Holiday firm leaves resort where Madeleine McCann disappeared.

[Brietta]

In that case it's collective selfishness from this particular group of people. What we do know is that other children were present with their parents and they did not go missing.

Isn't one enough?

[jassi]

I think that uniquely of all the accommodation the position and layout of apartment 5a lent itself to being entered by an unlocked patio door which was in close proximity to the tapas restaurant.

I think another issue would be if they had been made aware of the incidence of burglaries in that apartment block and the assaults on British children ... would any of them have left their children alone for a second, baby listening device or not?

Not so much the question of security in the resort, but maybe a greater awareness of the difficulties associated with the layout and difficulty of access to resort facilities highlighted by Madeleine's case may have led to holidaymakers looking for a more family friendly resort.
It is my opinion this one gives particular problems for families with three or four young children.

The apartment may have had a certain uniqueness but no one insisted that they should leave the patio door unlocked. Did they leave it unlocked in the daytime when they were out?

Is there any suggestion that previous tenants did the same thing and left the apartment unlocked while they were out at night?

I can imagine that Warner must have been absolutely amazed to learn that the place was unlocked.

[Alfred R Jones]

In that case it's perfectly reasonable for the parents to dine earlier, then later in the evening stay in the apartment actually looking after the children but that's not what they chose is it? They chose to exclude the children from their activity.

Common sense would tell anybody that children being left unattended is potentially more harmful to them than the child having a late night so please don't attempt to dress their actions up as selfless.

So, in your opinion a child tucked up asleep in bed in what seems to be a safe, tranquil environment whilst its parents are 50 metres away is at greater risk than one awake late in the evening, by the side of the pool and in a public place but with its parents close by (albeit in a group of other adults all socialising)?  I don't know you might be right, it would be interesting to see the stats on that.   I think the McCanns and their friends chose an option that they thought would suit everyone best.  It wasn't (IMO) about selfishly disregarding the kids wants and needs, though of course you will choose to see it otherwise. 

[Alice Purjorick]

The spread out nature of the accommodation in Praia Da Luz did give it particular problems.

If a risk assessment had been carried out for apartment 5a, I am sure the deficiencies of the accommodation would have stuck out like a sore thumb.

(a)   the isolated front door 
(b)   the high, overhanging trees at the front giving plenty of cover 
(c)   poor lighting, exacerbated at one time by a broken security light. 
(d)   easy public access to the property from the main road front, side and the lane at the back 
(e)   patio doors which did not lock from the outside   
(f)   insecurity of front door keys

I wonder how aware the holiday party were that not all the accommodation around them was part of a holiday complex but private residences?  A non sequitur perhaps, but not realising the open nature of the apartments might have been a contributory factor to them lowering their guard.

In view of the thread title do you mean that in your opinion these were contributory factors in Mark Warner Ltd's decision to cease management of The Ocean Club?  If not what was the purpose of bringing them up?

[Brietta]

The apartment may have had a certain uniqueness but no one insisted that they should leave the patio door unlocked. Did they leave it unlocked in the daytime when they were out?

Is there any suggestion that previous tenants did the same thing and left the apartment unlocked while they were out at night?

I can imagine that Warner must have been absolutely amazed to learn that the place was unlocked.

Probably that would be a fair assumption to be made by an observer or a burglar ... that the patio door was locked ... making the probable entry point the front door ... using a key which could have come into his/her possession in a number of ways.

Anyway ... I think you are missing the point here ... it doesn't matter what previous tenants may or may not have done ... it matters terribly what an intruder to the apartment did.

[jassi]

No, I think you are missing the point - of all the tenants to occupy 5A, only the McCanns lost a child through leaving their apartment unlocked.

[Alfred R Jones]

No, I think you are missing the point - of all the tenants to occupy 5A, only the McCanns lost a child through leaving their apartment unlocked.

Don't you mean - of all the tenants to occupy 5A only the McCanns lost a child?

[jassi]

Don't you mean - of all the tenants to occupy 5A only the McCanns lost a child?

OK, if you want to quibble     But still left unlocked. Did previous tenants take the same risks ?
 ( A rhetorical question that I don't suppose  anyone can answer)

[Eleanor]

In hindsight, 5A was the most vulnerable appartment.  Anyone could have got in if they wanted to, locked or unlocked.

[jassi]

In hindsight, 5A was the most vulnerable appartment.  Anyone could have got in if they wanted to, locked or unlocked.

Had that apartment been previously burgled ?

[Brietta]

In view of the thread title do you mean that in your opinion these were contributory factors in Mark Warner Ltd's decision to cease management of The Ocean Club?  If not what was the purpose of bringing them up?

Sigh ... if you are answering the post you will possibly have noticed that it was in response to another post and posts. 

It is called taking part in a discussion, which is probably quite appropriate for a "discussion forum".

Let me give you some assistance here ... perhaps you could have joined the discussion by phrasing your query in a less antagonistic fashion.

Then maybe you are feeling a bit bruised at having OT posts removed and consider this to be one; have no fear on that score, my wings get clipped too when threads are tidied up ... so the one which is causing you concern may stand or it may whoosh depending on the level of its irrelevance.

Let's try to address your concern about being OT now. 

Perhaps MW did give some thought to the management of the complex ... and although we are aware of the vulnerability of apartment 5a ... there may have been others which are equally as vulnerable and difficult to police. 

Maybe holiday accommodation spread out over a large area which consisted of properties in the midst of many in owner occupation was considered impractical or just too expensive to secure and manage.

I'm not really privy to the commercial reasons behind MW decision to quit ... maybe you can come up with something?

[Bert Singe]

So, in your opinion a child tucked up asleep in bed in what seems to be a safe, tranquil environment whilst its parents are 50 metres away is at greater risk than one awake late in the evening, by the side of the pool and in a public place but with its parents close by (albeit in a group of other adults all socialising)?  I don't know you might be right, it would be interesting to see the stats on that.   I think the McCanns and their friends chose an option that they thought would suit everyone best.  It wasn't (IMO) about selfishly disregarding the kids wants and needs, though of course you will choose to see it otherwise.

Correct I do choose to see it otherwise.

It's clearly better for adults to be around young children to supervise them, pool or no pool, rather than leave them unsupervised in an unlocked apartment. That should be blatantly obvious. Seems you think it's perfectly ok though and actually in the child's best interest!

I'm certain the McCann's themselves would also admit it was the wrong choice which makes your attempts at justification all the more worrying. 
 

[jassi]

Correct I do choose to see it otherwise.

It's clearly better for adults to be around young children to supervise them, pool or no pool, rather than leave them unsupervised in an unlocked apartment. That should be blatantly obvious. Seems you think it's perfectly ok though and actually in the child's best interest!

I'm certain the McCann's themselves would also admit it was the wrong choice which makes your attempts at justification all the more worrying.

Not sure if they would ever admit it, but if they could go back to the beginning of May 2007, I'm sure they would do things quite differently.

[Alfred R Jones]

Correct I do choose to see it otherwise.

It's clearly better for adults to be around young children to supervise them, pool or no pool, rather than leave them unsupervised in an unlocked apartment. That should be blatantly obvious. Seems you think it's perfectly ok though and actually in the child's best interest!

I'm certain the McCann's themselves would also admit it was the wrong choice which makes your attempts at justification all the more worrying.

All I can say is you're very good at seeing what you want to see and not what is actually written.  Should've gone to Specsavers, mate.

[Alfred R Jones]

Not sure if they would ever admit it, but if they could go back to the beginning of May 2007, I'm sure they would do things quite differently.

They have already said so, what are you on about?!