News of the World gave McCanns REWARD money in April 2011.

New Lazzeri up about the 'Find' fund & how the Mc's have a duty to the public to be open about what goes in & out.

http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com/McCann_Kick_in_the_Teeth.html

Trouble is they may have a theoretical moral or ethical duty based on the fact that it was the public that donated the money and the statements about 'openess' that were made, but legally they can get away with revealing f... all, which is exactly what they have been doing.

An update of the "sauce" today
http://asaucesaid.blogspot.nl/

Lots of questions, no answers ...

Doug D wrote:New Lazzeri up about the 'Find' fund & how the Mc's have a duty to the public to be open about what goes in & out.

http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com/McCann_Kick_in_the_Teeth.html

Trouble is they may have a theoretical moral or ethical duty based on the fact that it was the public that donated the money and the statements about 'openess' that were made, but legally they can get away with revealing f... all, which is exactly what they have been doing.

Yeah, moral or ethical duties has never stopped them.

To me, it appears that the News of the World was in the wrong, by donating money to the McCanns when they had specifically named three other charities would be beneficiaries.

Where Gerry McCann is at fault, is by being disingenuous - he talks about pledges - which would have been the reward by various worthies, and conveniently overlooks the c. £21K donation which came in via NotW - which he MUST know about - it's not small change.

http://asaucesaid.blogspot.nl/

Clarence Mitchell, official spokesman for Kate and Gerry McCann, was asked by email what had happened to the News of the World Reward Fund. He did not reply.

Two emails to the Find Madeleine website received only an automated response:

Thank you for contacting the Find Madeleine Campaign. Your email will be read by a member of our campaign team. Please understand that we receive a large volume of emails and as a result you may not necessarily receive any further contact from us.

A third email to the site’s Webmaster eventually produced a reply:

Sorry, I do not know the answer to your question.

Sent from my iPad

It was at this point, in early December 2013, that Dr. Gerry McCann was asked what had happened to the News of the World Reward Fund. He replied:

That is something you will need to take up with News International.

My understanding is that the reward was made up of pledges.

This reply contradicted the information previously given by News International, so two further emails were sent to Dr. McCann, explaining News International’s position. He did not reply.

Two further directors of Madeleine's Fund were then approached.

Jon Corner is  CEO of The Landing, a media facilities company at Salford Quays which, according to Visit Salford, is “a totally new facility at the heart of MediaCityUK where SMEs and micro-businesses can work alongside large media and technology organisations to drive product efficiency and develop new industry processes.”

According to his own website, Edward Smethurst is an “Award Winning Manchester Solicitor... In March 2012, Edward won the Outstanding Lifetime Achievement Award at the Manchester Legal Awards 2012, which recognised his contribution to the legal industry in addition to his charitable work that includes being Chairman of the Madeleine McCann Fund and a trustee of Cancer Research UK.”

Both directors were asked whether the News of the World Reward cash had been paid into the Madeleine’s Fund. How much? When? And had the transfer had been a subject of discussion at any board meeting of Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd.?

Mr. Corner did not reply.

Mr. Smethurst passed the enquiry to the Fund Secretary, whose name we are not releasing at this time.

(This was, it seemed, the experienced Fund Administrator who had been appointed to ensure the highest standards of transparency and accountability.)

Early in January 2014, the Secretary wrote:

I confirm that the Fund does not hold any reward money for finding Madeleine. The income received in the year to which you refer was from donations.

Once more,  this was at odds with the information given by News International.

The Secretary was further asked to confirm or deny if any payment other than the £550,000 for serialisation of Mrs. McCann's book was made by News International to the Fund in April 2011.

The Secretary replied:

I am sorry but I am not authorised to respond further.

In mid-January 2014, the same request was put to Mr. Smethurst.

The reply came, instead, from the Secretary:

In light of the fact that the Board is inundated with requests for information and we publish our accounts that are independently audited and publicly available, the Board is not prepared to enter into answering individual queries. We are sorry that we are not able to be of further help.

In May 2014, it was put to Mr. Smethurst and the Secretary that, in April 2011, News International transferred the amount of £21,257.32 to Madeleine’s Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd. The money had been donated by readers as a reward for information leading to the safe return of Madeleine.

Both were given the opportunity to amend or correct the claim.

No reply was received.

So what did happen to the News of the World readers’ money?

