UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon & Newborn (found deceased), Bolton Greater Manchester, 5 Jan 2023 #2 *Arrest*

[QB2022]

I called in the tent I spotted, interestingly the voicemail line states "a vulnerable missing child and its parents". An emphasis on the child being the main MP they are looking for, Mum paired in with him.

Yes, it will be the child that is the focus. CM and he are grown adults, they can do as they please. They are concerned about the baby. If they can help CM too, that would be a bonus but not the priority.

 

[Earthwindfire]

I called in the tent I spotted, interestingly the voicemail line states "a vulnerable missing child and its parents". An emphasis on the child being the main MP they are looking for, Mum paired in with him.

Where was the tent if you don't mind me asking?

 

[MistyWaters]

It will be part of information sharing. His sex offending will be on his records here

Yes but the sex offender registry is the formal means by which police keep tabs on one who has committed sexual offences in the past. Just because someone has a criminal record doesn’t automatically deem that person to be high risk in terms of becoming a parent.

Explained: The Sex Offenders Register

When faced with allegations of sexual assault, it is important to understand the reality of being on the sex offenders register.

www.slaterheelis.co.uk

 

[User1111]

I did mention previously but don't think I should again as if it was them I guess there's a chance of them hoofing it if they've been spotted. Absolutely miles away from Sussex though!

 

[Maltesepuppy]

In terms of social services, they would be involved in any pregnancy that is fathered by a known sex offender. It would then be down to CM and MG to prove they are fit to raise a child. This can involve a lot of hoop jumping and any hostility to this is seen as unwillingness to engage.
Often times SS will insist the woman leaves the man they deem as dangerous early in pregnancy to show she is able to keep away from him as her ability to keep herself safe shows she would be better able to keep a baby safe.
Speculation of course but it SS have told CM to leave MG and she has refused this alone child be used as evidence she can't protect a newborn.
SS also look at family support as a big aspect of assessing parents. If she is cut off from her own parents and his are in the USA then this could be another black mark against them as they would have little support.
I think if she had other children removed before, and she did nothing to better her situation before this pregnancy then she likely knew before getting pregnant that the baby would be taken into care.
I believe I read she had never seen a medical professional this pregnancy so it's likely she's decided early on to hide this baby and everything fell apart last minuet with the car fire / not making it to Ireland.

Yes to all of this. Also CM follows 2 websites that are 'against' social workers, ie. of the view that social workers remove children on a whim or "for profit". If CM shares these views with social workers it would go against her as social workers would view her as someone who is not showing "insight" into the concerns and is instead blaming others.
Even not having seen a medical professional will count against her, if/when found.
Of course, this is without the background and the subsequent disappearance.

 

[Earthwindfire]

Yes but the sex offender registry is the formal means by which police keep tabs on one who has committed sexual offences in the past. Just because someone has a criminal record doesn’t automatically deem that person to be high risk in terms of becoming a parent.

Explained: The Sex Offenders Register

When faced with allegations of sexual assault, it is important to understand the reality of being on the sex offenders register.

www.slaterheelis.co.uk

It doesn't mean he would necessarily cause harm to the child, but it does mean that social services would consider him to be high risk and he would have to prove himself not to be a risk.

 

[wizardizzo76]

Yes but the sex offender registry is the formal means by which police keep tabs on one who has committed sexual offences in the past. Just because someone has a criminal record doesn’t automatically deem that person to be high risk in terms of becoming a parent.

Explained: The Sex Offenders Register

When faced with allegations of sexual assault, it is important to understand the reality of being on the sex offenders register.

www.slaterheelis.co.uk

Assuming MG was on the sex offenders register when he returned to the UK, anyone on the register can apply to have their record removed after 8 years if they were a child when the crime was committed .https://www.benhoarebell.co.uk/application-to-be-removed-from-the-sex-offenders-register/#:~:text=Anyone%20who%20has%20been%20on,appeal%20to%20a%20Magistrates%20Court

As MG was imprisoned for 20, I think it highly unlikely that his record followed him to the UK, or he could immediately request it to be stricken off when deported. I suspect this is more complex: either a DV situation, or some other social needs or requirements. He or she or both may have eg a MH diagnosis that requires SS intervention, for example. I know people who have severe depression who have had social services informed when they have kids, sometimes even removed into foster care.

The most likely scenario in my opinion, given what has happened, and reading between the lines of the stories told, is that there is a snowballing out of control, because they live in a bit of a paranoid bubble and refusal to engage with anyone really is the reason SS is so hot on them, for whatever reason they are on their radar in the first place. Often engaging with social services means that they are more hands-off. Refusal to engage can get your kids removed via court order etc in scenarios where they might otherwise have supervision orders or other intervention. And not all removal is permanent, there are plenty of children returned to their parents when they have proven themselves capable.

