Australia Australia - Marion Barter, 51, missing after trip to UK, June 1997 #9

[centred]

I think they really stuffed up with the Chusan story.
We've already established it couldn't be 1970 because was reporting the birth of his child with IK then.
It couldn't be 1971 because that year the Chusan sailed from the US to Australia, not the UK.
It couldn't be 1972 because he was imprisoned then.

Then of course there's the other issue which they're not listed on any of the passenger lists from those journeys, either.

The only question in my mind is why it is so important they lie about that date and ship specifically.

yes true why the contradiction or importance but RB did add that he wasn't sure what name he used and we found 3 Walkers on the list but initial did not match but that could be human error .

Anyway he was meant to be elsewhere in that March so who knows what that was all about .

 

[Estelle]

Not on purpose But it looks that way.

Out of all the records we found online, and all we've learned at inquest, no-one's mentioned multiple concurrent passports in different names. Multiple aliases, yes. Multiple passports, no.

Out of all the aliases inquest revealed, only the pink names are associated with passports.

It could mean police are keeping info to themselves (likely).
Or RB has even more concurrent passport in names police don't know about yet (also likely).

I remember Casselden said RB had had ten passports in his life. You have accounted for six of them.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

I remember Casselden said RB had had ten passports in his life. You have accounted for six of them.

Woohoo, that's a good job in my eyes This case is bonkers!

If we count Roger Lauzoney, it's 7. I think the 2002 FDdH is also a passport as I think he officially returned to that name, so 8? A maybe 8 is practically 10, right? But now I can't sleep until I find all 10.

 

[ruby925]

Several of us have tried to work out if RB and MR married at some stage hence a theory was maybe at Narita on the way over but Ruby has debunked that theory tonight. Did they employ a Marriage Celebrant somewhere to conduct a marriage ceremony and Marion assumed she was married but RB did not submit the papers. I noticed when she left, Marion put on her Departure card that she was "divorced" and came back putting "married".

I don't see Marion as the type who would lie on a document that she was married when she was not. Then also putting "housewife" and "Luxembourg" was perhaps her fantasy but there is no evidence she has ever been there as she seemed to have spent all her time in England. IMO there was no need to lie. It sounds to me as if that was RB's idea and she was so "bewitched" by him doing naked belly dances in their hotel room for her that she put down what he told her to do.

I have always suspected that he might have collected a few Australian Arrivals cards in his past travels and coerced Marion to fill one out before he left the UK as Sally thinks it is Marion's handwriting. The flight no seems to have been added later in different handwriting using a different pen. Also the tick against Married is larger than the other ticks. I am still open to suspecting that RB forged it and gave it to DdH to use. This is just one of the reasons I doubt it was Marion on that flight home.

imo, if we think that Marion knew RB as Remakel and she officially changed her name to match, it is not a stretch to assume she wrote married, housewife and Luxembourg on her arrivals card as that is what she intended to be, only returning to Australia to retrieve her money. So at this point, she may still be under the illusion and only rumbles him later.

 

[Estelle]

Money withdrawal scenarios…

1. Marion withdrew the daily 5k in an area where she wouldn’t bump into anyone she might know. Either under the spell still of RB or after realising she was being scammed.
   
   
2. Marion withdrew the final 80k with the same possibilities.
   
   
3. Marion withdrew the money under duress
   
   
4. Marion did not withdraw any money herself, someone was impersonating her.

As far as is known, Marion did not try to retrieve the available funds from UK Barclays, as this was sent back to Australia when dormant .


The story of Marion talking about Sally not depositing the proceeds from the car sale could be genuine (Marion wanting to close the Barter accounts once that money was in the account and not cause queries) or a ploy to give credence to the impersonator. Or...this story was woven in somehow at a later date with the Salvation Army/Missing Persons enquiries.

If Marion was still with RB and withdrawing the money, we know RB says he favours cash rather than a bank account. If Marion had rumbled the scam, surely she would have opened another bank account, either in the Barter name, presuming she had ID, or in the new name Remakel, or a safety deposit envelope/box somewhere. It makes sense to avoid leaving a trail in all scenarios, but I can’t think Marion would have run around with so much cash.

I agree with you. RB is the Cash King not Marion. Few intelligent women would fall for having to withdraw cash on a regular basis up to $80,000 because it would not be safe on their person.

