Australia Australia - Marion Barter, 51, missing after trip to UK, June 1997 #8

[Eyespywithmylittleeye]

Sorry i wasn't suggesting you were saying he lied about it

D memorys has been proven to be unreliable today as per the misunderstanding explained
by Casseldon about the date of the cruise ship and he even admitted that could explain the discrepancies from both of them.
I found her really vague and easily confused and i had to remind myself that I am sure she has had to process a hell of a lot over the past year let alone a life of transient uncertainty and ggod knows what else she has endured ....

I just cannot imagine what it must be like being a public spectacle and all your family on display
for all to scrutinize etc in such a horrible circumstance . Just awful IMO and i noted D reactions changed dramatically when she was questioned re her children , she became defensive as a mother would when your children appear threatened .

TBH If i was Marion and still alive i would have been very hesitant to out myself back then let alone be quick to come forward into this very public s... show ...

I think for anyone caught in the fall out like his children who after today have potentially 3 half siblings and for his wife finding out an additional 2 marriages and also children would be horrible let alone for the country to find out at the same time.

the public has a huge interest in this yes it was TLV that brought the story to everyone’s attention but it’s also because of the mystery of ‘who put the Remakel ad in the paper’ finally being revealed and the history behind that person.

I still stand by my belief yesterday of D IMO having to know to some degree that FDH was doing some dodgy stuff.

It was obvious at times she was struggling with keeping up and her memory was the problem. And it is quite possible that could be due to a medical reason.

However the way FDH approached that today was in my opinion completely unnecessary as at the time there wasn’t a conflict of stories… he hadn’t revealed to his wife and she had said that the day before.

I felt like it was gaslighting move to discredit what she had said the day before.

And what I don’t understand is if there is a medical condition preventing memory loss why did her solicitor not inform the court prior to her taking the stand.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

According to Alison on TLV fb, "Ric Blum turned up today on his own". Lol, divorce is imminent.

Or she is at home busy hiding evidence and catching up on Websleuths?!

 

[KiwiNZ]

Is this when he told JO about having "20,000 acres of land in NSW where red cedar was grown"

No different areas, one is tambourine ( their home ) and the other Nymbodia ( the red cedar reference) - 4.30hrs drive south of Tambourine

 

[KiwiNZ]

Oh yes maybe this is why!
I can not remember this being mentioned on the podcast?

it is on her incoming passenger card, there are photos on the facenook page of the card, and on the internet, it is mentioned on the podcast and discussed extensively on here.

It was quite an exciting day when it was released lol

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

The small village of Burwash in East Sussex is very rural. It’s a similar distance from there to Tunbridge Wells to the north and Hastings and Rye to the south. Properties there would not be cheap either to buy or rent. It would be interesting to see if they were on the Electoral Roll in the 1980s and if so under what name? Also with such a small community would someone remember them especially if the boy went to the local Burwash CofE School. Was this perhaps the little village school Marion mentioned she could have worked as a relief in her postcard in 1997?

 

[Deleted member 249471]

When police first spoke to Mr Blum, he denied having a QLD licence in name of Fernand Remakel and knowing Marion at all. Then he changed his story.

Tonight's news story on YouTube

 

[TheCoolestNeopian]

According to Alison on TLV fb, "Ric Blum turned up today on his own". Lol, divorce is imminent.

My reading of this -- and of course, it's just an opinion -- was that he would've 'encouraged' her to stay home, probably telling her that it would be long and tiring and there was no need to put herself through it. Then he would be able to speak more freely about the tricky points where he'd lied to his wife and to present her to the court as being in some way confused, possibly with brain injuries, and otherwise deficient.

 

[StrangerDanger]

An alternative thought on why DdH wasn’t there today- I can imagine RB could be quite controlling and wouldn’t want D to hear any more bombshells that he had neglected to mention (other children, wives, affairs) so made her stay home. Bet the daughter was glued to the proceedings though. Gosh, what must his children think of all this.

 

[JLZ]

I think for anyone caught in the fall out like his children who after today have potentially 3 half siblings and for his wife finding out an additional 2 marriages and also children would be horrible let alone for the country to find out at the same time.

the public has a huge interest in this yes it was TLV that brought the story to everyone’s attention but it’s also because of the mystery of ‘who put the Remakel ad in the paper’ finally being revealed and the history behind that person.

I still stand by my belief yesterday of D IMO having to know to some degree that FDH was doing some dodgy stuff.

It was obvious at times she was struggling with keeping up and her memory was the problem. And it is quite possible that could be due to a medical reason.

However the way FDH approached that today was in my opinion completely unnecessary as at the time there wasn’t a conflict of stories… he hadn’t revealed to his wife and she had said that the day before.

I felt like it was gaslighting move to discredit what she had said the day before.

And what I don’t understand is if there is a medical condition preventing memory loss why did her solicitor not inform the court prior to her taking the stand.

Just my thoughts.

I suggest her solicitor didn't know, and he disobeyed his own, which led to them parting ways. 'She didn't like to talk about it'--yes well if he'd done the right thing it could have stayed confidential to the court instead of becoming a subject of discussion across the country.

 

[KeenSleuth17]

it is on her incoming passenger card, there are photos on the facenook page of the card, and on the internet, it is mentioned on the podcast and discussed extensively on here.

