I grant that there is little to no evidence of an abductor. On the other hand though, there is little to no evidence that the parents were involved. Still unwilling to condemn anyone myself.
I didn’t donate to the fund, but them using the funds to maintain their home wouldn’t bother me if I did. Nor would paying for hotel rooms while they traveled. It’s the CDB.
I didn’t donate either but if I had I’d be royally pissed.
These people are doctors and earn a fair amount of dosh, so why use money from a fund set up SPECIFICALLY to find their daughter
A serial killer can’t even get himself executed in Russia for cripes sake, what do you expect us in the UK to do!
Because they’ve both been on unpaid leave since their daughter disappeared? By using the money, they haven’t had to go back to work, so they’ve been able to spend more time looking for Madeleine. So it’s not hard to argue that the money is being used to help them find their daughter.
Geez, can we give them a break? I’m far from the biggest fan of how they’ve handled this whole situation - the visit to the Pope, the idiotic sketch that’s the subject of this thread - but they’ve just lost their daughter. Do they have to lose their house as well?
Are you seriously trying to tell me that these people don’t have any savings at all, nothing put aside, skint?
Added to which, what the hell is daddy doing to help find his daughter, playing fucking golf is what, that’s really helping :dubious:
Not having a clue about their personal finances, I wouldn’t know. But after six months of both being on unpaid leave with two other kids to support and a mortgage to pay, I’m not surprised that things are getting a little tight. I’m happy to be proved wrong if you know something else, but until then I see no reason to assume they’ve got plenty of money but are just taking it from the trust fund because … they’d prefer to save money than find their daughter? I’m not getting it.