The Strange Case of Nora Quoirin

https://www.foresightfactory.co/author/meabhquoirin/


Maebh Quirin seems to have a high profile career and her company (she is CEO and co-owner) has offices in London, New York and Singapore. I can't find out anything about her husband other than he was a director of Rayrock Ltd 2004-2006.

Who cared for Nora on an ongoing basis? Hardly Maebh given her career. Could it be Sebastien? I found a link to LinkedIn for him but it didn't work? Nora would have needed constant supervision; there has been no mention of a nanny so maybe Sebastien became a fulltime dad after he left Rayrock in 2006?

Possibly some journalistic licence here - if tabloid writers are journalists.

https://news.sky.com/story/nora-quoirins-mother-says-she-is-100-sure-her-daughter-was-abducted-11912505

The Quoirins didn't say on RTE that they were 100% sure of abduction and neither did they say that children with special needs are stigmatised in Asia.

Freedom wrote:That is very interesting! The sleeping arrangements have always been a mystery. Now why would the Quoirins let their disabled daughter sleep upstairs with its difficult access and wouldn't they have heard an intruder come in, even without the rigmarole of getting down the stairs with Nora?

https://www.rte.ie/player/series/the-late-late-show/SI0000001694?epguid=IH000384060

I would almost put this interview up with the McCann interview in terms of parents basking in the limelight in my opinion. The interviewer butters them up which they love and I think it serves to put their guard down.  Rather like that McCann interview, what jumps out is that: it's ALL ABOUT THEM.  Their daughter only months before died of starvation and stress alone and naked in the jungle, we are told. How AWFUL to imagine your own  flesh and blood having such a horrible death at such a tender age - a lingering death over a period of days and days. Neither parent can say: 'thank goodness she didn't suffer too much or for too long' because she clearly did - if we are to believe what we have read in the press about what happened.  There are no tears over their daughter's suffering as far as I can see. Nor self-reflective questions about the suitability of choice of accommodation or holiday destination, despite the fact that media reports have stated that the pair are planning to take legal action against the hotel regarding lack of security etc.

Just as he did with the McCann parents, the interviewer butters up the parents and gets them to talk about their daughter. This is clearly the easy bit as eulogising is quite easy, imo, especially when the person is dead. No awkward relationship stuff to deal with - just an idealized relationship that might never have existed in the first place, imo. It would be interesting to know more about Nora's relationship with her siblings.

In the McCann case, Madeleine was not officially dead at the time of the interview. In Nora's case, she has been dead for around six months. I don't believe that most parents would be able to talk about their daughter in the way that Nora's parents have done within such a short space of time.  The whole thing would still be incredibly raw yet Nora's mother is remarkably upbeat. Ditto the father.

I think the pair put on a reasonable show at the beginning although what kind of 'help' they are looking for from the Irish people is unclear, given their daughter is dead. Nora's father is not openly grinning and smirking which is an improvement on the previous interview linked up-thread where he almost looks like he's won the lottery.

Where it gets interesting is Nora's father's description of the afternoon that the family arrived in the resort. It was a quiet afternoon, according to Nora's father, because of the jet-lag. Despite this there is lunch, swimming, a walk, more swimming, then a barbeque and finally an early night. Sounds quite busy, really....no-one succumbed to jet-lag and had a nap? A curious inclusion, given the McCann case, is that Nora's father shares that Nora tripped on the walk and sustained a slight injury to her leg. Why did he include this? It is of course reminiscent of Madeleine falling on the steps of the plane. Nora's father states that the real adventures were to start the following day. This is a curious turn of phrase, given that he knows what happened the following day and then the eventual outcome. What an inappropriate thing to say in the context of his daughter's alleged abduction, imo.

The resort, we are repeatedly told by the parents, is isolated, remote,  surrounded by jungle and with inhospitable terrain.  So remote is the resort that the family had to pre-book lunch, Nora's father tells us, which rather begs the question of how did the barbecue happen in the evening at their villa? Did they pre-order food into the villa to cook? How did they get the ingredients for the bbq? Was this pre-booked as well? Nora's father does not tell us but surely it is quite important in terms of setting the scene for the disastrous events that are to unfold overnight?

There is so much more in this interview - I think it is rich in clues and meanings. IMO only and of course pure speculation they are both up to their necks in it. In the Mc case I don't think the parents were quite on the same page but in this case.....they are quite the double act.

You should have marketed your analytical skills, poster!

Some very good points there. We do get more of a feeling that the Quoirins actually knew their daughter than with the McCanns and their very vague descriptions of what Madeleine was like but, yes, was there another side to the story - "normal" difficult relationships with a teenager?

There have been cases where parents have talked about their lost children while looking as if it's the greatest thing that's ever happened to them. I'm thinking particularly of the Sandy Hook school shooting. I'm not saying it was a hoax and didn't happen but I can understand how some people thought it must be.

