Australia Australia - Marion Barter, 51, missing after trip to UK, Jun 1997 #3

[JLZ]

Back to the codes thing.... I have been through this with private health care in the UK. Your doctor writes down that you need procedure GYN567 and you call the insurer and they say it's a hysterectomy or whatever. In order for the "massive tumour" to be confused with "colonoscopy" the codes would have to be similar - a 8 mistaken for a 0 or a L for a I or similar. If the two codes were totally different then how could that even happen? Unless of course a ABC123 code meant one thing in 1997 and something totally different in 2020.

"Colonoscopy" is a procedure and "massive tumour" is a diagnosis; they're not mutually exclusive. If someone had an abnormal growth in the rectum or another part of the large bowel they'd be experiencing certain symptoms such as rectal bleeding. Those symptoms would trigger referral for a colonoscopy, but the diagnosis likely wouldn't be known until after the procedure.

Medicare codes are basically procedure codes. They represent the service the doctor provides to the patient. There is also such a thing as diagnostic codes, and these are used by hospitals and their funders. A Medicare code (colonoscopy would have been something like 32090) is not going to be mistaken for an ICD-10 code.

 

[sunnynz]

Bumping this. Any Aussies heard any updates in local news?

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Not a peep and I do regular searches via various searth methods.

 

[Garyb]

Just noticed on Sallys page that she has posted a new podcast is being made.

 

[Sophie-Renee]

Not a peep and I do regular searches via various searth methods.

I know, I been checking back periodically and assumed things went quiet because there haven't been many podcasts- will be good if they are now making another.

 

[astorytold]

Has anyone seen the latest video posted on the Lost Boy of TSS FB page? He feels the podcast has omitted important information and that Sally needs to "come clean" about the "toxic" relationship Marion had with her children.

 

[Dianarama66]

I've been away and look what happened! The Markovic idea is tantalizing-- and plausible. Pieces fit. However Markovic is 58. Marion would be 75. Not an impossible age difference, but a small glitch. However, if it's a mail con, you don't see the man and age is no problem. Interesting to think (or imagine) that Marion maybe showed up unannounced in UK to find Markovic. Maybe Kelly will come back and comment, or others of you know if he conned older women.

I do not think Markovic fits this case. For one thing, unless I'm mistaken, didn't someone on here post that yes he was in NSW between April and October of 1997 - but incarcerated at the time? So he could not have been directly physically involved in anything that happened in July of that year. Also, if this was some kind of a con plot romance scheme, that's not really Markovic's M.O. is it? I'm sure he would stoop at nothing, but it's just that that's not his thing. Conmen have particular cons that they have honed and the Lonelyhearts conman is a particular type. I don't see Markovic as that type.

 

[Dianarama66]

W

Very good point about her passport not being used again!
It’s probably unlikely she left on another passport. Possible but unlikely.
That means she either was killed by someone else, she suicided, she is still alive most likely under another name or she died under another name. Probably most likely she was killed. I guess when you are withdrawing a lot of money (if she did herself) it would put her at risk.

