1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Article 37.º

"Madeleine Fund Won't Pay For Legal Costs"

Madeleine McCann donations dramatically fell in just one year

Exclusive by Tom Pettifor 31/01/2010

Donations to the Find Madeleine McCann fund fell from almost £2million to £650,000 in just one year, it was revealed yesterday.

Only cash received in libel payouts to friends of Gerry and Kate McCann – dubbed the Tapas Seven – enabled the search for their daughter to go on, latest accounts show.

Around £260 an hour flooded into the Fund as a wave of public sympathy swept the UK after Maddie’s abduction in Praia da Luz in the Algarve in May, 2007,

It had £1.4million in bank donations alone in the first ten months of the search.

But contributions fell away after the McCanns became one-time suspects. And the Fund’s income dropped to £629,181 in the year up to 31 March 2009 – while spending rose from £815,113 to more than £1million.

Outgoings covered investigators, publicity and the pair’s legal fight against Portuguese policeman Goncalo Amaral.

Kate and Gerry, both 41, have been granted a temporary injunction on his book claiming Maddie, three, died the day she went missing.

The couple’s friends were paid £375,000 in October 2008 after false newspaper allegations about them.

In a foreword to the accounts lodged at Companies House, Fund chairman, Gerry’s brother John, said: “Rather than accepting libel damages, the friends requested a donation was made to the fund. This has enabled us to continue our search for Madeleine.”

in: Daily Mirror, 31.01.2010

Madeleine Fund Won't Pay For Legal Costs

7:11am UK, Thursday September 13, 2007

Money from the Find Madeleine campaign will not be used to fund Kate and Gerry McCann's legal costs, the trustees have announced.

They announced the decision after discussing the matter at a special meeting.

The McCanns had already said they would not use the cash - more than £1m - to pay any legal bills, even if the trust had let them.

But the trustees decided to meet anyway to consider whether the money could be used in principle.

Fund director Esther McVey said the decision had been taken despite legal advice that it would be legally permissible to use the money for a legal defence.

She said the trustees understood that as well as a "legal answer" there was a "spirit which underlies the generous donations to Madeleine's fund", which it was their responsibility to steer.

Ms McVey thanked contributors to the fund for their kindness, support and generosity, and then explained that the fund had been set up to find Madeleine, support the McCanns and bring the abductor to justice.

She stressed that the McCanns had not asked to use the money to pay for their legal costs, and went on to say that any future fund set up to pay such costs would have to be separately administered.

A family spokesman earlier confirmed the McCanns would not seek to use the money to pay their legal bills.

He spoke out shortly before the McCanns left their home in Rothley, Leicestershire, for a short trip to a nearby park.

Gerry McCann drove the family's turquoise Volkswagen people carrier while his wife sat in the middle seat in the back, in between their two-year-old twins.

The couple are facing mounting costs after being named suspects in relation to Madeleine's disappearance in Portugal on May 3.

They have appointed top lawyers in case they are charged by Portuguese police.

in: Sky News, 13.09.2007


  1. I wonder what Esther McVey is thinking now.

  2. what the mccanns didnt realize is it was not mr Amarals book that stopped the donations it was the files that did it,and this what it is all about NOT GETTING MONEY FOR THIER FUND ,it cant be about thier good name cause they havent got one

  3. So the contributions started to fall away after they were made "one-time suspects". But aren´t they claiming that it is Amaral´s book that is to blame for shifting public opinion? Doesn´t this seriously undermine their case against the book, and is this what the Mirror, rather cleverly, is getting at?

  4. yet another example of lying. Documented lying.

  5. anyone who has followed the bizarre antics of the McCann's over the last 2 years will not be at all surprised by this...

    they have continually moved the goal posts to try & make their story fit

    keep digging McCann's - we can still see you

  6. They are suing Goncalo Amaral for no other reason than the money they so badlly need to top up the dwindling fund. And those people who at the beginning were sending their cheques and cash in little brown envelopes, are now wise to them.

    According to the Daily Mirror,these caring parents have said that on the twins birthday and Christmas they always give them a present purported to come from Madeleine. This is, in my opinion, very cruel, as they are giving them false hope that their sister is still allive when there is absolutely no proof that she is. And to tell the newspapers something so private as that makes is perfectly clear they are just after publicity.

  7. That's probably why Esther McVey jumped ship.... and removed all references to the McCanns from her website

  8. They were far more open about their Defence Fighting Fund a few years back. Now they try to tell us they are blowing hundreds of thousands in on lawyers but this is actually to find Madeleine? Oh please, and who do they take this Pt Judge for? It is admitted here that even as far back as Feb 2008 they had appointed Portuguese and well as British lawyers to defend them from these allegations!! That is nothing to do with finding Maddie!

    from Feb 2008, full article at (where it is reported PJ feel Gerry controls Kate, well quite) Oh and they want letters and emails he has been exchanging with "certain people".

    We have seen the article from Dec 07 where John McCann is furious funds have dried up as a result of the allegations against the McCanns. It would seem they wanted two separate funds, but of course, the funds dried up! Well done Goncalo!


    A family spokesman, David Hughes ..said the McCanns will not seek to use any of the £1m raised by the fund to find Madeleine to pay for their legal defence. But they may seek to set up a separate fighting fund to pay mounting legal costs from defending themselves against accusations they were involved in her death.
    "Gerry and Kate's view is that if they take money from the fund, it might be that 90 per cent of people who made donations aren't bothered about it. But if 10 per cent of people are bothered about it, they don't want to upset them. They want to take the controversy out of the situation," said Mr Hughes.
    Family sources suggest that an alternative fund is "one of the options they may look at" to pay for the lawyers they have appointed both in Portugal and the UK.

