What PROOF is there that the McCanns benefited from the Fund?

[Rachel Granada]

@ sadie

You would if the legal expenses were mounting up.

Hi Faithlilly.  Do we know for a fact that Mr and Mrs McCann are using the fund for legal fees? Maybe they are, maybe they are not.  I for one do not have a problem with them using Fund monies to protect their reputations against the likes of Goncalo Amaral and Tony Benett.

[sadie]

Don't you find it an irony debunker, that someone who left their children unprotected in an allegedly unlocked/locked apartment, along with her husband, has made money from selling a book, which has come about as a result of their actions ?

Yet again, I remind you that the front of the apartment they believed to be locked as they had never touched the window since they arrived.


The patio door at the back of the apartment was unlocked, but closed.


Effectively they were in their back garden.   About 50 - 52 metres away


With good views of the steps up and the patio door. 


An area which was very well lit from the street lamp opposite, as is shown in numerous photographs


A VERY quiet area, altho they were chatting as we did in our garden ... yet easily heard the kids



Check it out in your own garden. (or the park)


Ask your kids to shout you


"Can you hear me Mother ?"

[faithlilly]

@ sadie

You would if the legal expenses were mounting up.

Hi Faithlilly.  Do we know for a fact that Mr and Mrs McCann are using the fund for legal fees? Maybe they are, maybe they are not.  I for one do not have a problem with them using Fund monies to protect their reputations against the likes of Goncalo Amaral and Tony Benett.

John McCann admitted in the foreword to the, I think, 2010 accounts, that the fund was funding the litigation in Portugal against Amaral so, to your question, yes we do know it for a fact. Further CR could not do the breadth and type of legal work they do for the McCanns under a CFA agreement so it seems,in all likelihood that the fund is paying for much of that work as well.

That you don't mind that the fund money is used in this way is commendable but many who have thought that they are furthering the search for Madeleine by donating will and I believe the McCanns know this and that is why there is a glaring lack of transparency in the fund accounts that have been made public.

[C.Edwards]

Don't you find it an irony debunker, that someone who left their children unprotected in an allegedly unlocked/locked apartment, along with her husband, has made money from selling a book, which has come about as a result of their actions ?

Money has been made for the search for their missing daughter.  Would you take the trouble to write a book to raise funds to continue the search, if your child had been abducted?

At that stage SY were not involved.

I still don't understand the process in the McCanns getting from, "oh my god, our daughter's been abducted" to "we must launch a fund immediately to search for her" so quickly.  I truly believe that setting up a fund would be one of the last things on my mind for quite a long time after such an incident.  Why assume the police wouldn't be able to find her and that a fund would be needed?  Did Kerry Needham jump to do this?  Did the parents of April Jones?  I have no idea, I don't recall it, but it just seems strange (again!) that the McCanns felt the need to take this action almost straight away. Why?

[C.Edwards]

April's fund set up within 4 days of her disappearance - http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/april-jones-search-appeal-fund-2020028

By then maybe the general public had been conditioned by the McCanns to think that chucking money at "bereaved" parents is the way to respond? Dunno really.  What about Kerry Needham?  What about Milly Dowler? Did they set funds up as quickly?  I have no idea, I'm asking not trying to score points.

Again, I really can't say as I'm not in that situation, but I really don't see how setting a fund up with objectives like "bringing the abductor to justice" is going to be high on my list of priorities where I would expect the authorities to be doing this.  Seems strange and/or clumsily worded.

[Rachel Granada]

@ sadie

You would if the legal expenses were mounting up.

Hi Faithlilly.  Do we know for a fact that Mr and Mrs McCann are using the fund for legal fees? Maybe they are, maybe they are not.  I for one do not have a problem with them using Fund monies to protect their reputations against the likes of Goncalo Amaral and Tony Benett.

John McCann admitted in the foreword to the, I think, 2010 accounts, that the fund was funding the litigation in Portugal against Amaral so, to your question, yes we do know it for a fact. Further CR could not do the breadth and type of legal work they do for the McCanns under a CFA agreement so it seems,in all likelihood that the fund is paying for much of that work as well.

That you don't mind that the fund money is used in this way is commendable but many who have thought that they are furthering the search for Madeleine by donating will and I believe the McCanns know this and that is why there is a glaring lack of transparency in the fund accounts that have been made public.

