Australia Australia - Marion Barter - Missing After Trip to UK - June 1997 #23

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I think this name is likely to just be a typo. The person copy typing the letter from the handwritten original was probably not familiar with the spelling of the surname and typed what they saw.

The address ‘Burwash Place’ is new I think?
I dont give them any slack what so ever.


IMO she wouldnt be using her real name or actual address, in a hand written letter to her church when her husband is thieving antiques and furnishings from various buildings around the UK and driving his little van to Europe to sell them off.

IMO what it shows is she didnt engage with the church community or get too close to the parish because she knew her husband was a thief and they wouldnt be staying too long.

If she was actively involved then parishioners from the 80s would be contacting the police about them, like their neighbour did, now that people know who they are. One of SL sleuths tried tracking down various people but only the neighbour knew them I think it was.

Mottynsden Lodge Burwash was where they lived for the 12 to 18mths they were there apparently
 
I think this name is likely to just be a typo. The person copy typing the letter from the handwritten original was probably not familiar with the spelling of the surname and typed what they saw.

The address ‘Burwash Place’ is new I think?
Totally possible.. though I’m interested to look into this name.
 
Between the MB FB Page, the TLV Podcast and now the book, with SO MANY discrepancies between the 3, no wonder this case is a quagmire


Then you have one of the papers reporting stuff like this to the general public who have never heard of the case!

FD dies 1989

The MB case comes to life in the wider community 2019 / 2020

The paper reports last year that FD said he never came to Australia

I mean, what the actual!?
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240605_074259_Samsung Internet.jpg
    Screenshot_20240605_074259_Samsung Internet.jpg
    54.4 KB · Views: 37
I dont give them any slack what so ever.
Agree, IMO, the misspellings are just too frequent to be innocent typos. Also, in the context of the regular name changes and name switch-arounds (eg Willy Wouters to Wouters Willy and back again) it’s even more convincing that it’s deliberate obfuscation to hide the trail. These tactics are his MO.
 
For those that missed this on TLV

Written January 1984 in the Burwash Parish Newsletter when they lived there for 1 or 2 yrs.

Time to get D deH on the stand

Anyone who thinks she knows nothing is dreaming.

How many names

How many women

How many scams for money

How many lies has this family told to others

How many more innocent people

How much longer before the police do their job!!
lol victim… my butt she is
 
Anyone else read the new book??

I have a completely different view point now of MB and the coercive control angle that LR is working at, I have to say.

IMO MB willingly and happily went with the chase because it was exciting to her at a time in her life that she wanted out of the one she was in.
No attachments, distant relationships with her adult kids, her family and school problems.

The story about Owen and how she left him was bloody heartbreaking IMO

There was a lot more to the dynamics of her family unit that has been publicly discussed but is addressed in this book which paints M in a completely different light and one that needs to be remembered in her lead up to OS and what may have happened later on.

As much as I would love to see him hung, I dont think he killed her here in Australia. I think she was too embarrassed to come home. I think she was still alive even after he continues on with other victims.

He may have killed her OS but IMO M never came back into Australia.

So much of the book refutes what SL has said about AH past and other aspects of the case.

Personally I think its been hastily written to help recoup some money for the journos and that the small donation to one of the victims was to help raise awareness for people to buy the book.

Half of it is full of inquest rebutals that we already know and heard and while there are a few new pieces of information that was unknown publicly prior, it's a book any of us could have written- half fiction half fact LOL
JMO

What do others think?
 
I have the book on my wishlist. It's the price that's the issue for me right now.
I did feel that it was astonishing that MB brought a boyfriend ( became her third husband) - to live in her home where her two young children were living. He was a stranger. This was explained by SL as showing how kind MB was, how giving and selfless. To me it was a reckless, selfish thing to do. Certainly, MB put her own needs, and that of her boyfriend ( who needed a place to live, basically )without concern for her children. She hadn't known him long, he could have been any kind of person. A really bad one. I think that she put her children in a potentially dangerous situation, in their home where they should be safe.
This worried me.
I don't want to sound unkind. MOO.
 
