Australia Australia - Marion Barter, 51, missing after trip to UK, Jun 1997 #4

[Deleted member 249471]

Two of Marion's sisters, Deirdre and Bronwen, are cooperating with the investigation and are witnesses at the inquest, providing info on who Marion was as a person, the conversations they had with Marion about her reasons and intentions for the trip, and the correspondence and gifts they received from Marion while in England.

Also witnesses:

• Janis - a friend of Marion's who says she spoke of travelling for around a year and wanted to go on the Orient Express
• Carrie - a teacher at TSS at the same time as Marion.

In blue are links to what they've said in the past.

On TLV facebook page, the podcast team say they have so much new evidence that they're going to make several more episodes, not just the two they originally planned.

 

[Meligator]

I’m not from Australia so still a bit confused about the process. From the podcast, there is description of a “brief of evidence,” which Sally is unable to share contents beyond her attorneys etc. But are details from the inquest also private? Here & some news articles provide some info about inquest—but will public have access to transcripts?

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Good question, it is confusing.

Inquests are public and anything said in them is public info. The public can attend the inquest in person to watch. Occasionally, the Coroner will specifically ask for something during the inquest to not be made public.

However, the Brief of Evidence is purely private. It's basically the handbook the inquest is working off. It's put together by the Coroner, coronial lawyers, the police assisting Coroner, and police from current and ongoing investigation.

This may be one of the reason's it's private - so as not to compromise any aspect of the ongoing investigation, separate from inquest. But it's also private because it's not for the public to scrutinise at this point. It needs due process.

Sally and her lawyer get to see it before the inquest because they need to prepare their case and questions. It's a lot like how other courts have to share all the evidence so both parties can talk about the same things, and there shouldn't be any surprises.

At the end of the inquest, the Coroner posts their 'Findings' on the Coroner's website. That is available to everyone and is a really good summary of the case and how the Coroner came to their conclusion.

After the inquest is complete, other family and media can request the case file. They will only get the parts of it that are relevant to their needs. Again, so ongoing investigations aren't compromised, but also to provide some privacy to the victim's family and whoever else was involved.

But generally no, the public doesn't have access to transcripts. The public relies on visiting the inquest in person, statements by police and media, and the Findings.

When the podcast say they have new evidence, this just means what they've seen and heard during the inquest. Sally will be able to talk about those things.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Today’s article by Alison Sandy and Damien Haffenden

There’s a tiny bit of new info.

Witness: Vicki Sidie - Marion’s friend since 1973

“Marion loved her antiques more than anyone or anything in her life. I believe wherever they ended up will be a clue as to what happened to her.”

Vicki recalls how Marion took Stuart Brown’s name before they married, which she discovered while Marion was filling out forms.

She wrote Marion Warren, then put her maiden name Wilson, and wrote ‘now known as Brown’. Marion said you can just change your name by deed poll.

Marion also took the surname Barter when she married her third husband Ray Barter.

They divorced in 1990 and she kept that name until she changed it by deed poll to Florabella Natalia Marion Remakel in May 1997.

 

[vivienbee]

The inquest will also hear about all the postcards, letters and phone calls Marion made from her travels.

The following is conjecture, not words from the inquest:

- A she was leaving Australia via South Korea, she may have stopped in Japan as per the Narita stationery.

- In a letter to Sally, she said she stored some of her 4 suitcases at Heathrow as they would not fit in the car she hired.

- Her postmarked letters from London, and then through south east of England (Brighton, Kent, Sussex Coast) may indicate she was making her way to Luxembourg via the Eurotunnel.​

The tunnel connects Folkestone (Kent) with Coquelles (France). From Coquelles, it's just a four hour drive to Luxembourg.

Perhaps this is why she cancelled her trip on the Orient Express? She may have preferred to cross the English Channel on a fun and exotic train ride, but whoever she was with preferred to do it privately by car, so as not to have so many witnesses?

