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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
From Jennie's link above ..... post 962



Well, I'm not him so I can't tell you how he was feeling".

She told detectives the couple were "very distraught
" and "a bit traumatised by the whole thing".
That's a very interesting reply.
"a bit traumatised by the whole thing"
Is the 'whole thing' all the media 'fuss' about their new-born baby being at risk in their care?
Or the ensuing 'fuss' about the finding of their new born baby dead in their care?
 
[…]

She said she had been "extremely tired" and had fallen asleep while she was in a tent hugging her baby - who was in her jacket.

"She wasn't moving when I woke up," she recalled.

During the police interview Ms Marten wept while describing the moment she realised their baby was not breathing.

She told officers the pair tried to resuscitate baby Victoria: "I tried to breathe in her mouth and pump her chest."

She said there was no response: "So I wrapped her in a scarf and cradled her for a few minutes. I didn't know what to do."

Asked by a detective whether they went to get help, Ms Marten replied: "No because she was definitely not alive.

"I mean she wasn't alive, so who's going to help?"


When asked how Mr Gordon felt after their baby had died, Ms Marten said: "Well, I'm not him so I can't tell you how he was feeling".

The detective then asked: "Well, what did he say to you?"

She replied: "Well, he was distraught of course".

"Tell me about that," asked the detective.

Ms Marten replied: "You'll have to ask him, I mean, that's his remit, isn't it?"

She told detectives the couple were "very distraught" and "a bit traumatised by the whole thing".

During the interview Ms Marten recalled seeing a copy of the Metro newspaper while they were waiting for a bus in Brighton some days afterwards.

"It just said, I think it was my father coming forward saying we really need to come forward with the baby".

Detectives also asked her how she was feeling following the birth of their daughter.
"I was feeling fine. I was elated to be with her actually. To be with one of my children. With Mark, together and parenting.

"It was a really nice Christmas period. I was very happy actually. Until all the media attention. That's my experience".

[…]

“A bit traumatised” :(

And yet, how easily and enjoyably can you parent constantly in holiday cottages, cars, taxis and hotels (sometimes more than one in a day)?

Also, does she mean Victoria slept in an adult sleeping bag? The Argus just says sleeping bag, rather than a baby/toddler one.

I feel awful for them and, obviously, for Victoria, but so much of this doesn’t add up. Victoria had a coat (after the one burnt in the car fire), but they don’t seem to have kept it (unless it appears later in the trial). She was perfectly happy during the Christmas period parenting, but constantly travelling in stressful conditions - she claims leaving the cottage two days after Victoria’s birth. She was starving to the point of utter weakness, but her breast milk was absolutely unaffected. Equally, they left before her milk would have come through (colostrum first) and, if she was driving, that’s quite long periods without a tiny newborn being able to feed on demand to encourage the milk to come. (And CM would have been unbelievably thirsty without access to lots of water/equivalent drinks as the oxytocin really makes you want to gulp water in those early feeding days.) She was well looked after, but slept in unsafe high SIDS risk conditions. Victoria died in Harwich, but was seen on cctv in a brick lane restaurant (and this was confused for Sussex because she was exhausted, but didn’t put anything in place to reduce risks around exhaustion - you can burp a baby lying down). They planned to get a flat in London, but travelled extensively up north before deciding this and only didn’t seek a flat because someone approached them and revealed they were on the news. They were desperate for a PM, but didn’t come forward or tell the police once caught or attempt to store Victoria in a way to assist that.

It’s the dragging the bag that sounds bizarre and so disrespectful somehow. Two grown, relatively tall adults unable to carry a no more than 10lb baby (50th centile average for a 1 month old girl is 7.8lbs so I’m being over fair with an upwards estimate)? 10lbs would be roughly the equivalent of two large (4 pint) bottles of milk. Heavy, but not impossible for adults on a shoulder, especially knowing it’s your daughter’s body - and Victoria was unlikely to even be that heavy. Would you not take a handle each if necessary? And surely it’s less to do with the weight and more with the smell? How unnoticed could you go carrying around a decomposing body?

So much of this seems well placed to counter certain points, but perhaps I am being unfair. If she passed in the way they said and they attempted resuscitation, it would have been heartbreaking for both of them.

Does anyone know if the resuscitation in the situation described would be able to be confirmed during a post mortem?
 
“A bit traumatised” :(

And yet, how easily and enjoyably can you parent constantly in holiday cottages, cars, taxis and hotels (sometimes more than one in a day)?

Also, does she mean Victoria slept in an adult sleeping bag? The Argus just says sleeping bag, rather than a baby/toddler one.

