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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
As always, thanks to everyone for this chat. I'm in the UK and have been catching up by reading through, as well as watching some highlights of the inquest recordings and speaking with a friend!

All of this information has been knocking around in my brain and some clusters of thought started emerging when I was in the shower this morning. Fundamentally, I've been asking myself - do I think this man has the information to answer the question of what happened to Marion? And, as I think we're all hoping, I think there's a good chance he does. So then my mind goes to - what do I actually think happened, even if we possibly have no hope of ever proving it, or compelling RB to tell us?

If he is responsible for her death, I see two competing storylines as the most likely. One: the serial conman killed her in cold blood, because that was always the plan. Two: he was pulling one of his regular cons and something went wrong. Either he realised he'd 'have to' kill her for some reason, or they fought and he killed her in the heat of the moment.

So then I start thinking, which do I find more likely? A criminologist would want to look at all the evidence on his past behaviour for clues. We likely don't have all of what the police/ lawyers have (yet) and obviously they themselves will never have everything. But, based on what we have heard, there's compelling evidence that this is what he did - he pulled these cons on women, for financial profit (though only a modest profit). More could come out, but I don't currently have a sense that he was motivated by sex or a pure love of violence. Which makes me tend to think scenario two is the more likely.

It leaves me with questions and uncertainties, though.

Do others see what (may have) happened with Marion and definitely did happen with the other two women we heard from as an extension/ escalation of an MO? Was he essentially 'doing the same thing' with these women as he did with his series of wives, but he realised he didn't have to marry them, he could just say he had intentions to? Or is there a difference in how he classified these women - i.e. wives (relationships motivated by something else) vs. women he conned (relationships motivated primarily by financial gain)? In terms of the timeline, it makes sense to be to see this as an extension or escalation of an MO. He moved on from marrying them to simply saying he intended to. But, I'm very aware that I'm not as up to date with the details of the case as others on here are.

Sorry if this has been answered before, but are RB’s other two ex wives still alive? I know one died young and I have a vague recollection another may have passed. It feels like it would be really important to hear from them, or speak with people who knew them at the time they were married to RB. Was his behaviour with them in any way similar to the behaviour he exhibited with the other women he conned?

Part of why I think these questions are important is that the evidence given by the two women he conned seems to suggest that he didn't have serious concerns about being caught. It was almost as if he thought confusion and shame about what had happened would be enough to stop them coming forward and pressing any charges? That pattern/ 'psychology' if you will, makes me think that if didn't ever plan to kill the two women we heard from. Sure, he had all the name changes, fake documents, travelling around etc., but he would've known that he couldn't possibly hope that quite surface level deception would be enough to stop him getting caught. But then, does Marion's case itself represent a further escalation of what he was doing? It does seem that he went to greater lengths to cover his tracks with Marion than the other two women we've heard from.

Oh, and one other thing. I've mentioned before that his demeanor reminded me of GSK, albeit superficially. Something that suddenly struck me today... Many here have commented on his general (******) attitude towards women, which might have been quite longstanding. It's widely believed that GSK was fixated on a past engagement he'd had with a woman ('B'). I could be way off track, but something in this story about MC reminds me of this. I don't have my head round the details of when RB and MC were in acquaintence, though, so I could be way off.


This was excellent!
Thank you for writing this out!

I absolutely agree with you. At this stage, I don't get the sense he is a killer. I agree, I think he's a conman where it's potentially gone wrong.

I would LOVE to hear from his daughter.
He seems to speak quite highly of his daughter and I get the impression he has an OK to good relationship with her.

Perhaps this 2 month break really will bring forward a lot more information. Maybe even his children will be called to witness.
 
yes quite possible it was one of the times he came over but my issue is HE SAID

"The last time he saw Marion was when she and a pilot came to pick up the Tea Packing Chests and they were skipping off to Europe together ...

Yes that too.

Many blunders by him today
 
His M.O with GGB and JO was to do everything “legally” (JO signed the power of attorney; GGB gave him her bank card)... so does that mean that Marion willingly (albeit conned) handed over her money to him? Both his and Diane’s answers to why he changed his name so often were heavily focused on the fact that it was legal to do so.

Marion gave him her most valued and expensive belongings.
I may be wrong, but I think what RB wanted most... his ultimate boon... was the money from sale of houses, and if he couldn't get that, the title deeds and Power of Attorney.

GGB refused to sell or have the sort of relationship where they would swap POA, but she did give him her bankcard
JO refused to sell but gave him the next best thing – deeds, keys, POA, all her ID and jewellery
Marion did sell, gave him her most expensive belongings, and changed name to his (as he had no POA but it served same function?)

