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

[QB2022]

Well I don't know.
But I'd be very surprised if the social services are putting it up.
Literally this chase is by the police.
We do not know why.
They have rights as parents.
Finding a placenta in a vehicle is not evidence that a birth took place, many couples keep their placenta, I think it's creepy but not a crime.
She has a right to have any style birth she chooses, I doubt she chose a car birth but maybe that is what happened.
We don't know she opted out of antenatal care, she may have been using an alternative medical practitioner.

The facts of this case is that there are no facts.
No sightings since Jan 9.
A tent purchased.
Abandoning a vehicle in a motorway would probably not be charged in court under the circumstances. Or as a misdemeanor and fined.

The long taxi rides were paid for, no crime there. No apparent purpose in visiting the places they did. But there must have been a purpose. I wonder whether they were searching for someone? I can't imagine who or why..

Thing is that she could have obtained legal aid had a court order been in place to take the child at birth but as no evidence of any such order exists I wonder whether we're not all barking up the wrong tree entirely?
If nobody knew she was pregnant, no such order existed.

I do of course wonder whether this could have been handled more discreetly and professionally by another police department in another location.

Any family court order is strictly secret. They can obtain a court order within 24 hours of a birth but they absolutely wouldn't share that with the public. Our family courts are very very strict on it.

 

[infinit]

Thanks for looking that up.
I had been wondering whether perhaps they had left a bloodbath in their wake somewhere but I'm pretty sure we would have heard about it had that been the case.

Is there provision for family to put up the money I wonder?

I've seen examples of 3rd parties putting up rewards but it's usually marked as anonymous donor, local businessman, community, family etc i.e. https://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/news/thames-valley/news/2022/march/14-03-2022/officers-renew-appeal-in-leah-croucher-investigation--milton-keynes/#:~:text=“Members of the local community,that reward is still available.”

 

[everybodhi]

Thanks for looking that up.
I had been wondering whether perhaps they had left a bloodbath in their wake somewhere but I'm pretty sure we would have heard about it had that been the case.

Is there provision for family to put up the money I wonder?

Yes. I think this is likely what happened here. Jmo.
If an alleged serious crime has been committed, which would obviously follow that there is an outstanding warrant under seal, I wonder what could possibly be the reason to hide this information from the public?

4. Reward Offered by a Third Party
4.1 Where the relatives of a victim make an offer of a reward, the SIO will need to discuss the issues carefully with the Family Liaison Officer (FLO), the relatives or their representative and the CPS. Once this has been done approval must be sought from the Head of Major Crime or Head of Crime for either Force.
4.2 In such cases, the reward money offered must be lodged with the Forces via BACS. This is retained on behalf of the family who will receive the money back after an agreed review period should it not be claimed.
4.3 When another agency wishes to offer a reward with the Forces, the SIO needs to ensure that the agency's motives are both ethical and professional. In this instance approval must be sought from the Head of Major Crime or Head of Crime for either Force.
4.4 Special care needs to be taken if the media offer a reward for information leading to the arrest and/or conviction of offenders for a specific offence. In most of these circumstances the Forces will not also offer a reward.
4.5 When a reward is offered by a third party through either Force, Legal Services will need to be consulted and a contract drawn up covering their commitment to pay.
4.6 It is the expectation of the Forces that funds sufficient to meet the cost of paying the reward, together with a reasonable sum to cover the cost of advertising, will be lodged via BACS in the favour of the Forces. The funds will be held by the relevant Force Financial Accountant until the monies are to be paid out or returned to the sponsor.
4.7 The Forces will ask the company's representative to agree and sign a Memorandum of Understanding specifying the responsibility of each party to the agreement. This must be agreed and signed by a senior representative of the company making the offer and will deal with the wording of advertisements, determination of reward levels and administration of funds.
4.8 It is essential that the Forces retain the final responsibility for determining the level of the reward.
4.9 Officers reviewing murder or other serious crime investigations must always consider the advertisement of a reward as an option.
4.10 The source of any reward or proposed reward must be identified in any application report submitted to the Head of Major Crime and/or the Head of Crime for either Force. This must include a proposed time period for the advertisement to be valid before requiring a review based on information submitted to the Head of Major Crime or the Head of Crime for either Force by the SIO.

https://www.sussex.police.uk/cy-GB/...Luj7lLocatjQiEoV67cA-1676008691-0-gaNycGzNC6U

 

[infinit]

That seems possible, I guess you wouldn't know rewards are originating from another source if the Police front it as them offering it. I wasn't aware that was a thing.

