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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #581
I agree there was absolutely no information. Basically the whole conversation revolved around the police refusing to cooperate and release the file due to 'making a mistake in the investigation and not wanting it found out'. I am sick of the whole bagging out the police. Just accept Marion is most likely living overseas.

The more the presenter's slag off the relevant authorities the less cooperation they will get from them. They have made their point in that regard and telling us for the 51st time and 52nd time is only counter productive.
 
  • #582
Yes, Gary Sheehan has inherited this case, and let's face it, it's a cold case ..... poor fellow's run off his feet dealing with current crime, oh boy, they've got to type statements, attend court, interviews, etc - and add to that, well, his 'hands are tied' .... this case should really be with a cold case team, don't you think, would be fairer on everyone, a team that has all the time and resources needed to put into it. Look, if one of them could just find out who that Monsieur Remakel number was registered to, that would be something that could get the ball rolling, not that hard to find out, and let Fernand off the hook and clear his name (if he's not involved in the matter) seems unfair to leave him dangling as a suspect for so long after being named publicly to millions of listeners around the world! When I saw that ad in Le Courrier I thought "ah, too easy", but, err, apparently not. Natural sagacity, I know you think Marion's having the time of her life living overseas, might very well be, riding a bicycle on a country road in France with a basket of lavender on the handle bars, nice thought, but if there was just some proof presented then everyone could pack up their bags and go home. Just a few thoughts. Cheers
She's probably not riding a bike now due to her age lol. Ron Iddles mentioned that a case he worked on regarding a missing person who was presumed dead was actually living in New Zealand. Apparently back in the day a person travelling to New Zealand one did not need to have/show a passport when entering New Zealand from Australia. It is possible that Marion went to New Zealand and then left from there to then travel to another country. When all the evidence points to a person making a choice to disappear, my question is should police/taxpayers waste money and resources to try and locate that person because family wont accept their loved ones choice? Í feel the push for a coroners inquest is to free up Marions money which is over $100k, however if the evidence presented points to a person's choice to disappear then an open finding would be most likely be the outcome. I do not feel it is a cold case due to the case not being a criminal investigation and that the reason the police do searches etc is because family will not accept Marion's decision to start a new life. I also do not like the comparison with the Leveson case as he was murdered and it was evident pretty early in the investigation that this was the case.
 
Last edited:
  • #583
May be going back a bit, but I only started listening to this podcast last week and now got to the landmark episode 11 and I would agree with a previous poster. I found a copy of the original Remakel ad from 1994 and it does state M F Remakel. How sure are we that the M stands for Monsignor? (not sure if I spelled that right!). The F could be a middle name. In the interest of leaving nothing to chance or assumption, there seems to be from a general search 3 people in Luxembourg with names starting with M. All sounding quite probably male names. Just a thought. I don't know enough about Luxembourg to say for sure, but in the interest of leaving no stone unturned..what if there could still be 3 possible Remakels in Luxembourg that have yet to be spoken to....? I guess it is quite obvious and Brian and Alison know enough to be sure the M is not indicative to a first initial?
 
  • #584
  • #585
May be going back a bit, but I only started listening to this podcast last week and now got to the landmark episode 11 and I would agree with a previous poster. I found a copy of the original Remakel ad from 1994 and it does state M F Remakel. How sure are we that the M stands for Monsignor? (not sure if I spelled that right!). The F could be a middle name. In the interest of leaving nothing to chance or assumption, there seems to be from a general search 3 people in Luxembourg with names starting with M. All sounding quite probably male names. Just a thought. I don't know enough about Luxembourg to say for sure, but in the interest of leaving no stone unturned..what if there could still be 3 possible Remakels in Luxembourg that have yet to be spoken to....? I guess it is quite obvious and Brian and Alison know enough to be sure the M is not indicative to a first initial?
Yes, agree Sophie-Renee, name could start with M for sure, no proof has been found thus far. Also the age in the ad of 47 could be fake, may have just put an age to attract a certain age lady. The entire ad could be phony, and quite frankly it's absolutely shocking to name Fernand in the podcast as the man (allegedly) who placed the ad without concrete evidence to back up who put it in, and who was registered to that phone number in 1994. They seem to have done the opposite of Ron Iddles' ABC, err, resulting in A - assume everything, B - believe everything, and C - check nothin'. I'm still fascinated and interested in the case, but h'mm, cranky about how Remakel's been treated. It's time for some proof!!
 
