Australia Australia - Marion Barter, 51, missing after trip to UK, June 1997 #14

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
My theory, as I said, is very similar to @MrsEmmaPeel

RB did months of ground work on MB starting with convincing her that he was FNR, the football player who 'almost' met her in 1968. Con-men mirror their victims by encouraging them to talk about themselves in order to insert themselves into the victims story. "Oh, traveling on the Orient Express is my dream too", sort of thing. Marion cannot be compared to JO in this regard, she was far more worldly and took months of grooming to allay her natural skepticism. He also had to include a credible reason for secrecy. I don't think Marion would have believed the "spy" line, MC obviously didn't, but she might have been convinced he was in the midst of a large business deal that required utmost secrecy until completed; perhaps even a deal with the Australian Government. Knowing Marion's close family ties, it would have to be something temporary.

Having completely "love bombed" Marion with a marriage proposal, he tells her the deal is nearing completion, his visa is about to expire and he will have to return to Luxembourg. This forces Marion to make a decision; sell up and go with him or lose him. She decides on the former with every intention of revealing all to her family in a matter of weeks. She was about to marry a millionaire business tycoon and live a life of luxury in Europe.

The name change was his idea but how he convinced Marion to comply and how it formed part of his scam is a mystery. Marion had so much to accomplish in such a short time frame (sell her house, resign from her job, re-organize her entire life) she must have been flustered. He kept up the pressure, he may have to leave early, the deal is almost done etc. so Marion barely had time to question anything. Her new passport is late arriving and her bank accounts still had to be changed.

RB ups the pressure; he has to return early on the 17th June to finalize the deal. He spends the night with her on 16th, she brings forward her resignation. Her passport still hasn't arrived, she had enough cash and money in the Barclays account to tide her over, she barely had time to think so she decided to sort out her bank accounts from the UK. It wasn't a priority to Marion, she was about to marry a millionaire!

RB meets Marion at Heathrow. He tells her it is advisable (criminals target tourists etc) to store her important documents with some of her luggage at Heathrow. He stores his little silver case also and he keeps the receipt. He's booked accommodation at Tunbridge Wells and they spend some time together. This is when he convinces Marion they are essentially 'married', the only thing missing is the piece of paper. Then he has to leave for a few days; he just has a few things to tie up in Luxembourg. He retrieves his luggage and checks Marion's documents and that's when he realizes Marion hasn't transferred her money. He is not happy! He has to change his whole plan. Going back to Australia is the last thing he wants to do.

He advises Marion to retrieve her documents at Heathrow (he posts back the receipt) and go to Barclays in London and sort out the problem. This is likely when she mentioned in her correspondence that she travelled on the tube in London.

Desperate to recoup the time, effort and money he'd already invested, he realizes his only option now is to return to Australia.

The rest is too long to post here.
 
For those keeping timelines, I noticed inquest has slightly different dates as to Marion's name change and passport application:

13 May 1997 (inquest says 15 May)
Name change via deed poll to FNMR, with the Public Trustee in Brisbane

16 May (inquest says 20 May)
Passport application with new name witnessed by dentist RJW.
 
One thing I don't understand is saying things like stand under a light so I can remember what you look like.

That did make me think that it made her sad that she might forget what a loved one looked like.
It sounded like someone thinking that this was a final parting.
 
Inquest summary on international licence and passport application
I've gone to the source Day 12, 4:31

When Smith asks, ‘Did you take FR’s licence?’, it’s unclear if RB replied, ‘I DID or DIDN’T take his licence.’ But I think he means he didn’t.

Because he goes on to say he went to the automobile club FR was a member of, and had an international licence made, and did not need to show any identification, or FR’s Lux licence. He then used this international licence to get his FNR QLD licence.

RB says it’s the same process to get an international licence in Aus, except you need to show your state licence. RB admits he is familiar with the process and got several of them in Aus.

Smith asks him if he told Marion to get an international licence as part of her identity change. RB denies it.

In passport application, near Florabella’s signature, ‘international licence’ is ticked as the ID shown to check signature. Smith alludes to RB using his international licences as proof of ID for Florabella’s passport.