And what happened to transparency?
***
Bolding is mine

'In light of the fact that the Board is inundated with requests for information and we publish our accounts that are independently audited and publicly available, the Board is not prepared to enter into answering individual queries. We are sorry that we are not able to be of further help.'


Where does the Board of the Fund publish the accounts?

Certainly not on the company website which would be an obvious place. It would cost nothing to publish the accounts there.

Publicly available? - yes if you know how to get accounts from Company House and pay the fee.  They have to be available by law at Company House.

Do the accounts give you much information? - No they provide the minimum information required by law.

Where is the transparency about the Fund promised in Dr Kate McCann's book?

lj wrote:

Mirage wrote:I've seen some "bitter twitter" on the subject of the News of the World giving the £1.5 million reward money to the Find Madeleine Fund. I thought I would bump this thread due to increased forum traffic in case anyone missed this.

I often wonder how much, in total, has poured into their coffers.

Me too, Mirage, me too.

If indeed the reward money was used for the "normal" Fund activities, wouldn't that be "inappropriate" use of the money?

A conservative guess would be around £4m imo.  At least £1.5 poured in through public donations in the early days. and indeed, the OFM page had a running total, showing how much it was mounting up.  It was whooshed when it got to around £1.5m.  They then had the money demanded with menaces (libel actions) and the advance and royalties from the book - although its not clear if this was paid into the Fund. 

They continued fund raising with a mission from them on, asking the public to organise boot sales, sports days etc and donate the money to them.  In 2010 they upped the fundraising activities, taking to the TV sofas in November of that year telling the public what their donations would buy, a 24 hour hotline, more good quality wristbands etc.  They also sent out begging letters to all their usual doners. Imo, at that time they were broke, or close to it. 

They got a huge boost in 2011 with the book advance and the royalties, but even that would not cover the enormous legal costs they keep mounting up.  I doubt very much they will have enough to pay the losses they will incur when they lose the case.  The question will be are they personally liable for the costs and damages in Lisbon, or can they use the 'Fund'?

Pure supposition on my part, but I wonder if they have had to pay a large sum up front in the event they lose?  Is this what is keeps them going back for the trial?

I assume that they could use the Fund because one of its purposes it to provide assistance to the family.

Cristobell wrote:Pure supposition on my part, but I wonder if they have had to pay a large sum up front in the event they lose?  Is this what is keeps them going back for the trial?

I don't know about that but weren't costs awarded against them for the book banning, the book banning appeal to the appeal court and the book banning appeal to the supreme court. This has, if I remember it correctly, all been held in abeyance, pending the outcome of the libel trial. If I'm right that would provide a very strong motive for continuing to go back - they have to win the libel trial to avoid the earlier costs

When discussing things like this, I often think it's useful to return to Gerry's truly horrible blog. 

Re-reading it now, it seems even more ghastly than 7 years ago. The period around today's date covers meetings Gerry had in the UK regarding the setting up of the Fund. It's breathtaking to think that this garbage was released in his name a mere 7 weeks after Madeleine disappeared.  It also gives you a sense of deja vu:  police digging around PdL whilst the McCanns concentrate on money-making exercises (the taxi run to pick up their mate Jon Corner who made sure he got his feet under the table as far as the Fund was concerned).

There's also those peculiar sick-man-on-the-plane   and lost-wallet episodes.  ENJOY!

13th June 2007 Met with Portuguese and British police today to get an update on the investigation. We were reaasured that information continues to come in, and we continue to pray for a breakthrough.  We were extremely disappointed in the publication of the anonymous letter in The Telegraaf (Netherlands) claiming to know where Madeleine is buried. Although all information will be taken seriously, we were very upset that the credibility of this letter had not been examined and, more importantly, published before the Portuguese police had an opportunity to investigate the claim, and search the area if appropriate without massive media attention. We feel strongly that this was an irresponsible piece of journalism and even if it were true is insensitive and cruel.  One can imagine how upsetting it is for Kate and I to hear of such claims through the media and if every piece of information was published like this there would be nothing else in the newspapers.

