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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Willowy said:
It's not clear in that Mail article (classic Mail) but I believe all those food items pictured were actually what CM & MG were carrying with them when they were arrested. (All in a different Lidl bag to which Victoria's body was found). It's mentioned in other articles and the Trial podcast. Note the open loaf of bread and turkey/chicken slices - adds up because MG was trying to make/eat a sandwich in the bodycam footage.
Click to expand...
RBBM
I was going to say the same.
The bag with the cornetto, jam and something else looks muddy, but it's the melted cornetto.
(For non-UK people, Cornetto is a brand of ice cream similar to drumsticks.)
It was the first time they had withdrawn cash from the ATM in a while, and I think they knew they would be found and thought they would go out with a feast and a drink, but they got arrested before they could have their feast.
It would explain MG's insistence on eating before being questioned. I think they had hidden for as long as they could, tried to shoplift, and failed, but they were so hungry that they gave up.
ETA: JMO
 
Obergine said:
Interesting. All the reports on the placenta said it was found in the back seat, but then I note the media have a habit of 'reading and reporting' between the lines. I am inclined to believe they would keep a placenta to bury, but then why not do it straight away? Unchilled placenta probably reeks after a few days.
Click to expand...
It could have been iced, and the fire melted the ice.
 
ShadowPuppet said:
Is anyone listening to The Trial podcast (DM - sorry, detest the Daily Mail generally, but podcast is interesting)? Anyone else think MG refusal to be interviewed in the seat is interesting?

JMOO, (I know I mentioned last time about the food/hunger issue, so apologies if repetitive) it seems in every interview so far he seems to demonstrate this need to control it, usually picking something to say repeatedly that relates to a minor discomfort he experiences at the time, which is blown into the only issue he will discuss in utter circles. (Aside, but very like someone with NPD I’ve known.) Also, the fixating on the treating him like ‘a dog’ idea, asking his solicitor to respond for him and trying to switch things back on the interviewer (‘how can the nurse know how much pain I feel etc. a doctor would understand’) are just quite strong unusual behaviours. I wasn’t expecting the feeling of playing the victim to come across quite as strongly as it has for me so far.
Click to expand...
I got a different impression from the podcast.
It seemed like he knew how it would go; he spent his teenage years and young adult years and a good chunk more in the prison system. His responses to them sound like someone who has lots of pent-up rage over how they were treated before and knows how LE are, except his experience was in the States; the LE in the UK are very different.
ETA: JMO (I'm on a roll for forgetting that tonight)
 
And this Podcast - only one episode - so far - which also includes a transcript





The transcript is auto generated, so you do have to correct the errors !

I found this part interesting - I don't remember it being reported by The Argus that MG was with her when she discharged herself and left the baby in the hospital ( this is baby 4 )


we don't know as much about the births of the other children but we do know that one of the children, after it was born in the hospital, Marten discharged herself from hospital, her and Gordon left the hospital without the baby and the next day they came back for the baby




and this section ..........


Her mother, Virginia De Selliers has been in court along with her brother Tobias.
They're both quite impressive figures. She was certainly wealthy and it's certainly been the case made that they had access to money.

When you say they're impressive figures what do you mean by that ?

I suppose I mean they're posh. I think they've been quite stoic, they haven't shown much reaction.
I think the only time we did see a reaction from the brother was when it was mentioned that Constance Marten had been into German Donner Kebab - where he seemed to put his head in his hands at the thought of his sister going into a kebab shop, but other than that they have remained quiet.
 
ShadowPuppet said:
Is anyone listening to The Trial podcast (DM - sorry, detest the Daily Mail generally, but podcast is interesting)? Anyone else think MG refusal to be interviewed in the seat is interesting?

JMOO, (I know I mentioned last time about the food/hunger issue, so apologies if repetitive) it seems in every interview so far he seems to demonstrate this need to control it, usually picking something to say repeatedly that relates to a minor discomfort he experiences at the time, which is blown into the only issue he will discuss in utter circles. (Aside, but very like someone with NPD I’ve known.) Also, the fixating on the treating him like ‘a dog’ idea, asking his solicitor to respond for him and trying to switch things back on the interviewer (‘how can the nurse know how much pain I feel etc. a doctor would understand’) are just quite strong unusual behaviours. I wasn’t expecting the feeling of playing the victim to come across quite as strongly as it has for me so far.
Click to expand...

For anyone who has seen as many episodes of 24 hours in police custody as i have, both their behaviours appear v similar to alot of the behaviours you seen on that.

(Pretty sure the programme only features people who are later found guilty but) those in custody often seem to fall into two main categories:

1. "no comment, no comment, no comment" similar to what CM was doing.

2. asking for gluten free sandwiches and complaining about being cold, needing medical attention, etc etc. This was more MG's approach IMO.
 
In some areas of life, circumstantial evidence is often the best, such as in intelligence work. This definitely does not apply in a criminal courtroom. (This is why it's extremely difficult to get a conviction for murder if there's no body.)

<modsnip - discussion of a diagnosis not presented at trial - sub judice>

I wonder whether the prosecution are going to offer a narrative as to why the defendants went on the run. Because otherwise the jury might get the idea that the prosecution position is that it doesn't matter in the slightest why they went on the run, whereas surely there's an extremely strong legal argument for saying it does matter. In some cases if there's a raging fire in a building and a parent throws their baby out of the window, that wouldn't be considered a criminal action. Can you imagine if in the minds of the jury the prosecution are saying "It doesn't matter why they went on the run, because we believe you'll conclude that the FACTS show XYZ"? The facts don't include any direct evidence of the physical cause of death. The prosecution accept that. This is a difficult case for the crown.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pidgy said:
In some areas of life, circumstantial evidence is often the best, such as in intelligence work. This definitely does not apply in a criminal courtroom. (This is why it's extremely difficult to get a conviction for murder if there's no body.)

