Australia Australia - Marion Barter - Missing After Trip to UK - June 1997 #18

[mishy66]

I am revisiting the coronial inquest via YouTube. It is interesting to hear it all again in the light of everything that has come up since, and all the excellent research I have read here. Currently on Day 3 when GGB gave her evidence.

GGB's evidence is an odd mixture. Her account of being love-bombed, swindled, robbed and lied to is compelling and rings familiar and true. It might be the most detailed and vivid account we have from any victim so far. However, she is also weirdly reticent or coy about some matters that are not as personal or embarrassing as the things she does talk about, and she fails to identify the photo of RB as the man she was involved with.

man of many faces

 

[CuriousKat99]

man of many faces

Absolutely, he changed his name so many times so not surprised if he changed his appearance to go with each name

 

[sah10406]

Also rewatching Day 3 just now, what do you think she is reticent or coy about?

A couple of things I guess. She denied they had any physical or romantic connection or relationship, yet she was clearly manouvered or persuaded to pose for intimate photos for him.

She disputed that they lived together by any definition, but she had previously told police that they had planned to be married.

She did not really explain how it came about that she was willing to give him her ATM card to withdraw $30,000 for a business venture, or why she never queried that the money appeared to have not been spent on anything relating to the business.

I understand that she was coerced into all these things in a horrible way by a master manipulator, but given her clarity and forthright views about him most of the time, it was just interesting that these things were glossed over. It seems his skills are so good, she barely knew what she was doing or why, even now.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

A couple of things I guess. She denied they had any physical or romantic connection or relationship, yet she was clearly manouvered or persuaded to pose for intimate photos for him.

She did say that she thought he must have drugged her.
So she is saying that she didn't willingly pose for the photos.

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

Story on Ch9 (Australia), but worth reading online, re : "Robert Wayne Collins, 80, who has spent a lifetime ripping people off, with a criminal history stretching close to 50 years. His first conviction was in 1973". Wife (allegedly) has profited from his fraud also.

I see from a report today that he has been released early. Yet again appearing to show that this type of crime isn’t taken seriously enough and the punishments are totally inadequate. They’ve even allowed him to continue to use the tools of his trade!

 

[mishy66]

I understand that she was coerced into all these things in a horrible way by a master manipulator, but given her clarity and forthright views about him most of the time, it was just interesting that these things were glossed over. It seems his skills are so good, she barely knew what she was doing or why, even now.

Laura Richards articulated this extremely well in the podcast. Coercive control is invisible to most, including the women caught up in the actual relationship. Same reasoning Marion changed her name,( which was the most exotic name in the world, she could have chosen Smith and he would never have been connected to the case, but no for some reason he need her to be FNMR and fly to the other side of the world. ) He was the puppeteer.
GBB did make reference to his blue willy and that she felt drugged, she wasnt herself. He controls the narrative. It isnt up to the victims to prove their innocence. And it could be GBB reluctance to go into more detail would see her under the microscope - something he would rejoice in.

 

[mishy66]

AKA born 1939

Long gap between drinks....

Fredy David born June 1942 - Father dies March 1943
Desire David born October 1943 - Father dies March 1943


Under oath Diane deH said Maria Coppenolle was his Aunt... interesting this comment - did they read the forum prior to inquest? We know that is true. Prior to the inquest we have Robert Coppenolle as his possible father, that would make Maria his aunt.

 

[Liselle]

Story on Ch9 (Australia), but worth reading online, re : "Robert Wayne Collins, 80, who has spent a lifetime ripping people off, with a criminal history stretching close to 50 years. His first conviction was in 1973". Wife (allegedly) has profited from his fraud also.

Sound familiar??? "In total, he scammed $386,000 from his seven victims, using their money to buy two Mercedes Benz cars worth $182,000, as well as holidays and paying a lump sum off his mortgage. He defrauded one victim of his $100,000 inheritance, spending all but $4,000 of it in five days." (from abc.net.au)

 

[sah10406]

GBB did make reference to his blue willy and that she felt drugged, she wasnt herself. He controls the narrative. It isnt up to the victims to prove their innocence. And it could be GBB reluctance to go into more detail would see her under the microscope - something he would rejoice in.