It was quite an exciting day when it was released lol

Yes!! First big breakthrough.

 

[TheCoolestNeopian]

Watching some of yesterday's inquest this morning, I was struck by his sad stories (his origins, the accident etc.) I can 100% visualise him spinning these stories to women to gain their sympathy.

I'm also somewhat up to date with the inquest via your comments here - thanks everyone!

 

[KeenSleuth17]

I suggest her solicitor didn't know, and he disobeyed his own, which led to them parting ways. 'She didn't like to talk about it'--yes well if he'd done the right thing it could have stayed confidential to the court instead of being a subject of discussion across the country.

100% - the most appropriate thing to do was for her to contact her solicitor and have him (the absent one or the step in one, lol) make an application of some sort. I don’t think DdH knew about it. I wonder what her thoughts are. Wonder if her brain is ticking about this all / him yet?!

 

[mishy66]

I think for anyone caught in the fall out like his children who after today have potentially 3 half siblings and for his wife finding out an additional 2 marriages and also children would be horrible let alone for the country to find out at the same time.

the public has a huge interest in this yes it was TLV that brought the story to everyone’s attention but it’s also because of the mystery of ‘who put the Remakel ad in the paper’ finally being revealed and the history behind that person.

I still stand by my belief yesterday of D IMO having to know to some degree that FDH was doing some dodgy stuff.

It was obvious at times she was struggling with keeping up and her memory was the problem. And it is quite possible that could be due to a medical reason.

However the way FDH approached that today was in my opinion completely unnecessary as at the time there wasn’t a conflict of stories… he hadn’t revealed to his wife and she had said that the day before.

I felt like it was gaslighting move to discredit what she had said the day before.

And what I don’t understand is if there is a medical condition preventing memory loss why did her solicitor not inform the court prior to her taking the stand.

Just my thoughts.

Yep.

 

[mishy66]

it is on her incoming passenger card, there are photos on the facenook page of the card, and on the internet, it is mentioned on the podcast and discussed extensively on here.

It was quite an exciting day when it was released lol

Yes I realised after I posted this

 

[LouLouSleuth]

Narcissist mysoganistics think they are smarter than lawyers so they don't really like to use them.

Yes!! I was going to say this too. All the crazies represent themselves!

 

[KeenSleuth17]

Watching some of yesterday's inquest this morning, I was struck by his sad stories (his origins, the accident etc.) I can 100% visualise him spinning these stories to women to gain their sympathy.

I'm also somewhat up to date with the inquest via your comments here - thanks everyone!

Doesn’t he speak confidently and captivatingly about the stories! If people didn’t know of him, his relevant history, the context in which he finds himself presently, most people would be so heart broken for him and drawn in. Preying on vulnerable women is one thing but preying on kind-hearted women who just want to ‘rescue him’ with all of their compassion is next level in my opinion.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

The fact RB refused to accept he made his original statement is a pretty big deal!

It would take unusual and extreme circumstances for a lawyer to argue their client DID NOT write and sign their police statement, and only very rarely do they argue it was made under coercion and duress.

But it's pretty damn impossible for a lawyer to deny the very obvious and recorded timeline of when police contacted their client.

Also, no lawyer would present such asinine evidence last minute without first presenting it to the court and other parties, which is a requirement... such as presenting 'proof' of his wife's memory issues THE DAY AFTER her testimony.

I suspect RB was trying to con his lawyer into conning the court. And the lawyer refused to perjure themselves. I reckon the lawyer split.

8 June 2021 – police first contact with RB
9 June 2021 – RB signed police statement (denied knowing Marion or having FR QLD licence)
14 Sep 2021 – second police contact with RB
Oct/Nov 2021 – date RB claims police first made contact

 

[KeenSleuth17]

From what we know he prefers others to drive him around, he probably expects a lift lol. to save on petrol, on a invalids pension moneys tight and the bus is unreliable lol

Still scamming off the Aussie tax payer

Edited to correct spelling error

 

[LouLouSleuth]

Ok my take and questions from today:
- his mother had her legs blown off? But then was on and he went to live with her later.
- later in the day he calls her Maria, not mum or my mother, seemed very cold
- why is he compelled to answer all of these questions that seem to have thing to do with Marion? Eg Number of affairs etc. I get why, as they are building a body of evidence but why can’t he just say ‘I don’t believe that is relevant’?
- narcissists always sack their lawyers and represent themselves
- the reference to not remembering his first daughters name was Cold As Ice
- Interpol HAS to be after him. Is that why they are going through all of this in detail??

 

[mishy66]

The fact RB refused to accept he made his original statement is a pretty big deal!

It would take unusual and extreme circumstances for a lawyer to agree to deny their client ever wrote and signed their police statement (only rarely do they argue it was made under coercion and duress).

But it's pretty damn hard for a lawyer to deny the very obvious and recorded timeline of when police contacted their client.

Also, no lawyer would present such asinine evidence last minute without first presenting it to all parties which is a requirement... 'proof' of his wife's memory surgery THE DAY AFTER her testimony. I reckon the lawyer split.

8 June 2021 – police first contact with RB
9 June 2021 – RB signed police statement (denied knowing Marion or having FR QLD licence)
14 Sep 2021 – second police contact with RB
Oct/Nov 2021 – date RB claims police first made contact

Thank you.
I was just going to ask about his lawyer!