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

[JTT]

I’ve been following thread this from the start but had to step away after the baby was found, but something has been nagging at me. Sorry if this has been covered elsewhere but there’s too many new posts for me to catch up on.

<modsnip>

The ITV News at 10 said last week that CM hid the pregnancy when they couldn’t hide it any longer (by which I took to mean her bump showing) that was when they ran away. But hide it from who?<modsnip>

Social Services IS the most likely explanation… but I wondered if there was any chance there was a third party like this Nigerian Church that they were actually involved running from and not the authorities at all (although even as I type this it sounds incredibly unlikely). I guess we may find out their motives when it comes to trial.

No, who they were running from has not been confirmed. You are quite right that there is a possibility they were running from a party other than SS, although as far as I'm aware the SCOAN is not known to have been accused of hunting anyone down.

As for "If...would they...?", this can only be answered "They might be".<modsnip> informs a GP she is pregnant I suspect word will get back to SS very fast, regardless of when she last met with SS face to face. Neighbours can also suspect stuff and make phone calls.

 

[JTT]

Has anyone deciphered what the man and woman were saying in the two pieces of video footage that purport to show CM and MG shortly before their arrest?

First piece, showing them walking and without bags:

Aristocrat's lover appears injured with stick and 'without baby' before arrests

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon were further arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter yesterday, as a major police search for a two-month-old baby continues into its second day

www.mirror.co.uk

Second piece, in which he is carrying two bags and she is carrying at least one:

 

[sunnynz]

Has anyone deciphered what the man and woman were saying in the two pieces of video footage that purport to show CM and MG shortly before their arrest?

First piece, showing them walking and without bags:

Aristocrat's lover appears injured with stick and 'without baby' before arrests

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon were further arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter yesterday, as a major police search for a two-month-old baby continues into its second day

www.mirror.co.uk

Second piece, in which he is carrying two bags and she is carrying at least one:

There was definitely a transcript in a news article and someone linked to it but I think it was in the third thread which is not available at the moment. I just had a quick google and couldn't find the article, but from memory one of them was saying let's leave for London. If I see it again I'll post it here

 

[Earthwindfire]

A KC is not going around digging up an old ex and getting them to go to the Sun with a rehash of information that's already in the public domain and has been for weeks.

To what end would a KC do that - hoping that the jury will hear this at some point prior to jury selection and they'll be lenient? Sounds like jury tampering to me.

This is just an ex who has realised he can make a bit of money by selling his story to a tabloid.

Or an ex who the Sun has contacted to get a quote so they can rehash information that's already out there.

 

[JTT]

How about this for a possible scenario. It is total speculation and it is not meant to suggest that they are either guilty or innocent of any offence.

It takes into account

a. In the video taken shortly before their arrest, the woman seems in a hurry. This is true when they are walking in both directions. In the video in which they are walking without bags, presumably shot first, she waits for the man to catch her up a bit. And then when he appears and he is a few metres away, she walks on.

b. In London, the man is shown with plastic bags on his feet.

c. It was winter and cold.

d. There's almost certainly no electricity mains to that shed.

e. The police have referred the case to the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

OK here are the elements of the scenario.

1. Could they have sometimes left Victoria alone in the shed and then tried to do their business as quickly as possible before hurrying back to her.

2. Could the reason CM took MG with her be that he has mental health difficulties as well as the foot injury or whatever is causing him to hobble and she considered it good for him to get out of the "house".

3. If this is so, and they are leaving Victoria behind because they do not wish to be observed with a baby while being sought by the investigation, might they have wrapped a living Victoria wrapped with unused nappies as insulation and with a plastic bag - covering much of her body but coming up to below her head, perhaps taped in place using nappy tape - to keep the insulating nappies in place.

Among the most important pieces of information or solidly based opinions that need to be derived from a postmortem examination is the time of death. We do not know whether the death occurred before or after they were arrested.

This scenario is consistent with various possibilities regarding guilt or innocence. She may also have been in a hurry to return if Victoria had already died. But element 3 fits with the known use of plastic bags.

 

[JTT]

More like this I would imagine

• if someone had direct or indirect contact with the police when, or shortly before, they were seriously injured or died. However, forces only need to refer cases where the contact may have caused or contributed to the death or injury

At the start of every investigation, we will outline which parts of the incident or event we will investigate. This is called our ‘terms of reference’.

Our investigators then gather evidence to establish all the circumstances of what’s happened. This may involve:

• taking witness statements
• interviewing police officers or members of police staff
• analysing footage from CCTV or cameras worn by police officers (body-worn video)
• obtaining other documents and records, such as telephone records
• reviewing policies that are relevant to what’s happened

Our investigations may also need forensic analysis and independent advice from experts.