Regarding the BBQ and the post mortem.
Do we know if this family were vegan or vegetarian? It is a very good point that poster made about the food for this bbq. Who provided it, who provided the BBQ fuel?
It seems that death is being put down to starvation and an internal bleed. Surely she couldn't have died in this short time from starvation. If food intake ceases the body uses body fat and though Nora wasn't overweight neither was she lacking in body fat to have lasted her well over a week imo. Lack of fluids would have caused death before lack of food, but she was found close to a stream so water was available.
I find it strange if the parents weren't aware of her ulcer and presume they weren't as never seen any comments from them about it. If she really did have a duodenal ulcer so sever as to rupture then her parents would have had a history of Nora suffering from at the very least stomach pain.

Freedom wrote:You should have marketed your analytical skills, poster!

Some very good points there. We do get more of a feeling that the Quoirins actually knew their daughter than with the McCanns and their very vague descriptions of what Madeleine was like but, yes, was there another side to the story - "normal" difficult relationships with a teenager?

There have been cases where parents have talked about their lost children while looking as if it's the greatest thing that's ever happened to them. I'm thinking particularly of the Sandy Hook school shooting. I'm not saying it was a hoax and didn't happen but I can understand how some people thought it must be.

Ha! I suppose I have done in my own way over the years.

Yes, I do agree that the parents give the impression of knowing their daughter better than the McCanns did but I suppose she was a lot older - ten years older - so many more years in which to forge a relationship.  I wonder what the prognosis is for a child with Nora's condition/s as they grow into adulthood? What kind of care/quality of life etc can they typically expect? I wonder what sort of relationship Nora had with her siblings? I know several families where there are three children and one child has significant special needs. It can place a huge strain on the whole family as the parents have to focus so much on that one child and the other children can feel excluded or marginalized. I've seen this many times. Rather as in the McCann case, the remaining siblings are a boy and a girl which some people might say constitutes a nice tidy family of four.

Notice how the parents talk about 'the family' doing things after Nora's disappearance, even though, at the time of this interview, Nora has been dead for six months or so. They don't make any reference to the family not being a complete family of five in that way that the McCanns did.  There is no great sense of loss or despair given, apart from at the very beginning when they couldn't possibly know what had happened unless they were there or had been involved when it happened. There is nothing said to indicate that the other siblings are missing Nora or how devastated the family is. In fact we get Nora's mother talking about 'celebrating' her death with burials in Ireland and France (how does that work I wonder?) and also a service in London for friends, hospital staff and charities involved in her care. Notice Nora's father's rapid head and eye movement as Nora's mother uses the word 'celebrate' in the context of Nora's death. His head swivels sharply round and his face wears an expression as if to say - 'omg!'. It's around the 21.25 mark and quite noticeable, imo. Nora's mother (an accomplished public speaker) then quickly repairs the blunder (for it surely is one, especially given her husband's reaction) and speaks of celebrating in death as in life.

There are many other red flags in my opinion. The description of the father first finding Nora missing has huge parallels with the McCanns as he states he immediately knew 'she had been taken'. Just like the McCanns, that has to be taken at face value and is, I believe, the  truth. You can only know what happened if you were there when it happened. If Nora's father wasn't there at the time Nora disappeared then he cannot possibly 'know' what happened. Notice how he smiles at various points when describing finding her missing - at around the 9.03 point and again at the 9.42 point. Notice how they describe the idea that Nora could have gone out on her own as 'absurd' and 'insane'. Kate's response when the police suggested Madeleine could have got out of the apartment on her own as 'insulting to our intelligence'.

The parents describe how Nora never got up in the middle of the night. I find this implausible unless she was given sleeping pills. The whole family would have had quite major jet-lag. It would have been perfectly feasible for all of them to have struggled with the different time zones including Nora. Did Nora never have to get up in the night to go to the toilet or adjust her bedding or because of a nightmare or for whatever reasons that people wake in the night which is completely normal? It's perfectly possible that all three of the children were struggling with adjusting to the different time zones that night, unless they had been given sleeping pills.

Nora's father's description of his waking up that morning is interesting. At around the 7.02 point he states: 'I was the first person to be awake that morning'. How does he know?  One or other of the children could have been  awake already and reading, say? He goes on to state: 'I think I was lying in bed at 7 o'clock or so contemplating the day ahead. At around 8ish I thought I would check on how the kids were doing.'

There above description is just plain weird and suspicious in my opinion.  It doesn't sound like the first day of an adventure holiday with three children to me. The father wakes up reasonably early and lies in bed for a whole hour with three excited children apparently slumbering peacefully above, despite the massive time-zone differences.  Really?

'I think I was lying in bed at 7am'. That's brain leak and a blunder, imo. He should have said: 'I think I woke up at around 7am'. Lying in bed is a given if you have just woken up. It must be sensitive. I wonder when Nora's abductor 'struck' during the night? It's lucky no-one was awake with jet-lag or was woken up as 'the abductor'  struggled down the spiral staircase with the dead weight of a sleeping teenager. Which window was allegedly the entry and exit point? Must have been a tricky manoeuvre for the abductor.  

Lying in bed for an hour 'contemplating the day ahead' is  a strange way to describe waking up on the first day of a family adventure holiday. Why weren't the children jumping up and down on their bed with excitement?  Apparently, after an hour of 'contemplation', Nora's father  'checks' on 'how the kids are doing' by which time it's 8am or so. A whole hour of being awake that morning and not hearing a dickybird from the three excited children with jet lag on the mezzanine above.  Amazing! Anyone would think they had been drugged? Perhaps, as in the McCann case, there are suggestions that the abductor could have drugged the children?

