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

[mishy66]

Looking closer at the dates of his name change and his track record, it's VERY possible he actually met DW right before their wedding. I mean, that's his pattern.

Yes this has been my thought on it too. It is his pattern of behaviour and he would have nothing to gain by 'courting' DW for 5 or 6 yrs before marriage. And given DW family background, it would seem impossible to believe she would spend the time writing to a criminal in jail on the other side of the world for many years right?

Is there something in DW life around the 1970's that she may be trying to hide and doesnt want to made public perhaps? It could be both of them having to establish the 1970 ship meet up to hide some detail in their own life ... He arriving back in Aust on a pigeon ( it seems!) and her perhaps......a young girl in the late 60's early 70's with her own 'baggage' . Just my opinion of this time.

 

[MrsWattle]

Auntie? living in Japan early 90's
Claire de Hedervary's Biography

 

[mishy66]

I wonder if the child of RB and DDH may be called to give evidence?

Hopefully both of them!

 

[Passingthru]

That’s the big question, lol
I think he’s just got confused about the initial time he was interviewed by police in June and gave a statement, and when he wrote his statement for the inquest.

Nah, I think he wants a takes-backsy on his original statement (where he lied a lot.)

 

[LouLouSleuth]

Yes, the boat thing is interesting, especially with the repeated reference to MC's testemony about a "long sailing trip".

I've seen mention here that the police are still unaware of how he entered Australia in 1974. Perhaps he had a yacht in French Polynesia that he used to illegally enter by? Maybe called Chusan?

IMO

We have family friends who did this around 1974. They were escaping the iron curtain in Germany, sailed to Samoa and then onto Aus on a tiny little sailing bait. I’m sure it’s not common but was possible

 

[Deleted member 249471]

That’s the big question, lol
I think he’s just got confused about the initial time he was interviewed by police in June and gave a statement, and when he wrote his statement for the inquest.

I think you're being far too generous When he made his statement on 9 June, he denied ever knowing Marion and MC, and ever having a QLD licence in the name of FR. He has since changed his story. Now he openly admits to all three things and has weaved them into his defense.

So he is pretending he never made that police statement, and in turn, pretending that police never contacted him in June. I don't believe it's confusion but cognitive dissonance and gaslighting the court. IMO.

 

[mishy66]

Like you all, my mind is spinning. Who ever thought we'd be at this point where the story keeps unfolding with more and more twists and turns? I know my comments repeat those of others. Forgive me for not giving credit.

1. Was it possible Blum's idea was to commit crimes in Europe and then to keep Australia as his safe zone? Like a dog who won't pee near its bed. Then Marion changed everything. . . . (although I still want IK exhumed!)

2. As Blum spun his stories yesterday, he became more confident on the stand. I believe this is a tactic by Mr C. Letting Blum weave the rope to hang himself. Showing who he is and hoping he'll incriminate himself.

3. If DdH had a serious brain issue, learning disability or any known compromising condition, I can't believe they'd make her a witness. To easy to overturn her testimony.

exactly.

 

[mishy66]

Auntie? living in Japan early 90's
Claire de Hedervary's Biography

I have been down this route also.
I came to the conclusion that no he wouldnt be standing under her umbrella as her profile is too highly linked to the UN and very well known.

He may very well believe in his own deluded mind she is his 'aunt' though

 

[Eyespywithmylittleeye]

Yes, the boat thing is interesting, especially with the repeated reference to MC's testemony about a "long sailing trip".

I've seen mention here that the police are still unaware of how he entered Australia in 1974. Perhaps he had a yacht in French Polynesia that he used to illegally enter by? Maybe called Chusan?

IMO

I just think he used a foreign passport in a name they don’t know.. used only to get here.. then he changed to FDH before wedding and got his Aussie ID

 

[Littleguy7]

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but the passenger list from the Chusan 1970 ship has a Mr J Walker, English and Mrs Walker, South African. D's parents names were Gordon and Peggy. And the single Miss Walker was considerably older than D, so there's not only no evidence of WW being on the ship, there's no evidence of D or her parents being on the ship.
So either there are gaps in the passenger list, or D is mistaken/mis-remembering or D is knowingly lying to align to an agreed story.
Add to the dispute of the June 2021 statement, the medical fact sheet, and the notes, at what point will they call out contempt of court? Surely it must be close. I wonder if that's why they closed court and adjourned given he had no legal representation, if they are getting close to a contempt of court charge...

 

[Deleted member 249471]

I half expect RB to turn up to court today with a bandage around his head and doctor's certificate saying he had brain surgery last night.

 

[CrowGirl87]

C

I think you're being far too generous When he made his statement on 9 June, he denied ever knowing Marion and MC, and ever having a QLD licence in the name of FR. He has since changed his story. Now he openly admits to all three things and has weaved them into his defense.

