Australia Australia - Marion Barter, 51, missing after trip to UK, June 1997 #13

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #1,021
Question: Do the briefs possibly contain more evidence than we heard in court?
Yes. So much more. The inquest is just a small part of the process.

The Coroner will examine the entire brief of evidence in order to make a finding.

The inquest is just an opportunity for the Coroner to hear directly from those involved or with expertise in the matter. But also to invite the public and media, to allow for transparency.

To give you an idea of how much the brief matters in contrast to inquest, only high profile cases or those with public repercussions go to inquest. MOST cases that go to Coroner are completed without an inquest, and purely rely on the brief of evidence.

Basically, the inquest in not about reading out and discussing every piece of evidence in the binders. The inquest is mainly to pick a few pertinent items to establish timelines, and then have witnesses and experts speak in order to clarify their previous statements given to police.

If someone will be named 'a likely contributor to the death or disappearance', then they just need to show enough at inquest to paint the picture. Because it's not a legal conviction.

If this becomes a criminal case, then yes, a lot more evidence will be revealed because ALL evidence used to convict someone must be laid out and thoroughly scrutinised.

The Coroner's 'finding' however, WILL detail how she came to her conclusion, so that may reveal details from brief of evidence we might not have heard in court.


For the most part, we will never see or hear most of the evidence. Her is an example of the kind of evidence collected and how it ends up at an inquest:

1. All the evidence police and homicide squad gather, including from all participating bodies.

2. Selected evidence the above teams pass on to police working with Coroners court.

3. The selected evidence the police working with coroners court put together for the brief of evidence which they deem relevant for the purpose of inquest and do not compromise the homicide and other investigations.

4. The evidence actually mentioned at inquest.
 
  • #1,022
That remark really struck me, and speaks to the kind of person he truly is, especially since he was responding to a question about whether he acknowledged the great harm he could have caused these women. "There are thousands and thousands on the internet every day" accompanied by a shrug just shows the contempt he holds for women. Why should anyone care about any one of them, when there are so many? They aren't people to him, they're fodder, to be exploited for gain and then thrown away when they're no longer useful to him.

That response also showed what a coward he is. He's never thought about the harm he causes, he doesn't want to think about it, he's never been forced to actually face it before. I loved the patient way AC kept asking him to respond to the question. It's quite possibly the only way of pointing out that he's lower than pond scum in a legal context.
AC did a masterful job of showing exactly what this piece of * is. The best part in the whole inquest since it began was the way AC read, and with great delight, pausing just at the right times, the letter Ric Blum wrote to MC. That moment alone was just gold. I hope that it continues to bring humiliation to him for the rest of his sorry pathetic life. IF that letter alone doesn't bring his wife to say what she knows, nothing will.
 
  • #1,023
  • #1,024
Oh wow. Smith is insinuating that RB was so infatuated with MC, that he was trying to relive the past by fantasising and making himself FNR so Marion could be the substitute for MC.
This was actually the point at which my kaleidoscope view shifted and started to revise some of my thinking to this point.What I mean is...there were inklings that MC was more important to him than any others and that he had fantasies of being FNR, but it shifted my thinking on how that related to MB in particular and what might have happened.I am processing it!
 
  • #1,025
Why did he invent this story of meeting her back then? To try and discredit her, by saying that she came up to him in Lucerne and asked him for sex?
I do think the story adds to his desire to discredit women as sx fiends. But personally, I think it's for two reasons:

1. Because what he did with Marion looks too similar to what he did with JO. So he needed to make the 'affairs' look different, unique and spontaneous, and not a pattern of planned behaviour.

2. To give the illusion he had a longer relationship with Marion to explain why she changed her name to his alias, left belongings at his house, and wrote those passenger cards. This doesn't make sense if he only 'hooked up' with her 3 times between Feb and April. So he's adding time together in Switzerland rather than what I believe is more likely.... that he was in a relationship (not just hook ups) with Marion for many months and he groomed her.

I believe he is using a previous con in Switzerland mixed with knowing Marion went to EU back then. IMO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,026
double
 
  • #1,027
I do think the story adds to his desire to discredit women as sx fiends. But personally, I think it's for two reasons:

1. Because what he did with Marion looks too similar to what he did with JO. So he needed to make the 'affairs' look different, unique and spontaneous, and not a pattern of planned behaviour.