We never do find out how the kids were doing (or at least how Nora's siblings were doing) as, according to Nora's father, Nora was missing from her bed. Now, the logical thing would be ask the two siblings where Nora was. There is no other logical response to this situation. Was there a bathroom upstairs for he children to use during the night? Maybe she was in there - after all, it was 8am, you would reasonably expect one or more of the children to be awake and needing the toilet, even with jet-lag. Were there other rooms upstairs that Nora could have gone into? What did Nora's siblings have to say? Did any of them wake up in the night and see or hear something suspicious? Despite the pair being vital eye-witnesses, neither of Nora's parents, apparently, feel it necessary to quiz the siblings. Now, that reminds me of another case.

Nora's father's mind - inexplicably or perhaps not -  is set in stone from the outset. Oops, here we go again. He can  'feel it in his bones'. He knew 'immediately' that Nora had been taken (7.46 time on the interview). Check out his beady look as he says this (there are many of these beady looks). In descriptions remarkably reminiscent of the McCann's descriptions, we are then told that 'panic' set in (7.58 - with another interesting facial expression). We even have the 'running like headless chickens' description which one of the Tapas males used to describe their reaction. Almost the same script in places - I wonder who writes it?

Notice how, in eerie parallels with some of Gerry's descriptions of finding Madeleine missing, we are told (7.50 mark) by Nora's father that the few seconds (after he had found her missing) lasted for ever (or something to that effect). He then gives a smile/smirk, as he does again at the 7.54 point and at many other times when a smile/smirk/grin seems quite inappropriate.  I think these little micro-expressions give him (and his wife) away as they did with the McCanns in media interviews. I think the dreaded dupers' delight can be seen at times. (The filming pans over the audience at various points. They look remarkably malleable, imo. I wonder how they were selected?)

There is so much more besides. As richly revealing as Kate's book in its own way, imo. At around the 17.15 mark Nora's father describes how 'we travelled on foot as a family' (to where Nora had been found dead) and 'all of us were struck by how impossibly difficult it was'.  I can't quite believe what I am hearing here. A decision to take Nora's siblings to the place where their sister was found dead was made, and what struck them all was how difficult it was to get there?

Nothing else struck them?  It's as though he is describing a family outing in which the rough terrain is the lasting impression. Where is the emotion around visiting the place where their daughter/sister was found dead? What was the purpose of this pilgrimage? To lay flowers on the spot? To weep and remember Nora? To pay their respects to poor Nora? Apparently not, according to her father. It seemed to be about bolstering up his version of events - that it would have been impossible for Nora to walk there unaided. Which of course begs the question of who took her there and WHY?

(In the context of what I think might have happened I find the inclusion of this little 'outing' macabre in the extreme and I think it confirms to me that Nora's father shares personality traits with Madeleine's father.)

The best bit or should that be the worst bit, though, is the question about the forensics. It's an absolute cracker. Watch at around the 13.30 mark as the interviewer asks about forensics. What we get is all the McCann guff about bungling police allowing contamination of the scene. Yet, like the McCanns, the parents insist they KNEW immediately that their daughter had been abducted by criminals. So why not INSIST on no contamination of the scene by family members and staff?  Easy enough to do in both cases. Both sets of families claim they know the entry/exit point of the abductor so keep the scene uncontaminated so as to find the culprit.

In strange echoes of the McCann case it seems  that nothing of value was taken from the accommodation, apart from Nora that is. I can't really get into the mind of a random mystery abductor who would steal a 14 year old child from her bed at night, navigating a tricky spiral staircase, then go out into the jungle with her leaving her to die and depositing her at the foot of a water fall. Were the abductor/s finger prints found on poor Nora's body? If she couldn't walk there someone or several people must have helped her get there and would have left DNA on her and finger prints on her body. What happened to her clothes, they would have been contaminated, surely?

It is at the 13.35 point where the double-act reaches a climax, imo. It's reminiscent of the interview where the McCanns were asked about the crying incident. The interviewer asks if police found anything important forensically and Nora's mother answers: 'They didn't and to be utterly frank they were never going to'.

 Look at Nora's father's face at this point. A picture tells a thousand words, so they say. Still, out of the horses mouths as is so often the case - there were no forensics to support a random mystery abductor.  Nora's mother confirms it. But of course it's all the fault of the bungling foreign police. We've heard it all before.

Notice how at the 14.15 point Nora's father circumnavigates having to show any genuine emotion when asked about how they were feeling prior to the finding of the body. Apparently they were feeling more hopeful as if she wasn't around then she had been abducted. Was Nora's father really believing that the abductor/s would be 'looking after' Nora nicely, rather as the McCann parents appeared to feel that the (paedophile) abductors of Madeleine would do? It's just all nonsense as Gerry might say.

The delicate question about having to identify Nora's  body was another apparent distraction from having to get emotional for Nora's father as he quite helpfully adds that they had to do it twice (16.11 mark).  He appears to be eager to fill the interviewer in on details of the case, however gruesome. No sign of being overwhelmed by emotion. Now that reminds me of someone else who grinned broadly a few days after his daughter was allegedly abducted as if he had not a care in the world.