 

[QB2022]

Well I don't know.
But I'd be very surprised if the social services are putting it up.
Literally this chase is by the police.
We do not know why.
They have rights as parents.
Finding a placenta in a vehicle is not evidence that a birth took place, many couples keep their placenta, I think it's creepy but not a crime.
She has a right to have any style birth she chooses, I doubt she chose a car birth but maybe that is what happened.
We don't know she opted out of antenatal care, she may have been using an alternative medical practitioner.

The facts of this case is that there are no facts.
No sightings since Jan 9.
A tent purchased.
Abandoning a vehicle in a motorway would probably not be charged in court under the circumstances. Or as a misdemeanor and fined.

The long taxi rides were paid for, no crime there. No apparent purpose in visiting the places they did. But there must have been a purpose. I wonder whether they were searching for someone? I can't imagine who or why..

Thing is that she could have obtained legal aid had a court order been in place to take the child at birth but as no evidence of any such order exists I wonder whether we're not all barking up the wrong tree entirely?
If nobody knew she was pregnant, no such order existed.

I do of course wonder whether this could have been handled more discreetly and professionally by another police department in another location.

Just to go back to this. In the UK they do not have parental rights as such, they have parental responsibilities. This gives them the right to make decisions for the child but the over riding significance is their responsibility towards the child and the child's rights. It's a subtle but important difference. Parental rights and responsibilities

The birth itself is for her to choose to do as she pleases, denying the baby medical care in the several weeks since is an issue.

 

[kittythehare]

Yes. I think this is likely what happened here. Jmo.
If an alleged serious crime has been committed, which would obviously follow that there is an outstanding warrant under seal, I wonder what could possibly be the reason to hide this information from the public?

4. Reward Offered by a Third Party
4.1 Where the relatives of a victim make an offer of a reward, the SIO will need to discuss the issues carefully with the Family Liaison Officer (FLO), the relatives or their representative and the CPS. Once this has been done approval must be sought from the Head of Major Crime or Head of Crime for either Force.
4.2 In such cases, the reward money offered must be lodged with the Forces via BACS. This is retained on behalf of the family who will receive the money back after an agreed review period should it not be claimed.
4.3 When another agency wishes to offer a reward with the Forces, the SIO needs to ensure that the agency's motives are both ethical and professional. In this instance approval must be sought from the Head of Major Crime or Head of Crime for either Force.
4.4 Special care needs to be taken if the media offer a reward for information leading to the arrest and/or conviction of offenders for a specific offence. In most of these circumstances the Forces will not also offer a reward.
4.5 When a reward is offered by a third party through either Force, Legal Services will need to be consulted and a contract drawn up covering their commitment to pay.
4.6 It is the expectation of the Forces that funds sufficient to meet the cost of paying the reward, together with a reasonable sum to cover the cost of advertising, will be lodged via BACS in the favour of the Forces. The funds will be held by the relevant Force Financial Accountant until the monies are to be paid out or returned to the sponsor.
4.7 The Forces will ask the company's representative to agree and sign a Memorandum of Understanding specifying the responsibility of each party to the agreement. This must be agreed and signed by a senior representative of the company making the offer and will deal with the wording of advertisements, determination of reward levels and administration of funds.
4.8 It is essential that the Forces retain the final responsibility for determining the level of the reward.
4.9 Officers reviewing murder or other serious crime investigations must always consider the advertisement of a reward as an option.
4.10 The source of any reward or proposed reward must be identified in any application report submitted to the Head of Major Crime and/or the Head of Crime for either Force. This must include a proposed time period for the advertisement to be valid before requiring a review based on information submitted to the Head of Major Crime or the Head of Crime for either Force by the SIO.

