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

[BreadnLumpit]

[snipped by B&L for focus]

Listening to CM I was constantly reminded of this woman, the inability to answer a straight question; the minimisation; the belief that being biologically related made up for everything and the exaggeration from doing the bare minimum (e.g buying them treat) as the biggest sacrifice they should be praised for.

I totally agree with your entire post, but this last paragraph brought to mind CM's dramatic claim in the witness box that: "I would throw myself in front of a bus for my child."

Constance Marten says her 'influential' family supported social services

It struck me at the time as being an utterly ridiculous thing to say. Needing to throw yourself in front of a bus for your child is a highly unlikely thing to happen to anyone for a start, and IMHO it shows an alarming level of self interest and cognitive dissonance that such a self sacrificing statement was made by someone who has previously:

Left hospital against medical advice while pregnant and injured;

Refused to take a Covid test in order to be re-united with her newborn;

Been noted by a family court judge to have failed to provide even minimum safe living arrangements for her children (supported by Cafcass and SS reports - because that's how family court works);

Had those children removed from her care due to not complying with minimum care requirements and then even failed them by not turning up for regular contact, leading to the children being put up for adoption.

JMO obviously

 

[Lindsay Lou Who]

BBM
100%. I met someone who called herself a "great mum" and had all 3 children removed. She could not see why they were taken. She minimised the impact that her behaviour was having on her children all the time.
She had all offers of help and didn't take any. Too socially anxious to go to parenting classes, not to go to the night club or pub, etc.
She failed a parenting assessment and the kids remained in kinship care.
She still posts photos of the kids all the time, from when they were babies to when she visits them. She talks about the "unbreakable bond" they have and "how close they are". In fact she posted more about the children since they stopped living with her. She loves the attention she gets from her friends who keep liking and commenting on her posts, validating her and telling her she is a great mum, and in her mind she continues to believe this.
Listening to CM I was constantly reminded of this woman, the inability to answer a straight question; the minimisation; the belief that being biologically related made up for everything and the exaggeration from doing the bare minimum (e.g buying them treat) as the biggest sacrifice they should be praised for.

This sounds exactly like my family member! 4 children, all removed from her care, yet tells everyone what a 'wonderful mother' she is. Constantly posts on social media their baby photos. The youngest was removed from her care at 6 weeks old after a tragic accident. She hasn't seen the youngest two for over two years. Eldest two she now has contact with on social media as they are now young teenagers, promises them the world and always let's them down. So sad!

 

[Alyce]

Central Criminal Court​	5​	T20237104​	constance marten mark alton gordon​
Details: Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 11:01 Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 14:00 - 11:26

thelawpages.com

 

[Alyce]

Central Criminal Court​	5​	T20237104​	constance marten mark alton gordon​
Details: Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 11:01 Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 14:00 - 11:26 Trial (Part Heard) - Summing Up - 14:18

www.thelawpages.com

 

[rockthecasbah]

Finally

"At 4.01pm on Tuesday, Judge Mark Lucraft KC sent the 11-strong jury out to begin deliberating on verdicts."

Jury sent out in Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial

The jury has been sent out in the Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial at the Old Bailey.

www.theargus.co.uk

 

[bobbymkii]

AT LAST!!! (BBM)

Central Criminal Court​	5​	T20237104​	Constance Marten Mark Alton Gordon​
Details: Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 11:01 Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 14:00 - 11:26 Trial (Part Heard) - Summing Up - 14:18 Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 15:20 - 15:15 Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 15:39 Trial (Part Heard) - Summing Up - 15:42 Trial (Part Heard) - Jury retire to consider verdict - 16:02 Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 16:25 - 16:06

 

[BreadnLumpit]

Finally

"At 4.01pm on Tuesday, Judge Mark Lucraft KC sent the 11-strong jury out to begin deliberating on verdicts."

Jury sent out in Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial

The jury has been sent out in the Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial at the Old Bailey.

www.theargus.co.uk

Hallelujah!!

 

[Alyce]

Finally

"At 4.01pm on Tuesday, Judge Mark Lucraft KC sent the 11-strong jury out to begin deliberating on verdicts."