She did say that she thought he must have drugged her.
So she is saying that she didn't willingly pose for the photos.

I agree @mishy66, it is all part of the con, the coercion and the selecting and grooming of victims. I re-listened carefully to both GGB's and JO's evidence at the inquest this week, what they said and what they didn't or couldn't say or couldn't remember, and they do seem to be describing not just coercive control but full-on hypnosis or brainwashing. Like much in this case, it sounds outlandish, but the more I think about it, the more I think he is some kind of hypnotist and cult leader.

 

[Boxplot]

AKA born 1939

Long gap between drinks....

Fredy David born June 1942 - Father dies March 1943
Desire David born October 1943 - Father dies March 1943


Under oath Diane deH said Maria Coppenolle was his Aunt... interesting this comment - did they read the forum prior to inquest? We know that is true. Prior to the inquest we have Robert Coppenolle as his possible father, that would make Maria his aunt.

Re-listening to both testimonies they can't seem to get their story straight about his 'family' - he calls them his brothers; she declares they were his cousins. She names WW as his father before correcting herself, insists Abel is always called Andre then automatically refers to him as Abel. Maria C is 'the woman I knew as my mother' and later 'the mother'. This is his 'family' he visits on his many trips back to Belgium'?

 

[mishy66]

Re-listening to both testimonies they can't seem to get their story straight about his 'family' - he calls them his brothers; she declares they were his cousins. She names WW as his father before correcting herself, insists Abel is always called Andre then automatically refers to him as Abel. Maria C is 'the woman I knew as my mother' and later 'the mother'. This is his 'family' he visits on his many trips back to Belgium'?

He is full of BS

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

He is full of BS

Say it like it is Mishy! If BS was an Olympic sport this guy would win the Gold medal every time.

I know I’m in the minority of probably one but I still think the deH name is harking back to his real family name of Hungarian Jewish descent.

How he came to live with the Coppenolle’s is another question.

Of course if the original 1939 Belgium birth certificate is published I’ll probably give up on my theory. Actually even then I’ll probably still think he stole the identity at some point.

JMO.

 

[CuriousKat99]

I agree @mishy66, it is all part of the con, the coercion and the selecting and grooming of victims. I re-listened carefully to both GGB's and JO's evidence at the inquest this week, what they said and what they didn't or couldn't say or couldn't remember, and they do seem to be describing not just coercive control but full-on hypnosis or brainwashing. Like much in this case, it sounds outlandish, but the more I think about it, the more I think he is some kind of hypnotist and cult leader.

Brainwashing is coercive control. The term brainwashing was first used in English to describe the treatment of Prisoners of War in camps run by the Chinese during the Korean War. Brainwashing comes from a Chinese term used in the Mao era. Later on, it was noticed that there were striking similarities between these POWs and victims of domestic abuse and Evan Stark coined the term coercive control. The technique of coercive control is not just used by domestic abusers but also, for example, by cult leaders and authoritarian governments on political prisoners. (Jess Hill, See What You Made Me Do - Power, Control & Domestic Abuse 2019) IMO, AKA’s behaviour is classic coercive control.

 

[gymtonic]

Brainwashing is coercive control. The term brainwashing was first used in English to describe the treatment of Prisoners of War in camps run by the Chinese during the Korean War. Brainwashing comes from a Chinese term used in the Mao era. Later on, it was noticed that there were striking similarities between these POWs and victims of domestic abuse and Evan Stark coined the term coercive control. The technique of coercive control is not just used by domestic abusers but also, for example, by cult leaders and authoritarian governments on political prisoners. (Jess Hill, See What You Made Me Do - Power, Control & Domestic Abuse 2019) IMO, AKA’s behaviour is classic coercive control.

Just out of interest then (and not a direct question to you @CuriousKat99 but generally to the forum), why are some so certain that DdH and the children are not also victims of coercive control? Would there be cases where a classic textbook case of someone using coercive control only does it selectively on « external victims » and not on members of their family?