You're right though, maybe the difference is that he did LESS things legally with Marion? I do recall she DID amend her will in 1996 to appoint Sally as executor. Imagine his disappointment! So when Marion sold her house, he might've felt he was closer to his ultimate boon than ever before, so might as well seal the deal and claim his prize by any illegal means necessary (making her disappear)?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
All excellent points :) I too think there is a difference between conmen and killers. But he does seem to have a pathological hate of women.

I keep reminding myself that he failed with all the witnesses we know of. And only succeeded with Marion. So it's hard to say what would've happened with the others, had he succeeded. And where are the other victims he did succeed with? Are they too embarrassed to talk. Or are they no longer alive?

MC escaped, not sure how, but he still seems infatuated with her, did he get her assets? (damage unknown)
AF
escaped as 3 people were aware of him and complained, now RB separates victims from family! didn't get her assets (plan unsuccessful)
GGB
escaped because she never sold her house or went with him overseas, didn't get her assets (plan unsuccessful)
JO
escaped because her cousin literally sent her home, didn't get her assets (plan unsuccessful)
What does 'success' look like for RB? Take everything from this victims? Or take everything and erase them?
I honestly have no clue.

Marion
got her to sell house and go overseas, separated her from family, got her assets (plan succeeded)

What does 'success' look like for RB? Take everything from this victims? Or take everything and erase them?
I honestly have no clue.[/QUOTE]

This is the 64000$ question ........

I am convinced as i think we all have established by now that he pulled this off somehow .....

We know a basic outline of the HOW he does it .....

We do not know WHAT happened when they returned ? Although i think it is more than probable Marion returned on that flight ...

We know HOW her money disappeared or at least that it did ....

We DO NOT KNOW if Marion is deceased or still alive or has since deceased .....

We need to find this out ...BUT HOW do we do this ?

The easy way is that he spills his guts ...

if he doesn't then what options do we have to trace her or track her down ?
 
I don’t think any other stations have covered it really because of 7’s interest in it. Such a shame really because there’s a wide cross-section of people who then aren’t hearing or seeing anything about it.

Wouldn't it be great if the New lady boss Karen Webb Australian Police commissioner made a media announcement about Marion. and all police social media pages posted pics of him
 
Today we heard a town we’d never heard… visited there in 99 to see his brother Desire David… it was during the time jo was in uk can anyone remember the town? Yes I’m trying to avoid scrolling through the pain of his testimony again and my ears bleeding from the sound of his BS

Didn't RB claim that he had not seen his brother for 30 years? IMO it was a lie so is knowing the town important?
 
I was feeling very sad and down after the inquest finished, well this part of it anyway.

After awhile I reminded myself that there is a lot more known now that we the public didn't know not that long ago.

I can only imagine how Sally must be feeling.
 
Yes that too.

Many blunders by him today


yes it shook me he said that in answer to C asking the question directly "when did you last see Marion Barter" and he launched straight into it and i was expecting to hear about the day the pilot in the uniform and Marion came to pick up the Tea chests ...and Cleverly skipped around it but i saw the looks in the courtroom and i was flabbergasted and expected C to pick him up on it but i just figured it was one of those THINGS he will come back too ..

He is very good this MR C
 
Some thoughts:

The only job you can prove this man ever held was with the gendarmerie due to the pension he is receiving from Belgium and I'm not convinced this is even true. I assume the Coroner can get his centrelink records.

I think the only job his wife ever had was probably in her parents coffee shop.

These two have been grifting off the Australian tax payer for decades. He on a DSP and and the wife on a carer pension. My conservative estimate of just his DSP payment alone, for 30 years is $780,000.

It's really shameful that he was allowed to get away with all the things he has done since the 70's. I would love to see this guy convicted then deported back to Belgium, they are welcome to have him back - I think Australia has done more than enough for him.

I would love to see him deported too after he is made to sell any assets he has and give them to the Australian Govt. If he did take Marion's money, he should also be made to pay Sally too. His children should inherit nothing as they have lived a good life as a result of their parents' fraudulent activities IMO.
 
He returned it when the complaint was made yes ?
Hence no wrong doing anyway once things are returned .

I suggest this is the catalyst to end his travels because now he is wanted by Belgium police for questioning ... I am thinking he cooled his heels big time when this incident caught up with him

Was it a forged receipt? LOL. I just don't trust this guy!
 
Casselden's posture and demeanour is that of a headmaster reprimanding a naughty school kid :D

I missed the full frontal to camera. What were they talking about that warranted such a display? So I can go back and find it...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm going to throw a new possibility of how they actually did first meet in Northern NSW or Gold Coast. He sells antiques and coins and clocks at the local Bangalow, Channon and Lismore car boot market. And he probably sold at Carrara market back in the day. These markets are very popular for Sunday outings. He probably targeted kind, vulnerable women at every market and preyed on people who wanted to get items valued. He is charming and dangerous remember.
 
