Would so many people have donated to the Madeleine fund if they had known .......?

Question

Would so many decent,caring people have donated if they had known that the money was going to be used to pay the McCanns mortgage and living expenses. According to Clarence M. 300,000pounds has already been spent, VERY little of it on actually looking for Madeleine. All they have done is market gimmicks which will make them more money, ie the wristbands, t.shirts and now the online shop selling Madeleine memorabilia. They haven't looked for Madeleine at all. The rest of the money is being spent on the mortgage for their 600,000 house and their living expenses. Will this go on indefinately. I don't think people donated the money to pay their living expenses, after all they left their children alone in the first place. Why should anyone pay for their negligence. The fund should be used to FIND Madeleine. Not to bankroll the 2 people suspected of her murder.

Hey listen doubters, I am only repeating what Mr Mitchell said, that as Gerry was the main breadwinner and now he isn't working, the money is being spent on the McCanns living expenses etc. Check it out. Dave S has the link.

Answer 1

I agree..whether they are Innocent OR Guilty..this money was never meant to be used for the McCann's living expenses !
However i would like to know when they say Living Expenses..exactly what they mean !
Do they mean while they were still in Portugal or since they arrived back in the UK ??
Not that it really makes much difference..as this fund should never have been used for this anyway !
I just cannot remember another past case of either a missing child or any missing person for that matter..where so many people and can i add very high profile people without proof of innocence or guilt were prepared to jump on the bandwagon with finances !
I think people have been extremely mislead in a massive way..and i think the fund should be frozen until such time as their suspect status is either dropped..or their guilt is proven in a Court of Law !

Added: For all you who are accusing this person of lying...IT DOES SAY ON THE NEWS THIS MORNING THAT THE FUND HAS BEEN USED FOR....'LIVING EXPENSES'..AND THAT CAME RIGHT FROM THE HORSES MOUTH BEING.....CLARENCE MITCHELL !!!

Answer 2

My job is funding voluntary organisations, including charities, for a range of activities of benefit to the public. Before we even consider an organisation, we carefully scrutinise such things as their aims and objectives, accounts (if there are any) and their governance. I had immediate concerns when this fund was initially set up and out of professioinal curiosity I visited the 'official' website specifically to check out the Fund's purpose etc. I agree with the questioner that, before actually processing an on-line donation, the donor should have been automatically directed to the information about the aims of the fund. My immediate concerns about the fund were the ambiguity of its stated purposes. Since the considerable resources of both domestic and international law enforcement agencies continue to be used in order to establish the whereabouts of the child, dead or alive, I cannot see how the Fund can usefully make a contribution towards these costs. That only leaves two other purposes. Leaving aside the personal expenses of the McCanns for a moment, the third and final purpose that " Any surplus funds will be used to help families and missing children in United Kingdom, Portugal and elsewhere in similar circumstances" assumes there will be balances remaining, but when would the Fund decide to start distributing these balances, especially if Madeleine is never found, and exactly how would they go about it? Finally, the support of specific individuals has, thank Goodness, precluded this company from achieving Registered Charitable status...but do that many people know what this means? My organisation would never dream of making funds available to any organisation with such woolly aims and objectives - or if we did, we would insist that they were revised. I don't think we would be inclined to give a grant to support the unspecified living costs of a group of people who are clearly not in dire social and financial need because we owe it to the source of our income (the public purse) to ensure money well-spent. Another thing, we would insist that relatives and close friends of the beneficiaries were removed from the governing Board of the Fund. Given the strength of public feeling about this, were I advising the McCanns I would say the following: Wind up the Fund, NOW and donate what has been collected so far (all of it) to something like the National Missing Person's Helpline or another appropriate charity....which would have the added benefit of making you look good. If they don't think they can stretch to legal costs from their own reserves, set up another fund specifically for that purpose...but be open and up-front about its aims and objectives and exactly what the money will be spent on. People should always make an informed choice about what they donate to and the onus is on the recipient to make absolutely sure that this is crystal clear before asking people to part with their cash.

Answer 3

What a disgrace. The word parasitical do come to mind. I have stated on more than one occasion that asking people to pay for your own living expenses is lacking in decorum. I would feel a sense of immense embarrassment about asking people to bankroll my lifestyle. I believe in social responsibility .. but not to this extent.

It is not the role of the general public to subsidise two parents who are definitely guilty of child neglect [whether the legal system chooses to bring them to book for this is immaterial as it is clear that our legal system is imperfect] and who have now been named as suspects in their daughter disappearance.

I do not see what is preventing these people from going back to work on a part time basis given that their employers are supposed to be sensitive to their needs. Gerry McCann is not a heart surgeon but a cardiac imaging specialist and if he felt unable to undertake this role I am sure there is something administrative he could do...

People have called them scorungers in the past and I am afraid that I have to agree with this.

Answer 4

This is just more media speculation!! They have hired their own private investigators to look for Madeleine. That is what the fund was set up for, to find Maddy, and that is precisely what it's being used for, certainly not paying their mortgage. I am sick and tired of people putting the McCanns down.

Answer 5

I may be the only one to agree with your issue but I am not sure about the accusations you make( as there is no evidence as to where they are spedning the money)

But I think the money could have been used for the more needy and poor people( the ones who cant even get a proper meal a day)

Answer 6

Lisa, Faith,

It is incredible that you still maintain this stance.

FACT. Gerries blog said the fund would not pay fior the villa
FACT..It did
FACT. Gerry lied...now he lies every day so compared to some of the whoppers he tells regarding Madeleine this is nothing...

300,000 has been spent from the fund, but they will not produce accounts..Why would that be do you think????

Now please...Please try to piece the puzzle together...

If you cant manage it on your own then why dont you follow what the Police force with all the evidence at their disposal think...???

Come on now...you can do it....Child Killers, Liars, Fraudsters.....

Answer 7

I think you need to update, and if you have any proof please provide the link. You should provide this link - we shouldnt have to go hunting for evidence to back up your point. You seem to be saying Dave S says it so it must be true.

Anyway, it is illegal for anyone to misappropriate charity donations and with intense media focus i dont believe its possible. The fund is maaged by a legal team.

I have donated to the fund, I am happy with how its being spent, but i would love to hear an update from you.

And as i understand it living expenses refers to their accomodation bills whilest they were in still in portugal and as they travel to other countries to promote the case. When she first went missing my concern was that they wouldnt be able to afford to stay out there and it was one of the reasons why I donated.

Answer 8

It was donated with the best intention and intention is what is the most important thing. If it helps to find Maddie then wonderful, if not the effect will have a much more far reaching result than we can ever imagine. That's how things work-Cause and effect.
Expenses would be mainly on private investigation etc

Answer 9

Why do you feel it is necessary to just lie about an issue which is at the least an absolute tragedy, do you derive some kind of weird perverted pleasure in making up stories which you have no way of proving. I have no complaint over people speculating but to just make wild accusations is beneath contempt, and in my opinion is based on some perverse jealousy, though why you should be jealous of someone who has had their child kidnapped and possibly worse, is absolutely beyond me . I think you need psychiatric help very badly because if even one syllable of what you suggest were true, there is not a newspaper on this planet that would not be on their case 24/7

Answer 10

I like to think I am a decent person, and personally, I don't care.
Not that I donated in the first place (I should imagine you didn't either), but it doesn't bother me. Why does it bother you?
Nothing, no amount of money, could ever replace a child. And if people gave to help the McCanns, well, that is up to them entirely.