Title: Feb 1 10 - A SECOND Fund? Registered at Companies House? | |
MadeleineMcCann > ARCHIVED FORUMS & INFO > HiDeHo Posts | Go to subcategory: |
Author | Content |
TinLizzy | |
Date Posted:03/01/2010 3:20 PMCopy HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccpO_iVOTSA A SECOND Fund? Registered at Companies House? <!-- google_ad_section_start -->The more I read back on old articles the more I am convinced there is a DIFFERENT fund for their legal expenses.
We know they are not 'allowed' to use Madeleine's Fund for legal expenses. Is there any way of checking with Companies House if it has been registered? Where would Brian Kennedy's 'support' be listed? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-481518/Tycoons-bankrolled-Madeleine-fund-refuse-fund-McCanns-legal-defence.html#ixzz0c5ufvULn 13 September 2007 Tycoons who bankrolled Madeleine fund refuse to fund McCanns' legal defence Another tycoon who pledged more than £100,000 to the Find Madeleine appeal ruled out making a donation to the legal fighting fund (...) "We need to rectify the PR and the fightback needs to start and it needs to start now." The source suggested a benefactor was waiting in the wings and has had a number of meetings with the McCanns and their legal team about giving money to any new legal fighting fund. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070916/branson_mccanns_070916/20070916?hub=TopStories Sunday Sep. 16, 2007 9:30 AM ET Branson to help fund McCanns' legal defence LONDON — British tycoon Richard Branson pledged US$200,000 Sunday to help the parents of missing four-year-old Madeleine McCann clear their name. A spokeswoman says the Virgin chairman has also contacted several other wealthy Britons to encourage them to contribute to a legal defence fund for Kate and Gerry McCann. The couple, both doctors, have been the focus of intense speculation over whether they played a role in the disappearance of their daughter from a holiday apartment in southern Portugal on May 3 after police there named them as formal suspects. Branson had already contributed US$2 million to a fund set up to help find Madeleine. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2441844.ece From The Times September 13, 2007 Parents will have to pay defence costs without Madeleine’s Fund Earlier in the day a family source told The Times that setting up a new fighting fund “was one of the options they may well look at”. "...However people have already called in offering their financial support. Any such funds to pay legal defence costs would have to be separately set up and administered.” http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:XnGdp7geFHMJ:news.scotsman.com/madeleinemccann/Scots-tycoon-attacks-scurrilous-allegations.3588338.jp+Scots+tycoon+attacks+%27scurrilous+allegations%27+as+he+comes+out+as+McCanns%27+secret+funder&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca 08 December 2007 Scots tycoon attacks 'scurrilous allegations' as he comes out as McCanns' secret funder ONE of Scotland's most wealthy businessmen can today be revealed as the mystery donor helping fund the fight to clear the names of Madeleine McCann's parents. Stephen Winyard, who owns the luxury Stobo Castle spa in Peebleshire, has spoken publicly for the first time since pledging £100,000 to help meet the escalating legal costs of Gerry and Kate McCann. In an exclusive interview with The Scotsman, Mr Winyard revealed he has already paid for DNA tests carried out on the Renault Scenic hire car used by the McCanns nearly four weeks after Madeleine's disappearance. The 58-year-old father-of-three has remained in the shadows since offering a £1million reward for four-year-old Madeleine's return in May. I have started to put together a timeline of the fund information, which helps highlight, for example, that the day that two tycoons (do we know who they are?) retracted their offer to 'bankroll' the fund is the same day that it was decided by the trustees that the fund would not be used for legal costs followed three days later that Branson was setting up the legal defence fund and encouraging others to contribute. No proof but does that men there ISN'T a second fund for their legal costs? See Timeline table here.. http://madeleinemccann.aimoo.com/Fund-Tables/Fund-Timeline-Tables-May-2007-Present-1-711878.html Once more info has been added I will try to make a simple summary. Thanks for the input. After reading those initial reports, I cannot believe that the Mc's would have refused the second fund if it was a possiblilty. At that time Branson and maybe others were willing to donate. One way or another their expenses have to far exceed what they have claimed this year, considering the cost of the lawyers if nothing else. (although I haven't had time to look at my approximate figures yet) I just cannot believe they do not have a separate place for money that they don't need to make public, especially because it was a consideration. It would have been like offering them $$$$$$ and they said no! It is 'established' that their first year reports did not include the following 'donations' or income. Where could they have 'hid' them from tax and public view? Sir Philip Green and Brian Kennedy and the Doctor........................? or other anonymous backers.......................................................? or any amounts from the public to the fund since Oct 07................? or the income from their TV and magazine interviews.....................? or the envelopes to Rothley...........................................................? or the income from sales of wristbands and tshirts...........................? or fundraising events since Sept 07 .................................................? or any money possibly already received from the book and movie deals that Clarence discussed!.......................................................? or the 'year-long deal' with Hello magazine......................................? or the unknown amount from News oF the World ref the 'Diaries' article....? Lets not forget their possible 'deal' with IMG for the movie they were considering.......? These were my figures from KNOWN amounts... August 29th 07............Fund rec'd to date .................................£1,005,000 Sept /Oct 07................Fund rec'd ............................................£53,000 Sept 16 ......................Stephen Winyard (defence fund DNA)....£100,000 Oct 3 07 'Leicester Mercury' Wristbands.....................£57,000 Dec 8 07.................Sir Richard Branson.(Legal costs)................£100,000 March 08................Express payout ..........................................£550,000 June 08...................Interest on £500,000 yr.............................£30,000 Sept 7 08.................Brian Kennedy.........................................UNLIMITED Oct 16 08................Tapas from newspaper damages...............£375,000 Nov 11 08................Liverpool Races..........................................£5000 Above total of FUND RECEIVED...(that is KNOWN) £2,275,000 - £1,895,000 to end March (approx estimated amount before official records released ) (pledged amounts may not be included) These are the official amounts Where did the rest go? HiDeHo on Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:20 pm <!-- google_ad_section_start -->Trying to establish the comparison to last year's figures. (If at any time anyone spots a mistake..please advise) Are there details available this year about the individual outgoings? <!-- google_ad_section_end --> <!-- google_ad_section_end --> <!-- google_ad_section_end --> <!-- google_ad_section_end --> |
|
HiDeHo | Share to: #1 |
Re:Feb 1 10 - A SECOND Fund? Registered at Companies House? Date Posted:05/23/2015 8:55 PMCopy HTML <iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ccpO_iVOTSA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="" data-ovi-hasaddedvoiceinputfunction="true" x-webkit-speech="" speech="" lang="en-US" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; border-style: initial; font-size: 13px; color: rgb(85, 85, 85); font-family: Roboto, arial, sans-serif; line-height: 13px; text-align: center; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"></iframe> |