If MG previous crime is not an issue - and I suspect it isn't - my guess would be DV or MH issues above all other options.

 

[QB2022]

Yes but the sex offender registry is the formal means by which police keep tabs on one who has committed sexual offences in the past. Just because someone has a criminal record doesn’t automatically deem that person to be high risk in terms of becoming a parent.

Explained: The Sex Offenders Register

When faced with allegations of sexual assault, it is important to understand the reality of being on the sex offenders register.

www.slaterheelis.co.uk

They have flexibility to avoid children falling through the gaps. Much like DBS checks have an "other relevant information" category. https://www.mind.org.uk/information...ecks-and-your-mental-health/about-dbs-checks/

They will know he has a sex offense and the nature of it. That will form the basis of a risk assessment. He doesn't need to be on the SOR. Family courts operate on the basis of "balance of probabilities" so they only need to satisfy that it is more likely than not.

 

[jiminy]

IF there are any other kids, they could be his with someone else for all we know and they never had custody. My love sprogs would make sense to me as a nickname for a partner’s kids.

If there are prior children and they are Constance’s, then it appears she/they at least had access. Now they don’t which could indicate something changed. Mark’s US conviction hasn’t changed so I’d be inclined to think this isn’t necessarily about that per se.

 

[MistyWaters]

They have flexibility to avoid children falling through the gaps. Much like DBS checks have an "other relevant information" category. https://www.mind.org.uk/information...ecks-and-your-mental-health/about-dbs-checks/

They will know he has a sex offense and the nature of it. That will form the basis of a risk assessment. He doesn't need to be on the SOR. Family courts operate on the basis of "balance of probabilities" so they only need to satisfy that it is more likely than not.

Do you have a relevant link? I think a DBS pre-employment check quite different than the circumstances that pertain to this case. As CM reportably did not seek prenatal care, how would SS have reason to conduct an advance risk assessment of the couple and specifically of MG‘s criminal record? The only possible reason I can think of is he failed to comply with the reporting terms set out with regard to the sexual offender registry but as to my earlier post, we don’t even know that his name was listed.

“A DBS check is a way for employers check your criminal record, to help decide whether you are a suitable person to work for them. This includes deciding whether it is suitable for you to work with children or vulnerable adults.”

 

[MistyWaters]

Assuming MG was on the sex offenders register when he returned to the UK, anyone on the register can apply to have their record removed after 8 years if they were a child when the crime was committed .https://www.benhoarebell.co.uk/application-to-be-removed-from-the-sex-offenders-register/#:~:text=Anyone%20who%20has%20been%20on,appeal%20to%20a%20Magistrates%20Court

As MG was imprisoned for 20, I think it highly unlikely that his record followed him to the UK, or he could immediately request it to be stricken off when deported. I suspect this is more complex: either a DV situation, or some other social needs or requirements. He or she or both may have eg a MH diagnosis that requires SS intervention, for example. I know people who have severe depression who have had social services informed when they have kids, sometimes even removed into foster care.

The most likely scenario in my opinion, given what has happened, and reading between the lines of the stories told, is that there is a snowballing out of control, because they live in a bit of a paranoid bubble and refusal to engage with anyone really is the reason SS is so hot on them, for whatever reason they are on their radar in the first place. Often engaging with social services means that they are more hands-off. Refusal to engage can get your kids removed via court order etc in scenarios where they might otherwise have supervision orders or other intervention. And not all removal is permanent, there are plenty of children returned to their parents when they have proven themselves capable.

If MG previous crime is not an issue - and I suspect it isn't - my guess would be DV or MH issues above all other options.

I agree, mental health or domestic violence could be the primary concern based on the snippets of information released. Fleeing from the car fire, totally abandoning the car and contents, toting a newborn baby is behaviour that surely arouses suspicion, then randomly travelling the country giving the appearance of homeless vagabonds.

I’d hope what prompted the search for the three is a result of compassion and concern for their wellbeing, primarily that of the child - exactly the reasons LE have stated.

Meanwhile I feel some of the UK media is out to stir the pot by reporting attention-getting scandal at the couple’s expense. The sad thing about that is if either one of CM or MG catches glimpses of these reportings it surely is not conducive to making themselves be known.

JMO

 

[OceanElix]

.

