Is the maddie fund.... now a secret fund

[Robittybob1]

Under the banner of OG?

No I'm just thinking that if she hasn't surfaced by the time she is 24 then we are in for the long haul.

[faithlilly]

The Victoria Beckham lookalike was traced https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/119414/Socialite-at-centre-of-Maddy-mystery and was eliminated from the inquiry apparently she was in Australia at the time.
I would say that is a result.

Tiresome to say the least in my opinion to resurrect the question of why the original Portuguese investigation with all the resources available to it failed to elicit enough information from the Smiths to construct a workable 'robot'.

I'm afraid if that is the best you can do to justify what is in my opinion, the obsession against having the means to fund the search for Madeleine McCann you will have to keep going.  Sadly, I think you will do just exactly that.

Yes I will just as you will unfortunately fail to come up with an original point, preferring  to let cut and paste do the job for you.

[Robittybob1]

Yes I will just as you will unfortunately fail to come up with an original point, preferring  to let cut and paste do the job for you.

Ignore.

[G-Unit]

It's important to look carefully when scrutinising company accounts. There was a misleading headline in the Daily Mail;

Where the £2m you gave to find Madeleine McCann has gone
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1131284/Where-2m-gave-Madeleine-McCann-gone.html

The newspaper looked at the March 2008 accounts and used the Income figure of £ 1,846,178. This was from;
Sale of T Shirts and wristbands £ 64,078
Donations (bank) £ 1,390,360
Donations (website) £ 391,740

The bank donations, however, included a sum of £ 563,152 which had not been received as @ March 2008. It seems to have been included in anticipation of receiving money from Express Newspapers.

Actual donations, therefore, were £ 827,208 via the bank, £390.360 via the website and £ 64,078 in sales. A total of £1,281,646. Take off the costs of the sales; 35,190 and it's down to £ 1,246,456.

The headline should have said;

Where the £1.2m you gave to find Madeleine McCann has gone

The McCann's friends received £ 375k in 2008 also, which was donated to the Fund, suggesting that donations in 2008-9 fell to £254,181.

Without those libel payments the Fund would have been very small or in the red by March 2009.

[Brietta]

It's important to look carefully when scrutinising company accounts. There was a misleading headline in the Daily Mail;

Where the £2m you gave to find Madeleine McCann has gone
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1131284/Where-2m-gave-Madeleine-McCann-gone.html

The newspaper looked at the March 2008 accounts and used the Income figure of £ 1,846,178. This was from;
Sale of T Shirts and wristbands £ 64,078
Donations (bank) £ 1,390,360
Donations (website) £ 391,740

The bank donations, however, included a sum of £ 563,152 which had not been received as @ March 2008. It seems to have been included in anticipation of receiving money from Express Newspapers.

Actual donations, therefore, were £ 827,208 via the bank, £390.360 via the website and £ 64,078 in sales. A total of £1,281,646. Take off the costs of the sales; 35,190 and it's down to £ 1,246,456.

The headline should have said;

Where the £1.2m you gave to find Madeleine McCann has gone

The McCann's friends received £ 375k in 2008 also, which was donated to the Fund, suggesting that donations in 2008-9 fell to £254,181.

Without those libel payments the Fund would have been very small or in the red by March 2009.

Which in my opinion epitomises the ersatz nature of the speculation about 'public subscription' in relation to Madeleine's Fund.

In effect, without personal libel awards being paid into Madeleine's Fund in conjunction with the profits from Kate's book being paid into it ... in my opinion there would have been nothing there to 'scrutinise' and complain about.
Certainly giving one pause for thought as to why the McCann baiting with the fund as its root has continued unabated for eleven years.

[faithlilly]

Which in my opinion epitomises the ersatz nature of the speculation about 'public subscription' in relation to Madeleine's Fund.

In effect, without personal libel awards being paid into Madeleine's Fund in conjunction with the profits from Kate's book being paid into it ... in my opinion there would have been nothing there to 'scrutinise' and complain about.
Certainly giving one pause for thought as to why the McCann baiting with the fund as its root has continued unabated for eleven years.

If the fund had been transparent as it promised then there would be no need to ‘scrutinise’ and complain about. It is a situation entirely of their own making.

[G-Unit]

Which in my opinion epitomises the ersatz nature of the speculation about 'public subscription' in relation to Madeleine's Fund.

In effect, without personal libel awards being paid into Madeleine's Fund in conjunction with the profits from Kate's book being paid into it ... in my opinion there would have been nothing there to 'scrutinise' and complain about.
Certainly giving one pause for thought as to why the McCann baiting with the fund as its root has continued unabated for eleven years.