Faithlilly, thanks for response.  I didn't know that John McCann had said that - again IMO it is a good use of monies to protect against and hopefully stop, once and for all,  those seeking to pile more agony onto this family.

As to fund donors being unhappy about how the money is spent - we can never know this, to be honest.  Maybe some are unhappy and have asked for refunds.

[faithlilly]

@ Martha

A fund was set up for April pretty quickly, within a couple of weeks of her going missing I think.  What "sceptics" refuse to understand or accept is that money began to start pouring in almost immediately Madeleine went missing, even before it was asked for.  What should the McCanns have done with this money, according to the "sceptics"?

The fund set up in the wake of April Jones's disappearance has charitiable status, unlike the McCann fund and will be used to fund several projects around the missing girl's home town, as well as provide assistance to her family. It's accounts will be fully transparent and there are, unlike the McCann fund, no family members or anyone close to the Jones family on the board of trustees.

The McCanns could easily have obtained charitable status if they had been willing to include helping other missing children in the fund's aims and with charitable status donators would have been able to gift-aid their donations thus offsetting any money they would have donated to other projects.

[C.Edwards]

April's fund set up within 4 days of her disappearance - http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/april-jones-search-appeal-fund-2020028

By then maybe the general public had been conditioned by the McCanns to think that chucking money at "bereaved" parents is the way to respond? Dunno really.  What about Kerry Needham?  What about Milly Dowler? Did they set funds up as quickly?  I have no idea, I'm asking not trying to score points.

Again, I really can't say as I'm not in that situation, but I really don't see how setting a fund up with objectives like "bringing the abductor to justice" is going to be high on my list of priorities where I would expect the authorities to be doing this.  Seems strange and/or clumsily worded.

"Conditioned by the McCanns?"  What nonsense - you reveal your hateful attitude with comments like that.  Who "conditioned" the general public to send money to the McCanns in the first few weeks after Madeleine went missing?  Do you think Kate and Gerry were able to exercise mind control on the general public during their televised interviews from PdL?

I used the words "maybe" and "dunno really" as well but it's convenient for you to forget those in your attempts to pillory me, isn't it?

Let's see... a few people may make offers of help.  What to do... knock it on the head quickly and say, "we're looking for our little girl and doing all we can to help the police find her" or instead go for the "please send money, the PJ are incompetent, we need to hire private detectives and we could probably do with a bit of money for legal expenses and paying the mortgage too if that's ok?  Money or cheques to the following address" line instead?

In the early days, the fund got huge publicity. Did the McCanns not know about this publicity then?  Whose idea was the fund?

Like I asked earlier (and you've ignored again) what about other missing children some years before McCanngate?

[C.Edwards]

@ Martha

A fund was set up for April pretty quickly, within a couple of weeks of her going missing I think.  What "sceptics" refuse to understand or accept is that money began to start pouring in almost immediately Madeleine went missing, even before it was asked for.  What should the McCanns have done with this money, according to the "sceptics"?

The fund set up in the wake of April Jones's disappearance has charitiable status, unlike the McCann fund and will be used to fund several projects around the missing girl's home town, as well as provide assistance to her family. It's accounts will be fully transparent and there are, unlike the McCann fund, no family members or anyone close to the Jones family on the board of trustees.

The McCanns could easily have obtained charitable status if they had been willing to include helping other missing children in the fund's aims and with charitable status donators would have been able to gift-aid their donations thus offsetting any money they would have donated to other projects.

Very good points well made faithlilly.  Enid O'Dowd's analysis of the accounts is a very interesting read too.  Not for the McCann supporters, obviously. http://www.mccannfiles.com/id405.html

[DCI]

@ Martha

A fund was set up for April pretty quickly, within a couple of weeks of her going missing I think.  What "sceptics" refuse to understand or accept is that money began to start pouring in almost immediately Madeleine went missing, even before it was asked for.  What should the McCanns have done with this money, according to the "sceptics"?

The fund set up in the wake of April Jones's disappearance has charitiable status, unlike the McCann fund and will be used to fund several projects around the missing girl's home town, as well as provide assistance to her family. It's accounts will be fully transparent and there are, unlike the McCann fund, no family members or anyone close to the Jones family on the board of trustees.

The McCanns could easily have obtained charitable status if they had been willing to include helping other missing children in the fund's aims and with charitable status donators would have been able to gift-aid their donations thus offsetting any money they would have donated to other projects.

