The Strange Case of Nora Quoirin

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?

I posted earlier about the silliness of the through the window scenario if the accommodation was open to the elements.

If one side is open to the elements, why even have a window that will open ?

Freedom wrote:

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?

I posted earlier about the silliness of the through the window scenario if the accommodation was open to the elements.

Quite. The parents cannot have it both ways. If they elect to go for an eco-lodge experience with open-air type accommodation and minimal security in the middle of the jungle then they accept the risks that go with this.

On the other hand, if they want a secure resort with 24 hour security and cctv cameras then select this type of accommodation.

I think you mean "don't select" in the last sentence.

The reason I asked whether it was possible whether one of the siblings had taken Nora outside is because I wondered whether it could have been a deliberate act, rather than an adventurous stroll. We know nothing about their family dynamics, whether there were stressors in the family caused by Nora's ongoing care and her need for attention, whether there were marital or financial problems which the other children could have been aware of, whether there were jealousies or resentments. Remember that Jon Benet Ramsay's older brother was considered a suspect in her death.

If one of the siblings had led her outside deliberately and left her to wander, they may well have had second thoughts and reported it to the parents. And the entire "abduction" scenario may well have been their attempt to cover up the guilt of their child (or children).

I also had a thought that perhaps Nora had got up in the night and fallen down the staircase and been seriously injured however I think the autopsy would have uncovered any serious injuries from that.

So my only theories are that a) sibling(s) deliberately took her outside and left her to wander or b) one or both parents may have done the same thing, for similar reasons

I don't for a second believe there was any abductor.

froggy wrote:If one side is open to the elements, why even have a window that will open ?

The parents CHOSE of their own volition this type of accommodation, knowing that one of their children had the developmental age of a child of five or six and had much less agility than the average child.  How can a legal case against the owners of the eco-lodges have a leg to stand on? It was more like enhanced self-catering accommodation than a hotel resort. If the parents wanted guards outside the door then why didn't they hire them?

I find the father's claim in the interview up-thread that they were waiting for (or expecting - not sure of the exact terminology) a ransom demand from the abductor/s rather fanciful, to put it mildly and politely.  The family are hardly in the Rockefeller or Getty league with huge wealth. The area is not known for kidnapping. Would kidnappers really choose a child with special needs with all the attendant extra care required?

The parents chose a simple relatively inexpensive lodge. It looks like it was under £100 a night with children accommodated free. If that includes breakfast, that's good value accommodation by any standards. While there are several airlines that fly non-stop to Kuala Lumpur from London, the father elected to fly with the children via Abu Dhabi, presumably partly to keep costs down.  This is an ambitious, demanding flight by any standards and one wonders for whose benefit the long journey was? I wonder what the intended itinerary after the planned few nights at the Dusun was?  

I would really like to know exactly what Jim Gamble's advisory role in this case was? The Malaysian authorities appear to have done their job and considerable resources were deployed. Sadly, Nora was not found alive.

A very strange case.

canada12 wrote:The reason I asked whether it was possible whether one of the siblings had taken Nora outside is because I wondered whether it could have been a deliberate act, rather than an adventurous stroll. We know nothing about their family dynamics, whether there were stressors in the family caused by Nora's ongoing care and her need for attention, whether there were marital or financial problems which the other children could have been aware of, whether there were jealousies or resentments. Remember that Jon Benet Ramsay's older brother was considered a suspect in her death.

If one of the siblings had led her outside deliberately and left her to wander, they may well have had second thoughts and reported it to the parents. And the entire "abduction" scenario may well have been their attempt to cover up the guilt of their child (or children).

I also had a thought that perhaps Nora had got up in the night and fallen down the staircase and been seriously injured however I think the autopsy would have uncovered any serious injuries from that.

So my only theories are that a) sibling(s) deliberately took her outside and left her to wander or b) one or both parents may have done the same thing, for similar reasons

I don't for a second believe there was any abductor.

The most likely scenarios by far, I would have said. Family dynamics can be incredibly complicated at the best of times.

Yes, a cover up to protect other children in the family is a possibility as I believe happened in the Jon Benet Ramsay and Ben Needham families.

Freedom wrote:Yes, a cover up to protect other children in the family is a possibility as I believe happened in the Jon Benet Ramsay and Ben Needham families.

The difference in this case, imo, is that Nora was found seemingly unharmed. In the Ben Needham case I think by far the most likely scenario is that he fell of his young uncle's moped and the males in the family panicked and covered it up. The Jon Benet Ramsay case most certainly looks like an 'insider job' but by whose hands it is difficult to determine (although I am sure those who investigated the case know).

The Madeleine McCann case was, imo, a media hoax - a 'good story to bury bad news' but it was botched/sabotaged/went wrong at the last minute or a combination thereof. Gerry has some secrets up his sleeve and connections in high places (or did have) as far as I can see.

The puzzle with Nora's disappearance is where the heck was she for all those days? I think it is perfectly possible that she was lured out of the villa, perhaps early in the morning with promises of a trip to the waterfall. Whoever did this may then have turned back on some pretext promising to return later and leaving her stranded. But whoever did it would have known the route taken and could have later returned and tried to follow her tracks. In any event, surely Nora after a time would have retraced her tracks? The area where she was found had already been searched. This does beg the question of whether she was held somewhere and also the question of why the sniffer dogs were unable to follow her scent for more than 100 metres from the villa. This suggests, imo, that she might have been taken away in a car which would be a far more logical getaway vehicle for the 'abductor' as a 14 year old girl would be very heavy to carry any distance. I wonder how far from a road was the place where Nora was found?

The father's claim that he lay in bed for an hour from 7am until 8am on the morning that Nora disappeared 'contemplating the day ahead' is a curiosity, imo. With three excited youngsters on the mezzanine above about to start an adventure this seems unlikely, imo and I think it points to sensitivity around what happened early that morning at daybreak. I presume police checked to see when the car the family hired was last used and whether it was used that morning? Were the sniffer dogs taken near the car?

All very strange. But the most perplexing aspect of it for me is Jim Gamble's 'advisory' role.

I find it strange that the £10K reward was offered after Nora had been missing for 9 days. That's a long time. This move had the blessing of Jim Gamble. Why not have offered it sooner when there would have been more chance of Nora still being found alive? Why wait a whopping nine days?

It was the following day the Nora's body was found I do believe and by then she was, tragically, dead.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/nora-quoirin-10k-reward-in-search-for-missing-teen-right-move-says-expert-38396905.html

Nora's mother talks about wanting to find the answers to the questions around how Nora could possibly have got to where she was eventually found.

https://www.thejournal.ie/nora-quoirin-parents-inquest-4938397-Dec2019/

Both parents are movers and shakers in the business world. These are intelligent people with creative minds. They must realize how unlikely their story sounds.  What it interesting to me is that they appear to have a touch of the McCanns' frugality. Nora's mother combined the holiday with a business trip to Singapore I do believe. I think it is reported that she joined the family in Kuala Lumpur. So this would mean that her flights were on business, presumably direct flights and possibly business class. Fair enough, but Nora's dad's journey with the three children was, according to him in the interview up-thread, via Abu Dhabi. Whether the family got off the plane here or not, this still makes it a longer but presumably cheaper flight. A reward was offered for anyone finding Nora, but only after 10 days and was made by an anonymous Belfast business-man,  apparently. This idea was given the full blessing of Jim Gamble but surely it would have been far better to have offered a reward much earlier on? The family started fund-raising fairly early on it would seem and they were supported by the Lucie Blackman trust. I wonder if the trust paid for the wider family members to go out? Did it pay for the family's accommodation after Nora was found missing?  We know that the family arranged several remembrance services for Nora after her body was flown home. Did the trust pay for this too?

Of course it would be heartless in the extreme to nit-pick over financial help for a family whose child was genuinely abducted by a stranger in a random attack. But, as Jim Gamble himself pointed out, children disappearing while on holiday with their parents is incredibly rare and Gamble was only able to point to the cases of Ben Needham and Madeleine McCann. The bodies of these children were never found although we know what Portuguese police think happened to Madeleine McCann. I wonder what the investigating police in Kos thought happened to Ben Needham? But the point is, there are literally no indications of an abduction by a stranger and Malaysian police say there is no evidence that this happened.

Why did Nora's family start raising money in the first place? There was an extensive search underway and Nora could have been found - alive or dead - quite early on. Holiday insurance and/or other types of insurance is designed to protect individuals and their families when things go horrible wrong - as tragically happened to Nora on this fateful holiday.






https://uk.linkedin.com/in/sebquoirin

https://uk.linkedin.com/in/meabh-quoirin-60a99a

Copied from the Ben Needham topic in case anyone wants to refresh their memory on that case.

If you have time there are 40 pages on this link plus the 33 here!

https://maddiemccannmystery.forumotion.co.uk/t1567-the-mystery-of-ben-needham

Thanks for the father's LinkedIn information, poster. I and Antonia were unable to find anything recent about him.

I know that the fund-raising campaigns were covered up-thread but just a reminder of what happened in the first few days. The parents report that the first few days were chaotic in terms of the police investigation and chances were missed to find Nora early on. But nevertheless, family at home found the time to set-up fund-raising campaigns to raise money for their expenses before travelling out to Malaysia.