14th June 2007 Six weeks since Madeleine disappeared. We believe Madeleine is alive and I am glad to say that following yesterday's letter in the Telegraaf (Netherlands) there has been no evidence that Madeliene is in the area indicated although there will be further searches tomorrow.  Kate and I picked up a friend from Faro airport who has been instrumental in helping with the campaign. He has been fantastic, producing the DVD of Madeleine to ‘Don’t you forget about me’ which has been shown at many sporting events and concerts as well as producing the look for maddie logo and various posters. We spent most of the day updating each other and discussing future campaign ideas. We are getting closer to appointing a campaign manager who will handle media liaison and coordinating events to keep Madeleine’s disappearance highly visible.

15th June 2007 The good news today is that the search in response to the letter in the Telegraaf did not find evidence of Madeleine. We still belive that Madeleine is alive. We have made some real progress deciding on campaign strategy. There is a huge amount of goodwill from people who want to help us find Madeleine and we have some concrete offers of support and are trying to finalise details before releasing them. Tomorrow will be a family day.

16th June 2007 Kate and I dropped Jon at the airport this morning and picked up some more friends/family who have come out to see us, but particularly the twins. They were certainly happy to see our visitors! After lunch we headed off to the local zoo. Relatively quiet on the campaign front today as it is a family day. Tomorrow we will announce one or two planned events to keep Madeleines disappearnace high profile.

17th June 2007 The first event of our longer term campaign will be on Friday 22nd June- this will mark the 50th day Madeleine will be missing. We will be launching green and yellow balloons from at least 50 centres worldwide to mark the fact that we are still searching as are other parents of missing children. Countries that are participating  so far are Argentina, El Salvador, USA, Canada, Ireland, UK, The Netherlands, Germany, Portugal (Kate and I in Praia da Luz), Spain, South Africa, Kenya, United Arab Emirates, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand. . Any other countries that wish to partcipate can download information from the website.

18th June 2007 Kate and I got the respone we wanted after speaking to the Portuguese ploice today. We are assured that no criticism of our actions on the night Madeline disappeared was intended.  There has been a good response to our planned balloon release for Madeleine and other missing children on Friday and we are confident that over 50 countries will be represented.  The twins have really enjoyed seeing family who have been visiting us for the last 3 days- it has passed very quickly. Hopefully the next time we see them it will be with Madeleine.

19th June 2007 Flew in to London to for a series of meetings. Helped a passenger on the flight who collapsed. He was ill enough to require a full assessment on arrival and went off to hospital in an ambulance.  Unfortunately shortly after arriving in London I had my wallet stolen which meant I was running late. I did manage to get to all my meetings which ran late into the evening. We had very good discussions regarding sustaining the search for Madeleine long term. The role for Kate and I in the campaign will not be nearly be so public. We have to balance any campaigning in the search for Madeleine with protecting Sean and Amelie and making sure their privacy is protected.  We are exploring the use of new media and using local advertising, particularly in Europe. There will of course be event driven media exposure such as the balloon launch on Friday 22nd. There are several other very good ideas being developed and a few large companies are willing to help us.

20th June 2007 Another busy day of meetings this time in Leicester. No mishaps thankfully.The main meeting was that of Maddeleines fund where we discussed implementing a strategy to maintain our campaign to find Madeleine. It was agreed in principle to appoint a family spokesperson who will act, not just for Kate and I, but also on behalf of the extended family who have been liasing with the media. This appointment will take a lot of strain off family members who have been putting in such massive efforts to help find Madeleine.  We are delighted with the response to the 50th day balloon launch which will truly be a global event. There will be a few variations to the release of balloons however. In Ventura, Southern California, 50 white doves will be released and in Afghanistan kite racing, an activity banned under the Taliban, will be the order of the day.  Arrived back in Praia da Luz this evening and it was great to see Kate and the Kids, even though I was only away for a day and a half.

I suspect the couple still have a few "secret" financial backers underwriting their mounting legal costs.

Enid O'Dowd wrote:'In light of the fact that the Board is inundated with requests for information and we publish our accounts that are independently audited and publicly available, the Board is not prepared to enter into answering individual queries. We are sorry that we are not able to be of further help.'


Where does the Board of the Fund publish the accounts?

Certainly not on the company website which would be an obvious place. It would cost nothing to publish the accounts there.

Publicly available? - yes if you know how to get accounts from Company House and pay the fee.  They have to be available by law at Company House.

Do the accounts give you much information? - No they provide the minimum information required by law.

Where is the transparency about the Fund promised in Dr Kate McCann's book?

***
And ... as I understand now, they're late paying their taxes this year ...

Miraflores wrote: I assume that they could use the Fund because one of its purposes it to provide assistance to the family.

