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

New Posts

I'm sure there is more. I just don't believe that 4 children are taken off you because of one incident of domestic violence. Also, the somewhat disengaged events that we've heard of eg not getting a COVID test, I still don't think is enough to meet the bar for removal of children (IMO). IMO, there's more to come out
 
bbsaz said:
I'm sure there is more. I just don't believe that 4 children are taken off you because of one incident of domestic violence. Also, the somewhat disengaged events that we've heard of eg not getting a COVID test, I still don't think is enough to meet the bar for removal of children (IMO). IMO, there's more to come out
Click to expand...
It might be that a lot of things can't come out even after the trial in this case, due to their other children still being minors. MOO
 
Observe_dont_Absorb said:
I imagined this at first - that only serious drug use could explain the chaos and other issues - but there has been flat zero evidence or suggestion of this and therefore I don't think that is the case whatsoever, surprisingly. JMO
Click to expand...
Never sure if it’s that it’s been agreed not to be introduced in trial or just not an issue/not current issue. We may never know.

My opinion is that there is a lot of faulty wiring and systems that aren’t operating as they should. Perhaps beyond treatment.
We will never know.
 
Observe_dont_Absorb said:
I imagined this at first - that only serious drug use could explain the chaos and other issues - but there has been flat zero evidence or suggestion of this and therefore I don't think that is the case whatsoever, surprisingly. JMO
Click to expand...
Agreed. I would have thought if evidence existed showing they were drug addicts and there was an argument over admissibility the judge would have ruled in favour of the prosecution and allowed the evidence to be brought. This is given that the prosecution case is that they are ultra-selfish and wrapped up in themselves and each other to the point of not being able to keep it together sufficiently to pay proper attention to their child's needs. Chronic drug addiction would be highly probative. JMO.
 
Maryanna said:
A lot of questions is an understatement. On average there was one question every 20 minutes or so during the time when there was a witness in the box.

Bear in mind that any juror may ask for a question to be asked. It's extremely unlikely that of the >150 questions that were asked, every juror asked roughly the same number.

Asking such a huge number of questions, probably smashing the existing record for an English criminal trial and going down in legal and Old Bailey history, probably made things go on for longer. That's more likely than one or more geniuses on the jury having the knack of brilliantly getting to the point very fast when barristers were beating around the bush and would have taken twice as long or not managed at all, and when even the judge didn't notice how good a certain question would have been. (Incidentally I wouldn't say this if the number of questions had only been 10 or 15.)

Nor do I think wanting to work longer days, which would have meant many other people working longer days too, in order to get the job done faster rather than slower, is something to be admired.

We should wish all the jurors strength in considering the evidence fairly and avoiding confirmation bias. Let it take as long as it has to.

I trust the refreshments served are to their satisfaction :)
Click to expand...
Maybe if CM had clearly answered the questions asked of her, instead of going off on irrelevant and distracting tangents, then perhaps the jury wouldnt have had to ask so many clarifying questions…
 
Amaz0nia said:
Maybe if CM had clearly answered the questions asked of her, instead of going off on irrelevant and distracting tangents, then perhaps the jury wouldnt have had to ask so many clarifying questions…
Click to expand...
The jurors' questions weren't only asked of CM. Judges can and often do tell witnesses to stop going off on irrelevancies. Also judges can and do examine witnesses.
 
Amaz0nia said:
Maybe if CM had clearly answered the questions asked of her, instead of going off on irrelevant and distracting tangents, then perhaps the jury wouldnt have had to ask so many clarifying questions…
Click to expand...
The Judge controls conduct in the court, not the witness. Many, many questions were asked whilst the prosecution and defence outlined their cases.
 
