Gerry McCann says that thousands did or would have done the same as them.

[stephen25000]

What wouldn't take much?    Are you saying it wouldn't take many letters (with names redacted) to convince you they had received 1000s of letters of support -  or that it wouldn't take much to publish 1000s of letters?  Please clarify.

Just evidence.

You know what that is, don't you ?

Meanwhile, no excuses for the McCanns Benice. Since there aren't any for what they did, or anyone, no matter how few others, have or would do the same.

[Benice]

It's not relevant how many people use listening services in closed resorts and hotels because the Ocean Club was neither of those; that's why there was no listening service there.

Baby monitor use is also not relevant because there wasn't one used.

UK law says children mustn't be left home alone if it puts them at risk. So the question is were those three children at risk alone in that apartment?

I've never used a travel cot but they look quite flimsy to me as a secure place for an active toddler. An almost 4 year old can clearly leave it's bed.

Once children are out of bed there are all the dangers which are present in any home. In this case there;s an unlocked door to a high balcony also.

Anyone who says three small children weren't at risk of harming themselves if left alone in that apartment is in denial in my opinion. People have been arrested for much less.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11498123/Arrests-for-leaving-kids-home-alone-made-every-day.html

The McCanns were not at home - they were on holiday where for decades it has been an accepted practice that people can leave their sleeping  children alone in their room having made arrangements for them to be checked regularly.   If they are breaking the law then why haven't the parents who have used this type of childcare been hauled before the courts in their thousands via Social Services for doing so?     Why haven't hoteliers and tour operators been arrested for inciting people to put their children in the danger which you describe can happen when children are are left alone?   Why haven't parents who use baby alarms and do not physically check their children been charged with  neglect via Social Services?

Constantly trying to apply the rules which apply at home to people who are on holiday is a non- starter because as illogical as it is - (and IMO it definitely is illogical)  - those rules have not applied for decades when it comes to people on holiday.

I would bet my house on the fact that 99% of those parents who did and still do leave their children asleep in bed and go to dinner whilst on holiday would not dream of doing that at home -  but people have a different mindset when on holiday and the psychological effect of knowing that reputable hoteliers and tour operators advertise this as a service is enough IMO to lull parents into a false sense of security.       IIRC Mark Warner have withdrawn the Listening Service because they have now recognised that it was doing just that.  (from memory)

The only people who are in denial are those that refuse to accept any of the above IMO.

Your link makes no comment on the childcare arrangements which have clearly been regarded as acceptable for families on holiday for decades - so is not relevant  IMO.

AIMHO

[Benice]

Just evidence.

You know what that is, don't you ?

Meanwhile, no excuses for the McCanns Benice. Since there aren't any for what they did, or anyone, no matter how few others, have or would do the same.

It's clear that your only answer to any of my questions to you regarding the actual thread title -  is to revert to your usual  'they left their kids'.. mantra.   So I'll leave you to it.

[stephen25000]

The McCanns were not at home - they were on holiday where for decades it has been an accepted practice that people can leave their sleeping  children alone in their room having made arrangements for them to be checked regularly.   If they are breaking the law then why haven't the parents who have used this type of childcare been hauled before the courts in their thousands via Social Services for doing so?     Why haven't hoteliers and tour operators been arrested for inciting people to put their children in the danger which you describe can happen when children are are left alone?   Why haven't parents who use baby alarms and do not physically check their children been charged with  neglect via Social Services?

Constantly trying to apply the rules which apply at home to people who are on holiday is a non- starter because as illogical as it is - (and IMO it definitely is illogical)  - those rules have not applied for decades when it comes to people on holiday.

I would bet my house on the fact that 99% of those parents who did and still do leave their children asleep in bed and go to dinner whilst on holiday would not dream of doing that at home -  but people have a different mindset when on holiday and the psychological effect of knowing that reputable hoteliers and tour operators advertise this as a service is enough IMO to lull parents into a false sense of security.       IIRC Mark Warner have withdrawn the Listening Service because they have now recognised that it was doing just that.  (from memory)

The only people who are in denial are those that refuse to accept any of the above IMO.

Your link makes no comment on the childcare arrangements which have clearly been regarded as acceptable for families on holiday for decades - so is not relevant  IMO.

AIMHO

'........ where for decades it has been an accepted practice that people can leave their sleeping  children alone in their room having made arrangements for them to be checked regularly.................'

WORDS FAIL.

[Benice]

'........ where for decades it has been an accepted practice that people can leave their sleeping  children alone in their room having made arrangements for them to be checked regularly.................'

WORDS FAIL.