I have the book on my wishlist. It's the price that's the issue for me right now.
I did feel that it was astonishing that MB brought a boyfriend ( became her third husband) - to live in her home where her two young children were living. He was a stranger. This was explained by SL as showing how kind MB was, how giving and selfless. To me it was a reckless, selfish thing to do. Certainly, MB put her own needs, and that of her boyfriend ( who needed a place to live, basically )without concern for her children. She hadn't known him long, he could have been any kind of person. A really bad one. I think that she put her children in a potentially dangerous situation, in their home where they should be safe.
This worried me.
I don't want to sound unkind. MOO.
Yes I dont want to come across as victim blaming at all, nor do want to cast a different light on M but honestly the book portrays a very different side to the one the journalists have with M being this " little house on the prairie' lady

I now think she was portraying this side of herself in her working life as a teacher but in reality she was very different.
And there were 'lots' of boyfriends going on what the book tells. In fact, I have to relisten to her sisters testimonies again because there definitely is a pattern of behaviour there and I kind of understand why they, initially, thought she was just living her best life OS


I also think she had her ' classroom children ' that she loved and mothered, even over her own children because she couldnt control them the way she could her classroom children


I dont know. I dont want to sound mean as Marion certainly fell into the hands of a monster but she herself was also coercive controlling to her own family and kids.

I also need to go back to the time of JW and his friend JE, who I now believe she had an affair with


JMO
 
Last edited:
Is it worth buying @mishy66?
To be honest no I dont think it is.

Its half full of the inquest Q & As

There are parts in it that contradict what SL has said about him and TBH I believe what she says as she has always maintained this case has enough lies as it is.

There are some new pieces of info not known before, eg. IMO about 5% - which I can discuss here in a general sense without plagerising.
Some background in regard to him, MR and ER family.
That is such a sad story in itself and needs its own podcast alone. Heartbreaking for IK kids.

AH really needs to be held accountable in so many areas within this case. I am appalled that his current wife and adult kids haven't stepped up. DdeH needs investigating too, she knows so much more IMO



And in my opinion, it has been hastily put together to recoup some coin.

Why they didnt wait until SL found more info after her OS trip, is beyond me.
 
I’m listening to the Audible version.

At first I thought “Whoa hold on” as the details of Marion’s personality and other people’s remembrances were detailed. But it makes sense to me. She was a perfect victim for AH. He was good at worming his way into a position and I think she would have been an ideal mark for someone like him. Dr. Laura the Crime Analyst has got it, I believe. It isn’t so straightforward as I thought. But coercive control is at the heart of this case IMO.
 
I’m listening to the Audible version.

At first I thought “Whoa hold on” as the details of Marion’s personality and other people’s remembrances were detailed. But it makes sense to me. She was a perfect victim for AH. He was good at worming his way into a position and I think she would have been an ideal mark for someone like him. Dr. Laura the Crime Analyst has got it, I believe. It isn’t so straightforward as I thought. But coercive control is at the heart of this case IMO.
I haven’t read the book yet, but IMO, based on all of the other info out there, Marion definitely had her flaws. The Little House on the Prairie reference was in regard to her appearance, her hairstyle and clothing, not so much her behaviour.

Agree with @Candytuft & @mishy66 on the poor treatment by Marion of her 2 children, moving a new man in to live with them, without even an introduction. But maybe we’re judging her by today’s standards where there is widespread awareness of child abuse. Maybe in those days it could have been considered the right thing to do to give the children a father figure. A single parent family would have been socially undesirable.

Marion had a lot more intimate partners than would have been socially acceptable for a female in those times as well. I wonder, did she ever cheat on any of them? Did she ever take advantage of them, manipulate them? She certainly appeared to make a lot of poor choices when it came to romance. For me, the choices were more foolish and perhaps even a little selfish.

IMO, coercive control is very much about breaching trust in another human being, to gain an advantage for yourself. There is one person who stands out in this case, only one person who is continuously breaching trust in the most vulnerable, leaving a trail of devastation.

I read a very interesting memoir by Jeanne Ryckmans recently, called “Trust: A Fractured Fable”. In the book, Jeanne tells the true story of her encounter with another AH, who she calls “the Irish Professor”. Jeanne did a great job of exposing the MO of these AHs. It’s like they went to the same school to study their craft. Fraud, lies, manipulation, Centrelink, broken promises, sophisticated & intelligent people deceived. Sure these AHs are masters of the art of BS, but they also take it a step further and have no hesitation taking advantage of the trust that other humans have placed in them, the trust that we, as humans, must have in those around us in order to survive. These AHs have absolutely no guilty conscience and therein lies their superpower.
 