The situation with the suitcases always interested me. If she did actually leave some of them at Heathrow, presumably they were items that she didn't need urgently, in which case why take them at all? For someone intending to travel around Europe, it seems odd that you would pack a cumbersome amount of items. Also, if it was not actually Marion who travelled back on her passport, what happened to her luggage? Had she picked it up by the point and the perpetrator simply disposed of 4 large suitcases somehow without raising any suspicion?
Was the luggage left unclaimed at the airport? I'm just firing out thoughts but I have so many questions on this one detail alone.
Surely, if she travelled with her friend in her car to the bus stop and was able to fit the suitcases in the car on that occasion, even a smaller hire car with only one person in it would provide more than enough room for them?
If anyone has any thoughts/clarification on this please let me know.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

If she really did intend not to come back to Australia, I could see why she might have wanted to take as much luggage as she could with her.

The situation with the suitcases always interested me. If she did actually leave some of them at Heathrow, presumably they were items that she didn't need urgently, in which case why take them at all?

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

Mr Rs mothers maiden name shown on his birth record was Jungblut. Only one marriage on record (over hundreds of years) has occurred in the UK with the brides surname as Jungblut. That marriage took place on the 7 July 1997 at Weybridge Registry Office a stones throw from Heathrow Airport. Just a massive coincidence?

 

[TootsieFootsie]

But they weren't elderly when Marion vanished. I would have thought they would be concerned at never hearing from her again.

Perhaps they will. Having said that, Marion’s sisters are elderly ladies. They have tried to grieve and move on in their own way

 

[Meligator]

Thanks. Super helpful info!

Good question, it is confusing.

Inquests are public and anything said in them is public info. The public can attend the inquest in person to watch. Occasionally, the Coroner will specifically ask for something during the inquest to not be made public.

However, the Brief of Evidence is purely private. It's basically the handbook the inquest is working off. It's put together by the Coroner, coronial lawyers, the police assisting Coroner, and police from current and ongoing investigation.

This may be one of the reason's it's private - so as not to compromise any aspect of the ongoing investigation, separate from inquest. But it's also private because it's not for the public to scrutinise at this point. It needs due process.

Sally and her lawyer get to see it before the inquest because they need to prepare their case and questions. It's a lot like how other courts have to share all the evidence so both parties can talk about the same things, and there shouldn't be any surprises.

At the end of the inquest, the Coroner posts their 'Findings' on the Coroner's website. That is available to everyone and is a really good summary of the case and how the Coroner came to their conclusion.

After the inquest is complete, other family and media can request the case file. They will only get the parts of it that are relevant to their needs. Again, so ongoing investigations aren't compromised, but also to provide some privacy to the victim's family and whoever else was involved.

But generally no, the public doesn't have access to transcripts. The public relies on visiting the inquest in person, statements by police and media, and the Findings.

When the podcast say they have new evidence, this just means what they've seen and heard during the inquest. Sally will be able to talk about those things.

 

[vivienbee]

If she really did intend not to come back to Australia, I could see why she might have wanted to take as much luggage as she could with her.

Yes, absolutely! I completely agree that if she didn't intend to come back that makes sense.

 

[Laughing]

Mr Rs mothers maiden name shown on his birth record was Jungblut. Only one marriage on record (over hundreds of years) has occurred in the UK with the brides surname as Jungblut. That marriage took place on the 7 July 1997 at Weybridge Registry Office a stones throw from Heathrow Airport. Just a massive coincidence?

Good find, good find!!!

Groom's name? Who were the witnesses, the officiant??? What else does the record include?

 

[TootsieFootsie]

I noticed there was a detective Jungblut in the Sallie-Anne Huckstep Case.

Sallie-Anne Huckstepp - Wikipedia

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Enquiring minds want to know.

Groom's name? Who were the witnesses, the officiant??? What else does the record include?

 

[StarrChance]

Mr Rs mothers maiden name shown on his birth record was Jungblut. Only one marriage on record (over hundreds of years) has occurred in the UK with the brides surname as Jungblut. That marriage took place on the 7 July 1997 at Weybridge Registry Office a stones throw from Heathrow Airport. Just a massive coincidence?