Last edited:
  • #586
Yes, agree Sophie-Renee, name could start with M for sure, no proof has been found thus far. Also the age in the ad of 47 could be fake, may have just put an age to attract a certain age lady. The entire ad could be phony, and quite frankly it's absolutely shocking to name Fernand in the podcast as the man (allegedly) who placed the ad without concrete evidence to back up who put it in, and who was registered to that phone number in 1994. They seem to have done the opposite of Ron Iddles' ABC, err, resulting in A - assume everything, B - believe everything, and C - check nothin'. I'm still fascinated and interested in the case, but h'mm, cranky about how Remakel's been treated. It's time for some proof!!

This is very true, as to the age being different. We can't even be sure the man in question is still alive or gave a real name! I can only imagine that in the pre internet dating days (of which there are many "catfishes") it would have been harder to get away with lies, if one was going through an agency or newspaper- but not impossible.Perhaps even more likely if the person in question was planning to decieve or take advantage . I can understand why it would be worthwhile to contact Remakel, but also think there are others that could potentially be of more interest. Perhaps also seeing F Remakel as being so close in age to Marion/Florabella has given the theory more "credence" to Brian , Alison and Sally.
 
  • #587
lady on bike.jpg
 
  • #588
Hi everyone. I haven’t been following this podcast for a while, but I came across this rather random little snippet and thought I’d share.

Remakel Delvaux (also Remaclo De Vaulx) wrote a book in 1666 about Harpcrates (the Greek god of silence and secrets). It’s written in Latin, which I can’t read, but I popped the title into Google translator and the book refutes that Harpcrates predicts the end of the world. There’s nothing to suggest Marion was a serious academic, read Latin or was into Greek mythology and its highly unlikely she ever knew about it but it made me wonder if maybe the name Remakel signifies hope (its not the end of the world).
 
  • #589
She's probably not riding a bike now due to her age lol. Ron Iddles mentioned that a case he worked on regarding a missing person who was presumed dead was actually living in New Zealand. Apparently back in the day a person travelling to New Zealand one did not need to have/show a passport when entering New Zealand from Australia. It is possible that Marion went to New Zealand and then left from there to then travel to another country. When all the evidence points to a person making a choice to disappear, my question is should police/taxpayers waste money and resources to try and locate that person because family wont accept their loved ones choice? Í feel the push for a coroners inquest is to free up Marions money which is over $100k, however if the evidence presented points to a person's choice to disappear then an open finding would be most likely be the outcome. I do not feel it is a cold case due to the case not being a criminal investigation and that the reason the police do searches etc is because family will not accept Marion's decision to start a new life. I also do not like the comparison with the Leveson case as he was murdered and it was evident pretty early in the investigation that this was the case.
Well said. I think the requirement for a passport between Australia and NZ came in 1981.
 
  • #590
https://7news.com.au/original-fyi/t...line-of-marion-barters-disappearance-c-200848

Between April and mid May Marion used her Medicare card 3 times before leaving for the UK. We also know she used it in September 1997 after the Florabella passport was used to come back to Australia. How likely could it be she was very ill and decided not to tell anyone, instead tying up loose ends, perhaps going to the UK as something she had always wanted to do , transferring money when she returned to cover Medicare costs and set up a new account? How likely is it someone diagnosed with a terminal condition would keep it from their family and choose to live out their last days in solitude? There have been so many theories but one I haven't heard discussed in the podcasts.
 
  • #591
That's a thought that I don't recall anyone coming up with before, on here or anywhere else.
I was just wondering yesterday what those doctors visits were for. Would some have been for vaccinations ?

. How likely could it be she was very ill and decided not to tell anyone,
 
  • #592
That's a thought that I don't recall anyone coming up with before, on here or anywhere else.
I was just wondering yesterday what those doctors visits were for. Would some have been for vaccinations ?
.

