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

[Mjjj14]

It's specifically a letter discussed at great length on podcast and inquest. The letter sent to Marion's dad from Salvos says that they spoke to 'Police missing persons' who claimed they spoke to 'Security at Colonial', who told them it was definitely Marion who withdrew $80,000 on 5 Oct 1990, and she spoke of 'starting a new life'. But during the inquest, Colonial said that they never had a securities officer.

Also, it was the inconsistency of the date provided in letter, 5 Oct 1990, that made Sally and her dad concerned that it wasn't properly investigated, and again, wonder if anyone had actually seen Marion.

This prompted Sally to request that Salvos investigate again, starting from scratch. They did, and eventually apologised and admitted that they never physically sighted Marion nor can they confirm if Marion truly made the statements in their original letter.

As we now know, the date of the Ashmore withdrawal was 15 Oct 1997. So Salvos and Police passed on that information incorrectly too.

I'd like to clarify another question I saw floating around no one was able to answer.

There is speculation that the Salvation Army said that police/bank/Marion said “you can stop looking for me in Byron Bay as I’m far, far away and you can tell Sally that I’m annoyed with her for not putting any money in my account after selling the car”.

Sally believes what happened was this: she and her grandad had several conversations about what to do with the sale of the car money as they didn’t want to put it in Marion’s account if it was only going to be drained by a thief. They also discussed what the Salvos letter said about Marion 'wanting to start a new life', and if so, would she get angry if the car sale money wasn't deposited? In the end they together decided to hold onto the money until they saw Marion again in person, because they believed they would

Sally thinks this conversation was a confused by her sick grandfather who was devastated about the situation and dying of cancer at the time. She believes he mixed up the conversation thinking it had been Salvos who said it too, like the other things. When it was, in fact, his own painful concern.

The Salvation Army has since confirmed that they never give a family that much personal detail about a missing person. Its’ their policy to give basics only such as not found or found safe and well.

So basically, it never happened. Hope that makes sense.

I thought it was only the letter but I wasn’t sure if there was any other confirmation of this.

With all due respect to her, I found Betty Brown’s evidence confusing with reference to QLD police rather than NSW police. Unfortunately the salvos aspect of this case just creates confusion especially in regards to what was said in 1998. Who knows who spoke to who at this point.

The letter from salvos definitely said 15 October 1990 and the podcast suspected that the 1990 was a typo, Alison commented that she was unsure how because 0 and 7 aren’t close on a keyboard. I didn’t think it had ever been confirmed by anyone at a later date though (as bank records weren’t available even when Gary Sheehan took over).

It would make sense if Jack Wilson perhaps was mistaken by the car comment conversation, however if Marion cancelled her racq policy, who knows. Cancelling that policy does make her seem pressed by the car issue.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Yes! That is another aspect to it - Salvos NEVER spoke to Byron Bay police. They spoke to a contact at QLD Police who must have reached out to Byron Bay. It's yet another example of how this was a game of 'telephone' and it's hard to pinpoint who said what, and who is to be held accountable for the misinformation and lies.

 

[poppypopcorn]

They don't keep them for long, apparently. HMRC in the UK tells airlines to keep passenger records for 6 years for tax purposes. Saw something that US only says to keep them 3 months. In most of Europe, data protection rules you can't just keep personal info like names and passport numbers just because. 7 years is usually the upper limit. 20 odd years would be exceptional. If however someone had requested those specific passenger lists in late 90s or early 2000s, they may have been kept.

 

[Mjjj14]

They don't keep them for long, apparently. HMRC in the UK tells airlines to keep passenger records for 6 years for tax purposes. Saw something that US only says to keep them 3 months. In most of Europe, data protection rules you can't just keep personal info like names and passport numbers just because. 7 years is usually the upper limit. 20 odd years would be exceptional. If however someone had requested those specific passenger lists in late 90s or early 2000s, they may have been kept.

I really know nothing about the Department of Immigration (in Australia or anywhere else) but would they keep a record of everyone’s entries and departures? Wouldn’t that be something that would need to be retained permanently? I wonder how their system works in respect to being able to search who left the country on a certain day on a certain vessel? Perhaps that could be a way to track who was on the same flight/s at least.

