UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged, Newborn (found deceased), Bolton Greater Manchester, 5 Jan 2023 #4

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Oops, yes. (And I've only just trained myself too to stop using the number for the previous year, well into January, sometimes even February!)

No fixed abode would mean weekly reports. (Is that what you mean, or do you suspect there may have been other reasons?) Change of address would require notification within three days, so perhaps that's it. I wonder when his last report was before 19 December. I don't know how "regularly" is interpreted in the following: "Any other addresses or premises where you stay regularly (i.e. at least seven nights of the year or where you stay for two or more periods which adds up to seven days)". But that's from NACRO and not statutory.

Advice for people on the Sex Offender Register

Explore our advice for people on the sex offender register. Speak confidentially to one of our advisors. See more for information and guides.

www.nacro.org.uk

I suspect as MG had No Fixed Abode (NFA), he was required to check into the station nearest wherever he lands up ~ possibly on a week to week basis or more likely upon every significant geographic shift.

That’s firstly as it would be the terms of his conditional freedom and secondly as if a crime is perpetrated that fits known MO of prior offenders, the police go straight to those known persons to clear them. Not much point in weekly check ins if one can travel from the South Coast to the Outer Hebrides in the space of a 24 hrs. IMO

Notable that he was complying until the baby came.

 

[Alyce]

Do we know if CM is physically present in court this morning?

I havent seen any reporting so far that indicates if either of them are in Court.

 

[Alyce]

So far, Fraser hasn't added anything more than The Argus are reporting, but he is worth following as may provide more in depth detail as the day progresses.




https://twitter.com/Fraser_Knight

 

[Alyce]

 

[Sleepyjean]

Re. possible dates of Victoria's short life:

* CM says she gave birth on 24 December
* on 28 December a recovery driver says he did not hear or see a baby
* CM says her daughter died on 9 January, and I think it is alleged to have been shortly after then (even the same day?) that she bought petrol
* on 19 February a witness says he saw CM carrying a very young baby with a wobbly head, which he touched, and that the baby wasn't wearing a hat

I can't see where the prosecution are going. They aren't suggesting murder or preparation for murder.

The motorist who filmed the car on fire on 28th dec saw a baby and touched its head according to him. Don’t think the witness on 19 Feb touched the baby

 

[ShadowPuppet]

Good morning everyone. A few points...

1. MG visited Sheffield police station on 19 December 2022 and was arrested on 27 February 2023, a little over 3 months later. In January 2024 there was a hearing at Bromley magistrates' court regarding an alleged non-notification offence. What was the alleged date of that offence? Is he on a 3-month schedule?

2. Not sure whether this has already been observed here, but CM in her police interview is alleged to have said "I wanted to turn myself in at the time. I've been debating it". She doesn't say "we" have been debating it, discussing it, talking about it. She says SHE had.

<modsnip - discussions elsewhere are not approved sources>

I think in relation to SS, they wouldn’t be asking if he was guilty or not guilty, it would be presented factually, more similarly to “Our procedure is to put support in place for any family where a family member has been charged and found guilty of sexual offences.” They’d be likely to refocus the conversation on the children and away from specifics of whether anyone is or is not guilty.

I think if he would not admit to it, it would be a concern, but there would tend to be lots of other concerns that would build to a big picture of children being unsafe. SS would generally work on trying to get a parent to develop emotionally to a point where they can self-assess more accurately. This would be done in multiple ways including directly 1:1 with a social worker and in parenting classes. Social workers in child protection tend to be clear with the parents that they are the child’s social worker, so as much as they can support the parent to work through things, they make decisions and act on the best interests of the child. If the parents refuse to talk things through, blame children for behaviour but fail to put the given techniques into place, don’t seek any help for themselves that they’ve been asked to seek, regularly miss meetings and/or contact sessions, then those are failure to engage. These situations tend to be multifaceted rather than focusing on a single point. If it’s helpful, the NSPCC website has a section on reviews that have happened after serious incidents occur (eg. A child’s death or a failure to recognise neglect for several years) and they tend to list lots of complex issues rather than a single one.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Does anyone know on what legal grounds CM is not appearing in court?

Surely her barrister must have made some form of application to exempt her -or- she's refusing to attend and the court have filed some sort of order to continue in her absence?

 

[DSleuth]

The motorist who filmed the car on fire on 28th dec saw a baby and touched its head according to him. Don’t think the witness on 19 Feb touched the baby

No, there were 2 breakdowns with 2 different cars- a Suzuki and then a Peugeot.

One on 28 December when the recovery driver didn’t see or hear a baby.

The car fire was on 5 January (with a different car) and it was this one when the witness saw the baby and touched her head.