In a variety of holiday venues in this country and abroad.

[stephen25000]

In a variety of holiday venues in this country and abroad.

Who has said it is accepted practice ?

You ?

[G-Unit]

The McCanns were not at home - they were on holiday where for decades it has been an accepted practice that people can leave their sleeping  children alone in their room having made arrangements for them to be checked regularly.   If they are breaking the law then why haven't the parents who have used this type of childcare been hauled before the courts in their thousands via Social Services for doing so?     Why haven't hoteliers and tour operators been arrested for inciting people to put their children in the danger which you describe can happen when children are are left alone?   Why haven't parents who use baby alarms and do not physically check their children been charged with  neglect via Social Services?

Constantly trying to apply the rules which apply at home to people who are on holiday is a non- starter because as illogical as it is - (and IMO it definitely is illogical)  - those rules have not applied for decades when it comes to people on holiday.

I would bet my house on the fact that 99% of those parents who did and still do leave their children asleep in bed and go to dinner whilst on holiday would not dream of doing that at home -  but people have a different mindset when on holiday and the psychological effect of knowing that reputable hoteliers and tour operators advertise this as a service is enough IMO to lull parents into a false sense of security.       IIRC Mark Warner have withdrawn the Listening Service because they have now recognised that it was doing just that.  (from memory)

The only people who are in denial are those that refuse to accept any of the above IMO.

Your link makes no comment on the childcare arrangements which have clearly been regarded as acceptable for families on holiday for decades - so is not relevant  IMO.

AIMHO

Using a service offered by a holiday operator is one thing. What the McCanns did was another thing. Why you insist on pretending two different things are the same I don't know - well, I can guess.

Nothing you say alters the fact that those particular children were left alone in an unsafe environment. Not only that, we are expected to believe that their parents didn't notice the hazards.

[mercury]

Using a service offered by a holiday operator is one thing. What the McCanns did was another thing. Why you insist on pretending two different things are the same I don't know - well, I can guess.

Nothing you say alters the fact that those particular children were left alone in an unsafe environment. Not only that, we are expected to believe that their parents didn't notice the hazards.

They took a risk IMO
what pissed people off was not admitting they did and that were not at fault and actually refused when asked by a bbc reported inaninterview go advise other parents not to do the same whether for fear of strangers entering or other risks
Their arrogance and hubris were responsible for alot of bad press

[slartibartfast]

They took a risk IMO
what pissed people off was not admitting they did and that were not at fault and actually refused when asked by a bbc reported inaninterview go advise other parents not to do the same whether for fear of strangers entering or other risks
Their arrogance and hubris were responsible for alot of bad press

In a nut shell.

[sadie]

Using a service offered by a holiday operator is one thing. What the McCanns did was another thing. Why you insist on pretending two different things are the same I don't know - well, I can guess.

Nothing you say alters the fact that those particular children were left alone in an unsafe environment. Not only that, we are expected to believe that their parents didn't notice the hazards.

So YOU are saying that using a listening service provided by an hotel is OK, but doing the same yourself is not OK ?

Gawd strewth Gunit the hotels (and Butlins) did not go into the place, they just listened outside. 
The Tapas group actually went into the apartments and observed (altho poor Matt missed looking around the corner at Madeleine).  I feel so sorry for that poor guy and for Jane.  They have taken some stick !

As for listening devices at reception!   They would be a very poor substitution, because as soon as reception got very busy (such as checking a line up of new guests in) the listening devices would very much take a back seat.   

I doubt that an abduction using drugs and thru the front door would have been heard or noticed by reception anyway.

[Robittybob1]

So YOU are saying that using a listening service provided by an hotel is OK, but doing the same yourself is not OK ?

Gawd strewth Gunit the hotels (and Butlins) did not go into the place, they just listened outside. 
The Tapas group actually went into the apartments and observed (altho poor Matt missed looking around the corner at Madeleine).  I feel so sorry for that poor guy and for Jane.  They have taken some stick !

As for listening devices at reception!   They would be a very poor substitution, because as soon as reception got very busy (such as checking a line up of new guests in) the listening devices would very much take a back seat.   

I doubt that an abduction using drugs and thru the front door would have been heard or noticed by reception anyway.

It is the going inside that is the problem. 

[G-Unit]

So YOU are saying that using a listening service provided by an hotel is OK, but doing the same yourself is not OK ?

Gawd strewth Gunit the hotels (and Butlins) did not go into the place, they just listened outside. 
The Tapas group actually went into the apartments and observed (altho poor Matt missed looking around the corner at Madeleine).  I feel so sorry for that poor guy and for Jane.  They have taken some stick !

