#I'm reasonably fine with judging the hotel in principle

[dogsliampaynedoesntinstagram]

A lot more info and cctv footage has come to light today. In one video, Liam is shown being carried through the hotel lobby back to his room after convulsing. The writer of the piece thinks the hotel owners are guilty of neglect and trying to push the blame onto Roger Nores. Surely there would have been a policy that a guest in Liam's condition shouldn't be left alone?

https://www.tumblr.com/statementlou/767894152191082496/hi-is-the-liam-article-that-you-read-the-new-one?source=share

I appreciate that you're talking about the hotel and owners and not the workers (although I don't think the Daily Mail gets that credit - but hating workers is one of their core beliefs).

I guess I have a few different things to say. I have no idea about hotel policies - but I'd be surprised if most hotels had the staffing levels that would allow them to have workers spending extended time with one customer in that way. I imagine that any policy would be about calling for medical help (although you can't sue for personal injury where I am - so I may be way off base how things work elsewhere).

I think there are important caveats when it comes to hotel policy. Whatever policy the hotel says - that doesn't necessarily reflect what happens or what is asked for from staff. Practice can be very different from policy - due to decisions from management (mostly understaffing, but there were a lot of competing pressures).

One of those pressures is 'don't piss off rich people'. Some media have reported that he didn't have the room booked and should have been out by 10am - he wasn't treated like other people. And one of the fears at all levels when responding to him - would be that he doesn't want anyone called.

The argument that there's a limited amount of culpability to be shared between Roger and the hotel is ridiculous. Although there seems to be a lot of 'not me' lines being run through the media - and it wouldn't surprise me if someone connected with Roger had placed this story.

It doesn't make any sense - what Roger is accused of is much earlier than the responsibility the article is suggesting the hotel would have. There's no reason that the actions of another party in the 15 minutes before Liam's death would make any difference to what Roger is accused of.

I think in general, the article is pretty much what you would expect from the Daily Mail. It is continuing the trend of blaming foreign service workers. The way that it directly addresses the chief receptionist is really gross - and seems to ignore a very reasonable explanation (that after Liam was taken up he woke up and started smashing things, and had locked the door as the waiter had described him doing another time).

I don't want to minimise how awful any of this. Particularly the feeling it could have been prevented. Of course it would have been better if the hotel had called emergency services earlier (and not police).

But I'm just not comfortable with judging the individuals involved. They had a lot of knowledge we don't have about what their bosses wanted, what they'd get fired for, the state of emergency services, what guests in Liam's position want and say they want.