Interesting that he confirms that most of the the remaining money in the Madeleine Fund is from libel actions and the fundraising events, and that this will be "spent in any way that assists Kate and Gerry and the wider family".
Yes, that's very interesting Duke
What is Mitchell saying here ? ... that there have been no donations from the public since the McCanns received libel damages two years ago ?
Well we we know that's not the case because the published accounts show income from donations and sale of 'merchandise' after the McCanns got their pay-out from the papers.
Or maybe he's talking about the libel damages the Tapas crew donated to the Fund ? ... but that would have to mean the public made no donations ( and bought no merchandise ) since October 2008. In any event, the Tapas crew donated 375, 000 and there is currently half a million in the Fund account ... so where did the other 125K come from ?
Or is he really just saying that they are 'counting' the last 500,000 in the account, as the money Kate and Gerry received in damages, and paid into the Fund ?
... that the last 500,000 in the Fund account is therefore, 'technically' theirs, and they are free to do with it as they wish ( like spend it on their personal legal fees for instance )
If that's the case, then they didn't really 'donate' their libel winnings to the Fund at all did they ? ... in fact, if that's the case, then they havn't given a single penny of their own money towards 'the search'
To add a little more background Frisky, this is transcript from the documentary:
Quote:
41.09 – Witness: "I drive down this street every day to turn my car around at that end, and every time that I passed the house, and I looked at the car, and the car always had an open boot door, day or night. I often passed at night, and always verified it. It was a fact, I reported it, and that was it."
41.33 – It's important to report the following: that lady, that lawyer, was never heard at the Polícia Judiciária because her deposition was not considered to be relevant, which is strange. While she was not heard, while a rogatory letter was sent to England, relatives of Gerald and Kate McCann came out to say that they had transported, inside this car boot, food from the supermarket, namely a meat package that leaked blood.
42.09 – The great question is how the family heard about the witness, despite the fact that she was not heard by the PJ, and tried to reply to the observed facts.
It doesn't look like Clarence Mitchell's spin is fooling many people.
It's quite rare these days to find anybody who is fooled. If you look at the comments section of any online newspaper, you will see that most people are very sceptical about this case.
To add a little more background Frisky, this is transcript from the documentary:
Quote:
41.09 – Witness: "I drive down this street every day to turn my car around at that end, and every time that I passed the house, and I looked at the car, and the car always had an open boot door, day or night. I often passed at night, and always verified it. It was a fact, I reported it, and that was it."
41.33 – It's important to report the following: that lady, that lawyer, was never heard at the Polícia Judiciária because her deposition was not considered to be relevant, which is strange. While she was not heard, while a rogatory letter was sent to England, relatives of Gerald and Kate McCann came out to say that they had transported, inside this car boot, food from the supermarket, namely a meat package that leaked blood.
42.09 – The great question is how the family heard about the witness, despite the fact that she was not heard by the PJ, and tried to reply to the observed facts.
What is Mitchell saying here ? ... that there have been no donations from the public since the McCanns received libel damages two years ago ?
Well we we know that's not the case because the published accounts show income from donations and sale of 'merchandise' after the McCanns got their pay-out from the papers.
Or maybe he's talking about the libel damages the Tapas crew donated to the Fund ? ... but that would have to mean the public made no donations ( and bought no merchandise ) since October 2008. In any event, the Tapas crew donated 375, 000 and there is currently half a million in the Fund account ... so where did the other 125K come from ?
According to Clarence Mitchell's PowerPoint presentation at a recent media conference in Dubai, that was the exact amount paid to Kate by the News of the World for apparently publishing extracts from her diary without her consent.
Or is he really just saying that they are 'counting' the last 500,000 in the account, as the money Kate and Gerry received in damages, and paid into the Fund ?
