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

[Meligator]

I think one untapped lead is Marion’s artwork. If she sold the paintings to liquidate her assets, then someone should have those paintings. If she left her shipping container untouched—the paintings would have eventually been sold and someone would have them. In fact, unless Marion still has the art (or someone destroyed/hid it), then the location of the artwork should be known to someone.

 

[Mel 1303]

It probably means nothing, but I have been thinking this morning about Marion's plans, had starting over not been on her agenda. What was her plan? Sally talks of Marion's plans to downsize, to buy a unit on Main Beach. Then what? She had quit her job on the gold coast, and was only early 50's. There was some talk of her teaching in Europe (for example in her resignation letter to TSS), however with only her tourist visa she couldn't work- she knew she couldn't even take her resume to inquire about work. The only solid plan she seemed to have was to go on the orient express- then she tells Sally she had postponed the trip, for the sake of little old ladies in Tunbridge Wells. Why???? Why tell Sally she had postponed the trip? Obviously, if she was on route to Australia, she couldn't go on the Orient Express, but why tell Sally then? Unless she thought that maybe that was somewhere she could be tracked, if no one had heard from her in a while?

 

[Garyb]

I think one untapped lead is Marion’s artwork. If she sold the paintings to liquidate her assets, then someone should have those paintings. If she left her shipping container untouched—the paintings would have eventually been sold and someone would have them. In fact, unless Marion still has the art (or someone destroyed/hid it), then the location of the artwork should be known to someone.

Remember they were numbered prints not originals so much harder to trace. Sally went down this track and found that without the number it was very hard to identify them.

 

[Intriguedbyintrigue]

I think at the time Sally was probably overwhelmed and didn't know what to do [/QUOTE]

Not knocking Sally at all. I too would be overwhelmed and would probably blindly trust the authorities are doing everything they can.

What frustrates me is that Marion was dismissed, most likely, for being a woman over a certain age who was thrice divorced. Ironically, it is precisely these qualities that made her prime prey.[/QUOTE]

Marions disappearance was not discounted by police. She gave a clear indication (as is her right) that she wanted a new life with no contact with her family. The actions of police would have been exactly the same had Marion been an unmarried spinster, in her 20's or male

 

[Mel 1303]

Not knocking Sally at all. I too would be overwhelmed and would probably blindly trust the authorities are doing everything they can.

What frustrates me is that Marion was dismissed, most likely, for being a woman over a certain age who was thrice divorced. Ironically, it is precisely these qualities that made her prime prey.

Although it doesn't sound like it at times, Marion wasn't dismissed. The police did investigate. It was this first investigation that found the colonial account at Ashmore, which is where she was identified by a person in authority, as per police procedure. Marion indicated to the bank employee, the person in authority, that she did not want contact with her family. The bank confirmed identity. Thus, Marion was deemed legally to be located. To dig any further into Marions life would have been police harassment, and a breach of Marion's legal rights. For Sally's sake, I do wish it had been a police officer, instead of the bank employee, who had identified Marion.

 

[Itsapuzzle]

This is the quote from Conversations 17 about the magazine tip - have left out off topic conversation to reduce quote.
"… a couple of weeks ago I got a message through the anonymous tip site www.theladyvanishes.org …… from a listener in Los Angeles. Now, they discovered something in the Public Library there which I won't reveal here because we're running this clue down, but it's a - it's an extraordinary clue and - and the last place you would think to look and find something like this. I mean, it's purely because someone there has been listening to the podcast, is intrigued by the story, has decided to do a bit of ferreting around in their own backyard and they've come up with something that frankly we would never have come across. I doubt that this information, this particular publication is - exists anywhere in Australia … so, it really is that - that wide reach of the podcast that unique format of the podcast where people can just plug it in, listen and think 'okay, I might go and have a look at that when I'm next in the library', and come across something remarkable."

This is the Los Angeles Library search link, searches 100 branches ..... whoops, I previously thought there were only 29 libraries in LA, not so, yikes .....
LS2 PAC

PS: If I did happen to get lucky and find the answer I'll still keep it a secret, won't put it up here on the thread, but will let you regulars/sleuthers here know in private message if you're interested ... err, not that I think I'll find it, but there it is.

 

[Itsapuzzle]

It probably means nothing, but I have been thinking this morning about Marion's plans, had starting over not been on her agenda. What was her plan? Sally talks of Marion's plans to downsize, to buy a unit on Main Beach. Then what? She had quit her job on the gold coast, and was only early 50's. There was some talk of her teaching in Europe (for example in her resignation letter to TSS), however with only her tourist visa she couldn't work- she knew she couldn't even take her resume to inquire about work. The only solid plan she seemed to have was to go on the orient express- then she tells Sally she had postponed the trip, for the sake of little old ladies in Tunbridge Wells. Why???? Why tell Sally she had postponed the trip? Obviously, if she was on route to Australia, she couldn't go on the Orient Express, but why tell Sally then? Unless she thought that maybe that was somewhere she could be tracked, if no one had heard from her in a while?

