I imagine that all 3 of them will be in the Vulnerable prisoners wing given their crimes against children. They would be targets in the General population for sure
Killer aristocrat Constance Marten 'befriends Sara Sharif's stepmum'
Aristocrat Constance Marten, 38, was convicted yesterday alongside Mark Gordon of causing their newborn Victoria's death after going on the run to prevent authorities taking the baby away.www.dailymail.co.uk
During her trial Marten was an inmate at HMP Bronzefield in Ashford, Surrey, where she reportedly became close to Beinash Batool - the stepmother of 10-year-old Sara who was tortured to death at home by her father and his wife in August 2023.
Yet the friendship between Batool and her cellmate Marten developed, despite the aristocrat professing her love for children throughout her trial and claiming she did everything she could to protect her own baby from harm.
The pair once had the same legal representative, according to The Times.
As articles about Batool have stated that she was also friends with Letby ,it is possible that Marten also met with her on the same prison wing. I
GUILTY UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged in death of baby Victoria, GUILTY on all counts incl retrial on manslaughter, 5 Jan 2023 #9
- Thread starter StillDiggin
- Start date
Yes I would like to know this too .Maybe he was entitled to some sort of housing and benefits when he arrived back in the UK perhaps a hostel of some sort and help to find employment and he would have to report regularly from the off after being placed on the SO register.
Having been locked up for so long he would not have any social skills limited education or been able to have relationships .
Did he have any relatives here from before or friends . Maybe there will be people coming forward now with stories to sell to the media?
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2012
- Messages
- 7,134
- Reaction score
- 71,974
Usually there are still limits on what the press can publish until sentencing happens so perhaps more will come out then.
Though if he was living with family members or anyone else I do hope their privacy is respected by the press.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2021
- Messages
- 362
- Reaction score
- 3,375
This is what I am fascinated about. I suppose they were able to mutually bond over being institutionalised - he had, after all, spent almost half his life in prison at that point?
What on earth did they talk about to begin with and how on earth did she not know about his conviction? How did he explain away 20 years in prison? Did he lie? Did he suggest he was the subject of a miscarriage of justice? I’m wondering if he is some kind of master manipulator (like her) that he was able to draw her in so quickly but keep all that past covered up? Was she not even vaguely curious?! He may well have been extremely charming etc but it seems like even if CM was fooled to begin with, her family were not, hence the distrust? I still find that relationship utterly fascinating - but from the perspective of what she was getting out of it. She’s clearly not stupid - but is she emotionally naive? Did her time in the cult damage her quite profoundly that this was the life she felt was fulfilling? Or was it all about travel and then children and so there wasn’t really that long that it was just the two of them living a mundane life in London! (What on earth did they do - was he still working at the beginning? Was she? Or did they just sit around drinking tea and watching tv all day! using her money to fund this really quite small little life?!)
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 14,031
- Reaction score
- 61,270
I think there was a family member living in London, so possibly they provided support.
I've just edited this to be a bit more obscure. As Skigh rightly said, his family members deserve their privacy.
Yes definitely.
I do find it hard to believe she was unaware of his past conviction. Perhaps he played the wrongful conviction and race card and that appealed to her anti establishment rebel side, ,she may even still believe this to be true.
D
Deleted member 367833
Guest
Sentencing thoughts.
www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk
"Concealment, destruction, defilement or dismemberment of the body (where not separately charged)" would put it in at least category B, but will that apply in this case? So it looks like C (start at 4y, range 3-7y) or B (start at 8y, range 6-12y) depending on the answer.
No relevant convictions reduces seriousness within a category. Crown likely to say they ignored previous warnings, which increases seriousness. Mental health can take it down to D (start 2y, range 1-4y) and down within D. Possible this will be argued but unlikely.
My guess is C and big weight on warnings given, so not less than 4y and maybe up to 5-6y. Central prediction is 5y for GNM. Sentence of 6y won't be a surprise though. Multiply by 50% (40% only applies to less than 4y), so 2.5-3y served. Somewhere between immediate release and another 5 months in jail. This is for M. With G there is also missing signing on as registered sex offender, and the assault convictions may be considered relevant too.
