KM's Paperback (PB)

[Holly Goodhead]

why is it important in any context......or do we just not acccept a word kate says.....i think thats a bit stupid

All the lawyers I know are quite circumspect in offering up opinion for obvious reasons ie those who decide who's right and who isn't are often judges and jurors not barristers.   

Do we have anything in writing from this barrister?  Was he aware that the McCanns went out every evening from 8.30 pm to 11.00 pm plus leaving the patio doors unlocked? 

Why does the barrister's opinion deviate wildly from guidelines and recommendations drawn up by NSPCC?

Its up to you what you choose to accept at face value.   

[G-Unit]

Why would he?   They were doing a reconstruction,  he was focused on that.   Maybe if it hadn't have been such a stressful occasion and he wasn't doing a reconstruction he would have laughed at what Jane said.

You don't know what he was thinking or what motivated him. Maybe he knew there was no football on TV on 3rd May, maybe he just wanted to get back to his hotel and relax, maybe he was concentrating on getting his opinion accross; the one the other two disagreed with.

[Holly Goodhead]

He certainly spoke to Jes, but Jes never confirmed what the time was.

I think he said 3 - 5 mins which imo seems too short a time for KM to start fretting where he was.   

[Mr Gray]

All the lawyers I know are quite circumspect in offering up opinion for obvious reasons ie those who decide who's right and who isn't are often judges and jurors not barristers.   

Do we have anything in writing from this barrister?  Was he aware that the McCanns went out every evening from 8.30 pm to 11.00 pm plus leaving the patio doors unlocked? 

Why does the barrister's opinion deviate wildly from guidelines and recommendations drawn up by NSPCC?

Its up to you what you choose to accept at face value.

barristers give opinion on law....I see no reason to to disbeleive kate.  she may of course be lying but i doubt it. We have established that pare

i dont see it as a particularly important point

[Lace]

But Lace how do you explain that GM said the only time he ever physically checked on the children was when he checked at circa 9 pm on 3rd May and the reason he gave for doing so is that the door was open further than how he left it at circa 8.30 pm.  He attributed the moving door initially to MM up and about.  Now we're told by KM that at breakfast on 3rd May MM had a question for her parents: 'Why didn't you come when Sean and I cried last night?'.   KM claims she and GM were disconcerted and agreed they had to be hyper-vigilant with their checks in case one or more children woke up in between checks.  Given GM claims the door moved between 8.30 pm and 9.00 pm which he initially put down to MM up and about why didn't he mention this to KM when he returned to the table?  And if he did mention they why did KM allow MO to check at 9.30 pm who had no knowledge about how he should find the door? 



The above is just one of many contradictory aspects of their accounts.  Another is that KM tells on page 73 that their checks provided a higher level of attention that the checks provided by MW at similar resorts in that the McCanns were going into the apartment and looking as well as listening and yet:

- GM tells us his circa 9.00 pm check on 3rd May was the first time he had actually entered the bedroom during a check.

- KM tells us that when she checked at circa 10 pm she found the door open further than they had left it and assumed MO had moved it.  She then went to return it to its normal position (10 cm ajar) when suddenly it slammed shut.  So again she had no intention of going into the bedroom she simply intended to return the door to its original position.

You must remember that they didn't know that Madeleine would be abducted on the evening of the 3rd of May.   You are talking as if they knew an abductor was on the prowl.   So Gerry found the door open further that they had left it,  he wondered if Madeleine had gone to the toilet,  he wasn't thinking 'I wonder if an abductor has been in the bedroom'.   He left and probably thought no more about it.  It was the first time Gerry had gone into the bedroom on his check,  it was the first time he did a check on that evening.  Again you are talking about how the McCann's should behave if they think someone sinister is happening,  why would they tell Matthew how the door was left?    Kate said it was all quiet,   not one of the children was crying,  so she went to shut the door and it slammed shut.

[Lace]

You don't know what he was thinking or what motivated him. Maybe he knew there was no football on TV on 3rd May, maybe he just wanted to get back to his hotel and relax, maybe he was concentrating on getting his opinion accross; the one the other two disagreed with.

Maybe,  but you made it sound as though he didn't discuss the football as he'd been watching it on the evening of 3rd of May,   I just pointed out there could have been a reason why he didn't indulge with Jane about the joke of him watching football,  that being they were in the middle of a reconstruction.

[Holly Goodhead]

barristers give opinion on law....I see no reason to to disbeleive kate.  she may of course be lying but i doubt it. We have established that parents leave children in locked hotel rooms ...they re not prosecuted...the guidelines are guidelines   .....not law

Parents leaving children in locked hotel rooms is completely different to what was going on at 5A.  And afaik when parents leave children in locked hotel rooms it is usually whilst they're on site usually dining in the hotel restaurant.  Effectively they are in the same building as the left children. 

We have no idea who the barrister was and whether or not he was basing it on UK law or Portuguese?  We have no relevant case law to know how the law would interpret such an event.

KM doesn't need to lie for info to be incorrect since much of what she offers up is based on her perception. 

