Confirmation 50% in the Pocket

Yes we have confirmation 50% of all book sales made by Pat Brown will go in her pocket.  Today a blog post has appeared on a site called Women in Crime Ink where Pat Brown states the fact in her own words, she says (screenshot):

2. At present, 50% of monies received from the sale of the Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann will go to the Pat Brown Maddie Search Fund. The other 50% earned from the book is income, not donations. I am selling a product and do not have to donate all earnings (or any) to charitable causes (however, I do pro bono work on other cases as there are OTHER missing and murdered children and adults than Madeleine in this world, so part of my earnings through any means funds this). I have chosen to donate 50% of the book’s earnings to my Maddie search fund since she is the focus of this book.

So for every £1 earned 50p will go in Pat Brown’s Pocket.  So will she use this 50% to fund her expenses to Portugal in February and during her search?  … NO.  Because she states:

3. The Pat Brown Maddie Search Fund monies will be not be spent on a personal salary (any time spent will be pro bono). Monies will be used for expenses related to doing a search: travel, equipment, hiring of local PIs, or bringing in experts.

So she won’t charge the search for her time, but she will for her meals, places to stay… whilst still holding nicely onto the 50% she has made on the book.

How nice of her to confirm that she won’t stay anywhere  5 star.

I always endeavor to always keep costs low when I do pro bono work so that the funds will stretch further: inexpensive hotels, staying with local people, cheap meals, etc.). If I choose to spend above the cheapest rate I can achieve, I pay out-of-pocket.

Kate McCann wrote a book, every penny she made from that book and the advance she received along with the deal she made with the serialisation with the Sun Newspaper went into the Find Madeleine Fund.

Kate McCann and her husband NEVER took one penny of the money raised from their book for themselves, unlike Pat Brown who is going to take 50% of her proceeds to feather her own nest.

How many is that now profiting off  the back of a missing child, without giving any of the proceeds to the Official Find Madeleine Fund?  Oh yes, these people…..

Pat Brown

Steve Marsden

Brian Johnson

Goncalo Amaral

Hernani Carvalho

The Madeleine Foundation

Paulo Pereira Cristóvão


Thank you to the people at JATYK2 forum for finding a wonderful screenshot of Pat Brown selling her book for 0.99 euros and where she states that ALL royalties will go to her Search Fund.

pat brown 99 cents

Now it is being sold on Barnes & Noble for $2.99 dollars she is going to pocket 50% of that….

Pat Brown book on Barnes Noble

Says it all really, doesn’t it?

Update 11th November 2011

Now we have confirmation that this e-book is part of her business.


10 comments on “Confirmation 50% in the Pocket

  1. She does mention travel… air fare?

    She does realise that people have already been asked to contribute financially to Amaral’s various legal costs? Not sure whether TB’s fans have asked for financial help or not. 

    These are people facing court cases, not simply wishing to cross the Atlantic to attend them. 

    Still, if team Amaral and team TB have lots of spare cash, why not?

  2. Just watched the clip. ROFLLLLL

  3. I have just had a real good chuckle at Jayelles comment on JATYK

    Lordy. If this hits the tabloids, we’ll have burglars all over the UK suing householders that install intruder alarm systems for “tortious interference with business”.

  4. The only think I can think of why she is doing this, is simply, she doesn’t want to be left out.

    Perhaps she is hoping the McCanns will counter sue her, after all Bennett is going to probably end up in front of a Judge, so is Amaral and there she is with no street cred in pitchforking whatsoever.

  5. I watched that clip about 5 times… Brilliant find.

    Re PB in particular, dunno. Hopes of getting her original book translated into umpteen European languages? Matinée TV appearances for the European ladies who knit? She does realise that TVI is also being sued, doesn’t she?

  6. Brilliant find Bren. My fav tune for the month.

  7. I thought the tune and the words were very apt.   

  8. Oh I love this one found by Sal on Stop The Myths

    Profilers don’t help their own cause much, either, at least not with the “amateur internet cybersleuths,” and we are legion. An example is Pat Brown, a Minnesota-based profiler who manages to accrue a remarkable amount of face-time every time a major serial case hits the news. When the alleged BTK Strangler, Dennis Rader [Google search], was arrested in late February 2005, Brown seemed to defy time and space, showing up to do commentary for nearly every special break-in about the arrest. No one bothered to note that Brown’s profile of BTK, while on-the-mark in some general and a few specific ways (something that could also be said about my own completely off-the cuff profile of this killer), was based on one particular person she’d zeroed in on a while back – and unfortunately for her, not Dennis Rader, but an ex-employee of the Wichita Eagle who many suspected was guilty of his wife’s murder while on a camping trip about 10 years ago.Profiler Brent Turvey, who at one time was Pat Brown’s teacher, said the following about the peripatetic profiling pundit:Pat Brown (…)approached me years ago, after taking several courses, to get my assistance in naming a person that she was essentially stalking as a serial murderer. No evidence. No proof. Just her firm belief that she knew better than anyone else. I of course refused, told her to stop stalking the guy lest she find herself arrested, and this did not make her happy at all. Ignoring admonishments regarding this and other terribly unprofessional conduct, she continues to go her own way in her corner of the profiling community…