Why do you find it unlikely she left on another passport? You said yourself that she could be alive under another name. If she's living under another name somewhere, and we know it's not Florabella Ramekal, then she still has to have ID for that identity right? If she really did intend to disappear without a trace, that would be exactly the convoluted path to take: change identities twice, once legally, once illegally. The illegal identity would be untraceable. So actually quite brilliant to fly into the country on your real, but new name, passport, get your cash, and then fly out on your counterfeit one. Like a double fake-out to really throw everyone off the trail. Perhaps such false identity documents are what she was organizing in Europe. If you have enough money, you can definitely purchase forged passports that are good enough to fool the authorities. She had enough money for that. Taking large sums of cash on planes legally would definitely create a paper trail as someone pointed out on here. But if we're talking about someone who is changing identities multiple times and using forged passports, I don't see why smuggling cash would be out of their league. Especially back in 1997 before enhanced airport security. I'm not proud of it but in the 1990s I once helped a friend create a false-bottom suitcase for a mission to Ecuador he was going on for this wealthy NY art collector who'd bought some pre-Columbian antiquities on the black market. It totally worked. so I don't think hiding 80gs would've been that tough. There are also other ways to transport wealth without it being noticed, such as buying a bunch of expensive jewelry and just wearing it. It can be liquidated and converted back into cash at the destination. We know there isn't a Florabella Remakel living in either Luxembourg or NSW so...I wonder if anyone has ever investigated one-way departures from Australia after October 1997 (when she finished withdrawing the money). Like, a list of female passengers taking round trip flights that never used the return portion back to Australia. Things may be different now, but I know it certainly used to be that you could not buy one-way tickets to destinations that you were not a citizen of. You had to show proof that you're returning to your own country. So if she did leave the country under another name, it presents more issues to explore. First is to consider what nationality she would have chosen for her new identity. If she plans living in Europe then it would likely not be an Australian passport, (unless the lady bloody switches identities AGAIN after that) so then she wouldn't have to purchase the round trip ticket and investigating that would be a dead end. However, on a European passport, she would have to explain when and how she entered the country - she can't buy a one-way ticket out because the obvious question is, well where's the other half of the ticket you came in on? So logically, if she left the country on another passport, it would have to have been another Australian passport. I think we can pretty much dismiss all the Luxembourg stuff as red herrings if the departure was intentional because Marion would be aware that eventually all this stuff about the name change etc. would come to light and so any clues resulting from that would be planted and fake. I'm just kind of freestylin' here but the more I think about it, the more it makes sense that an intentional disappearance would have to include multiple additional false identities. One to leave the country on and one with which to assume another new identity in the new place. That way, you would be totally untraceable unless someone recognized you which I guess is what the daughter is hoping the new publicity may lead to.

 

[Dianarama66]

You could not leave Australia on a different passport to that which you entered. Unless you were an Australian resident, you can travel on differnent passports but they must be in the same name.

For example If you enter Aus as a visitor on a uk passport you can not exit on a American passport, if you try to you would need to show how you entered Aus by producing the passport you entered on and the names would need to match. However they get prettty annoyed if you do this and you would likely miss your flight while they tripled checked that your intentions where not illegal.

That's correct. But only relevant if you're playing by the rules (I have a UK and a USA passport myself so know just what you mean.) However, the rules don't apply if you're in the black market: so if you have a falsified / stolen / identity-thieved Australian passport in another name, you could leave the country on a new round-trip ticket in that name and then just not return just like the other you who entered the country, never left. Other people have suggested something similar (I'm new on here, sorry, just catching up, plz excuse any repetitions as I come up to speed) and I agree that checking departure record from mid-October 1997 would be useful if only for elimination purposes. The criteria to check would be: do passenger manifests record any female Australian passports leaving the country from say mid-October to the end of the year (she'd likely do it sooner than later, so focusing hard on mid-Oct) where the return portion of their ticket remained unused?

 

[Dianarama66]

I just have to say, the locations she visited in England are incredibly odd. She didn't go to Stonehenge or the Lake District or the coast. I mean when you think to take a year off work and treat yourself to the trip of a lifetime, by what strange logic does one end up hanging out in bloody Tunbridge Wells! I mean, no offense to Kent (I was born there) but it's not exactly got the Taj Mahal! It's quite middle-class boring suburban. Yes it's cute and quaint but there's not much nightlife and so the only other thing to do would be sight-seeing, but if that was her interest then those are odd places to send postcards from. Kent has some fantastic natural beauty and scenery as well as some ancient historic sites. If you are in Kent then why on earth wouldn't you go to Canterbury, which has the famous cathedral and is a historical city because of Chaucer and the Mayflower etc? It's one of the top tourist destinations in the UK. There are lots of interesting little villages around Kent and Sussex that you can get to by short picturesque train journeys, and go on little day trips to very pretty destinations and stay in lovely old cottages and things. I mean if you're gonna visit Kent, then visit Kent. But she sends postcards from East Grinstead? Has anyone on here besides me ever been to East Grinstead? It would be like going to New York, but sending your family postcards from the Borough of Queens and just skipping Manhattan altogether. I just found out she sent postcards from Brighton which does make sense but there are so many places within really short distances around there, with great views and it seems she did not visit them or at least chose not to send her family postcards from, but goes to Tunbridge Wells twice? I find it really weird. Hanging out in this small area of Kent/Sussex, without visiting its best sites that are right there, at the start of an international travel adventure, is to me the most bizarre aspect of this entire thing! What was she there for really? Because clearly sight-seeing was not the goal Makes no sense at all. Tunbridge Wells! Unbelievable.