  9. Just think of all the people you know - relatives, friends, neighbours, colleagues - is there anyone who would send a penny to the Fund? I doubt it. And how many of these people have read Mr Amaral's book? Very few, if any. So, no connection at all between the book and the lack of donations to the Fund.

    Same for 'looking for Madeleine' - who has stopped looking for Madeleine because they've read the book? Do the McCanns really expect anyone to believe that someone reads the book and then decides 'That's it. I'm not looking for her any more.' They know quite well that if anyone saw a child who looked like Madeleine they'd still report it (though how exactly anyone's supposed to know what Madeleine would look like now aged almost 7 I don't know. The most recent age-progressed picture they issued makes her look about 12/13).

    I think the public has a right to be told in much more detail where exactly the money in the Fund is going, at least while the McCanns still ask the public for money. Maybe if there was more transparency in its outgoings the Fund would get more donations from ordinary members of the public, but while this crucial information is kept hidden I'm sure most people would be very reluctant to hand over their hard-earned money. There may be no legal requirement to detail where exactly the money goes, but why not disclose it to the public anyway? They wanted maximum publicity for the 'search' so why not extend that to maximum transparency for the Fund that pays for the 'search'?

  10. Sorry, this is off topic, but I woke up to this news item on BBC Radio 4 this morning: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8490524.stm

    It's a pity it was broadcast/published a few days late.

  11. The item 'Donations' appears to be zero in the 2009 accounts. The 'Income' may be mainly from TV appearences and interviews perhaps.

  12. Inbetween their 2-year old twins?

  13. Sorry, was reading Sky report as if it was also today...

  14. anon-11 Indeed the general public donations do appear to have dried up 2009 that is why they have taken to sponging off the rich & famous. I mean cmon! Who invites "To the Manor Born" actor Peter Bowles to a party if there's no interest in getting your fifthly, money grabbing hands on some of his estate? :))

  15. I think it is time those of us who gave to the 'Fund' and I use the term in a very loose way started asking for our money back. There is a Petition for the case of Madeleine to be re opened I would now like to see one opened for the 'Fund'.

  16. "Just think of all the people you know - relatives, friends, neighbours, colleagues - is there anyone who would send a penny to the fund? I doubt it. And how many people have read Mr Amaral's book? Very few, if any. So, no connection at all between the book and the lack of donations to the fund." - Dimsie,comment 9

    That's so true. I'd never paid much attention to the McCann case until I happened to see their Channel 4 documentary and 'reconstruction'. It was that programme which made me want to find out more because there were so many things that just didn't make any sense. At that point I had no idea who Goncalo Amaral even was, so nothing he had said or written helped to shape my thoughts...


  17. They just dont get it do they, they arent getting the donations they expect a)because alas M isnt the only missing child b) its their own fault she is missing - and c)the general public just dont like or trust them.
    Anyone who can have a fundraiser whilst the tragedy of Haiti is happening is beyond selfish. It's all me me me.

  18. I agree it is nothing to do with Goncalo or his book. IN UK only those of us really interested in the case and blogging about it even knew about his book! But of course the McCanns will claim in this latest action it is the impression upon the Portuguese people because nearly two years later, they decided that is probably where Maddie is! It is the impression the McCanns give to ordinary members of the public. They have never bothered to look for Madeleine, not even in the first few hours. In the Britis press at the time we saw pictures of them looking radiant, laughing, playing sport and jogging. They were police suspects for a very lengthy period of time, and British Police insist they intend to bring to justice "those behind the disappearance of Madeleine". They are always suing someone to just grab money. They left their children alone every single night with the door open and go on British TV to brag about it! The only investigators they appoint are fraudsters who make ridiculous claims. Just how much more does the British public need to hear to form a view about this couple. No one I have spoken to recently is the least bit impressed, they just give the impression they are after cash and most people say they just do not know what they did, but they do not trust them amd they obviously had something to do with it.

    When is it going to dawn on the McCanns that the reason the Portuguese people do not like them is because of what they have admitted to doing and that even if they did not kill Madeleine or dispose of her, they exposed her to that serious risk. Rather than take responsibility for their own actions they threaten and attack the Portuguese Police, initially threatening to sue THEM FOR ONE MILLION. No reasonable person can see how their bitter battle against Goncalo Amaral is going to get Maddie back. If I thought I saw her I would do something immediately and anyone would, but I agree we have pictures of Maddie aged two and then age enhanced where she looks about 12. This adds to my feeling she may well be still alive but the McCanns actually want to make sure no one can recognise her! It could just be one big con! If they had just gone for an injunction then fair enough, but they did not, they did what they make such a habit of, also demanded ONE MILLION. If they cannot finally see why everyone mistrusts and dislikes them, they should get a couple of shrinks to help them understand. We are all McCanned out and sick of the sight of them!

  19. To Anonymous # 7. The original Fund Director Esther McVey is a "Political Wannabe", she jumpted onto the Fund Bandwagon on the basis of having met Kate McCann when they were both doing their A levels. She has attempted to gain election several times to the Parliamentary seat of Wirral West for the Tories. It seems that she wont speak about her reasons for, as you put it "Jumping ship"! However the general opinion in Wirral seems to be that some development in the fund frightened her so badly, that she saw her political ambitions about to be destroyed. Perhaps one morning she woke-up not to the smell of coffee, but to the stench of the people she had become embroiled with !