... that the last 500,000 in the Fund account is therefore, 'technically' theirs, and they are free to do with it as they wish ( like spend it on their personal legal fees for instance )
If that's the case, then they didn't really 'donate' their libel winnings to the Fund at all did they ? ... in fact, if that's the case, then they havn't given a single penny of their own money towards 'the search'
It's quite rare these days to find anybody who is fooled. If you look at the comments section of any online newspaper, you will see that most people are very sceptical about this case.
Then I'll ask the question put to Clarence Mitchell by the ITV news reader Alastair Stewart on the day he (Clarence) became the McCanns' PR man full-time: "WHAT IS THE POINT OF YOU?"
What's the point of him if people are not buying his spin?
According to Clarence Mitchell's PowerPoint presentation at a recent media conference in Dubai, that was the exact amount paid to Kate by the News of the World for apparently publishing extracts from her diary without her consent.
That's what it sounded like to me.
I thought that as well - making what I would call an excuse to completely change the function of the money in the fund and do the opposite of what they promised when it was first set up.
That stinks almost as much as the car come to think of it.
Well count me out Lizzy , I haven't got any of them.
And I daren't be typing on anything else, I told you last night , I was answering something on here , and said that, to the person on the phone,They thought I had gone mad.
Told them I thought Kate had OCD.
And they were phoning about business.:o
I've got 'em all. Twitter, DS and Facebook.
I often type something then multi post it on everywhere at once!
I retweeted all the tweets from Ruis earlier so anyone following me will have got them.
It doesn't look like Clarence Mitchell's spin is fooling many people.
Nope, not any longer anyway. Although I feel in this case, that its put people's blood up because they are actually criticising the Police who seem to have done an awful lot to help them.
Then I'll ask the question put to Clarence Mitchell by the ITV news reader Alastair Stewart on the day he (Clarence) became the McCanns' PR man full-time: "WHAT IS THE POINT OF YOU?"
What's the point of him if people are not buying his spin?
I think lots of people do still believe the spin. I know loads of people who think the McCanns are entirely innocent of anything other than the neglect issue, that they have cooperated fully with the police, and that the police are corrupt and have let them down.
I think lots of people do still believe the spin. I know loads of people who think the McCanns are entirely innocent of anything other than the neglect issue, that they have cooperated fully with the police, and that the police are corrupt and have let them down.
Clarence would be happy to hear that as it means his post is still justified . I must admit, I haven't come across anyone who doesn't think the case smells fishy.
I think lots of people do still believe the spin. I know loads of people who think the McCanns are entirely innocent of anything other than the neglect issue, that they have cooperated fully with the police, and that the police are corrupt and have let them down.
I'm not saying there has never been a corrupt policeman in the history of the world, however I feel that statistically now there seems to be an awful lot of them supposedly in one department in Portugal. :rolleyes:
I thought that as well - making what I would call an excuse to completely change the function of the money in the fund and do the opposite of what they promised when it was first set up.
That stinks almost as much as the car come to think of it.
Yes it does stink mazzy
Why is Mitchell making a distinction between money paid into the Fund by the public ( over 2,000,000 ) and money paid into the Fund from the McCanns ( and their mates ) libel payouts ?
I mean it was all money paid into the Fund.
If the 'libel money' comes under some special category of 'donation' that can be used for purposes not 'in the spirit' of the Fund , then why bother making the donations in the first place ?
Why not just pay it straight into Kate and Gerry's personal bank account ? ... because they might as well have done, by the looks of it.
Clarence would be happy to hear that as it means his post is still justified . I must admit, I haven't come across anyone who doesn't think the case smells fishy.
I'm not saying there has never been a corrupt policeman in the history of the world, however I feel that statistically now there seems to be an awful lot of them supposedly in one department in Portugal. :rolleyes:
Some people don't look further than the tabloids they read, and up until now, that's pretty much the story they've been publishing.
Why is Mitchell making a distinction between money paid into the Fund by the pubic ( over 2,000,000 ) and money paid into the Fund from the McCanns ( and their mates ) libel payouts ?
I mean it was all money paid into the Fund.