That's all as maybe - the question raised was about the speed with which a fund was set up, as if this was somehow indicative of suspicious behaviour.  The April Jones fund was set up within 4 days of her disappearance, even more quickly than the Madeleine Fund.

Don't forget the Shannon Mathews fund, Martha,  >@@(*&)

[C.Edwards]

@ Martha

A fund was set up for April pretty quickly, within a couple of weeks of her going missing I think.  What "sceptics" refuse to understand or accept is that money began to start pouring in almost immediately Madeleine went missing, even before it was asked for.  What should the McCanns have done with this money, according to the "sceptics"?

The fund set up in the wake of April Jones's disappearance has charitiable status, unlike the McCann fund and will be used to fund several projects around the missing girl's home town, as well as provide assistance to her family. It's accounts will be fully transparent and there are, unlike the McCann fund, no family members or anyone close to the Jones family on the board of trustees.

The McCanns could easily have obtained charitable status if they had been willing to include helping other missing children in the fund's aims and with charitable status donators would have been able to gift-aid their donations thus offsetting any money they would have donated to other projects.

That's all as maybe - the question raised was about the speed with which a fund was set up, as if this was somehow indicative of suspicious behaviour.  The April Jones fund was set up within 4 days of her disappearance, even more quickly than the Madeleine Fund.

Don't forget the Shannon Mathews fund, Martha,  >@@(*&)

Are you trying to help or hinder Martha's argument here...?  We all know why the Shannon Matthews fund was set up!

[DCI]

@ Martha

A fund was set up for April pretty quickly, within a couple of weeks of her going missing I think.  What "sceptics" refuse to understand or accept is that money began to start pouring in almost immediately Madeleine went missing, even before it was asked for.  What should the McCanns have done with this money, according to the "sceptics"?

The fund set up in the wake of April Jones's disappearance has charitiable status, unlike the McCann fund and will be used to fund several projects around the missing girl's home town, as well as provide assistance to her family. It's accounts will be fully transparent and there are, unlike the McCann fund, no family members or anyone close to the Jones family on the board of trustees.

The McCanns could easily have obtained charitable status if they had been willing to include helping other missing children in the fund's aims and with charitable status donators would have been able to gift-aid their donations thus offsetting any money they would have donated to other projects.

That's all as maybe - the question raised was about the speed with which a fund was set up, as if this was somehow indicative of suspicious behaviour.  The April Jones fund was set up within 4 days of her disappearance, even more quickly than the Madeleine Fund.

Don't forget the Shannon Mathews fund, Martha,  >@@(*&)

Are you trying to help or hinder Martha's argument here...?  We all know why the Shannon Matthews fund was set up!

Where did the impetus for the Shannon Fund originate?  Her parents or the public?

Not 100% sure, but I thought the parents.

It is understood one request to the fund was made by a man claiming to be a freelance journalist who was seeking money to help in the search for Shannon.
 
The Madeleine fund later received a one-line email asking for money, and on another occasion someone claiming to be close to Shannon's mother made a call to representatives of the McCanns.

[sadie]

@ sadie

You would if the legal expenses were mounting up.

Please DO NOT attribute your moral standards to me.

Nor to The Mccanns

-------------

I cannot see why The Mccanns should not use limited funds to stop you lot from trying to prevent the search for Madeleine.  Amaral and Bennett seemed set on that ... as many of you do too.

As a bonus, there is little doubt that any monies achieved from their Court cases will go into the fund.

Despite the fact that The Mccann Family have suffered grievously from the unjust comments from Amaral and Bennett ... and from so many of you ... and deserve any monies awarded for themselves.

Sorry to say it, but you lot have hindered the search for Madeleine

[xtina]

who pays Clarence Mitchel.....the legal fees...we all know if you have enough money...Pr's can keep anything out of the press..money protects so to speak if you have enough of it ...[to sue]

[Rachel Granada]

who pays Clarence Mitchel.....the legal fees...we all know if you have enough money...Pr's can keep anything out of the press..money protects so to speak if you have enough of it ...[to sue)

PRs didn't keep the foul tirade of lies about Kate and Gerry McCann out of the press back in 2007, did they? Thankfully the press were made to pay for their lies and defamation.

Yes, money protects - against liars like Goncalo Amaral and frankly creepy stalkers like Tony Bennet,