  20. To 10
    Yeh this people do not have any common sense, lets be honest, they keep coming out with very inrespondable and selfish actions, leaving children alone, lantterns up in the sky, etc, etc...

    Nice work for getting this.

  21. Back in 2007, the fund was not to be used for legal fees, humm? Well, that was before BOTH parents( McCanns)were made directors of the fund, and before McVey got out. She never really gave a reason for distancing herself from the whole business, did she?...I bet she was not wiling to "eat some frogs"...the lady must have a "decency bone" somewhere inside her...who knows? If she was still a member of the fund's board maybe she would be one to blow the whistle ( they have an item in the accounts to deal with that possibility...)

  22. No legal fees, but definitely their expensive mortgage and trips around the world. I want a fund.

  23. Do the McCanns have someone to foot the legal fees then? The glazing uncle Brian? Because they wouldn't spend a pound from their own pockets! Furthermore, do they have that kind of money? Could the dough have been siphoned out of the fund a long time ago into their private accounts under a false entry in the books? This sudden announcement sounds more like a huge smokescreen to me. As we say "p'ra inglês ver".

  24. It seems to be forgotten in the 'now' about the state of their own finances at the time of that fateful holiday in 2007.

    Both parents were working - Gerry as cardiologist, Kate as a part-time locum. (Remember, that's where she managed to aquire the cadaver odour on her chequered trousers from SIX dead bodies in the Leicester area.)This was a good family income between them.

    By late that summer (date?) they had to use the Fund for payment of two months' worth of their mortgage. After three months default one is in trouble with financal services and could lose one's house. In other words, why had they become so much in debt so soon?

    Their holiday was surely paid for in advance and later they were given free accommodation in Pria da Luz after leaving the 5A apartment.
    Why couldn't two doctors afford two months mortgage?
    The Fund came into sight just in time......

  25. I can't see the fund can afford the Legal Action anymore. Even half a million which sounds huge to most people will be used up very quickly between Carter Ruck and Isabel Duarte (I assume she is not working for free)Even the most basic of lawyers charge huge hourly rates, we all know that legal action costs the earth. The fundraiser seems to have raised £90, 000 according to the Daily Express. If the 2 real charities get £15,000 each , the LTD Company fund gets £60,000. That is probably legal fees for a couple of days only. ID is still needed on Feb 10, even if they win on the injunction that won't in itself bring in any money as they would still have to win libel- more lawyers fees for that. Meanwhile Mr Amaral is saying he will go to the European courts if he loses, so they will presumably need to defend the injunction once more- more legal fees.If they carry on sueing people like this the fund will be empty in no time, and they can only do so many fundraiser before even the most desperate of celeb will not return their calls. Double Glazing King must be stumping up, else I can't see they can afford all this legal action, let alone pay for the PI's.

  26. @10 - Interesting article even if it is a few days after the event. But did you notice the coincidence of the complaining parties - Chester and Leicestershire. Subliminal reporting or what!

  27. Anon 25, correct me if im wrong but isnt Farter Cock on a no win no fee basis, i seem to remember reading that. The account statement says the legal fees are being paid from the fund for the case in Lisbon, so that could be ID fees, as for BK i think he's backing off. Wasnt there some press recently saying they were having a meeting with him to discuss his continuing his backing.

    Anon 24, i think it wouldnt have looked so bad had they said the fund has paid for accomodation in PDL as they had a mortgage to pay at home. I could be wrong but was under the impression that they had to pay for the place they moved to when they moved out of the Ocean club.
    As much as i cant stand them, i would have understood that. If they were on extended leave of absence from their jobs i would have thought they wouldnt have been paid or at least on half pay or something similar.

  28. @Ironside
    A petition asking how money was spent as a condition for further donations looks good.

  29. Anon 25 Yes, it doesn't take a great deal or ordinary common sense to realize that a million isn't much when faced with those sorts of expenses. It could have been taken for granted before that the McCanns were a pair of provincial yokels with badly-flawed characters, but going on like this, apparently also with delusions of grandeur, they're beginnng to look like raving lunatics to boot.


  30. I note with this post that you are only a day behind my post pointing out this revelation ;))

    Bringing the McCanns to account

    As I understand it, the McCanns stated that the fund would not be used for the McCanns legal defence in relation to their conduct in the disappearance of Madeleine.

    I note that the fund has been raided to pay for the legal action against Mr Amaral. In my view, this is an inappropriate use of the money in the fund.

    I am hoping that the Portuguese court finds in favour of Mr Amaral, and awards costs against the McCanns. This should then empty the fund.

    There is something rather distasteful about robbing pensioners, and little children of their pocket money, to pay for the McCanns flight from justice. The sooner the fund dries up and the company goes into liquidation the better it will be.

  31. The double glazing is no uncle at all.

  32. you wouldnt see these people staying in a basic self catering apartment anymore only 5 star will do now and i doubt kate and gerry pay for it from there own pockets.

  33. @ Joana M.
    Sarah wrote
    "I'd never paid much attention to the McCann case until I happened to see their Channel 4 documentary and 'reconstruction'. It was that programme which made me want to find out more because there were so many things that just didn't make any sense. At that point I had no idea who Goncalo Amaral even was, so nothing he had said or written helped to shape my thoughts..."
    Why not opening a page where every one could say when and why he/she started to pay real attention to this case ?

  34. I completely agree with Anon # 25.

    With a reported balance in the fund of somewhere in the region of £500k it was difficult to understand how they could possibly run out of money by March, until it became apparent that they were footing the legal bills from it.