 

[buyerninety]

I would have thought the (believed to have occurred)
multiple $5000 withdrawals wouldn't have been
actioned by FR but an impersonator. Also AUSTRAC
was formed in 1989, I assume there were reporting
requirements by the late '90s (by the banks to
AUSTRAC) if a dollar sum of $10k or greater were
withdrawn from a bank account in one hit (I'm not
sure of the exact dollar trigger amount), so RB may
have been careful enough to know that $5000 was
below the AUSTRAC reporting limit. No big deal,
just RB being careful not to go over the reporting
limit and cause a financial note being made by
AUSTRAC, if he could avoid it. Also, I was
surprized to see in the AUSTRAC Wiki, that;
"Under the Freedom of Information Act 1982,
any person can access records held by AUSTRAC,
subject to certain exemptions."
(Interesting - so potentially, a person like Sally,
a relative who might conceiveably at a later date
be granted a Power Of Attorney over Marion
Barter's [FR] financial affairs by a Court, or
who might conceiveably get a lawyer to check
into FR's financial affairs at a later date if FR
was declared legally deceased - maybe in those
circumstances, any records of FR's financial
affairs could be FOI'd from AUSTRAC - but,
unfortunately, the $5000 single withdrawals
didn't reach the cash sum individual
withdrawal reporting trigger limit).

I assume it would not be so difficult for an
Australian police force to access any AUSTRAC
records as part of an investigation, whereas the
actual itself bank no longer has records of
those withdrawals (apparently) in this current
day. So the $5000 multiple withdrawals thing,
may have been RB being careful and
knowledgeable enough not to leave financial
tracks where he didn't have to (because a e.g.
$20000 withdrawal would have had to have been
reported by any Australian bank to AUSTRAC,
and AUSTRAC would have kept a record of any
such reported financial transaction, probably
forever).

 

[BonnieB]

Thank you I'm still confused:
You believe she was killed early Oct, before he withdraw her money, right?
But her money started being withdrawn in Aug.
So which is it? Did he kill her between 3-10 Aug? Or 3-10 Oct?
If he killed in Oct, then who was withdrawing her money between Aug-Sept?

Sorry, my mistake. Between 3-10th August - BEFORE the money was withdrawn. I don't believe that was his plan but I think Marion confronted him and it happened. I think he might have used the car to move the body to a more secure and secluded burial place in early October AFTER the money was withdrawn by someone dressed as Marion in the "old fashioned clothes" he mentioned in his testimony and the hairstyle he also mentioned. There was also mention by JO of him "owning" a 20,000 acre cedar forest at Nymboida. Nymboida National Park is a remote, heavily forested area west of Grafton on the way to Armidale. A perfect spot to hide a body IMO.

 

[Estelle]

imo, if we think that Marion knew RB as Remakel and she officially changed her name to match, it is not a stretch to assume she wrote married, housewife and Luxembourg on her arrivals card as that is what she intended to be, only returning to Australia to retrieve her money. So at this point, she may still be under the illusion and only rumbles him later.

I understand that but I wouldn't put it if it wasn't true.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Oh wait @Estelle there are two RLW (1992 and 1997). But it's the same one, it was only meant to highlight the period in which he had the name. So I only have 5/10. There's still ample opportunity for him to have a bunch of names we don't know about.

Main aliases
Pink: Legal name / passport
Black: Alias only

1969 – Willy Wouters (passport, arrived in Aus)
1976 – Frederick David de Hedervary (passport, 1976 Aus citizenship name)
1976-77 – Roger Lauzoney/Lazoney (alias only or pass? convicted in Lux with FDdH passport on him)
1985 – Chaim Frederick David Dehedervary (NSW license, alias only)
24 Aug 88 – Fernand Remakel (QLD license, alias only)
1992 – Richard Lloyd Westbury (passport)
2 Oct 1992 – FR resissued (QLD license, alias only)
10 Dec 94 – FN Remakel (Le Courrier rencontres, alias only)
Jun-Jul 97 – Richard Lloyd Westbury (passport, travel with Marion)
Late 90s – Hedervary (alias only, encounter with GGB)
1999 – Ric West (alias only)
Nov 1999 – Rich Richard (change by deed poll, passport, travel with JO)
May 2002 – Frederick David de Hedervary (alias only or passport?)
mid 2000’s – Willy David Coppenolle (CBA, alias only)
Current – Ric Blum (change by deed poll, possibly when podcast came out)

 

[centred]

I understand that but I wouldn't put it if it wasn't true.

i get what you are saying , my take on the different writing is officials add things we do not tick so a flight number added by them makes sense and the married or divorced she may have forgot or left it out for some reason so it was ticked for her when she was asked . IMO . Maybe she didn't tick the box because she was conflicted about telling the truth on an official document until she had to make that choice when she HAD to ?

 

[centred]

Oh wait @Estelle there are two RLW (1992 and 1997). But it's the same one, it was only meant to highlight the period in which he had the name. So I only have 5/10. There's still ample opportunity for him to have a bunch of names we don't know about.

