VERDICT WATCH UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged, Newborn (found deceased), Bolton Greater Manchester, 5 Jan 2023 #8

New Posts

I'm even wondering if either defendant is having an issue with their defence representation - would that matter at this point? For example if one or the other decided to sack their barrister or there was any type of scenario that meant the barrister wanted to step off the case, would that cause the court to have to stop for admin / paperwork, yet again?
 
Observe_dont_Absorb said:
I'm even wondering if either defendant is having an issue with their defence representation - would that matter at this point? For example if one or the other decided to sack their barrister or there was any type of scenario that meant the barrister wanted to step off the case, would that cause the court to have to stop for admin / paperwork, yet again?
Click to expand...
This happened in another case I followed recently (see link). The defendant represented herself after sacking her counsel once she had finished giving evidence and delivered her own closing argument. It wouldn't be grounds for a mistrial.

www.bbc.co.uk

Murder-accused Ushaw Moor mum 'sacks' lawyers during trial

Christina Robinson dismissed her lawyers after two days of giving evidence at her murder trial.
www.bbc.co.uk
 
bbsaz said:
Why do you need legal submissions when the jury is out. Unless he's offered a majority verdict from when they resume tomorrow?
Click to expand...
A bail application?

That would be possible if one or more verdicts have been delivered. And not necessarily for both defendants. Really many things could be happening or not happening.
 
Maryanna said:
A bail application?

That would be possible if one or more verdicts have been delivered. And not necessarily for both defendants. Really many things could be happening or not happening.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine they're going to give either of these two bail - they're a proven flight risk, and facing anything up to life imprisonment if convicted of GN manslaughter. Of course they may have given a verdict on some charges but not others - but I'm struggling to imagine that they're all clear on the manslaughter verdict and still deliberating over the lesser charges.

I've no idea what's actually happening, of course, but I'd bet a chunk of money it's not a bail application.
 
For the record: the maximum sentence for concealing a birth is two years' imprisonment. So there are circumstances in which a bail application might be thought worthwhile. Personally I don't feel any verdicts have yet been delivered.

To add to the mystery, today the case has been adjourned, not released:

b.jpg
 
bobbymkii said:
This happened in another case I followed recently (see link). The defendant represented herself after sacking her counsel once she had finished giving evidence and delivered her own closing argument. It wouldn't be grounds for a mistrial.

www.bbc.co.uk

Murder-accused Ushaw Moor mum 'sacks' lawyers during trial

Christina Robinson dismissed her lawyers after two days of giving evidence at her murder trial.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...

Just for clarification, I wasn't suggesting a mistrial, I was thinking more in terms of time potentially eaten up for filing all the documentation and a new representative to be briefed and read up. It's just my sense of it but if CM were to wish to disrupt the system, maybe all she has to do is sack off her lawyer again. Hope she's not reading WS!
 
bbsaz said:
I'm sure someone said that means the jury are out and they put 00:00 as they've no idea what time the jury will return a verdict

So they gathered at 9.37 and 9 minutes later went out to continue deliberations
Click to expand...
Yesterday it said "released until 00:00". Today it says "adjourned until 00:00".

"Adjourned" is not the right word for when the jury is sent out, either for the first time or to continue deliberating.

Either a clerk isn't too picky about what menu item they choose, or else stuff has happened today that's different from yesterday.
 
Observe_dont_Absorb said:
Just for clarification, I wasn't suggesting a mistrial, I was thinking more in terms of time potentially eaten up for filing all the documentation and a new representative to be briefed and read up. It's just my sense of it but if CM were to wish to disrupt the system, maybe all she has to do is sack off her lawyer again. Hope she's not reading WS!
Click to expand...

I don't think - at this stage, - that dismissing her 6th Counsel would disrupt the Jury process, it would just mean she has to do her own mitigating argument if she is found guilty.
But am sure she would be more than ok to do that.
 
Maryanna said:
Yesterday it said "released until 00:00". Today it says "adjourned until 00:00".

"Adjourned" is not the right word for when the jury is sent out, either for the first time or to continue deliberating.

Either a clerk isn't too picky about what menu item they choose, or else stuff has happened today that's different from yesterday.
Click to expand...
Going back through the Lawpages entries posted to this thread, every other day bar yesterday it's been "Case adjourned until 00:00", so either yesterday we had a fat-fingered clerk, or something different was going on yesterday to every other day of the jury's deliberations so far.
 
The way I am reading it

They started in Court this morning at 09.37 hrs
They were sent out at 09.46 hrs
The timing of 00.00 hrs was then quoted - because no one knew when Jury might return with verdicts.

At 14.11 hrs I think they were back in Court for something - an update with the Judge perhaps ?
That session was estimated to last until 14.40 hrs
But it actually ended at 14.35 hrs - and they have now gone back to the Jury room.

Happy to be wrong on this and hope it is an indication of verdicts incoming.

all MOO of course
 
I'm fairly sure that they were adjourned for what was predicted to be 30 minutes, but was 45 in the end. Because it said case adjourned until 14.40, then started again
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 78 more.
Total: 2,410 (members: 79, guests: 2,331)

Online statistics

Members online
79
Guests online
2,331
Total visitors
2,410
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
595,350
Messages
18,022,875
Members
229,626
Latest member
MambeuX
Back
Top