    I never gave a penny to that fund - not having undergone a lobotomy beforehand - but if I had, I would now be mightily pissed off with how the money was being spent. Were it not for the payments made to both the McCanns and the Tapas 7 by Express Newspapers, the fund would have run out of money some time ago.

    #25 is right - that fund will empty in no time should they persist with this. It's my guess that they never expected in a million years that Amaral would stand toe-to-toe with them and allow the prospect of this going to trial. They probably expected him to back down and give them what they wanted when they Carter Rucked him.

    If I was the Express, I'd be wanting my money back. Wasn't their perceived crime that they claimed that the PJ suspected the parents of having covered up an accidental death ? Well I never! Did they really? If they knew then what we know now, etc.............

    I am beginning to seriously wonder at their sanity. One cannot sue people into thinking what you want them to think and believing what you want them to believe. I know nothing about Brian Kennedy, but surely there must be a limit to what he is prepared to put his hand in his pocket for ? I can't see him indefinitely bankrolling this pair.

    Surely at some point questions will be asked about the fund. Maybe that, ultimately, will be their downfall.

  35. Anon 24 I agree with you. Why would two professional people need to use a fund to find their daughter to pay their mortgage so soon after her disappearance. They were both working for the NHS, under the circumstances they would have been given compassionate leave on full pay, maybe after 6 months they would have gone on to half pay. The mortgage company woud have understood their predicament, after all they hadn'tlost their jobs. So why the need to use the fund to pay a mortgage. I have never understood that.

    It certainly struck me at the time I read about it as being very odd. Actually I couldn't understand why they didn't have savings to fall back on in case of an emergency. Maybe that's just me and the way I have been brought up - always have money saved for unforseen circumstances.

  36. Who is to say that the Accounts rendered are 'hereby certified true and correct'? This Fund is a 'family and friend' business and wrong figures could be given out without anyone being any the wiser.

  37. Anon 24 You make good points there.

    They do not appear as well off as they might have been.

    But they had a large house they were paying for.

    Also, the child care help needed by Kate (unless the nanny worked for free) would have taken up quite a bit of money as well.

    Had they been living well beyond their means?

    Was this the reason they didn't want to pay for a babysitter at night whilst on holiday, because their finances were so tight.

    But the expense on childcare at home couldn't be helped because Kate had found it so hard to cope alone with the kids.

  38. The NHS will generally only pay compassionate leave for up to five days but more in exceptional circumstances. They certainly would not pay for up to 6 months as you suggest ! After that time the employee would have to arrange to take unpaid leave, utilise part of their annual leave or to continue to receive full pay for up to 6 months by supplying sick notes after that even with sick notes it is half pay for a further 6 months generally dependant on service etc. I do not think either Kate or Gerry wanted to get involved with doctors to supply sick notes. Additionally, I do not think Kate even had a proper job, it would seem she was either still on maternity leave from having the twins, which after that length of time would have meant no pay at all, or she was just a locum GP and would not have been entitled to sick pay. So this lack of income would have been dire for Kate and Gerry. I think his sense of entitlement in particular would have meant he saw no reason why the mortgage payments should not be made for them. When he got stopped from doing that, I believe by Esther McVey, he promptly made arrangements to get himself back to paid work!

    When you have £2000 per month mortgage as the McCanns do in fact mortage companies are not the least bit sympathetic because massive arrears can build up so quickly. By law once the mortage is more than two months in arrears the lender can start to take possession proceedings for the property. I believe that is why the McCanns took the action that they did otherwise they could have been evicted from their home! It is an extraordinary level of mortgage debt for such a couple to have, particularly when Kate was not working and having children etc, not even going back to work. Was she unwell with post natal depression? I believe it was the instalments for August and September that got paid, and when you think about it they could quite easily have been two months in arrears by that stage and in serious trouble with their loan. They appear to be a couple made of straw, you would expect such a couple to have savings etc for emergencies but this rather suggests they did not. I think the whole scheme was motivated by the need for money and lots of it. Gerry was just starting the way he had intended to carry on. I can imagine the row he had with Esther and the other one who left at the time, I think, I retired coroner of all things!

  39. "It seems like a disaster that we've got this huge donated fund and now we're not allowed to use it for legal costs because we're under suspicion," said Gerry.

    From: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-480825/Gerry-McCann-We-did-kill-daughter.html

    Um, interesting link title, Daily Mail… saving space?

    "And in terms of what Kate knows about me, I was away from her for just ten minutes."
    "As I said, I was away from the table for ten minutes," he said.
    "Six minutes of that was spent speaking to another guest I met as I came out from checking on Madeleine.

    Hmm. Where do the football and number one/number two time fit into this? Seems like someone might have to justify their absence to someone other than the public, too. Interesting distinction between the first and second line.

    "All of this can come out. And it doesn't stack up."

    Quite, Gerry. That’s kind of the problem.

    "I'm still concerned with their perception of the evidence, but that's for us to sort out with legal support."

    There is no evidence, surely? Only “intelligence”, yes?

  40. I think the headline of this blog article should be altered to immediately bring attention to the fact that 2007's stated policy was not adhered to, as evidenced by the Daily Mirror's recent report.

    Someone just giving a cursory glance at the title might think this is currently the facts of the use of the fund, when it is not.

    I am gratified to know that members of the general public are no longer duped into sending donations to this notorious and undeserving couple's fund.

