OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: British Police / Government Interference :: 'Operation Grange' set up by ex-Prime Minister David Cameron
Page 1 of 1 • Share
OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by Jill Havern 15.03.16 20:47
Tuesday, 15 March 2016
OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysmacIntyre
Respectively Solicitors and Accountants for the Madeleine Fund
Individual Copies sent to redacted and redacted
who it is reported were jointly concerned with setting up the Fund
Dear Sir and Madam,
Several years ago I wrote to you about claims by Francisco Marco - proprietor of the detective agency, Metodo3, that they would be able to return Madeleine McCann to her parents 'by Christmas'.
You were kind enough to reply. You denied that such a claim had been made.
I am not sure whether you were fully aware that the McCanns' spokesman, Clarence Mitchell had already said that the family were satisfied, saying '....but we are pleased the agency is confident that they will find Madeleine in due course.'
You will also be aware that Marco's words are on a 'video' clip, available on YouTube, where he re-states his position, - helpfully in English. (full reference in Appendix - 1)
But given that you and HaysM were concerned with the creation and running of the Fund are we to believe that both your firms were simultaneously neglecting their duties.
As you know, in her autobiography, 'madeleine', Kate McCann herself admitted that these words had been used, which gave rise to a number of questions about your and HaysM's level of interest, professional competence, and/or veracity.
You will be aware that a recently published book - La Cortina de Humo - by a sometime employee of Metodo3 details several large scale frauds committed against the Madeleine Fund, and shows how the techniques employed should have been apparent to anyone with responsibility for 'due diligence' and certainly to a trained and conscientious accountant. (full reference in Appendix - 2)
Again this may raise important questions about professional competence.
I am confident that you will have read the book, and will have studied in depth the chapter devoted to the fraud, but so that anyone else reading this shall know, he details very crude and simple methods, which should have been obvious to anyone. He says that evidence is available to investigators, and may already be in their hands.
They include simply obtaining receipts for travel from an El Corte Ingles travel branch, and then forging them by overwriting the relevant details, before including these in the monthly invoices to the Fund, overseen by you.
He states that the 20 operatives - or 40 as sometimes quoted - who were being routinely charged for consisted of at most three (3), and for most of the time, only two. He names them.
He goes on to expose the mendacious claim that Metodo3 had successfully recovered more than 300 missing persons in a single year. He worked for this company for several years and was aware of only two (2) such examples. Perhaps these issues could and should have been explored in detail before the contract was signed. Data Protection and the laws relating to the protection of minors would not prevent outline details of many of the cases being supplied for investigation, and Company accounts detailing a total of only twelve (12) employees are public documents.
He publishes the e-mails he sent to the people who had been financing the operation, in which he gives details of the fraud. He also sent these to two of the six Directors of the Fund, whom he names.
He received no reply and no acknowledgement. He interprets this, perhaps with justification, as a 'wall of silence'.
It is inconceivable that you and HaysM were not made aware of this, and again it raises further questions about your involvement, and your professional competence. The possibility of higher level collusion is of course unthinkable.
In your internet advertising you both make great play of your devotion to, and the importance of conducting and maintaining Due Diligence - you use the term 42 time, and HaysM 35 times. You both mention Transparency ((58 and 44 times respectively), and Justice (86 and 16). You go further to discuss Investigation (78) and you use the word Fraud 35 times. HaysM use it 25 times.
It is clear therefore that both firms, at least in publicity and advertising, say they understand the importance of vigilance against Fraud at all levels and at all times.
It may be however that on this on occasion both firms simultaneously made the identical mistake or simultaneously failed to notice the glaring irregularities.
This would be in line with what is alleged to have happened many times during this perplexing case.
The blood and cadaver detection dogs were said to have made a series of mistakes but only in this case, when they alerted to 14 items and places linked with the McCanns - but to no other places. The dogs' previous and subsequent performance has never been successfully challenged in the criminal courts
Some of the best detectives and Police advisors from several police forces from different countries made identical and false deductions
Top lawyers and public prosecutors in Portugal concurrently and independently made identical gross errors
...and so on. The case is full of remarkable coincidences. Many hundreds have been recorded so far. The revelation that £ 500,000 of publicly donated money was squandered on a fraudulent enterprise, but worse - that no attempt was then made to recover the money, nor to take action against the alleged fraudsters, might damage public confidence in both your firms.