So he is pretending he never made that police statement, and in turn, pretending that police never contacted him in June. I don't believe it's confusion but cognitive dissonance and gaslighting the court. IMO.

I may be wrong here, but I thought C said that on the 8th of June was when he was first approached by Police and at that time he denied knowing Marion Barter and he denied ever using the name Fernand Remakel.
But then he contacted Police and made a statement on June 9th. He said he originally said he lied because his wife was there on the 8th and he didn't want her to hear about it as she never knew about it before.

But I may be wrong.. there was so much new information yesterday!

ETA: but yes I totally agree with you that he is trying to pretend it never happened!

 

[CrowGirl87]

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but the passenger list from the Chusan 1970 ship has a Mr J Walker, English and Mrs Walker, South African. D's parents names were Gordon and Peggy. And the single Miss Walker was considerably older than D, so there's not only no evidence of WW being on the ship, there's no evidence of D or her parents being on the ship.
So either there are gaps in the passenger list, or D is mistaken/mis-remembering or D is knowingly lying to align to an agreed story.
Add to the dispute of the June 2021 statement, the medical fact sheet, and the notes, at what point will they call out contempt of court? Surely it must be close. I wonder if that's why they closed court and adjourned given he had no legal representation, if they are getting close to a contempt of court charge...

RDH agreed yesterday that the boat trip to Australia must have happened in 1971

 

[mishy66]

I just loved the ' no never in Luxemburg, never been arrested in Luxemburg' comment

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but the passenger list from the Chusan 1970 ship has a Mr J Walker, English and Mrs Walker, South African. D's parents names were Gordon and Peggy. And the single Miss Walker was considerably older than D, so there's not only no evidence of WW being on the ship, there's no evidence of D or her parents being on the ship.
So either there are gaps in the passenger list, or D is mistaken/mis-remembering or D is knowingly lying to align to an agreed story.
Add to the dispute of the June 2021 statement, the medical fact sheet, and the notes, at what point will they call out contempt of court? Surely it must be close. I wonder if that's why they closed court and adjourned given he had no legal representation, if they are getting close to a contempt of court charge...

Yes that is all I was able to find also after doing a 3 yr variable.
They werent on that ship at all.

 

[sistermadly32]

Apologies if this has been asked before, but is there no ramifications for lying on the stand when it’s a coroner’s inquest? Only if it’s a trial?

 

[Deleted member 249471]

I may be wrong here, but I thought C said that on the 8th of June was when he was first approached by Police and at that time he denied knowing Marion Barter and he denied ever using the name Fernand Remakel.
But then he contacted Police and made a statement on June 9th. He said he originally said he lied because his wife was there on the 8th and he didn't want her to hear about it as she never knew about it before.
But I may be wrong.. there was so much new information yesterday!
ETA: but yes I totally agree with you that he is trying to pretend it never happened!

My understanding is that police spoke to him at home on the 8th.
The next day, RB went to police station and provided them with a signed statement.
Then they spoke again in September but the story started changing.
RB is denying both June and Sept incidents happened and is saying first contact was Oct/Nov.
Casselden pressed him why there was a difference between June and Sept, was it because he had more time to come up with a plan and story?
And RB replied that it was because he wife was present in June.
But that makes no sense because it still doesn't explain his written statement. He could have done that without his wife present.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Apologies if this has been asked before, but is there no ramifications for lying on the stand when it’s a coroner’s inquest? Only if it’s a trial?

Yes, lying to the court is perjury (even at an inquest) and has a penalty of 10 years max in prison. If they have nothing on him for Marion, I suppose they can put him in jail for perjury. They need to prove it and have a trial for it. I don't know how frequently this happens though. It's more of a threat than a promise?

 

[vivienbee]

Is there a link for Inquest Day 8? I can't see it yet on the YT.

 

[CrowGirl87]

My understanding is that police spoke to him at home on the 8th.
The next day, RB went to police station and provided them with a signed statement.
Then they spoke again in September but the story started changing.
RB is denying both June and Sept incidents happened and is saying first contact was Oct/Nov.
Casselden pressed him why there was a difference between June and Sept, was it because he had more time to come up with a plan and story?
And RB replied that it was because he wife was present in June.
But that makes no sense because it still doesn't explain his written statement. He could have done that without his wife present.

fair enough! That definitely makes it more damning that he would wait so long between statements to change his story! *head explodes*

 

[MrsWattle]

In the 70's a willy Wouters was doing heroin deals between Switzerland and new York. I know the age 54 is a bit off but who knows what he told them .

U.S. Gets Heroin Suspect From Swiss (Published 1971)