Jury sent out in Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial

The jury has been sent out in the Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial at the Old Bailey.

www.theargus.co.uk

AT LAST!!! (BBM)

​

Central Criminal Court​	5​	T20237104​	Constance Marten Mark Alton Gordon​
Details: Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 11:01 Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 14:00 - 11:26 Trial (Part Heard) - Summing Up - 14:18 Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 15:20 - 15:15 Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 15:39 Trial (Part Heard) - Summing Up - 15:42 Trial (Part Heard) - Jury retire to consider verdict - 16:02 Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 16:25 - 16:06

Hallelujah!!

Hallelujah indeed…I thought this day would never come !

 

[Maryanna]

Finally

"At 4.01pm on Tuesday, Judge Mark Lucraft KC sent the 11-strong jury out to begin deliberating on verdicts."

Jury sent out in Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial

The jury has been sent out in the Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial at the Old Bailey.

www.theargus.co.uk

My goodness, 4.01pm is late in the day to send a jury out.
Let's wish the jurors strength.
My guess is that the most question-asky among them - who could easily be the most question-asky jurors in English legal history - may keep the ushers forever on their toes!

 

[Obergine]

Mark has the utmost faith in them. He must be so relieved!

 

[BreadnLumpit]

Hallelujah indeed…I thought this day would never come !

I was fully expecting another adjournment today!

 

[Alyce]

At 4.01pm on Tuesday, Judge Mark Lucraft KC sent the 11-strong jury out to begin deliberating on verdicts.
After just over half an hour, jurors came back into court and were told by Judge Lucraft to “press the pause button” on their discussions.
The jury will resume deliberations at 10am on Wednesday.

Jury sent out in Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial

The jury has been sent out in the Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial at the Old Bailey.

www.theargus.co.uk

 

[Parker Knoll]

Hallelujah!

 

[wowiezowie]

So is it sub judice to even guess what the jury's desicion will be? That's not stating one's own opinion on the defendant's innocence or guilt

 

[Telltale]

Yes that confused me as well. I posted the definition of gross negligence homicide and that it could still apply if Martens version of events were believed. I didn't think that would count as opining on what they would come back with.

 

[kittythehare]

So is it sub judice to even guess what the jury's desicion will be? That's not stating one's own opinion on the defendant's innocence or guilt

if unsure press 'Report' under your own post and a box will appear and write your question there. Or read opening remarks by moderator.

 

[RachelZachary]

BBM
100%. I met someone who called herself a "great mum" and had all 3 children removed. She could not see why they were taken. She minimised the impact that her behaviour was having on her children all the time.
She had all offers of help and didn't take any. Too socially anxious to go to parenting classes, not to go to the night club or pub, etc.
She failed a parenting assessment and the kids remained in kinship care.
She still posts photos of the kids all the time, from when they were babies to when she visits them. She talks about the "unbreakable bond" they have and "how close they are". In fact she posted more about the children since they stopped living with her. She loves the attention she gets from her friends who keep liking and commenting on her posts, validating her and telling her she is a great mum, and in her mind she continues to believe this.
Listening to CM I was constantly reminded of this woman, the inability to answer a straight question; the minimisation; the belief that being biologically related made up for everything and the exaggeration from doing the bare minimum (e.g buying them treat) as the biggest sacrifice they should be praised for.

And I think this stems through her entire family, in my opinion. The lifestyle of the rich, for example, who pass their kids to a Nanny then private boarding schools, then throw money at them to try make everything complicated go away. It’s a viscous cycle. “Let’s pay for her to go to uni, let’s pay for her to go travelling, let’s pay for her to go on a lovely retreat, let’s pay for her to check into rehab, let’s buy her a house etc etc” - I would really like someone to do this for me but in reality, I don’t think it replaces the basic need to be loved, taught well, have healthy and safe relationships and true support in your life.