You are also surely aware of the book, El Método, by the proprietor of Metodo3, Fransicso Marco, in which at p. 452, he says 'Someday I'll explain if we believe that Maddie is alive or dead, and, if she was killed, who we think did it.' (full reference in Appendix - 3)
I draw this to your attention, as, of course, if it is eventually shown that Madeleine was in fact dead and that the parents knew or suspected this, as now seems increasingly likely, then the entire Fund would itself have been fraudulent ab initio, and the issue of due diligence and professional supervision will assume even greater importance, with the persons concerned being liable to account either to Civil or Criminal Courts.
The apparent failure or neglect of due diligence in the contracting of Kevin Halligen, of Oakley International, the Company referred to by Clarence Mitchell as 'the big boys, the best there is in international investigation.', - Halligen a proven and convicted fraudster and the Fund's subsequent failure to claim back the £ 0.5 m handed over to him under your joint supervision, is now a matter of historical note, and is documented and has been discussed elsewhere at considerable length.
Similarly the strange case of the contract awarded to two retired junior police officers, Dave Edgar and Arthur Cowley - according to Clarence Mitchell, a team of crack detectives - and of a company falsely named in many press reports as the impressive 'Alpha Group Investigations', - a respectable company in the USA. The company, was only incorporated as ALPHAIG, with an address of a cottage in the hills of Wales, some considerable time after this had been said. This strange case has already been picked over and the timeline confirmed.
Again the level of due diligence performed here seems - to a lay outsider - to be questionable. It is not clear, for example, how even the most basic Company Check could possibly have been conducted. According to the filed Company accounts it was operating on resources of £ 650 cash and fixed assets of £ 853. This case and the alleged involvement of your two firms has been discussed at length.
But we are left wondering whether two firms of your stature could have made three consecutive and identical errors of professional judgement and competence, not learning from the preceding ones, in the handling of a huge amount of donated money paid into just one Fund, benefitting just one couple.
Yours sincerely, redacted
PLEASE NOTE:
I fully appreciate that you are under no legal or moral obligation to reply to this letter, nor to answer any of the concerns raised.
In view of that, and the huge public interest generated by this case over the past eight years, it is intended, after a reasonable time, that this letter will be published on a web forum as an Open Letter, with some personal details redacted.
I am confident that given your commitment to Transparency, Justice and Investigation that this is acceptable.
1 YouTube
The interview with Francisco Marco, in which he says - in English -
“I know the kidnapper and we know where he is.
We know who he is and we know how he has done it . . .”
may be viewed at 1:23 on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
2 La Cortina de Humo - 'The Smokescreen' - by Julian Peribañez and Antonio
Tamarit
(August 2014, ISBN 978-84-941649-8-9)
3 El Método - ‘The Method’ - by Francisco Marco Fernández
(October 2013, ISBN 978-84-9970-943-7)
Both books are available from Amazon.es, Casa del Libro, and Amazon.co.uk
Quotes from La Cortina de Humo. Translated by a qualified and attested translator
p. 177 - I began to realise to what extent the company was swindling the fund which had been set
up and which was supported by hundreds of unsuspecting people whose sole objective was to
find Madeleine. Nothing special, just inflated expenses, invented items and false invoices, etc.
p.178 - Francisco Marco, whenever asked, always replied that Método 3 had deployed ‘twenty
men’ to investigate Madeleine’s disappearance! That was yet another lie.
This was the tactic used by Francisco Marco to inflate Método 3’s invoices to the client
p. 182 - He omitted to tell the journalist that his specialists were his mother and his cousin; he
must have thought there was no need to mention this. Alternatively, he may have thought
that the journalist had realised that his cousin was the chief financial officer (meaning the
accountant) of Método 3 and that his mother was just a woman who didn’t even hold a driving
licence and had been a secretary at a detective agency and who was involved in sales for the
agency and not investigative work.
p. 185 - He presented them with false invoices for travel and accommodation expenses for the 20
people who were supposed to be working in Portugal. The procedure for accomplishing this task
was simple and straightforward and no scientific methodology was required: all they had to do
was obtain some El Co
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysmacIntyre
Respectively Solicitors and Accountants for the Madeleine Fund
Individual Copies sent to redacted and redacted
who it is reported were jointly concerned with setting up the Fund
Dear Sir and Madam,
Several years ago I wrote to you about claims by Francisco Marco - proprietor of the detective agency, Metodo3, that they would be able to return Madeleine McCann to her parents 'by Christmas'.