 

[Earthwindfire]

Assuming MG was on the sex offenders register when he returned to the UK, anyone on the register can apply to have their record removed after 8 years if they were a child when the crime was committed .https://www.benhoarebell.co.uk/application-to-be-removed-from-the-sex-offenders-register/#:~:text=Anyone%20who%20has%20been%20on,appeal%20to%20a%20Magistrates%20Court

As MG was imprisoned for 20, I think it highly unlikely that his record followed him to the UK, or he could immediately request it to be stricken off when deported. I suspect this is more complex: either a DV situation, or some other social needs or requirements. He or she or both may have eg a MH diagnosis that requires SS intervention, for example. I know people who have severe depression who have had social services informed when they have kids, sometimes even removed into foster care.

The most likely scenario in my opinion, given what has happened, and reading between the lines of the stories told, is that there is a snowballing out of control, because they live in a bit of a paranoid bubble and refusal to engage with anyone really is the reason SS is so hot on them, for whatever reason they are on their radar in the first place. Often engaging with social services means that they are more hands-off. Refusal to engage can get your kids removed via court order etc in scenarios where they might otherwise have supervision orders or other intervention. And not all removal is permanent, there are plenty of children returned to their parents when they have proven themselves capable.

If MG previous crime is not an issue - and I suspect it isn't - my guess would be DV or MH issues above all other options.

May I ask why you believe it unlikely his record would follow him to the U.K.?

He wouldn't have been on the sex offenders register prior to returning to the U.K. he can be removed form his first notification Information: Sex offence notification requirements - Unlock Therefore if we take it that he was added on his return which is the earliest point his first notification could take place, he would only have been eligible to be removed from it from 2018. That's not that long ago (and after he got to know CM). Any request for removal would have been assessed and one of the criteria (stated in your link) is that consideration will be given to the seriousness of the crime. We know his crime was very serious. Indeed, if he hadn't been extradited he would have still be in prison for the crime.

 

[Amaz0nia]

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed> I dont think alchohol a use is involved. They are too focussed for that. I think its more
Mental health and coercive control that has probably been going in for years to the point that its just ‘normal’ now..

 

[QB2022]

Do you have a relevant link? I think a DBS pre-employment check quite different than the circumstances that pertain to this case. As CM reportably did not seek prenatal care, how would SS have reason to conduct an advance risk assessment of the couple and specifically of MG‘s criminal record? The only possible reason I can think of is he failed to comply with the reporting terms set out with regard to the sexual offender registry but as to my earlier post, we don’t even know that his name was listed.

“A DBS check is a way for employers check your criminal record, to help decide whether you are a suitable person to work for them. This includes deciding whether it is suitable for you to work with children or vulnerable adults.”

I was using DBS as an example where convictions don't actually matter if its deemed relevant. If there's a known piece of information that is relevant it's shared.

It looks like an overseas conviction would be recorded "For UK Nationals, any offence where there is a UK equivalent can be added to the PNC provided that offence is deemed to be a recordable offence." Convictions obtained overseas - Unlock So even if he isn't subject to Sex offender register requirements, it will almost certainly be on his record.

Working together to safeguard children highlights the necessity of inter agency information sharing Working together to safeguard children No information of a parent's is exempt from information sharing if it is relevant for child protection.

I would suspect this all came out with the previous children and they knew it would be the same outcome.

 

[MistyWaters]

I was using DBS as an example where convictions don't actually matter if its deemed relevant. If there's a known piece of information that is relevant it's shared.

It looks like an overseas conviction would be recorded "For UK Nationals, any offence where there is a UK equivalent can be added to the PNC provided that offence is deemed to be a recordable offence." Convictions obtained overseas - Unlock So even if he isn't subject to Sex offender register requirements, it will almost certainly be on his record.

Working together to safeguard children highlights the necessity of inter agency information sharing Working together to safeguard children No information of a parent's is exempt from information sharing if it is relevant for child protection.

I would suspect this all came out with the previous children and they knew it would be the same outcome.

Am I correct, you are claiming MG’s criminal record would automatically disqualify from him parenting a child? That SS has the right to seize and remove any child of his solely based on him having a prior criminal conviction, even if he was never listed on the sex offenders registry? If the right to that action is contained in your link would you kindly quote it because it’s a very large document. But I’d be very surprised if it‘s contains information to contradict that which I earlier quoted, pasted below.

It goes without saying that employers conduct background checks on potential candidates. But that same example can’t possibly be compared to a democratic society determining if a couple has the right to parent a child.

