The Find Madeleine Fund

Back the original question  - "is the "Fund" fraudulent, or might it be"

The legislation in question if the Fraud Act 2006, which you can read at

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/introduction
[tricky to copy and paste because of the formatting, so I'll screen grab]
S. 2 is the relevant one here



Note subsection 2,  "A representation if false if –
(b) .  the person making if knows that it is, OR MIGHT BE, untrue or misleading.

We know, know, that the McCanns are on record, right from the start, conceding that Madeleine was probably dead, and have repeated that at odd moments ever since.  
They must therefore have known, known, that the claim that she was alive and well MIGHT HAVE BEEN untrue, or at least misleading.
So far as I am aware, they never publicly said words to the effect " Although some people may think she must by now be dead, and we accept that our actions in publicising her eye defect, and details of suspects may well have hastened that outcome,  we nevertheless ask you to give up your savings and Pension and pocket money on the off-chance that she might still be alive . . "


I submit that the "Fund" falls squarely into the mischief aimed at by Section 2(b)

People donated to this fund because they believed, as told by the McCanns, that Madeleine was abducted and that the fund would be used for the search for her.

Was Madeleine really abducted?
Is the fund really for the search for her?
 
Or,

Were they accepting donations from the public under false pretences?

Knowing is one thing - proving is another. Surely?

Look back over the 'funds' history. It all started as a 'place' for goodhearted folk to pay-in donations to assist the search. A limited company, not a charity, so transparency is not a requisite stipulation, although professed and expected under the circumstances.

Then it was declared a fight fund. Either way it could be said that public donations were made by choice with full knowledge of the fund's purpose.

I've said before and I'll say again, it's all hidden in the small print, as a limited company there will always be a get out clause - hence the reason they opted for a limited company rather than a charity. The reason offered for not opting for charity status was vapid in the extreme.

The name McCann is protected by a firewall of accomplished lawyers, I can't believe for a moment they would be stupid enough to lay themselves open to an investigation by the fraud squad.

There will be a get out clause.

I can't believe that the McCanns have claimed back their expenses, £94 last year plus £288 which was owing to them, this year. 

Everyone else is expected to donate but they cant even waive their petty expenses for their own daughter.

Did they ever repay the money that they used for their mortgage and various other things?  And what about their personal legal expenses?

SharonL:
 
‘Did they ever repay the money that they used for their mortgage and various other things?’
 
Million dollar question, which of course we cannot ascertain from the little that shows in the accounts.
 
I’m sure we all know the answer, but of course there is no actual evidence either way in the published accounts.
 
And never forget:
 
‘An experienced Fund Administrator has been appointed to ensure the highest standards of transparency and accountability.’
 
http://www.findmadeleine.com/about_us/madeleines-fund.html
 
‘Highest standards of transparency and accountability.’
 
Really?

Gerry McCann's blog - day 14, 17th May 2007 (only two weeks after Madeleine's alleged disappearance)..

There was and indeed still seems to be, some confusion differentiating between donations made to the Find Madeleine Co. Ltd. and pledges made by a number of people to swell the reward on offer by the now defunct News of the World - a dial M for Murdoch tentacle.

A few high profile wealthy individuals pledged considerable amounts for the reward, people like Richard 'tricky dicky' Branson, Sir Philip Green and author JK Rowling.  No one genuine ever claimed the rewad which effectively means the money pledged was safe in the hands of their rightful owners (I use the words tentatively).  If you pledge money, you  don't hand it over until a reward is claimed and paid-out. I believe it can be safely concluded that the generous wealthy didn't part with a single penny of their vast forutunes to aid the McCanns or their infamous 'search'.

A couple of occasions when a private jet or Virgin Atlantic was laid-on can easily be put-down to a publicity stunt.

Who has donated to the fund?

A breakdown of the reward, and a full list of who, including celebrities, has donated to the Madeleine McCann reward fund is:

£10,000 from The Sun newspaper, €15,000 (£10,250) from the Portuguese newspaper Record, £100,000 (€147,000) from a colleague of Kate McCann, £1,000,000 (€1,470,000) from British businessman Stephen Winyard.

A further £1,500,000 (€2,200,000) was raised through a News of The World pledge, including £250,000 from the News of the World themselves, £250,000 from Sir Philip Green, £50,000 from Simon Cowell and £25,000 from Wayne and Coleen Rooney.

Other notable contributors include Sir Richard Branson, JK Rowling, and Bill Kenwright. Harry Potter author JK Rowling donated the highest amount to the News of The World fund, but her figure was undisclosed.

What are the details of the Madeleine McCann reward?

The reward is for anyone that can provide information directly resulting in the safe return of Madeleine.

Kate and Gerry McCann appealing for information
Has anyone ever tried to claim the money?

There have been fraudulent attempts to claim the Madeleine McCann reward money. On June 28th, 2007, police arrested an Italian man and a Portuguese woman over allegations they had tried to defraud the McCanns by claiming a reward for information about Maddie. However, police said there was no direct link with Madeleine's kidnap. Then on July 6th of the same year, police in the Netherlands arrested a man who allegedly demanded two million euros from the McCanns for information about their missing daughter.