You were kind enough to reply. You denied that such a claim had been made.
I am not sure whether you were fully aware that the McCanns' spokesman, Clarence Mitchell had already said that the family were satisfied, saying '....but we are pleased the agency is confident that they will find Madeleine in due course.'
You will also be aware that Marco's words are on a 'video' clip, available on YouTube, where he re-states his position, - helpfully in English. (full reference in Appendix - 1)
But given that you and HaysM were concerned with the creation and running of the Fund are we to believe that both your firms were simultaneously neglecting their duties.
As you know, in her autobiography, 'madeleine', Kate McCann herself admitted that these words had been used, which gave rise to a number of questions about your and HaysM's level of interest, professional competence, and/or veracity.
You will be aware that a recently published book - La Cortina de Humo - by a sometime employee of Metodo3 details several large scale frauds committed against the Madeleine Fund, and shows how the techniques employed should have been apparent to anyone with responsibility for 'due diligence' and certainly to a trained and conscientious accountant. (full reference in Appendix - 2)
Again this may raise important questions about professional competence.
I am confident that you will have read the book, and will have studied in depth the chapter devoted to the fraud, but so that anyone else reading this shall know, he details very crude and simple methods, which should have been obvious to anyone. He says that evidence is available to investigators, and may already be in their hands.
They include simply obtaining receipts for travel from an El Corte Ingles travel branch, and then forging them by overwriting the relevant details, before including these in the monthly invoices to the Fund, overseen by you.
He states that the 20 operatives - or 40 as sometimes quoted - who were being routinely charged for consisted of at most three (3), and for most of the time, only two. He names them.
He goes on to expose the mendacious claim that Metodo3 had successfully recovered more than 300 missing persons in a single year. He worked for this company for several years and was aware of only two (2) such examples. Perhaps these issues could and should have been explored in detail before the contract was signed. Data Protection and the laws relating to the protection of minors would not prevent outline details of many of the cases being supplied for investigation, and Company accounts detailing a total of only twelve (12) employees are public documents.
He publishes the e-mails he sent to the people who had been financing the operation, in which he gives details of the fraud. He also sent these to two of the six Directors of the Fund, whom he names.
He received no reply and no acknowledgement. He interprets this, perhaps with justification, as a 'wall of silence'.
It is inconceivable that you and HaysM were not made aware of this, and again it raises further questions about your involvement, and your professional competence. The possibility of higher level collusion is of course unthinkable.
In your internet advertising you both make great play of your devotion to, and the importance of conducting and maintaining Due Diligence - you use the term 42 time, and HaysM 35 times. You both mention Transparency ((58 and 44 times respectively), and Justice (86 and 16). You go further to discuss Investigation (78) and you use the word Fraud 35 times. HaysM use it 25 times.
It is clear therefore that both firms, at least in publicity and advertising, say they understand the importance of vigilance against Fraud at all levels and at all times.
It may be however that on this on occasion both firms simultaneously made the identical mistake or simultaneously failed to notice the glaring irregularities.
This would be in line with what is alleged to have happened many times during this perplexing case.
The blood and cadaver detection dogs were said to have made a series of mistakes but only in this case, when they alerted to 14 items and places linked with the McCanns - but to no other places. The dogs' previous and subsequent performance has never been successfully challenged in the criminal courts
Some of the best detectives and Police advisors from several police forces from different countries made identical and false deductions
Top lawyers and public prosecutors in Portugal concurrently and independently made identical gross errors
...and so on. The case is full of remarkable coincidences. Many hundreds have been recorded so far. The revelation that £ 500,000 of publicly donated money was squandered on a fraudulent enterprise, but worse - that no attempt was then made to recover the money, nor to take action against the alleged fraudsters, might damage public confidence in both your firms.
You are also surely aware of the book, El Método, by the proprietor of Metodo3, Fransicso Marco, in which at p. 452, he says 'Someday I'll explain if we believe that Maddie is alive or dead, and, if she was killed, who we think did it.' (full reference in Appendix - 3)
I draw this to your attention, as, of course, if it is eventually shown that Madeleine was in fact dead and that the parents knew or suspected this, as now seems increasingly likely, then the entire Fund would itself have been fraudulent ab initio, and the issue of due diligence and professional supervision will assume even greater importance, with the persons concerned being liable to account either to Civil or Criminal Courts.