    Read more: http://blogcritics.org/culture/article/who-is-haunting-houma-louisiana/page-3/#ixzz1d1boVrVC

  9. 1.0 out of 5 stars
    Terrible introduction to the subject, January 21, 2008

    C. Williams (Fayetteville, Arkansas United States) – See all my reviews

    This review is from: Killing for Sport: Inside the Minds of Serial Killers (Hardcover)

    Having read this book, I will never listen to a thing Pat Brown has to say.

    I purchased this book used for $8 from a local book dealer, and I
    can’t remember the last time I felt more ripped off. Judging by the
    book jacket and introduction, it seemed like it may have been at least a
    decent introductory text on the subject. Instead, what I found was a
    book full of unsupported opinions with no research materials listed, no
    footnotes, and no indication of any actual, first-hand knowledge of the
    subject. Instead, the author makes constant, thinly-veiled attacks
    against the superstars of the profiling world–authors like ex-FBI
    profilers John Douglas and Roy Hazelwood–who DO have the decades of
    experience and research necessary to provide informed opinions about how
    serial killers and other violent criminals function. Pat Brown is a
    great example of the “Hollywood expert,” those people that have no real
    credentials, but look good on camera (and make ample use of that fact.)
    For my money, I’ll take the ACTUAL experts any day. I kept thinking,
    “What’s the matter, Pat? Did the FBI turn you down for a job? Get over
    it already!”

    Another thing that irked me about this book was the sheer amount of
    needless filler and bad formatting. At 194 pages (not including the
    ridiculously unnecessary “glossary”), it seems like there should be more
    material there than is actually present. Sometimes-large sections of
    each page are taken up with serial killer quotes, with no credit given
    to her sources (some of which are from interviews with the very same
    experts that she constantly slams). In fact, one of the “killer quotes”
    wasn’t even from a murderer, but from a convicted necrophiliac. The
    Q&A formatting, while seemingly a good idea, just serves to take up
    more space, with each question in large, bold print. Essentially, it
    looks as though the book was designed to stretch a relatively small
    amount of information into a book-length manuscript. Since the primary
    purpose of the book is to pimp her own profiling agency, maybe she
    should have stuck with an advertising pamphlet.

    Brown states in the introduction that she wants her readers to be
    offended, that the book is written from the perspective of the killers
    themselves. She certainly succeeded in offending me, but for all the
    wrong reasons. If you want to read a decent (if still flawed) book
    about serial killers from the perspective of a killer, try “The Gates of
    Janus” by Ian Brady. There’s a guy who knows, from ample and grisly
    experience, exactly what he’s talking about…

    Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

    Was this review helpful to you? Yes

    Report abuse
    | PermalinkComment Comment (1)

  10. 1.0 out of 5 stars
    Irresponsible Vigilantism, June 11, 2011

    L. Williams – See all my reviews

    This review is from: The Profiler: My Life Hunting Serial Killers and Psychopaths (Hardcover)

    This book is a dangerous threat to justice, not the indictment of our
    system that the author wants it to be. Pat Brown’s profiling experience
    consists of conducting (untrained) private (unofficial) investigations
    into unsolved crimes. Profiles that are so clear-cut and professional
    that NONE of them results in a conviction. What she apparently is
    successful at is being interviewed as an expert on TV.

    What Brown does in this book is libel. She investigates people she
    suspects of crimes, makes judgments about them, not just based on
    physical or circumstantial evidence, but also on her evaluation of their
    characters and psychological states. She claims all kinds of scientific
    reasons for why she suspects them of these crimes (which no official
    ever gives credence to, except in secret and off the record.) Then she
    gives their names in a book! There is a good reason why people have to
    be tried in court, and why we have the presumption of innocence. I
    suspect none of us would like to live in a state where a person could
    just decide you were likely to have committed a crime and then spread
    their tales about you to the whole world. I can’t believe she hasn’t
    been sued over and over. Maybe it’s because she picks on powerless,
    fringey people. I notice she doesn’t name the police she says obstruct
    these cases. She probably knows they would have her in court the next

    Pat Brown might be right about some of these cases. Who knows? If I
    were a crime victim, I’m sure I’d try to do everything I could to find
    the perpetrator. But I don’t want her and people like her deciding who
    is or isn’t guilty. It’s dangerous and not worth the loss of liberty for
    the sake of “security” that this kind of action involves.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: