As explained to Laffin Assasin here I decided upon this nominal sum rather than my original intention of only donating a penny because I am aware of examples whereby £1 has been accepted for this purpose. For example: Russian oligarch buys British newspaper for nominal sum.
I could not help but notice this further example of a McCann inconsistency. It is advertised as a “Don’t Give Up On Me T-Shirt” but then goes onto say: The front has the text “Dont You Forget About Me” and the rear has the web site addresses. Madeleines picture is shown on the front and the back. Apart from the first and last words being the same, the three words in the middle are obviously different.
I would not have raised this little issue, but it reminds me of everything about the McCanns saying one thing when something else is the case in fact.
Gerry McCann: We did kill daughter
It says so in the text of the link…
Aileen said… 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.
Um, interesting link title, Daily Mail… saving space?”
Hat-Tip to Aileen and Joana Morais
Anyone reading the following may be forgiven for thinking that the Madeleine’s Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned Limited is a registered charity rather than a business set up by the McCanns to earn money for themselves. However, the Sunday Express has a duty not to mislead its readers with inaccurate information. “The £90,000 raised will be split between the Maddie Fund and two other missing people’s charities“. For the record and avoidance of any further doubt, the Madeleine’s Fund is not a missing people’s charity.
There are a few interesting things to emerge from the Madeleine’s Fund Accounts March 2009. For example, whereas in 2008 the income was £1, 846, 178 and the merchandise and campaign costs amounted to £673, 366, but in 2009 it was £629, 181 and £974, 786 respectively. This shows that the fund received substantially less donations because the McCanns are losing a lot of the previous support from the public, and a lot more money was spent unsuccessfully trying to improve the McCanns image in the eyes of the public.
Unfortunately, the published accounts do not state how much each of the directors are being paid from the fund. This shows a lack of transparency, indicating once again that the McCanns have something to hide.
For example, in spite of claiming that they have registered the conflict of interests of those involved in the fund nowhere in the report are these conflict of interests listed. Similarly, it is claimed that the directors take responsibility for the “prevention and detection of fraud and other irregularities”, and yet have not prevented the fund itself being fraudulent!
Clarence Mitchell: “There is a wholly innocent explanation for any material the police may or may not have found” (Joana Morais).
So, let’s put it to the test, shall we?
(b) Brian Healy Grandfather:
“Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone,”
“There was no evidence of a break-in,” said Mr Mitchell (The McCanns’ spokesperson – Irish Independent, 25 October 2007).
Can the McCanns or their spokesman now please provide a wholly innocent explanation for claiming that there had been a break-in when on the facts there had not?
McCanns: A penny for your thoughts
It goes onto say: “A person who suffers legal damages may be able to use tort law to receive compensation from someone who is legally responsible, or liable, for those injuries”.
A person needs to show a judge that he/she has personally suffered a loss to bring an action into court. Sometimes a judge may only award nominal damages to the claimant, for example, one penny. By the same token, legal damage suffered can be as little as one penny.
The plan is this. I intend to donate the sum of one penny to the ‘Madeleine’s Fund : Leaving No Stone Unturned’. Then I can claim that I have legitimately suffered by the McCanns fraud, and take the matter into court.
“In simple terms, fraud occurs when somebody makes a misrepresentation of material fact, in order to obtain action or forebearance by another person, where the other person relies upon the misrepresentation and suffers injury as a result of the act or forebearance taken in reliance upon the misrepresentation. In most fraud cases, there is active misrepresentation by the defendant. In some, the misrepresentation occurs through the defendant’s silence on a key issue”.
“A material fact is a fact which, if known, would have affected the judgment of one or more of the parties to a transaction. In an action for fraud, a material fact must be of sufficient importance to the matter that a reasonable person would have been likely to rely on it. A material fact cannot be an opinion, belief, prediction, or speculation, and typically must relate to something in the past or present that can be proved or disproved”.
“Within the context of fraud, reliance means that plaintiff would not have taken the particular action which underlies the fraud action (e.g., would not have entered into a contract with the defendant), had the defendant had not made the representation, promise or created the false impression, even if the representation, promise, or false impression was not the only reason for plaintiff’s action”.
“To establish fraud, a plaintiff typically has the burden of proving each of the following elements:
The defendant made a representation of one or more material facts;
The representation was false when it was made;
The defendant knew the representation was false when the defendant made it, or defendant made it recklessly (i.e., without knowing whether or not it was true);
The defendant made the representation with the intention that the plaintiff rely upon it;
The plaintiff relied upon the representation; and
The plaintiff suffered damages as a result of the reliance“.
This is an interesting bit of info…
“[i]t would…be a grave lacuna in our system of public law if a pressure group…or even a single public sprited taxpayer, were prevented by outdated technical rules of locus standi from bringing the matter to the attention of the court to vindicate the rule of law and get the unlawful conduct stopped.“
McCanns false accounts in relation to Madeleine
According to John McCann, Chairman of Madeleine’s Fund: Leave no stone unturned Ltd, “On 3rd May 2007, Madeleine McCann was abducted in Praia da Luz, Portugal”. Clearly, this is a false statement. It lacks supportive evidence to make it a fact. Therefore, why is a false account being included in a statement of accounts?
For the record, John McCann, I believe it is Gerry and Kate McCann who are amoral. If you must refer to Mr Amaral, the least you can do is spell his name correctly!
See the madeleinefundaccountsmarch2009 here.
It is not just a matter of ensuring that funds are accounted for. The McCanns need to be held to account in relation to other matters as well.
No. We repeat, and it is a matter of record, that Kate & Gerry McCann lied from beginning to end of the investigation into their daughter’s disappearance, a claim that will stand up in the libel courts because it is undeniably true“.
The news story you read here first.
Re: LATEST NEWS ON MADELEINE
posted at 27/1/2010 9:16 PM GMT on Sky News
Total posts: 45
First post: 12/1/2010
Last post: 28/1/2010
New post Reply to this post
Maddie: 20 people attend mass in Praia da Luz TVI
“Approximately 20 people attended a religious ceremony this Wednesday, at the Church of Praia da Luz, to mark the passage of 1000 days since the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, which happened in May 2007, in that Algarve village.
The initiative, which was organised by the FindMadeleine Fund, and celebrated by Anglican priest Haynes Hubbard, gathered mainly members of the English community that resides in Praia da Luz, near Lagos.
At the end of the prayer “to remember Maddie”, which lasted for about half an hour, the participants set off some light lanterns into the sky, in a homage to the little missing girl“.
As most of the 20 are part of the ex-pat English community in Praia da Luz, it does not appear as though the McCanns propaganda fools the Portuguese people as a whole.