Timeline of events in Constance Marten and Mark Gordon case

Mark Gordon and Constance Marten have gone on trial at the Old Bailey where they deny manslaughter by gross negligence of their baby daughter.

www.theargus.co.uk

I think the prosecution are possibly going to suggest she gave birth in the car which later caught fire (there has been mention of blood on the back seat of this car) or at least that she gave birth after they acquired this car. But that’s IMO.

 

[Alyce]

Taxi driver evidence - journey to Harwich

Recap: Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial continues

Updates from The Old Bailey as the Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial continues.

www.theargus.co.uk

 

[JTT]

Does anyone know on what legal grounds CM is not appearing in court?

Surely her barrister must have made some form of application to exempt her -or- she's refusing to attend and the court have filed some sort of order to continue in her absence?

She doesn't have the right to refuse. It will be with the judge's consent. He said last week she was absent because she was in conference with her legal team, which we can assume to be true given that it was the judge who said it. I'm trying to find out whether she's been in court today. No success as yet.

 

[guiser]

Me neither - seems a completely abhorrent phrase for anyone to use.

It's a phrase with horrible connotations that only someone with an agenda or desire to shock would use.
Frankly I'm surprised mods permit its continued use, but perhaps they are unaware of the history.

 

[Earthwindfire]

I've just been listening to the podcast. None of this make any sense. I understand that they wanted to hide from authorities to keep their daughter - I get that bit. And it's a bad idea but I get that they decided to stay in a tent. But why on Earth, if they wanted this child so, so much, did they not dress the child appropriately and take measures to protect her. It seems such a contradiction - they wanted this child so much, yet they didn't take measures to keep her safe.

 

[JTT]

Taxi driver evidence - journey to Harwich

Recap: Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial continues

Updates from The Old Bailey as the Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial continues.

www.theargus.co.uk

View attachment 478738

MG's counsel John Kemi-Ola suggested that Victoria was wearing clothing and that she was changed in the car and this is when Mr Yaryar saw her in the nappy.

If there were a half-decent court reporter reporting on this case, they'd tell us what the witness said when this was put to him.

Did he for example say "That's quite possible, yes. I'm just saying that that was the only time I saw her. And come to think of it, they did throw away a nappy bag when I stopped"? Or did he say "No, that can't be true. I saw her in my mirror numerous times during the journey, and throughout the whole time she was only wearing a nappy"?

If this trial does have a second half, I think it's likely now we're going to hear from the defendants in the witness box.

 

[Twittens]

I've just been listening to the podcast. None of this make any sense. I understand that they wanted to hide from authorities to keep their daughter - I get that bit. And it's a bad idea but I get that they decided to stay in a tent. But why on Earth, if they wanted this child so, so much, did they not dress the child appropriately and take measures to protect her. It seems such a contradiction - they wanted this child so much, yet they didn't take measures to keep her safe.

Perhaps you've answered your own question.

 

[JennieM]

[Mr Yaryar, the taxi driver,] said when he stopped at a shop on the journey he believed the baby was just wearing a nappy.

Recap: Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial continues

Updates from The Old Bailey as the Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial continues.

www.theargus.co.uk

 

[Rolypolyoly]

Sorry, posted too soon there.

She had so much money she could have been whoever she wanted to be. She picked to be an Irish traveller. Why? Equally she didn't have to be anything or anyone. She could have just had her baby at home and employed the services of a doula. But then when you have your first that maybe seems a scary idea.

I'm wondering if the traveller story was because she knew she wasn't going to be sticking around and she didn't want them alerting SS when she didn't return for follow up care? Could she possibly have thought that saying she was a traveller, thus insinuating a transient lifestyle, would explain why they wouldn't be able to get hold of her again and head off any concern?.

She seems both totally naive and utterly cunning in equal measure!.

 

[JennieM]

I've just been listening to the podcast. None of this make any sense. I understand that they wanted to hide from authorities to keep their daughter - I get that bit. And it's a bad idea but I get that they decided to stay in a tent. But why on Earth, if they wanted this child so, so much, did they not dress the child appropriately and take measures to protect her. It seems such a contradiction - they wanted this child so much, yet they didn't take measures to keep her safe.

There is a difference between wanting and being able to, IMO.

 

[Earthwindfire]

I'm wondering if the traveller story was because she knew she wasn't going to be sticking around and she didn't want them alerting SS when she didn't return for follow up care? Could she possibly have thought that saying she was a traveller, thus insinuating a transient lifestyle, would explain why they wouldn't be able to get hold of her again and head off any concern?.

She seems both totally naive and utterly cunning in equal measure!.

I also wonder on the cunning/manipulation front, if she felt saying she was a traveller might give her certain protections. It is accepted that travellers tend to do things a bit differently. Perhaps she felt she might be left alone more.

 

[Rolypolyoly]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1751954659349065773

 

[wowiezowie]

Do we know if CM is physically present in court this morning?

She's not there again. It's just MG today, as reported by The Argus