 

[HinterlandObserver]

I think it’s important to remember that it’s possible that participation/complacency and coercive control don’t have to be mutually exclusive.

 

[KiwiNZ]

Just out of interest then (and not a direct question to you @CuriousKat99 but generally to the forum), why are some so certain that DdH and the children are not also victims of coercive control? Would there be cases where a classic textbook case of someone using coercive control only does it selectively on « external victims » and not on members of their family?

Hard one to answer for me because I will sound like a hard cow lol ... I believe DDH is possible a victim of RB however my personal opinion is that when you allow others to be harmed due to your inaction, I lose empathy. I am sure in alot of cases - Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo, the Wests, Myra Hindley and Ian Brady - one of the pair was likely been controlled but I have no empathy for them because they allowed others to be hurt due to their inaction. Unless you are so challenged that you don't know right from wrong then there is no excuse that would satisfy me. Also we do not know them, as we don't know any of the above killers ... they could just as likely be as evil as each other ... I personally can not give her a pass.

The kids I haven't really decided.

 

[sah10406]

Just out of interest then (and not a direct question to you @CuriousKat99 but generally to the forum), why are some so certain that DdH and the children are not also victims of coercive control? Would there be cases where a classic textbook case of someone using coercive control only does it selectively on « external victims » and not on members of their family?

Great question, although I don't have an answer because I do think DdH is one of his victims. I think probably everyone he meets in any area of life is to a certain extent his victim.

With the benefit of hindsight, I just watched Day 4 of the inquest again, the JO evidence. What struck me is how the tone and delivery of her evidence is so similar to DdH's. JO's nightmare is 20+ years behind her, unlike DdH who is still in deep, but she had clearly never felt willing or able to reflect on her dreadful and cruel experiences in 1999. She didn't appear to have ever wondered how RB had so easily and cruelly persuaded her to give him her money, her time, her body, her power of attorney, her house potentially, or why she was led to agree to the absurd Bali/Europe trip with no plans, no money, no tourism itinerary, no nothing. Poor woman came across like a un-deprogrammed cult member, even all these years later. AC asked her a few times whether she had queried anything, or wondered about anything, and no she didn't at the time and appeared to have never done so since. I clocked that AC also slightly lost his cool at least once with a rather sarcastic "Thank you" when she finally answered a question after a lot of wandering.

Interestingly, what she doesn't say sometimes makes her evidence all the more powerful. Her rather blank and naive account of being abandoned in the UK with no money, then her scrambled return to Australia and seeing RB again, with no reflections or conclusions about what was going down, had me on the edge of my seat. During this evidence SL's face several times showed her anger and disbelief at what she was hearing.

It's heartbreaking to see the long-term effects of RB's crimes on JO and the others, and how skilfully he selected his victims for their combination of vulnerability, passivity and wealth. Revenge in the form of prosecution will be cathartic for them, but I hope they get some good therapy and are able to meet with other victims.

 

[CuriousKat99]

Hard one to answer for me because I will sound like a hard cow lol ... I believe DDH is possible a victim of RB however my personal opinion is that when you allow others to be harmed due to your inaction, I lose empathy. I am sure in alot of cases - Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo, the Wests, Myra Hindley and Ian Brady - one of the pair was likely been controlled but I have no empathy for them because they allowed others to be hurt due to their inaction. Unless you are so challenged that you don't know right from wrong then there is no excuse that would satisfy me. Also we do not know them, as we don't know any of the above killers ... they could just as likely be as evil as each other ... I personally can not give her a pass.

The kids I haven't really decided.

But in the cases you mention, there was plenty of evidence that both members of the couple were very actively involved. For example, both Fred and Rose West participated enthusiastically in the torture, assault and often murder of their victims, including their own children. So far, I am not aware of DdH or the children being mentioned by any of the victim survivors. AKA, however, was front and centre of all of the victims’ accounts of their experiences. Of course DdH and the children would have had many financial benefits from his enterprises and DdH appears to have knowingly participated in welfare fraud and the coin counterfeiting racket. But do we have evidence of DdH scamming, manipulating or doing any harm to individuals? I acknowledge that there may be more information that is not publicly available at this stage. At the moment with the information at hand, it’s looking to me like DdH is likely to have been under coercive control for years, but at the same time, I wouldn’t describe her as a model citizen. Like @HinterlandObserver said, she could be both a victim and a perpetrator at the same time. As time goes by with AKA’s activities being publicly exposed and providing DdH and the children are given adequate support (protection from AKA, etc) I would hope that they come forward and assist the investigation team. If they don’t, then I would be comfortable saying that they stood by and let others be harmed by this vile P*O*S
Thanks for the question @gymtonic, this is one of the aspects of this case that makes it so fascinating.

 

[MrsEmmaPeel]

Just out of interest then (and not a direct question to you @CuriousKat99 but generally to the forum), why are some so certain that DdH and the children are not also victims of coercive control? Would there be cases where a classic textbook case of someone using coercive control only does it selectively on « external victims » and not on members of their family?

This is exactly why I've learned to Love the Law in my old age. The law doesn't care how terrible your childhood was or how badly your husband treated you if law is broken. (Or at least not much.) We can feel sympathy for a coerced perpetrator/victim like DdH, but if she has broken laws then she must be punished. In the end, the effects of coercive control can be lifelong and are punishment in themselves. Think of someone like Buster Murdaugh, who I believe has grown up under coercive control but seems wholly unsympathetic to me. The fact that DdH is a pitiful old bag can make it harder to judge her accountable. Guess I'm a "hard cow," too, @KiwiNZ.

 

[MrsEmmaPeel]

Great question, although I don't have an answer because I do think DdH is one of his victims. I think probably everyone he meets in any area of life is to a certain extent his victim.

With the benefit of hindsight, I just watched Day 4 of the inquest again, the JO evidence. What struck me is how the tone and delivery of her evidence is so similar to DdH's. JO's nightmare is 20+ years behind her, unlike DdH who is still in deep, but she had clearly never felt willing or able to reflect on her dreadful and cruel experiences in 1999. She didn't appear to have ever wondered how RB had so easily and cruelly persuaded her to give him her money, her time, her body, her power of attorney, her house potentially, or why she was led to agree to the absurd Bali/Europe trip with no plans, no money, no tourism itinerary, no nothing. Poor woman came across like a un-deprogrammed cult member, even all these years later. AC asked her a few times whether she had queried anything, or wondered about anything, and no she didn't at the time and appeared to have never done so since. I clocked that AC also slightly lost his cool at least once with a rather sarcastic "Thank you" when she finally answered a question after a lot of wandering.

Interestingly, what she doesn't say sometimes makes her evidence all the more powerful. Her rather blank and naive account of being abandoned in the UK with no money, then her scrambled return to Australia and seeing RB again, with no reflections or conclusions about what was going down, had me on the edge of my seat. During this evidence SL's face several times showed her anger and disbelief at what she was hearing.

It's heartbreaking to see the long-term effects of RB's crimes on JO and the others, and how skilfully he selected his victims for their combination of vulnerability, passivity and wealth. Revenge in the form of prosecution will be cathartic for them, but I hope they get some good therapy and are able to meet with other victims.

IMHO, this is the classic flat effect of someone who has never fully dealt with trauma. They can talk about it clearly, but it's all in their head. Healing the heart and body is much harder. This is exactly how I felt about MC and her glibness. These are lonely women who have been shamed to their core, and to revisit that and do the work necessary to heal it is so so hard. (The victims with supportive family seem a bit better.) Being free of a perpetrator doesn't always take away his power to affect your life. (I can say this as an abused child who has been therapy and emotional work for many
years.)

The important takeaway, for me, is this is the after-effect Marion may have felt-- the shame and desperate hopelessness-- if the lovebombing wore off and she realized what had happened to her. In some ways I hope she was spared that.