Granted it would be very very rare. I have heard of people being diagnosed with a terminal illness and not disclosing but what are the chances of her going as far as to change her name? The name change kind of suggests a new chapter or fresh page in her life. To be honest you are probably spot on. Vaccinations make more sense but they have been listed as though part of the puzzle. Us brits certainly need them for Australia so there must be stuff here that Australians require the vaccines even although we are not really seen to be a country with much risk to poisonous things that you could get in say Africa. I never really thought what do Australians require medically for UK? Those 3 appointments just got me thinking but to be honest of they know about them and are not questioning it, they probably already have an idea what they were for as they haven't mentioned it specifically in the podcast.
 
  • #593
.

Granted it would be very very rare. I have heard of people being diagnosed with a terminal illness and not disclosing but what are the chances of her going as far as to change her name? The name change kind of suggests a new chapter or fresh page in her life. To be honest you are probably spot on. Vaccinations make more sense but they have been listed as though part of the puzzle. Us brits certainly need them for Australia so there must be stuff here that Australians require the vaccines even although we are not really seen to be a country with much risk to poisonous things that you could get in say Africa. I never really thought what do Australians require medically for UK? Those 3 appointments just got me thinking but to be honest of they know about them and are not questioning it, they probably already have an idea what they were for as they haven't mentioned it specifically in the podcast.

Great theory! The police have had access to the Medicare records though. I dont think the police would be continuing an estrangement approach if there was any evidence she had a shortened life expectancy (even if it was a serious illness rather than a terminal one) theyd refer it to the coroner so the case could be finalized.

As someone who works with children she may have been keeping up with her vaccination boosters. I know with vaccinations you sometimes have to fill the script (one appointment) and then go back to have the vaccination administered (second appointment). If there were multiple vaccines she may have had to have them administered separately. It's not uncommon for retired people to work cash in hand. Perhaps Marion ran a unregistered home day-care to make money.
 
  • #594
People in Australia have always needed to have vaccinations before going overseas.
Even now there are a lot of diseases that we don't have in Australia that do exist overseas, like Rabies.

Another that came to my mind was that Mad Cow disease. but not sure if there was a vaccine against it.

This list is current now for people travelling from the US to the UK but have googled and it seems it applies to Australia and other countries too

Do I Need Vaccines for the United Kingdom?
Yes, some vaccines are recommended or required for United Kingdom. The CDC and WHO recommend the following vaccinations for the United Kingdom: hepatitis A, hepatitis B, rabies, meningitis, polio, measles, mumps and rubella (MMR), Tdap (tetanus, diphtheria pertussis)chickenpox, shingles, pneumonia and influenza.

Travel Vaccines and Advice for the United Kingdom
 
  • #595
Yes, Gary Sheehan has inherited this case, and let's face it, it's a cold case ..... poor fellow's run off his feet dealing with current crime, oh boy, they've got to type statements, attend court, interviews, etc - and add to that, well, his 'hands are tied' .... this case should really be with a cold case team, don't you think, would be fairer on everyone, a team that has all the time and resources needed to put into it. Look, if one of them could just find out who that Monsieur Remakel number was registered to, that would be something that could get the ball rolling, not that hard to find out, and let Fernand off the hook and clear his name (if he's not involved in the matter) seems unfair to leave him dangling as a suspect for so long after being named publicly to millions of listeners around the world! When I saw that ad in Le Courrier I thought "ah, too easy", but, err, apparently not. Natural sagacity, I know you think Marion's having the time of her life living overseas, might very well be, riding a bicycle on a country road in France with a basket of lavender on the handle bars, nice thought, but if there was just some proof presented then everyone could pack up their bags and go home. Just a few thoughts. Cheers
Please let me apologise in advance, as my post may sound snappy. I respect the differing views of everyone, however the way Gary Sheehan has been portrayed is really starting to get to me.
Yes, Gary Sheehan inherited this case. Its a cold case. He also has current crime, statements, court, interviews, hands tied (by the law)- so what does he do? He investigates, and pretty thoroughly.