Wouldn't it be great if the New lady boss Karen Webb Australian Police commissioner made a media announcement about Marion. and all police social media pages posted pics of him
Unfortunately authorities can't prematurely 'out' him, or even suggest, he is the culprit in Marion's disappearance. News (and podcast) can write stories and post images but wording has to be very careful. This is why all TLV fb pages had comments turned off.

This is to protect the integrity of a future criminal trial and so jurors can make an unbiased assessment. It needs to be fair and he can't be openly declared the perpetrator until a trial and outcome is finalised. If we didn't do this, RB could ask to throw out all potential trials due to prejudice and might never be convicted.

It's why everything we say here is prefaced with 'speculation' 'IMO' 'MOO' etc. Innocent until proven guilty and all that... Sometimes, the news (or the court) isn't even allowed to talk about previous convictions so as not to influence opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As always, thanks to everyone for this chat. I'm in the UK and have been catching up by reading through, as well as watching some highlights of the inquest recordings and speaking with a friend!

All of this information has been knocking around in my brain and some clusters of thought started emerging when I was in the shower this morning. Fundamentally, I've been asking myself - do I think this man has the information to answer the question of what happened to Marion? And, as I think we're all hoping, I think there's a good chance he does. So then my mind goes to - what do I actually think happened, even if we possibly have no hope of ever proving it, or compelling RB to tell us?

If he is responsible for her death, I see two competing storylines as the most likely. One: the serial conman killed her in cold blood, because that was always the plan. Two: he was pulling one of his regular cons and something went wrong. Either he realised he'd 'have to' kill her for some reason, or they fought and he killed her in the heat of the moment.

So then I start thinking, which do I find more likely? A criminologist would want to look at all the evidence on his past behaviour for clues. We likely don't have all of what the police/ lawyers have (yet) and obviously they themselves will never have everything. But, based on what we have heard, there's compelling evidence that this is what he did - he pulled these cons on women, for financial profit (though only a modest profit). More could come out, but I don't currently have a sense that he was motivated by sex or a pure love of violence. Which makes me tend to think scenario two is the more likely.

It leaves me with questions and uncertainties, though.

Do others see what (may have) happened with Marion and definitely did happen with the other two women we heard from as an extension/ escalation of an MO? Was he essentially 'doing the same thing' with these women as he did with his series of wives, but he realised he didn't have to marry them, he could just say he had intentions to? Or is there a difference in how he classified these women - i.e. wives (relationships motivated by something else) vs. women he conned (relationships motivated primarily by financial gain)? In terms of the timeline, it makes sense to be to see this as an extension or escalation of an MO. He moved on from marrying them to simply saying he intended to. But, I'm very aware that I'm not as up to date with the details of the case as others on here are.

Sorry if this has been answered before, but are RB’s other two ex wives still alive? I know one died young and I have a vague recollection another may have passed. It feels like it would be really important to hear from them, or speak with people who knew them at the time they were married to RB. Was his behaviour with them in any way similar to the behaviour he exhibited with the other women he conned?

Part of why I think these questions are important is that the evidence given by the two women he conned seems to suggest that he didn't have serious concerns about being caught. It was almost as if he thought confusion and shame about what had happened would be enough to stop them coming forward and pressing any charges? That pattern/ 'psychology' if you will, makes me think that if didn't ever plan to kill the two women we heard from. Sure, he had all the name changes, fake documents, travelling around etc., but he would've known that he couldn't possibly hope that quite surface level deception would be enough to stop him getting caught. But then, does Marion's case itself represent a further escalation of what he was doing? It does seem that he went to greater lengths to cover his tracks with Marion than the other two women we've heard from.

Oh, and one other thing. I've mentioned before that his demeanor reminded me of GSK, albeit superficially. Something that suddenly struck me today... Many here have commented on his general (******) attitude towards women, which might have been quite longstanding. It's widely believed that GSK was fixated on a past engagement he'd had with a woman ('B'). I could be way off track, but something in this story about MC reminds me of this. I don't have my head round the details of when RB and MC were in acquaintence, though, so I could be way off.

"It does seem that he went to greater lengths to cover his tracks with Marion than the other two women we've heard from."

This makes me think that he had to make sure that Marion met her demise. When they go over the places he visited and lived in the UK, it makes me suspect that they think that Marion may have met her demise there. Also Casselden was curious about those two days he thought RB could have remained in England after he put JO on the train. Did he visit where Marion was buried? Or did he go to see the hitman? The reason I say that is because if Marion died in England, RB or his wife could not have done it. He would have to have found a hitman to do it.