The apparent failure or neglect of due diligence in the contracting of Kevin Halligen, of Oakley International, the Company referred to by Clarence Mitchell as 'the big boys, the best there is in international investigation.', - Halligen a proven and convicted fraudster and the Fund's subsequent failure to claim back the £ 0.5 m handed over to him under your joint supervision, is now a matter of historical note, and is documented and has been discussed elsewhere at considerable length.
Similarly the strange case of the contract awarded to two retired junior police officers, Dave Edgar and Arthur Cowley - according to Clarence Mitchell, a team of crack detectives - and of a company falsely named in many press reports as the impressive 'Alpha Group Investigations', - a respectable company in the USA. The company, was only incorporated as ALPHAIG, with an address of a cottage in the hills of Wales, some considerable time after this had been said. This strange case has already been picked over and the timeline confirmed.
Again the level of due diligence performed here seems - to a lay outsider - to be questionable. It is not clear, for example, how even the most basic Company Check could possibly have been conducted. According to the filed Company accounts it was operating on resources of £ 650 cash and fixed assets of £ 853. This case and the alleged involvement of your two firms has been discussed at length.
But we are left wondering whether two firms of your stature could have made three consecutive and identical errors of professional judgement and competence, not learning from the preceding ones, in the handling of a huge amount of donated money paid into just one Fund, benefitting just one couple.
Yours sincerely, redacted
PLEASE NOTE:
I fully appreciate that you are under no legal or moral obligation to reply to this letter, nor to answer any of the concerns raised.
In view of that, and the huge public interest generated by this case over the past eight years, it is intended, after a reasonable time, that this letter will be published on a web forum as an Open Letter, with some personal details redacted.
I am confident that given your commitment to Transparency, Justice and Investigation that this is acceptable.
1 YouTube
The interview with Francisco Marco, in which he says - in English -
“I know the kidnapper and we know where he is.
We know who he is and we know how he has done it . . .”
may be viewed at 1:23 on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
2 La Cortina de Humo - 'The Smokescreen' - by Julian Peribañez and Antonio
Tamarit
(August 2014, ISBN 978-84-941649-8-9)
3 El Método - ‘The Method’ - by Francisco Marco Fernández
(October 2013, ISBN 978-84-9970-943-7)
Both books are available from Amazon.es, Casa del Libro, and Amazon.co.uk
Quotes from La Cortina de Humo. Translated by a qualified and attested translator
p. 177 - I began to realise to what extent the company was swindling the fund which had been set
up and which was supported by hundreds of unsuspecting people whose sole objective was to
find Madeleine. Nothing special, just inflated expenses, invented items and false invoices, etc.
p.178 - Francisco Marco, whenever asked, always replied that Método 3 had deployed ‘twenty
men’ to investigate Madeleine’s disappearance! That was yet another lie.
This was the tactic used by Francisco Marco to inflate Método 3’s invoices to the client
p. 182 - He omitted to tell the journalist that his specialists were his mother and his cousin; he
must have thought there was no need to mention this. Alternatively, he may have thought
that the journalist had realised that his cousin was the chief financial officer (meaning the
accountant) of Método 3 and that his mother was just a woman who didn’t even hold a driving
licence and had been a secretary at a detective agency and who was involved in sales for the
agency and not investigative work.
p. 185 - He presented them with false invoices for travel and accommodation expenses for the 20
people who were supposed to be working in Portugal. The procedure for accomplishing this task
was simple and straightforward and no scientific methodology was required: all they had to do
was obtain some El Co
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
____________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MAGA [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MBGA
Jill Havern- Chief Faffer, Forum Owner
- Posts : 31197
Activity : 44013
Likes received : 7758
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe -
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by Knitted 15.03.16 21:53
This letter makes for a damning indictment of 'the Fund' and all it claimed to stand for.
The points, carefully presented by the author, demonstrate either inexcusable levels of incompetence and a dereliction of duty... or complicity in instigating, and perpetuating, a fraud. The evidence speaks for itself.
I wonder if anyone, who may fall into the 'incompetent' camp (maybe understandably, owing to being swept along emotionally in the early days), will do the decent thing and speak out and accept that donations to the Fund were misused? Sadly, I suspect not... as I hold the view that it has been a cornerstone of the cover-up from the start.