  41. Article in British newspaper "The Sun" today: "BIRTHDAY GIFT FROM MADDIE TO THE TWINS"

    How can the McCanns get away with giving their twins "presents" from their deceased sister?

    Totally sick!!

  42. Aileen - interestingly, two members of staff from the Tapas bar place Gerry away from the table for 30 minutes that night

  43. "But the trustees decided to meet anyway to consider whether the money could be used in principle.

    Fund director Esther McVey said the decision had been taken despite legal advice that it would be legally permissible to use the money for a legal defence"

    WHO GAVE THEM LEGAL ADVICE? Carter- Ruck yah? The Lawyers payed by the public which donate to the Fund, thinking that the money was to help madeleine, not her parents and all the lunatic employees.

  44. Enganaram o POVAO. Sera que alguem teria contribuido para o Fundo se soubesse desde inicio que este poderia ser usado para perseguir e acusar a policia? NAO!!! NAO!!! POUCOS OU NENHUNS CONTRIBUIRIAM. COMETERAM MAIS UM CRIME COM DOLO PORQUE AFINAL O OBJECTIVO PRINCIPAL ERA SENTAR A POLICIA NO BANCO DOS REUS E NAO AJUDAR A INVESTIGACAO.


  45. I reckon the McCanns are brazenly using the fund's money for legal expenses because they consider that, on a "first in first out" basis, all of the money donated by the public has long since dried up, and that all monies are the proceeds of libel victories. More worryingly, the accounts do not disclose if any money has been used to pay salaries or fess to the directors....maybe even fees to Kate as full-time administrator. Anything to maintain their luxury lifestyle.

  46. No 27- I wonder about Carter Ruck being no win no fee. Where is the 'win' when they send letters to blog owners asking them to remove Goncalo's documentary for example? Either the blog owner removes it, or tells them to take a running jump. At this point they have written letters on behalf of their client, letters which have to be paid for, but there is no 'win' which will bring in the money to pay the fee. So do the McCies pay for those letters themselves? Or is it all rolling over until they get some money back from the libel case? I can't see CR have much in the way of actual involvement in the case in Portugal as they are not experts in Portugeuse law so they can't be claiming a fee for their services in the libel case, that is down to ID. So I don't quite know how 'no win no fee' works with them but one thing is for sure, Lawyers do not work for nothing.

  47. hello #41
    Too right. That's the kind of tasteless situation one would expect to encounter in a Stephen King horror story, but not in real life with real children.
    Presents from a dead -sorry, "abducted"- sibling. Yukk.

  48. Don't forget that a lot of parents were more or less forced to contribute to the Lifestyle/Legal Fund by gullible primary school teachers who organised sales to raise funds for the ghastly pair. How do you explain to your small child that you are not going to provide any cakes/money/whatever because you believe these parents have killed their daughter and hidden the body? You can't really, so you have to stump up as little as you can get away with in order not to terrify your own child. Absolutely disgraceful, and I would like a refund.

  49. If Kate was still on maternity leave from her practice, then where did the smell of the six dead bodies come from?
    This smell of death was alerted to by the cadaver-detecting dog Eddie or Kela.

  50. I thought you would all like to see an email I sent to Esther McVey on 1/9/2007 (ie pre-arguido) and the reply I got (not from Esther of course):

    Dear Esther
    If you haven't already put this right, do you think you could consider making sure that donations to the fund are more appropriately acknowledged than just via a Paypal receipt? It has been very disappointing to a lot of donors, particularly to children giving their pocket money, to feel that their efforts are not appreciated, and it is not common practice among charities. In the light of recent unfortunate publicity it also reinforces the impression that this is just a ruthless money making enterprise.
    Kind regards

    Dear xxxxxx
    As Fund Administrator, I have been passed your email regarding donations made to Madeleine's Fund. Thank you for your interest.
    As I'm sure you will appreciate, it has been impossible to acknowledge every individual donation made to the Fund. Donations have been received from thousands of people in a number of different ways. As is the case with charities running disaster appeals, many donations are untraceable. The directors of the Fund, and Madeleine's family, are very appreciative of all contributions and are aware that many of the donations are from children. In light of this, we are in the process of developing an addition to the website, thanking everyone for their donations and explaining what this has enabled/is enabling the Fund to do to support the search for Madeleine.
    Thank you for your support
    Kind regards
    Cxxxxxxx Wxxx

  51. Bit off the subject but didnt you just love the sandals with the black tights that Kate wore to the fund raising party, and gerry looked such a prat just like he was some kind of star.
    you think with all the money they waste from the fund the could leave no stone unturned in looking a little better dressed.
    cant believe grieving parents could fill their lives with suing others, but then money is the name of the game, once you have a taste you want more..the fund should be investigated.

  52. Had posted this on another site, listing a few of the threats they have made to sue people

    Here are a few examples


    Threatened to sue a Spanish TV station for comments made following an interview.


    Threatened to sue Amaral because of the claims made in his book


    Threatened to sue bloggers everywhere for ...well, blogging, basically


    Threatened to sue the Express for being the Express


    Threatened to sue Tal & Qual for correctly stating that the police believed Madeleine dead


    Threatened to sue Sandra Felguieras, presumably for making them look ridiculous which she usually does


    Threatened to sue for not finding their daughter. The daughter who disappeared when they left her alone


    Threatened to sue over article claiming Gerry wasn't Madeleine's father.

    All guaranteed to find their daughter, naturally. I especially like the one about suing the police for not finding her. Way to go, Team McCann.

    Here's an excerpt from that article

    ''Kate and Gerry McCann could sue the Portuguese police for failure to find their daughter, it was claimed yesterday.

