Australia Australia - Marion Barter, 51, missing after trip to UK, Jun 1997 #3

[TootsieFootsie]

Marion was only 51, hardly an age when any modern woman would be wanting to or needing to slow their pace down.
She was nowhere near retirement age and a long way from approaching a "slowing down" age.
Just because she had tea with a couple of old ladies doesn't mean she was ready to think of herself as one of them.

I agree, I think there is some real credibility to the theory that Marion chose this Marion was more into the quaint and small town feel than to the big bustling cities- she was a woman then into her 50s- a time when many people start to crave a slower , gentler pace of life. I think Marion was no exception. So why not choose Cornwall on the far west coast, where many a Brit even flocks to for the summer? More noted for its tourism .

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Post was deleted as I did't use acceptable wording

 

[Deleted member 249471]

once they’re in Luxembourg that she is unable to withdraw the remainder of her money whilst overseas and needs to return home to get it. The only reason why she would’ve done it in increments that I can think of would be to avoid detection by the FTRA. Maybe she then deposits the money into an international bank account again in increments. Maybe the account is in someone else’s name and at this stage hasn’t been looked into.

Close. Another story is that he realises he can’t access her money overseas so he needs to return to Aus with her.

As a ruse to get her back in the country, he tells her they can finally tell her family about her relationship and relocation (hence customs card info) and she ships her container (why he has her lamp).

But he doesn’t let her see her family. Instead he asked her to transfer/withdraw her money. The penny drops. She refuses. Marion is disappeared.

I suspect the scammer wanted to complete the scam on his own and reap the rewards. But because Marion refused to hand over the money, he needed to involve other people in particular positions that could facilitate the scam.

One might suspect this is why a particular location was chosen, because one could find two such corrupt individuals in that area?

Perhaps someone at the bank with a criminal history helped withdraw her money in instalments so as not to raise alarm bells, with the support of someone who helped hinder any potential investigation? For their services, I suspect they got part of her money.

They then deposit the cash into timeshare/resort/retirement village like scams (such as someone with a sudden interest in quitting their lifelong profession to start selling and managing these accounts), and other shell companies (such as a scammer with a long track record of doing just that).

Meanwhile Fernand is travelling in and out of the country, and around the world, on another name. This is why Fernand's partner claims he's never been to Australia. She's telling the truth. He travels on an alias.

BTW, this is all just wild and unsubstantiated speculation.

 

[KiwiNZ]

As a ruse to get her back in the country, he tells her they can finally tell her family about her relationship and relocation (hence customs card info) and she ships her container (why he has her lamp).


Sally confirmed on facebook it was not her mothers lamp or even the same lamp, it was just similar in style. They seem to like to make statements on the podcasts ( or in this case the televised sting) and then correct them on facebook when an individual asks the question, rather than giving an update on the podcast, ( actually I think they may have corrected the lamp theory on one of the podcasts but not sure) in the meantime we all rush down the wrong rabbit hole lol

 

[Deleted member 249471]

My apologies I fixed it: "she ships her container to Luxembourg, hence why he has a lamp that *looks* like Marion's Laura Ashley lamp".

 

[KiwiNZ]

As regards the Fernand link- I wonder how Sally has found about the length of time Fernand has been with his partner , not being the same length as what he originally stated.

I think it was purely based on the date his ex-wife said they separated when they interviewed her, he would have still been with his previous wife.

 

[KiwiNZ]

[QUOTE="Sophie-Renee, post: 16216226, member: 214576"


As regards the Fernand link- I wonder how Sally has found about the length of time Fernand has been with his partner , not being the same length as what he originally stated.

I think it was purely based on the date his ex-wife said they separated when they interviewed her, he would have still been with his previous wife.

 

[Seriallyaddicted]

I wonder if the podcast’s continued position (bryon more so) on Fernand Remakel has any relationship to what the police currently know.
You would think the police would currently know whether they can rule out Fernand or not from their investigations.
Perhaps they have spoken to Sally and let her know whether they are still investigating him or not and if Fernand is a person of interest.
If he is still a person of interest maybe the police advised Sally that and that is reflected in the podcast’s current stance?

 

[KiwiNZ]

I wonder if the podcast’s continued position (bryon more so) on Fernand Remakel has any relationship to what the police currently know.
You would think the police would currently know whether they can rule out Fernand or not from their investigations.
Perhaps they have spoken to Sally and let her know whether they are still investigating him or not and if Fernand is a person of interest.
If he is still a person of interest maybe the police advised Sally that and that is reflected in the podcast’s current stance?

They definitely have more info than what they are sharing, and you would hope they know more about F Remakel than what they have shared, because what they have shared is not enough to publicly convict the man and it would be so wrong of them to dig that hole any deeper without having something concrete on him

 

[Sophie-Renee]

Marion was only 51, hardly an age when any modern woman would be wanting to or needing to slow their pace down.
She was nowhere near retirement age and a long way from approaching a "slowing down" age.
Just because she had tea with a couple of old ladies doesn't mean she was ready to think of herself as one of them.

