GUILTY UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged in death of baby Victoria, GUILTY on all counts incl retrial on manslaughter, 5 Jan 2023 #9

[Deleted member 367833]

From www.thelawpages.com, today, Thursday:

 

[Alyce]

Today's full schedule



www.thelawpages.com

 

[Alyce]

No listing for this trial tomorrow

 

[Yellowbelly]

No listing for this trial tomorrow

The jury went out at dinner time on Monday. Three and a half days later we still haven't got verdicts. It's looking like a majority verdict at best, at worst another hung jury.

 

[Sherlockhames]

The jury went out at dinner time on Monday. Three and a half days later we still haven't got verdicts. It's looking like a majority verdict at best, at worst another hung jury.

I reckon it will be a hung jury again… I reckon CM will have managed sow enough doubt in a few of the jurors minds that she only did what she did because she felt compelled to do it and therefore she is not culpable (they may feel she has suffered enough?). Having sat on a couple of juries it always amazes me who comes out with the weirdest most outlandish anti-“the system” stuff that you only need a couple of strong characters to derail the whole jury discussion down a route they may not have initially looked like ending up down! I’m 60:40 on this being a hung jury again. The 40 says there may be enough sensible people on the jury who may manage to make the case she was highly negligent taking an infant on do the downs in an unsuitable tent and should very much have known better - I think her selfishness was what led to the death of baby Victoria. And I would err towards a conviction. But I could easily see it being split again.

I don’t think they will be fully acquitted. But stranger things have happened!

 

[Deleted member 367833]

I reckon it will be a hung jury again… I reckon CM will have managed sow enough doubt in a few of the jurors minds that she only did what she did because she felt compelled to do it and therefore she is not culpable (they may feel she has suffered enough?). Having sat on a couple of juries it always amazes me who comes out with the weirdest most outlandish anti-“the system” stuff that you only need a couple of strong characters to derail the whole jury discussion down a route they may not have initially looked like ending up down! I’m 60:40 on this being a hung jury again. The 40 says there may be enough sensible people on the jury who may manage to make the case she was highly negligent taking an infant on do the downs in an unsuitable tent and should very much have known better - I think her selfishness was what led to the death of baby Victoria. And I would err towards a conviction. But I could easily see it being split again.

I don’t think they will be fully acquitted. But stranger things have happened!

Each defendant is facing two charges - manslaughter and causing or allowing the death of a child.

Would you assess it as 60:40:0 on no decision / guilty / not guilty for both charges?

I don't really have a view, except I think it's highly probable that the verdicts (or absence thereof) will be the same for both defendants.

Both offences carry a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. (Sentencing guidelines probably vary though.)

 

[AcerPacer]

Please can someone remind me what would happen if this was another hung jury!?

 

[SilentHill]

I despair thinking of the conditions baby Victoria was subjected to, they never seemed to show any care or affection towards her and discarded her like she was a piece of rubbish. They had plenty of opportunities to get her in a warm, safe environment and just straight up refused to. I sincerely hope the jury return a guilty verdict this time, JMO.

 

[Alyce]

Please can someone remind me what would happen if this was another hung jury!?

It will be up to the CPS to decide whether or not to go for a third trial.
If they do not have a third trial, then C and M will be sentenced on the 2 charges for which they have already been found guilty.
Concealing the birth of a child & Perverting the Course of Justice



This is JMO - If they do have a third trial, then c and m might remain in the remand section of the prison and not be sentenced on their current guilty crimes, until the conclusion of trial 3.

 

[Lucy6226]

It will be up to the CPS to decide whether or not to go for a third trial.
If they do not have a third trial, then C and M will be sentenced on the 2 charges for which they have already been found guilty.
Concealing the birth of a child & Perverting the Course of Justice



This is JMO - If they do have a third trial, then c and m might remain in the remand section of the prison and not be sentenced on their current guilty crimes, until the conclusion of trial 3.

It's going to be the never ending trial!!

 

[Yellowbelly]

Please can someone remind me what would happen if this was another hung jury!?

That would probably be that with regards to the manslaughter charge. Only in very exceptional circumstances would the CPS proceed with a second re-trial after two hung juries.

"If two juries have retired to reach their verdict and have had to be discharged having been unable to do so (as distinct from the discharge of a jury prior to considering their verdict) the prosecution must apply the relevant authorities as to whether the case should proceed to a third trial. There is a very clear presumption and expectation that there will not be a third trial save in very exceptional circumstances."

Re-trials | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

 

[dotr]

Cannot believe i somehow missed an entire thread, wish i had something new to post to keep 'subscribing'.

 

[Alyce]

www.courtserve.net




The Crown Court at Central Criminal Court

Daily Courtroom List for Monday 14 July 2025

​

 

[Lucy6226]

Cannot believe i somehow missed an entire thread, wish i had something new to post to keep 'subscribing'.

Just press the watch button at the top of the thread

 

[Sherlockhames]

Each defendant is facing two charges - manslaughter and causing or allowing the death of a child.

Would you assess it as 60:40:0 on no decision / guilty / not guilty for both charges?

I don't really have a view, except I think it's highly probable that the verdicts (or absence thereof) will be the same for both defendants.

Both offences carry a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. (Sentencing guidelines probably vary though.)

I agree they will likely be the same for both defendants (unless the jury somehow determine MG to be acting under some form of coercive control by CM - she strikes me as the forceful character who would have been calling the shots rather than him so couldn’t see him getting convicted and not her).

I could potentially see a greater chance of a conviction for causing or allowing the death of a child rather than manslaughter by gross negligence which I think is the 60:40 chance of a hung jury. But I reckon I put the chances of a conviction for causing allowing the death of a child at 50:50 (and wouldn’t be surprised if that was via a majority verdict rather than unanimous).

This is all IMO and supposition only based on what has been reported in the news rather that any other insight!

 

[Deleted member 367833]

I saw @bobbymkii 's summary of the advice at the first trial regarding how the jury should approach the different counts, which then numbered five. Boiling it down, changing the numbering, and leaving the cruelty charge in even though they are not being retried for this:

0. Child cruelty (G&M TOGETHER)
Are you sure
1. G and M neglected the child or exposed her to the elements AND
2. the neglect or exposure was likely to cause her unnecessary suffering or injuries?
(Yes, then Guilty to this; No, then Not Guilty on this and the next two charges).

1. Manslaughter (G&M TOGETHER)
Are you sure
1. G and M breached duty of care to baby AND
2. the breach gave rise to serious and obvious risk of death AND
3. the breach caused or made a significant contribution to the death AND
4. breach amounts to gross negligence?

2. Causing or allowing death (G&M SEPARATELY)
Are you sure
1. there was a significant risk of serious physical harm being caused to baby AND
2. she died of an unlawful act AND
3. they (each defendant considered separately) caused the death or were in a position in which they ought to have been aware of the risk of serious harm and they failed to take the steps they could reasonably have been expected to take to protect baby from death, and that death took place in circumstances they foresaw or should have foreseen?

Boiling it down further to what must be present for a guilty verdict:
GNM (defendants together): obvious risk of death, caused by breach of duty of care;
CAD: significant risk of serious harm, baby died of unlawful act, and (each defendant separately) steps not taken to protect baby from death.

 

[Alyce]

www.thelawpages.com

 

[Bluebear15]

Phew

BBC News - Constance Marten and Mark Gordon guilty of gross negligence manslaughter over baby's death
Constance Marten and Mark Gordon guilty of gross negligence manslaughter over baby's death - BBC News

 

[Sarahlou]

Finally! I'm glad they've been found guilty.

 

[DianaWW]

Justice at last!