<modsnip - discussion of diagnosis not presented at trial - sub judice>

I wonder whether the prosecution are going to offer a narrative as to why the defendants went on the run. Because otherwise the jury might get the idea that the prosecution position is that it doesn't matter in the slightest why they went on the run, whereas surely there's an extremely strong legal argument for saying it does matter. In some cases if there's a raging fire in a building and a parent throws their baby out of the window, that wouldn't be considered a criminal action. Can you imagine if in the minds of the jury the prosecution are saying "It doesn't matter why they went on the run, because we believe you'll conclude that the FACTS show XYZ"? The facts don't include any direct evidence of the physical cause of death. The prosecution accept that. This is a difficult case for the crown.
Click to expand...
Circumstantial evidence is often the very best evidence. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it and it's definitely possible to get a conviction in a no body murder case based purely on circumstantial evidence. It's just part of a jigsaw puzzle that when the jury put it together can give them a picture that they can be sure a person has committed a crime (or not).

I think circumstantial evidence still gets a bad name based on 80's TV shows.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CM quoted in The Argus from her first police interview

"I was doing fine," she said.

"I was elated to be with my and baby and with Mark parenting.

"I was very happy actually."

Marten said she had enough milk to feed Victoria regularly and that she was "well looked after".

A large amount of cognitive dissonance going on here in my opinion! She is talking as though what they were doing / how they were living with a newborn is normal!
 
“Her lips were blue”
"Marten said Gordon did not at first believe Victoria was dead.

They commenced CPR.

Marten said when she breathed into Victoria's mouth she could hear a "bubbly" noise from her chest like "water"was in her lungs.

"It seemed like she had been dead for a while," she said."

So... they did CPR but they did NOT call an ambulance?

That's going to be *quite* hard to explain IMO.
 

Bag became “too heavy”​

“It got to the point where she became really heavy, the bag became too heavy to carry," said Marten

“It just became excessively heavy and also Mark and I hadn’t eaten in a long time, it just became impossible to carry it, so sometimes we actually had to leave it in the tent or in the allotment, we left it in there because it was just too, too heavy.

“I almost fainted it was so heavy.”

How can the bag have become too heavy over time? Poor baby Victoria will weigh no more dead than alive! It's nonsense!
 
Legally Bland said:
Circumstantial evidence is often the very best evidence. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it and it's definitely possible to get a conviction in a no body murder case based purely on circumstantial evidence. It's just part of a jigsaw puzzle that when the jury put it together can give them a picture that they can be sure a person has committed a crime (or not).

I think circumstantial evidence still gets a bad name based on 80's TV shows.
Click to expand...
There's nothing wrong with circumstantial evidence, and it's possible to convict for murder without a body but it's extremely rare. Unlike direct evidence, circumstantial evidence is rarely strong enough on its own to prove anything. I doubt convictions for murder without a body have become any more frequent since any particular decade of TV shows. In this case the physical cause of death is unknown. That piece of the jigsaw is absent.

"they can be sure a person has committed a crime (or not)"

Better : "they can be sure (or not) that a person has committed a crime".

<modsnip - quoted post and response removed for discussing a medical condition not presented at trial - sub judice>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
InstantCoffee said:

Bag became “too heavy”​

“It got to the point where she became really heavy, the bag became too heavy to carry," said Marten

“It just became excessively heavy and also Mark and I hadn’t eaten in a long time, it just became impossible to carry it, so sometimes we actually had to leave it in the tent or in the allotment, we left it in there because it was just too, too heavy.

“I almost fainted it was so heavy.”

How can the bag have become too heavy over time? Poor baby Victoria will weigh no more dead than alive! It's nonsense!
Click to expand...
I don't think she means it became objectively heavier.

She seems to have done well in the interviews. I wonder whether the crown will accuse her of lying or mention her actor training.

So she may...may possibly also do well under cross-examination.

Perhaps if she takes the stand she will upbraid the prosecutor if he calls a liar and say "You can say that, but I was there. I know what happened, I told the police, and now I'm telling you."

I would say she seems very bright. Goodness knows why relationships with lawyers keep ending.

Anyway we shall see.
 
It seems she did mean objectively heavier...

Marten said she didn't know "what state" the baby's body would be in because they had been "dragging the bag" because it was "so heavy".

They had put soil in the bag "to try and mask the smell".

Again - cognitive dissonance - in what world is this rational behaviour?
 
Pidgy said:
I don't think she means it became objectively heavier.

She seems to have done well in the interviews. I wonder whether the crown will accuse her of lying or mention her actor training.
Click to expand...

So interesting that you read it as having "done well". I find her explanations completely unconvincing, maybe even baffling.

I mean, I guess she managed to stay sitting in a chair which is more than MG managed, but as for explaining how her child ended up dead in a plastic bag in a shed, there's absolutely no humanly understandable explanation that ive read so far.

I'm only going off the Argus updates tho, perhaps there is more info elsewhere?
 
InstantCoffee said:
It seems she did mean objectively heavier...

Marten said she didn't know "what state" the baby's body would be in because they had been "dragging the bag" because it was "so heavy".

They had put soil in the bag "to try and mask the smell".

Again - cognitive dissonance - in what world is this rational behaviour?
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the only reason you would add soil to a bag containing a body would be to hasten decomposition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 190 more.
Total: 1,734 (members: 191, guests: 1,543)

Online statistics

Members online
191
Guests online
1,543
Total visitors
1,734
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,008
Messages
18,102,578
Members
230,967
Latest member
M5FL72
Back
Top