My own interpretations as always.

Another horrible case - that poor child, what must she have gone through in those last days of her life? The curiosity, perhaps, is why the mother is claiming that she wants the case reopened (although judging by Nora's fathers look when she states this in the interview they are not necessarily on the same page here)? Perhaps, as in the McCann case in my opinion, the mother is not entirely in the picture? And of course, as in the McCann case, there are two other children to consider.

It's a corker of an interview, imo. Right up there with the McCann interview on the same 'show'. A grave error of judgement in both cases I would say. And to give such an interview so soon after your child has died. I can quite understand why the interviewer asked about the trust that supported them. He suggests (although somewhat hurriedly) that the public donate to the trust which I find distasteful in the extreme given the ongoing questions around the case not least from the parents themselves.

The Donegal connection is indeed curious, as is the 'appeal' to the Irish public. An appeal for what? It would appear money. Does the trust give financial support for funerals I wonder?

Tangled Web wrote:Regarding the BBQ and the post mortem.
Do we know if this family were vegan or vegetarian? It is a very good point that poster made about the food for this bbq. Who provided it, who provided the BBQ fuel?
It seems that death is being put down to starvation and an internal bleed. Surely she couldn't have died in this short time from starvation. If food intake ceases the body uses body fat and though Nora wasn't overweight neither was she lacking in body fat to have lasted her well over a week imo. Lack of fluids would have caused death before lack of food, but she was found close to a stream so water was available.
I find it strange if the parents weren't aware of her ulcer and presume they weren't as never seen any comments from them about it. If she really did have a duodenal ulcer so sever as to rupture then her parents would have had a history of Nora suffering from at the very least stomach pain.

I don't believe starvation would happen that quickly. However I do wonder what medications Nora might have been on and whether she or indeed her siblings had been given any medications the night of the disappearance.

I agree about the ulcer - very strange. It would be interesting to see her past history. One of the services after her death was for, among others, hospital staff who had treated her so that suggests she had been in hospitals during her life.

We are told Nora had the developmental age of a five or six year old. That is old enough to try to seek help, drink water from a stream, try to find your way back to your family etc. A child of that developmental age would shout and cry to try to attract help.

Why wasn't Nora found sooner while still alive? The surrounding forest area was searched in the first few days or so including the area where she was found.

I see the parents are still planning to sue the resort that they considered to be a suitable choice of holiday accommodation for their daughter - as they say - remote, in the jungle, an adventure etc. If they wanted a secure resort with cctv and 24 hour manned security why didn't they chose one? If the window was found with a broken hinge then who is to say the 'abductor' didn't do it? No property or even hotel room can be 100% secure. You'd have to go to a prison to guarantee that absolutely no-one could get in or out.



https://news.sky.com/story/nora-quoirins-family-sue-malaysian-resort-where-teen-stayed-before-she-died-11913919

A reminder of what Jim  Gamble said:

A former police officer advising Nora Quoirin's family said the window mechanism of their holiday villa in Malaysia was broken and it “could have been opened from outside.”

Speaking to the BBC’s Breakfast programme, Jim Gamble said that the 15-year-old's family could not lock the Dunsun resort villa window because it was faulty.

He said: “In the villa we do know that the downstairs window was broken so it couldn't have been locked by the family and could have been opened from outside.”


Mr Gamble said the ordeal had been "the worst possible time" for Nora's family, adding: "I think the sooner the family are able to bring Nora home and begin the journey that their grieving process will take them on, the better."​

The family need to be given "the time and the space to grieve with dignity" as they "bring this very, very special child home", he added.


Absolutely nothing at all about how Nora suffered. We know that the family arrived at the resort at around 12.30pm. Plenty of hours of daylight left to check over the suitability of the villa, alert the staff to the broken window mechanism, consider the security of the resort, speak to management about concerns, ensure that Nora had a secure room in which to sleep - possibly near her parents in case she woke up and was scared. There would have been enough time to have decided that the resort was not suitable for Nora and to find alternative accommodation, if necessary. At the very least to get the window secured.

What did they do instead? Have lunch, swim, go for a walk, go for another swim and then have a bbq at the villa. Sounds like a family who were really concerned about the suitability of the accommodation for their daughter, doesn't it?




https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/nora-quoirin-villa-window-mechanism-broken-and-it-could-have-been-opened-from-outside-says-a4214731.html

Sections nipped from the story linked below (my emphasis). The story seems quite clear.

SEREMBAN, Aug 8 — The police today said that they are confident the only exit used in missing Irish teenager with specials needs, Nora Anne Quoirin, 15, was the aluminium glass window at The Dusun resort where she was staying with her family, here.

Negri Sembilan Police Chief Datuk Mohamad Mat Yusof said investigations by the forensic team confirmed that Nora Anne had exited from the premises through the glass window.

“Yes, only the glass window exit was used. We are certain about this,” he said this evening at a press conference in Pantai police station here.

Yesterday, investigators had said that several sets of fingerprints were found on the window panel.

Negri Sembilan deputy police chief SAC Che Zakaria Othman yesterday said the police are checking if the fingerprint samples could belong to a criminal or an outsider.