As for listening devices at reception!   They would be a very poor substitution, because as soon as reception got very busy (such as checking a line up of new guests in) the listening devices would very much take a back seat.   

I doubt that an abduction using drugs and thru the front door would have been heard or noticed by reception anyway.

What I said is they are two different things. One is a hotel room in a building called a hotel. One is an apartment in a village.

The apartment contained all the hazards present in a home and a high balcony accessible to the children if they awoke. It takes much less than 30 minutes for children to find something dangerous to touch or do.

Kate McCann seems to have had some awareness of this;

Before they left she took some precautions: put the medicine inside a bag with a clasp in her room inside the wardrobe or the dresser.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm

She never thought of the kitchen though;

In the kitchen were cutting elements used to prepare the meals and which were not put out of sight.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm

Neither parent noticed the danger of children getting onto that balcony, it seems.

[Benice]

Using a service offered by a holiday operator is one thing. What the McCanns did was another thing. Why you insist on pretending two different things are the same I don't know - well, I can guess.

Nothing you say alters the fact that those particular children were left alone in an unsafe environment. Not only that, we are expected to believe that their parents didn't notice the hazards.

What is the difference between leaving your children asleep and going for a meal having arranged for them to be checked by a member of staff at regular intervals  - and leaving your children asleep and going for a meal and checking them yourself at regular intervals?    In both scenarios the children are being checked.   To say otherwise is nitpicking IMO.

You have missed the point  I was making -  which is not about the safety aspects but the fact that - regardless of the rights or wrongs of it -  thousands of other parents have done the same as the McCanns when on holiday - and some still do.  That is a fact which is carefully avoided by sceptics..   

IMO this can only be because they know they can't accuse the McCanns of being neglectful parents without also accusing those thousands of other parents of being the same.       Their answer to that 'problem' is to studiously ignore their very existence and pretend that it is only the McCanns who ever opted for this type of childcare.  That is clearly not true.

What other reason can there be for such a massive avoidance of a very relevant fact concerning the childcare arrangements made by thousands of decent loving parents when on holiday - of which the McCanns were just one couple?

AIMHO

[stephen25000]

What is the difference between leaving your children asleep and going for a meal having arranged for them to be checked by a member of staff at regular intervals  - and leaving your children asleep and going for a meal and checking them yourself at regular intervals?    In both scenarios the children are being checked.   To say otherwise is nitpicking IMO.

You have missed the point  I was making -  which is not about the safety aspects but the fact that - regardless of the rights or wrongs of it -  thousands of other parents have done the same as the McCanns when on holiday - and some still do.  That is a fact which is carefully avoided by sceptics..   

IMO this can only be because they know they can't accuse the McCanns of being neglectful parents without also accusing those thousands of other parents of being the same.       Their answer to that 'problem' is to studiously ignore their very existence and pretend that it is only the McCanns who ever opted for this type of childcare.  That is clearly not true.

What other reason can there be for such a massive avoidance of a very relevant fact concerning the childcare arrangements made by thousands of decent loving parents when on holiday - of which the McCanns were just one couple?

AIMHO

You keep saying 'thousands of people have done the same', yet you cannot prodice any figures,and all we actually hear are the odd anecdote.

You need to come up with CITES which can be verified, not hearsay.

[G-Unit]

What is the difference between leaving your children asleep and going for a meal having arranged for them to be checked by a member of staff at regular intervals  - and leaving your children asleep and going for a meal and checking them yourself at regular intervals?    In both scenarios the children are being checked.   To say otherwise is nitpicking IMO.

You have missed the point  I was making -  which is not about the safety aspects but the fact that - regardless of the rights or wrongs of it -  thousands of other parents have done the same as the McCanns when on holiday - and some still do.  That is a fact which is carefully avoided by sceptics..   

IMO this can only be because they know they can't accuse the McCanns of being neglectful parents without also accusing those thousands of other parents of being the same.       Their answer to that 'problem' is to studiously ignore their very existence and pretend that it is only the McCanns who ever opted for this type of childcare.  That is clearly not true.

What other reason can there be for such a massive avoidance of a very relevant fact concerning the childcare arrangements made by thousands of decent loving parents when on holiday - of which the McCanns were just one couple?

AIMHO

Can you cite one case of people leaving three small children in an unlocked apartment on a public road while they went out to dinner five nights in a row?

If not, your 'thousands of decent loving parents' haven't done the same as the McCanns did, so comparisons can't be made.

It is also very noticeable that you are avoiding the particular dangers associated with this apartment.