No invoice or bill in this case though. It was a Medicare claimable service with no out of pocket expenses. claimed directly by the practitioner to Medicare. An eye exam is the only optometry service claimable through Medicare. Dental not covered by Medicare at all.
" IF he DID resell her passport to someone wanting to come into Aust ......" there are only 2 options in my scenario, agreeing with Gymtonic that he could have resold her PP or as I mentioned prior someone he knew came in on the passport.
I like it. I wish neither options were true and Marion would just turn up at Sally's and say what's all this fuss about
I think in order to explain the bank withdrawals, there has to be some clear indication of the mechanics and this has been widely discussed previously. Evidence at the inquest indicates, prima facie, that procedures were followed but after the fact and with few records to absolutely verify this was the case. It has been a case of "if the money was withdrawn, it must have happened this way because we would always follow procedure". So for example the testimony indicates for the daily withdrawals (my notes):
A good point. But I don't see the connection.
Occam's razor for me...actually the simplest explanation is that the postcards were posted when the postmarks say they were, and the phone call happened when SL says it was and from where it is reported MB said she was. Anything else is supposition and belief to fit a narrative. I'm curious...What makes you say MB had a habit of leaving correspondence at the hotel desk to save looking for a post box? who said this? was it at inquest?in one of the letters? because I missed it.
Smith said Marion did not travel to Japan. Unless it was a slip of the tongue.
Thank you for your comprehensive answer to my question. I hadn't heard or read that the $80,000 may of been an actual bank transfer. As you say, if it was, then that would have most likely been easier for a fraudster, rather than doing a withdrawal. So many questions and possibilities in this case...
What I meant was...So do you think the phone call was made on a different day or from a different place? Because according to a UK sleuth who investigated the departure, transit and arrival times of the scheduled route that the FNMR passport arrived on, it was not possible to have made the call on that day from TW. I know others interpret this as, so it must have been made on an other day or from transit, but this means SL is wrong about the date (but Threadbo fixes it) or MB lied about where she was calling from, and somehow she was able to obtain foreign coins for an airport payphone and cover the background noise of phoning from an airport.
Maybe she didn't return, as AKA seemed adamant (i cannot remember exact words) that he had not done anything in "Australia". Maybe the card was filled out beforehand. Good question ... was the date the same handwriting, pen?
Yeah, I agree the call doesn't add up and we can't take it at face value.
Oh how I would love to see the signature on the F N Remakel QLD licence to compare to this!