In a Daily Mirror article of 11 Sept 2007 it talked about the possibility of the McCanns being charged and said: 'Kate and Gerry now have the headache of meeting hefty legal bills to try to prove their innocence. So far more than £1 million of donated money has flowed into the fund set up to find Madeleine. But using fund money is not an option.'

If the Fund money wasn't an option for their defence if charged, it would seem strange it could now be used to pay for their legal costs in a libel case brought by them, something that after all they didn't have to do. I suppose it could be said Fund money used in the libel case would benefit the family, but only if they win; it certainly won't benefit them if they lose. It would essentially be gambling with the Fund money if they use it to fund a libel case.

Issy wrote:

Miraflores wrote: I assume that they could use the Fund because one of its purposes it to provide assistance to the family.

In a Daily Mirror article of 11 Sept 2007 it talked about the possibility of the McCanns being charged and said: 'Kate and Gerry now have the headache of meeting hefty legal bills to try to prove their innocence. So far more than £1 million of donated money has flowed into the fund set up to find Madeleine. But using fund money is not an option.'

If the Fund money wasn't an option for their defence if charged, it would seem strange it could now be used to pay for their legal costs in a libel case brought by them, something that after all they didn't have to do. I suppose it could be said Fund money used in the libel case would benefit the family, but only if they win; it certainly won't benefit them if they lose. It would essentially be gambling with the Fund money if they use it to fund a libel case.

Yes Gerry was very upset about that. He said something like "to know we have all that money in the fund and we cannot use it". His own board members voted against it, that should have given him a hint..

But later on Clarrie had a good one for that too. He said (paraphrased) that all the donated money in the fund had been replaced by money from their libel blackmail cases and the bewk, so now they were free to do with it whatever they wanted.

Their chutzpa has no limits

Enid O'Dowd wrote:'In light of the fact that the Board is inundated with requests for information and we publish our accounts that are independently audited and publicly available, the Board is not prepared to enter into answering individual queries. We are sorry that we are not able to be of further help.'


Where does the Board of the Fund publish the accounts?

Certainly not on the company website which would be an obvious place. It would cost nothing to publish the accounts there.

Publicly available? - yes if you know how to get accounts from Company House and pay the fee.  They have to be available by law at Company House.

Do the accounts give you much information? - No they provide the minimum information required by law.

Where is the transparency about the Fund promised in Dr Kate McCann's book?

Hi Enid. A quick question if I may.

I had always thought the "restricted" funds in the Ltd Co balance sheet referred to the book sales/royalty payment as they were worded "every penny for the search" so must be spent on PI's etc. Could this money actually be ringfenced away from normal expenditure in case they lose the libel trial?


ETA as they appear to have had no problem using donated ££s in the search for 1.2 million euros  Madeleine in the past.

Gillyspot wrote:

Enid O'Dowd wrote:'In light of the fact that the Board is inundated with requests for information and we publish our accounts that are independently audited and publicly available, the Board is not prepared to enter into answering individual queries. We are sorry that we are not able to be of further help.'


Where does the Board of the Fund publish the accounts?

Certainly not on the company website which would be an obvious place. It would cost nothing to publish the accounts there.

Publicly available? - yes if you know how to get accounts from Company House and pay the fee.  They have to be available by law at Company House.

Do the accounts give you much information? - No they provide the minimum information required by law.

Where is the transparency about the Fund promised in Dr Kate McCann's book?

Hi Enid. A quick question if I may.

I had always thought the "restricted" funds in the Ltd Co balance sheet referred to the book sales/royalty payment as they were worded "every penny for the search" so must be spent on PI's etc. Could this money actually be ringfenced away from normal expenditure in case they lose the libel trial?


ETA as they appear to have had no problem using donated ££s in the search for 1.2 million euros  Madeleine in the past.

Hi Gillyspot,

I hope you don't mind me tagging on to your post.

I've wondered about Directors Loan accounts and perhaps Enid could answer this too.

https://www.gov.uk/directors-loans

"
(snipped from JackieL's post previous to this, with thanks)


Fifty white doves to be released in Ventura, Southern California...

...and in Afghanistan (no less) a bit of kite racing, an activity banned under the Taliban, will be the order of the day.