Interesting, although Ancestry has 3 other females with maiden name Jungblut married in England between 1913 and 1960.
I can’t find any other trace of Heide in all collections atm. The spouse Wolfgang A B Engelken is also difficult to locate, could only find some German records between 1969 and 1980 under Wolfgang Engelke which may or may not be the same person.
It looks like the marriage certificate can be ordered though.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Sally Leydon appeals for information into 1997 disappearance of her mother, Marion Barter

 

[sunnybree]

Sorry, double post.

 

[sunnybree]

If she really did intend not to come back to Australia, I could see why she might have wanted to take as much luggage as she could with her.

I agree with you, Tootsie. I think the amount of luggage possibly indicates she did not intend to return so soon, if at all. So I wonder what happened there. If she was traveling with someone she saw as a romantic partner (with the intention of marrying him), could her return have been instigated because she could not access all of her accounts from overseas.

The other thing that has kind of stuck with me is the comment from a friend that Marion was struggling to get all her luggage on the bus at Southport. I can’t quite remember - did the friend also say she had offered to drive Marion directly to the airport but Marion declined? Because if so, I find that interesting. I’ve done my share of travel and if I had that much luggage to sort out I would ask someone to drive me there because otherwise it would be such a hassle. Was there a reason she did not want a friend (or even Sally) to take her to the airport?

But they weren't elderly when Marion vanished. I would have thought they would be concerned at never hearing from her again.

Maybe they were concerned in the immediate aftermath. Jack Wilson, Marion’s father, was not satisfied with the initial outcome and that is why he contacted the Salvation Army. He was told she was confirmed to be back in Australia (although we now know that this was not confirmed by a satisfactory investigation, Jack did not know that and likely Marion’s sisters did not know that). So, they believe she is back and not wanting contact, and perhaps they go through their stages of grief, including anger and blame and sadness, and finally they just reach acceptance because to do otherwise may only prolong the pain. They are not the only ones in such a situation to respond like this. The Dawson case also featured a mother who believed her daughter had “just left” and expressed this view publicly for years, which doubtless caused her immense pain, but it did not mean she did not care. She had her reasons for needing to believe her daughter was alive somewhere. Perhaps Marion’s sisters are no different.

Sally has grieved differently, and finally it seems her concerns are validated. Perhaps that will heal the rift in the family, perhaps not. Families are messy and complicated. If Marion did not leave her family of her free will, then all of her family members are victims.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Yes I "think" the friend did offer.
My guess is that she was travelling with someone that she didn't want anyone she knew finding out about.

Or maybe she wasn't flying to where she said she was.

The other thing that has kind of stuck with me is the comment from a friend that Marion was struggling to get all her luggage on the bus at Southport. I can’t quite remember - did the friend also say she had offered to drive Marion directly to the airport but Marion declined? Because if so, I find that interesting. I’ve done my share of travel and if I had that much luggage to sort out I would ask someone to drive me there because otherwise it would be such a hassle. Was there a reason she did not want a friend (or even Sally) to take her to the airport?

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Excellent find Lord Peter

I have long suspected the surname Jungblut might be associated with the case and the potential name the other person is travelling on. So I'm pleased you found this record.

From my notes, Marion's location is unknown/unaccounted for from 8 July until 1 August.

Possibly the last known postcard Marions's family received was postmarked 7 July from Hastings, just and hour and a half drive from the Weybridge Registry Office you mentioned.

Mr Rs mothers maiden name shown on his birth record was Jungblut. Only one marriage on record (over hundreds of years) has occurred in the UK with the brides surname as Jungblut. That marriage took place on the 7 July 1997 at Weybridge Registry Office a stones throw from Heathrow Airport. Just a massive coincidence?

 

[StarrChance]

Excellent find Lord Peter

I have long suspected the surname Jungblut might be associated with the case and the potential name the other person is travelling on. So I'm pleased you found this record.

From my notes, Marion's location is unknown/unaccounted for from 8 July until 1 August.

Possibly the last known postcard Marions's family received was postmarked 7 July from Hastings, just and hour and a half drive from the Weybridge Registry Office you mentioned.

I have bit the bullet and ordered the certificate , just letting people know to save them the expense of more than one person ordering. It’s a 30 to 35 day wait though.