At the end of our investigation, we produce a report that sets out:

• what happened
• what and how we investigated
• what evidence our investigators found
• our analysis of the evidence

We send the report to the police force. We also decide what should happen to those involved in the incident – for instance, they may need further training, or they may face a misconduct meeting or a gross misconduct hearing.

The police force can then provide its representations about what should happen. While we will consider those views, we will make the final decision on what happens as a result of our investigation.

It is the police force that carries out any disciplinary action. They can hold disciplinary hearings (for gross misconduct) or meetings (for misconduct).

The possible disciplinary actions that the police force can carry out include:

• written warning
• final written warning
• reduction on rank
• dismissal without notice

The force can also take non-disciplinary actions for low-level matters of misconduct or performance, such as ‘practice requiring improvement’. Supervising officers may also offer informal advice to their staff, identify any training needs and arrange for these to be met.

If our investigations find areas for improvement or learning opportunities, we can make recommendations to the force involved – or to all forces, if appropriate.

What we investigate and next steps | Independent Office for Police Conduct

www.policeconduct.gov.uk

That's for when IOPC receive a case. The police in this case say they have referred the case to IOPC because it was "mandatory" (quote) in these circumstances to do so. The basis for the referral being mandatory is unclear.

 

[rhino]

How about this for a possible scenario. It is total speculation and it is not meant to suggest that they are either guilty or innocent of any offence.

It takes into account

a. In the video taken shortly before their arrest, the woman seems in a hurry. This is true when they are walking in both directions. In the video in which they are walking without bags, presumably shot first, she waits for the man to catch her up a bit. And then when he appears and he is a few metres away, she walks on.

b. In London, the man is shown with plastic bags on his feet.

c. It was winter and cold.

d. There's almost certainly no electricity mains to that shed.

e. The police have referred the case to the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

OK here are the elements of the scenario.

1. Could they have sometimes left Victoria alone in the shed and then tried to do their business as quickly as possible before hurrying back to her.

2. Could the reason CM took MG with her be that he has mental health difficulties as well as the foot injury or whatever is causing him to hobble and she considered it good for him to get out of the "house".

3. If this is so, and they are leaving Victoria behind because they do not wish to be observed with a baby while being sought by the investigation, might they have wrapped a living Victoria wrapped with unused nappies as insulation and with a plastic bag - covering much of her body but coming up to below her head, perhaps taped in place using nappy tape - to keep the insulating nappies in place.

Among the most important pieces of information or solidly based opinions that need to be derived from a postmortem examination is the time of death. We do not know whether the death occurred before or after they were arrested.

This scenario is consistent with various possibilities regarding guilt or innocence. She may also have been in a hurry to return if Victoria had already died. But element 3 fits with the known use of plastic bags.

MSM had all reported that the baby had likely been dead for weeks, e.g. Missing baby ‘dead for several weeks’ before discovery, say police

While date of death has not been released I think it very unlikely that the death occurred after arrest given the above.

 

[Meeky]

How about this for a possible scenario. It is total speculation and it is not meant to suggest that they are either guilty or innocent of any offence.

It takes into account

a. In the video taken shortly before their arrest, the woman seems in a hurry. This is true when they are walking in both directions. In the video in which they are walking without bags, presumably shot first, she waits for the man to catch her up a bit. And then when he appears and he is a few metres away, she walks on.

b. In London, the man is shown with plastic bags on his feet.

c. It was winter and cold.

d. There's almost certainly no electricity mains to that shed.

e. The police have referred the case to the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

OK here are the elements of the scenario.

1. Could they have sometimes left Victoria alone in the shed and then tried to do their business as quickly as possible before hurrying back to her.

2. Could the reason CM took MG with her be that he has mental health difficulties as well as the foot injury or whatever is causing him to hobble and she considered it good for him to get out of the "house".

3. If this is so, and they are leaving Victoria behind because they do not wish to be observed with a baby while being sought by the investigation, might they have wrapped a living Victoria wrapped with unused nappies as insulation and with a plastic bag - covering much of her body but coming up to below her head, perhaps taped in place using nappy tape - to keep the insulating nappies in place.

Among the most important pieces of information or solidly based opinions that need to be derived from a postmortem examination is the time of death. We do not know whether the death occurred before or after they were arrested.

This scenario is consistent with various possibilities regarding guilt or innocence. She may also have been in a hurry to return if Victoria had already died. But element 3 fits with the known use of plastic bags.

Given the level of decomposition (the fact they couldn’t determine gender tells us it was advanced), means this baby was dead well before their arrests

 

[everybodhi]

How about this for a possible scenario. It is total speculation and it is not meant to suggest that they are either guilty or innocent of any offence.