2. To give the illusion he had a longer relationship with Marion to explain why Marion changed her name to his alias, left belongings at his house, and wrote those passenger cards. This doesn't make sense if he only 'hooked up' with her 3 times between Feb and April. So he's adding time together in Switzerland rather than what I believe is more likely.... that he was in a relationship (not just hook ups) with Marion for many months and he groomed her.

I believe he is using a previous con in Switzerland mixed with knowing Marion went to EU back then. IMO.
Yes, you're right and your reasoning makes perfect sense. I've just rewatched the last 30 minutes or so of yesterday's inquest and a couple of things come to mind. What would he have told Marion in regards to travelling O/S separately to her, albeit by 2 days and then returning 5 days before her. Wouldn't she have found is strange that he didn't at least travel back to Australia with her, on the same flight? Also, it would be interesting to know his spending history since Marion 'disappeared' in August 1997. There was an amount of $80,000 withdrawn from Marion's bank account the day after he opened a safety deposit box with the same bank. Assuming that he ended up with that money, what has he done with it?
#Justice for Marion and Sally
 
  • #1,028
This was actually the point at which my kaleidoscope view shifted and started to revise some of my thinking to this point.What I mean is...there were inklings that MC was more important to him than any others and that he had fantasies of being FNR, but it shifted my thinking on how that related to MB in particular and what might have happened.I am processing it!
Oh wow. To be honest, I just thought Smith was baiting RB, provoking him, trying to make him angry and unravel so that he might let something slip.

But now that you mention it. Yes. RB might be a very sick and twisted individual. (Might? Ok, we know he is.)
We've said all along that conmen don't usually kill. Something made Marion's case different.
So it's possible that his fantasy took over in a rage at the thought of Marion/MC leaving him again. Perhaps he completed with Marion what he could not with MC? :(
 
  • #1,029
From watching his moods change so quickly in the inquest I started to get a vibe that he could in fact turn violent.
He is an large framed tall man. He has zero respect for women " thousands of them on the internet". He said it like " so many women to scam so little time" almost like it was too easy for him. " why wouldn't I scam them? They're all asking for it putting themselves on the internet"

I imagine when he was younger he was very intimidating when he didn't get his way.
When Sally said her mum was a similar age to her when she disappeared it put it in to perspective just how young she was at the time.

I can see RB verbally abusing DdH with his booming voice and wouldn't surprise me if he was psychical.
Maybe Marion worked things out and tried to leave, he blocked her passage, she pushed/hit him to try and get away he hit her and things got out of hand.
 
  • #1,030
Oh wow. To be honest, I just thought Smith was baiting RB, provoking him, trying to make him angry and unravel so that he might let something slip.

But now that you mention it. Yes. RB might be a very sick and twisted individual. (Might? Ok, we know he is.)
We've said all along that conmen don't usually kill. Something made Marion's case different.
So it's possible that his fantasy took over in a rage at the thought of Marion/MC leaving him again. Perhaps he completed with Marion what he could not with MC? :(
Yup, that's nailed it, we are like twinnies! Until now, I couldn't get past the criminal pattern...if he was a petty crim (traffic offences, fraud, maybe IMO odd job man with OC links, to alleged romance scams etc) then why escalate it to murder and then back again to romance scam (GGB JO) when criminologists say escalation fixes the new pattern. But maybe MB was a lot closer in type to MC (school teacher, smart, football connection etc) and when it went wrong, he has "wiped it" and started the old pattern again? I don't know...this is all JMO and MOO. I want to know a lot more about evidence from O/S before fixing on this.
 
  • #1,031
I do think the story adds to his desire to discredit women as sx fiends. But personally, I think it's for two reasons:

1. Because what he did with Marion looks too similar to what he did with JO. So he needed to make the 'affairs' look different, unique and spontaneous, and not a pattern of planned behaviour.

2. To give the illusion he had a longer relationship with Marion to explain why she changed her name to his alias, left belongings at his house, and wrote those passenger cards. This doesn't make sense if he only 'hooked up' with her 3 times between Feb and April. So he's adding time together in Switzerland rather than what I believe is more likely.... that he was in a relationship (not just hook ups) with Marion for many months and he groomed her.

