No 2 - The Search for Madeleine McCann and Spanish Investigators Método 3

[Jean-Pierre]

I thought it was Brian Kennedy who paid Halligan,

Correct of course Eleanor - but don't spoil it for Stephen
___________

Been checking - looks as though Kennedy settled Metodo 3, and the FM fund settled Oakley.   So I was wrong. Apologies Stephen.

 

[stephen25000]

I thought it was Brian Kennedy who paid Halligan,

There is proof of that, I presume.

Was it Kennedy's money ?

Then we have metodo3 and all their promises.

Who paid them ?

How much was he paid by the way ?

'Mr Mitchell explained: "A sum of £500,000 has been committed to them from the Find Madeleine Fund.'

[Jean-Pierre]

There is proof of that, I presume.

Was it Kennedy's money ?

Then we have metodo3 and all their promises.

Who paid them ?

How much was he paid by the way ?

'Mr Mitchell explained: "A sum of £500,000 has been committed to them from the Find Madeleine Fund.'

See post above.

It looks as though around £350,000 - £400,000  was paid to Oakley.

[Alice Purjorick]

There is proof of that, I presume.

Was it Kennedy's money ?

Then we have metodo3 and all their promises.

Who paid them ?

How much was he paid by the way ?

'Mr Mitchell explained: "A sum of £500,000 has been committed to them from the Find Madeleine Fund.'

It may be included in the £975k "Campaign & Merchandising Costs" shown in the 2009 financial statements but we have no way of knowing as it isn't broken down! 

[stephen25000]

See post above.

It looks as though around £350,000 - £400,000  was paid to Oakley.

From the fund, controlled by the mccanns as well.

[stephen25000]

It may be included in the £975k "Campaign & Merchandising Costs" shown in the 2009 financial statements but we have no way of knowing as it isn't broken down! 

Quite possibly.

Transparency didn't rule there. 

[Jean-Pierre]

From the fund, controlled by the mccanns as well.

and your point is?

Was Halligen a convicted criminal when employed by the McCanns?   

[stephen25000]

and your point is?

Was Halligen a convicted criminal when employed by the McCanns?

He was illegally using other peoples money for his own ends.

Didn't you watch the documentary on him and why the Americans were after him ?

Or are these minor considerations to you.

Especially as it was other peoples money.

[Jean-Pierre]

He was illegally using other peoples money for his own ends.

Didn't you watch the documentary on him and why the Americans were after him ?

Or are these minor considerations to you.

Especially as it was other peoples money.

Not a bit of it.  Yes he was - but when did it come to light that that was what he was doing?

He seems to be have been a rather clever con man - and fooled a lot of people.

Why do you think the McCanns should have been able to spot this back in 2008?

 It would be interesting to see your reasoning, given you have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight?
 

[Jean-Pierre]

OK Stephen - firstly lets have a look at Metodo 3 in Portugal. 

You state they were not allowed to under Portuguese law?

Does this mean that (a) the PJ were not aware of Metodo 3s activities?

Or (b) that they were aware and cooperated

or (c) that they were aware and took action against Metodo 3?


And yes, it turns out they, and Kennedy, did employ a series of agencies and detesctives who turned out to be incompetent or crooked.  How clever of you to point this out, and how nice for you to have the opportunity to gloat, with the benefit of 20 20 hindsight.   Well done, I'll give you that one.   

My view - very unfortunate - but at least they tried.   

By the way,you have not answered the questions about Metodo 3 and the PJ.

[Mr Gray]

He was illegally using other peoples money for his own ends.

Didn't you watch the documentary on him and why the Americans were after him ?

Or are these minor considerations to you.

Especially as it was other peoples money.

The McCanns were victims of  a criminal act...but once gain you want to blame the victims instead of the criminal....how much blame do you attach too Halligen

[Jean-Pierre]

The McCanns were victims of  a criminal act...but once gain you want to blame the victims instead of the criminal....how much blame do you attach too Halligen

Good question, Davel.  Don't hold your breath for an answer.     

[stephen25000]

Not a bit of it.  Yes he was - but when did it come to light that that was what he was doing?

He seems to be have been a rather clever con man - and fooled a lot of people.

Why do you think the McCanns should have been able to spot this back in 2008?

 It would be interesting to see your reasoning, given you have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight?
 

With all the 'advice'  the mccanns were getting, why didn't they check out his record.

As to 'hinfsight', that appears to be rolled out when required to defend the mccanns incompetence.

[Jean-Pierre]

With all the 'advice'  the mccanns were getting, why didn't they check out his record.

As to 'hinfsight', that appears to be rolled out when required to defend the mccanns incompetence.

What record was that, Stephen?

Lets make it really easy for you  - can you provide some cites /documentary evidence from around August 2008 which would have shown the McCanns that Halligan was untrustworthy?   

[stephen25000]

The McCanns were victims of  a criminal act...but once gain you want to blame the victims instead of the criminal....how much blame do you attach too Halligen

Whose money was it that paid for the crook ?

Was it the mccanns, or the money donated to them by other people ?

Which of course should never have been necessary in the first place.


Oh that's hindsight for you.