and the spin he is putting forward is to try and convince the public that the maccanns are innocent, so this has to be seen as defending the allegations against the maccanns, and that is using the fund money by stealth, in a defence for them .
something we have been told would not happen.
Just wait and see the new campaign they have used the fund for , it will be more designed more towards , defending the parents than finding the child.
2007-09-19 21:47:28 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
are your spin is trying to force everyone to believe they are guilty!
You have your opinion I have mine
Deal with it!!!!!!!!
2007-09-19 21:51:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 9⤋
I think Brian Kennedy is paying for Mitchelll - he must have it in for the McCanns for some reason because Mitchell is doing more harm than good. Regarding Clause 1.1.3, had the McCanns been doing something helpful in the search for Madeleine or if they had had nervous breakdowns due to the stress and were unable to earn a wage, then I don't see a problem with getting financial assistance from the fund. But they are both fit to work so there should be no need for claiming financial assistance.
2016-05-19 00:51:57 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I understand he is not being paid by the fund, but by an anonymous benefactor, rather like Richard Branson and others picking up the legal bills. From what I see in the papers today, no action is to be taken against them at all. They are not even going to be questioned.
I must say I am not sure why Mr and Mrs McCann would need a "spokesperson" at all, and if they do, why such high profile PR people? Surely they are just parents whose child has been abducted, aren't they? And Gerry McCann has a daily blog that anyone can look at. And they have a lawyer who could perfectly well speak on their behalf when necessary, which would be much more cost-effective.
Someone on a forum suggested that rather than spending £80,000 on posters, it might have been better spent on employing private detectives to find Madeleine, or find out what happened to her. I think that would be a good idea and might lead to some developments.
2007-09-19 22:16:34 · answer #3 · answered by Specsy 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
That is precisley why i personally will NEVER donate to the fund...that's not because i am either Pro nor Anti McCann's..it's simply because i do not know why The McCann's need this kind of person to be their spokeman..
I don't know how he is going to be paid and whether or not it is coming out of the fund or not...But what i do know is that NO ONE leaves what i would imagine to be not only a very well paid job, but also a very secure and credible job within the Government just to show support to the McCann's simply because HE personally believes they are innocent...and maybe they are...BUT i would gaurantee there is a nice lump sum involved..after all, what is he going to do when this case is hopefully solved...or does he figure that this case may go on until it's time for him to retire at 65 ??
It make's me sick quite honestly..and if the McCann's think for one moment that this is going to win sincere support from the British Public..i think their in for a rude awakening....he's just another high profile mouth....jumping on the bandwagon !!
So what..he say's he spent 14 hrs a day with The McCann's in the beginning and saw no reason to suspect them...well that's fine and dandy except that no one initially suspected Ian Huntly of the Soham Murders's as he was portrayed as a kind and caring person, his closest friends could not believe he could commit such a terrible crime....BUT HE DID !!
So Clarence Mitchell's opinion means NOTHING...except the chance of a probable nice big healthy bank account !!
2007-09-19 22:17:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
They said they wont use the fund for their defence legal costs.
I am not 100% sure where the cost of Clarence is coming from but I understood it was being paid for by a benefactor.
I would like to see them get on and look for Maddy with the funds.
2007-09-19 22:03:17 · answer #5 · answered by Saucy B 6 · 6⤊ 1⤋
clarence mitchell and his dumb explainations for the dna in the car. it was reported that his wage is to be paid by one of the mccann's friend....though i do not believe that for a second it will all be paid out of the fund....i wonder if they will defend justine mc guiness's salary as being paid by 'a friend too'.
2007-09-20 00:40:00 · answer #6 · answered by daisy 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
You make a valid point.
Every single day we see the McCanns lie, twist the truth and spin.
They said the villa the rented would not be paid from the fund, that was a lie.
They are lying cold calculating child killers.
Their time is up...When the Priest turns up again he might have a story to tell...
2007-09-19 22:05:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
In my opinion it is utterly wrong to use money donated by a gullible public for the purpose of paying this PR creep. Why on earth do these awful people want such constant publicity if they are innocent?
2007-09-19 22:00:27 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Spin Doctors for politicians get paid to do that out of taxes every day!
2007-09-19 22:11:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
I agree. Most of the quotes in news stories recently haven't even mentioned Madeleine.
It might not be legal expenses, but it's still not what people donated for.
2007-09-19 21:56:48 · answer #10 · answered by Sally 4 · 6⤊ 3⤋
no it is not right,the fund should be used to actively go out and find Madeleine..
2007-09-20 00:49:08 · answer #11 · answered by nicole b 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