GUILTY UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged in death of baby Victoria, Guilty on counts 1 & 5, 2025 retrial on manslaughter, 5 Jan 2023 #8

[Sillybilly]

“Our focus has always been, and remains, securing justice for baby Victoria.”
~Detective Superintendent Lewis Basford

​

 

[Kemug]

Such a loving couple. And now so cruelly parted. Just like Fred and Rosemary West, Lori and Chad Daybell, and many many others. Doesn't your heart bleed for them?

 

[Maltesepuppy]

Such a loving couple. And now so cruelly parted. Just like Fred and Rosemary West, Lori and Chad Daybell, and many many others. Doesn't your heart bleed for them?

A modern day Romeo and Juliet story, practically.

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

Do we know if they are still in jail? Or any next legal moves from either side?

 

[CaptainNancy]

Do we know if they are still in jail? Or any next legal moves from either side?

Held on remand on the manslaughter charge until the retrial - so we wouldn't hear anything publicly as that charge is sub-judice until any further court decision were to be made. They weren't sentenced for the charges on which they were found guilty, not sure of the legal complexities of that but would guess that would come at the conclusion of the re-trial. Set for March 25 I think. By which time if they are not found guilty of further charges its possible they may be found to have served sentence on those charges as they have been on remand since their arrest in early 2023.

 

[bobbymkii]

Oh:

10:45 am

For Application to Extend Custody Time Limit

CP Case

GORDON Mark

01RG1007723

CPS

 

[pokerowan]

Oh:

10:45 am

For Application to Extend Custody Time Limit

CP Case

GORDON Mark

01RG1007723

CPS

Hiya Bobby! Can you explain this one a little if poss? Can't get my head around what this means....

 

[bobbymkii]

Hiya Bobby! Can you explain this one a little if poss? Can't get my head around what this means....

well (IANAL) but I know that in England & Wales jurisdiction you can't just keep someone in custody forever awaiting trial without good reason (although we know they have both been formally convicted of at least some of the offences they stood trial for the first time around). So the Crown do have to apply to keep a defendant in cutody for longer that usual. Do they have good reason to keep Mark (and Connie for that matter) in custody longer than the usual limit? Yes IMO

 

[pokerowan]

well (IANAL) but I know that in England & Wales jurisdiction you can't just keep someone in custody forever awaiting trial without good reason (although we know they have both been formally convicted of at least some of the offences they stood trial for the first time around). So the Crown do have to apply to keep a defendant in cutody for longer that usual. Do they have good reason to keep Mark (and Connie for that matter) in custody longer than the usual limit? Yes IMO

Right! Cheers for the clarification, you're in the know far more than me I assume this was something that had to happen given the new trial date and the original time period has simply expired. Seems routine or expected based on your explanation!

 

[CaptainNancy]

I wonder why just him though?

 

[Smccat]

I wonder why just him though?

Excellent question captain.

 

[bobbymkii]

I wonder why just him though?

Connie has probably had/is going to have a similar hearing at some point. Probably on a day when I'm not noseying around on Courtserve!

 

[Nikynoo]

Hiya Bobby! Can you explain this one a little if poss? Can't get my head around what this means....

Speculating here- it could be just MG because it is in relation to the 'non-attendance' charge he faces, and perhaps that cannot be heard until the main trial is over?

 

[CaptainNancy]

Speculating here- it could be just MG because it is in relation to the 'non-attendance' charge he faces, and perhaps that cannot be heard until the main trial is over?

Oh, well remembered!