The window in the resort, which could only be opened from the inside, was seen left open.

..........Sniffer dogs used in the operation were only able to trace the odour of the victim on the first day of the operation and as far as 100m from the chalet occupied by the teen.

Her scent faded by the following day.

Police have classified Nora Anne as a missing persons case and has rubbished rumours of abduction, as claimed by family members.



https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2019/08/08/police-only-exit-used-in-missing-irish-teen-case-was-glass-window-other-rou/1778895

Oh dear, I really should get a life, but having become intrigued by the case (and appalled by the attitude of Nora's parents) it would seem that the family were staying in Sora House (as noted up-thread in the excellent Crimerocket blog on the case).

A look at the tripadvisor reviews on the resort reveals that you are up close to the jungle, with open-air rooms exposed to the elements and insect life is never far away. At night it would indeed be pitch-black. At least one reviewer noted there were no locks on doors (if indeed there are doors at all...).  It is clearly NOT a place you would chose if security was uppermost in your mind. That could not be clearer from reviews of the place and Nora's parents must have been fully aware of this prior to booking, imo.

This is what one reviewer had to say about Sora House  in April 2017 (my emphasis). There are many other reviewers who mention the insect life and the noise from the jungle even at night.

Sora is big and lovely. The master bedroom is downstairs and has an entire suite bathroom which is the only bathroom (also accessible from the terrace). It has a shower and a bath which is separate from the shower. The bath is sunken and is in the patio next to the master bedroom....The Sora has a mezzanine floor which has a double bed and room for another bed. The kitchen in the Sora is open plan and big. .....Also worth mentioning is the fact that The Sora has a lovely terrace that overlooks the rainforest which is lovely for sitting out in, but there isn't a door, so it can't be closed up. It wasn't an issue though and made the house very airy.

The huge downside for me about the Dusun and this is through no fault of theirs, is the mosquitoes. The foreigners in our party (not the locals!) suffered lots of mosquito bites despite religious application of mosquito repellents. The double bed upstairs at the Sora as well as the spare bed had mosquito netting but there were lots of holes in them!

As The Dusun is literally in the middle of the rainforest, you can hear bird calls and insect noises throughout the day and night and these can keep you up! Ear plugs are a good idea!


It would appear that the claims that Nora would never have woken up should be taken with a large pinch of salt. Apart from anything, mosquitoes appear to be a problem for some and there is a fair bit of insect and wild life noise.  The bathroom appeared to be on the ground floor necessitating negotiating a spiral staircase at night for any of the children sleeping upstairs.

As Nora's father states it would certainly be an adventure but you would absolutely not book this place if you wanted a secure resort with 24 hour cctv and were worried about the safety and security of a child with special needs.


https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Hotel_Review-g298290-d1567592-Reviews-or95-The_Dusun-Seremban_Seremban_District_Negeri_Sembilan.html#REVIEWS

Great posts, Poster.

The Late Late Show would have a research team to brief the interviewer Ryan Tubridy. Why couldn't they have come up with the material on the holiday accommodation that you have found?

I understand now why the parents slept downstairs - because it was the master bedroom with good facilities.

But how they could have been happy with three children on a mezzanine with it appears the only bathroom facilities down the spiral staircase.

If properly briefed the interviewer could have asked the relevant questions in a gentle way so as not to antagonise the audience.

My mother would have had fits about the mezzanine accommodation. There was a time when we stayed in a one room chalet with a single bed and bunk beds. Needless to say, my sister and I clamoured for the top bunk and she was allowed to sleep there, being older and less likely to fall out of it.

It's interesting that the terrace is completely open to the elements so why did the dastardly abductor not come in that way, rather than clambering through a window?

Antonia wrote:Great posts, Poster.

The Late Late Show would have a research team to brief the interviewer Ryan Tubridy.  Why couldn't they have come up with the material on the holiday accommodation that you have found?

I understand now why the parents slept downstairs - because it was the master bedroom with good facilities.

But how they could have been happy with three children on a mezzanine with it appears the only bathroom facilities down the spiral staircase.

If properly briefed the interviewer could have asked the relevant questions in a gentle way so as not to antagonise the audience.

Thanks! I do get a bit OCD when presented with cases where so many things don't add up to the detriment of all the other things I have to do.

With regard to the research team who would have briefed the interviewer I can really only assume that the idea (as with the McCanns I do believe) was to let the parents speak without censure and see what they had to say.  I have to say, for a young family with a very nervous child with special needs the accommodations sounds like a nightmare. The approach road is precipitous; access to the villas - there are only around half a dozen or so - sounds quite awkward; there a steep hills and tracks nearby that become treacherous after it has rained; it is pitch black at night; there are mosquitoes; insect and wild life inevitably enters the accommodation some of which is open to the elements. Doors and windows (where they exist) do not necessarily have locks it would seem. Many, many reviewers report many insects and also wildlife in the accommodation. Some were thrilled by this as it was part of the 'jungle experience', others less so.  And that's without taking into account the spiral staircase although I do wonder if it is possible that Nora slept downstairs?