https://www.sussex.police.uk/cy-GB/...Luj7lLocatjQiEoV67cA-1676008691-0-gaNycGzNC6U

here's one

£10,000 reward offered for information to trace suspect on anniversary of murder

Michael Fadeyibi was stabbed to death on Henniker Road in Newham, east London, on August 6 2021.

www.expressandstar.com

Police offer £10k reward after man, 98, died after violent burglary

They are keen to hear from anyone offered a stolen Panasonic TV or who saw people or vehicles in the vicinity of Evesham Road, Enfield that appeared out of place

www.mylondon.news

2015 £10,000 reward to find Shane O'Brien over Josh Hanson's murder

This is very strange..if they were wanted for murder then that is the information that would have gone public...and nobody would have sheltered them.

 

[QB2022]

Yes. I think this is likely what happened here. Jmo.
If an alleged serious crime has been committed, which would obviously follow that there is an outstanding warrant under seal, I wonder what could possibly be the reason to hide this information from the public?

4. Reward Offered by a Third Party
4.1 Where the relatives of a victim make an offer of a reward, the SIO will need to discuss the issues carefully with the Family Liaison Officer (FLO), the relatives or their representative and the CPS. Once this has been done approval must be sought from the Head of Major Crime or Head of Crime for either Force.
4.2 In such cases, the reward money offered must be lodged with the Forces via BACS. This is retained on behalf of the family who will receive the money back after an agreed review period should it not be claimed.
4.3 When another agency wishes to offer a reward with the Forces, the SIO needs to ensure that the agency's motives are both ethical and professional. In this instance approval must be sought from the Head of Major Crime or Head of Crime for either Force.
4.4 Special care needs to be taken if the media offer a reward for information leading to the arrest and/or conviction of offenders for a specific offence. In most of these circumstances the Forces will not also offer a reward.
4.5 When a reward is offered by a third party through either Force, Legal Services will need to be consulted and a contract drawn up covering their commitment to pay.
4.6 It is the expectation of the Forces that funds sufficient to meet the cost of paying the reward, together with a reasonable sum to cover the cost of advertising, will be lodged via BACS in the favour of the Forces. The funds will be held by the relevant Force Financial Accountant until the monies are to be paid out or returned to the sponsor.
4.7 The Forces will ask the company's representative to agree and sign a Memorandum of Understanding specifying the responsibility of each party to the agreement. This must be agreed and signed by a senior representative of the company making the offer and will deal with the wording of advertisements, determination of reward levels and administration of funds.
4.8 It is essential that the Forces retain the final responsibility for determining the level of the reward.
4.9 Officers reviewing murder or other serious crime investigations must always consider the advertisement of a reward as an option.
4.10 The source of any reward or proposed reward must be identified in any application report submitted to the Head of Major Crime and/or the Head of Crime for either Force. This must include a proposed time period for the advertisement to be valid before requiring a review based on information submitted to the Head of Major Crime or the Head of Crime for either Force by the SIO.

https://www.sussex.police.uk/cy-GB/...Luj7lLocatjQiEoV67cA-1676008691-0-gaNycGzNC6U

I think there's a tendancy in this thread to conflate a crime being necessary for them to be sought in this way. Our family and criminal systems are seperate. If there is a family court order (that we would never be privy too) the police can be ordered by the court to help search for them. It wouldn't be any less serious just because criminally a crime a hasn't been comitted and the police involvement does not signify a crime has happened. It also does not mean there are not serious, significant, reasons they are being tracked down.

 

[QB2022]

If they were wanted for a crime such as murder/assault that information would be shared. It has all the hallmarks of the secret family court system with the minimal information available.

 

[infinit]

If they were wanted for a crime such as murder/assault that information would be shared. It has all the hallmarks of the secret family court system with the minimal information available.

I get what you mean. I can't find another example of a £10k reward for a missing baby when I set it to search only before 2023 to exclude this one though.

 

[QB2022]

I get what you mean. I can't find another example of a £10k reward for a missing baby when I set it to search only before 2023 to exclude this one though.