I wonder who organised all this, and why are these places given the extra-special treatment?

missbeetle wrote:"
(snipped from JackieL's post previous to this, with thanks)

Must. Fight. Inner-grammar-and-spelling-nazi.  
  

[sarcasm] Nice to see that he spells his missing daughter's name with the surgical precision you'd expect from a cardiologist [/sarcasm]

You can't help but wonder what the point of a publicity 'presence' in Ventura and Afghanistan was?

FGS!

I thought Gerry had attended medical conferences in the States. I visit often and I would love to know how the parents think a small child could get past their immigration system   -  wait  -  not just 'a' small child, but the most publicised missing child in the world?

And Afghanistan? Really?

Perpetrator A : Boring here ,innit?
Perpetrator B:  I know. Nowt to do but fight, run away from opposing warring factions, avoid military drones, try to carry on a normal existence- like you said, boring.
Perp A: I know, let's just nip out and travel to an obscure resort in , er, what's that country called, you know, like Spain but isn't Spain-
Perp B Portugal?
Perp A That's the one!Yeah, Portugal, let's travel there, blending in with the local population and /or tourists, and abduct a child.
Perp B Wow! Why didn't I think of that...
Perp A And while you're getting your suitcase out of the loft, bring the kites down will you. I like to plan ahead....

Aquila and Gillyspot asked me to address accounting issues re the Fund concerning directors’ loan accounts and the ‘restricted funds’ in the audited accounts.

Directors' loans do not appear in the audited accounts. If any of the Funds directors had taken or made loans to the company this would be in the audited accounts.

In the audited accounts for the year ended 31 March 2012 for the first time Income was divided into Restricted and Unrestricted funds.
Note 5 to the accounts states:


‘ following the publication of Dr Kate McCann’s book, ‘ Madeleine: Our daughters disappearance and the continuing search for her’, £550,000 was donated for the direct costs of the search for, and the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine.’

The balance on the Reserved Funds account as at 31 March 2013 was £218,937 and on the Unrestricted Funds £197,240.

Audited Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2014 have not been filed at Companies House and judging from the Fund’s past filing history, these accounts will not be filed until the end of the year. The figures we have for funds available are now over 15 months old.

I was asked ‘could the restricted funds be ring fenced away from normal expenditure in case the McCanns lose the libel case?


IMO the legal expenses arising from losing the case could be paid by the Fund regardless of the current division of income into Restricted and Unrestricted. Since the main purpose of the Fund is to search for Madeleine, taking a case against someone who, it is claimed hindered the search by publishing a book which Madeleine’s parents say made untrue allegations against them, would seem to be a legitimate company expense. And, if the case is won, and substantial damages awarded, these could be used for the continuing search.

Thank you Enid.

missbeetle wrote:"
(snipped from JackieL's post previous to this, with thanks)


Fifty white doves to be released in Ventura, Southern California...

...and in Afghanistan (no less) a bit of kite racing, an activity banned under the Taliban, will be the order of the day.

I wonder who organised all this, and why are these places given the extra-special treatment?

If it is true. They are so megalomanic they think the Taliban will have a cease-fire for them (probably to be accused next as the dirty abductor). Really there is nothing healthy in these people's mind.

Poe wrote:

missbeetle wrote:"
(snipped from JackieL's post previous to this, with thanks)

Must. Fight. Inner-grammar-and-spelling-nazi.  
  

[sarcasm] Nice to see that he spells his missing daughter's name with the surgical precision you'd expect from a cardiologist [/sarcasm]

Didn't we have a list here of all the ways he spelled Madeleine? This one seems phonetic for him though.

Enid O'Dowd wrote:Aquila and Gillyspot asked me to address accounting issues re the Fund concerning directors’ loan accounts and the ‘restricted funds’ in the audited accounts.

Directors' loans do not appear in the audited accounts. If any of the Funds directors had taken or made loans to the company this would be in the audited accounts.

In the audited accounts for the year ended 31 March 2012 for the first time Income was divided into Restricted and Unrestricted funds.
Note 5 to the accounts states:


‘ following the publication of Dr Kate McCann’s book, ‘ Madeleine: Our daughters disappearance and the continuing search for her’, £550,000 was donated for the direct costs of the search for, and the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine.’

The balance on the Reserved Funds account as at 31 March 2013 was £218,937 and on the Unrestricted Funds £197,240.