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

I just have to say, the locations she visited in England are incredibly odd. She didn't go to Stonehenge or the Lake District or the coast. I mean when you think to take a year off work and treat yourself to the trip of a lifetime, by what strange logic does one end up hanging out in bloody Tunbridge Wells! I mean, no offense to Kent (I was born there) but it's not exactly got the Taj Mahal! It's quite middle-class boring suburban. Yes it's cute and quaint but there's not much nightlife and so the only other thing to do would be sight-seeing, but if that was her interest then those are odd places to send postcards from. Kent has some fantastic natural beauty and scenery as well as some ancient historic sites. If you are in Kent then why on earth wouldn't you go to Canterbury, which has the famous cathedral and is a historical city because of Chaucer and the Mayflower etc? It's one of the top tourist destinations in the UK. There are lots of interesting little villages around Kent and Sussex that you can get to by short picturesque train journeys, and go on little day trips to very pretty destinations and stay in lovely old cottages and things. I mean if you're gonna visit Kent, then visit Kent. But she sends postcards from East Grinstead? Has anyone on here besides me ever been to East Grinstead? It would be like going to New York, but sending your family postcards from the Borough of Queens and just skipping Manhattan altogether. I just found out she sent postcards from Brighton which does make sense but there are so many places within really short distances around there, with great views and it seems she did not visit them or at least chose not to send her family postcards from, but goes to Tunbridge Wells twice? I find it really weird. Hanging out in this small area of Kent/Sussex, without visiting its best sites that are right there, at the start of an international travel adventure, is to me the most bizarre aspect of this entire thing! What was she there for really? Because clearly sight-seeing was not the goal Makes no sense at all. Tunbridge Wells! Unbelievable.

Why visit Kent & Sussex? Close to London Heathrow and Gatwick? Close to the ferry ports of Dover & Folkestone? Close to Eurostar including Ashford International. Close to the start point of the Orient Express. Marion’s letter to Sally mentions the awful weather in the UK on her arrival and it was that week (Wimbledon was washed out for 2 days) so I’m 99% certain she did come to the UK. Was she in the UK on the 1 August when she last spoke to Sally that I am not so sure. My own view is that on or around that date she was on her way to a small nation in Europe. I don’t believe for one minute she was in the UK as a tourist of her fruition.

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

Whilst Marion was in mainland Europe her impersonator (probably a victim themselves) was already well on their way to Brisbane airport. I don’t believe the mastermind/conman behind this scam was even on that flight and never entered Australia again.

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

I also have a suspicion the person caught on CCTV using Marion’s card the year before her disappearance was in fact Marion herself. This was part of the initial plan (perhaps aborted) to say someone had stolen her identity. The person controlling her was playing poor Marion. The Deed Poll plan was used the next year. What fictitious story she was told to do this might never be known but it must have scared Marion enough to follow it through, give up her precious job in 4 days and sell her house in a rush at a loss and then travel closer to the perpetrator of this crime.

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

The impersonator of Florabella Remakel never used her name again after October 1997. If the 80000 dollars (and probably more) were taken out of the country in cash then a specially adapted travelling suitcase was likely used. The container carrying Marion’s private artefacts was later moved out of Australia under yet another name. There is one very small country in the EU well known for those who like to hide assets and wealth with few questions asked.