The first few days when a person goes missing in mysterious circumstances are the 'golden hours' when the person is most likely to be found alive. Yet Nora's uncle and aunt both set up fund-raising campaigns in these first few days rather than just jumping on a plane to Malaysia. Strange, imo.

Nora's uncle and aunt set up campaigns to collect money in both the UK and also in France. This was on 5th August, a day after Nora went missing. The aunt's fund is shown as having raised £105,449.

Nora's aunt writes: "Local police now consider this a criminal matter and are treating it as an abduction.......

More family members are travelling to Malaysia to participate in the search and rescue effort and would appreciate donations to cover any unforeseen expenses or charges incurred in the process.

The balance of funds will be withdrawn directly by Meabh Quoirin, Nóra's mother, to ensure that all expenses incurred by the family are covered by this campaign. Funds will be used at the family's discretion as the search for Nóra continues to develop and as needs arise.

If there are funds in excess of the family's needs, they have expressed wishes to donate the reminder to charity, such as the Lucie Blackman Trust in order to help families in similar situations to ourselves.

We are working with Meabh and Sebastien to ensure that their immediate costs are covered, and will update you all as we have more information."

What 'immediate costs?' The family presumably pre-booked and pre-paid for their accommodation and we know that they pre-ordered lunch for the first day as Nora's father tells us. They presumably also requested provisions ahead for the barbeque that the family enjoyed on the first evening of the holiday. So what were these 'immediate costs,' exactly?

The family would get help from the embassy, surely, and would also have insurance schemes to cover for unseen circumstances? The police investigation was huge and Malaysian police were joined by police from the UK, France and I think there was also help from Ireland.

Are the fund-raising accounts made public?

https://uk.gofundme.com/f/wt9zdm-find-nora-quoirin

If this was a fictitious mystery story and I was writing it, this would be the scenario:

1. Nora's disappearance was meticulously planned in advance.
2. One parent travelled with Nora and her siblings.
3. The other parent travelled on their own to another country where they paid money in advance to a third party.
4. The family meets up and travels to a remote jungle accommodation where it would be very difficult to prove or disprove an abduction.
5. At a predetermined time, Nora is taken out to meet her "abductor" who takes her away and likely sedates her with something to keep her unconscious - some drug which leaves the system quickly and cannot be detected in an autopsy (such as insulin or one of several other drugs which are difficult if not impossible to detect).
6. After an appropriate amount of time, Nora is taken back to the jungle and left to die.
7. After the autopsy, the family takes Nora's body home and cremates it, which destroys any possibility of exhumation in the future.

All theory, all fiction.

If you were writing this totally fictional story, what would be the motive for the crime?

Freedom wrote:If you were writing this totally fictional story, what would be the motive for the crime?

I think I'd need to consider a lot of scenarios. Possibly all of them.
1. A bleak financial prospect - the prospect of continuing care for Nora, eating up a massive amount of money, and only getting worse as she got older and progressed into adulthood.
2. A misguided sense of what might be "best" for the future - building on #1 - an adult who requires permanent care and the parents might have felt that she would require "the best" care rather than just "adequate" care and that would involve a lot of expenses - possibly depriving the other two children
3. Current financial issues that we may not know about
4. Stressors within the family - one parent becoming overly obsessed with Nora's situation and care, to the point that it's affected the marriage, and the only solution might have been to remove the cause of the distress
5. Difficult to consider, but an attitude that "perhaps the kindest thing to do is to put her out of her misery". We never consider that parents are capable of this, yet there are instances in the news all the time of parents who have actually gone to prison because that was the step that they took with a severely handicapped child. I can think of one recent one in Saskatchewan where a father had a severely handicapped child (far more disabled than Nora and in constant pain) and he deliberately took her life, confessed to it and went to prison for it, unapologetic. It was clear that he loved the child immensely, but it was better, he felt, that the child did not have to continue suffering.


Those would be the possible scenarios.

Really interesting fictional scenarios. The other ones I would add would be that high achieving families might tend to expect or want to have children who are also high achieving. The expectations levels might be quite high, especially for the first child. The reality of having to accept that your child cannot and will not meet those expectations might be a difficult journey. In a society or societies where success is measured in terms of grade levels, money, sporting achievements etc then having a child with learning difficulties would be challenging I would think.

Another fictional scenario might be that a child with the type of condition that Nora had might only be expected to have a life-span of a certain number of years. Possibly she might not have been expected to reach full maturity or adulthood. And possibly the parents might have been told by 'experts' to expect very little - possibly far less than Nora was capable of.