Maryanna said:
The jurors' questions weren't only asked of CM. Judges can and often do tell witnesses to stop going off on irrelevancies. Also judges can and do examine witnesses.
Click to expand...
Yes, but however, this particular trial CM has been especially challenging when its come to her giving a straight answer. Even the judge has had to have a word. MG not giving evidence hasnt really helped as everything said by CM is her perspective only. this has been a platform for her to have a rant about SS and family court processes etc…and not the case that they are on trial for. MOO
 
bbsaz said:
But then, we all expected a tsunami of weird stories about Lucy Letby to come out, and they didn't. So, who knows!
Click to expand...
hasn't she appealed or there are still cases to be tried? I haven't followed that case, so have only seen snippets in the press here and there.
 
Amaz0nia said:
Yes, but however, this particular trial CM has been especially challenging when its come to her giving a straight answer. Even the judge has had to have a word. MG not giving evidence hasnt really helped as everything said by CM is her perspective only. this has been a platform for her to have a rant about SS and family court processes etc…and not the case that they are on trial for. MOO
Click to expand...

Absolutely this.
When one of the top judges in the country, presiding at the most prestigious court in the country, has to ask a witness to please be quiet in order that he might say something....that speaks volumes ( pardon the pun ).
Her attitude of arrogance and disrespect for the court and due process has been astonishing. I fully expect the jury to take this into account. Whether or not they should is another matter, but they are only human and I think it will have influenced them, even if only subconsciously.

MOO of course
 
Observe_dont_Absorb said:
I imagined this at first - that only serious drug use could explain the chaos and other issues - but there has been flat zero evidence or suggestion of this and therefore I don't think that is the case whatsoever, surprisingly. JMO
Click to expand...
I agree, though I think one of them could easily have alcohol issues (not necessarily dependent). Weren’t beer cans found in the bag with Victoria’s body and wine stains in the holiday house? I appreciate wine stains could be blood, but most people would be able to tell the difference.
 
bbsaz said:
I'm sure there is more. I just don't believe that 4 children are taken off you because of one incident of domestic violence. Also, the somewhat disengaged events that we've heard of eg not getting a COVID test, I still don't think is enough to meet the bar for removal of children (IMO). IMO, there's more to come out
Click to expand...
I think a huge part of the ‘more’ in families with children removed generally (not necessarily CM and MG) is refusal to take advice and act upon it; refusal to recognise and admit to the significant risk the parents’ behaviour causes; and the specific relationship with those children. Parenting assessments will look at the responses of the children as well as how the adults act. It’s common for adults to try very hard in contact sessions, but it may be a child’s behaviour indicates something else. Equally, if they confided in their Foster Carers about certain circumstances then that would be considered. When a child is removed, it is very clear from behaviour if they are strongly attached and, often, what types of issues they faced at home. You might see a multitude of issues from a lack of boundaries to a desperate need to hoard food, to purposefully urinating in wardrobes to make it smell more like home or lack of facial tone due to a lack of engagement or a refusal to play because of anxiety or many other behaviours. You might see a baby appear very calm moments after being removed from the parents, where usually you’d expect tears. Or simply asking why a foster carer is at home at night time when adults go out. All of these types of observations are noted and form part of the case.

In CM and MG situation, consistency turning up during contact was an issue brought up during this court case. Again, not uncommon and can be very simple reasons including feeling utterly broken by children going into care and struggling with the feeling of every normal daily parenting act being under a microscope. However, for some, it can also indicate other issues, including that parents may not be consistent in care at home either. We don’t know (and shouldn’t really, as the children have the right to privacy) what full case was presented. What’s almost always true about all cases that go forward to permanent removal from a family is it will be very complex with both parents (and often both sides of the family) having multiple different issues and failing to meet the evolving needs of their growing children in the right amount of time. The part lots of families can’t grasp is that the needs do evolve and how quickly.

I 100% agree that there will be lots of complicated factors that - all together - resulted in the removal and adoption of CM and MG’s children.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 79 more.
Total: 3,500 (members: 80, guests: 3,420)

Online statistics

Members online
80
Guests online
3,420
Total visitors
3,500
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,993
Messages
17,997,187
Members
229,294
Latest member
drena519
Back
Top