It takes into account

a. In the video taken shortly before their arrest, the woman seems in a hurry. This is true when they are walking in both directions. In the video in which they are walking without bags, presumably shot first, she waits for the man to catch her up a bit. And then when he appears and he is a few metres away, she walks on.

b. In London, the man is shown with plastic bags on his feet.

c. It was winter and cold.

d. There's almost certainly no electricity mains to that shed.

e. The police have referred the case to the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

OK here are the elements of the scenario.

1. Could they have sometimes left Victoria alone in the shed and then tried to do their business as quickly as possible before hurrying back to her.

2. Could the reason CM took MG with her be that he has mental health difficulties as well as the foot injury or whatever is causing him to hobble and she considered it good for him to get out of the "house".

3. If this is so, and they are leaving Victoria behind because they do not wish to be observed with a baby while being sought by the investigation, might they have wrapped a living Victoria wrapped with unused nappies as insulation and with a plastic bag - covering much of her body but coming up to below her head, perhaps taped in place using nappy tape - to keep the insulating nappies in place.

Among the most important pieces of information or solidly based opinions that need to be derived from a postmortem examination is the time of death. We do not know whether the death occurred before or after they were arrested.

This scenario is consistent with various possibilities regarding guilt or innocence. She may also have been in a hurry to return if Victoria had already died. But element 3 fits with the known use of plastic bags.

Marten case police believe baby 'dead for some time' - BBC News
By all media accounts the police reported the body was already in decomposition.
If you research infant forensics, they decompose at a faster rate than juveniles or adults due to lower mass and bone mineral density. In as little as six days their organs liquify which can make time and manner of death difficult to determine.
Any link on this is graphic so I’ll leave it up to you to verify, therefore jmo.
Edited to add: The fresh placenta offered more forensics than the body in decomposition, including biological sex, pre term birth, low birth weight, abnormalities, infections, and diseases of the infant.
A practical guide to placental examination for forensic pathologists - PubMed

The review aims to discuss concepts, with illustrations, that forensic pathologists may not routinely focus on in death investigations that may either contribute or mask the cause of a fetal or neonatal death, or are associated with a recurrence risk. While it is recognized that many forensic facilities do not have formal guidelines for placental examination, involvement of local perinatal pathology services in cases is one way of obtaining additional specialist expertise.

 

[CaptainNancy]

Once again, speculation and opinions about guilt in various forms are creeping into this thread.

The sub judice / contempt of court rules are taken seriously in the UK, and breaking them can potentially contribute to a challenge that a fair trial is no longer possible.

Let’s not make work for mods. Once charges are brought the time for speculation and public sleuthing and sharing are over. IMO.

 

[JTT]

Given the level of decomposition (the fact they couldn’t determine gender tells us it was advanced), means this baby was dead well before their arrests

Have the police said that before the autopsy took place (which was delayed for a day for as yet unexplained reasons) they tried to determine the sex of the baby? "Unable" may not mean that they tried and couldn't.

Also how many hours after discovery did they state that they had been unable to determine the sex? Although it is a natural human thing to want to know (and therefore to be able to call the baby "he" or "she" rather than "it"), it might not necessarily have been the first thing the police sought to know, especially if they didn't know the sex of the baby that CM had given birth to and therefore didn't have this piece of information to check the sex of the dead baby against. (This is supposed to have been the case, although I am not sure why, since examination of the placenta would have determined sex.)

If Victoria did die several weeks younger than 8 weeks, that will certainly be clear in the autopsy report, though, even if COD remains unknown. That may well have been the police's opinion even before they received the report, given that they charged CM and MG with perversion of the course of justice.

 

[everybodhi]

Once again, speculation and opinions about guilt in various forms are creeping into this thread.

The sub judice / contempt of court rules are taken seriously in the UK, and breaking them can potentially contribute to a challenge that a fair trial is no longer possible.

Let’s not make work for mods. Once charges are brought the time for speculation and public sleuthing and sharing are over. IMO.

This is such a difficult concept for US citizens, judges have to issue gag orders in order the stop attorneys and LE from talking to the press about the guilt or innocence in cases they represent. There’s a guy in Polk County Florida who is notorious for making long winded personal attacks on the defendant when he announces an arrest.
Social media is rife with rumors, speculation, and accusations, not only of defendants but their families and the victims too.
I can’t help but wish for some sub judice in the US but it can’t get past the First Amendment

 

[Cherwell]

the autopsy ...... (which was delayed for a day for as yet unexplained reasons)

They waited for a specialist in paediatric pathology.

 

[Cuko]

They waited for a specialist in paediatric pathology.

Do you have a source for that, please?

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

The police have said that their self-referral to IPOC was mandatory:

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon: found baby ‘may have been dead for weeks’

Police say they have been unable to confirm gender of infant whose remains were found on Wednesday

www.theguardian.com

“Because we believe the death occurred during the course of a missing person investigation, we have made a mandatory referral to the Independent Office for Police Conduct. This is standard protocol for such circumstances.”

