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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is there a link handy with any more detail?
Whichever of them instigated it, if it wasn't an accident, losing 2 presumably much loved children as a result would harm a relationship permanently, would it not?
Blame etc...




 



Thank you.
This from Indo broke my heart
Social services said the parents had “interacted well” with their children during supervised contact sessions, but that their attendance was “inconsistent”, leaving the children distressed and unsettled, the court heard.

One of the children became quiet and withdrawn, telling staff: “Mummy and Daddy cancelled again.” The child was described as “inconsolable” when the parents failed to turn up at the contact centre.
 
There isn't much information available on the window incident, it must be because of DV and privacy stuff. But it's a bizarre thing to happen.. like I have a million questions about it. What do you mean you fell from a window? An upstairs window? How big is this window, was it fully wide open, is it floor to ceiling length, were you leaning out of it, why? were you hanging curtains? with the window fully open? how does the window open, is it one of those huge ones that swings open sideways... I just have so many questions even if it was an accident. It's weird

@BreadnLumpit - your point about a coercive control perpetrator threatening to harm themselves stood out to me. I had been assuming by DV incident they meant being pushed from the window for example. But your point makes a lot of sense! It wouldn't surprise me if there is a hefty dose of it in the mix of this erratic relationship

MOO
 
Last edited:
Her (his/their) own choosing according to evidence disclosed during this trial:

She admitted under cross examination that the trust were buying her a house in early 2017 (child ff was born late 2017) but she refused to sign the sale contracts at the last minute. At the time she claimed her backing out was because of her "career progression", but in court she said it was because she wanted to live in the countryside.

Neither makes any sense - once the house was hers she could have sold it and bought some where rural or rented it out.

IMO she just does stuff to thumb her nose at everyone else (family, convention, societal conventions, SS, authority in general), regardless of whether it impacts her negatively or not, simply because she can.

It reminds me of a family member of mine who was diagnosed with oppositional defiance disorder. Behavior and personality disorders aren't mental illnesses though - some people just behave in ways that make their lives harder, while blaming everyone else for whatever happens.
Yep 100% ODD-i said and thought that a while back-her behaviour seems all defiance-based
 
Yep 100% ODD-i said and thought that a while back-her behaviour seems all defiance-based
Honestly of everything infuriating about her I find that the most understandable.

If you watch the documentary about the Nigerian cult she was in. It was a very high demand/control group. Apparently especially for it's young white western female members. TB Joshua enjoyed controlling, abusing and humiliating them the most - all 'for their own good' of course. She wasn't there long, only half a year, but she was only a teenager and there would have been a period of grooming before that.

I think it did a lot of damage. Seems like after that, any (perceived) attempts by an authority figure/organisation to control/coerce her triggered a trauma response.

Didn't matter if was sensible advice she needed to hear, well-meaning pressure from family/trusties concerned about her lifestyle/relationship, or social service restrictions aimed at safeguarding her kids. Whenever she feels pressured, corralled or trapped by a 'higher authority' she responds with blind defiance, no matter what it costs her.

Of course, my sympathy is limited. She's had a decade to use her free money tap to access the very best mental healthcare. Any trauma is not her fault, but as an adult and a mother. Working through her shiite so it doesn't impact (or kill) her kids is her responsibility.

Pretty damn clear she decided to not do that. At all. Being stubborn seems to have been more important than the kids she claimed to love so much.
 
Last edited:
Honestly of everything infuriating about her I find that the most understandable.

If you watch the documentary about the Nigerian cult she was in. It was a very high demand/control group. [...]

[...] Seems like after that, any (perceived) attempts by an authority figure/organisation to control/coerce her triggered a trauma response.

Didn't matter if was sensible advice she needed to hear, well-meaning pressure from family/trusties concerned about her lifestyle/relationship, or social service restrictions aimed at safeguarding her kids. Whenever she feels pressured, corralled or trapped by a 'higher authority' she responds with blind defiance, no matter what it costs her.
The defiant behaviours pre-date her time in the cult though, judging by her own SM entries.
 
The choice of partner could simply be C sticking two fingers up at her family. It seems more than this to me - they appear to be really fond of each other. I wonder what would happen if C is found guilty, but M is not - would he move on to another relationship, or would he stand by her?
I think whatever happens they will stick with each other.
 



First time I have read that the family court said their living arrangements were well below the standard a reasonable parent should provide. Then the DV incident.
CM didnt mention this but but said it was only about the DV incident the children were removed,
I assume that the living conditions must have been pretty dire MOO
 
There isn't much information available on the window incident, it must be because of DV and privacy stuff. But it's a bizarre thing to happen.. like I have a million questions about it. What do you mean you fell from a window? An upstairs window? How big is this window, was it fully wide open, is it floor to ceiling length, were you leaning out of it, why? were you hanging curtains? with the window fully open? how does the window open, is it one of those huge ones that swings open sideways... I just have so many questions even if it was an accident. It's weird

@BreadnLumpit - your point about a coercive control perpetrator threatening to harm themselves stood out to me. I had been assuming by DV incident they meant being pushed from the window for example. But your point makes a lot of sense! It wouldn't surprise me if there is a hefty dose of it in the mix of this erratic relationship

MOO
Wide open windows also a high risk factor with young children in the house !!
 