When Gary Sheehan inherited the case, his investigation uncovered the fact that she had changed her name by deedpoll, and the name on her passport, to Florabella Remakel. Complete shock to all- an unknown fact until Gary's investigation. He determined that the passport reentered Australia, with a claim that she was a house wife from Luxembourg who would be in the country for three days. His investigation found that the passport never left the country again.
Gary requested and received all of the documentation from the Commonwealth bank, as per conversations 12. He has access to all of the transaction information, the identification information, any change of address, contact numbers etc. This request was made as part of his investigation.
Gary Sheehan found the tip about a missing woman called Marion being buried in Armidale. He found the tip, which was by this stage fairly old, by sifting meticulously through YEARS of crimestoppers tips. He organised a search- with a cadaver dog and SES volunteers. He went to the address supplied by the tipster, which was real, and identified that the name supplied was fake.
Gary has searched medicare, Centrelink, RTA, banks. Gary has stayed in contact with Sally. When his investigation concluded that for reasons unknown, Marion had walked away from her own life intentionally, he went to Sallys home to tell her. In a different state. He didn't phone, or send an interstate colleague. He travelled to her house. He left more information that he really should not have on the table, and went to the bathroom. His hands were tied- however he broke a few rules to try and give Sally enough information to understand why he had come to this conclusion. For this- he was thrown under the bus. Completely outed on a public podcast. At the beginning of the podcast, Gary was cooperative and helpful. Was interviewed, and spoke openly. Yes, he has pulled back now, and answers emails fairly curtly with very police speak responses, but that is hardly surprising. The only thing that I find surprising with this is that the hosts of the podcast keep sounding surprised that people they are openly rude about all of a sudden wont cooperate with them.

Gary Sheehan has completed an investigation. Just through the information supplied in the podcast, we can put together a decent overview of some of what he has done. After a thorough investigation, he, as a professional, experienced investigator, concluded that at the time, Marion chose to walk away from her life. As was her legal right. She has the right to walk away, and to then have her privacy respected. I so wish the original investigator had actually seen her, and not been so trusting of the bank, however he didn't. It irks me that as the podcast has progressed, there is this continual "Sally has the right to know what happened to her mum" theme. She doesn't. Marion has the right to her privacy, and Sally has no right to access her bank details, her medicare details- any of it. Legally, Sally has zero right to any of it. Gary Sheehan's hands are tied by the law. The law that would protect each and every one of us if we chose to walk away from our lives. I find it really difficult, in many ways, as the reasons someone might walk away are so varied- if they are ill (mentally or physically, or both), were they fit to make the choice? If they were being coerced, were they happy with the choice? Unfortunately, in a lot of cases this is irrelevant- they made the choice, they left. I can see why friends and family would find it very hard to accept that a loved one just walked away- I don't know that in Sally's situation I could accept it either, but Gary had to reach a conclusion and he did.

There are plenty of times, especially early on, where the police could have done much better. However Gary Sheehan, in my opinion, is being portrayed very unfairly on the podcast.
 
  • #596
Doctor's visits may have been in relation to menopause which could have been part of the catalyst for so many dramatic changes...
 
  • #597
Please let me apologise in advance, as my post may sound snappy. I respect the differing views of everyone, however the way Gary Sheehan has been portrayed is really starting to get to me.
Yes, Gary Sheehan inherited this case. Its a cold case. He also has current crime, statements, court, interviews, hands tied (by the law)- so what does he do? He investigates, and pretty thoroughly.

