Girl, 2, drowned in her buggy after father let go to kiss mistress

[mrshamiltiongiles]

here

what a bastard

Typical of the species.

aitch, the BBC report mentions nothing about this guy being with his mistress..isn't that what we are talking about?.

Much as I like to think I'm a clever, superior, lentil scoffing, Guardian reading bleeding heart I'm confused (pouts)

it was from the 16th and reported on the rescue, no such detail had emerged. indeed, the witness quotes suggest an assumption that the male and female were the parents, which we now know not to be the case. "'The parents were beside themselves, absolutely distraught.' jeremy francis"

in any case, the bbc is a corporation funded by the license-payer, it is not in the business of making money, unlike the newspapers and other broadcast media. notably in later reports they call her 'his female friend', which is a mistress. if not, she'd be referred to as 'a friend of the family'.

soooo, er, you're clamped, i think, seeing as we're being childish.

Well, until any further details emerge (which I can't see happening now, can you?), I can't see what else (insightful) can be added to this thread.

But I'm sure someone WILL add something......tis the type of topic that's always gonna collect 10,000 posts and get added to in a year's time.

FFS the mistress had nothing to do with it. They've only put that in cos it gets a double shock factor. It was some sort of freak accident. He could have let go of the handles to tie his shoe, zip up his coat, get something out of a bag, kiss his WIFE had she been there instead - anything. And then we would all be giving him sympathy. Yes having an affair is wrong, but his dd did not die because he was having one.

"What kind of sleaze ball takes his DCs on a "date"?"

Erm, me. Is there some sort of rule saying that you shouldn't take your child on a date? OK obviously it is a bit sick to take your children with you when you go and see your mistress but your bog standard date is ok, non?

When they say kiss I wonder if they mean a peck on the cheek or something. Surely they wouldn't risk a proper kiss with an almost 3 year old witnessing who would innocently relay the events of the day to her mum?

A peck on the cheek just wouldn't be long enough to lose the pram. I've had a 3 wheeler run away from me when I turned to close the car door and hadn't pushed the break hard enough. Because I'd turned for only a few seconds, I was able to run and grab hold of the handle.

What I find confusing about this thread is the number of posters who want this to be something that could happen to anyone. Who want to assert that any one of us could take our young children out for a walk on a sloping, uneven path that led to a drop to a wild sea and not hold on to the handle for dear life.

Letting go of the handle wasn't an accident. He didn't trip, or have to chase a toddler, or sneeze or stumble. He let go to kiss someone. It was a choice.

It's very simplistic to assert that you can't take all of that into account and still feel sympathy for him. It's insulting to say that thinking about the details and having an opinion on them automatically makes one a tabloid reading, prurient, man-hating, rabid reactionary.

Not trying to be difficult or picky at all, but I haven't seen any report that says they were on the steep part which slopes down into the sea. Were they? (because I agree that would be an odd place to let got of pushchair).

I had just presumed they were on the flat bit, which is wide and fairly smooth, and the tide was in to the edge of that.

MS - I presumed they were at the flat bit you get at the top of a slope iyswim or the slope was hardly a slope at all.

reports stated a 15ft drop into the water, so wherever it was, the brakes should have been on.

entering firmly into the realms of speculation, it would make sense to me that if daddy was kissing his friend and didn't want kids to see, he'd have turned the buggy to face away. that's horrific for him to deal with if so, that he'd have pointed them in the direction of the sea.

by which i also mean, if he'd been kissing his wife, tying shoelace etc etc he wouldn't have had need to do this. buggies don't tend to change direction as they roll.

I am in awe of poster's stamina and versatility in being able to keep this thread going for soooo long..well done all!!

do you mean posters'? and are you really in awe or was that some sort of snidey, superior comment?

beccause if you find long threads awesome and feel compelled to comment thusly, might i direct you towards the veggers?

yes, Aitch I saw the rogue chappie but didn't bother correcting it. ta. As for the comment, I was hoping the deeply facetious effect, non??

Excellent posts nappyaddict. The voice of sanity. Of course the child didn't die because of the mistress. And I think it's pretty low to describe someone who takes their children on a date as a 'sleaze ball' is pretty insulting.

I think if it was the case that the man used taking his children for a trip out as COVER for meeting up with his mistress, then it's fair enough to call him a sleazeball, don't you think? IF that's what happened.

Yes, I agree with that. But as you say, we don't know whether that was the case or not. I was responding to the statement that someone taking their children on a date is a 'sleaze ball' which I think is pretty insulting.

Looking at the picture on the BBC link it doesn't look like the buggy would have been on the actual ramp down to the sea but the flat promenade. If I had been walking along that promenade and stopped to do whatever I wouldn't have put the brake on either. Anyway how do we know he didn't put the brake on? And even if he had the wind would have probably still blown it into the sea.

That's highly unlikely, nappyaddict. A pram with a functional, properly secured brake wouldn't roll, a gust of wind would just blow it over onto it's side if strong enough.

I don't think it's that unlikely. If a gust of wind can blow people off cliffs surely it could blow a pushchair into the sea?

Sure, if it was parked on the edge. But to roll from further away quickly enough to go unobserved then it surely must have been without a brake when the father let go of the handle.

We don't know it rolled away though do we? We don't know if it was parked on the edge or not. It's all speculation.

Yes we do, nappyaddict, from the police statement and the statement made on his behalf by his father. Both state that the pram either "rolled away" or "slipped away" from them on a sloping bit of the path and that they were unable to stop it before it toppled over.

It's not speculation, it's on the record.

Anyway, enough from me on this subject, I guess we just see it differently.