However, if Marion met her demise in Australia, RB and DH are my prime suspects especially when I heard when they bought and sold that car. Yes the car could have just been so that they could get around to the bank every day but also to do other things like hide a body then bury it. Then you sell the car and there is no trace to you (you hope).

ALL IMO
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately authorities can't prematurely 'out' him, or even suggest, he is the culprit in Marion's disappearance. News (and podcast) can write stories and post images but wording has to be very careful. This is why all TLV fb pages had comments turned off. This is to protect the integrity of a future criminal trial and so jurors can make an unbiased assessment. It needs to be fair and he can't be openly declared the perpetrator until a trial and outcome is finalised. If we didn't do this, RB can ask to throw out all potential trials due to prejudice. It's why everything we say here is prefaced with 'speculation' 'IMO' 'MOO' etc. Innocent until proven guilty and all that... Sometimes, the news isn't even allowed to talk about previous convictions so as not to influence opinion.


yes and thanks for the reminder because sometimes i forget to do that in the right places and i guess everyone else could be mindful of it too ..cheers
 
As always, thanks to everyone for this chat. I'm in the UK and have been catching up by reading through, as well as watching some highlights of the inquest recordings and speaking with a friend!

All of this information has been knocking around in my brain and some clusters of thought started emerging when I was in the shower this morning. Fundamentally, I've been asking myself - do I think this man has the information to answer the question of what happened to Marion? And, as I think we're all hoping, I think there's a good chance he does. So then my mind goes to - what do I actually think happened, even if we possibly have no hope of ever proving it, or compelling RB to tell us?

If he is responsible for her death, I see two competing storylines as the most likely. One: the serial conman killed her in cold blood, because that was always the plan. Two: he was pulling one of his regular cons and something went wrong. Either he realised he'd 'have to' kill her for some reason, or they fought and he killed her in the heat of the moment.

So then I start thinking, which do I find more likely? A criminologist would want to look at all the evidence on his past behaviour for clues. We likely don't have all of what the police/ lawyers have (yet) and obviously they themselves will never have everything. But, based on what we have heard, there's compelling evidence that this is what he did - he pulled these cons on women, for financial profit (though only a modest profit). More could come out, but I don't currently have a sense that he was motivated by sex or a pure love of violence. Which makes me tend to think scenario two is the more likely.

It leaves me with questions and uncertainties, though.

Do others see what (may have) happened with Marion and definitely did happen with the other two women we heard from as an extension/ escalation of an MO? Was he essentially 'doing the same thing' with these women as he did with his series of wives, but he realised he didn't have to marry them, he could just say he had intentions to? Or is there a difference in how he classified these women - i.e. wives (relationships motivated by something else) vs. women he conned (relationships motivated primarily by financial gain)? In terms of the timeline, it makes sense to be to see this as an extension or escalation of an MO. He moved on from marrying them to simply saying he intended to. But, I'm very aware that I'm not as up to date with the details of the case as others on here are.

Sorry if this has been answered before, but are RB’s other two ex wives still alive? I know one died young and I have a vague recollection another may have passed. It feels like it would be really important to hear from them, or speak with people who knew them at the time they were married to RB. Was his behaviour with them in any way similar to the behaviour he exhibited with the other women he conned?

Part of why I think these questions are important is that the evidence given by the two women he conned seems to suggest that he didn't have serious concerns about being caught. It was almost as if he thought confusion and shame about what had happened would be enough to stop them coming forward and pressing any charges? That pattern/ 'psychology' if you will, makes me think that if didn't ever plan to kill the two women we heard from. Sure, he had all the name changes, fake documents, travelling around etc., but he would've known that he couldn't possibly hope that quite surface level deception would be enough to stop him getting caught. But then, does Marion's case itself represent a further escalation of what he was doing? It does seem that he went to greater lengths to cover his tracks with Marion than the other two women we've heard from.

Oh, and one other thing. I've mentioned before that his demeanor reminded me of GSK, albeit superficially. Something that suddenly struck me today... Many here have commented on his general (******) attitude towards women, which might have been quite longstanding. It's widely believed that GSK was fixated on a past engagement he'd had with a woman ('B'). I could be way off track, but something in this story about MC reminds me of this. I don't have my head round the details of when RB and MC were in acquaintence, though, so I could be way off.

Who is GSK?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
166
Guests online
1,684
Total visitors
1,850

Forum statistics

Threads
602,517
Messages
18,141,737
Members
231,419
Latest member
FlyingHorses4
Back
Top