What's the relevant document?

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Documents/statutoryguidance/2020_statutory_guidance_english.pdf

Chapter 7 covers "Death or Serious Injury" matters, but only when the deceased person was arrested or detained by the police or otherwise had direct or indirect contact with the police that may have caused serious death or injury.

They said "mandatory" though. There must be quite a few cases when they look for someone as a Missing Person and the person dies while the police are looking for them. Do they always refer themselves to IPOC when that happens?

Edit: could it be that the reason they have referred themselves is because a complaint might be submitted by one or both of the defendants? IPOC is all about complaints or possible complaints, and AFAICT actual complaints will only be processed if they come from persons who claim they were affected.

I'm just speculating here as I'm not a legal eagle but the same thing has just happened in the recent case of UK adult missing person, Nicola Bulley who was found deceased after three weeks (assumed to be an act of suicide / misadventure / maybe an accident - not yet verified and maybe can never be truly known). Anyhow, the police in that instance also referred themselves.

I'm unsure why but it must be a fairly new protocol to review if things could have been done differently or whether 'lessons have been learned'. Seemingly their self referral means nobody needs to advocate for the deceased to bring about the review but I would imagine that complaints can still be made if any agency or individual wished to.

It seems the common factors in both these cases is that the missing person was located sadly deceased, was actively known to be missing and was being searched for, and the authorities had been involved since before they became 'missing'. My suggestion is the review is to see what could have been done differently during any interactions or interventions *before* the person went missing as a) it could have saved their life; b) it could have saved a huge amount of police time and resources which ultimately equals money.

JMO MOO

 

[Nikynoo]

Do you have a source for that, please?

a simple google search revealed this article from the Daily Mail - Constance Marten smiles at her lover and blows him a kiss in the dock
'At a press conference Detective Superintendent Lewis Basford of the Met Police said it was clear the baby's remains had been there for 'several weeks'.

They said it is also too early to provide a specific date of death.

A post mortem is due to be carried out by a specialist paediatric pathologist...'

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I’ve been following thread this from the start but had to step away after the baby was found, but something has been nagging at me. Sorry if this has been covered elsewhere but there’s too many new posts for me to catch up on.

<modsnip>

The ITV News at 10 said last week that CM hid the pregnancy when they couldn’t hide it any longer (by which I took to mean her bump showing) that was when they ran away. But hide it from who?<modsnip>

Social Services IS the most likely explanation… but I wondered if there was any chance there was a third party like this Nigerian Church that they were actually involved running from and not the authorities at all (although even as I type this it sounds incredibly unlikely). I guess we may find out their motives when it comes to trial.

Reading between the lines of CM's mother's public communication it would seem they were running from law enforcement and social services for fear of having the baby removed. We don't know enough to speculate more but it appears CM was no longer involved in any cult or church as firstly that was many years ago when she was living overseas and secondly MG was not any part of it as far as we know.

<modsnip> it seems possible, to me, that CM was maybe in some sort of periodical contact / review situation with some form of authority. She may have also been in regular contact with a GP or other welfare or healthcare organisation regarding her own emotional well-being (this is not known or verified). It could even be the case she was legally obliged to notify a pregnancy (again this is not in any way known or verified - I am just aware of that's how it can work for some people who struggle with certain difficulties). JMO MOO.

 

[Cuko]

a simple google search revealed this article from the Daily Mail - Constance Marten smiles at her lover and blows him a kiss in the dock
'At a press conference Detective Superintendent Lewis Basford of the Met Police said it was clear the baby's remains had been there for 'several weeks'.

They said it is also too early to provide a specific date of death.

A post mortem is due to be carried out by a specialist paediatric pathologist...'

Thank you. Explains why I hadn't seen it. Have a pathological aversion to the Daily Mail!

 

[wizardizzo76]

It's worth noting that court reports stated that the couple "initially refused to co-operate". This suggests that they have told them more about what occurred than just the name and sex of the baby since she was found. Perhaps the appointment of KC saw advise for full co-operation and the police have fewer blanks than we think.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

<modsnip - quoted post was removed>

Sometimes, some events are so completely predictable and the people involved have repeated the same behaviour enough times and not shown any signs of change or improvement - or may have even visibly declined and escalated the problematic behaviour - that a particular outcome is almost certain and hope is not on the cards. When this is a known situation and other people (systems, institutions, organisations) are already involved and aware *and* a life is at direct threat *and* that life is the single most vulnerable being in humanity, a tiny newborn baby, then because we do here in the UK have those safety systems allegedly in place to advocate and protect the life at threat, one can reasonably ask 'what went wrong?' or 'why wasn't more done'. After all, it is a tragedy and all of us want to protect the sanctity of life for those who are too young and vulnerable to do it for themselves.

JMO MOO