I haven’t read the book yet, but IMO, based on all of the other info out there, Marion definitely had her flaws. The Little House on the Prairie reference was in regard to her appearance, her hairstyle and clothing, not so much her behaviour.

Agree with @Candytuft & @mishy66 on the poor treatment by Marion of her 2 children, moving a new man in to live with them, without even an introduction. But maybe we’re judging her by today’s standards where there is widespread awareness of child abuse. Maybe in those days it could have been considered the right thing to do to give the children a father figure. A single parent family would have been socially undesirable.

Marion had a lot more intimate partners than would have been socially acceptable for a female in those times as well. I wonder, did she ever cheat on any of them? Did she ever take advantage of them, manipulate them?
I think you need to read the book.

I agree with what you have said as this side is what we have heard through inquest, media and SL

In the book it tells a very different side to M relationship with her kids. Especially Owen. Its just heartbreaking and very cruel.

You're right in it was a very different time back then bringing up kids to what it is today.
Which was my point in my post. IMO, Marion made some really cruel decisions based on Owen and what she said to him and what she did to him affected him his whole life and now that Ive read this, IMO what led to his downhill spiral. IMO this would have happened regardless of AH involvement.

It also touches on her relationships with men while married both to the kids father and also to JW and in between marriages.

My reference to her being described as "little house on prairie " lady is how much of the public view her thanks to the media and who have never really followed the case aside from what is written in the papers. The majority of the public you might say. Poytrayed as a kind nurturing teacher who was swallowed by a monster.
In my view she had two sides to her personality. The teacher stage side and the real M that her family saw each day. M could look after herself. She was in no way a meek and mild woman.

The book shares a very different side to M. One that, after reading it, convinces me she was as manipulating and as feisty as he. She would have put up a fight thats for sure. In her eyes she had nothing to lose as far as family was concerned because she had burnt her bridges. JMO

I agree with what you say also about "coercive control is very much about breaching trust in another human being, to gain an advantage for yourself". M herself did the same.

IMO after reading this book, M would have stood her ground.

I think its good to have a clearer perspective of M herself because it helps understand just how she fell for him and what she herself would have taken charge of during the lead up. Eg, IMO I now believe she herself chose her new names.

In saying all this though lets be clear that Im removing AH behaviours and patterns for the moment and solely focussing on the woman that M was at the time. The book also made it clearer to me just why M was so short with SL husband the day he helped her pack. SL has said her mother would never speak like that to someone else. But thats just not true if you believe the book. That was very much M pattern of behaviour.

All JMO
 
Last edited:
I've read the book. I thought it was worth buying.
@mishy66 I agree entirely with your observations. The part about Owen was heart breaking.
I don't think Marion came back, or at least she wasn't the one withdrawing the money.
I'm still ruminating.
Yes I still believe she never came back. And I now believe she was in the UK when she made that last call to Sally. If she was planning her way back on the suggestion she wanted money to buy a school ( which is one theory I personally have never believed) then she wouldnt have been wasting her short time on the phone making sure SL had taken back the school scales. In fact why would that have even concerned her if she was coming back in incognito the very next day and not even notifying anyone. The school scales etc would be the furtherest thing from her mind if she was half way back to Australia for her 8 day stay to get money for a school.

She never came back. And somehow he threatened and frightened her enough to stay away. Perhaps a threat to her kids and or saying he had proof she had interfered with the TSS boys. ( which I personally believe is all BS and that someone like LG started the rumour after she rejected his advances and the possibility of M sharing this with AH and he using that to his advantage later on JMO)

If the book was half the price and full of revelations then I would say everyone invest in it but at $50 + , I still think it was a money making campaign to recoup some cash for the journos


The book does have a lot in it that has already been refuted by SL previously so why they added it in to confuse the public and this case is a mystery

They insist he was placed in an orphanage as a boy as he said at inquest and SL has declared that was BS. And for a book that is written about a monster preying on innocent vistims and wanting to spread the story of TLV far and wide to communities that dont yet know of the case, WHY not declare his true identity and that of his real parents and a full list of aliases, even last names, which is what I was hoping for.


Written by journalists. Parts of it fictitious and taken from the inquest from what he said. And we all know he speaks BS.
 
I think on Audible it's $14.95 which is a lot better than $50. And they didn't include his aliases? That's pretty sloppy for journalists.
That sounds much better re price!

There are some of his aliases in there of course the ones we all know of and that have been published before.
But it would have been much more sensible to have a full list of every last name he used over the years at the back of the book.
The 50 odd that the journalists say he had

Because there would be women out there, and possibly men, who only knew him by a certain name and have no idea about the Australian podcast.

There was one new Christian name given though.... "Chusan".
 
Last edited:
Just listing all the aliases we know of so far with birthdates he used

Anthony Grech - July 1951
Atilla Dupont - date unknown
Bernard Dupont - March 1944
Charles Guyon - April 1947
Christopher Du Pont - March 1944
Christopher Stein - March 1944
David Freddy - February 1937 and June 1932
Fernand Nocolas Remakel - December 1947
Francis David De Hedervary - 9 July 1939 - AH real birthdate
Franck Melan - September 1938
Freddy David- June 1942
Frederick David De Hedervary - 9 July 1939 - AH real birthdate
Frederick De Hedervaru - AH real birthdate
Frederick De Hedervary- AH real birthdate
Frederique De-Haverdary - AH real birthdate
Gaetan Le Boursicot - October 1939
Guy Divio - 1 January 1901 ( WTActual ? This has to be a typo surely??!)
Philippe Dint - March 1937
Remy Lajoy - September 1938
Ric Blum- AH birthdate
Rich Richard - as above
Richard Lloyd West - as above
Richard Lloyd Westbury - as above
Rick Richard - as above
Rick West - as above
Roger Lazoney / Lauzoney - February 1945
Willy Coppenolle - AH real birthdate
Willy / Will David-Coppenolle. - AH real birthdate
Willy Wouters - AH real birthdate
Wouters Willy - AH real birthdate


* MB FB page has also said he used De Hedervay - without the last R


Then theres :

Willy BOUTEN
Chaim Frederick David DEHEDERVARY
Chaim DE HEDERVARY
Chaim Frederick DAVID
Zabdiel Zillig

Fleming - last name
Wilson - last name

Chusan - first name
 
Last edited:
I've read the book. I thought it was worth buying.
@mishy66 I agree entirely with your observations. The part about Owen was heart breaking.
I don't think Marion came back, or at least she wasn't the one withdrawing the money.
I'm still ruminating.
I was just reading back over my post from last year in June on here.

I still hold this theory.

There has to be another person who used that passport JMO MOO


" Knowing that AH could not have possibly been able to marry Marion in Lux or that she was even there- having found no evidence of, I am more convinced than ever before that something happened to Marion in the UK and while her passenger card may have arrived back into Australia, I don't think it was her that carried it in.

His admittance and that of Diane's, that he collects the passenger cards at the 'little stand' and fills out her arrival & departure cards for her - he would have no trouble what so ever getting anyone to prefill the details - especially someone smitten by the creep. Marion prefills the card but leaves the passport number blank for a custom officer to fill in??? Odd thing to do for Marion being a stickler for accuracy no doubt, having been a teacher for years. Left blank because at the time she didn't have access to it to get the number of her new passport, because he would have been holding onto it for her - just like he did for the others - a valuable commodity for a creep.

If she was in the UK in the hours before leading up to the flight home and the plane left Amsterdam not Luxembourg, no reason for her to write Luxembourg (resident) IF she had filled it out just hours prior to flying because she wasn't ever there, she was in the UK and what purpose would it serve her to do so? AH wasn't even with her and IF she had dropped everything to get back because she smelt a rat, all the more reason to fill in resident - Australia, if coming back for 8 days. WHY write home duties on the card if she was rushing back to a rat and filled it out just before the flight, she is a teacher and she didn't have a home, she had sold it and she was traveling through the UK.

Passenger card says she was coming in for 8 days and the passport never left Australia again. He had someone else come in on that passport, another victim from Europe or someone he knew IMO

The unfilled passport number and the big fat tick for married, was filled out just prior to the passport coming back in. IMO Marion had already prefilled most of the card and AH held onto them along with her passport. HOW could she get home without it. "
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
171
Guests online
1,227
Total visitors
1,398

Forum statistics

Threads
599,278
Messages
18,093,701
Members
230,837
Latest member
StuartGotz
Back
Top