I feel awful for them and, obviously, for Victoria, but so much of this doesn’t add up. Victoria had a coat (after the one burnt in the car fire), but they don’t seem to have kept it (unless it appears later in the trial). She was perfectly happy during the Christmas period parenting, but constantly travelling in stressful conditions - she claims leaving the cottage two days after Victoria’s birth. She was starving to the point of utter weakness, but her breast milk was absolutely unaffected. Equally, they left before her milk would have come through (colostrum first) and, if she was driving, that’s quite long periods without a tiny newborn being able to feed on demand to encourage the milk to come. (And CM would have been unbelievably thirsty without access to lots of water/equivalent drinks as the oxytocin really makes you want to gulp water in those early feeding days.) She was well looked after, but slept in unsafe high SIDS risk conditions. Victoria died in Harwich, but was seen on cctv in a brick lane restaurant (and this was confused for Sussex because she was exhausted, but didn’t put anything in place to reduce risks around exhaustion - you can burp a baby lying down). They planned to get a flat in London, but travelled extensively up north before deciding this and only didn’t seek a flat because someone approached them and revealed they were on the news. They were desperate for a PM, but didn’t come forward or tell the police once caught or attempt to store Victoria in a way to assist that.

It’s the dragging the bag that sounds bizarre and so disrespectful somehow. Two grown, relatively tall adults unable to carry a no more than 10lb baby (50th centile average for a 1 month old girl is 7.8lbs so I’m being over fair with an upwards estimate)? 10lbs would be roughly the equivalent of two large (4 pint) bottles of milk. Heavy, but not impossible for adults on a shoulder, especially knowing it’s your daughter’s body - and Victoria was unlikely to even be that heavy. Would you not take a handle each if necessary? And surely it’s less to do with the weight and more with the smell? How unnoticed could you go carrying around a decomposing body?

So much of this seems well placed to counter certain points, but perhaps I am being unfair. If she passed in the way they said and they attempted resuscitation, it would have been heartbreaking for both of them.

Does anyone know if the resuscitation in the situation described would be able to be confirmed during a post mortem?

My guess is the heavy bag story is designed to 'explain' the fact that they've been caught on CCTV without her body. It's just an obfuscation. One of many.
 
'They [my family] were involved with social services for years trying to get involved with my children'

Interesting quote from the DM piece, quoting from Police interview.That makes it sound like her family have tried to intervene for years, going to great lengths with Private Investigators etc - so have obviously had great cause for concern over a long period of time. There's an elephant in the room here, that hasn't been discussed in court as yet I think! This surely has to go deeper than her family just not liking MG and his history?
 
'They [my family] were involved with social services for years trying to get involved with my children'

Interesting quote from the DM piece, quoting from Police interview.That makes it sound like her family have tried to intervene for years, going to great lengths with Private Investigators etc - so have obviously had great cause for concern over a long period of time. There's an elephant in the room here, that hasn't been discussed in court as yet I think! This surely has to go deeper than her family just not liking MG and his history?
Maybe concern from the family about previous cult involvement? JMO.
 
'They [my family] were involved with social services for years trying to get involved with my children'

Interesting quote from the DM piece, quoting from Police interview.That makes it sound like her family have tried to intervene for years, going to great lengths with Private Investigators etc - so have obviously had great cause for concern over a long period of time. There's an elephant in the room here, that hasn't been discussed in court as yet I think! This surely has to go deeper than her family just not liking MG and his history?

I always find it problematic when people don't accommodate for the other side's POV. The positioning of a family as unreasonable for being concerned about children is IMO, in itself a cause for concern. CM accuses everyone else as being unreasonable, unfair, out of order, ill-informed...

She is always the wronged party. Even once the baby has died.
 
'They [my family] were involved with social services for years trying to get involved with my children'

Interesting quote from the DM piece, quoting from Police interview.That makes it sound like her family have tried to intervene for years, going to great lengths with Private Investigators etc - so have obviously had great cause for concern over a long period of time. There's an elephant in the room here, that hasn't been discussed in court as yet I think! This surely has to go deeper than her family just not liking MG and his history?
Maybe, but maybe they didn't think him suitable partner material because of his past. I agree that there is more background to this and it may have to do with CM and not MG.
 
I don't recall this being reported in the Argus live feed. Was the information discussed in court today?
I didn’t see it in the Argus either. I need to reread it, but it seems to be being reported alongside the rest of the interview, so I assume it was discussed?

Also (as far as I’m aware) SS would be bound to remain silent about it, unless they are questioned in line with the case in court etc.

CM has obviously said the falling out of the window was the catalyst here, however, there was a national alert after the birth of the first baby (2017) when they presented in hospital saying they lived in a campervan. They said they accumulated fines on the campervan, which CM family would not pay. Around this time they were visited in a tent, which was bowed under rainwater.

