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

New Posts

bbsaz said:
IMO, most of the charges are easy to decide on. I think they might just be discussing the one charge about "allowing or causing the death of a child". I'm not sure this is cut and dried. JMO etc...
Click to expand...
If it's one charge that has been under discussion for most of this time it could be the cruelty charge, for which a guilty verdict in respect of a given defendant requires the jury to be sure that they neglected or exposed Victoria in a way that was likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury.

A verdict of guilty of causing or allowing death requires jurors to be sure that she died of an unlawful act by the defendant, which is much more of a thing to prove IMO.
 
Has the judge said he’s prepared to accept a majority verdict yet? I don’t think so, but may have missed it. If he hasn’t, then I think that may indicate that they haven’t yet communicated that they’re struggling to agree…Just lots to discuss I guess. JMO.
 
DianaWW said:
Has the judge said he’s prepared to accept a majority verdict yet? I don’t think so, but may have missed it. If he hasn’t, then I think that may indicate that they haven’t yet communicated that they’re struggling to agree…Just lots to discuss I guess. JMO.
Click to expand...
Normally juries don't initiate telling the judge they're struggling to agree, but this is a highly unusual jury.

There have been no reports saying the judge has issued a majority direction, but I wouldn't necessarily conclude that he hasn't. If he is holding back, that's probably wise.

Judges are very careful in what they tell juries, including when they give majority directions. For instance they can't imply that if ALMOST the required number of jurors support such-and-such a verdict, well they should try to persuade the few who don't to change their minds. They definitely can't say or imply anything like that!

If an 11-person jury fails to reach a decision on a charge, then assuming a majority direction has been given the split could have been in any of 8 different ways (9-2 in favour of not guilty, 8-3, 7-4, ... , all the way to 3-8 and 2-9) - and no-one will know which one because jurors aren't allowed to say.
 
Last edited:
Maryanna said:
Normally juries don't initiate telling the judge they're struggling to agree, but this is a highly unusual jury.

There have been no reports saying the judge has issued a majority direction, but I wouldn't necessarily conclude that he hasn't. If he is holding back, that's probably wise.

Judges are very careful in what they tell juries, including when they give majority directions. For instance they can't imply that if ALMOST the required number of jurors support such-and-such a verdict, well they should try to persuade the few who don't to change their minds. They definitely can't say or imply anything like that!

If an 11-person jury fails to reach a decision on a charge, then assuming a majority direction has been given the split could have been in any of 8 different ways (9-2 in favour of not guilty, 8-3, 7-4, ... , all the way to 3-8 and 2-9) - and no-one will know which one because jurors aren't allowed to say.
Click to expand...
Agree with the first part. I think they’d definitely let him know if they were struggling to agree, but that wouldn’t necessarily be reported.

I’ve never known it not to be reported when the judge communicates he will accept a majority though. But that’s JME.
 
I have followed the case carefully and I don't know which way I would decide a verdict, times this by 11. The jury have been together for some time and I would assume that they have gone into their groupings as inevitably happens on a jury. 11 random people put together to decide a verdict where there is no real evidence is a recipe for no-verdict.
 
DianaWW said:
Agree with the first part. I think they’d definitely let him know if they were struggling to agree, but that wouldn’t necessarily be reported.

I’ve never known it not to be reported when the judge communicates he will accept a majority though. But that’s JME.
Click to expand...

I agree Diana. With UK cases at least, we always get a heads up when the Judge decides to allow a majority verdict.
 
bbsaz said:
Remember we are already down 1 juror to 11, so he may hold off offering a majority option yet. Plus, it still means only 1 can differ in their verdict (10-1)
Click to expand...

If there are only 2 dissenters within the Jury….then, at the moment ,they are stuck.
A 9-2 verdict is not allowed.

However, if one of those two had to step down unexpectedly ( illness, emergency ) then the remaining Jury of 10 would be allowed to bring in a 9-1 verdict
 
Alyce said:
I agree Diana. With UK cases at least, we always get a heads up when the Judge decides to allow a majority verdict.
Click to expand...
It's only in the England and Wales jurisdiction and the Northern Ireland jurisdiction that a judge can give a majority direction. He can't speak to the jury in the absence of defence and prosecution, so they definitely get to hear. Whether his direction is reported in the media is another matter. In the Scottish jurisdiction this doesn't arise, because a majority can be 8-7 from the outset.
 
Maryanna said:
It's only in the England and Wales jurisdiction and the Northern Ireland jurisdiction that a judge can give a majority direction. He can't speak to the jury in the absence of defence and prosecution, so they definitely get to hear. Whether his direction is reported in the media is another matter. In the Scottish jurisdiction this doesn't arise, because a majority can be 8-7 from the outset.
Click to expand...
Wow, 8-7! That concerns me alot
 
So, her social media profile is open (the one set up by Zuckerberg) and I was having a stalkery nose at her posts and comments and I found it gave an interesting insight into parts of her personality ie defiant, oppositional, contrary. IMO, we've seen some of those personality traits form part of this case. Not sure if this will get deleted as can't make head nor tail of the rules. Apologies if it does break them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 172 more.
Total: 3,802 (members: 173, guests: 3,629)

Online statistics

Members online
173
Guests online
3,629
Total visitors
3,802
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
594,185
Messages
18,000,236
Members
229,334
Latest member
kayjay90
Back
Top