If MG was currently listed on the sex offender list in UK, as he obviously has failed to report his whereabouts, police would have the right to issue a warrant for his arrest. But no such development has occurred. So IMO despite speculation, we do not know why the couple has chosen to go off the grid. JMO

Information: Relationships, children and dealing with social services - Unlock

Aim of this page This information is designed to set out what you may need to consider if you have been convicted of a sexual offence and are looking to start a new relationship. It also looks at how social services may become involved in any new or existing relationship. Why is this important...

unlock.org.uk

Having a family of your own​

All the time you are on the sex offenders’ register, you stand a good chance of there being some involvement with children’s services if you choose to start a family of your own. Once you come off the register, you should be treated no differently to any other couple looking to start their own family.

 

[QB2022]

Am I correct, you are claiming MG’s criminal record would automatically disqualify from him parenting a child? That SS has the right to seize and remove any child of his solely based on him having a prior criminal conviction, even if he was never listed on the sex offenders registry? If the right to that action is contained in your link would you kindly quote it because it’s a very large document. But I’d be very surprised if it‘s contains information to contradict that which I earlier quoted, pasted below.

It goes without saying that employers conduct background checks on potential candidates. But that same example can’t possibly be compared to a democratic society determining if a couple has the right to parent a child.

If MG was currently listed on the sex offender list in UK, as he obviously has failed to report his whereabouts, police would have the right to issue a warrant for his arrest. But no such development has occurred. So IMO despite speculation, we do not know why the couple has chosen to go off the grid. JMO

Information: Relationships, children and dealing with social services - Unlock

Aim of this page This information is designed to set out what you may need to consider if you have been convicted of a sexual offence and are looking to start a new relationship. It also looks at how social services may become involved in any new or existing relationship. Why is this important...

unlock.org.uk

Having a family of your own​

All the time you are on the sex offenders’ register, you stand a good chance of there being some involvement with children’s services if you choose to start a family of your own. Once you come off the register, you should be treated no differently to any other couple looking to start their own family.

It isn't an automatic bar, that is the point of a section 47 assessment. His history would automatically trigger an assessment. They will look at all of the information available. It is not as black and white as being on the sex offender register, it just isn't. Our system does not work on the basis of black and white, full assessments are specifically to look at the whole picture.

 

[Maltesepuppy]

Am I correct, you are claiming MG’s criminal record would automatically disqualify from him parenting a child? That SS has the right to seize and remove any child of his solely based on him having a prior criminal conviction, even if he was never listed on the sex offenders registry? If the right to that action is contained in your link would you kindly quote it because it’s a very large document. But I’d be very surprised if it‘s contains information to contradict that which I earlier quoted, pasted below.

It goes without saying that employers conduct background checks on potential candidates. But that same example can’t possibly be compared to a democratic society determining if a couple has the right to parent a child.

If MG was currently listed on the sex offender list in UK, as he obviously has failed to report his whereabouts, police would have the right to issue a warrant for his arrest. But no such development has occurred. So IMO despite speculation, we do not know why the couple has chosen to go off the grid. JMO

From what I know it's a case by case basis. Past convictions get looked at but so do other factors e.g. how old the person was, how long ago, what work the person has done since in terms of rehabilitation, what the person themselves say about it, if they take responsibility etc.
Of course if there are other factors, say, domestic abuse, this past offence gets seen in combination with current behaviour.
I'm not saying this is the case here, although I suspect it is.

 

[MistyWaters]

It isn't an automatic bar, that is the point of a section 47 assessment. His history would automatically trigger an assessment. They will look at all of the information available. It is not as black and white as being on the sex offender register, it just isn't. Our system does not work on the basis of black and white, full assessments are specifically to look at the whole picture.

It is not my intention to come across as rude but is there a possibility your familiarity with SS is prior to UK’s adoption of the sexual offender’s registry? Otherwise how would his history “automatically trigger” an assessment? What you describe appears to mirror the registry’s function. However after 8 years a person convicted as a juvenile can apply to be removed from it, which could explain why MG is no longer on the registry.

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

 

[QB2022]

2.1.6 Child Protection (Section 47) Enquiries section 47 assessment


They will also assess the other parent's ability to protect through capacity assessments and the wider family support network. A parent who scores highly on the ability to protect makes the whole situation less of a concern as it instills confidence that in a bad situation they will put the child first. That is also the importance of a wider support network as they are also protective factors. They will look at mental health and if things have been logged as concerns even if NFA.

It's hugely complex.

MOO is she originally kept her children and then something triggered them to no longer to be in her care.

In cases when I've seen similar, and I'm not implying this is what has happened here, there can be a parenting agreement drawn up initially and then there is an incident logged which breaks that agreement and they come down swiftly with removing children.