From reading the reviews it would appear that the 'resort' is really an 'eco-lodge' type of place and the owner/s live there.  You go there for the 'jungle experience' and to get away from it all with nature around you. If you wanted cctv; 24 hour security; securely locked and bolted villas; kids' clubs; room service et al then it is not the place to go.  This is why I find it so audacious that Nora's parents are reported as suing the owners, apparently because the lack of security meant an 'abductor' could get in. They would have known what the resort was like before booking and it was their responsibility to chose somewhere suitable for their children, imo. Rather like the McCanns leaving the children alone without a babysitter. They knew there was no baby-listening at Ocean Club so why book the resort if that facility was important to them? And why not use the night creche or hire a babysitter?  If you want security and safety with 'child friendly' and 'health and safety' in spades then go to Centre Parcs or similar I would suggest.

Both the McCanns and Nora's family would have had ample opportunity to research their choice of accommodation beforehand, ask questions and ensure that it suited their needs.

From reading the tripadvisor on the Dusun reviews, it would seem that the jungle trek to the waterfall was a big feature and it was reasonably challenging, especially if it had recently rained, but still doable for children over five or so it would seem. Given that Nora's father spoke about an adventure about to begin I would presume the family were planning to do the walk during the trip. Although given that Nora struggled with agility I imagine the walk might have been tricky and not just the walk but the resort generally.

But really the question has to be asked WHY did Nora's parents chose this type of accommodation if they were concerned about one of their children being abducted? Given that Nora's father (incredibly) claims that he knew 'immediately' that she had been taken, then clearly the risk of abduction was something significant for him. So why  chose an eco-lodge with open plan and sometimes open air accommodation in the middle of the jungle with limited cctv and security?

Freedom wrote:My mother would have had fits about the mezzanine accommodation. There was a time when we stayed in a one room chalet with a single bed and bunk beds. Needless to say, my sister and I clamoured for the top bunk and she was allowed to sleep there, being older and less likely to fall out of it.

It's interesting that the terrace is completely open to the elements so why did the dastardly abductor not come in that way, rather than clambering through a window?

Agreed. Allowing a child with special needs whose developmental age was five or six to sleep on a mezzanine would appear to be somewhat reckless, especially given that she was a nervous child. I can only imagine that the jungle might have seemed very scary.  The pitch-black jungle certainly scared some of the reviewers who were in lodges open to the elements!

One thing that stuck me from the interview is that the parents were asked about 'bringing Nora home'. We know that this meant bringing Nora's body home but nevertheless the parents seemed reasonably upbeat about the various celebrations of her life that were planned. I found their enthusiasm for the various celebrations of her death quite strange, given that she had been in good health (according to the parents) and her death had been unexpected and traumatic. After just five months of so one might have thought that the parents would still be in mourning for the life that had been traumatically and tragically cut short.

There are some weird echoes of the McCann case around this. We know that the McCanns were allegedly wanting to bring Madeleine home alive, despite the evidence from Portuguese police that she had died and the parents had hidden her body and faked an abduction. There has been speculation about what might have happened to Madeleine's body and also whether her family made any arrangements for goodbyes or 'laying her to rest' (if Dr Amaral's claim is correct).

Were it not for Jim Gamble popping his head about the parapet I would probably not have made much connection between the two cases  but given Gamble's huge support for the McCanns and then his role as 'advisor' to Nora's family (advising them about what, exactly, given that they already had the Lucie Blackman trust working for them?) I do start to wonder what is going on.

All very peculiar, imo.

More reviews of the eco-lodges where Nora's family stayed and from where she was allegedly abducted. One reviewer notes that the terrain is challenging for 2 - 4 year olds; another notes: 'not child friendly' and yet another 'paths precipitous'. Did Nora's family do their research and ensure 'due diligence'?

https://www.booking.com/reviews/my/hotel/the-dusun-seremban.en-gb.html?aid=356980;label=gog235jc-1DCA0ooQFCEnRoZS1kdXN1bi1zZXJlbWJhbkgzWANoUIgBAZgBCb

I hope that the claim for damages will be laughed out of court (if it gets that far) in view of the evidence that the resort was not suitable for the family's needs and that they should have been perfectly aware of that.

Guinea Pig wrote:I hope that the claim for damages will be laughed out of court (if it gets that far) in view of the evidence that the resort was not suitable for the family's needs and that they should have been perfectly aware of that.

One would hope so - is it a deliberate distraction I wonder? Look that way, not this way?

At the risk of entering into geek territory (ahem!) I couldn't help looking into sunset and sunrise times at the resort at the time that Nora disappeared. I assume Nora was around for all the activities on the day and evening that the family arrived which her father has outlined, which ended in an evening barbecue? Even if there were no independent witnesses to this, her siblings would have been there. There may, of course, have been other witnesses who saw Nora on the day the family arrived and later that day when the family had a barbecue.

Given that the resort was in the jungle, night-time there would have been very dark and it appears the resort was quite isolated so little if any light pollution. Don't know how full the moon was than night but night time in the jungle is dark.

I couldn't help thinking about what Nora's father said about waking up on the first full day of their 'adventure' in the jungle and finding Nora missing from her bed. In the interview linked up-thread  he said that he was lying in his bed at around 7pm. I found this a slightly curious turn of phrase as I would have expected him to say that he woke up at around 7pm. Lying in bed is a given if you have just woken up and he claims he was the first member of the family to wake up but of course we only have his word for all this.

