Parents quizzed on suspicion of child neglect

jejune wrote:Parents quizzed on suspicion of child neglect after toddler, 2, is found wandering in town centre at 11pm

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1350310/Parents-quizzed-suspicion-child-neglect-toddler-2-wandering-town-centre-11pm.html#ixzz1C4eUePPV

The parents of a two-year-old girl found wandering the streets alone at 11pm have been arrested on suspicion of child neglect.
The youngster was spotted in Westcliff town centre, Essex, by a member of the public last night.
A spokesman for Essex Police said: ‘Police can confirm that a man and
a woman were arrested in Westcliff on suspicion of child neglect.

‘A 37-year-old woman and a 24-year-old man, both from Westcliff, are currently being interviewed at Southend police station.’

Posting this here for now, as I can't see a thread about it on MM. Apologies if I'm wrong. When it was published that Madeleine McCann had been left, with her younger siblings, in an apartment without a parent present, the above situation would seem a strong possibility. As we know, the parents were adamant that this scenario could not have taken place. Why?

An 'older' woman and a 'younger' man again. Nothing wrong with that, but there are a number of abuse cases reported where this is so. Wonder why?

In answer to your last question, I am tempted to say "Valium", but I won't.

Obviously the couple are not doctors and are believed to be African.... Well, that says it all then, they plainly do not fit the criteria for behaving in a responsible manner, well outside the bounds of responsible parenting ....No Carter Ruck or Clarence Mitchell for them and they have more chance of getting their little girl back from a ravening and bad tempered Dobermann than the Social Services relinquishing their grip on her ... Wicked parents, just what is wrong with the parents nowadays...send them to Rothley for some tuition in how to do it properly....

They must have been down the pub getting drunk as opposed to being at the Tapas bar having dinner. It makes a difference you know!!!!

Now, Kate McCann apparently told one of her friends that the door was unlocked so that Madeleine could find them. Supposing she had been found wandering around in Praia da Luz! Stooopid woman!

AnnaEsse wrote:Now, Kate McCann apparently told one of her friends that the door was unlocked so that Madeleine could find them. Supposing she had been found wandering around in Praia da Luz! Stooopid woman!

Quite right, Anna. From Fiona Payne's rogatory interview (I'm sure people are tired of reading this, but IMO it's important) -

Reply
“She did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying ‘Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or’, erm, ‘or locking it and, you know, finding that we’re not there and the door’s locked if she woke up’, because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh”.

01.15.57
1485
“So she asked you what your thoughts were regarding locking?”

Reply
“Yeah”.

1485
“Did she say whether she had locked or?”

Reply
“No, that was the point, I think they said they’d left it, well she’d said she’d left it unlocked”.

This makes it perfectly clear that Kate McCann envisaged Madeleine leaving the apartment and go looking for her parents ('she can get out and find us') and then subsequently leaving the door open so that this useful plan could presumably be put into practice. This bright idea of Kate's has AFAIK never made it into the newspapers; I wonder just what most people would think if they knew about this? The very idea of a 3-year-old leaving an apartment on the hunt for her parents in a holiday resort at night makes the blood run cold; it's as far away from normal ideas on child safety as it's possible to be.

All IMO.

Reply
“No, that was the point, I think they said they’d left it, well she’d said she’d left it unlocked”.

So if she had gone down the steps of the apartment to find her Mum and Dad, and a car had come round the corner and knocked her down, I'm sure we wouldn't be here now. What makes neglect? Although it would have been the car drivers fault if he had knocked her down on the road, in the Mccanns world TBH!

fred wrote:

Reply
“No, that was the point, I think they said they’d left it, well she’d said she’d left it unlocked”.

So if she had gone down the steps of the apartment to find her Mum and Dad, and a car had come round the corner and knocked her down, I'm sure we wouldn't be here now. What makes neglect? Although it would have been the car drivers fault if he had knocked her down on the road, in the Mccanns world TBH!

Oh yes, I'm sure someone else would have been blamed no matter what happened. The whole scenario is chilling when you think about it. Madeleine was known to wake up at night, both at home and on holiday; she'd even told her mother she'd been awake and crying one night and no one came to her. Yet, if we are to believe FP (and I see no reason not to, it's not something someone would make up), Kate mulled over the idea that if Madeleine woke up again it might be a good thing if she had the ability to leave the apartment through an unlocked door and go looking for her parents. This would, I presume, have meant going down the steps, along the footpath beside the road, back into the complex, past the swimming pool and into the Tapas bar (if any of that is wrong, please somebody correct me). It would also have meant she could have been seen by someone with evil intentions. In any case, a whole host of dangers, which of course is why no one would ever let a child of that age wander about at night. Yet here was her mother calmly wondering whether this was a better scenario than locking the door and Madeleine waking and finding they weren't there. So, since FP then said: 'well she’d said she’d left it unlocked' it seems Kate thought Madeleine going out to look for her parents was better than her being locked in.