The points, carefully presented by the author, demonstrate either inexcusable levels of incompetence and a dereliction of duty... or complicity in instigating, and perpetuating, a fraud. The evidence speaks for itself.
I wonder if anyone, who may fall into the 'incompetent' camp (maybe understandably, owing to being swept along emotionally in the early days), will do the decent thing and speak out and accept that donations to the Fund were misused? Sadly, I suspect not... as I hold the view that it has been a cornerstone of the cover-up from the start.
____________________
Justice... Fought for by the masses. Purchased by the wealthy. Traded by the powerful.
Knitted- Posts : 240
Activity : 259
Likes received : 15
Join date : 2015-01-02
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by Rogue-a-Tory 15.03.16 22:41
The writer of the letter should send their complaint about Haysmacintyre to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England & Wales. Ask them to formally investigate that the financial statements don't show a true and fair view of the company and the audit hasn't properly been conducted.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Rogue-a-Tory- Posts : 647
Activity : 1115
Likes received : 454
Join date : 2014-09-10
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by Guest 15.03.16 22:48
How long have they sat on this letter? How the hell has this been allowed to go on? The fraud and lies are so blatent and yet it appears no-one who should be questioning it are doing anything at all or the fund would have been frozen long since. Just what did happen in May 2007 because it must be something big to warrant this level of cover-up.
Guest- Guest
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by Jill Havern 16.03.16 6:08
Two weeks.melisande wrote:How long have they sat on this letter?
____________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MAGA [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MBGA
Jill Havern- Chief Faffer, Forum Owner
- Posts : 31197
Activity : 44013
Likes received : 7758
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe -
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by Jill Havern 16.03.16 6:53
Thank you. This will be done.Rogue-a-Tory wrote:The writer of the letter should send their complaint about Haysmacintyre to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England & Wales. Ask them to formally investigate that the financial statements don't show a true and fair view of the company and the audit hasn't properly been conducted.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It's also been sent to DCI Nicola "I nick 'em so quick, they are nicked before they even know they've been nicked" Wall.
____________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MAGA [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MBGA
Jill Havern- Chief Faffer, Forum Owner
- Posts : 31197
Activity : 44013
Likes received : 7758
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe -
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by hogwash 16.03.16 8:30
Dear DCI Nicola Wall, please define "quick".
hogwash- Posts : 209
Activity : 472
Likes received : 197
Join date : 2015-09-20
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by Guest 16.03.16 8:41
Great letter!
I've wondered for a while how much we really know about the Halligen affair, and the touted £500k - have we seen authentic documents to that effect? It strikes me that a good chunk of that could've been divvied up as 'hush money/story planters' here and there (or am I too conspiratorial?).
I've wondered for a while how much we really know about the Halligen affair, and the touted £500k - have we seen authentic documents to that effect? It strikes me that a good chunk of that could've been divvied up as 'hush money/story planters' here and there (or am I too conspiratorial?).
Guest- Guest
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by Guest 16.03.16 10:49
I can maybe believe they made a naive mistake hiring Metodo 3 but then Halligen and Alphaig? No way. Not with all their advisers etc. This goes much deeper imo.
Guest- Guest
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by tinkier 16.03.16 21:50
For the scam to continue, they had to pick liars and thieves. A couple of good PI'S with a brain cell between them would have picked up very very quickly what was going on. Metado 3 were hand picked for what they were, or more accurately, what they were not!melisande wrote:I can maybe believe they made a naive mistake hiring Metodo 3 but then Halligen and Alphaig? No way. Not with all their advisers etc. This goes much deeper imo.
tinkier- Posts : 239
Activity : 411
Likes received : 160
Join date : 2015-06-08
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by canada12 17.03.16 1:39
From the very start, when the first dodgy firm was hired, I suspected a convenient form of "money laundering", whereby a fairly hefty percentage of the money paid out to the firm was then cycled back to the Fund, with the dodgy firm's principals pocketing the rest in exchange for their "work".
It would have given the impression that the Fund was actually being used to "find" Madeleine - and if anyone queried the subsequent dismal track records of the firm's principals, the McCanns could be counted on to claim they were innocently taken advantage of. Meanwhile the Fund could claim half a million in write-offs each time and Madeleine was kept in the news.