 

[poppypopcorn]

I know that Ancestry for example has records of passenger manifests for ships and aircraft from the 19th century right up to the 1960s.

 

[Mjjj14]

Also sorry to double post but could anyone clarify what the police officers evidence was in relation to his searches for Marion’s drivers licence? He said he searched both NSW and QLD and found no licence. I wasn’t sure if he meant in for the relevant time period (97 era) or when he became involved in the case. I will re-listen to part 2 of the inquest later to see if I can make sense of it a second time round.

 

[Meligator]

I’m sure this is so hard on Sally, but hopefully further investigation helps validate what she has always expressed—that the investigation was far from sufficient. I’m so glad that they are taking her concerns more seriously. These is no good outcome for Sally, but the idea that her mother could have been the victim of foul play and have no one investigate it properly just seems so unjust to Marion as a human being. Sally may never know the truth, but just knowing that the police made solid investigative efforts will hopefully offer some comfort.

alisonsandy
@alisonsandy

Surprise outcome to the inquest into Marion Barter with Senior Counsel for the Coroner announcing it will reconvene for 5 days in February 2022 to give
@nswpolice
time to chase up other leads from our podcast and interview Fernand Remakel. Watch
@7NewsAustralia
at 6 for details.

2:53 PM · Jul 2, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

Mark Leveson replied and said it’s not a surprise and it’s only fair to Marion to source as much info as possible. He’s such a gem. I’m so glad him and Faye are supporting Sally.

 

[PhilOlivettifan]

Also Marion's friend said she had mention deed poll as a way of changing your name. Her friend also didn't think it would be unusually for her to miss Sally's wedding if she had something she though was more important too her.

I am finding it hard to get a real understanding of Marion since a lot of people paint her as someone whom was quite self absorbed, and others don't

There are certainly a lot of contradictions about Marion's personality.

Notable examples: concerning the podcast where her ex-husband says that when he went to see her to collect Owen she was very cold and cruel towards Owen. That flies in the face of the "caring teacher" that is spoken of. A friend at the inquest said that if she had something better to do, she would probably miss Sally's wedding and at the time she was in the running for - and subsequently won - "teacher of the year", her own classroom assistant was reporting her for her behaviour towards her students.

I think she was self-absorbed but also very complex with much going on below the surface. She may have been more lonely and depressed than she let on to those around her.

 

[PhilOlivettifan]

Yep it’s bizarre. The lack of media coverage is still bothering me too. Is it possible there were things that they weren’t allowed to report on? Maybe that’s where all the missing information is? Gosh I hope so, but I don’t really know how it all works.

Also, I thought that inquests only happen when everything else has been exhausted and there is nothing to go on. This feels like such an incomplete investigation in regards to the new leads that the podcast brought up. Surely they could have waited until all the possible new leads were exhausted before commencing an inquest?

I can comment on the lack of wider reporting. Because the podcast is made by Channel 7, other outlets don't want to be seen giving them a free leg-up on their podcast. Also, the revelations have been few and far between. Any progress on the case is obscure yet. I think a few things have been revealing but that is because I am a close observer. There are no headlines yet. That's why you are not seeing it widely. The Daily Mail have had a report or two on it.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Don't fret. Sally could only ask for her mother's passenger cards through FOI. But Police can ask for ALL the passenger cards from the days Marion travelled Passenger cards have passport numbers on them. No doubt police have a lot more than they can tell the public and media about.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

The problem with the news reporting Marion's case is that media generally work from Police statements, press releases and news conferences. To date, there has only been one statement, released with the notice of reward which was only made after the first week of the inquest. Now that a statement has been made, the media could report on it more, but...

... The only real way to do that, is to listen to the entire podcast which:
1. no journo has had time to do during these final days of the inquest
2. it goes on a million tangents and possibilities, so media have no real way of summarising it in a concise story to fit into a short column in the paper or tv spot
3. journos would have to chose which version of the story to tell which is against the unbiased approach news reporters are supposed to take.

Even if the media interviewed Sally, she's been unable to pick a consistent version of events. That's no shade on Sally, it's just that Marion's story is complex and confusing.