Main aliases
Pink: Legal name / passport
Black: Alias only

1969 – Willy Wouters (passport, arrived in Aus)
1976 – Frederick David de Hedervary (passport, 1976 Aus citizenship name)
1976-77 – Roger Lauzoney/Lazoney (alias only or pass? convicted in Lux with FDdH passport on him)
1985 – Chaim Frederick David Dehedervary (NSW license, alias only)
24 Aug 88 – Fernand Remakel (QLD license, alias only)
1992 – Richard Lloyd Westbury (passport)
2 Oct 1992 – FR resissued (QLD license, alias only)
10 Dec 94 – FN Remakel (Le Courrier rencontres, alias only)
Jun-Jul 97 – Richard Lloyd Westbury (passport, travel with Marion)
Late 90s – Hedervary (alias only, encounter with GGB)
1999 – Ric West (alias only)
Nov 1999 – Rich Richard (change by deed poll, passport, travel with JO)
May 2002 – Frederick David de Hedervary (alias only or passport?)
mid 2000’s – Willy David Coppenolle (CBA, alias only)
Current – Ric Blum (change by deed poll, possibly when podcast came out)

Thanks for the list ...did someone mention when we discussed travel details in other countries we are not privy too if it is possible to leave or enter other countries on the next flight with a different passport ?

 

[Estelle]

Sorry, my mistake. Between 3-10th August - BEFORE the money was withdrawn. I don't believe that was his plan but I think Marion confronted him and it happened. I think he might have used the car to move the body to a more secure and secluded burial place in early October AFTER the money was withdrawn by someone dressed as Marion in the "old fashioned clothes" he mentioned in his testimony and the hairstyle he also mentioned. There was also mention by JO of him "owning" a 20,000 acre cedar forest at Nymboida. Nymboida National Park is a remote, heavily forested area west of Grafton on the way to Armidale. A perfect spot to hide a body IMO.

I agree that Nymboida would be a good place to bury a body and that Marion could have met her fate 3-10 August.

Another theory I've had is if they arrived in Heathrow at the same time, his tactic is to ask the female to store her other bag with the documents in a shared locker at the airport to which both parties have the keys. Another idea is did they arrive at Amsterdam airport and share the locker there? then travel by ferry to the UK then hire a car as he did with JO? So did RB make up the excuse that he had to return to Australia urgently or did he lie and say he was in a hospital somewhere and Marion phoned the hospital and he wasn't there? My point is where was Marion's other case? Did RB take it home with him? Or was it left for Marion to take home? Did she actually know that RB returned home to Australia? How did they get Marion's passport from her if an impersonator used it? Did RB steal her passport and get the photo changed on Marion's passport or get a faked one?

If the point of the trip home was just for Marion get money to take back to Europe, why did both of them need to go home and waste money on a return trip? Did Marion actually know where RB was?

If the second transfer was done electronically, why wasn't the first amount done the same way?

I have so many questions.

 

[ruby925]

I would have thought the (believed to have occurred)
multiple $5000 withdrawals wouldn't have been
actioned by FR but an impersonator. Also AUSTRAC
was formed in 1989, I assume there were reporting
requirements by the late '90s (by the banks to
AUSTRAC) if a dollar sum of $10k or greater were
withdrawn from a bank account in one hit (I'm not
sure of the exact dollar trigger amount), so RB may
have been careful enough to know that $5000 was
below the AUSTRAC reporting limit. No big deal,
just RB being careful not to go over the reporting
limit and cause a financial note being made by
AUSTRAC, if he could avoid it. Also, I was
surprized to see in the AUSTRAC Wiki, that;
"Under the Freedom of Information Act 1982,
any person can access records held by AUSTRAC,
subject to certain exemptions."
(Interesting - so potentially, a person like Sally,
a relative who might conceiveably at a later date
be granted a Power Of Attorney over Marion
Barter's [FR] financial affairs by a Court, or
who might conceiveably get a lawyer to check
into FR's financial affairs at a later date if FR
was declared legally deceased - maybe in those
circumstances, any records of FR's financial
affairs could be FOI'd from AUSTRAC - but,
unfortunately, the $5000 single withdrawals
didn't reach the cash sum individual
withdrawal reporting trigger limit).

I assume it would not be so difficult for an
Australian police force to access any AUSTRAC
records as part of an investigation, whereas the
actual itself bank no longer has records of
those withdrawals (apparently) in this current
day. So the $5000 multiple withdrawals thing,
may have been RB being careful and
knowledgeable enough not to leave financial
tracks where he didn't have to (because a e.g.
$20000 withdrawal would have had to have been
reported by any Australian bank to AUSTRAC,
and AUSTRAC would have kept a record of any
such reported financial transaction, probably
forever).

MOO, so the 80k withdrawal from the other bank would have been reported to Austrac and therefore there is still a record of the transaction?

 

[Estelle]

Thanks for the list ...did someone mention when we discussed travel details in other countries we are not privy too if it is possible to leave or enter other countries on the next flight with a different passport ?

Yes IMO it would be possible.

 

[MrsEmmaPeel]

Marion's possible timeline
Applying JOs experience to Marion...