If the 'libel money' comes under some special category of 'donation' that can be used for purposes not 'in the spirit' of the Fund , then why bother making the donations in the first place ?
Why not just pay it straight into Kate and Gerry's personal bank account ? ... because they might as well have done, by the looks of it.
They did do that, in a way, in my opinion. Anyone under any real illusion as to what the fund money is used for these days, really needs to get out more.
I am not saying they don't use any of it to pay to search for Madeleine, presumably they are still paying the investigators etc.
In fairness, it was their money won legally, they were certainly under no obligation to put it into the fund. Indeed they could have spent it on dancing girls and fast cars and they would have been within their rights.
The story looks better if it goes to the fund though doesnt it?
Why is Mitchell making a distinction between money paid into the Fund by the public ( over 2,000,000 ) and money paid into the Fund from the McCanns ( and their mates ) libel payouts ?
I mean it was all money paid into the Fund.
If the 'libel money' comes under some special category of 'donation' that can be used for purposes not 'in the spirit' of the Fund , then why bother making the donations in the first place ?
Why not just pay it straight into Kate and Gerry's personal bank account ? ... because they might as well have done, by the looks of it.
You have forgotten about the 2 months mortgage payments that the libel damages repaid.
You're probably right Lizzy, but I still think that if they changed the purpose of the fund they should have said so. They should certainly have mentioned when they decided to change from'every penny' going towards the search for Madeleine and not on legal fees - Clarence's own promise as I recall.
I'm not saying there has never been a corrupt policeman in the history of the world, however I feel that statistically now there seems to be an awful lot of them supposedly in one department in Portugal. :rolleyes:
You're probably right Lizzy, but I still think that if they changed the purpose of the fund they should have said so. They should certainly have mentioned when they decided to change from'every penny' going towards the search for Madeleine and not on legal fees - Clarence's own promise as I recall.
I think the fund objectives changed the day Gerry and then Kate became directors.
My personal feeling is, that for me, it lost all appearance of being controlled when Kate and Gerry became directors.
I honestly feel they should appoint someone to run it (with the backing of some family/friend board members if they like) who is unbiased and can look at things neutrally when it comes to what the money is spent on.
If they are indeed completely innocent, and do not know what happened to Madeleine, how can they use common sense when it comes to the best way to look for her? They would naturally want to follow up everything, do everything, and its just not possible.
The fund is now a business enterprise as far as I am concerned. Nothing more, nothing less.
Comments
Yes, that's very interesting Duke
What is Mitchell saying here ? ... that there have been no donations from the public since the McCanns received libel damages two years ago ?
Well we we know that's not the case because the published accounts show income from donations and sale of 'merchandise' after the McCanns got their pay-out from the papers.
Or maybe he's talking about the libel damages the Tapas crew donated to the Fund ? ... but that would have to mean the public made no donations ( and bought no merchandise ) since October 2008. In any event, the Tapas crew donated 375, 000 and there is currently half a million in the Fund account ... so where did the other 125K come from ?
Or is he really just saying that they are 'counting' the last 500,000 in the account, as the money Kate and Gerry received in damages, and paid into the Fund ?
... that the last 500,000 in the Fund account is therefore, 'technically' theirs, and they are free to do with it as they wish ( like spend it on their personal legal fees for instance )
If that's the case, then they didn't really 'donate' their libel winnings to the Fund at all did they ? ... in fact, if that's the case, then they havn't given a single penny of their own money towards 'the search'
To add a little more background Frisky, this is transcript from the documentary:
Quote:
41.09 – Witness: "I drive down this street every day to turn my car around at that end, and every time that I passed the house, and I looked at the car, and the car always had an open boot door, day or night. I often passed at night, and always verified it. It was a fact, I reported it, and that was it."
41.33 – It's important to report the following: that lady, that lawyer, was never heard at the Polícia Judiciária because her deposition was not considered to be relevant, which is strange. While she was not heard, while a rogatory letter was sent to England, relatives of Gerald and Kate McCann came out to say that they had transported, inside this car boot, food from the supermarket, namely a meat package that leaked blood.