First time I have read that the family court said their living arrangements were well below the standard a reasonable parent should provide. Then the DV incident.
CM didnt mention this but but said it was only about the DV incident the children were removed,
I assume that the living conditions must have been pretty dire MOO
Well we saw pictures of the state of the holiday cottage after just the 2 of them had been there only a few days.

I can easily imagine what that would escalate into over a long period and with young children in nappies (diapers) living in the space as well.

At one point during her testimony, CM chose to illustrate how well the children were looked after by saying that they had a bouncy castle in their bedroom.

IMO that perfectly demonstrated how skewed her childcare priorities are (MOO)
 
Well we saw pictures of the state of the holiday cottage after just the 2 of them had been there only a few days.

I can easily imagine what that would escalate into over a long period and with young children in nappies (diapers) living in the space as well.

At one point during her testimony, CM chose to illustrate how well the children were looked after by saying that they had a bouncy castle in their bedroom.

IMO that perfectly demonstrated how skewed her childcare priorities are (MOO)
Maybe having a bouncy castle in the bedroom is what caused the ceiling to fall down.
 
Well we saw pictures of the state of the holiday cottage after just the 2 of them had been there only a few days.

I can easily imagine what that would escalate into over a long period and with young children in nappies (diapers) living in the space as well.

At one point during her testimony, CM chose to illustrate how well the children were looked after by saying that they had a bouncy castle in their bedroom.

IMO that perfectly demonstrated how skewed her childcare priorities are (MOO)
Maybe having a bouncy castle in the bedroom is what caused the ceiling to fall down.


Those two children were extremely young at that time - surely it was dangerous to put this into a bedroom - it would allow them permanent access and be unsupervised overnight ?
 
Also wondered if the open window was in the same room as the bouncy castle..
I had/have so many questions!

Was the bouncy castle instead of beds? The window... how close was it? Was it protected with nursery bars? What was the floor covering? Were the children playing on it unsupervised?

We will never know, but it was one of those "Wow" moments for me.
 
Well we saw pictures of the state of the holiday cottage after just the 2 of them had been there only a few days.

I can easily imagine what that would escalate into over a long period and with young children in nappies (diapers) living in the space as well.

At one point during her testimony, CM chose to illustrate how well the children were looked after by saying that they had a bouncy castle in their bedroom.

IMO that perfectly demonstrated how skewed her childcare priorities are (MOO)
It's unusual okay but I reckon it was a pretty small one..
there was probably quite a lot of 'unusual' which is not the same as unhygienic. I wouldn't go down that road without evidence.
She has enough problems.

Like, any of those could have caused death, bouncy castles in bedrooms and such like..
but they did not.

She might have been reliving her own childhood through them, being a child with them and probably loved it and was a great mother in many ways as a result.
The children would have had a lovely playmate.

Then again, it's only fair to say that she could have worked all that out of her system with a good psychotherapist and a few years of hard work on herself.
I doubt she ever did it.
I'd say she ran from crisis to crisis and if there wasn't a crisis she created one.. Not necessarily narcissistically either, more like pathological.
 
[...]

She might have been reliving her own childhood through them, being a child with them and probably loved it and was a great mother in many ways as a result.
The children would have had a lovely playmate.

Then again, it's only fair to say that she could have worked all that out of her system with a good psychotherapist and a few years of hard work on herself.
I doubt she ever did it.
I'd say she ran from crisis to crisis and if there wasn't a crisis she created one.. Not necessarily narcissistically either, more like pathological.
I truly admire your positivity and desire to see the best in people, but IMO risky childcare is not OK just because it didn't cause death or injury before the children were removed from the situation. That's just sheer luck as far as I see it, and (again MOO) it's not the primary job/responsibility of a parent to be a lovely playmate.

Sure, that's nice, but keeping your children clean, fed and clothed in a safe, clean environment (as opposed to one that authorities and a Judge deemed to be well below even minimum standards) comes first IMO.
 
I truly admire your positivity and desire to see the best in people, but IMO risky childcare is not OK just because it didn't cause death or injury before the children were removed from the situation. That's just sheer luck as far as I see it, and (again MOO) it's not the primary job/responsibility of a parent to be a lovely playmate.

Sure, that's nice, but keeping your children clean, fed and clothed in a safe, clean environment (as opposed to one that authorities and a Judge deemed to be well below even minimum standards) comes first IMO.
You're absolutely right, of course.
Sometimes if I become totally enraged by someone I'll force myself to walk in their shoes because of the need to understand what it is that motivates people to do crazy things.
It's a good exercise and dissolves all the wrath, but only for a short time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
208
Guests online
2,633
Total visitors
2,841

Forum statistics

Threads
592,953
Messages
17,978,336
Members
228,957
Latest member
JJ81
Back
Top