That's a good point, yes, why tell Sally about postponing the Orient Express .... very curious, could have just said that she went on it, or was going on it, why say cancel .... h'mm, interesting point Mel 1303, something to think about

 

[TootsieFootsie]

I was thinking that if the woman going to the bank and withdrawing money was not the real Marion, then of course she would not want to have anything to do with the family or friends of the woman whose identity she had taken over.

Just a thought and of course it's been awhile since I listened back to all the episodes so it's more than likely I've forgotten the part where it proved it really was Marion going to the bank and taking her money out.

 

[KiwiNZ]

I was thinking that if the woman going to the bank and withdrawing money was not the real Marion, then of course she would not want to have anything to do with the family or friends of the woman whose identity she had taken over.

Just a thought and of course it's been awhile since I listened back to all the episodes so it's more than likely I've forgotten the part where it proved it really was Marion going to the bank and taking her money out.

Probally to late to retrieve now but the signature for the withdrawals would have been useful in establishing if it was Marion. We did not know if it was her on the flight back to Aus but I think the arrival card handwriting proves it was, for me anyway.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

I thought police needed to sight a missing person in order to deem them found and close the file?

In this case, there's no record of them sighting Marion. They relied on hearsay and just took the bank's word rather than following up and sighting her themselves. So yes, they dismissed her.

It kinda looks as though they assumed she would show up. When she didn't turn up 10 years after going missing, the file was finally looked at and officially classified a missing person's case and put on the NSW missing person's register. This was done because it was clear they had not sighted her nor had it been properly investigated... ie, they realised they dismissed her 10 years ago.

Then when Gary (bless him) showed Sally the documents in an effort to suggest she let it go and move on, is another example of Marion (and Sally) being dismissed.

Even more evidence to suggest they hadn't sighted her, is that police insist the case was never closed. So... if case was never closed... means they never saw her... yet they didn't believe it was worth taking seriously until now... equals they dismissed it over and over again.

I'm not trying to argue. It's a mute point now and not a thing I want to waste time on. I truly AM frustrated that we've lost so much evidence because Marion was dismissed as a man crazy runaway who would eventually show up. I just wanted to clarify I wasn't having a go at Sally. We do and should be able to rely on our authorities.

I'm mostly inclined to think police do a good job and the best they can. This case is obviously a tricky one that has international elements, which are the hardest to get authorities involved in due to jurisdictions and limited resources. I feel the perpetrator knew this. All the reasons why police dismissed Marion is exactly why she was targeted. I feel this would never have happened had the perpetrator believed police would act on it.

 

[Intriguedbyintrigue]

Probally to late to retrieve now but the signature for the withdrawals would have been useful in establishing if it was Marion. We did not know if it was her on the flight back to Aus but I think the arrival card handwriting proves it was, for me anyway.

It may have been card and pin withdrawal (no signature). If they were voucher (signature) withdrawals I dont know how long the vouchers are generally stored for but in Marion's case there would be copies of those particular vouchers retained with the documentation for the various enquiries made to the bank (Sally disputing the transactions, the police, and the red cross).

 

[Garyb]

How many times does it need to be pointed out that in the original police inquiry they did exactly what they are required to do.
They tracked down the Colonial bank link and established via the bank security officer (an authorised person under law) that it was infact Marion and she didn't want to be contacted.

 

[sunnynz]

That's a good point, yes, why tell Sally about postponing the Orient Express .... very curious, could have just said that she went on it, or was going on it, why say cancel .... h'mm, interesting point Mel 1303, something to think about

She may well have fully intended to go on the orient express when she returned to Europe after a brief trip back to Aus to withdraw money. And then potentially met with foul play before she got the chance to leave the country again.
Just speculation.

 

[JLZ]

How many times does it need to be pointed out that in the original police inquiry they did exactly what they are required to do.
They tracked down the Colonial bank link and established via the bank security officer (an authorised person under law) that it was infact Marion and she didn't want to be contacted.

Was it established that the bank security officer sighted Marion?

 

[Intriguedbyintrigue]

I thought police needed to sight a missing person in order to deem them found and close the file?

In this case, there's no record of them sighting Marion. They relied on hearsay and just took the bank's word rather than following up and sighting her themselves. So yes, they dismissed her.

It kinda looks as though they assumed she would show up. When she didn't turn up 10 years after going missing, the file was finally looked at and officially classified a missing person's case and put on the NSW missing person's register. This was done because it was clear they had not sighted her nor had it been properly investigated... ie, they realised they dismissed her 10 years ago.

