Australia Australia - Marion Barter, 51, missing after trip to UK, Jun 1997 #5

Status
Not open for further replies.
You said your main reason for thinking it was Marion who returned to Australia and not an imposter was that the person attended an optometrist "with her eye condition". So correct me if I've missed it, which is entirely possible, but as far as I know there's no evidence of the attendee who was billed as Marion having the same eye condition as Marion or any mildly unusual condition. So once you've raised the possibility of an imposter having returned on Marion's passport, how is the appearance of an item on Marion's Medicare account the most persuasive evidence that it was Marion and not an imposter who returned--or proof that Marion was at that time alive?
We commonly use the word opticians here in the UK so my idea of an optometrist was more medical and someone who would have had access too Marion's personal medical files. It was then pointed out that this is not the case so I am now less persuaded it was Marion. However in my opinion It would still be risky for an imposter to visit banks over a period of days to draw out money especially as the places where not far from Southport. At any time it would have just taken one bank teller who may have been relief staff from her local branch to have recognised it was not Marion making withdrawals. There are also not any known Male/Female fraudsters who worked together conning people in Australia reported around this time period as far as I am aware.
 
Was it a single visit to the optometrist? Normally it's a two-visit process - eye test + pick up glasses or lenses. If it was just one visit, what could that be for? Just to collect a copy of her prescription because she planned to be away a while and knew she'd be needing it at some point in future?
 
Looking at the homicide angle what could have been the motive

Here are a few ideas of my own although I am still swayed both ways into thinking alternatively she may have started a new life and further changed her name to go undetected.

a) Marion is a victim of fraud and is coerced by someone posing as a potential partner then murdered.
b) Marion starts a new relationship with someone and gets into a physical fight which leads to manslaughter.
c) There are some allegations of abuse at a certain school and Marion is a whistleblower. She is silence by someone who does not want the truth to come out about something which has happened there.
d) Marion is desperate to find a new husband but comes across the wrong type of person. He may have murdered women in the past and Marion is not aware of his background.
e) Marion has some kind of terminal health diagnosis and asks someone to assist either legally or illegally (or both) with her death. For example someone gets Marion out of the country on a fake passport to a country where assisted suicide is allowed. Only four countries approve of assisted dying as a whole: Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg.
I think a) seems the most likely option when you consider her disappearance/her money withdrawals/change of name. The combination of those three things really points in one direction IMO.
 
We commonly use the word opticians here in the UK so my idea of an optometrist was more medical and someone who would have had access too Marion's personal medical files. It was then pointed out that this is not the case so I am now less persuaded it was Marion. However in my opinion It would still be risky for an imposter to visit banks over a period of days to draw out money especially as the places where not far from Southport. At any time it would have just taken one bank teller who may have been relief staff from her local branch to have recognised it was not Marion making withdrawals. There are also not any known Male/Female fraudsters who worked together conning people in Australia reported around this time period as far as I am aware.
Thank you; I read your initial response as sarcastic; my mistake. Optometrists are university-trained allied health practitioners. They provide eye health checks, currently one check in two years is claimable, and if disease is detected refer the patient to a medical specialist. In addition they check vision and sell spectacles etc. Vision checks can be claimed more frequently than eye health checks. Optometrists would not normally have access to a patient's general medical records, or optometry records with a different optometrist unless the patient brought them in, but they could check with Medicare as to when the patient last had a type of optometry service, because it might have been by a different optometrist and if too recent would affect claiming.

If Medicare records could be obtained that far back, it would be worth checking whether Marion had ever visited that optometrist before. An optometrist would recognize a regular patient, but likely not one returning for only the second or third visit after a number of years. (However you make a fair point that a return patient would be cross-checked against previous clinical notes and it's reasonable to think that in that case an impersonation would be detected.)
 
Last edited:
Was it a single visit to the optometrist? Normally it's a two-visit process - eye test + pick up glasses or lenses. If it was just one visit, what could that be for? Just to collect a copy of her prescription because she planned to be away a while and knew she'd be needing it at some point in future?
Or the reverse--to hand over a prescription from another optometrist to request that the items be made, and in due course fitted.
 
Thank you; I read your initial response as sarcastic; my mistake. Optometrists are university-trained allied health practitioners. They provide eye health checks, currently one check in two years is claimable, and if disease is detected refer the patient to a medical specialist. In addition they check vision and sell spectacles etc. Vision checks can be claimed more frequently than eye health checks. Optometrists would not normally have access to a patient's general medical records, or optometry records with a different optometrist unless the patient brought them in, but they could check with Medicare as to when the patient last had a type of optometry service, because it might have been by a different optometrist and if too recent would affect claiming.

If Medicare records could be obtained that far back, it would be worth checking whether Marion had ever visited that optometrist before. An optometrist would recognize a regular patient, but likely not one returning for only the second or third visit after a number of years. (However you make a fair point that a return patient would be cross-checked against previous clinical notes and it's reasonable to think that in that case an impersonation would be detected.)


