Australia Australia - Marion Barter, 51, missing after trip to UK, June 1997 #9

[MrsEmmaPeel]

@Peralta, building on your bullet points --

• RB made her come back with him on purpose, which is different from JO's story (for example, 'he couldn't withdraw her UK money, so he dragged her back to Aus')

1. JO didn't have a bundle of money waiting to be taken in Australia.
2. RB had to return to take possession of Marion's money.
3. RB may have thought it would only take a few days to get all the money.
   
4. RB may have planned to leave again with Marion after money was secured, and leave her stranded ala JO or worse.
5. Is the fact that it took longer than RB planned what led to Marion's death?
6. Had Marion not followed RB's instructions from the beginning so the money was in 3 different locations? Did her caution lead to her demise?

• MB was leaving breadcrumbs

1. Seems unlikely to me. Too spy-novelly. If she was that worried, she'd have contacted someone. RB doesn't seem the threatening-someone-with-death kind of conman, although I can imagine him acting impulsively or in a rage.

• she didn't write either of the passenger cards, or at least, it wasn't her that returned.

1. Sally is convinced the 2nd passenger card is her mum's writing.
2. RB has gone to elaborate lengths to create situations where he is given things. He seems careful not to commit felony crimes connected directly to himself. If the plan fails, he moves on or improvises an alternative. Marion would have had to be killed after her phone call to Sally, and then RB and accomplice would have had to rush to AUS, bribe a teller, and steal the money. Not just once! but in many withdrawals! Each withdrawal a risk.

FWIW.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

It seems to me that Casselden firmly established the character of Ric Blum. There is no doubt he is a slimeball grifting liar who preys on women. What I want to know is this-- does the inquest, in a sense, establish need for further investigation, in funding or manpower etc? Because it seems to me the entire Marion case rests entirely on the period of time from Sally's last phone call with her. I refuse to believe there are no stones left to turn in UK or AUS from those weeks.

Yes. The Coroner's Court investigates the case and puts on inquest. They have a team of people working the case that includes a lot of lawyers. But lawyers only work with the info they are given, right? Someone else is doing the actual investigating... police investigators that work closely with Coroners Court to produce the brief of evidence.

Because they are police, they have access to more police, and all their usual means of investigation. Like contacting foreign bodies and access to classified information.

In addition to those police working with Coroner's, there is STILL a concurrent investigation by a police squad that deal with possible homicide. They too have access to all kinds investigation tools and methods. I do believe that the kitchen sink is being thrown in, and all possible avenues are being explored.

I have no proof or inside knowledge, but I suspect given all that's been uncovered about RB, including Interpol looking for him in the 80s, HIS ENTIRE LIFE AND HISTORY is going under the microscope and being investigated for fraud, embezzlement, money laundering, racketeering, identity theft, immigration offences, kidnapping, homicide, etc. I suspect multiple countries are doing the same, and that they may all be working together to get to the bottom of it. Fingers crossed.

 

[KiwiNZ]

I'm inclined to think end of '96 too. The Switzerland story was not established as a version of truth in my opinion. If Marion kept all her old passports, as many people do, RB could have seen her travel status from those, I'm sure he could have weaved that into a conversation to look at them if she kept them, having an interest in such things! Also they could have had discussions about their travels, "Oh I was in Switzerland too in the 60s", "oh, where did you stay, we may have crossed paths", etc. It would be interesting to know if Marion's old passports were in the storage container too, along with other personal papers.

If he gave his statement the day after police contacted him, and came up with the Switzerland story, he had either been following the case already on line or podcast, or did a huge amount of research overnight, there is no way he could remember or align dates ( with times she could have possible been in Switzerland) just from his memory of conversations he had with Marion in 1997 he would have had to reference something.

The event never happened (Switzerland) choosing a point in time that could not be confirmed as true or false, He has to have been using the podcast or online to weave this story of Switzerland.

I say he was already following the case, also part of the reason he decided to go and speak to the police, he knew this wasn't going away and the podcast had information .. how long before channel 7 doorstep him, he front footed this

 

[LouLouSleuth]

Having finally caught up with the end of the inquest today just how unsatisfactory was that to end on the cliffhanger of Marion’s case. The one the inquest is supposed to be delving into. AC has been magnificent but to have your man on the ropes only to back off is deeply frustrating.

The delay is probably not helpful but I’m praying I’m completely wrong for Sally’s sake. She has been put through the wringer more than enough.

I thought this too initially but then another meme we sparked the thought that the pace was Mr C’s plan to buy time to undertake further research into what’s been discussed this week, and that hopefully more will come forward in this time. He’s clearly keeping Monique and Flemme his sleeves. He covered a little if Marion but not enough. I hope it’s brilliance the way it worked out. IMO

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Here's the thing... Even if it WAS Marion making ALL of the withdrawals, it was still UNUSUAL behaviour that, in a normal circumstance, would be reported and investigated for possible fraud and money laundering. Yet it wasn't.

Even if it was Marion legitimately withdrawing $5k daily for 3.5 wks in Byron, something dodgy happened because a bank won't let you do that. It wasn't her branch. It's too much cash in a short period of time. It warrants a Suspicious Transaction Report. A bank will report you for exactly what 'she' did.