CM then enters temporary placement with this baby. We don’t hear many of the concerns around this, but they do highlight the sleeping concerns as these relate to Victoria too. CM warned repeatedly about dangers of falling asleep with baby on her. This placement was with foster carers.

In January 2020, care proceedings started. In June 2020, there was a separation order made because both defendants refused a residential placement.

In 2021, during care proceedings, child ii born and EPO made. Child ii is left in hospital, but parents later return to collect them. (Recently reported MG was with CM during this time.)

It wasn’t until January 2022 that care and placement orders were made for all four children.

None of this suggests it was purely a case of a misunderstanding about falling from a window.

If she fell, why did she fall? It’s not easy to do.

Absolutely it could be an incident that contributed but it was not a single concern that escalated beyond belief.
 
I thought he didn't have a passport? Or did he have one 7 years back but it ran out.

My bet is that the British Embassy had to issue him with a new passport so he could be deported in 2010.

That would have been valid for 10 years, which would explain how he could go to Peru ~2017 but didn't have a passport in 2023

While the weekly reporting would have confined them to a 6 day trip to Peru, that's possible.
 
Maybe, but maybe they didn't think him suitable partner material because of his past. I agree that there is more background to this and it may have to do with CM and not MG.

JMO but I suspect her family are sufficient bohemian that if CM and MG were happy together and he had not re-offended, and the children were happy and well cared for, they would have accepted the relationship. They must surely have had serious concerns of some sort, also social services don't have the time in the day to listen to unfounded complaints from malicious relatives. MOO
 
11:23am


Gordon said that Marten was driving when the car exploded as he cannot drive.







From earlier reports

The person who got out of the driver's side went to the rear of the vehicle, opened the boot of the car and was frantically trying to get things out of the car.

The person then came towards me and stood to my right as I was looking at the car.
I then started to record the fire on my mobile phone, and the first response from the gentleman was to ask me Am I filming that?



https://podcasts.musixmatch.com/podcast/the-trial-01gw40zm7r6hc08w7jepkajncm/episode/constance-marten-and-mark-gordon-somethings-not-right-01hndshe4838eawv9y9qm4ymx0



Mr Hudson said he saw a woman get out of the passenger’s side of the car and run past him on the hard shoulder, while the male driver "frantically" pulled items out of the burning vehicle.



'I could have saved baby of runaway aristocrat Constance Marten' - motorist





www.standard.co.uk
 
Last edited:
11:23am


Gordon said that Marten was driving when the car exploded as he cannot drive.







From earlier reports

The person who got out of the driver's side went to the rear of the vehicle, opened the boot of the car and was frantically trying to get things out of the car.

The person then came towards me and stood to my right as I was looking at the car.
I then started to record the fire on my mobile phone, and the first response from the gentleman was to ask me Am I filming that?



https://podcasts.musixmatch.com/podcast/the-trial-01gw40zm7r6hc08w7jepkajncm/episode/constance-marten-and-mark-gordon-somethings-not-right-01hndshe4838eawv9y9qm4ymx0



Mr Hudson said he saw a woman get out of the passenger’s side of the car and run past him on the hard shoulder, while the male driver "frantically" pulled items out of the burning vehicle.



'I could have saved baby of runaway aristocrat Constance Marten' - motorist





www.standard.co.uk
Wonder what his motivation is for saying that? He doesn't want to get done for driving without a license/insurance? Insurance companies don't like having convictions
 
It’s not exactly easy though is it? There are certain steps you need to do and if you don’t do them, then the marriage isn’t recognised.

From the link above.

What you need to do
You’ll be asked to provide an affirmation or affidavit document to prove you’re allowed to marry.

Make an appointment at the British embassy or consulate in Peru to swear an affirmation or affidavit that you’re free to marry. You’ll need to bring your passport and pay a fee.

Make an appointment at the embassy in Lima.

You’ll need to complete an affidavit form to prove you’re allowed to marry.

You can download and fill in (but not sign) the form in advance. You must take the form with you to your appointment.

Legalisation and translation
You’ll need to get your affirmation or affidavit translated into the local language and ‘legalised’ (certified as genuine) by the local authorities - the embassy or consulate should be able to give you advice.

I agree it's faffy - but those are the steps that would be required to marry in Peru - which CM claims they did.

Those aren't the extra steps required to have a legit Peruvian marriage recognised in the UK

My bet is this was an unofficial marriage ceremony of the type that wouldn't have been recognised by the Peruvian government if Peruvians had done it in Peru, nor by the UK government if UK citizens had done it in the UK.

A ceremony of sorts, but nowt legal to back it up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
231
Guests online
1,678
Total visitors
1,909

Forum statistics

Threads
599,987
Messages
18,102,328
Members
230,958
Latest member
FormerSoldier
Back
Top