I thought it showed how careless journalists are when it comes to researching and writing their stories. Vanessa Allen overstated the amount donated by the public because she didn't understand the accounts.

The fact remains that the Fund received £ 2,475,369 from May 2007 to March 2009. As at March 2009 it had
£ 719,723 in the bank. It had spent £ 1,735,841 in just under two years.

It seems that at least £ 800,000 was spent on private investigators during that period, with £ 935,841 being spent elsewhere. (Cites below)



It was said by Clarence Mitchell that Metodo 3 were paid £ 50,000 per month, so by March 2008 they had been paid £300,000. (October 2007 onwards)
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/mccanns-refuse-to-axe-50000-a-month-private-detectives-in-search-for-madeleine-6632100.html

Metodo 3, it is alleged, claimed to have received only £ 84,627. Only they and the Fund directors know the truth of how much they were paid.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3085.msg114663#msg114663

In March 2008 Oakley International came along. They, allegedly, received £ 500.000 for their efforts.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-42679242

[Brietta]

If the fund had been transparent as it promised then there would be no need to ‘scrutinise’ and complain about. It is a situation entirely of their own making.

In my opinion no reasonable person would demand access to any more information than Madeleine's Fund is legally entitled to impart.

Alice has informed us of the dire financial state the fund was in prior to the money received in libel settlement being put into it ... in my opinion the cupboard was almost bare until the McCanns and their friends put that money into it.
Further to that it had to be replenished at a later date with the proceeds from the sale of Kate's book 'Madeleine' for exactly the reason that the Fund to finance the search for Madeleine was almost running on empty yet again.

In the full knowledge that without the libel payments and the book profits being paid into Madeleine's Fund there would have been no money in it at all ... how is it possible in conscience for individuals to take it upon themselves to pejoratively scrutinise it as a means in my opinion, to excoriate Madeleine's parents?

[Vertigo Swirl]

If the fund had been transparent as it promised then there would be no need to ‘scrutinise’ and complain about. It is a situation entirely of their own making.

In the first year the Fund was transparent and it was thoroughly scrutinised and criticised and complained about, so I would say you are mistaken.

[G-Unit]

In my opinion no reasonable person would demand access to any more information than Madeleine's Fund is legally entitled to impart.

Alice has informed us of the dire financial state the fund was in prior to the money received in libel settlement being put into it ... in my opinion the cupboard was almost bare until the McCanns and their friends put that money into it.
Further to that it had to be replenished at a later date with the proceeds from the sale of Kate's book 'Madeleine' for exactly the reason that the Fund to finance the search for Madeleine was almost running on empty yet again.

In the full knowledge that without the libel payments and the book profits being paid into Madeleine's Fund there would have been no money in it at all ... how is it possible in conscience for individuals to take it upon themselves to pejoratively scrutinise it as a means in my opinion, to excoriate Madeleine's parents?

The Fund has a promise on it's website which, in my opinion, it has not kept. It isn't the McCanns who have broken that promise, it's every director since May 2008. Do those seeing scrutiny of the Fund as a criticism of the McCanns believe that they are actually in control of it and the other directors are there just for show?

[Vertigo Swirl]

The Fund has a promise on it's website which, in my opinion, it has not kept. It isn't the McCanns who have broken that promise, it's every director since May 2008. Do those seeing scrutiny of the Fund as a criticism of the McCanns believe that they are actually in control of it and the other directors are there just for show?

Why don’t you ask them?

[John]

If the fund had been transparent as it promised then there would be no need to ‘scrutinise’ and complain about. It is a situation entirely of their own making.

I have seen this time and time again.  Something starts out with the best of intentions but somewhere along the way the goals move for one reason or another. 

[John]

The Fund has a promise on it's website which, in my opinion, it has not kept. It isn't the McCanns who have broken that promise, it's every director since May 2008. Do those seeing scrutiny of the Fund as a criticism of the McCanns believe that they are actually in control of it and the other directors are there just for show?

A poster made a good point yesterday to the effect that the directors should all have been completely independent of the family and especially so given the McCanns former official status within the investigation and the recent Portuguese Supreme Court clarification.

[Vertigo Swirl]

A poster made a good point yesterday to the effect that the directors should all have been completely independent of the family and especially given the McCanns former offcial status within the investigation.

Do you think the McCanns should have had no say in how the money raised in their daughter’s name is spent?

[John]

Do you think the McCanns should have had no say in how the money raised in their daughter’s name is spent?

As pointed out previously, those funds have been exhausted long ago.  I would add though given the funds squandered on Oakley, Método 3 and by default, Correia, it might have been better had that happened.