Gross negligence manslaughter
www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk
"Concealment, destruction, defilement or dismemberment of the body (where not separately charged)" would put it in at least category B, but will that apply in this case? So it looks like C (start at 4y, range 3-7y) or B (start at 8y, range 6-12y) depending on the answer.
No relevant convictions reduces seriousness within a category. Crown likely to say they ignored previous warnings, which increases seriousness. Mental health can take it down to D (start 2y, range 1-4y) and down within D. Possible this will be argued but unlikely.
My guess is C and big weight on warnings given, so not less than 4y and maybe up to 5-6y. Central prediction is 5y for GNM. Sentence of 6y won't be a surprise though. Multiply by 50% (40% only applies to less than 4y), so 2.5-3y served. Somewhere between immediate release and another 5 months in jail. This is for M. With G there is also missing signing on as registered sex offender, and the assault convictions may be considered relevant too.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 367833
Guest
Where does the idea that she didn't know about his conviction and long time in jail come from?
One of the MSM articles stated that CM only became aware of it after the birth of the first baby in 2017. Presumably when he was arrested for the assault of the 2 police officers
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2019
- Messages
- 1,005
- Reaction score
- 11,200
No expert … but considering a 14 yr old, in America that can be year 8, year 9 … possible year 10.
A young person of that age, IMO, to commit his crimes … violence, kidnap, assault w weapon & sexual violence. A 40 yr sentence reflecting seriousness AND age.
Environmental? Gang? Drugs?
Organic - emergence of serious MH issue?
Both
Conviction details:
A young person of that age, IMO, to commit his crimes … violence, kidnap, assault w weapon & sexual violence. A 40 yr sentence reflecting seriousness AND age.
Environmental? Gang? Drugs?
Organic - emergence of serious MH issue?
Both
Conviction details:
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2021
- Messages
- 362
- Reaction score
- 3,375
I think it was reported as part of the family court proceedings - but she is quite an unreliable narrator so may well have been that she only told this to the family court to absolve herself of responsibility for her choice to have children with him up until then. I suspect the family court may well not have believed this account in any event.
And then once she did found out about his past her narrative was that she would “stand by her man” rather than being in a position to explain why she had chosen to have children and remain with someone with such a violent past. She could then explain - well I’ve known him for years and this is a shock etc etc but I know the real Mark so what sort of person would I be to hold this against him, he has changed since the and I know the real Mark. So she maybe felt it would have made her sound like a forgiving person, rather than someone who knew she was potentially taking some serious risks having children with a violent offender and remaining with him after the assault as well.
(It sort of doesn’t really matter - she stayed with him regardless and continued to have his children even once she found out and AFTER he assaulted the police officers for which he was convicted - they were clearly bonded by then. Nothing was going to get her to deviate from the path she had chosen).
(It mentioned in this daily mail article that she only found out when he assaulted the police officers in hospital -
REVEALED: Why daughter of privilege had FOUR kids taken into custody
Marten was convicted on Monday alongside her violent lover Mark Gordon of causing their newborn Victoria's death after going on the run to prevent authorities removing her.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 14,031
- Reaction score
- 61,270
He was just a few weeks short of his 15th birthday, so year 10.
There was also a comment from his first victim that he said to her she was not as good as the others ? could have been earlier consensual activity or could have been previous assaults that were not reported ?
"I was told to say goodbye to my children because this was the day I was going to die. I was told I was worthless, not as good as the others, which led me to believe I was not the first one he had raped.
Mark Gordon is a ‘psychopath’, says US woman he raped in 1989
Gordon raped his neighbour at knifepoint in 1989 when he was aged 14 and living in Florida.
www.bbc.co.uk
D
Deleted member 367833
Guest
I find that hard to believe. She gave birth in late 2017. They met in 2016, not sure when in the year, but they moved in together, went to Peru, got married, all before the Wales hospital events. If she didn't know about the rape conviction, that would probably mean he gave her a bunch of complete lies about what he'd been doing for almost half his life, and much more than half of his adult life, and when she found out she said "Okay, never mind" and stayed with him, which doesn't sound believable.