It's highly unusual. I recall one from about 5 years ago where the parents fled abroad with the children. I cant find anything about it now, I know police tend to wipe their communications once found so I wonder if there was a request to the media to also remove relevant articles. That's something that can be ordered by a court too as reporting restrictions are common place.

Really interestingly, as the secret courts have been a contentious issue for years, I've just stumbled a cross this https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/reporting-in-the-family-court/ a trial began 30th January 2023 to allow more reporting at 3 courts. I have no idea if there are court proceedings in place or where they would be held when they didn't really have a home base but on a general note, this could be beneficial in other cases.

 

[everybodhi]

If they were wanted for a crime such as murder/assault that information would be shared. It has all the hallmarks of the secret family court system with the minimal information available.

It always amazes me the broad differences in legal consensus even though English common law has tradition globally.
In the Canadian child family kidnapping case of the O’Driscoll sisters, the WS thread has links to all their custody hearings, which exposed the manipulation leading up to the crime.
Thanks for bringing attention to the secretive UK civil family court proceedings compared to their more public criminal proceedings, but LE actions still seem a bit overboard as I’ve never seen anyone without an arrest warrant treated this way.
LE has made a civil family court issue appear criminal, feeding undue speculation by the media/public and undue fear in the missing family, possibly driving them into hiding. Jmo.
I doubt these are the only people in the UK living and birthing unconventionally and thousands of children live daily in similar, or worse, risky situations without making the news, no one’s looking for them to make sure they are okay. Unlike royalty with access to resources, they don’t choose to not have housing, pre/post natal and neonatal care but can’t get it due to poverty and an overburdened/underfunded system.
The only difference I can see here is the mother’s social status and access to funds, they were reported to be staying in Airbnb’s until the manhunt started!
It’s not really a surprise that she gets more LE and media attention, (and a £10,000 reward for information on her location), than all the other families under the family court’s scrutiny but I don’t think it’s helping. Jmo

 

[QB2022]

It always amazes me the broad differences in legal consensus even though English common law has tradition globally.
In the Canadian child family kidnapping case of the O’Driscoll sisters, the WS thread has links to all their custody hearings, which exposed the manipulation leading up to the crime.
Thanks for bringing attention to the secretive UK civil family court proceedings compared to their more public criminal proceedings, but LE actions still seem a bit overboard as I’ve never seen anyone without an arrest warrant treated this way.
LE has made a civil family court issue appear criminal, feeding undue speculation by the media/public and undue fear in the missing family, possibly driving them into hiding. Jmo.
I doubt these are the only people in the UK living and birthing unconventionally and thousands of children live daily in similar, or worse, risky situations without making the news, no one’s looking for them to make sure they are okay. Unlike royalty with access to resources, they don’t choose to not have housing, pre/post natal and neonatal care but can’t get it due to poverty and an overburdened/underfunded system.
The only difference I can see here is the mother’s social status and access to funds, they were reported to be staying in Airbnb’s until the manhunt started!
It’s not really a surprise that she gets more LE and media attention, (and a £10,000 reward for information on her location), than all the other families under the family court’s scrutiny but I don’t think it’s helping. Jmo

It is interesting the differences and the secret family courts are a bit of a hot topic.

To be fair, people generally don't go on the run like this, it is exceedingly rare. It is such a dense population country it is hard to really hide in it. More people flee into mainland Europe but there's no real point doing big UK based campaigns for those as they are known to not be in the country and once on the mainland its a different ballgame.

In the UK no child nor pregnant person would be left unable to access health care. Every pregnant woman has routine scan and antenatal appointments. Home birth and free birth aren't an issue at all, but it raises concerns when a newborn doesn't receive a post birth medical check. Deliberately hiding a pregnancy is a big concern. Obviously these things in themselves are minor but when you add them all up it paints a bigger picture which is how social services tend to operate.

Children are also never allowed to be left on the streets. Granted temp accommodation can be utterly grim but there is a legal obligation on the state that children must have a roof over their heads. On rare occasions if parents are deemed to be deliberately making themselves homeless they will house the child and not the parents. Off-grid living isn't a thing here like it is elsewhere.