The podcast is great for us long term listeners (even we get super lost), but it's pretty poor as a reliable source of information for news outlets to re report from. Just look at every 7 News article written about Marion - each one has a different perspective and is often inconsistent. And that is from the writers of the podcast!

If you were a news reporter picking up the case for the first time, how would you report it? Which version of events would you chose? Interesting question, isn't it

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

Hi Lord Peter,

Where did you read the info about the latest postcard being from Winchelsea? I think I’ve missed something. Do we know the date on this one? Was Jack Wilson still right in saying that the last postcard received was from Tunbridge on 30 Aug? Or was this postcard of Winchelsea just a photo of Winchelsea and still sent from Tunbridge?

Also Tunbridge is the smaller town and Tunbridge Wells is slightly larger right? It makes it even more weird that the 30 August postcard was sent from Tunbridge because it’s not a big place at all.

Quote from the author on the Facebook page;
the postmark was from Tonbridge and the postcard was from Strand Gate UK. We’ll post a picture of the new postcard as soon as we have it and are allowed to do so.

Apparently it’s a postcard of Strand Gate in Winchelsea. From memory this isn’t really a tourist attraction but something you would pass by/through if going from Hastings to Rye along the East Sussex coast.

The postcard was postmarked in Tonbridge (who I think were the Royal Mail sorting office for Tunbridge Wells) reaffirming Marion was based in Tunbridge Wells 5 miles away.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

People on TLV fb are really losing their minds over the Inquest being delayed until Feb in order for investigation to dig deeper. I understand the lack of investigation in the past was disgraceful, but things are very different now.

Just putting it out there that the Inquest is not a criminal trial. The Coroner's priority is to determine the circumstances surrounding Marion's disappearance, to make a finding on whether they think she is deceased or not, and to improve public safety and processes. That's it.

A lot of things discussed in the podcast were never going to be part of the Inquest, because it's not the purpose of a Coroner. They're not under any obligation to reveal every piece of evidence so that it can be publicly inspected. In fact, it's detrimental to the ongoing case.

Because separate to the Inquest, there's still an active investigation by the Unsolved Homicide Squad. Their priority is finding who did it and getting charges laid.

I did mention earlier, that if there's new evidence or person's of interest, the inquest is typically put on hold. If appropriate, criminal proceedings are initiated. The inquest extension/delay is brilliant news, actually. Otherwise, they would've just completed the inquest as is, with an inconclusive result, as many unsolved missing person cases do.

Also worth noting is that the Homicide Squad will keep many things to themselves so as not to compromise the integrity of the investigation. They certainly know more than they're telling the public and media, and they're likely following leads on many of the questions we've been asking.

Personally, I think the whole 'let's reconvene in Feb' thing is arbitrary. Much will happen before then. I'm feeling confident that things are heating up, moving closer to an answer, charges being laid, and to criminal proceedings starting. I'd bet on this scenario.

It just means we won't hear much until arrests are made, then criminal case begins. Frustrating but worth it

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

People on TLV fb are really losing their minds over the Inquest being delayed until Feb in order for investigation to dig deeper. I understand the lack of investigation in the past was disgraceful, but things are very different now.

Just putting it out there that the Inquest is not a criminal trial. The Coroner's priority is to determine the circumstances surrounding Marion's disappearance, to make a finding on whether they think she is deceased or not, and to improve public safety and processes. That's it.

A lot of things discussed in the podcast were never going to be part of the Inquest, because it's not the purpose of a Coroner. They're not under any obligation to reveal every piece of evidence so that it can be publicly inspected. In fact, it's detrimental to the ongoing case.

Because separate to the Inquest, there's still an active investigation by the Unsolved Homicide Squad. Their priority is finding who did it and getting charges laid.

I did mention earlier, that if there's new evidence or person's of interest, the inquest is typically put on hold. If appropriate, criminal proceedings are initiated. The inquest extension/delay is brilliant news, actually. Otherwise, they would've just completed the inquest as is, with an inconclusive result, as many unsolved missing person cases do.

Also worth noting is that the Homicide Squad will keep many things to themselves so as not to compromise the integrity of the investigation. They certainly know more than they're telling the public and media, and they're likely following leads on many of the questions we've been asking.