Even if it was Marion that legitimately withdrew her own $80k in cash from Colonial, something dodgy happened because a bank won't let you do that. $10k in one go warrants an AUSTRAC investigation, let alone $80k. A bank will report you for exactly what 'she' did.

The point is, whether it was Marion, RB or someone else dressed as Marion who withdrew the money, the bank was dodgy (bribed). So, why did he need Marion for that? He could have just done it without her No?

I honestly don't think he needed her. Especially if he had her Aus bankcard and id.
So why come back as Florabella, married from Lux, visiting for 8 days only?

Ooooh, my confusion limit has already maxxed out and it's not even 9.30am, lol.

 

[LouLouSleuth]

The one where he worked for her parents in the 70s or the one where he used to meet the Le Courier guy? The last one was on the corner of Pitt and Market Streets, Sydney, I think he said. But I doubt that a coffee shop has ever been there.

I think he said it was the newspaper shop in that location?

 

[vivienbee]

The point is, whether it was Marion, RB or someone else dressed as Marion who withdrew the money, the bank was dodgy (bribed). So, why did he need Marion for that? He could have just done it without her No?

Agreed that regardless it would have flagged up as a dodgy situation.

But if it wasn't Marion who withdrew the money and someone inside the bank was bribed, why did he go overseas with Marion at all?

"Here's a ticket to England, go and enjoy yourself. I'll come and join you as soon as I've got a few things tied up here and we can buy a house together and move to Lux. Leave your documents with me here so I can buy us a new property." He stays in Aus and withdraws the money, with someone on the inside not caring about the lack of ID. Wouldn't that be easier?

Surely if someone was working as an insider at the bank/getting paid off they wouldn't have the scruples to be like, "yeah, you can withdraw this money no questions asked, but I'm gonna need to see the ID for the sake of it."

No idea where I'm going with this, just thinking out loud.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Good question. I need coffee and time to think about that one
But off the top of my head... I think he likes taking them overseas so it looks like they ran off for a new life?
So the optics are bad if anyone starts looking?
Maybe he doesn't intend for them to ever return?
Maybe JO got super lucky because she was not supposed to live?
Hmmm... we're back to the 'does he kill them' question.

 

[Itsapuzzle]

If he gave his statement the day after police contacted him, and came up with the Switzerland story, he had either been following the case already on line or podcast, or did a huge amount of research overnight, there is no way he could remember or align dates ( with times she could have possible been in Switzerland) just from his memory of conversations he had with Marion in 1997 he would have had to reference something.

The event never happened (Switzerland) choosing a point in time that could not be confirmed as true or false, He has to have been using the podcast or online to weave this story of Switzerland.

I say he was already following the case, also part of the reason he decided to go and speak to the police, he knew this wasn't going away and the podcast had information .. how long before channel 7 doorstep him, he front footed this

Agree KiwiNZ, good points, however re the contact with police, I do recall something about him being contacted in June and something about a statement months later .... I need to go and fact check that, could be wrong, h'mm, will have a listen today unless anyone recalls now, that'd be fab.

 

[Procrastinator]

I cannot recall which member wrote this or the thread number but the theory, and IMO, maybe RB had taken photos of MB and was using them to blackmail her, as he had tried to do with I think JO(?) or the other lady.

 

[MrsEmmaPeel]

One last thought, and then I'm done for the day on this side of hemisphere. Again, I believe, there is a trail for investigators, however faint. Praying for that. Where are those tellers!

I know things weren't supposed to be done, but I can imagine a middle-aged woman spinning a ditzy story about having done a dumb thing and needing to transfer the entire sum to a different account-- and therefore having to withdraw in increments to abide by the rules and the two women (teller and Marion) laughing about it. It is hard to go back to the 1990s and to a place as relaxed as the AUS coast (I live in beachy California which has been notorious for scams because people are so laid back) and remember a time before DNA, instant electronic transfer, debit cards. There may have been protocols but there weren't algorithms and automatic procedures that kicked in. There were people. My husband couldn't dress as his mother or mine or the other women he embezzled from, but damn could he spin a story that made people break rules right and left. At banks and brokerage firms in the 1990s.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

One last thought, and then I'm done for the day on this side of hemisphere. Again, I believe, there is a trail for investigators, however faint. Praying for that.

I know things weren't supposed to be done, but I can imagine a middle-aged woman spinning a ditzy story about having done a dumb thing and needing to transfer the entire sum to a different account-- and therefore having to withdraw in increments to abide by the rules and the two women (teller and Marion) laughing about it. It is hard to go back to the 1990s and to a place as relaxed as the AUS coast (I live in beachy California which has been notorious for scams because people are so laid back.) and remember a time before DNA, instant electronic transfer, debit cards. There may have been protocols but there weren't algorithms and automatic procedures that kicked in. There were people. My husband couldn't dress as his mother or mine or the other women he embezzled from, but damn could he spin a story that made people break rules right and left. At banks and brokerage firms. In the 1990s.