If anything, her class and status would typically go in her favour with SS. It is a commonly held belief that middle class and wealthy parents get away with far more in relation to kids and SS than working class/poor families do.

 

[Obergine]

I'm not convinced: 'Big police presence in town'- force reveal why officers were seen last night

 

[rockthecasbah]

I'm not convinced: 'Big police presence in town'- force reveal why officers were seen last night

Me neither. IMO if you find somebody you're looking for while training, that's very useful

 

[rightsaidfred]

Well I don't know.
But I'd be very surprised if the social services are putting it up.
Literally this chase is by the police.
We do not know why.
They have rights as parents.
Finding a placenta in a vehicle is not evidence that a birth took place, many couples keep their placenta, I think it's creepy but not a crime.
She has a right to have any style birth she chooses, I doubt she chose a car birth but maybe that is what happened.
We don't know she opted out of antenatal care, she may have been using an alternative medical practitioner.

The facts of this case is that there are no facts.
No sightings since Jan 9.
A tent purchased.
Abandoning a vehicle in a motorway would probably not be charged in court under the circumstances. Or as a misdemeanor and fined.

The long taxi rides were paid for, no crime there. No apparent purpose in visiting the places they did. But there must have been a purpose. I wonder whether they were searching for someone? I can't imagine who or why..

Thing is that she could have obtained legal aid had a court order been in place to take the child at birth but as no evidence of any such order exists I wonder whether we're not all barking up the wrong tree entirely?
If nobody knew she was pregnant, no such order existed.

I do of course wonder whether this could have been handled more discreetly and professionally by another police department in another location.

As PP said, they have responsibilities rather than rights.

Of course a placenta is evidence a birth took place - how else would one come to exist?

Freebirthing is legal but the birth has to be notified and I think there are much wider safeguarding concerns that we are not privy to (and nor should we be) Unassisted birth - Birthrights

We do know that she received no antenatal care - "There has been no medical contact before or after Ms Marten’s pregnancy, and police believe the child may have been delivered in the vehicle." Man missing with aristocrat’s daughter and newborn is convicted rapist

She likely had good reason to conceal her pregnancy - her midwife would have alerted social services to the new pregnancy, given the presumed history, and that would have started a pre-birth assessment process. It is much easier to hide a baby if no one knows it exists; it looks very much like the placenta was the first the authorities knew of her latest pregnancy. As soon as she was visibly pregnant they started moving around very frequently to avoid the authorities being alerted.

There is some interesting information here as to how SS deal wtih safeguarding concerns around unborn and newborn babies 2.2.1 Safeguarding Unborn and Newborn Babies It specifically states that care proceedings can only be started after the baby is born.

Concealed / denied pregnancies, as this one appears to have been, get their own chapters 2.2.2 Concealment and Denial of Pregnancy

Absolutely none of the things they've done over the last month would have been of concern to the authorities if they didn't have a newborn with them. It's a safeguarding issue more than a criminal one.

It's highly unusual. I recall one from about 5 years ago where the parents fled abroad with the children. I cant find anything about it now, I know police tend to wipe their communications once found so I wonder if there was a request to the media to also remove relevant articles. That's something that can be ordered by a court too as reporting restrictions are common place.

Really interestingly, as the secret courts have been a contentious issue for years, I've just stumbled a cross this https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/reporting-in-the-family-court/ a trial began 30th January 2023 to allow more reporting at 3 courts. I have no idea if there are court proceedings in place or where they would be held when they didn't really have a home base but on a general note, this could be beneficial in other cases.

Going to Ireland is a fairly well trodden path for such families British families flee to Ireland to escape threat of social services | The Irish Post

I think removing some of the mysticism around the family courts will help to improve public trust; at the moment all we see is children removed from parents but not the reasons why. Of course anonymity must be preserved; no child needs to grow up able to google the details of their traumatic early life.

It is interesting the differences and the secret family courts are a bit of a hot topic.

