The current £20,000 Reward is not for the safe return of Madeleine McCann.

[Mr Gray]

That knowledge might only be second or even third hand - someone discovering something and reporting it. Not necessarily criminal in itself.

the trail of knowledge would lead back to the criminal

[jassi]

the trail of knowledge would lead back to the criminal

Would that not likely be a condition of the reward?

[Mr Gray]

Would that not likely be a condition of the reward?

thats the point of the thread

[Carana]

That knowledge might only be second or even third hand - someone discovering something and reporting it. Not necessarily criminal in itself.

Yes, that's possible.

However, the issue of a reward seems to be a double-edged sword... and no, I can't remember all the reasons offhand. The police would be more familiar with the [banned word] and cons of that than a family, or even the media.

ETA: LOL

Substitute "advantages" for [banned word].

There's a section on that topic in a publication I posted some time ago. I'll add the title again if I remember it...

[Eleanor]

SY are a police force whose job it is to catch criminals...are they allowed to offer a reward for a safe return or are they only able to offer rewards leading to arrests and convictions

That would be it.  It is their job to arrest and convict primarily.  Offering a reward for the safe return could be misconstrued.  It is public money that is being offered, so a conviction would be paramount.
If Madeleine is returned safe and well then no doubt the person who made this possible would be rewarded by others, provided they weren't involved.

[John]

Who gives a shit about the perpetrator if the child can be recovered safely.  This should be the primary objective here and from everything I have seen recently it appears not to be the case. If the child is found dead then the perpetrator can be pursued but while there is a chance, even the slightest glimmer of hope, then EVERY POSSIBLE MEANS should be used to get her back.

Remember that SY have their own agenda regardless of what image they portray publicly.  Someone will have to pay the piper!

[Mr Gray]

Who gives a shit about the perpetrator if the child can be recovered safely.  This should be the primary objective here and from everything I have seen recently it appears not to be the case. If the child is found dead then the perpetrator can be pursued but while there is a chance, even the slightest glimmer of hope, then EVERY POSSIBLE MEANS should be used to get her back.

Remember that SY have their own agenda regardless of what image they portray publicly.  Someone will have to pay the piper!

on that line of thinking SY could offer a reward to the "abductor" ...just to get maddie back

[Carana]

Do the police offer rewards for the safe return of a missing person? Appeals for information, yes, but rewards?

Nothing comes to mind.

If that has ever happened, how frequent would it be in modern policing?

[Mr Moderator]

So on that line of thinking what's more important?

* Getting Madeleine back ?

 or

* Prosecuting some perv(s) ?

[Carana]

So on that line of thinking what's more important?

* Getting Madeleine back ?

 or

* Prosecuting some perv(s) ?

Both I would have thought. Whether the victim is alive or dead, a crime has been committed by someone, and information on the culprit may lead to the victim.


I've found the publication I had in mind:

When your child is missing: a survival guide

Chapter 6 Rewards and Donations

http://www.o[Name removed]dp.gov/pubs/childismissing/ch6.html

[Mr Moderator]

Both I would have thought. Whether the victim is alive or dead, a crime has been committed by someone, and information on the culprit may lead to the victim.


I've found the publication I had in mind:

When your child is missing: a survival guide

Chapter 6 Rewards and Donations

http://www.o[Name removed]dp.gov/pubs/childismissing/ch6.html

Why jeopardise one by attempting to achieve both?  Is Madeleine's life not worth more than the need for a prosecution?

[Carana]

Why jeopardise one by attempting to achieve both?  Is Madeleine's life not worth more than the need for a prosecution?

Re Claudia Lawrence:
The independent charity Crimestoppers has also lent its support by offering a £10,000 reward for information that leads to an arrest and charge. Callers can remain anonymous.
http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/13147

There's no proof that Claudia's dead yet. Perhaps the police have more experience on such matters than distraught parents (or the media) in the aftermath of a disappearance?

[Mr Moderator]

Re Claudia Lawrence:
The independent charity Crimestoppers has also lent its support by offering a £10,000 reward for information that leads to an arrest and charge. Callers can remain anonymous.
http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/13147

There's no proof that Claudia's dead yet. Perhaps the police have more experience on such matters than distraught parents (or the media) in the aftermath of a disappearance?

Perhaps CrimeStoppers' agenda is to stop crime.

[Carana]

Perhaps CrimeStoppers' agenda is to stop crime.

And also to help apprehend culprits. Rewards by the police seem to be similar (if indeed rewards are distinct).

The lower amount offered by the police is an incentive, but not so high as to create a media frenzy of false sightings.

For a desperate family, a reward keeps a high profile, particularly when there may be a high chance of finding the missing child / adult quickly. A huge one increases paper sales or general media advertising, positive PR, etc.

However... how much of this supposed £2.6 million reward by various benefactors is actually cash-in-bank ready to be handed over as opposed to pledges?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactions_to_the_disappearance_of_Madeleine_McCann#Rewards

Who would be legally responsible for this alleged £2.6 million announced in the press? What about the amount pledged by the now defunct News of the World (£250,000), for example? Have pledges been withdrawn for any reason? Negative press assuming the parents were guilty?

Other benefactors may simply not have the same means that they did in 2007 when they first pledged.

The issue might well be quite complicated.

[John]

And also to help apprehend culprits. Rewards by the police seem to be similar (if indeed rewards are distinct).

The lower amount offered by the police is an incentive, but not so high as to create a media frenzy of false sightings.

For a desperate family, a reward keeps a high profile, particularly when there may be a high chance of finding the missing child / adult quickly. A huge one increases paper sales or general media advertising, positive PR, etc.

However... how much of this supposed £2.6 million reward by various benefactors is actually cash-in-bank ready to be handed over as opposed to pledges?

Who would be legally responsible for this alleged £2.6 million announced in the press? What about the amount pledged by the now defunct News of the World (£250,000), for example? Have pledges been withdrawn for any reason? Negative press assuming the parents were guilty?

Other benefactors may simply not have the same means that they did in 2007 when they first pledged.

The issue might well be quite complicated.

The cosy relationship with Murdoch's London Times just isn't what it used to be if recent articles are anything to go by.  Little wonder the NOTW reward has never been repeated.