Every time I write this down I'm struck by how truly strange it all sounds, yet it's there in the interview.

It is disturbingly apparent that Kate McCann was fully knowledgeable of the enormous dangers she was placing her three tiny children in, making their subsequent protestations regarding "hindsight is a wonderful thing" an absolute crock of sh1t.

Kate and Gerry McCann are clearly guilty of the endangerment, reckless abandonment, and neglect of three minors...... and that's just for starters!

Dimsie wrote:

fred wrote:

Reply
“No, that was the point, I think they said they’d left it, well she’d said she’d left it unlocked”.

So if she had gone down the steps of the apartment to find her Mum and Dad, and a car had come round the corner and knocked her down, I'm sure we wouldn't be here now. What makes neglect? Although it would have been the car drivers fault if he had knocked her down on the road, in the Mccanns world TBH!

Oh yes, I'm sure someone else would have been blamed no matter what happened. The whole scenario is chilling when you think about it. Madeleine was known to wake up at night, both at home and on holiday; she'd even told her mother she'd been awake and crying one night and no one came to her. Yet, if we are to believe FP (and I see no reason not to, it's not something someone would make up), Kate mulled over the idea that if Madeleine woke up again it might be a good thing if she had the ability to leave the apartment through an unlocked door and go looking for her parents. This would, I presume, have meant going down the steps, along the footpath beside the road, back into the complex, past the swimming pool and into the Tapas bar (if any of that is wrong, please somebody correct me). It would also have meant she could have been seen by someone with evil intentions. In any case, a whole host of dangers, which of course is why no one would ever let a child of that age wander about at night. Yet here was her mother calmly wondering whether this was a better scenario than locking the door and Madeleine waking and finding they weren't there. So, since FP then said: 'well she’d said she’d left it unlocked' it seems Kate thought Madeleine going out to look for her parents was better than her being locked in.

Every time I write this down I'm struck by how truly strange it all sounds, yet it's there in the interview.

Dimsie from the R O Rog. interview:

Reply “Mmm yeah, I mean the patio doors were locked, erm yeah I didn’t really like going up there by myself, it was, like going through that car park was quite dark and there was never anyone around, it was a bit, you know made me feel a bit uneasy”.
Reply
1578 “Okay. What about the lighting there”?
Reply “Well there were lights, there were street lights along the road as you came out of the Ocean Club, erm sort of orangey you know street lights and along the main road at the back and the car park was quite dark cos there were quite a lot of trees that were sort of on that corner, erm and so the car park was quite dark and then when you actually got, you came down a ramp, or down some steps into the sort of area in front of the apartments and erm you know they were, there were sort of lights, you press a button and they come on for a certain length of time, so you know, you put those on to get to the front door, it wasn’t pitch black but I’m not keen on the dark anyway so erm”.http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic43.html

An adult feels uneasy going to flats on her own yet the McCs left the door unlocked for their then 3-year-old, whom they had left in a flat with no adult supervision, to get out and find them at the bar!

zodiac wrote:

Dimsie wrote:

fred wrote:

Reply
“No, that was the point, I think they said they’d left it, well she’d said she’d left it unlocked”.

So if she had gone down the steps of the apartment to find her Mum and Dad, and a car had come round the corner and knocked her down, I'm sure we wouldn't be here now. What makes neglect? Although it would have been the car drivers fault if he had knocked her down on the road, in the Mccanns world TBH!

Oh yes, I'm sure someone else would have been blamed no matter what happened. The whole scenario is chilling when you think about it. Madeleine was known to wake up at night, both at home and on holiday; she'd even told her mother she'd been awake and crying one night and no one came to her. Yet, if we are to believe FP (and I see no reason not to, it's not something someone would make up), Kate mulled over the idea that if Madeleine woke up again it might be a good thing if she had the ability to leave the apartment through an unlocked door and go looking for her parents. This would, I presume, have meant going down the steps, along the footpath beside the road, back into the complex, past the swimming pool and into the Tapas bar (if any of that is wrong, please somebody correct me). It would also have meant she could have been seen by someone with evil intentions. In any case, a whole host of dangers, which of course is why no one would ever let a child of that age wander about at night. Yet here was her mother calmly wondering whether this was a better scenario than locking the door and Madeleine waking and finding they weren't there. So, since FP then said: 'well she’d said she’d left it unlocked' it seems Kate thought Madeleine going out to look for her parents was better than her being locked in.

Every time I write this down I'm struck by how truly strange it all sounds, yet it's there in the interview.