Audited Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2014 have not been filed at Companies House and judging from the Fund’s past filing history, these accounts will not be filed until the end of the year. The figures we have for funds available are now over 15 months old.

I was asked ‘could the restricted funds be ring fenced away from normal expenditure in case the McCanns lose the libel case?


IMO the legal expenses arising from losing the case could be paid by the Fund regardless of the current division of income into Restricted and Unrestricted. Since the main purpose of the Fund is to search for Madeleine, taking a case against someone who, it is claimed hindered the search by publishing a book which Madeleine’s parents say made untrue allegations against them, would seem to be a legitimate company expense. And, if the case is won, and substantial damages awarded, these could be used for the continuing search.

Thank you,  Enid. All of the money, even that won by "Madeleine" and the twins?

lj wrote:
[sarcasm] Nice to see that he spells his missing daughter's name with the surgical precision you'd expect from a cardiologist [/sarcasm]

Didn't we have a list here of all the ways he spelled Madeleine? This one seems phonetic for him though.[/quote]

Moneyleined ?

PeterMac wrote:
quote="lj"
[sarcasm] Nice to see that he spells his missing daughter's name with the surgical precision you'd expect from a cardiologist [/sarcasm]
Didn't we have a list here of all the ways he spelled Madeleine? This one seems phonetic for him though.

Moneyleined ?

I assumed that the mis-spelled name was a one-off!

Oh that poor child. It's bad enough that she was given a name that both parents struggle to pronounce but for her own father to regularly mis-spell her name shows such contempt. 

PeterMac wrote:

lj wrote:
[sarcasm] Nice to see that he spells his missing daughter's name with the surgical precision you'd expect from a cardiologist [/sarcasm]

Didn't we have a list here of all the ways he spelled Madeleine? This one seems phonetic for him though.

Moneyleined ?[/quote]


 

Poe wrote:

PeterMac wrote:
quote="lj"
[sarcasm] Nice to see that he spells his missing daughter's name with the surgical precision you'd expect from a cardiologist [/sarcasm]
Didn't we have a list here of all the ways he spelled Madeleine? This one seems phonetic for him though.

Moneyleined ?

I assumed that the mis-spelled name was a one-off!

Oh that poor child. It's bad enough that she was given a name that both parents struggle to pronounce but for her own father to regularly mis-spell her name shows such contempt. 

Oh no it was not, in  the first versions of his blogs he misspelled it regurlarly. I don't know if Pamalam was able to save some of the unedited blogs, if so you could find them here:

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/

Another treasure-trove that sometimes might give you an upset stomach.

Didn't he once even call her Margaret?

lj wrote:

Enid O'Dowd wrote:Aquila and Gillyspot asked me to address accounting issues re the Fund concerning directors’ loan accounts and the ‘restricted funds’ in the audited accounts.

Directors' loans do not appear in the audited accounts. If any of the Funds directors had taken or made loans to the company this would be in the audited accounts.

In the audited accounts for the year ended 31 March 2012 for the first time Income was divided into Restricted and Unrestricted funds.
Note 5 to the accounts states:


‘ following the publication of Dr Kate McCann’s book, ‘ Madeleine: Our daughters disappearance and the continuing search for her’, £550,000 was donated for the direct costs of the search for, and the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine.’

The balance on the Reserved Funds account as at 31 March 2013 was £218,937 and on the Unrestricted Funds £197,240.

Audited Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2014 have not been filed at Companies House and judging from the Fund’s past filing history, these accounts will not be filed until the end of the year. The figures we have for funds available are now over 15 months old.

I was asked ‘could the restricted funds be ring fenced away from normal expenditure in case the McCanns lose the libel case?


IMO the legal expenses arising from losing the case could be paid by the Fund regardless of the current division of income into Restricted and Unrestricted. Since the main purpose of the Fund is to search for Madeleine, taking a case against someone who, it is claimed hindered the search by publishing a book which Madeleine’s parents say made untrue allegations against them, would seem to be a legitimate company expense. And, if the case is won, and substantial damages awarded, these could be used for the continuing search.

Thank you,  Enid. All of the money, even that won by "Madeleine" and the twins?

ij - my understanding is that if the McCanns won the libel case, the money specifically awarded for the twins could be used as the McCanns saw fit and presumably for the benefit of the twins. Now as Madeleine is a ward of court, I assume any money awarded to her would be dealt with by the UK courts but I have to stress I have no legal expertise.