Otherwise (by my calculation) Marion would’ve had to:
- change her name by deed poll on 15 May
- apply and receive a state licence
- take it to RACQ and receive an international licence
- take that to the passport application made 20 May.

Seem plausible? Hmmm... o_O
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If we knew who booked MBs airline ticket ex Aus, we would know for definite whether RB knew about the name change.

They seem to have tracked down his travel agent - they said the name at the inquest - if they had found something out from the travel agent I assume they could not bring this up at the inquest if it wasn't in the original brief of evidence ?

Like I assume they can't do a gotcha moment, if the witness hasn't already been briefed on that evidence prior to the inquest ? I don't know but anyone with a legal background maybe could confirm, I am just using my logic and what I follow on podcasts and TV lol
 
I might be missing something here but most documents, passport, drivers licence, bank accounts etc have a person's full name. There must be thousands of people with the same "J.M.F. Smith" for example.
What benefit would there be having Marion's initials match FNR's? Are there some official documents overseas that just have initials and the surname?

I have a current Aus bank card that contains only my initials and surname.
 
Inquest info on international licence and passport application

I've gone to the source Day 12, 4:31

When Smith asks, ‘Did you take FR’s licence?’, it’s unclear if RB replied, ‘I DID or DIDN’T take his licence.’ But I think he means he didn’t.

Because he goes on to say he went to the automobile club FR was a member of, and had an international licence made, and did not need to show any identification, or FR’s Lux licence. He then used this international licence to get his FNR QLD licence.

RB says it’s the same process to get an international licence in Aus, except you need to show your state licence. RB admits he is familiar with the process and got several of them in Aus.

Smith asks him if he told Marion to get an international licence as part of her identity change. RB denies it.

In passport application, near Florabella’s signature, ‘international licence’ is ticked as the ID shown to check signature. Smith alludes to RB using one of his international licences as proof of ID for Florabella’s passport.

Otherwise (by my calculation) Marion would’ve had to:
- change her name by deed poll on 15 May
- apply and receive a state licence
- take it to RACQ and receive an international licence
- take that to the passport application made 20 May.

Seem plausible? Hmmm... o_O


Applying for an international driving licence — Citizens — Guichet.lu - Administrative Guide - Luxembourg (public.lu)

I don't believe him when he says he didn't need a country of origin drivers license in Luxembourg to get an international one, I do think he could have easily made his own, I got one in 97, I could have made it myself lol, it was very basic but you have to present your actual drivers license when you present this otherwise they wouldn't accept it, police and rental companies ... I think its really just to say your "class" is relatable to the "class" of each country, that is why they need to see your actual DL, because they use the info on there to transfer over to the international on, like Class ..

it kind of looked like this attached

upload_2022-5-3_17-48-36.png
 
Last edited:
They seem to have tracked down his travel agent - they said the name at the inquest - if they had found something out from the travel agent I assume they could not bring this up at the inquest if it wasn't in the original brief of evidence ?

Like I assume they can't do a gotcha moment, if the witness hasn't already been briefed on that evidence prior to the inquest ? I don't know but anyone with a legal background maybe could confirm, I am just using my logic and what I follow on podcasts and TV lol


I think it was 'Anywhere Travel'
 
I've been to the library and scanned the Wednesday and Saturday personal announcements pages from the Gold Coast Bulletin dated 13 Nov 1996 to 12 Feb 1997 E&OE. On Mon Tue Wed and Fri there are few personal announcements published. The microfilm was poorly filmed so the ads are hard to read. But you will find several ads that might have been placed by RB or anyone else. I did find a pilot advertising. The staff at the library had no idea who MB was even though this library would have been her local library. I merged all the pages into a pdf file. Am I allowed to upload it or is it against the rules?
 
Applying for an international driving licence — Citizens — Guichet.lu - Administrative Guide - Luxembourg (public.lu)

I don't believe him when he says he didn't need a country of origin drivers license in Luxembourg to get an international one, I do think he could have easily made his own, I got one in 97, I could have made it myself lol, it was very basic but you have to present your actual drivers license when you present this otherwise they wouldn't accept it, police and rental companies, I think its really just to say your "class" is relatable to the "class" of each country, that is why they need to see your actual DL, because they use the info on there to transfer over to the international on, like Class ..

it kind of looked like this attached

View attachment 342354

Totally agree! We have done the same.
 