Well first of all, I never said she had to be of retirement age. My point is we already know Sally said she doesn't drink, we know the kind of things she does like, Sally had said she was more old fashioned to some degree and what I meant was she was not exactly looking for bars, pubs and clubs in a big bustling city. As u get older u are more likely to be drawn to places off the beaten track. I then went on to explain a range of other reasons why Tunbridge Wells may have appealed. A lot of people do like a slower pace of life as they get older. Not all, but some and saying no modern woman at 51 would need or want that is a sweeping generalisation. Some do and Marion is not what you would call "modern". We know that already.

 

[Mjjj14]

I have thoguht for a long time that the person who placed the ad wasn't F Ramekel. Possibly a married man, posted to Aus and looking for fun on the side. Or given that the French speaking community was so small, someone who didn't want to "out" himself as posting a lonely hearts ad and get stick from his mates.

And remember - there's no proof that Marion ever saw the ad, never mind replied to it.

Based on the polices statement that no Remekel left/entered Australia across that time period, it couldn’t have been Fernand Remakel who placed the ad in my opinion - he wouldn’t have an Australian PO Box as he according to police, wasn’t here. Unless he was using a false identity and if so, you wouldn’t use your own name in an ad.

There’s no proof Marion saw the Le Courier ad but if someone was masquerading as F Remakel, perhaps they used this name for a lengthy period of time and Marion happened to meet him somewhere. In my opinion, likely at the art centre.

 

[Mjjj14]

I also had a thought today when discussing the latest podcast episodes with a friend - sorry if this has been mentioned before.

I would really not be surprised if the flight manifests don’t reveal any interesting information about who Marion was sat next to on her flights to and from the UK.

If Marion did fall victim of a conman who wanted to go undetected, surely he would be smart enough to book a flight on a different day so that when something eventually happened to Marion after the con ended, fingers couldn’t be pointed at him.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

The podcast is investigating and telling a story that is a matter of public interest which is their actual job. What's the alternative? Censoring the media? Banning all podcasts?

Although the media and police are occasionally at ends on how much of a case to reveal, they both have the right to perform their job. Sometimes the media solve and expose stuff the police fail to - there are countless examples. Watergate and Spotlight are famous ones.

The media and police often work together to break cases. Not only to widely distribute facts and rewards, but they also use subtle tactics such as only mentioning some but not all of the evidence, or placing bits of info out there to see if anyone bites and to see how people react.

For all we know, the podcast has checked in with police, coroner and lawyers. For all we know, police might be checking this forum, a victim friendly site, to see who protests too much. To see who defends the people of interest, and tries to derail and discredit the people investigating. Who knows.

If Fernand or anyone else mentioned in the podcast thinks they have been portrayed unfairly, to the point where it is costing them their livelihood and reputation, they might want to consider suing. They will of course, have to prove they absolutely did not do what the podcast said they did.

Mostly, I find it very interesting how people are up in arms about how many times Fernand is mentioned in the podcast and are consistently finding ways to absolve him. Yet the same amount of uproar is not extended to all the times Scientology, Hermes Far Eastern Shining, the pilot, the dentist, and Luke Glover have been mentioned. What's with that?

 

[Sophie-Renee]

A named man called remakel could still have gone in and out of Australia if he was using a forged passport. He could be using his real name in oz then travelling in a different name, by illegal means... OR he did travel in his real name and used the Remakel name as a cover the rest of the time. That is the kind of flip side of is f remakel involved in this or not argument.

 

[Mjjj14]

A named man called remakel could still have gone in and out of Australia if he was using a forged passport. He could be using his real name in oz then travelling in a different name, by illegal means... OR he did travel in his real name and used the Remakel name as a cover the rest of the time. That is the kind of flip side of is f remakel involved in this or not argument.

If someone is using a stolen/forged passport to travel on and is then giving out their real name in a newspaper with their PO Box, then they are not very smart.

He certainly could have been travelling on a false passport but I think that the most plausible/simplest conclusion was that it was someone impersonating him because he was slightly well known at one point in Western Europe and maybe the person impersonating him was a soccer fan. That’s just my take on it.

 

[Mjjj14]

For all we know, the podcast has checked in with police, coroner and lawyers. For all we know, police might be checking this forum, a victim friendly site, to see who protests too much. To see who defends the people of interest, and tries to derail and discredit the people investigating. Who knows.

I got the impression from Bryan and Alison on the latest conversations that there was some real tension between police and the podcast still but you’re right, who knows what they have discussed behind closed doors.

 

[Sophie-Renee]

The podcast is investigating and telling a story that is a matter of public interest which is their actual job. What's the alternative? Censoring the media? Banning all podcasts?

Although the media and police are occasionally at ends on how much of a case to reveal, they both have the right to perform their job. Sometimes the media solve and expose stuff the police fail to - there are countless examples. Watergate and Spotlight are famous ones.

The media and police often work together to break cases. Not only to widely distribute facts and rewards, but they also use subtle tactics such as only mentioning some but not all of the evidence, or placing bits of info out there to see if anyone bites and to see how people react.

