I find the statements of the McCs too confusing-throwing red herrings in whenever they get the chance.
Risk assessment how safe were the children?
1. if all doors are locked the children can't 'go wandering' if they wake up during adult drinking times
2. they also can't get out if there is a fire-can fires start whilst people are sleeping ?
PR would dictate don't say the children were locked in.
3. If a door was left unlocked children can go wandering if they wake up to look for parents if ey are distressed in anyway.
PR would dictate do not say the door was unlocked
So what has KATE offered with regards to Maddie being missing?
she has suggested an abductor came in and out of a window using a (jemmie)
both PR boxes are ticked in safe mode
this is discarded as a no started as there is no evidence of a window being jemmied.
Kate goes to another thesis; Someone from NW has a key and enters and leaves with a child.
ok but why mention jemmied shutters?
No need for a key, because it transpires one door was left unlocked-for checking the children
ok but why mention NW staff entering and leaving the apartment using a stolen key?
Kate claims she knew right away that Maddie did not wander- how did she know for sure?
was the apartment locked?
No The said the patio doors were not locked- so what else did Kate see that made her KNOW for sure that Maddie didn't wander out of that apartment?
MW played no part in the Missing childs fate: that is solely at the hands of the parents!