 

[sunnynz]

The container carrying Marion’s private artefacts was later moved out of Australia under yet another name. There is one very small country in the EU well known for those who like to hide assets and wealth with few questions asked.

interested to hear more about your theory on this?

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

interested to hear more about your theory on this?

The mysterious guy Sally and her husband saw with Marion in her car just before she left Australia for the final time is no doubt the person of interest in this case. I do believe Marion was telling her daughter the truth when she stated she met him at a Art Show. This guy flitted in and out of her life probably giving some weird story or stories for his disappearance. He was probably grooming other unsuspecting and vulnerable women at the same time.

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

There is still a very small possibility Marion is alive and being held prisoner unable to leave or escape due the way she has been brainwashed and controlled. Many conmen are not murderers.

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

I assume the name Florabella came about after she was gifted some chinaware that came from Villeroy & Boch makers of such items in Luxembourg.

 

[Sophie-Renee]

Why visit Kent & Sussex? Close to London Heathrow and Gatwick? Close to the ferry ports of Dover & Folkestone? Close to Eurostar including Ashford International. Close to the start point of the Orient Express. Marion’s letter to Sally mentions the awful weather in the UK on her arrival and it was that week (Wimbledon was washed out for 2 days) so I’m 99% certain she did come to the UK. Was she in the UK on the 1 August when she last spoke to Sally that I am not so sure. My own view is that on or around that date she was on her way to a small nation in Europe. I don’t believe for one minute she was in the UK as a tourist of her fruition.

What is so frustrating about so much of this case is the availability of records. Had the authorities filed it even before 2002 when they had the crimestoppers tip off, as a missing persons case, phone records of sally's , from the phone boxes in Tunbridge Wells, guest houses, visitor books and the hotel she allegedly stayed at in Brisbane on her return would have been available under the 7 year rule (I believe a standard time frame to keep records)..but all that is gone. They could have answered so many questions. Can Sally be absolutely sure of the day she received the call? Would she have thought to make a record of it at the time to recall for certain months later when trying to report her mother as missing?

What is needed now is partnership with authorities in both the UK and Luxembourg- which hopefully can begin if they get a coroner inquest.

 

[Dianarama66]

Why visit Kent & Sussex? Close to London Heathrow and Gatwick? Close to the ferry ports of Dover & Folkestone? Close to Eurostar including Ashford International. Close to the start point of the Orient Express. Marion’s letter to Sally mentions the awful weather in the UK on her arrival and it was that week (Wimbledon was washed out for 2 days) so I’m 99% certain she did come to the UK. Was she in the UK on the 1 August when she last spoke to Sally that I am not so sure. My own view is that on or around that date she was on her way to a small nation in Europe. I don’t believe for one minute she was in the UK as a tourist of her fruition.

One reason I hate posting on these things is the fear of being totally misquoted. Did I say "why visit Kent and Sussex"? Did I? No I did not! I'm from there OK. I know exactly what is around there. I know that area of England intimately. What I did say was: if you are visiting Kent and Sussex why the f would you go to obscure places like East Grinstead and slightly interesting places like Tunbridge Wells, but NOT go to the beautiful and historic medieval town of Canterbury? Especially if you are a teacher. Valid thing to ponder. I also did not imply that this therefore led me to believe she was not in the UK so I don't know where you got that from. I don't have to "believe" she was in the UK, she obviously was. My point is that I don't believe she was in the UK for sightseeing because she was there for weeks yet hardly saw anything, within a very small area, including one of the most famous and beautiful tourist attractions in the world, which was spitting distance from where she was. Thus, I surmise that she had to have been there for some other purpose. Whether that was to throw her family off the scent when she came back to Australia or to evade someone who was tailing her we don't know. It's unfortunate when you lie to and keep secrets from the people in your life. I feel sorry for what Sally's had to go through because her mother was deceptive. My personal theory is that she DID want to disappear, and tried to set it up but got taken out by more experienced criminals who noticed a woman alone with access to money and a plan to take a long vacation so it would be a while before people started looking.