 

[bobbymkii]

Tried my best to recreate:

Jury instructions - route to verdict:
count 1: Concealing the birth of a child
1. not in dispute
2. not in dispute
3. (must be same verdict for both defendants) are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants concealed the birth of the child by secretly disposing of the dead body (Yes= Guilty, No= Not guilty)
count 2: Child cruelty:
1. not in dispute
2. not in dispute
3a. (must be same verdict for both defendants) are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants neglected the child (Yes= move on to question 4. No= move on to question 3b)
OR
3b. (must be same verdict for both defendants) are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants exposed the baby (to the elements) (Yes= move on to question 4 No= not guilty)
4. (must be same verdict for both defendants) are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants' neglect or exposure was likely to cause the baby unnecessary suffering or injuries (Yes= Guilty, No= Not guilty, AND ALSO MUST FIND DEFENDANTS NOT GUILTY OF COUNTS 3&4)
count 4 (MUST BE CONSIDERED BEFORE COUNT 3): Manslaughter (by Gross Negligence):
1. not in dispute
2. are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants' breached duty of care to baby V (Yes= move on to question 3 No= not guilty)
3. are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants' breach gave rise to serious and obvious risk of death (Yes= move on to question 4, No= not guilty)
4. are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants' breach caused or made a significant contribution to the death (Yes= move on to question 5 No= not guilty)
5. did the breach amount to gross negligence (Yes= Guilty, No= Not guilty)
count 3: causing or allowing the death of a child
1. not in dispute
2. not in dispute
3. are you satisfied so that you are sure that there was a significant risk of serious physical harm by either defendant (MG and CM to be judged seperately) (Yes= move on to question 4, No= not guilty)
4. died of unlawful act by the relevant defendant (MG and CM to be judged seperately) (Yes= Guilty, No= Not guilty)
count 5: Perverting the course of justice:
are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants' did what they did with the intent to pervert to course of justice (IE lying in police interviews) (Yes= Guilty, No= Not guilty)

 

[BreadnLumpit]

Tried my best to recreate:

Jury instructions - route to verdict:
count 1: Concealing the birth of a child
1. not in dispute
2. not in dispute
3. (must be same verdict for both defendants) are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants concealed the birth of the child by secretly disposing of the dead body (Yes= Guilty, No= Not guilty)
count 2: Child cruelty:
1. not in dispute
2. not in dispute
3a. (must be same verdict for both defendants) are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants neglected the child (Yes= move on to question 4. No= move on to question 3b)
OR
3b. (must be same verdict for both defendants) are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants exposed the baby (to the elements) (Yes= move on to question 4 No= not guilty)
4. (must be same verdict for both defendants) are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants' neglect or exposure was likely to cause the baby unnecessary suffering or injuries (Yes= Guilty, No= Not guilty, AND ALSO MUST FIND DEFENDANTS NOT GUILTY OF COUNTS 3&4)
count 4 (MUST BE CONSIDERED BEFORE COUNT 3): Manslaughter (by Gross Negligence):
1. not in dispute
2. are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants' breached duty of care to baby V (Yes= move on to question 3 No= not guilty)
3. are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants' breach gave rise to serious and obvious risk of death (Yes= move on to question 4, No= not guilty)
4. are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants' breach caused or made a significant contribution to the death (Yes= move on to question 5 No= not guilty)
5. did the breach amount to gross negligence (Yes= Guilty, No= Not guilty)
count 3: causing or allowing the death of a child
1. not in dispute
2. not in dispute
3. are you satisfied so that you are sure that there was a significant risk of serious physical harm by either defendant (MG and CM to be judged seperately) (Yes= move on to question 4, No= not guilty)
4. died of unlawful act by the relevant defendant (MG and CM to be judged seperately) (Yes= Guilty, No= Not guilty)
count 5: Perverting the course of justice:
are you satisfied so that you are sure that the defendants' did what they did with the intent to pervert to course of justice (IE lying in police interviews) (Yes= Guilty, No= Not guilty)

An excellent summation.

For those who would like to know more about the questions not in dispute, or the Sub Judice rules, these are covered in a new episode of 'the trial' podcast, which was released last night.

 

[Maryanna]

So is it sub judice to even guess what the jury's desicion will be? That's not stating one's own opinion on the defendant's innocence or guilt

AIUI it is not permitted by the site owners to express an opinion here at this time on what verdicts or non-verdicts the jurors are likely to return. It is of course different from expressing an opinion on guilt or innocence, but it is nonetheless banned here and therefore I shall refrain from doing it.