I believe he is using a previous con in Switzerland mixed with knowing Marion went to EU back then. IMO.
Also...given my kaleidoscope shift view of deep psychological issues from MC...he may, as we have speculated, fixed on Marion from a news article of her being awarded School Teacher of the Year, may have also discovered the Johnny Warren football connection at that point and actually had a fantasy that she was MC and that they met in Switzerland. I had an ex that was a narcissist and he used to be "off with the fairies" on occasions and I would refer to him being in "Robbie-land" because in his head he was replaying a story of some sort. He also used to constantly say that he told me something (gaslighting), when I proved he hadn't his face would change and he would remember that he had said it to himself in his head but not to me or that it was part of some story that he had done "in his head". I see patterns here.
 
  • #1,032
I do think the story adds to his desire to discredit women as sx fiends. But personally, I think it's for two reasons:

1. Because what he did with Marion looks too similar to what he did with JO. So he needed to make the 'affairs' look different, unique and spontaneous, and not a pattern of planned behaviour.

2. To give the illusion he had a longer relationship with Marion to explain why she changed her name to his alias, left belongings at his house, and wrote those passenger cards. This doesn't make sense if he only 'hooked up' with her 3 times between Feb and April. So he's adding time together in Switzerland rather than what I believe is more likely.... that he was in a relationship (not just hook ups) with Marion for many months and he groomed her.

I believe he is using a previous con in Switzerland mixed with knowing Marion went to EU back then. IMO.

IMO, the previous encounter with Marion in Switzerland became almost 'real' in his mind. As speculated by @gymtonic, after meeting Marion he began to connect her to MC (teacher, intelligent, previous marriage to football player etc.)
Con-men encourage their victims to talk about themselves in order to make personal connections eg. Marion may have mentioned that she & Johnny Warren traveled to Switzerland in 1968. He would then have inserted himself (FNR) into her story - "Oh really, I was staying at that same hotel at that time". These 'connections' make victims feel more comfortable and accepting.
I feel that, as time passed, he came to see Marion more and more as a MC substitute and the Switzerland encounter became increasingly more 'real' in his mind. He may have even privately fantasized about the 'foyer encounter'
 
  • #1,033
He just can't control himself when MC is mentioned, one would think my wife is watching this, lets not put my real feelings out there, but he does, we all know his true love is MC and not his wife ..... he made that clear as day
 
  • #1,034
Does anyone remember in the early days of the inquest, I think it might of been in the Feb days, I think it was AC asked RB if he had ever been to the Villeroy and Boch factory? and he said no?
Does anyone else remember? I wish there was transcripts we could search.
 
  • #1,035
He just can't control himself when MC is mentioned, one would think my wife is watching this, lets not put my real feelings out there, but he does, we all know his true love is MC and not his wife ..... he made that clear as day

Whats even scarier is the fact MC said she wants nothing to do with him and RB said he always thought MC was his best friend even up to this day.
Terrifying.
 
  • #1,036
I’m confused about this a bit. To me it sounded (from earlier testimony) that RB essentially “sold” Ballina coin (I guess it was re-established as Clarendon hills)…but my question is why wouldn’t someone just close the Ballina coin company and then open a separate company. What would be the purpose of transferring the company to someone else who is going to change the name? Is it about the saving the costs of opening a new company? Or is it a way to somehow retain remnants of Ballina Coin?

With him as a silent partner perhaps?
 
  • #1,037
Yes he threw the R family under the bus well and truly yesterday.
It was the first time he actually ever made comment about them so I suspect they made it clear to him prior just what an A.H. he is.

I think it was him that knew about the podcast without anyone having to point him to it. AND I think he reads everything on here.

Maybe the daughter told his wife if she was unaware but he certainly wasn't.

He confirmed yesterday that he DOES use the computer....a computer he has never had :rolleyes: when he said "there are thousands and thousands of women on the internet ".

Yes, that was a definite slip of the tongue because he was rattled.
Thousands of potential victims "on tap" just asking to be scammed.
 
  • #1,038
various snippets from various sites on the traits of a psychopath.

I have no doubt this is who he is. Not everything is applicable but when you read the general characteristics IMO this is him.

to normal people it’s impossible to comprehend. To him this is normal.

this is why women of all walks of life and intelligent don’t stand a chance if that fall for people like this they are masters at what they do.


Pathological Lying and Manipulation

“If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes accepted as the truth.” —attributed to various sources

In their desire for ever more power (over relationships, organizations, or society at large), many sociopaths and psychopaths will literally make up and say anything in order to achieve their aims. Blatant lies, distortions, deceptions, broken promises, and blaming the victim are just some of the common devices used to enable the sociopath or psychopath to advance his or her aggressive and unscrupulous schemes. Instead of making factual statements based on reality, sociopaths and psychopaths repeat lies incessantly to distort. Solid evidence is ignored and dismissed with contempt.