    The couple could sue for an estimated £1million if the investigation is closed, it was reported.

    Their spokesman Clarence Mitchell said it was something the couple's legal team might consider in the future.''

    Joana, please feel free to delete this bit - it will just make me feel better for saying it.
    Message to the McCanns. Sincerely, just f*ck off, eh?

  53. AND.... after more then 2 years, the world still waiting for the HUGE CAMPAIGN in SUPERMARKETS in Spain and Portugal. THEY ASK DONATIONS for that campaign and promised to do it, leaving no stone unturned, to spread Madeleines face everywhere. WHERE IS THE CAMPAIGN? WHERE WENT THE MONEY? After foolish honest people and reaching round Euro figures, they shift the bullet- THE TARGET IS THE POLICE AND PORTUGUESE JUSTICE, of-course. Every single centime spend with Madeleine is a waste of money. They know where she is and what happened to her. And the public... less they know, much better. MORE POSSIBILITY to foolish them.


  54. Post 46
    I speculted some time ago that CR were operating on a no-win, no-fee basis for the main libel application, hence the Mccanns having no choice but to go through with the action, in spite of the dangers it now poses for them. However, I agree with you that other legal costs associated with the action will be for them to pay when matters are finally settled. They will need a considerable amount in the fund if they lose their libel case.

  55. Bridget @52. Thank you, that's quite a list. People probably find it insulting that the duo think because someone reads a book they can't make up their own mind about the case.

  56. Anon 51 - I thought maybe i was just being a bitch about Mrs McDrips oxfam chic at the fraudraiser so i showed a pic to one of my daughters yesterday and just said what do you think? She said 'oh mum she looks a mess and what has she got on her feet?' i said i thought she was wearing brown suede shoes with black tights and she agreed. I am glad of moments like that, of light relief, it stops me putting my foot through the tv.

    Anon 54 i think i read the CR no win no fee in McTw*ts discourse about the press invasion, it was definately said by him and is on record. I think its all part and parcel of the libel trial. I do think ID is being paid from the fund as John McShrek said in the fund statement it was paying for the injunction.


  57. 54 & 56 If they have to pay the legal expenses out of their fund then they are stuffed, they really can't afford it. Maybe that was the reason for the celebrity bash, to charm some celeb into providing enough money for legal fees. In short, they are looking for another Brian Kennedy.

  58. But what happens when the tables turn?

    When they lose the injunction and then the libel case against Gonçalo Amaral there will be a line of claimants wanting to lodge claims against them and thier palls.

    There will be big fees rerquired to defend the actions (do conditional fee arrangements exist for defending actions?) and where will the money come from to pay the awards to defamed claimants?

    Mr B

  59. They need to catch up with their ex-PI, Kevin Halligen, who is wanted on wire fraud and money laundering charges.

  60. 46 Carter Ruck can only act for Kate and Gerry on a no win no fee basis when there is going to be a case where damages are paid, as in the Daily Express. Carter Ruck will then, typically, charge the loser about three times the level of damages recovered in costs. It is not difficult to imagine this cost Daily Express about £2M including the costs.

    But it has become clear Carter Ruck are just on the other end of a phone for Kate and Gerry which suggests a permanent and regular retainer. Adam Tudor told us as much at the Select Committee when we were told that generally offending newspapers etc, respond "properly" to a quick phone call. I think it was Clarence who actually said that bit. We know that as part of that retainer, Carter Ruck have done a very considerable amount of work threatening various people for Kate and Gerry. There was obviously a great deal of correspondence in relation to Tony Bennett to take just one example. ISP's and blog owners have been written to also. The London Evening Standard get a very regular hammering. In relation to Tony Bennett the instructions to threaten him also seemed to come from Brian Kennedy (millionaire one) in that Tony was said to have written a false thread on 3 As about his apparent Knutsford haunt for the PIs, the activities of Kennedy and his son etc. So it is not difficult to imagine that the Fund is regularly paying costs, probably on a monthly retainer basis to threaten for Kate and Gerry but also Kennedy dips his hand into his pocket when he is also "libelled".

    In the case of Tony Bennett they would have had a simple enough remedy in simply complaining to the police as his behaviour clearly met the legal definition of criminal harassment. I have always wondered why they did not do that!

    I recall that it was never clear who was paying the fees of Metodo 3 at the time and it seemed like the Fund and Kennedy were slugging it out to claim responsibility for that. One week we would be told by Clarence the Retardos were costing the Fund £50K per month plus expenses and then the next week Kennedy would say he was paying them. It seems like there has always been this filtering off of money by the Fund, was Kennedy actually paying those fees? More to the point, why would Kennedy pay anything at all? I recall that when there was a problem about Red Defence International and Halligen's other company Kennedy announced he had taken the decision to axe them but Kate and Gerry were happy with that decision. At the time, I thought, now hang on a minute, if the Fund are payng the fees how can Kennedy be deciding to axe investigators looking for Maddie. Now it seems abundantly clear there never was any investigators looking for Maddie. AT best they were snooping into people's assets that the McCanns wished to sue and harassing witnesses/bribing false ones etc. And, there is nothing very "best practice " about that.

    This whole thing just reeks of money laundering and underhand fraud. The Fund is nothing more than what it was originally described "The Defence Fighting Fund". And this is one incredibly dirty "defence". Maybe Gerry thinks it is amusing that he should expect the police officer who investigated him to partially foot the bill? We are not laughing Gerry !

