to be hard to convince a jury he didn't know it was open.

 

[mjkacmom]

But anyone suggesting what kind of color blindness he has is ok in your mind because it still makes the man a villain? I was simply saying there are many kinds and the one caused by cataracts is entirely possible given his age. Possible, not definitive.

I did not exaggerate anything. I simply gave another option to the question of his being color blind and how it could keep him from seeing that the window was open, since the types that a couple of posters have wouldn’t stop them from seeing it. I am not color blind so I have no idea how it would make someone see those windows.

The whole story about the mirror had nothing to do with the window. It was simply an example of the mind playing tricks on a person.

I totally get what you are saying, many times due to certain circumstances, you see things wrong. For example, when letting my dog out very early in the morning, I saw that she had vomited on the floor. Deciding to deal with it after I got up again, I was happily surprised when a couple hours later, and a change in lighting, it was just a leaf.

 

[Searc]

What on earth am I exaggerating?

I asked your point of bringing up the handicap. I was simply pointing out that there are several types of color blindness. One of which is caused from cataracts. And in case you didn’t know, for many people, as their eye sight from cataracts worsens, they aren’t always truly aware of it.

I used their example for exactly what I said. How it’s easy to think we “know” something when we are completely wrong. How our mind can discount very obvious clues. I think I know what I meant.

And newsflash—anyone that says ANYTHING that could have happened is speculating. Just because it doesn’t agree with your opinion doesn’t make anyone wrong. You were not there anymore than I was.

When one sense starts to go, the others compensate for it. There is absolutely no way to stand in front of an open window on a ship and NOT know it is open. Unless you have been on a cruise ship, you don't know.

 

[LSUmiss]

I went back and looked at the CNN article again. Remember, a reporter got to watch the video. Here's the quote from that reporter (so presumably he shouldn't have bias):

So now we're at about 30 seconds being next to an open window. I think it's going to be hard to convince a jury he didn't know it was open.

Yes that’s a lot different b/c if he held her up to bang on the window, he should have immediately knew it was open.

 

[Flowers12]

He wasn't paying attention. He wasn't thinking. He was distracted. He was careless. Whatever the reason and because of his actions a little girl died.

Agreed. It comes down to him. He was at fault.

 

[sam_gordon]

There is absolutely no way to stand in front of an open window on a ship and NOT know it is open. Unless you have been on a cruise ship, you don't know.

I disagree with the bolded. Again, they were 100'+ above ground. Go to any high rise on the 10th or 11th floor and stand next to an open window.

ETA: If someone hasn't been on a cruise ship, they might not understand:
* How far the railing is from the window
* The difference in color between a permanently closed window and one that can be open

 

[luvsJack]

I totally get what you are saying, many times due to certain circumstances, you see things wrong. For example, when letting my dog out very early in the morning, I saw that she had vomited on the floor. Deciding to deal with it after I got up again, I was happily surprised when a couple hours later, and a change in lighting, it was just a leaf.

Lol I have done the same thing! It happens to everyone.

 

[WorldWacky]

At the end of the day, colorblind, breeze/no breeze, window open or closed, distracted by the baby, etc, this tragedy would not have happened had he not put that child up by the railing- a railing that is at least six inches away from the window. That railing IS one of the safety features keeping people from being directly at the window. Railings are not seats or step stools. Placing the child on that railing, IF that is what the video shows, IS sadly, negligence.

 

[Disneylover99]

Colour blind or not, windows opened or closed, I just can’t get over him hoisting her up on a railing to bang on the glass in a cruise ship.

 

[QueenIsabella]

A lot of the information here is clearly deflecting from the grandfather's carelessness (I won't go so far as to say "recklessness"). First off, he's not elderly--he's 51. That's not that old! While he could possibly have some medical conditions, he's likely got a few decades left in him.

Secondly, even if he's color blind, he would see tones. When someone cant' see, say, the color red, they don't see nothing, they see gray. So, even assuming he was color blind and cannot differentiate the color blue (the tint of the windows), he would still be able to recognize that they were tinted, but might think that they're tinted gray. So, he could discern the tinting, regardless.

I know that a lot of the people on this thread, myself included, have never been on Freedom of the Seas (or one of her sister ships). However, when I watch that video, it's clear that (a) the railing is several inches away from the windows, (b) there was glass at floor height, where a child could press on the glass if she so desired, (c) the pool/children's area is not near the walkway/railing/windows, and (d) the tinted windows are very obvious.

The grandfather had a lapse in judgement here. If the child's feet had stayed on the ground, she would have been fine. My heart breaks for the entire family, and I don't think for a second that the grandfather did anything with any kind of bad intent. It was a horrible, tragic accident. But, 100%, he's at fault. If I were on the jury, I'd convict, but argue for mercy in the punishment phase.

 

[smokeyblue]

I really have pretty good eyesight, but they way my brain processes what I see is a whole other story. Changes in lighting, dry eyes and being tired can cause a big shift in how I see things. Seeing the world the way I have seen it, I could see how it is possible that this guy was lacking the awareness in the moment that there was danger. It still doesn't account for putting a child up on a fairly high railing which seems dangerous in and of itself.

That being said, I still think he will be convicted. It reminds me of an accident that happened in my area. A woman was pulling out of a gas station driveway and hit a motorcycle killing the driver. The sun was cresting over the horizon in the direction which the motorcycle was coming from and she said she didn't see him. It's plausible that she didn't see him, but it was still her duty to ensure it was safe to enter the roadway. She ended up being convicted of negligent homicide, but given the lightest sentence possible.