As well as this, people have claimed to be raising funds for the Madeleine McCann reward fund. One of these was Debbie Clifton, who was jailed for 90 days after she pleaded guilty to stealing from people, saying she was raising money to go towards trying to find missing Madeleine.

https://thetab.com/uk/2019/03/20/madeleine-mccann-reward-fund-96101

I don't have time at present to check the detail of this ^^^ from a reliable source so I can't vouch for the accuracy, particularly as it's Netflix associated.  It's only intended as a guide to the basis of the News of the World reward and the total inability for investigative journalists to get their facts right !!!

Note the reward is for "anyone that can provide information directly resulting in the safe return of Madeleine". Similarly worded is object 3.1.1 of Madeleine's Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned Limited.

The only thing that explains (for me) the actions and attitude of the parents, such as their invariable references to "the search" and Dr Gerald McCann's smirk at mention of his missing daughter's possible whereabouts, is the certainty that she can neither be returned nor her body found.

In a few short years the missing family member will be deemed to have attained the age of 18, and her Ward of Court status will need to be revisited. The objects of the fund will become largely redundant, and perhaps investigation will turn to a different direction.

Jonal wrote:In a few short years the missing family member will be deemed to have attained the age of 18, and her Ward of Court status will need to be revisited. The objects of the fund will become largely redundant, and perhaps investigation will turn to a different direction

The Ward of Court proceeding was but a cosmetic exercise, if you study the general reason for making a child a ward of court, it's clear that Madeleine McCann did not fall into the accepted rationale. Confirmed to a certain extent by the inappropriate ramblings of the judge in question. In my view making Madeleine a ward of court was a means to an end - to get their grubby little trotters on information appertaining to the investigation which wouldn't otherwise have been accessible. They failed and so the ward of court became instantly redundant.

A missing person can be legally declared deceased if not found after seven years. Have Messrs McCann considered this option?

Published 12th May 2007

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/6649951.stm

Verdi:
 
They failed and so the ward of court became instantly redundant. 

A missing person can be legally declared deceased if not found after seven years. Have Messrs McCann considered this option?
 
From their point of view, having failed to access the police records, it might seem redundant, but as far as we are aware, it is still in place.
 
On that basis, it would be down to the Court to go down the ‘7 year missing’ option, rather than the parents, if the Court so wished.

Presumably though, if the parents approached the Court expressing such a wish, the Court would consider it favourably, unless other factors were present to suggest this was not the appropriate route to take.

From Gerry McCann's Blog..

crusader wrote:This sounds dodgy to me if true. 13th May 2007, news of the world set up The Madeleine Fund. To offer a reward for Madelein's safe return. (why nearly the same name as the Mccann's fund? ) And set up day's apart.

The reward consisted of pledges from the rich and famous and donations from the readers of the  news of the world.

It stated that if the reward was not paid out, the money donated by readers would be shared by 3 charities. Barnardo's  n s p c c and Childline.

Instead in 2011, it was paid into the Mccann's fund. The Mccann's never acknowledged the payment. Gerry Mccann, when asked about it said, That is something you will have to take up with News International. My understanding is the reward was made up of pledges.

News International  at that time , no longer existed.

This was at a time when Murdochs news empire was suffering badly as more people were reading the news on the internet instead of buying papers.  They opened up a new company at the time, just in case the worst happened.

At the same time, Missing People were in difficulty and needed a boost, a new beginning - according to them.

Tony and Cherie Blair were associated with Lady Meyers charity which in turn is associated with Missing People.

Blair sent his media manipulator off to become spokesman for the McCanns

It was Rebekah Brooks who demanded the setting up of operation grange.

And in her words to David Cameron at Leveson - "Were all in this together"

One day we'll complete this jigsaw, we just need those final pieces

It is December 2019, 12.7 years since Madeleine McCann was reported missing. Over twelve years caught in a labyrinth of false information, mainly through the hands of the media but sometimes the McCanns themselves have contributed to this never ending story of deception. Eight years of media/McCann reports of Operation Grange who continue to rumble on month after month, with little or no known progress.

To this very day the official Find Madeleine website, affiliated to The Fund, has this to offer the 'search' (that word again) for their missing daughter. All the money donated by good hearted people - where has it all gone? Are the McCanns and/or Operation Grange still looking for this list of suspects. Wasn't the first ruled out by Operation Grange?

No Christmas message this year...?

Jill Havern wrote:No Christmas message this year...?

Last year they left it to the very last minute - Boxing Day if I remember rightly .

Jill Havern wrote:No Christmas message this year...?

Maybe we'll be spared this year    

They struggled with finding the reasons they missed their daughter !

sandancer wrote:

Jill Havern wrote:No Christmas message this year...?

Maybe we'll be spared this year    

They struggled with finding the reasons they missed their daughter !

No they didn't!

They missed their daughter because err err erm mmm mmm, eeh oh yer erm err oh yer well .... you know ... err dunno really, well err yeah hmmm rhubarb rhubarb ..... what was the question again?