Then when Gary (bless him) showed Sally the documents in an effort to suggest she let it go and move on, is another example of Marion (and Sally) being dismissed.

Even more evidence to suggest they hadn't sighted her, is that police insist the case was never closed. So... if case was never closed... means they never saw her... yet they didn't believe it was worth taking seriously until now... equals they dismissed it over and over again.

I'm not trying to argue. It's a mute point now and not a thing I want to waste time on. I truly AM frustrated that we've lost so much evidence because Marion was dismissed as a man crazy runaway who would eventually show up. I just wanted to clarify I wasn't having a go at Sally. We do and should be able to rely on our authorities.

I'm mostly inclined to think police do a good job and the best they can. This case is obviously a tricky one that has international elements, which are the hardest to get authorities involved in due to jurisdictions and limited resources. I feel the perpetrator knew this. All the reasons why police dismissed Marion is exactly why she was targeted. I feel this would never have happened had the perpetrator believed police would act on it.

Police dont need to physically sight someone. Bank identification isnt hersay its considered gold-standard. Police can legally rely on bank identification.

Once it was established Marion had chosen to disappear and wanted no contact (or details shared) with her family there is little more police can do, it is then up to Marion to make contact with her family when and if she chooses to do so. The police cant keep checking in with a person to see if theyve changed their mind, because that could constitute harassment.

Its hard not to lament what wasnt done I agree but from what Marion's sister said the idea of Marion wanting to start afresh wasnt a completely unbelievable scenario. If you look at the timeline, after the police advise Marion was located and didnt want contact (1997) police case closed. The family go to red cross a few months later and get a response confirming what the police said. The family wait 5 years after which they renew their search (again through red-cross) they get a response back in 2006. In 2007 Sally goes back to police (AFP missing persons) and if you look at the NCAT documents there are several documents (fully redacted) from 3 different banks dated 2007. We dont know what is in these documents but if the banking records showed activity then this would explain why Marion was pulled as the face of missing persons week.

Police didn't ignore/dismiss Marion. There was a resolution to the initial enquiry and when Sally contacted missing persons in 2007 they actioned it and the case has been open ever since (with periods of inactivity).

 

[Deleted member 249471]

How many times does it need to be pointed out that in the original police inquiry they did exactly what they are required to do.
They tracked down the Colonial bank link and established via the bank security officer (an authorised person under law) that it was infact Marion and she didn't want to be contacted.

If so, why was case kept open? And then later upgraded to an oficial missing person. And then put on state register? And now put on national register?

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Police dont need to physically sight someone. Bank identification isnt hersay its considered gold-standard. Police can legally rely on bank identification.

Once it was established Marion had chosen to disappear and wanted no contact (or details shared) with her family there is little more police can do, it is then up to Marion to make contact with her family when and if she chooses to do so. The police cant keep checking in with a person to see if theyve changed their mind, because that could constitute harassment.

Its hard not to lament what wasnt done I agree but from what Marion's sister said the idea of Marion wanting to start afresh wasnt a completely unbelievable scenario. If you look at the timeline, after the police advise Marion was located and didnt want contact (1997) police case closed. The family go to red cross a few months later and get a response confirming what the police said. The family wait 5 years after which they renew their search (again through red-cross) they get a response back in 2006. In 2007 Sally goes back to police (AFP missing persons) and if you look at the NCAT documents there are several documents (fully redacted) from 3 different banks dated 2007. We dont know what is in these documents but if the banking records showed activity then this would explain why Marion was pulled as the face of missing persons week.

Police didn't ignore/dismiss Marion. There was a resolution to the initial enquiry and when Sally contacted missing persons in 2007 they actioned it and the case has been open ever since (with periods of inactivity).

Cool. Why wasn't case closed / solved then?

 

[Intriguedbyintrigue]

Was it established that the bank security officer sighted Marion?

No it hasnt been established if the contact with the bank security officer was in person. From my experience I would say it was in person because in those days you had to sign an account closure form in order to close an account. Also the info from red cross said she closed the account and withdrew the balance so it suggests she was there to collect the funds.
Either way (sighted or not) bank identification is sufficient.

 

[JLZ]

How many times does it need to be pointed out that in the original police inquiry they did exactly what they are required to do.
They tracked down the Colonial bank link and established via the bank security officer (an authorised person under law) that it was infact Marion and she didn't want to be contacted.

I remember that being pointed out but I don't remember the source of the information. Are we taking someone's say-so or has there been a link to an official manual for instance? I would like to see the exact wording.

 

[Intriguedbyintrigue]

Cool. Why wasn't case closed / solved then?

It was in 1997. Marion was found to be missing of her own volition.
From 2007 onwards we have no access to information to know if Marion was located. But we do know as of 2019 Marion can no longer be located through regular missing persons enquiries and this is why it has been moved to homicide.