Edit: Ah, she may have said it to the family court. I still don't believe it. "I don't hold what he did 30 years ago against him - he's a changed person now" is one thing, but "I don't hold it against him that he lied his head off to me about his life until we were married and had become parents" is something else entirely.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 14,031
- Reaction score
- 61,270
At a hearing on 29 February 1990, Gordon pleaded guilty to four counts of armed sexual battery (rape), one of armed kidnapping, one of aggravated battery and two of burglary with a weapon. He later withdrew his guilty plea and stood trial in a chaotic court case in 1994 where he was convicted.
The defence's main witness in mitigation during the sentencing hearing was Gordon's mother, Sylvia Satchell. She revealed to the judge that her son had been the victim of sexual abuse at the age of four while at a nursery in Birmingham.
"I'm asking for a little leniency for him," she told the judge. "This is a first offender and I wouldn't want him to be a hardened criminal at this young age. He's only 15 now."
www.bbc.co.uk
The defence's main witness in mitigation during the sentencing hearing was Gordon's mother, Sylvia Satchell. She revealed to the judge that her son had been the victim of sexual abuse at the age of four while at a nursery in Birmingham.
"I'm asking for a little leniency for him," she told the judge. "This is a first offender and I wouldn't want him to be a hardened criminal at this young age. He's only 15 now."
Mark Gordon is a ‘psychopath’, says US woman he raped in 1989
Gordon raped his neighbour at knifepoint in 1989 when he was aged 14 and living in Florida.
www.bbc.co.uk
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 14,031
- Reaction score
- 61,270
I don't find it hard to believe at all. People lie all the time, about trivia and about the important facts of their life.
<modsnip>
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes thats the article . I really dont like those mug shots find them really creepy!I think it was reported as part of the family court proceedings - but she is quite an unreliable narrator so may well have been that she only told this to the family court to absolve herself of responsibility for her choice to have children with him up until then. I suspect the family court may well not have believed this account in any event.
And then once she did found out about his past her narrative was that she would “stand by her man” rather than being in a position to explain why she had chosen to have children and remain with someone with such a violent past. She could then explain - well I’ve known him for years and this is a shock etc etc but I know the real Mark so what sort of person would I be to hold this against him, he has changed since the and I know the real Mark. So she maybe felt it would have made her sound like a forgiving person, rather than someone who knew she was potentially taking some serious risks having children with a violent offender and remaining with him after the assault as well.
(It sort of doesn’t really matter - she stayed with him regardless and continued to have his children even once she found out and AFTER he assaulted the police officers for which he was convicted - they were clearly bonded by then. Nothing was going to get her to deviate from the path she had chosen).
(It mentioned in this daily mail article that she only found out when he assaulted the police officers in hospital -
REVEALED: Why daughter of privilege had FOUR kids taken into custody
Marten was convicted on Monday alongside her violent lover Mark Gordon of causing their newborn Victoria's death after going on the run to prevent authorities removing her.
D
Deleted member 367833
Guest
MG's sister Karen Satchell has given an interview to Sky since their conviction. She seems a genuine person and I wouldn't want to say she did it for the money. I doubt the "friend of" and "source close to" CM's father who spoke to the Telegraph did it for money either.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2021
- Messages
- 362
- Reaction score
- 3,375
Agree - I don’t really believe this either. But if this what she told the Family Court, then they probably didn’t believe it either and so it doubly counted against her here as they would have just concluded she was lying.
We only know what was reported that she herself said she didnt know about it. As had been mentioned before she may have said this only to satisfy SS rather than admit she was in a relationship with a SO and had just had his child. After all they lied to the hospital gave false names and told staff that MG was not the father but just a friend !
I believe that of course she knew her parents had already found out before the first baby was born .
He probably told her that he was not guilty it was a miscarriage of justice ,racism etc etc and she chose to believe him. probably still does MOO
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