Lack of Morality and Rule Breaking

Most people have a basic sense of right and wrong. In general, we may agree that kindness is right, and cruelty is wrong; healthy relationships are right, and toxic relationships are wrong; honest hard work is right, and stealing and cheating are wrong. Sociopaths and psychopaths, however, have little or no sense of morality. They are more inclined than the general population to violate human rights or have brushes with the law. They believe that “might is right” and “rules are meant to be broken.” Human and ethical considerations are abhorred and viewed as weaknesses. In short, they have little or no conscience.
On occasions when sociopaths and psychopaths do mention morality or “fairness,” it is done either for the sake of appearance or to conveniently forward their own self-serving agenda. Fake morality is used as a manipulative device, rather than genuine value.


Lack of Empathy and Cold-Heartedness.

As sociopaths and psychopaths lack empathy, ethics, and reflection, they also tend to be unfeeling and cold-hearted toward the pain and suffering they cause others. This lack of humanity has several dangerous implications:

  • It compels the sociopath or psychopath to commit trespasses with little or no moral conflict.
  • Knowing the suffering of their victims does not bring about ethical pause. Just the opposite — it may encourage the sociopath or psychopath to do more harm (for they feel like they’re “winning”).
  • Abuses are committed without regret or remorse.
  • Little or no lessons are learned from the negative consequences of their actions. Sociopaths and psychopaths often blame their victims for causing their own victimization.


Narcissism and False Superiority Complex


Not all narcissists are sociopathic (many narcissists are emotive, many sociopaths are non-emotive, or primitively emotive), but most sociopaths and psychopaths possess certain narcissistic traits, such as calculated charm, manipulativeness, self-absorption, entitlement, conceit, and a false superiority complex. In the mindset of many sociopaths and psychopaths, being “better” than others provides them with twisted justification to exploit and mistreat people at will. Those who are “inferior” deserve their downtrodden fate, and should only be regarded with contempt.


Gaslighting and Psychological Bullying

Gaslighting is a form of persistent brainwashing that causes the victim to doubt her or himself, and ultimately lose his or her own sense of perception, identity, and self-worth. At its worst, pathological gaslighting constitutes a severe form of mind-control and psychological bullying. Gaslighting can occur in personal relationships, at the workplace, or over an entire society.

For many sociopaths and psychopaths, gaslighting is used as a specialized form of lying and manipulation, where the gaslighter incessantly repeats falsehoods about the undesirability, inadequacy, and/or detestableness of the gaslightee. It degrades an individual or a group’s identity and stigmatizes and marginalizes their value and acceptability. Gaslighting is psychological violence.

Lack of Contrition and Self-Serving Victimhood


When caught in the act with their unscrupulous behavior, most sociopaths and psychopaths will not show signs of contrition or remorse (unless it is strategically advantageous for them to do so). On the contrary, they are more likely to double or triple down on their aggressive tendencies, increase hostility, deny responsibility, accuse and blame others, and maintain a facade of arrogance and conceit. Interestingly, many sociopaths will invent a victimhood story for themselves: The romantic partner charged with domestic battery claims he was “set-up,” the investment advisor caught defrauding clients thinks he was betrayed, the politician whose policies harmed entire populations insists he’s being scapegoated, the business executive accused of setting up sweatshops overseas laments being singled out, and the media talking head penalized for spewing vile and hateful remarks believes she’s being persecuted. Casting themselves as victims can help sociopaths and psychopaths to defend their immoral conduct.

Exploitation of Others for Personal Gain

A psychopath will use, abuse, and exploit other people, especially when it means getting something they want. In their pursuit of power, wealth, fame, and so forth, there are no lengths they won’t go to in order to get what they want. This is bound to leave many casualties in their path, and a psychopath will have no remorse when they need to throw someone under the bus in order to get ahead, even when this is someone who has helped them along the way.


Disregard for Rules, Laws, & Norms

Psychopaths do not follow the same code of ethics as most people in society, which is why they often behave in immoral or even illegal ways. These may include minor offenses like inappropriate comments or profanity or more serious offenses like crime and violence. While not all psychopaths are violent criminals, a very high percentage of people who commit crimes (especially violent crimes) have psychopathic traits.