  61. Could it be that the Fund pays the accounts for the legal fees and the defectives, and then Kennedy reimburses the McCann family that money therefore converting fund monies into family money?

  62. Good post viv (60) I think you have hit the nail on the head with this post. I doubt Gerry is laughing at the moment though - far from it.

  63. Viv 60 - I totally agree with your post. If they think by distancing themselves from Halligan ie Pinkys statement about not being duped, they will be sadly mistaken, the FBI will be tracking every penny KH has ever had and that might well unravel the fund. The FBI have no problem charging cops and politicians either.

  64. When other children have gone missing, has there always been an influx of donations to them?

    The McCanns` reasons for setting up the fund in the first place was because so many people were sending money to them. I find this hard to believe - unless they were asked - its not normally what happens when children go missing.

  65. cotfree said... 61

    Could it be that the Fund pays the accounts for the legal fees and the defectives, and then Kennedy reimburses the McCann family that money therefore converting fund monies into family money?

    What an excellent suggestion! I have previously made the point that when "donations" like say a half a million pound windfall from the Daily Express are paid into the Fund, it is not subject to income tax. But, if Kate and Gerry had received that money directly it would have been taxable income in their hands. Not only that, of course, we would know it was money that went straight into their hands. So the route you suggest avoids the money being taxed and avoids the McCanns having to admit they are just ripping newspapers etc off because they want loads a money. I am convinced Gerry did away with Madeleine quite planned and deliberately because he wanted to make a fortune. He has had to be pretty creative as to how he gets his hands on that cash and he has had to give up altogether on some of his more adventurous plans for cash. In fact what would have set him and Kate up for life, Maddie the Movie and Maddie the Book. Both of which they have had to drop because of their clear suspect status. Mr Kennedy has been described as "a bit of a rough diamond". I would say that is something of an understatement and imagine he is an old golfing/sports friend of Gerry's, maybe just like David Payne is. They all play golf!

    Anonymous said... 62

    Good post viv (60) I think you have hit the nail on the head with this post. I doubt Gerry is laughing at the moment though - far from it.

    I entirely agree, I believe and will continue to firmly believe there is no way on earth British authorities are going to let this lot get away with just disposing of a little girl and then cashing in. It is the most horrific crime. Kate's face, and his arrogant bullish stance, say it all for me. Their little games are almost over. That charity bash was desperate and quite pathetic. It could not and did not net them the sort of money they want to try and defend themselves from what they know full well is coming to them.
    02/02/2010 17:08
    Anonymous said... 63

    Viv 60 - I totally agree with your post. If they think by distancing themselves from Halligan ie Pinkys statement about not being duped, they will be sadly mistaken, the FBI will be tracking every penny KH has ever had and that might well unravel the fund. The FBI have no problem charging cops and politicians either.

    Are you the Lizzie I know and love? I entirely agree, countries work co-operatively together and the Halligen link will be one of the final nails in the coffin.
    02/02/2010 17:43
    Anonymous said... 64

    When other children have gone missing, has there always been an influx of donations to them?

    The McCanns` reasons for setting up the fund in the first place was because so many people were sending money to them. I find this hard to believe - unless they were asked - its not normally what happens when children go missing.
    Lousie, remember the McCanns had lawyers set this fund up just FORTY EIGHT HOURS after Maddie went missing. In other words they were instructing the lawyers even before that! This could not have been in response to money coming in from the public, it was set up for what Gerry KNEW he would get from the public, because he planned it! He selected the best pictures and he even flashed them up at Everton. This man is a sick grasping evil git and his time will come!

  66. Halligen's speciality appears to have been snooping.

    Is that why the McCanns don't want him saying too much about the work he was doing for them?

    Did that work include snooping on people. If so, who were these people?

    I hope we get to hear from Halligen about what it was the McCanns requested him to do for them when he used to visit them at Rothley Manor.

  67. Thanks, Bridget. I'll need to look more closely. It just seems like there are so many lies to work through, but I'm sure there are answers in where the stories vary. I keep going back and forth on certain things, like Tanner and O'Brien and the Paynes according to their seemingly contradictory statements and actions (e.g. Fiona's story about Kate checking the twins' breathing compared with her defiant demeanour at the court photo op).

    As regards Carter-Ruck, 46, a site I was using printed a statement in which they confirmed that they would release the personal details of their customers to lawyers who requested them. On three occasions, the site failed to answer e-mails asking if they already had. Call me suspicious, but I have a feeling I know which lawyers approached them. If they're trying to find out people's identities, it doesn't seem like 'no win, no fee' would apply.

  68. So far they have not used a penny of theirs to look for Madeleine. The twins must be very proud of them!
    Anyway, imo the twins because of their age are used to suit the mccanns agenda. It is my view that once they are old enough to ask proper questions they will be told the truth. Blood is thicker than water. What will the twins do with that info - NOTHING. You cant bring back the dead.

    The emotional relationship be it good or bad between the twins and their parents is an issue that will be kept private and Maddie will be long forgotten by the public by then.

  69. No 68, I don't personally think the twins will be told the truth. I don't think they could risk it. That knowledge would eat them up, if they knew but could not tell anyone. What would happen when they married? Their spouse would probably be appalled and urge them to do something about it. Also, it is easier to manipulate children but when the twins are adults they may not see things the same way. People fall out with their families, their parents. How could they trust the twins not to blab if they had had a big row???? NO, I think they will keep their secret away from the twins for as long as they can, after all, Madeleine was the twins' 'blood' too, and the parents may find that as adults, the twins' sympathies lie entirely with her.

