A woman in Hunan was killed by a "psychological teacher" in a hotel. What's the trouble between them?

I don't know what entanglements there are between them, but it is understood that the woman Li is 365,438+0 years old, divorced her ex-husband in 2020, and later met Liu online. They talked for a while and then broke up. Finally, Li married her current husband. After Liu was informed, he registered a WeChat trumpet and contacted Li, claiming that he was the female psychological teacher of Li's child and needed to meet Li.

On the day of the incident, Li went to see each other alone. Originally, her husband wanted to accompany her, but when he learned that the other person was a woman, he felt inconvenient and gave up. As soon as Li left by taxi, his family felt something was wrong. At that time, he called to ask about Li. However, later he called and showed that his phone was turned off. Li's family was very worried and came to the hotel to ask about the situation. Hotel staff said that they had never seen Li enter the hotel. The family asked to see the monitoring, but the staff did not allow it. They asked the police to come before they could see it.

However, the police station said that it was impossible to prove that Li had disappeared in such a short time, so the family had to return to the hotel and begged the staff to check the monitoring. Through monitoring, I saw that Li was pulled into the hotel room by a strange man. Seeing this, everyone believed that Li was really killed.

On September 12, the suspect Liu was arrested. After the trial, Liu admitted that he did deceive Li and killed him by pretending to be a child psychology teacher. Afterwards, the family members thought that if the hotel had checked the monitoring, perhaps Li would not have been hurt, and felt that the hotel was responsible, and the hotel never responded to this matter.

According to the provisions of China's National Code Law, hotels, shopping malls, gyms and other public places have the obligation to protect everyone's safety. Whether the hotel should bear the responsibility in this case needs specific analysis. First of all, the suspect used a fake ID card when he checked in. After being rejected, he took a real ID card to check in. At this time, the staff did not doubt, so there was a fault. The second family wanted to watch the monitoring, and it was also a serious mistake to be stopped by the staff many times. To sum up, hotels should bear certain responsibilities.