Boredom & Thrill-Seeking Behaviors

Because psychopaths lack some of the normal emotional wiring that most people have, it takes a lot more to excite them, make them happy, or give them a thrill. Psychopaths are overall less impulsive than sociopaths because they aren’t driven by strong emotions, but their dulled emotional response may cause them to seek out thrills. This may be why psychopaths are more likely to engage in crime, violence, sexual promiscuity, and drug and alcohol use









 
  • #1,039
Why did he invent this story of meeting her back then? To try and discredit her, by saying that she came up to him in Lucerne and asked him for sex?
Because he’s a psychopath
 
  • #1,040
Please take the following for what it is: my own imagination filling in the details of this case. I go out on a limb with my thoughts. Here is what I see in my mind:

Marion responds to an ad placed by a Mr. Remakel. RB notes her details and eventually he gets around to contacting her. He love-bombs her for weeks/months. Marion is swept up in romantic possibilities. Because RB is a nasty little AH, he causes Marion distress by way of her beloved profession. Then leans on her to make good with all their romantic plans because it is “you and me against the world.”

In a hurry Marion sells her house for less than she paid, walks away from her career position, (commits to the relationship by changing her name and passport-I believe she did this on her own without RB’s knowledge-the fact is this action led to finding RB and he is too devious to have allowed this breadcrumb trail).

RB sets up flights in tandem. They will never be connected to each other. Then the luggage storage trick at the airport, his usual m.o. He has her documents. He has control. Marion goes to the UK and waits for him, filling in the lonely hours with shopping, driving around a small area, and writing postcards.

But! Disaster for RB. He gets to the UK and discovers she has changed her name. The papers he possesses use the Barter name. He meant to transfer her Australian bank accounts to Europe under her Barter name. He considers using her new Remakel identity to get the money. It’s convenient, he has to admit. But very dangerous. He is too cautious to let this kind of unpredictable event slip him up.

RB feels extremely angry by this foolish woman and her silly romantic notions. In the UK his mask drops and he shows Marion that he is not to be trifled with. He is angry and frustrated but he sees a way it could work. He announces he is returning to Australia, with or without her. If she really loves him then she knows where he is. He leaves Marion behind but he has her documents.

Marion is utterly miserable and has to make yet another fast decision, without time to really think about what is happening to her. It’s all so overwhelming. She is also beginning to feel that she might have a bit of a mess with her closest and dearest relationships back in Australia. Yes, she will return to try to make things good with RB again. But she will have to deal with the problem of trying to explain to her family the process which she has undergone in the last few months. It’s all happened so fast, and she can barely explain it to herself. Truthfully, she feels confused, befuddled, lost at sea. It is kind of embarrassing. She usually lives her life carefully, pursuing her dreams but in an ordered progression.

She decides to follow RB back, because he has instilled in her an insecurity which can’t be ignored; her lifelong dream of taking The Orient Express can’t be enjoyed anymore and all of her plans of travelling were with him.

She is not quite ready to tell anyone what she is suffering. She instinctively knows that if she were to divulge her situation to someone close then her relationship with RB would effectively end. It just would. And he has impressed upon her that his affection is contingent on her discretion, that he is very private, etc. So being a decent person, Marion doesn’t want to betray him. Not yet.

On her way back to Australia, Marion makes contact with Sally. She doesn’t want to talk about her situation, she just wants to hear her daughter’s voice.

Marion makes her way down to Byron Bay, the nearest town to RB with decent accomodation. Here, they will work things out, she hopes. RB convinces Marion to withdraw cash, the maximum allowed every day.
But Marion discovers Diane. Diane, who has made her bed long ago and knows what she’s got. What a disgusting revelation for Marion. She is shocked and devastated.

Marion confronts RB. No more money for him, she says. Or: what have you done with the money I have already given to you?

He is knee-deep in illicit funds, yet too much is never enough. He can see the finish line and has other prospects he needs to get on to. There is also the question of her name change and new passport. It nags at him. A rare loose end. He has an encyclopaedic memory for details and he knows this one thing is going to haunt him if he doesn’t do something.

Marion loved her family, her friends, and her chosen profession. She wouldn’t leave them without explanation. I feel she was moving herself back to her family and eventually would have moved on from RB.

What happened to Marion?

And on a personal note I lived on the Gold Coast at the same time as Marion and wish I’d known her. I really want to see Justice done for Marion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
53
Guests online
1,712
Total visitors
1,765

Forum statistics

Threads
632,332
Messages
18,624,867
Members
243,095
Latest member
Lillyflowerxx
Back
Top