I really appreciate you stories @MrsEmmaPeel as it helps provide real context

I am wholeheartedly prepared to image a scenario where the bank was not bribed. The fact I know of employee fraud convictions definitely colours my perspective. And it's an easy way to explain things that don't make sense.

But yes, he is a conman and a master of spin, after all. We see a bumbling idiot in court. But he didn't get away with it for all these years had he not been charming and capable.

I think part of me wants to create a timeline where Marion returned because I don't want to accept she perished alone, while in the UK, so far from home.

Another part of me insists she never returned because I don't want to accept she was under his con/spell and believed what she wrote on the passenger cards was true, or the she willingly lied.

Anyhow, thanks for you perspective, as always

 

[KiwiNZ]

Agree KiwiNZ, good points, however re the contact with police, I do recall something about him being contacted in June and something about a statement months later .... I need to go and fact check that, could be wrong, h'mm, will have a listen today unless anyone recalls now, that'd be fab.

He was contacted on 8th of June and said he did not know Marion, he phoned the police next day and said he wanted to make a statement - he made the first statement on the 9th of June

This is what he spent forever denying on day one, that the above never happened lol and his first statement was October

He only had 24hr to come up with a story ... he couldn't have come up with this story without having followed the case prior to been contacted, it fits to neatly into the podcasts timeline.

Following the podcast he would know they have information that could lead to him, rather than have channel 7 turn up on his doorstep, he choose to go back to the police and try and talk his way out of it

 

[ruby925]

deleted as duplicate info on another post

 

[Itsapuzzle]

He was contacted on 8th of June and said he did not know Marion, he phoned the police next day and said he wanted to make a statement - he made the first statement on the 9th of June

This is what he spent forever denying on day one, that the above never happened lol and his first statement was October

He only had 24hr to come up with a story ... he couldn't have come up with this story without having followed the case prior to been contacted, it fits to neatly into the podcasts timeline.

Following the podcast he would know they have information that could lead to him, rather than have channel 7 turn up on his doorstep, he choose to go back to the police and try and talk his way out of it

Good on ya KiwiNZ, ah yes, I remember that bit, lol, about the statement - h'mm, I still think there's a possibility it was discussed with Marion when they were together, they could have looked at her old passports, discussed where they'd travelled, I think it's something you'd probably remember if it happened that way. Just don't think that Switzerland meeting story has been adequately proven, there's too many variables to get to that point. MOO of course

 

[MrsWattle]

There's a Diane Walker in Woonona in 1972. Could she have been visiting her family uncle and auntie in Vaucluse in early 70's

 

[mishy66]

I found it, but now think I was perhaps drawing a long bow with a link. The name was Dorothea Maslowska and It was a post by @Eyespywithmylittleeye for this company:

CORDEMANS ET Cie (BVBA)
Private limited liability company • Founded 27/12/1984 • Closed 24/12/2003

rue des Francs 46, 1040 Etterbeek

BE 0426.659.844

I can’t find a connection though, Albert Cordemans resigned and Dorothea Maslowska is appointed from 1/7 2001

then 23-12/2003 the company goes into liquidation. Document says something about the last tax and other obligations will still need to be repaid and handled by Albert Cordeman (at the same address) and that he will retain and assume custody of the company’s books and documents. Cordemans Et Cie will cease to exist subject to its passive existence for a period of 5 years.

Ahhhh ok that one. Sorry I tagged you with others last night.
Just catching up with all the posts the morning!
It does my head in with his dealings

 

[mishy66]

This hotel happens to be close to a cliff looking over water. So he suggests they take a romantic walk one night and he pushes her over the cliff and her body has never been found.

 

[KiwiNZ]

Good on ya KiwiNZ, ah yes, I remember that bit, lol, about the statement - h'mm, I still think there's a possibility it was discussed with Marion when they were together, they could have looked at her old passports, discussed where they'd travelled, I think it's something you'd probably remember if it happened that way. Just don't think that Switzerland meeting story has been adequately proven, there's too many variables to get to that point. MOO of course

I agree it could have been discussed with her in 1997 but remembering a date 25 years later from a conversation I had with someone ? and dates that are coincidently hard to verify but lines up with the podcast ?, if you ask him any other dates including one in the last 10 years he cant remember.

To me this is a "recent memory" he has formed from listening to the podcast, not from conversations with Marion in 1997

I don't believe for a second Switzerland happened, its just another story, but I also think he made this up overnight in his head between the 8th and the 9th of June and I think he used the podcast to weave a story that was difficult to discount ... sorry if I am not making sense, I know what I am trying to say but having trouble communicating it lol

I think my point is he has been listening to the podcast and following on line all along, and if correct I would say he is not as frail or inept as he appears in court

 

[mishy66]

The only question in my mind is why it is so important they lie about that date and ship specifically.

Yes this is the big Question! Why.
They weren't on that ship.
I made comment a while back that is it because it is something to do with her and not him at this point?
She is about 19 ? from a wealthy family. Meets a European sweet talker and falls head over heels. He has spoken many times about his zest for sex ( opps! sorry he made it clear the women are the sex fiends not him), her family would be very disappointed should she fall pregnant prior to marriage at that time yes?
Just my thoughts on this specific timeline.