Marion ships her belongings to RB's house as he offered to store her things until they return from their trip.
When she returns to Aus, she intends to buy a much smaller apartment by the water (she told Sally this once).

Once in the UK, RB tells Marion to place unneeded bags in Heathrow storage.
He tells her to leave all her Aus paperwork in there so it won't get stolen.
It includes her birth certificate, medicare, drivers licence, Aus bankcard and jewellery.
She only keeps her passport and Barclays card.

They hire a car and make stops as per postcards.
As usual, RB doesn't do much touristy stuff and sights seeing.
So Marion is bored and confused, but has plenty of time to wander around on her own and write postcards.
RB tells her they can't go on the Orient Express because he has business to do.

He checks her into an accommodation and leaves her alone for a few days.
He then calls Marion and claims he was robbed and is recovering in hospital for a few weeks.
In reality, he's back at Heathrow, taking Marion's bag full of clothes and documents.
He returns to Aus with the intention of leaving Marion stranded in the UK.
It's OK, she as $20k to get by on and she'll never find him upon her return because he isn't really FR.

His plan is, if Marion ever calls police, they'll confuse FR/Aus for FR/Lux (hence Lux lies on passenger cards)
It's great because he hates FR/Lux because he was MCs husband and RB is still infatuated with MC.
It's spiteful payback, essentially.

Marion, still in the UK, is suddenly very suspicious after RB's last phone call.
She suspect's he went back to Aus without her and that he might be trying to fleece her.

She calls Sally, and tells her she'll be busy for a while and to not expect contact.
She doesn't tell Sally the truth because she feels ashamed by how much this man tricked her.
She's also not 100% convinced? She wants to see him face-to-face. She wants to take care of it herself.
Marion buys herself a plane ticket and returns to Aus.

Back in Aus, RB starts withdrawing Marion's cash with the intention of disappearing.
He chose Byron because he knows a teller who accepts bribes.
Occasionally this teller works at Burleigh Heads and Ashmore.
RB and wife buy a car to make all the trips to the bank in a car no-one recognises as theirs.

Marion finds RB, she wants to call the police but there's a confrontation.
They use the car to make to make Marion disappear.
They have to sell the car now.

I like it. It matches the JO scenario. It explains all the details. The only misfit piece imo: Marion's boarding card saying that her home is Luxembourg and she only intends to stay in Australia 8 days. This seems unlikely if she'd copped to Blum. I can't imagine her thinking she could return, then pick up where she left off in Europe.

 

[MrsEmmaPeel]

Random thought. Upon arrival into UK airports, Immigration usually want to know circumstances of your visit, business or pleasure, length of intended stay etc, whether you have a visa if you intend to work or be a student.. your answer needs to be supported by evidence of funds (particularly if you have a one way ticket) or your return ticket. Obviously a ticket has to be in the same name as your passport (this has been checked by airlines in UK for over 40years to my knowledge). So if RB bought Marion's ticket, it would have to be in the Florabella name and therefore he was aware of her name change.
Or is there a legally acceptable document from the deed poll name change so that Marion could have travelled under the old name? Or did she buy her own ticket (not the established pattern)?

good point. if Blum encouraged Marion to change her name, then it creates more chaos around her, whether she is murdered or abandoned. It makes her look flighty and if her property disappears, it implies she did it willingly, imo.

 

[MrsEmmaPeel]

Whatever the scenario, it would seem that the prosecution needs to investigate the hell out of Marion's return to Australia and to enlist the aid of UK investigators and interpol.

 

[MrsEmmaPeel]

Which is why my theory is he has another passport - he doesnt fly over with Marion nor does he come back with her so is this why??....he cant risk his passenger finding out he is traveling under another name...many times throughout the long haul you are addressed by the name on your passenger card or passport.

nice!

 

[Estelle]

Perhaps a wild theory

Is RB setting this case up for his wife to take the fall and he is going to say he had nothing to do with it - yet he set it all up.

1. I was shocked that RB said he left Marion's ad (which I don't think existed as it was his ad in 1994) for his wife to see.
2. She had denied knowing anything about Marion until they were in the car returning from police when he told her.
3. As a female had to go in to withdraw the $5,000 every day, it might have been DdH. I doubt it was Marion.
4. DH could have flown over there briefly using a passport in a new name in the school holidays and flown back on Marion's Remakel passport.

Has RB manipulated two women to do his begging in 1997 and he will claim he has done nothing illegal?

IMO

 

[MrsEmmaPeel]

Absolutely.
And I could never be a criminal - it's all so complex living a lie!

My embezzler husband was the smartest person I'd ever met. Truly. Scored a perfect score on his SAT. He embezzled money during the dot com bubble of the 90s. Everyone else made money hand-over-fist, and Husband could have, too. But he had to be smarter than everybody else-- and that was his downfall.