Slightly strangely, imo, given that the children were very excited about the adventure ahead and there was a massive 7 hour time difference meaning sleeping/waking times would be all messed up and other factors (mosquitoes/insects/jungle noises etc) Nora's father lay in bed for an hour, from 7pm until 8pm, before deciding to 'check' on the children on the mezzanine upstairs. (I think there are some reports that Nora was sleeping downstairs but not sure where these came from?)

By 8am, if not before, you would expect one or more of the children to have been up and about partly due to factors above as well as the need to use the toilet, which was downstairs.

Given how dark it was at night, you might expect whoever had abducted Nora to wait until day break/first light simply because the logistics of carrying/frog-marching a 14 year old teenager out of the villa and into the jungle would be considerable in complete darkness. You could argue the abductor struck the previous evening, before it was completely dark, but with sunset was at 7.35pm  - probably while the family were enjoying the barbecue, and twilight of whatever description only an hour later, it is highly likely that the parents, at least, were awake until nightfall and beyond.

So perhaps it was more likely that the abductor struck in the early hours. It would seem from the charts below that sunrise on the day Nora disappeared was at 7.11am - 11 minutes after Nora's father states he was lying in bed awake. But morning twilight was anywhere between 5.59 and 6.24 depending on which type of twilight it was (see charts). This would mean that by 8pm, if the abductor had say struck during the morning twilight, Nora could have been quite far away as the abductor would have had around an hour and a half to make a getaway.

Is it not slightly strange that Nora's father does not lament the fact that he lay in bed for a whole hour, completely oblivious to the calamity that had struck on the mezzanine above, rather than going and checking on the children when he was first lying in bed awake at 7am? That would have given the parents an extra 'golden hour' as it were to find their daughter. Also, lying in bed for an hour 'contemplating the day ahead' does not really seem in keeping with the excitement of the first morning of a jungle adventure?

Who knows, had Nora's father made his way up the spiral staircase early in the morning, perhaps he might even have disturbed the abductor, in the manner that Gerry McCann thinks he might have done? (The McCanns think that the abductor may have hidden in the wardrobe or even behind the door while Gerry/Matt did their checks.)

If I was convinced that someone had abducted my child overnight I would be feeling quite distressed about having spent an hour lying in bed in the morning rather than going up to bedroom. All those 'what ifs'?

Also of note is that the sniffer dogs apparently only followed Nora's scent to within a 100 meters or so of the villa and then lost the scent. So where was she for all those days before she was found?

https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/malaysia/seremban?month=8&year=2019

Hallo there ,i have been reading over and over about this child and what really happened to her. I just had a thought about how she gotPUT where she was found .so how did she get there? I wonder if she was taken before she reached where she was going to?Its possable she was picked up before she went to the place she needed to b. Taken maybe even to a house where from there She could have been placed to the spot she was found laying down hands behind her head. Might think it could be that way ,felt that were not bad underneath etc ,clothes missing also .please get back and tell me if this might be it?? joyce1938.

You think she was found wandering by someone and kept somewhere? I don't think there were any houses anywhere near apart from the resort's accommodation.

It is apparently untrue (as the media said) that she was found naked. She still had the underwear on that she was wearing when she went to bed.

I wonder if one of her siblings was capable of leading her outside in the middle of the night and causing her to be lost?

Maybe but wouldn't they have woken the parents?

As we now know that the three children were all sleeping on the mezzanine level, with the two sisters presumably in the same bed, that makes it more unlikely that a stranger could have got up there and taken Nora without disturbing the other children.

Freedom wrote:Maybe but wouldn't they have woken the parents?

As we now know that the three children were all sleeping on the mezzanine level, with the two sisters presumably in the same bed, that makes it more unlikely that a stranger could have got up there and taken Nora without disturbing the other children.

I think if this had really been the case, it would rule out the random mystery abductor. Is s/he really going to sneak into the villa at night not knowing where everyone was sleeping? Discover the parents are sleeping downstairs so therefore must go up the spiral staircase.  Navigate a tricky spiral staircase without waking anyone up and in the dark. Choose which child to steal from the option of three children. Elect to choose the oldest child (the tallest and heaviest?) who could possibly be sharing the bed with a sibling. Get her out of the bed without disturbing the other children and without her screaming, crying or protesting? Then carry or frogmarch Nora down a spiral staircase to the ground floor where her parents are sleeping?  And at this point we are expected to believe that Nora (knowing her parents are sleeping downstairs) does not scream out and cry for help from her parents? This is all in the dark. The 'abductor' then carries Nora out of the downstairs window and into the pitch-black jungle? To avoid Nora crying out he must have drugged her or gagged her presumably?

Really?

Yet the family appear convinced that this did indeed happen, if it is true that Nora was sleeping upstairs with her siblings. (If she was sleeping downstairs, was it on a separate bed to her parents and, again, why didn't they wake up or get woken up when she would surely have protested to her 'abductor'.)