Personally, I think the whole 'let's reconvene in Feb' thing is arbitrary. Much will happen before then. I'm feeling confident that things are heating up, moving closer to an answer, charges being laid, and to criminal proceedings starting. I'd bet on this scenario.

It just means we won't hear much until arrests are made, then criminal case begins. Frustrating but worth it

My only concern with more delay is if Marion is still alive but held captive (unlikely but not totally impossible) and the chance for any perpetrator(s) to alter or remove incriminatory items. It’s probably too late for that now too.

There are probably (I certainly hope so) things going on behind the scene. All I want to know is did Mr R ever visit or live in Australia? I can wait another 7 months if need be as long as that particular can doesn’t keep being kicked down the road.

 

[Estelle]

Yes it's important that Mr R's involvement (or not) is looked into thoroughly by police in Luxembourg.

 

[Meligator]

The reward money is a big deal also. There may already be new leads we don’t know about. Investigators clearly have not yet been able to prove definitively that Marion is alive or deceased, even after whatever investigations have happened in the recent months. I don’t know what challenges come with trying to interview someone in another country, but the fact that they haven’t been able to clear Remakel yet, I think is interesting too.

 

[sunnybree]

Re: different interpretations of Marion’s character. Sally and Chris Leydon were teenagers when they last saw Marion. Their insight into other people, including parents, at their age may be restricted by their youth. Turn back the clock 20 years, and compare the way you understood your parents then to now. Likewise, Marion may have been far less likely to openly display her distress or problems in front of her teenaged daughter. I know I would be. I do think there were definitely elements of dysfunction within the family.


The evidence of her friends, women outside the family, is interesting as they point to a woman who had priorities outside of her family. This lends credence that under specific circumstances Marion would leave her family if she believed she would be happier eg with a new romantic partner, or as an escape from significant stress at work. However completely cutting herself off permanently seems out of character. The inability of proof of life checks to find her is concerning as it means she never actually started this new life as Florabella.

 

[KiwiNZ]

The last phone call from Marion to Sally - as callous as it sounds, could the phone call have been made thinking if something had happened to Sally at Thredbo, the family would not have been able to contact her and the police would have had to assist in locating her, this would all happen at a time she did not want to be exposed and the fact they would have located her in Australia where she wasn't meant to be. I think the fact she mentioned she wouldn't be in contact and wont be sending postcards is significant, especially now that post cards have turned up after the date of return, it was obliviously on her mind and part of her plan, that postcards where a signal of proof of life, everything is ok ... and indicating to Sally the absence of them is not to be taken as abnormal.

I do believe the bank contacted and verified it was Marion removing the money from the account, and her response seems consistent with Marion's reaction from other statements given about times when she was direct or abrupt, like been seen a the garage or asking Sally's husband to leave, she seem to be quite defensive when caught out.

A bank does not sit on its hands when a accusation of fraud on someone's account is made, because the bank would have to repay the $80K. I think the reference to the "security guard" is actually "bank security" whom you would refer to if someone was going to investigate a possible fraud.

 

[KiwiNZ]

double post

 

[Mjjj14]

Mjjj14, you're kind of on the right track...

It is weird that Sally reported the 20 or so withdrawals at CBA to Byron Bay Police. Yet they instead passed on information about the one Colonial withdrawal to Salvos that Sally hadn't even known about, without seeming to have made any enquiries. Byron Bay Police also never again mentioned CBA, despite it being what triggered the search for Marion and her welfare.

It's NOT Salvos who pulled that info out of thin air - it was Byron Bay Police. In the inquest, it is clear no one can understand how Byron Bay Police got the Colonial Ashmore info or came to the conclusion Marion had been seen.

Haha I’m not sure what you mean about being on the right track because really, we are all speculating and I don’t think my speculation is any less accurate than anyone else’s.

As we know from the inquest, Byron Bay police seem to have been not particularly good at note taking and recording information correctly.

I would be willing to bet that in 1997, the Byron Bay police could easily do a credit check or something of that nature (such as a check with the ATO) and that would’ve informed them of the Colonial account. I don’t think them finding out about this is far fetched.

I do think someone from a policing unit somewhere spoke to someone at a bank. Their job title may not have been security officer and they may not have physically worked at the Ashmore branch.