  70. and what of Hogan International who were instructed at the same time as Metodo 3 to conduct the British end of the investigation and yet we were told the Retardos were going to contact the Smiths. So TWO firms of investigators being paid in around Jan 08 when the McCanns were stil being investigated as prime suspects. I think they were running very scared around that time and craved knowledge of the building case against them.. they had their investigators interviewing /harassng witnesses? In April 2008 they make an application to the HIgh Court seeking to force disclosure of British agency files? And how much was this costing the Fund? "Investigators" in both Spain and UK?? Is this another way of perhaps explaining why Brian Kennedy was saying he was paying too? I think he must be a very good friend of Payne, McScam and O'Brien and their interests cover rather more than golf/sport. He has never got around to threatening me directly for those views !

  71. Their recent fund-raising gala was attended by Ken Loach, director, and former scourge of the Thatcher government. His work in the 80s, he felt, was censored by the BBC and the government and he fought bitterly against it.

    Ken, how do you now explain raising money for a private company, one of whose aims is the banning of publication and distribution of a book and documentary? Are you know in favour of such censorship? What has changed?

    The poet, Simon Armitage, who wrote a poem for the occasion, gave an original signed copy up for auction to help raise funds. Simon, is it now the task of poets to promote prohibition and censorship?

  72. 66 Halligen was said to have bugged his own employees. It's possible he bugged the MCCanns too. If he proves to be the con man he is alleged to be, it's always useful to have something on the people you have been dealing with.

  73. Slightly in reference to 70 above, someone from the Smith family was due to be interviewed on the Joe Duffy RTE programme (Radio Teilifis Eireann)at two o'clock one afternoon in summer (?) 2008.

    There was an announcement the day before that it was going to happen. Came the day - nada, not even an explanation. No reference to them since.Whooshclunked efficiently, even in Ireland.

  74. It is baffling that the latest accounts say that the McCann's legal fees are now being paid directly by the Fund.

    In the past, we were told that the McCanns had 'private backers' who were picking up the lawyers' bills - so when did that change ?

    Or has it ?

    Multi- millionaire Brian Kennedy is on record as saying he would use his entire fortune, if that's what it took, to support the McCanns, and there is no indication that he has changed his mind and withdrawn that promised support. Indeed, there is every indication that he is still 'on board' given that his personal lawyer, Ed Smethurst, remains as one of the Fund's board of directors.

    So why the switch from 'rich friends' paying the McCann's legal fees, to the Fund itself doing it ? why the sudden fast and furious running down of the Fund's resources ?

    Could it be that when the McCann's predict that coffers will be empty by April, that they are paving the way for a tactical withdrawel from a Libel trial they dare not invoke ?

    All of a sudden they paying their OWN legal fees, just at the time when the money is due to run out ... and just at the time when they are expected to proceed with Libel action against Amaral.

    Can we, perhaps, expect the McCanns to announce in the coming weeks, that they simply do not have the financial means to pursue Amaral through the courts ?

  75. Anon 74 - or to be able to pay any damages when other people start suing them.
    Is been drained down the plughole to America no doubt. Wouldn`t surprise me if they made a move there soon.

  76. it's known that Brian Kennedy is a practising jehovah witness,
    whilst many jehovah witness's are very sincere moral people they do suffer at times the sin of intolerance,they are intolerant of the faith of any religious organisation other than their own.

    "Jehovah's Witnesses regard secular society as a place of moral contamination under the influence of Satan,and limit their social interaction with non-Witnesses" @wikipedia

    The British entrepreneur and founder of the
    Virgin group has stated he does not believe in God. -
    Richard Branson, Losing my Virginity, p.239

    Jack Dee@
    “Well, I don’t think being contradictory is unique. I am not a churchgoer. I don’t associate my beliefs with any formal body. Most of what I see as being portrayed as Christianity is absurd anyway. I find it difficult to square anything with the evangelical Right.”

    What strange bed fellows these sponsors maker when
    coupled with the Roman Catholicism that the Mccanns publicly proclaim they practise.

    The roman catholic church very quickly distanced itself from the mccanns and their supporters,not much escapes the network of the Holy See and they very clearly wanted nothing more to do with the mccanns

    Was the pope informed of a witness connection?

    what is interesting is that the roman catholic church and the jehovah witness's have at least one doctrine in common,

    they both view IVF conception as wrong,immoral and against the teachings of their God religion and faith.

    The witnesss's read the bible /old testament
    catholics generally read only the new testament/the gospels
    the chapter and verse's that Kate was advised to,and did indeed read, would not be suggested by a catholic priest.

    The Mccanns and the Jehovah witness's,

    not what you'd expect from a donegal lad and an annie road tim !

  77. 73 Thanks for that information about the Smith interview being whoosh clunked. Unlike most people that actually gives me great confidence of a police case against the McCanns. They are the star witnesses who saw Gerry carting Madeleine off. I can well imagine British Police would have wanted to put a stop to them giving any interview to the media because it would contaminate their evidence to be used in court.

    You can see in emails passing between Stuart Prior Rebelo Ricard Paiva etc there was grave concerns about the media and discussions as to how they would deal with that.

    I know that people want all the evidence against the McCanns in the British media but were that to happen, it would enable them to say the evidence had already been aired in the public domain, those witnesses had spoken to the media etc and therefore no fair trial could take place.

    How seriously do you think a British Judge would take Gran Cooper after her frequent chats to Brian Kennedy and the Daily Mirror!


Powered by Blogger.