For all we know, the podcast has checked in with police, coroner and lawyers. For all we know, police might be checking this forum, a victim friendly site, to see who protests too much. To see who defends the people of interest, and tries to derail and discredit the people investigating. Who knows.

If Fernand or anyone else mentioned in the podcast thinks they have been portrayed unfairly, to the point where it is costing them their livelihood and reputation, they might want to consider suing. They will of course, have to prove they absolutely did not do what the podcast said they did.

Mostly, I find it very interesting how people are up in arms about how many times Fernand is mentioned in the podcast and are consistently finding ways to absolve him. Yet the same amount of uproar is not extended to all the times Scientology, Hermes Far Eastern Shining, the pilot, the dentist, and Luke Glover have been mentioned. What's with that?

In reference to your last point, I think for me it is about the scientology and hermes Eastern shining being theories about groups, rather than homing in on a specific person directly. Yes luke glover has been mentioned but not anywhere near to the same focus as f remakel. An individual who, the focus has been on due to the direct evidence of a clue in Marion's name change. The truth is we cannot be too judging of the podcast, because the issue is just that....we genuinely have no idea how much information they may have about any involvement. It may be entirely justified, their focus on him due to things they cannot tell us. That said, on the contrary a connection to this man could also be... his identity has been stolen and used in Marion's disappearance and when you look at it like that, he is a victim in all of this who.. if it turned out that was the case has had a crime committed against him as well as having his name dragged through the mud in connection to this case. As far as the forums go.. I think exploring any connection to the Remakel name is one thing, when it comes to getting personal about him or judging it.. is up to the police. Because anything that is found may or may not have been abuse by a third party of his name and private details.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

If someone is using a stolen/forged passport to travel on and is then giving out their real name in a newspaper with their PO Box, then they are not very smart.

He certainly could have been travelling on a false passport but I think that the most plausible/simplest conclusion was that it was someone impersonating him because he was slightly well known at one point in Western Europe and maybe the person impersonating him was a soccer fan. That’s just my take on it.

I get where you are coming from, but not necessarily. My sense is that this is a very experienced conman. To be 'experienced', you have to do something a lot of times! This means some of his aliases might've been tarnished by that point. Perhaps Remakel, his actual name was the 'cleanest'. And he needed a clean name for this particular scam.

After all, how to you get a lady like Marion to trust you immediately? Tell her some of the truth - you are a soccer player, just like her first true love that left her brokenhearted. How many of us have fallen into a quick sense of security because a new partner or friend resembles an old one in some way? Using his real name was the best trap of all - a big risk I believe he took for a big reward.

There is a lot of interesting psychology behind criminals 'hiding in plain sight'. It's quite a technique.

To me it would seem he used his actual name, the cleanest and most useful for the target, but made sure to never officially link it to Marion. I bet we may one day find a bunch of his aliases and it might be those that have all the links to the crimes.

It's twisted but clever, no?

Just a hunch.

 

[Sophie-Renee]

If someone is using a stolen/forged passport to travel on and is then giving out their real name in a newspaper with their PO Box, then they are not very smart.

He certainly could have been travelling on a false passport but I think that the most plausible/simplest conclusion was that it was someone impersonating him because he was slightly well known at one point in Western Europe and maybe the person impersonating him was a soccer fan. That’s just my take on it.

Well you probably have a point I don't actually know how you go about applying for a po box as I have never had one and also never had 2 seperate passports either... sounds as if it would be an easy thing to be caught out on.

I agree that I think anyone who has a high profile of some kind is more likely to be impersonated than the Joe bloggs down the road. I am not a remakel did not do it camp, but just keeping an open mind. I think when we do know what the police have or have not decided to do with a lead on this individual, the sooner we may get a better idea of what is fair to make judgments about.

 

[Sophie-Renee]

I get where you are coming from, but not necessarily. My sense is that this is a very experienced conman. To be 'experienced', you have to do something a lot of times! This means some of his aliases might've been tarnished by that point. Perhaps Remakel, his actual name was the 'cleanest'. And he needed a clean name for this particular scam.

After all, how to you get a lady like Marion to trust you immediately? Tell her some of the truth - you are a soccer player, just like her first true love that left her brokenhearted. She has a second chance with this football player. Using his real name was the best trap of all - a big risk I believe he took for a big reward.

There is a lot of psychology behind criminals 'hiding in plain sight'.

To me it would seem he used his actual name, the cleanest but made sure to never officially link it to Marion. I bet we may one day find a bunch of his aliases and it might be those that have all the links to the crimes.

Just a hunch.

It does get messy when you have a criminal that does this sort of thing and just moves around. I don't think there is link, but as far as the whole changing names things goes.. chasing Charlie is an amazing podcast to get a sense of how they operate. He can't really be placed near Marion at the the time of her disappearance, but as a new Zealander he did con woman in Australia in the 2000s and then moved around. He also married a couple of times amongst all that. That is something that has been brought up also about fernand. He was married before his current partner.. which apparently he was lying abiut how long he has been with Marie. But would that not then mean he was married at the time Marion disappeared. I forget the dates? But what about questioning his ex wife as to exactly his whereabouts on 1997? I would need to return to thst podcast I think.