Dimsie from the R O Rog. interview:

Reply “Mmm yeah, I mean the patio doors were locked, erm yeah I didn’t really like going up there by myself, it was, like going through that car park was quite dark and there was never anyone around, it was a bit, you know made me feel a bit uneasy”.
Reply
1578 “Okay. What about the lighting there”?
Reply “Well there were lights, there were street lights along the road as you came out of the Ocean Club, erm sort of orangey you know street lights and along the main road at the back and the car park was quite dark cos there were quite a lot of trees that were sort of on that corner, erm and so the car park was quite dark and then when you actually got, you came down a ramp, or down some steps into the sort of area in front of the apartments and erm you know they were, there were sort of lights, you press a button and they come on for a certain length of time, so you know, you put those on to get to the front door, it wasn’t pitch black but I’m not keen on the dark anyway so erm”.http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic43.html

An adult feels uneasy going to flats on her own yet the McCs left the door unlocked for their then 3-year-old, whom they had left in a flat with no adult supervision, to get out and find them at the bar!

...and the street lights were 'orangey,' so how did Jane Tanner see 'pinkish,' pyjamas?

When you read these quotes it seems even madder that a few deluded people believe that the McCanns should never have been looked at negatively by the PJ because they'd lost their daughter. Neglect is neglect, whatever the outcome. Of course, you get the cries of, 'but they didn't intend to neglect them, so it's not neglect' ', but I've never been able to figure out the logic to that one .

zodiac wrote:Dimsie from the R O Rog. interview:

Reply “Mmm yeah, I mean the patio doors were locked, erm yeah I didn’t really like going up there by myself, it was, like going through that car park was quite dark and there was never anyone around, it was a bit, you know made me feel a bit uneasy”.
Reply
1578 “Okay. What about the lighting there”?
Reply “Well there were lights, there were street lights along the road as you came out of the Ocean Club, erm sort of orangey you know street lights and along the main road at the back and the car park was quite dark cos there were quite a lot of trees that were sort of on that corner, erm and so the car park was quite dark and then when you actually got, you came down a ramp, or down some steps into the sort of area in front of the apartments and erm you know they were, there were sort of lights, you press a button and they come on for a certain length of time, so you know, you put those on to get to the front door, it wasn’t pitch black but I’m not keen on the dark anyway so erm”.http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic43.html

An adult feels uneasy going to flats on her own yet the McCs left the door unlocked for their then 3-year-old, whom they had left in a flat with no adult supervision, to get out and find them at the bar!

Yes, I'd forgotten Rachel had said that; it certainly adds to the strangeness of a mother thinking her 3-year-old could cope out and about on her own with only the street lights to give a bit of light to the darkness. Not that it would be acceptable for a child of that age to be running around looking for her parents in the full glare of daylight, of course, but at night? - 100 times worse. (And Anna, good point about the 'orangey' colour of the street lights.)

BTW, although I'm treating what they all said in various statements and interviews as though I believe it, that's not necessarily the case. It's impossible to know what the truth is of various matters regarding doors and times and crying and all the rest of it, but I'm just looking at what they've said and trying to think of what I'd feel if all they said was actually true. Also I can't help wondering if we're the only people who know about some of these odd things. Do those who have defended the McCanns 'because we've all done it' or 'they were checking the children regularly' know the door was left open as much to facilitate Madeleine's exit from the apartment as her parents' or other checkers' entrance? If they do know, aren't they horrified that such a thing would even enter a parent's head? If they don't know, then they haven't done any research before they jumped to the McCanns' defence.

Even if they haven't read the interviews, it was in the papers that Madeleine had told her parents she was awake and crying one night. It was also in the papers that the door had been left unlocked. Didn't it occur to any of the duo's defenders that a child who woke up one night might (if not sedated) wake up the next night too? That she might have gone to the unlocked door and gone out on her own? Don't they think that parents leaving a door unlocked in an apartment containing a very possibly wakeful child was the height of recklessness, something that deserves the strongest censure? Or is this now considered good childcare practice? No wonder I have such contempt for the British media, especially the press, shedding crocodile tears over other children neglected by their parents but praising Madeleine's parents to the skies. All IMO.

Dimsie wrote:Do those who have defended the McCanns 'because we've all done it' or 'they were checking the children regularly' know the door was left open as much to facilitate Madeleine's exit from the apartment as her parents' or other checkers' entrance? If they do know, aren't they horrified that such a thing would even enter a parent's head? If they don't know, then they haven't done any research before they jumped to the McCanns' defence.

One of the best points I have read on any of the forums. And of course the 'ones we regularly read' do know this!!!

If a green does not appear, I had none to give.

docmac wrote:

Dimsie wrote:Do those who have defended the McCanns 'because we've all done it' or 'they were checking the children regularly' know the door was left open as much to facilitate Madeleine's exit from the apartment as her parents' or other checkers' entrance? If they do know, aren't they horrified that such a thing would even enter a parent's head? If they don't know, then they haven't done any research before they jumped to the McCanns' defence.

One of the best points I have read on any of the forums. And of course the 'ones we regularly read' do know this!!!

If a green does not appear, I had none to give.

doc