See, I can't get my head around this. SURELY, MB would have had at least one card for the Barclays account so she could make purchases and/or withdraw cash at ATMS. If you were going travelling you wouldn't be popping into Barclays every 5 minutes to get cash out (unless needing a substantial amount). Or am I missing something?
According the Bank Officer’s testimony, MB’s Visa card statement gave the address of Barclays Bank, Mint St, Rye as the recorded mailing address. This could mean that the Visa card was linked to the money and large purchases were made by credit cards and paid off in full each by prior arrangement. I lived O/S for 2 years 1996-1998 and this was the arrangements I made. You can take cash out on a credit card at an ATM. It’s not the most economical way of doing it because of ATM and other fees, but it can be done.
 
Married over 45 years, husband flying OS numerous times a year, never asks where he is going or who he is staying with, never questions his 'family' - she says she lived with them for 2 years - so never calls them to speak to her husband while he is there seeing them, never queried where the money was coming from to pay his airline tickets throughout the year - must have a great accountant to turn a blind eye to money coming in and going out all while on 2 pensions...., how does he get to the airport - "he doesn't have a car, or drive" she says but he has a dozen licenses, they don't own a computer they both say but he knows there are thousands of women on the internet, they didn't know about the podcast but her sister tells them about it....., he has over 30 name changes and she doesnt know about it?, he comes into Aust when they met under Fredi David but she knows he is Willy Wouters -
AC: "what was his name when you met him on that trip - "willy wouters"
but has always called him Ric, why? So she DOES know at least 4 aliases he is using, Willy Wouters, Fredi David, Ric Blum and Frederick deHedervary, BUT has never questioned it? She was with him when he was arrested and
found with the passport FdeH.


She says he worked in her parents coffee lounge - he wouldnt work a day in his life so pretty sure that is another lie
Covering for who knows what. She lied about the car saying it was for her daughter and was sold within 3 months because of a gearbox issue - why lie about that? Why not just say it was passed to her then the son. WEIRD thing to lie about!

Diannes evidence was that she didn't know about Marion until Police came knocking on the door.

His was: I told my wife and Marion I didn't want this charade to go on…I stopped the relationship because I was married with children - I told my wife I was cheating on her with Marion -



He said it himself, and it was probably one of the few truths, « She doesn’t ask questions ». An alternative is that she has had years of coercion and has been told what to say. In these circumstances she is not quick enough or practiced enough to cover inconsistencies and that might be why her evidence doesn’t hang together. If she was an accomplice, IMO she is a pretty bad one. I know of lots of women who are shells and not used to thinking for themselves and have got used to keeping a low profile and not questioning. This makes her complicit, by neglect but IMO if I were a con man I wouldn’t chose or trust her as an accomplice. IMO she is the « nice family » long term base and cover story.
JMO and MOO
 
My theory, as I said, is very similar to @MrsEmmaPeel

RB did months of ground work on MB starting with convincing her that he was FNR, the football player who 'almost' met her in 1968. Con-men mirror their victims by encouraging them to talk about themselves in order to insert themselves into the victims story. "Oh, traveling on the Orient Express is my dream too", sort of thing. Marion cannot be compared to JO in this regard, she was far more worldly and took months of grooming to allay her natural skepticism. He also had to include a credible reason for secrecy. I don't think Marion would have believed the "spy" line, MC obviously didn't, but she might have been convinced he was in the midst of a large business deal that required utmost secrecy until completed; perhaps even a deal with the Australian Government. Knowing Marion's close family ties, it would have to be something temporary.

Having completely "love bombed" Marion with a marriage proposal, he tells her the deal is nearing completion, his visa is about to expire and he will have to return to Luxembourg. This forces Marion to make a decision; sell up and go with him or lose him. She decides on the former with every intention of revealing all to her family in a matter of weeks. She was about to marry a millionaire business tycoon and live a life of luxury in Europe.

The name change was his idea but how he convinced Marion to comply and how it formed part of his scam is a mystery. Marion had so much to accomplish in such a short time frame (sell her house, resign from her job, re-organize her entire life) she must have been flustered. He kept up the pressure, he may have to leave early, the deal is almost done etc. so Marion barely had time to question anything. Her new passport is late arriving and her bank accounts still had to be changed.

