UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged, Newborn (found deceased), Bolton Greater Manchester, 5 Jan 2023 #7

[Baby baby Jane]

Police would be the first port of call, not PIs

My neighbor (Rural England), has a son who I politely call a fantasist. He was close to & worked alongside his dad for 10-15 years.
The son lies constantly, puts on big show of being an IT expert (isn’t), has “cancer” then doesn’t, has identity stolen then doesn’t, says he’s won contests, free trips, when he hasn’t, big in conspiracies, borrows money then insists he’s paid it back when he hasn’t. When parents confronted on his lies, he, at age 35, he decided that wanted no contact with his parents & siblings.

His parents, worried for his MH, went to his address And knocked and knocked begging him to come and talk. The son called the police who came and warned the parents not to harass him, and then son put a no-contact order in place. The parents are so upset to be disowned in this way.

When they send a Christmas card the son calls the police.

(Every so often the mum and dad borrow a car and go do a stakeout near his home just to see him alive)

They worry about his MH, and miss him terribly. If he sees parents or their friends in town, he pretends not to see them.

The police would be no help to CM family. PI would be who you would call.
Speculating, that perhaps they just want to know she’s safe want to offer support.

 

[Nikynoo]

But we don't know if he was complying at the time the PIs were involved.

No, I guess not. But I think it more likely he was than was not.

 

[Nikynoo]

Yes but if CMs parents had no idea of her whereabouts which local police would be contacted to conduct the welfare check?

Because the initial call would have initiated a check of the SO register.

 

[Nikynoo]

would he have been reporting as an RSO 40 years after the crime?

EDIT
I apologise, I had missed this

Constance Marten’s partner Mark Gordon refuses to appear in court

The partner of an aristocrat accused of the manslaughter of their baby refused to appear in court.

www.theargus.co.uk

You would have thought not, but yes, it appears so.

 

[Nikynoo]

Yes but they would not divulge his whereabouts to CMs parents

No they would not, but they would say that she wanted no contact/was safe and well etc.

 

[Nikynoo]

No way.
IMO

I think they would, bearing in mind her connections, the child/children and the fact that she was in the company of a previous serious offender

 

[Nikynoo]

But the money CM got came from a trust fund set up by a grandparent I believe. The parents would not have any say in that? If her parents had also been giving her money well that was up to them . Doubtful they were though if they didnt know where she was?
Strange that some of you dont believe that her parents were genuinely worried about their daughter and grandchildren?

I would imagine that her father is also a beneficiary of the same trust.

 

[kittythehare]

I think they would, bearing in mind her connections, the child/children and the fact that she was in the company of a previous serious offender

But she was not a missing person at the time, she simply did not want contact with her family and that is her right.

 

[kittythehare]

Yes but if CMs parents had no idea of her whereabouts which local police would be contacted to conduct the welfare check?

wherever they were living.. social welfare/ RSO lists etc.. most people are traceable.

 

[kittythehare]

I would imagine that her father is also a beneficiary of the same trust.

Possibly. But was there not an episode where her brother sold the estate below it's market value and contra to the terms of the grandmother's will?
I had assumed that was the point where she started disengaging with her family?
Am I right? My memory is fuzzy about this.

 

[kittythehare]

I think they would, bearing in mind her connections, the child/children and the fact that she was in the company of a previous serious offender

Here's the UK criteria.

Missing persons | College of Policing

This page is from APP, the official source of professional practice for policing.

www.college.police.uk

 

[Maryanna]

An example of wedding ceremonies in Peru being marketed further afield:

Andean Marriage Cusco

The Andean Inca Marriage includes: There are 9 complete ancient Inca purification techniques, and in total we offer 12 different ceremonies.

www.ayahuasca-amazon.com

The statement is made on that page that ayahuasca "cures cancer" and "improves genetics"!

See also

Peru’s ayahuasca industry booms as westerners search for alternative healing

Every year, thousands of tourists head to the Peruvian Amazon to take the plant medicine ayahuasca. But what does the powerful drink actually do, and what do local shamans think of the rise in its popularity?

www.theguardian.com

Note the buckets.

 

[kittythehare]

An example of wedding ceremonies in Peru being marketed further afield:

Andean Marriage Cusco

The Andean Inca Marriage includes: There are 9 complete ancient Inca purification techniques, and in total we offer 12 different ceremonies.

www.ayahuasca-amazon.com

The statement is made on that page that ayahuasca "cures cancer" and "improves genetics"!

See also

Peru’s ayahuasca industry booms as westerners search for alternative healing

Every year, thousands of tourists head to the Peruvian Amazon to take the plant medicine ayahuasca. But what does the powerful drink actually do, and what do local shamans think of the rise in its popularity?

www.theguardian.com

Note the buckets.

ayuhusca is an emetic.
Most people throw up following ingestion.
we don't actually know that it was an ayahusca wedding they had, do we?

(an aside, a very dodgy type of a wedding ceremony where one is equally likely to hallucinate goblins pf all descriptions emitting from other participants and here you are stuck with them)

 

[Maryanna]

ayuhusca is an emetic.
Most people throw up following ingestion.
we don't actually know that it was an ayahusca wedding they had, do we?

(an aside, a very dodgy type of a wedding ceremony where one is equally likely to hallucinate goblins pf all descriptions emitting from other participants and here you are stuck with them)

Yes - hence the buckets.
And no, we don't know. But a wedding ceremony in Peru. I doubt the actual "You are now man and wife" part of the experience advertised on that page coincides with the ayahuasca trip.