42.09 – The great question is how the family heard about the witness, despite the fact that she was not heard by the PJ, and tried to reply to the observed facts.
So they had a reply to the dogs ......
It's quite rare these days to find anybody who is fooled. If you look at the comments section of any online newspaper, you will see that most people are very sceptical about this case.
Yes - how convincing do you find it?
According to Clarence Mitchell's PowerPoint presentation at a recent media conference in Dubai, that was the exact amount paid to Kate by the News of the World for apparently publishing extracts from her diary without her consent.
That's what it sounded like to me.
Well it would get them off the hook , once they knew the dogs were coming in , to explain.
Not convinced at all.
It stinks .....:rolleyes::)
A bit like the car then.....
So did the car apparantly.
:sorry
Then I'll ask the question put to Clarence Mitchell by the ITV news reader Alastair Stewart on the day he (Clarence) became the McCanns' PR man full-time: "WHAT IS THE POINT OF YOU?"
What's the point of him if people are not buying his spin?
I thought that as well - making what I would call an excuse to completely change the function of the money in the fund and do the opposite of what they promised when it was first set up.
That stinks almost as much as the car come to think of it.
I've got 'em all. Twitter, DS and Facebook.
I often type something then multi post it on everywhere at once!
I retweeted all the tweets from Ruis earlier so anyone following me will have got them.
That is very amusing.
Nope, not any longer anyway. Although I feel in this case, that its put people's blood up because they are actually criticising the Police who seem to have done an awful lot to help them.
Not very.
Does it smell fishy?
I think lots of people do still believe the spin. I know loads of people who think the McCanns are entirely innocent of anything other than the neglect issue, that they have cooperated fully with the police, and that the police are corrupt and have let them down.
Clarence would be happy to hear that as it means his post is still justified
I'm not saying there has never been a corrupt policeman in the history of the world, however I feel that statistically now there seems to be an awful lot of them supposedly in one department in Portugal. :rolleyes:
Yes it does stink mazzy
Why is Mitchell making a distinction between money paid into the Fund by the public ( over 2,000,000 ) and money paid into the Fund from the McCanns ( and their mates ) libel payouts ?
I mean it was all money paid into the Fund.
If the 'libel money' comes under some special category of 'donation' that can be used for purposes not 'in the spirit' of the Fund , then why bother making the donations in the first place ?
Why not just pay it straight into Kate and Gerry's personal bank account ? ... because they might as well have done, by the looks of it.
I hope I haven't just extended his contract :eek:
Some people don't look further than the tabloids they read, and up until now, that's pretty much the story they've been publishing.
We are, indeed, doing well in the tea tray race portion of the Olympics
They did do that, in a way, in my opinion. Anyone under any real illusion as to what the fund money is used for these days, really needs to get out more.
I am not saying they don't use any of it to pay to search for Madeleine, presumably they are still paying the investigators etc.
In fairness, it was their money won legally, they were certainly under no obligation to put it into the fund. Indeed they could have spent it on dancing girls and fast cars and they would have been within their rights.
The story looks better if it goes to the fund though doesnt it?
You have forgotten about the 2 months mortgage payments that the libel damages repaid.
But Lizzy anyone , what is the MOTIVE.
Wow, its Saturday.
Yes, indeed.
I'm not sure Policemen need a motive for looking at evidence and coming up with a thesis.
My personal feeling is, that for me, it lost all appearance of being controlled when Kate and Gerry became directors.
I honestly feel they should appoint someone to run it (with the backing of some family/friend board members if they like) who is unbiased and can look at things neutrally when it comes to what the money is spent on.
If they are indeed completely innocent, and do not know what happened to Madeleine, how can they use common sense when it comes to the best way to look for her? They would naturally want to follow up everything, do everything, and its just not possible.
The fund is now a business enterprise as far as I am concerned. Nothing more, nothing less.