RB ups the pressure; he has to return early on the 17th June to finalize the deal. He spends the night with her on 16th, she brings forward her resignation. Her passport still hasn't arrived, she had enough cash and money in the Barclays account to tide her over, she barely had time to think so she decided to sort out her bank accounts from the UK. It wasn't a priority to Marion, she was about to marry a millionaire!

RB meets Marion at Heathrow. He tells her it is advisable (criminals target tourists etc) to store her important documents with some of her luggage at Heathrow. He stores his little silver case also and he keeps the receipt. He's booked accommodation at Tunbridge Wells and they spend some time together. This is when he convinces Marion they are essentially 'married', the only thing missing is the piece of paper. Then he has to leave for a few days; he just has a few things to tie up in Luxembourg. He retrieves his luggage and checks Marion's documents and that's when he realizes Marion hasn't transferred her money. He is not happy! He has to change his whole plan. Going back to Australia is the last thing he wants to do.

He advises Marion to retrieve her documents at Heathrow (he posts back the receipt) and go to Barclays in London and sort out the problem. This is likely when she mentioned in her correspondence that she travelled on the tube in London.

Desperate to recoup the time, effort and money he'd already invested, he realizes his only option now is to return to Australia.

The rest is too long to post here.
Just on this bit…
The name change was his idea but how he convinced Marion to comply and how it formed part of his scam is a mystery. Marion had so much to accomplish in such a short time frame (sell her house, resign from her job, re-organize her entire life) she must have been flustered. He kept up the pressure, he may have to leave early, the deal is almost done etc. so Marion barely had time to question anything. Her new passport is late arriving and her bank accounts still had to be changed.
Maybe he said that they were going to be married in Europe but that it would take some time to organise with special licences (or similar story) and that it would make it easier in the interim if she had the same surname and can change it before leaving as it was not that complicated and he knew how to do it. As part of the excitement maybe she could change her first name too? Was there anything she really wanted or dreamt about being called? [some playful brainstorming ensued and Florabella Natalia is settled on].

The reason I thought of this was that I actually got married 3 days before emigrating and sent my passport away for the name change prior to the official wedding, but I could only pick it up on the way to the airport and by producing the marriage certificate. Maybe to save all that drama (which seems very risky in terms of precision timing I relate it!), the idea to get a deed poll name change ahead of the wedding might have seemed a better option! It would explain why MB ticks not married on the ongoing card too? But that she expected to be married soon.

How it plays out after that I am yet to settle on…
 
Inquest summary on international licence and passport application
I've gone to the source Day 12, 4:31

When Smith asks, ‘Did you take FR’s licence?’, it’s unclear if RB replied, ‘I DID or DIDN’T take his licence.’ But I think he means he didn’t.

Because he goes on to say he went to the automobile club FR was a member of, and had an international licence made, and did not need to show any identification, or FR’s Lux licence. He then used this international licence to get his FNR QLD licence.

RB says it’s the same process to get an international licence in Aus, except you need to show your state licence. RB admits he is familiar with the process and got several of them in Aus.

Smith asks him if he told Marion to get an international licence as part of her identity change. RB denies it.

In passport application, near Florabella’s signature, ‘international licence’ is ticked as the ID shown to check signature. Smith alludes to RB using his international licences as proof of ID for Florabella’s passport.

Otherwise (by my calculation) Marion would’ve had to:
- change her name by deed poll on 15 May
- apply and receive a state licence
- take it to RACQ and receive an international licence
- take that to the passport application made 20 May.

Seem plausible? Hmmm... o_O
That’s certainly how I interpreted the questioning…that BS was hinting that MB used RB’s FNR INT licence as ID.
 
He said it himself, and it was probably one of the few truths, « She doesn’t ask questions ». An alternative is that she has had years of coercion and has been told what to say. In these circumstances she is not quick enough or practiced enough to cover inconsistencies and that might be why her evidence doesn’t hang together. If she was an accomplice, IMO she is a pretty bad one. I know of lots of women who are shells and not used to thinking for themselves and have got used to keeping a low profile and not questioning. This makes her complicit, by neglect but IMO if I were a con man I wouldn’t chose or trust her as an accomplice. IMO she is the « nice family » long term base and cover story.
JMO and MOO

I agree with this - I think she would make a terrible accomplice. I think she kept her mouth shut and turned a blind eye, not questioning anything he did.

