The 'Find Madeleine Campaign' Helpful or Harmful?

[G-Unit]

you can be selective in the facts you present and intepretation you promote...based on fact...flat earthers can prove the earth is flat...they just ignore the facts that contradict them...as odowd did

Enid O'Dowd demonstrated that the Fund could have been a charity if a bit more time had been taken. Her main contribution was to highlight the lack of the promised transparency. She didn't ignore anything when doing that.

[Mr Gray]

Enid O'Dowd demonstrated that the Fund could have been a charity if a bit more time had been taken. Her main contribution was to highlight the lack of the promised transparency. She didn't ignore anything when doing that.

thats you opinion....as far  as  i know it couldnt because it was only for the benefit of maddie...not all children..just because odowd says something doesnt make it true

[Vertigo Swirl]

Enid O'Dowd demonstrated that the Fund could have been a charity if a bit more time had been taken. Her main contribution was to highlight the lack of the promised transparency. She didn't ignore anything when doing that.

And what has her contribution achieved in the grand scheme of things? 

[jassi]

And what has her contribution achieved in the grand scheme of things?

If using that as a benchmark, who, if anyone has achieved anything >

[faithlilly]

you can be selective in the facts you present and intepretation you promote...based on fact...flat earthers can prove the earth is flat...they just ignore the facts that contradict them...as odowd did

So what has Miss O’Dowd wrote that is wrong ? Please elucidate?

[Vertigo Swirl]

If using that as a benchmark, who, if anyone has achieved anything >

I guess it depends on what you consider to be an achievement.  I suppose dear Enid has gained the admiration and respect of a bunch of fellow sceptics online and this might have given her a sense of worth and well being, but apart from that I don’t really see what she has achieved beyond that to merit all the time and effort she put into studying thr Fund’s accounts.  She must have been gutted not to fimd anything remotely illegal.

[faithlilly]

I guess it depends on what you consider to be an achievement.  I suppose dear Enid has gained the admiration and respect of a bunch of fellow sceptics online and this might have given her a sense of worth and well being, but apart from that I don’t really see what she has achieved beyond that to merit all the time and effort she put into studying thr Fund’s accounts.  She must have been gutted not to fimd anything remotely illegal.

So why do you think that the parents didn’t wait the few days it would have taken for the Charity Commission to help them achieve charity status ? Do you have an answer that doesn’t contain the words ‘ is it important ‘ or malign the questioner ?

[Vertigo Swirl]

So why do you think that the parents didn’t wait the few days it would have taken for the Charity Commission to help them achieve charity status ? Do you have an answer that doesn’t contain the words ‘ is it important ‘ or malign the questioner ?

You seem to be under the impression that in the early days of their child’s disappearance, with donations flooding in from all quarters that they should have set about creating a charity to help all missing children.  I think that is patently absurd, frankly. 

[G-Unit]

And what has her contribution achieved in the grand scheme of things?

Like many others who gave their time for free she added to the public's knowledge of the case. Had those peopke not bothered the only sources of information would have been the McCanns, their lawyers, spin doctors and the media. We would have been completely misled imo.

[barrier]

Like many others who gave their time for free she added to the public's knowledge of the case. Had those peopke not bothered the only sources of information would have been the McCanns, their lawyers, spin doctors and the media. We would have been completely misled imo.

Confusion is good,twas said.

[Holly Goodhead]

So why do you think that the parents didn’t wait the few days it would have taken for the Charity Commission to help them achieve charity status ? Do you have an answer that doesn’t contain the words ‘ is it important ‘ or malign the questioner ?

According to KM's book law firm BWB spoke with the Chairty Commission about whether the fund would meet eligibility for charitable status but it was deemed the 'public benefit test' would not be met since it was essentially set-up to assist one family.  Therefore it was set up as not-for-profit private limited company?  Is this wrong?

[Eleanor]

According to KM's book law firm BWB spoke with the Chairty Commission about whether the fund would meet eligibility for charitable status but it was deemed the 'public benefit test' would not be met since it was essentially set-up to assist one family.  Therefore it was set up as not-for-profit private limited company?  Is this wrong?

No, it isn't wrong.  The funds were donated for Finding Madeleine in whatever way necessary. And to aid The Family.  It could never have had charitable status.

But some people keep on bashing at this.

[faithlilly]

According to KM's book law firm BWB spoke with the Chairty Commission about whether the fund would meet eligibility for charitable status but it was deemed the 'public benefit test' would not be met since it was essentially set-up to assist one family.  Therefore it was set up as not-for-profit private limited company?  Is this wrong?

Partly right. The Charity Commission said that they’d be willing to help the parents achieve charitable status, which would mean their donations would be able to be gift-aided, but the parents decided on the limited company option which, of course, would be subject to less scrutiny with regard to how donations were spent.

[faithlilly]

You seem to be under the impression that in the early days of their child’s disappearance, with donations flooding in from all quarters that they should have set about creating a charity to help all missing children.  I think that is patently absurd, frankly.

Why is it absurd ? What did they need it for at that point ? They were high earners with, I’m sure, money in the bank, and were being given free accommodation, donations could have been kept in an account until a more considered decision was made. I believe that’s what happened with both the money donated when  Daniel Morcombe and April Jones went missing.

[Miss Taken Identity]

Like many others who gave their time for free she added to the public's knowledge of the case. Had those peopke not bothered the only sources of information would have been the McCanns, their lawyers, spin doctors and the media. We would have been completely misled imo.

OK Bottom line- The fund was set up to and marketed as a  'find Madeleine fund'. After initial donations  sent to perhaps assist a grief stricken  family . It became a 'family business'.

 I have no issue with that if they want to make money, fair dooz. However, usng their daughters name to emotionally blackmail people is morally and ethically wrong.  They could have called it a 'family fund' to be used to help search for  Madeliene and legal fees. ofcourse this was done before we found out about the time line-unlocked door-etc.

And people in the beginning were buying into the drama of 'jemied window whooshing curtains and MBM 'snatched' from her bed'. As opposed to could have walked out of the apartment to get her parents who were eating and drinking- not even mentioning the crying incident- 'checks' we listening at a door and not physical checks! I feel sure, armed with this information on day one, things would have worked out quite different.