On the other hand, if the principals of the dodgy firms had come across some information that might have been very detrimental to the McCanns - if, for instance, they had discovered information about Madeleine that proved she had died in the flat and was not abducted - then the possibility of blackmail now looms large. Hire us, pay us half a million, we'll do a pretendy job of trying to find her, and we promise we won't spill the beans to the coppers.
Above is my opinion only.
It would have given the impression that the Fund was actually being used to "find" Madeleine - and if anyone queried the subsequent dismal track records of the firm's principals, the McCanns could be counted on to claim they were innocently taken advantage of. Meanwhile the Fund could claim half a million in write-offs each time and Madeleine was kept in the news.
On the other hand, if the principals of the dodgy firms had come across some information that might have been very detrimental to the McCanns - if, for instance, they had discovered information about Madeleine that proved she had died in the flat and was not abducted - then the possibility of blackmail now looms large. Hire us, pay us half a million, we'll do a pretendy job of trying to find her, and we promise we won't spill the beans to the coppers.
Above is my opinion only.
canada12- Posts : 1461
Activity : 1698
Likes received : 211
Join date : 2013-10-28
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by Nina 17.03.16 9:51
Well whatever Metedo3 were doing they left a paper trail, boxes full of paper..................................canada12 wrote:From the very start, when the first dodgy firm was hired, I suspected a convenient form of "money laundering", whereby a fairly hefty percentage of the money paid out to the firm was then cycled back to the Fund, with the dodgy firm's principals pocketing the rest in exchange for their "work".
It would have given the impression that the Fund was actually being used to "find" Madeleine - and if anyone queried the subsequent dismal track records of the firm's principals, the McCanns could be counted on to claim they were innocently taken advantage of. Meanwhile the Fund could claim half a million in write-offs each time and Madeleine was kept in the news.
On the other hand, if the principals of the dodgy firms had come across some information that might have been very detrimental to the McCanns - if, for instance, they had discovered information about Madeleine that proved she had died in the flat and was not abducted - then the possibility of blackmail now looms large. Hire us, pay us half a million, we'll do a pretendy job of trying to find her, and we promise we won't spill the beans to the coppers.
Above is my opinion only.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
____________________
Not one more cent from me.
Nina- Forum support
- Posts : 3323
Activity : 3684
Likes received : 349
Join date : 2011-06-16
Age : 81
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by Rogue-a-Tory 17.03.16 10:11
Precisely, how else did Mr & Mrs end up with large 'chunks' of money outside of the fund?canada12 wrote:From the very start, when the first dodgy firm was hired, I suspected a convenient form of "money laundering", whereby a fairly hefty percentage of the money paid out to the firm was then cycled back to the Fund, with the dodgy firm's principals pocketing the rest in exchange for their "work".
Rogue-a-Tory- Posts : 647
Activity : 1115
Likes received : 454
Join date : 2014-09-10
Letter to Fund set up Managers
by willowthewisp 17.03.16 10:50
It would seem as though it just wasn't the "Jammies that were washed",not forgetting Bell Pottinger being paid 1/2 Million to keep up the profile in the press,eg Leveson?Rogue-a-Tory wrote:Precisely, how else did Mr & Mrs end up with large 'chunks' of money outside of the fund?canada12 wrote:From the very start, when the first dodgy firm was hired, I suspected a convenient form of "money laundering", whereby a fairly hefty percentage of the money paid out to the firm was then cycled back to the Fund, with the dodgy firm's principals pocketing the rest in exchange for their "work".
willowthewisp- Posts : 3392
Activity : 4912
Likes received : 1160
Join date : 2015-05-07
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by roy rovers 17.03.16 11:13
Did Alphaig ever submit accounts To Companies House? Do they tally with payments made to them listed in the accounts of the Fund?
roy rovers- Posts : 473
Activity : 538
Likes received : 51
Join date : 2012-03-04
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by woodpecker 17.03.16 18:14
roy rovers wrote:Did Alphaig ever submit accounts To Companies House? Do they tally with payments made to them listed in the accounts of the Fund?
I went onto the website of Company House and in the place for search for a company - I put in Alphaig Ltd and guess what the search came up with nothing! Was Alphaig a limited company at all? Even if Alphaig had filed accounts, surely they could not have been cross checked with the Fund Accounts as they apparently give no detail?
woodpecker- Posts : 53
Activity : 80
Likes received : 27
Join date : 2014-10-09
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by tinkier 17.03.16 19:08
Is this the one?woodpecker wrote:roy rovers wrote:Did Alphaig ever submit accounts To Companies House? Do they tally with payments made to them listed in the accounts of the Fund?