When Gary Sheehan inherited the case, his investigation uncovered the fact that she had changed her name by deedpoll, and the name on her passport, to Florabella Remakel. Complete shock to all- an unknown fact until Gary's investigation. He determined that the passport reentered Australia, with a claim that she was a house wife from Luxembourg who would be in the country for three days. His investigation found that the passport never left the country again.
Gary requested and received all of the documentation from the Commonwealth bank, as per conversations 12. He has access to all of the transaction information, the identification information, any change of address, contact numbers etc. This request was made as part of his investigation.
Gary Sheehan found the tip about a missing woman called Marion being buried in Armidale. He found the tip, which was by this stage fairly old, by sifting meticulously through YEARS of crimestoppers tips. He organised a search- with a cadaver dog and SES volunteers. He went to the address supplied by the tipster, which was real, and identified that the name supplied was fake.
Gary has searched medicare, Centrelink, RTA, banks. Gary has stayed in contact with Sally. When his investigation concluded that for reasons unknown, Marion had walked away from her own life intentionally, he went to Sallys home to tell her. In a different state. He didn't phone, or send an interstate colleague. He travelled to her house. He left more information that he really should not have on the table, and went to the bathroom. His hands were tied- however he broke a few rules to try and give Sally enough information to understand why he had come to this conclusion. For this- he was thrown under the bus. Completely outed on a public podcast. At the beginning of the podcast, Gary was cooperative and helpful. Was interviewed, and spoke openly. Yes, he has pulled back now, and answers emails fairly curtly with very police speak responses, but that is hardly surprising. The only thing that I find surprising with this is that the hosts of the podcast keep sounding surprised that people they are openly rude about all of a sudden wont cooperate with them.

Gary Sheehan has completed an investigation. Just through the information supplied in the podcast, we can put together a decent overview of some of what he has done. After a thorough investigation, he, as a professional, experienced investigator, concluded that at the time, Marion chose to walk away from her life. As was her legal right. She has the right to walk away, and to then have her privacy respected. I so wish the original investigator had actually seen her, and not been so trusting of the bank, however he didn't. It irks me that as the podcast has progressed, there is this continual "Sally has the right to know what happened to her mum" theme. She doesn't. Marion has the right to her privacy, and Sally has no right to access her bank details, her medicare details- any of it. Legally, Sally has zero right to any of it. Gary Sheehan's hands are tied by the law. The law that would protect each and every one of us if we chose to walk away from our lives. I find it really difficult, in many ways, as the reasons someone might walk away are so varied- if they are ill (mentally or physically, or both), were they fit to make the choice? If they were being coerced, were they happy with the choice? Unfortunately, in a lot of cases this is irrelevant- they made the choice, they left. I can see why friends and family would find it very hard to accept that a loved one just walked away- I don't know that in Sally's situation I could accept it either, but Gary had to reach a conclusion and he did.

There are plenty of times, especially early on, where the police could have done much better. However Gary Sheehan, in my opinion, is being portrayed very unfairly on the podcast.

I also think Garry's portrayal is very unfair. The problem for the police is that it's not just a consideration of privacy, it's also one of harrassment.

If a person is determined missing under their own volition (as Marion was/is) the police cant just keep tracking her down every few years for the sake of her family and I imagine there are guidelines around this to prevent harrassment of people who do not want contact with their former lives.
The podcast unfortunately ignored the opportunity to talk about this with Garry when they interviewed him. They should be thinking about under what basis Marion could be re-reported missing say at a later date due to unusual behaviour/circumstance (no contact after sons death) or if there would have to be evidence of endangerment (like the call to crimestoppers). This case hasnt been sitting on a shelf there has been regular police involvement and they wouldnt invest time and resources unnecessarily. If they really couldnt find Marion and there was no indication of life over time the file would be sent off to the coroner to be finalized.
 
  • #598
I just can't get past the 3 and a half weeks of $5000 withdrawals, that's too out of left field for me, too weird and suspicious, makes no sense at all, so I am still of the mind that Marion did not estrange herself from her family. Also, Marion being a good writer as we've heard she probably would have left a letter saying farewell had she intended to take off, hey, to tidy up loose ends and put their minds at rest, but there was none. Just my thoughts. Heading off for a bickie now
 
Last edited:
  • #599
Major Breakthrough! NSW Police have today confirmed they are reopening their Investigation into the disappearance of Marion Barter, adding her to the Missing Persons Register and will refer her case to the Coroner. Congratulations to Marion’s daughter Sally and the 7NEWS team
 
  • #600
Oh wow that is the best news!!


Good work Sally and Team for never giving up!


I imagine another Podcast is not far off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
128
Guests online
3,312
Total visitors
3,440

Forum statistics

Threads
632,121
Messages
18,622,391
Members
243,027
Latest member
Richard Morris
Back
Top