And despite the implausibility of the above, the father insists that Nora was abducted and knew immediately. Incredibly, given the parents are convinced that a serious crime has just occurred and one of their most precious possessions has been stolen from the villa, neither parent insists on preserving the crime scene from contamination at all and family and staff are allowed to traipse all over the villa, apparently leaving the forensics in tatters.

One of the first things you are told to do if your house is burgled is leave things as they are so that when police come they can take finger-prints and find any evidence. Despite this, both the McCann family and Nora's family did the opposite it would seem. Both families appeared to have encouraged people to swarm all over the accommodation. The McCanns at some stage appeared to have done a deep cleanse of the villa so that none of Madeleine's DNA was found, incredibly. They also had clothes washed a few days later.

I wonder what Nora's family did with the bedding where Nora was sleeping and any items such as comforters or soft toys she might have taken to bed with her? We know she loved her soft and cuddly toys as her mother tells us. Was Nora on any medications for her condition which had clearly required periods of hospitalization in the past? Had any of the children been given any medications to help them sleep and/or avoid jet lag?

Was a light left on upstairs in case any of the children woke in the night? If it had been there would have been swarms of insects around it (see reviews of the eco-lodge) as jungle life was never far away.  Did Nora and her siblings have bottles of water near their beds in case they were thirsty? By what means were they expected to negotiate the spiral staircase at night if one of them woke (which would be perfectly likely) and needed to use the bathroom downstairs or  wanted to see one of their parents for comfort in a place so very far away from the urban jungle of Balham (I think it is reported they lived in this area of London?)

The whole story is just so unbelievable, imo.

One other thing that struck me about the interview in which Nora's father spoke was that one of the first things he said about Nora was that 'she couldn't add two and two'. (Please correct me if I'm wrong - but that's what it sounds like to me). I can't remember the context of the question - perhaps it was about her cognitive abilities or about the level of her development. But we nevertheless then hear how much Nora achieved from her own determination and no doubt much hard work from all her caregivers and her school. Her mother is more positive about Nora's capabilities adding that she was bilingual - a considerable skill. I think it is reported that she was at the Garratt school in Earlsfield which is for children with 'moderate' learning difficulties. There appears to be a full academic syllabus with all the usual school activities.

I don't know, but if my daughter aged 14 had just been 'abducted' and I was asked about her, I'm not sure that the first thing that would spring to mind would be 'she can't add two and two'. Sounds rather pejorative to me and in the context of what the father is asking us to believe happened to his bilingual daughter, one might argue that the father thinks that no-one else can add two plus two either.

IMO only.

https://www.garrattpark.wandsworth.sch.uk/

Another great post from poster.

Apart from the impossibility of abduction giving the facts and the logistics of the holiday home, why would someone abduct Nora or another sibling?

Tourists at the complex would be middle class people with middle class incomes.  There is no reason to think the complex attracted 'celebrities' with millions.  The most likely target of intruders would be to take decent mobile phones, cameras and cash.

The family only arrived at lunchtime the day before Nora vanished so not much time for a dodgy staff member to pass information to a criminal friend. And wouldn't this observant staff member have noticed that something wasn't normal with Nora?  Why abduct a child with difficulties?

This story is way more bizarre than the McCann case where you can put forward believable alternatives to the official story.

It is possible that a sibling persuaded Nora to go for a midnight walk and they got out without waking the parents and then something went horribly wrong given the difficult terrain. But wouldn't the sibling have got help. he/she would have been terrified of the parents reaction but surely he/she didn't just return to the lodge as if nothing had happened. And the pair couldn't have got far so how did Nora get to where she was found.  I can't believe my own theory. Surely the police would have questioned the siblings who were key witnesses or did the parents tell the police that the other two had slept soundly and only woke up when the father started shouting that Nora was gone?  The McCann twins were to young to be interviewed but the siblings were 9 and 12.

Excellent thoughts, poster.

Could I just say that Nora was 15, not 14. Not that it makes a lot of difference!

In the public domain, a review of the Sora lodge accommodation from April 2019 (link below):

Beautifully set, a true jungle experience. Staying in the house (Sora), it is uniquely designed. For a short visit this is a haven of tranquility. Pools are atractive and generally well maintained. Grounds are well maintained, and the staff friendly, helpful and courteous On the downside, the unique architecture of the Sora (open on one side) means it is uniquely exposed to the jungle and its insect inhabitants. Getting around at night, especially in the comfortable but trip hazard mezzanine flaw is difficult ...any light draws in the insects. The tight spiral staircase is a challenge every time. Although the house is spacious and comfortable its upkeep is not quite to the standard one would expect for a rental at this price and i suspect the more traditional wooden house offer as good an experience at a more appropriate price, and one slightly less as one with the insect community. Finally, my local friends were as impressed by the Nasi Lemak on Sunday as they were disappointed with the (no Nasi Lemak) the previous day! Overall it was a good weekend and worth the visit but doubt i would want to return

If it is correct that the Sora lodge, where I think it is reported that Nora and her family were staying, is 'open on one side' then I'm not sure that unlocked doors or open windows are particularly relevant? The mezzanine, in particular, appears to be a challenge with the tight spiral staircase access. I would have thought that - along with all the lizards and insect life - would be quite a good repellent for any abductor/s.

https://uk.hotels.com/ho725014400/the-dusun-seremban-malaysia/