It was previously mentioned that Marion had (unknown) medical appointments leading up to the time she left AU. I don’t think it’s ever been clarified what type of Dr she saw then, but would be interesting to know if it was optometrist also.
 
Has everyone looked at Jane Doe cases both in Australia and other countries. I know there was a big thing with testing remains of people a few Months ago in Australia.

The clearest description of Marion when she went missing is the interpol one which can be found on the yellow notice list.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20210930-202240.png
    Screenshot_20210930-202240.png
    173.2 KB · Views: 22
Last edited:
UK Missing Persons Unit
This person is interesting
Age would fit in 2001- age 55 to 65
Hysterectomy scars
I think the height may be different though as Marion is 1.67 metres (5ft 4 inches) not 5ft 6 inches according to Interpol yellow notice.
Mallory flashlight with body also appears to be American brand rather than Australian.
 
Last edited:
UK Missing Persons Unit
This person is interesting
Age would fit in 2001- age 55 to 65
Hysterectomy scars
I think the height may be different though as Marion is 1.67 metres (5ft 4 inches) not 5ft 6 inches according to Interpol yellow notice.
Mallory flashlight with body also appears to be American brand rather than Australian.

Lacking - Upper Teeth - Teeth - All Missing - Probably Dentures

I don't think that sounds like Marion to have lost all of her teeth in a few years ?
 
I do think Deirdre and Browen know more than they say. They do not invest in the search to find Marion. Lee had offered to advance the money to hire a private investigator around the time Marion's father was investigating. Besides, I would like to know why Sally refused this proposal at the time.
 
I do think Deirdre and Browen know more than they say. They do not invest in the search to find Marion. Lee had offered to advance the money to hire a private investigator around the time Marion's father was investigating. Besides, I would like to know why Sally refused this proposal at the time.

I am not sure they know anything, I mean they are extremely strange but they would have to be void of all empathy to put Sally and their own parents through this and not say anything. It's like they have their head firmly stuck in the sand and choose to believe she is happy somewhere, is it possible the alternative is too much for them to bare ? although I don't think that would be a normal reaction, most people want to know what happened no matter how awful.

it's almost like Bronwyn is jealous of Marion's ability to "escape" the family judging by some of her comments.
 
In November 2020, Sally wrote on Facebook: "I’ve always said, something happened at TSS to make her leave! I won’t stop till I found out exactly what it was!"
It would have made sense for Marion to confide in someone from her family whom she could trust. If she didn't, it was because someone advised her not to do it or because she felt in danger and also worried for the safety of her family or those around her. I still think she must have said things to her sisters or her aunts.
According to this logic one can presuppose that Marion wanted to take shelter by changing her name, by going abroad, etc.
Once everyone was informed that she had been away to Europe for several months, she returned incognito to Australia and was unable to come forward for fear of being in danger again.
I think Marion didn't coordinate this plan on her own and that the mysterious man Sally saw was not her new boyfriend but the person advising her on how to plan her "disappearance".
 
In November 2020, Sally wrote on Facebook: "I’ve always said, something happened at TSS to make her leave! I won’t stop till I found out exactly what it was!"
It would have made sense for Marion to confide in someone from her family whom she could trust. If she didn't, it was because someone advised her not to do it or because she felt in danger and also worried for the safety of her family or those around her. I still think she must have said things to her sisters or her aunts.
According to this logic one can presuppose that Marion wanted to take shelter by changing her name, by going abroad, etc.
Once everyone was informed that she had been away to Europe for several months, she returned incognito to Australia and was unable to come forward for fear of being in danger again.
I think Marion didn't coordinate this plan on her own and that the mysterious man Sally saw was not her new boyfriend but the person advising her on how to plan her "disappearance".
Interesting angle!
 
In November 2020, Sally wrote on Facebook: "I’ve always said, something happened at TSS to make her leave! I won’t stop till I found out exactly what it was!"
It would have made sense for Marion to confide in someone from her family whom she could trust. If she didn't, it was because someone advised her not to do it or because she felt in danger and also worried for the safety of her family or those around her. I still think she must have said things to her sisters or her aunts.
According to this logic one can presuppose that Marion wanted to take shelter by changing her name, by going abroad, etc.
Once everyone was informed that she had been away to Europe for several months, she returned incognito to Australia and was unable to come forward for fear of being in danger again.
I think Marion didn't coordinate this plan on her own and that the mysterious man Sally saw was not her new boyfriend but the person advising her on how to plan her "disappearance".


This really makes sense, @Tintenbar. I can totally see Marion doing a cloak and dagger thing, to disappear. Very nice!

My take might be that the man advising Marion, saw a way to bilk her, and coaxed her back (incognito) to Australia and then double-crossed her.

To be honest, this is the first theory that has made sense to me.
 
Above all, she knew that she could not count on the police and judicial authorities to protect her and had to disappear and abandon her family.
 
Marion had sent a postcard to L. Callinan living in North Kockhampton. Who is this person ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
81
Guests online
2,842
Total visitors
2,923

Forum statistics

Threads
592,286
Messages
17,966,694
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top