Another fictional scenario would be that the father was jealous of the amount of time, love and attention that the mother lavished on a child deemed to be possibly not worthy of such love, time and attention.

Rather as in the McCann case, money seems to have been at the forefront of the family's mind. Relatives set up funds in Ireland and France within days of Nora going missing. There were media reports that the family were going to sue the resort (this appears to have come to nothing though). The Lucie Blackman trust offers financial assistance, I do believe. Jim Gamble made public his support for a cash reward for anyone who found her, but only after she had been missing for over a week. Call me cynical but after this period of time the chances of her being found alive would have been getting quite remote. In other words, a cash reward was only offered at the point where it was unlikely to have been paid out - Nora had already been missing for 9 days and it is possible that the family already knew or suspected she was dead by then. The family's visit to Malaysia was paid for by the funds and/or the Lucie Blackman trust.  There was a huge emphasis on fund-raising from the very beginning. All sounds quite familiar, really?

The other aspect of the case is that the family will almost definitely have had insurance - possibly several different types. For instance specific holiday insurance, holiday insurance linked to a credit card, possibly household insurance with extra cover. I'm not sure what the pay-out would be for the death of a child on holiday but I presume it would be quite large. The hotel would have some kind of indemnity cover which is presumably what the family would have been going for if they had sued the hotel? The parents may well have had insurance schemes linked with their work.

When you factor in the money from the funds, the money from Lucie Blackman trust, and any insurance payouts (have I missed anything?) that would probably amount to a sizeable sum of money. This money was NOT needed for their search because we know that Malaysian police did a thorough job and were joined by other police forces. The accommodation had presumably been paid for along with the flights so why were the family so focused on money as opposed to finding Nora? If Nora had been on medication, why were the family not making appeals to the kidnapper/s directly? What was the MOTIVE for her abduction by a stranger? There was no motive.

The police do not appear to have an active search on to find 'the abductor/s'. The two people who might well be able to provide some good evidence - Nora's siblings - were advised not to speak to the press. Did the family hire a law firm as the McCanns did? Were funds partly use for this?

On the other hand, in a purely fictional scenario I can see what the motive might be for the family of a teenager with special needs. (Scenes from Hansel and Gretel are playing out in my head).

A very murky case indeed, made murkier by the 'assistance' of Jim Gamble. He appears to have set himself up as an apologist for families whose children disappear in hugely suspicious circumstances, imo. But WHY?

Not visited the forum for a long time but looked in tonight after the MM stories in the press today. I found this thread really interesting as the case intrigued/troubled me at the time.

I've seen lots of comments about the suitability of the accomodation but no one has mentioned that the resort is located on a durian farm. I appreciate that many people enjoy eating the fruit but that smell. It's so bad that it is banned on public transport and holiday accomodation in neighbouring Singapore. I cannot believe anyone in their right mind would want to stay in an open sided house anywhere near ripe durian fruit. It also crossed my mind that the smell may also have masked the scent of the missing girl.

It's good to "see" you again. 

Yes, this is a very puzzling case.

I've never even heard of this fruit - having read the link here, I can understand what you mean!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durian

An inquest is due to start next month.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-53371594

I think the pressure for the inquest (now going to happen) from the parents relates to their legal case against the hotel, and also to their own possible feeling of guilt about choosing this location for a family holiday..

If the inquest ruling refers at all to the lack of CTV, weak security and to a possibly defective latch on the downstairs window then that will help their case to get MONEY.

I cannot see why there would be a motive for an abduction. The Quirins are not monied celebrities. There was no ransom demand. They had only just arrived so not much time to target Nora - and why would she be targeted? From the pictures I have seen, I can tell there were health issues with her. Why not take one of her younger siblings?

How did this kidnapper get up a spiral staircase in the darkness and carry a teenager down that staircase without tripping and/or waking up the other family members.

This case has so many similarities to Madeleine going missing.

How time flies - we're just past the anniversary of Nora's reported disappearance - with the 13th the date she was found.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8659897/Police-chief-insists-no-evidence-Nora-Quoirin-abducted-Malaysian-resort.html?ito=push-notification&ci=29812&si=10306854

It is all so strange. How can she have had so few cuts and bruises if she had been wandering in the jungle for days?

It is from The Sun but don't let that put you off. It's interesting as it shows that the parents' claim that Nora could not walk far unaided was false. The police didn't start looking in a larger area until 8 days after she disappeared in the mistaken belief that she couldn't have got far. Now why would anyone want to hinder a police investigation by not giving correct information?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12504238/nora-quoirin-cctv-walking-death-jungle-inquest/

I've just noticed that we've lost our great poster Canada12.