I think partly for me they were not truthful at the beginning..........and one lies begets another........until things dont make sense. Does that mean they harmed their daughter? No it means perhaps they were liberal in their checking and needed to cover it all up, otherwise they feared they would be ridiculed as professionals for leaving their children for so long unattended each night.
We only have the 3rd May checks to go by, I personally do not believe they were check so often as a normal course of action.
Anyway....will we ever get closure. I hope so......because if it was a stranger or even a friend etc, they need to be caught and put away.......mind you the other thing i find of interest......a leopard never changes its spots.
If it was a pedophile, they got away with it, they would be bold and would try again, I am convinced of that....but nothing seems to have happened to any children since ..... all very odd........which brings it down to travellers, or dead people perhaps, or migrants.......phew...brain overload lol.
On checks, there is plenty of anecdotal evidence in the files confirming regular checks.
There are waiters who recall having to return meals to the kitchen to re-heat because people were absent from the table.
On the night, Kate's check is corroborated by her alert; Gerry's prior check, by Jez Wilkins, whom he met outside the apartment after his check.
Stephen Carpenter was present in the restaurant on May 3rd and comments in his rogatory interview on the regular comings and goings of folk, obviously tooing and froing to check on the children.