 

[Scorpio63]

Had they followed the path of real travellers, living in an ultra clean caravan, Victoria could still be alive .

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I think they would, bearing in mind her connections, the child/children and the fact that she was in the company of a previous serious offender

I wonder if they (family) were viewing CM as a victim of DV who could wind up dead? Possibly because of MG's history or maybe other stuff we don't know about? Perhaps their only concern was wondering if she's alive and feeling suspicious anything could happen to her and no-one would know? JMO

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

Possibly. But was there not an episode where her brother sold the estate below it's market value and contra to the terms of the grandmother's will?
I had assumed that was the point where she started disengaging with her family?
Am I right? My memory is fuzzy about this.

I agree. CM said that family members had gone against her grandmother's wishes.

(ETA: Not aimed at you @kittythehare . Sorry for jumping off your post.)


JMO, but I think she was close to her grandmother, being the only granddaughter of that son.
I empathize with CM on the issue of family members going against the departed member's will and/or wishes and then being mocked, ignored, and finally removed from even being told any financial decisions. It happened to me twice. (Not that I am anything near an aristocrat, but the father's and grandmother's generational ages are the same.) I get the strong feeling she had to defend herself against them a lot. She was the black sheep and scapegoat.
These are just my thoughts based on what each family member, including CM, has said and not said.
Certain phrases they have used and the tensions between them all seem monetary.
I also think the family is embarrassed by her and has been for a long time before MG was even in the UK. This has led to many of the admissions and accusations from either side. I do not think they approved of MG, not in a racist way, but in a snobbish way. Ex-con, older and poor. I also think this was a major issue for them, and they may not have wanted her to have the trust payments, which she was entitled to, and they likely could not change it, so they worked on any loopholes they could find.

I understand fully that the general majority here do not think like me. Still, I want to make it clear that I am not excusing CM or MG for anything proven they have done wrong, which I feel we will never really know the truth of what happened in January 2023, but as it stands, there are two versions of events. Neither has been proven. Yet, we are taking the supposed events as true from one or the other angle, which is all you can do if you would like closure on it, but it still stands that no one except CM and MG knows the real truth. My point, I guess, is that neither thinking CM is a manipulative , who was so adamant about getting her way, she put her child at risk or thinking she may have truly been fleeing a toxic family, who she believed were trying to destroy her life, plus the government officials that they believed were in dire straits with the toxic family, and made some hasty, dire and compromising decisions, is really just a matter of opinion.

Regardless of how the jury finds them, I doubt we will ever really know unless cases are brought against one or the other, or one of the family members does an exclusive or writes a book, and even then, it is just yet another opinion.
Once again, JMO

 

[kittythehare]

I agree. CM said that family members had gone against her grandmother's wishes.

(ETA: Not aimed at you @kittythehare . Sorry for jumping off your post.)


JMO, but I think she was close to her grandmother, being the only granddaughter of that son.
I empathize with CM on the issue of family members going against the departed member's will and/or wishes and then being mocked, ignored, and finally removed from even being told any financial decisions. It happened to me twice. (Not that I am anything near an aristocrat, but the father's and grandmother's generational ages are the same.) I get the strong feeling she had to defend herself against them a lot. She was the black sheep and scapegoat.
These are just my thoughts based on what each family member, including CM, has said and not said.
Certain phrases they have used and the tensions between them all seem monetary.
I also think the family is embarrassed by her and has been for a long time before MG was even in the UK. This has led to many of the admissions and accusations from either side. I do not think they approved of MG, not in a racist way, but in a snobbish way. Ex-con, older and poor. I also think this was a major issue for them, and they may not have wanted her to have the trust payments, which she was entitled to, and they likely could not change it, so they worked on any loopholes they could find.

I understand fully that the general majority here do not think like me. Still, I want to make it clear that I am not excusing CM or MG for anything proven they have done wrong, which I feel we will never really know the truth of what happened in January 2023, but as it stands, there are two versions of events. Neither has been proven. Yet, we are taking the supposed events as true from one or the other angle, which is all you can do if you would like closure on it, but it still stands that no one except CM and MG knows the real truth. My point, I guess, is that neither thinking CM is a manipulative , who was so adamant about getting her way, she put her child at risk or thinking she may have truly been fleeing a toxic family, who she believed were trying to destroy her life, plus the government officials that they believed were in dire straits with the toxic family, and made some hasty, dire and compromising decisions, is really just a matter of opinion.

Regardless of how the jury finds them, I doubt we will ever really know unless cases are brought against one or the other, or one of the family members does an exclusive or writes a book, and even then, it is just yet another opinion.
Once again, JMO

That makes an awful lot of sense to me and it's an underlying feeling I've had from the outset.
I think it could have been used by her defence to paint a fuller picture.

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

That makes an awful lot of sense to me and it's an underlying feeling I've had from the outset.
I think it could have been used by her defence to paint a fuller picture.

I agree.
I have pondered why it wasn't used in defence and I think that may have been the cause of the turn around in representation. I think CM wanted to bring it in 100%, and that is why she tangented to it so much during her statements.
I think she was advised against it and told she could bring it up in an appeal if found guilty or as its own case, if found not guilty.
I don't know too much about the inner workings of the courts but I am assuming a separate accusation cannot be made within a different (even if connected) case?

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

And furthermore, if it is true that she has been in constant fight or flight from a toxic family, it can take a lot to speak out. It is hard to fully understand the emotional strength that is needed to admit you were emotionally abused by your whole family, even just to admit it to yourself. You have to admit that the 'love' you felt you received from these family members was not love at all.
To publically admit it, is even harder.

ETA: JME