But in the situation she now finds herself in, if she doesn't say what she knows, if she doesn't help the police than she is just as culpable as RB. IMO
 
He said it himself, and it was probably one of the few truths, « She doesn’t ask questions ». An alternative is that she has had years of coercion and has been told what to say. In these circumstances she is not quick enough or practiced enough to cover inconsistencies and that might be why her evidence doesn’t hang together. If she was an accomplice, IMO she is a pretty bad one. I know of lots of women who are shells and not used to thinking for themselves and have got used to keeping a low profile and not questioning. This makes her complicit, by neglect but IMO if I were a con man I wouldn’t chose or trust her as an accomplice. IMO she is the « nice family » long term base and cover story.
JMO and MOO

IMO, it's a bit of both! I think she started 'covering' for him way back when he was in prison in France. I bet Grease was her favourite movie - good girl falls for the 'bad' boy. As @mishy66 said, she couldn't possibly have been oblivious to his wheeling and dealing for 40 odd years. What she didn't know about, were the other women and his affairs except MC, and I believe she left him back in 1980 when she found out about her. He may have been able to talk his way out of GGB and JO with his concocted stories in court but I think his goose was cooked when that letter was read for all the world to hear. Absolutely humiliating for Diane! It must have been the last straw for his daughter as well.
If DdH hasn't actually participated in any of his scams over the years, he should be VERY worried that she will give the police the evidence they need to hang him by his musical testicle. IMOO
 
There’s always been one aspect of the story that baffled me, re:
« A friend of mine worked in customs so I asked them to check Mum’s passport.

It confirmed that she had returned to Australia on August 2 - just a day after I’d spoken to her. »

If SL didn’t know about MB’s name change, she would have asked the friend to check for a passport in the name MB? How then did the friend know that the passport FNMR entering on August 2 was MB? How was the link made? Yes, you can match outgoing passport numbers but wouldn’t you just report back first that there was no evidence of a passport in MB’s name leaving or entering? Wouldn’t it take a fair while to connect dots with a deed poll name change? I feel like I am either missing something simple or….?
 
Just been reading over the postcards and letter again Marion sent.
It is heartbreaking knowing what we know now - her writings are so uplifting, like she is having the time of her life.
Not the sort of letters one would write if they were leaving forever and never wanting to see their loved ones again.

I have no doubt now she is traveling about on her own. She pretty much indicates this numerous times.

The postcard to her sister marked 7 August 1997 where she says she has delayed her Orient Express trip until late August due to first available booking rescheduling from a recent flood is interesting.

She still has her heart set on this trip so there is no doubt she is doing it.

When she calls Sally that one last time to say she won't phone much as she is going to enjoy her holiday, I think she meant just that......."I don’t want to leave The UK just yet...."
She told Sally she would be back for her wedding the following October.
‘I’m going to take a good break now,’ Mum said. ‘I’m not going to keep writing postcards to everyone.’
‘Of course, take it easy Mum,’
Sally told her.

I think she was really finally unwinding after a horrendous year thanks to Glover and crew.

WHY would a postcard be posted on August 7 when Marion was supposedly back in Australia August 2nd.

And why would Marion declare she was only staying in Aust for 8 days, and staying in a hotel, and NOT contact Sally even if she felt embarrassed she had been duped. She could have called her friend Lesley to help her if she didn't want to reach out to Sally, but at some point I believe Marion WOULD have made contact with Sally. Her postcards home tell how much she loved her.

I can not believe that Marion would come into the country for ONLY 8 days and not start withdrawing her money straight away if that was the reason.

Why would Marion write "Luxembourg Housewife" on her entry card back into Australia when she was in the UK ???

I am back in the Marion did not come home camp.
I think she was killed overseas with one of RB associates - the same people JO was told to contact.
I think another female came in on FNMR passport.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
162
Guests online
2,459
Total visitors
2,621

Forum statistics

Threads
603,513
Messages
18,157,723
Members
231,755
Latest member
babycakes15
Back
Top