To be fair, people generally don't go on the run like this, it is exceedingly rare. It is such a dense population country it is hard to really hide in it. More people flee into mainland Europe but there's no real point doing big UK based campaigns for those as they are known to not be in the country and once on the mainland its a different ballgame.

In the UK no child nor pregnant person would be left unable to access health care. Every pregnant woman has routine scan and antenatal appointments. Home birth and free birth aren't an issue at all, but it raises concerns when a newborn doesn't receive a post birth medical check. Deliberately hiding a pregnancy is a big concern. Obviously these things in themselves are minor but when you add them all up it paints a bigger picture which is how social services tend to operate.

Children are also never allowed to be left on the streets. Granted temp accommodation can be utterly grim but there is a legal obligation on the state that children must have a roof over their heads. On rare occasions if parents are deemed to be deliberately making themselves homeless they will house the child and not the parents. Off-grid living isn't a thing here like it is elsewhere.

If anything, her class and status would typically go in her favour with SS. It is a commonly held belief that middle class and wealthy parents get away with far more in relation to kids and SS than working class/poor families do.

It's very rare for a few reasons - being realistic few families with social services involvement have the resources to go on the run so effectively. Typically between a lack of financial resources, personal organisation and generally chaotic lifestyles, it's just not something they can manage. If they do try to disappear they'll typically be found fairly quickly - at a family member's house, or when they go to withdraw cash, etc.

I'm also in the UK and two or three years ago I did spot a family with children aged 8-ish and a dog camping in a city centre park in winter; I was shocked. I rang the police non-emergency line (101) to report it as a safeguarding concern. They took it seriously; obviously I didn't hear any more because it was none of my business. I'm 90% certain the same family moved in on my road a few weeks later; they didn't speak much English though the children soon learned.

You do occasionally hear of off-grid living, but it normally involves families living in remote areas, such as some of the Scottish islands, generating their own energy and using well water. They're far more likely to be middle class eco-warrior types and it's a world away from CM & MG's recent lifestyle. This is an example; children are mentioned as being there too, no suggestion of safeguarding concerns Rationing energy is nothing new for off-grid community

 

[CaptainNancy]

This is very odd, IMO.

Local Councillor speaks out over reports of 'search' for missing couple and 4 week-old in Newhaven

This afternoon (10th February) Sussex News spoke to Councillor for Ouse Valley and Ringmer, Sean Macleod regarding confusion over reports yesterday of a Sussex Search and Rescue operation occurring in Denton, Newhaven.Last night locals spotted a Search and Rescue team and police officers near...

sussex.news

I can’t copy the text but it reported that a local Councillor near Newhaven reported a search and rescue team, who told him they were looking for the missing couple. Subsequently Sussex Police refuted that there was such an operation. The report then quoted local people who sat Met officers are in the area and that they are witnessing searches.

 

[rightsaidfred]

I agree the search that might or might not be a search is rather odd.

If I were to try and give it its most innocent explanation, perhaps they were due a training exercise anyway and it was a case of "while you're here keep an eye out for that couple".

But perhaps they think they're in the area, they didn't want to spook them.

 

[QB2022]

I agree the search that might or might not be a search is rather odd.

If I were to try and give it its most innocent explanation, perhaps they were due a training exercise anyway and it was a case of "while you're here keep an eye out for that couple".

But perhaps they think they're in the area, they didn't want to spook them.

This would make the most sense. I can't see how they would have Internet access, that would make them very trackable

 

[rightsaidfred]

This would make the most sense. I can't see how they would have Internet access, that would make them very trackable

If they were using burner phones (or a sim card registered to someone else) and didn't log into accounts known to be linked to them then I don't think it would link back to them too readily.

If I were the police I would be working on the assumption that they do have access to the news.

 

[infinit]

If they were using burner phones (or a sim card registered to someone else) and didn't log into accounts known to be linked to them then I don't think it would link back to them too readily.

If I were the police I would be working on the assumption that they do have access to the news.

There's a significant shift in the degree they go to cover up from the Norfolk to London CCTV. I am taking a guess that they knew the CCTV had been found and released and modified their behaviour.