I went onto the website of Company House and in the place for search for a company - I put in Alphaig Ltd and guess what the search came up with nothing! Was Alphaig a limited company at all? Even if Alphaig had filed accounts, surely they could not have been cross checked with the Fund Accounts as they apparently give no detail?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
also discussed here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
tinkier- Posts : 239
Activity : 411
Likes received : 160
Join date : 2015-06-08
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by dottyaussie 17.03.16 22:15
dottyaussie- Posts : 161
Activity : 337
Likes received : 170
Join date : 2016-02-25
Location : NorthWest
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by plebgate 23.03.16 18:28
Thanks for posting GEG. WOW. I don't suppose the writer has received an acknowledgement. Wow again.
plebgate- Posts : 6729
Activity : 8938
Likes received : 2123
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by Jill Havern 30.03.16 17:53
Update on tigger's blog:
Acknowledgements and replies were received from both companies after the Easter break:
Haysmacintyre explained that 'Client Confidentiality' prevented their making any further comment.
Bates Wells Braithwaite added that the remarks by Julian Peribanez were defamatory of Francisco Marco, which is undoubtedly correct if those allegations are untrue.
They also helpfully suggested that the matter should be referred to the regulatory and disciplinary authorities.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Wednesday, 30 March 2016
OPEN LETTER - UPDATE BY SOCRATES
Acknowledgements and replies were received from both companies after the Easter break:
Haysmacintyre explained that 'Client Confidentiality' prevented their making any further comment.
Bates Wells Braithwaite added that the remarks by Julian Peribanez were defamatory of Francisco Marco, which is undoubtedly correct if those allegations are untrue.
They also helpfully suggested that the matter should be referred to the regulatory and disciplinary authorities.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
____________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MAGA [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MBGA
Jill Havern- Chief Faffer, Forum Owner
- Posts : 31197
Activity : 44013
Likes received : 7758
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe -
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by plebgate 02.04.16 12:19
Very helpful suggestion being as this had already been suggested by one of CMOMM members. Very helpful. Me wonders if certain peeps are reading this site.Get'emGonçalo wrote:Update on tigger's blog:Wednesday, 30 March 2016
OPEN LETTER - UPDATE BY SOCRATES
Acknowledgements and replies were received from both companies after the Easter break:
Haysmacintyre explained that 'Client Confidentiality' prevented their making any further comment.
Bates Wells Braithwaite added that the remarks by Julian Peribanez were defamatory of Francisco Marco, which is undoubtedly correct if those allegations are untrue.
They also helpfully suggested that the matter should be referred to the regulatory and disciplinary authorities.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
plebgate- Posts : 6729
Activity : 8938
Likes received : 2123
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco
by sharonl 10.03.17 11:44
tinkier wrote:Is this the one?woodpecker wrote:roy rovers wrote:Did Alphaig ever submit accounts To Companies House? Do they tally with payments made to them listed in the accounts of the Fund?
I went onto the website of Company House and in the place for search for a company - I put in Alphaig Ltd and guess what the search came up with nothing! Was Alphaig a limited company at all? Even if Alphaig had filed accounts, surely they could not have been cross checked with the Fund Accounts as they apparently give no detail?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
also discussed here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
All the documents can be downloaded here [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I hope that there is a copy of this letter laying in wait for the next auditor
sharonl- Forum Owner
- Posts : 8644
Activity : 11283
Likes received : 1397
Join date : 2009-12-29 -
Similar topics» OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco and Kevin Halligen
» OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco ex Private Investigator hired by Kate and Gerry McCann
» Open letter to Operation Grange and the PJ by Lorraine Holden
» Now shown on Channel 5: 'THE McCANNS AND THE CONMAN'
» An open letter to AC Mark Rowley, who wrote an open letter to the media this week
» OPEN LETTER TO Bates Wells Braithwaite AND TO HaysMacIntyre re Francisco Marco ex Private Investigator hired by Kate and Gerry McCann
» Open letter to Operation Grange and the PJ by Lorraine Holden
» Now shown on Channel 5: 'THE McCANNS AND THE CONMAN'
» An open letter to AC Mark Rowley, who wrote an open letter to the media this week
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: British Police / Government Interference :: 'Operation Grange' set up by ex-Prime Minister David Cameron
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