[Mr Gray]

Parents leaving children in locked hotel rooms is completely different to what was going on at 5A.  And afaik when parents leave children in locked hotel rooms it is usually whilst they're on site usually dining in the hotel restaurant.  Effectively they are in the same building as the left children. 

We have no idea who the barrister was and whether or not he was basing it on UK law or Portuguese?  We have no relevant case law to know how the law would interpret such an event.

KM doesn't need to lie for info to be incorrect since much of what she offers up is based on her perception.

thats why i dont think its of any importance what the barrister did or didnt say. Leaving a child in  a locked hotel room is contrary to the guidelines

[Holly Goodhead]

You must remember that they didn't know that Madeleine would be abducted on the evening of the 3rd of May.   You are talking as if they knew an abductor was on the prowl.   So Gerry found the door open further that they had left it,  he wondered if Madeleine had gone to the toilet,  he wasn't thinking 'I wonder if an abductor has been in the bedroom'.   He left and probably thought no more about it.  It was the first time Gerry had gone into the bedroom on his check,  it was the first time he did a check on that evening.  Again you are talking about how the McCann's should behave if they think someone sinister is happening,  why would they tell Matthew how the door was left?    Kate said it was all quiet,   not one of the children was crying,  so she went to shut the door and it slammed shut.

No one is talking as if they knew an abductor was on the prowl.  And no one has suggested MM got up to use the loo only that she simply may have been up and about due to the fact GM claimed the door had moved.  Surely he would think more about it given MM's claims on morning of 3rd May 'Why didn't you come last night when Sean and I cried' and the fact he and KM were disconcerted and agreed they needed to be hyper-vigilant with regard to their checks?  If GM thought MM may have been up and about why wouldn't he share this info with KM when he returned to the table?  And if he didn't want to worry her why didn't he go and check at circa 9.30 pm instead of allowing MO to?  Had GM gone to check at 9.30 pm he would know whether or not the door had moved yet again. 

[Holly Goodhead]

thats why i dont think its of any importance what the barrister did or didnt say. Leaving a child in  a locked hotel room is contrary to the guidelines

Contrary to what guidelines?

[Mr Gray]

Contrary to what guidelines?

the giudelines you posted

[Erngath]

Parents leaving children in locked hotel rooms is completely different to what was going on at 5A.  And afaik when parents leave children in locked hotel rooms it is usually whilst they're on site usually dining in the hotel restaurant.  Effectively they are in the same building as the left children. 

We have no idea who the barrister was and whether or not he was basing it on UK law or Portuguese?  We have no relevant case law to know how the law would interpret such an event.

KM doesn't need to lie for info to be incorrect since much of what she offers up is based on her perception.

And your judgement that children locked in a hotel bedroom whilst their parents dine in the hotel in their dining room being completely different is your perception of what constitutes being different or any more acceptable.
I've never stayed in any hotel where the bedrooms are not at least one level, or two or three above the dining room.
Nonsense to think that is acceptable either.

[Holly Goodhead]

the giudelines you posted

Its all hypothetical Davel.  If a case went to court it would fall and rise on its individual merits. 

Parents A dine out in hotel restaurant where children B are tucked up in locked room and parents can observe using a video monitor like those offered at New Park Manor:

https://www.newparkmanorhotel.co.uk/family-friendly-hotel

Parent B dine out at a restaurant a 2 - 3 minute walk away from unlocked holiday apartment where children C are tucked up but the parents have no idea what's going on and as it so happens a 3 yoa child disappears.   

[Holly Goodhead]

I would suggest most parents would be looking for the following level of security to feel comfortable about leaving small children: 

Here at New Park Manor you may take advantage of our video baby monitors to allow you to enjoy some time together alone to relax and unwind while having the peace of mind that your little ones are safe and sound.

Pop down to reception and we will provide you with the video monitor, you simply plug this into your room before you settle your little one down and then we provide you with a handset that you keep with you so that it allows you to keep an eye on your little one.

A £150 deposit will be applied to your bill, which will be refunded on return of the monitor and handset. Please note that handsets must be kept with parents at all times and unfortunately cannot be monitored by our team.

https://www.newparkmanorhotel.co.uk/family-friendly-hotel

[Erngath]

I would suggest most parents would be looking for the following level of security to feel comfortable about leaving small children: 

Here at New Park Manor you may take advantage of our video baby monitors to allow you to enjoy some time together alone to relax and unwind while having the peace of mind that your little ones are safe and sound.

Pop down to reception and we will provide you with the video monitor, you simply plug this into your room before you settle your little one down and then we provide you with a handset that you keep with you so that it allows you to keep an eye on your little one.

A £150 deposit will be applied to your bill, which will be refunded on return of the monitor and handset. Please note that handsets must be kept with parents at all times and unfortunately cannot be monitored by our team.

https://www.newparkmanorhotel.co.uk/family-friendly-hotel

Is this the norm for hotels nowadays?

Just to add I wouldn't use the facility.