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

[Sherlockhames]

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.

I wonder whether he might have told her he was wrongly convicted of something - that he had spent time in prison in the US as a result of their racist system, yada yada, but maybe didn’t tell her it was rape and she might not have been told the details (he would almost certainly have told her he was not guilty!).

But by the time she was told the truth she was already hooked in so wasn’t going to change her course then - and wouldn’t believe anyone in authority by then either so even though she has been told/knows her cognitive dissonance means I suspect she actually still doesn’t believe that he did that (although surely deep, deep down she must suspect after he pushed her out of a window?!)

 

[jackal67]

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.

Of course not but often you find that random ex friends school mates neighbours etc crawl out of the woodwork after these cases

 

[Alyce]

former Assistant District Attorney David Hodge described his experience prosecuting a 14-year-old Gordon for his sexually motivated attacks.
Hodge described it as 'one of the most heinous crimes' his team had ever prosecuted, stressing the lasting emotional damage inflicted on the mother-of-two.
'I met the victim', the lawyer said.
'She described to me what had happened, and it was absolutely terrifying… the incident itself was brutal. How could somebody be that evil?

'
The former District Attorney told the podcast that he had been the one that pushed for Gordon to receive a life sentence.
He remembered: 'I determined that the plea offer would be nothing less than life.
'The public defender's office told me that I needed to grow up and give them a reasonable offer. I told them that was our offer – you don't have to take it; you can go to trial.
'The judge listened to the testimony of the victim and the testimony of the accused… I believe there was also an expert witness on my side who worked for the Child Protection team.
'He drilled into me that, as far as the accused went, the greatest predictor of his future behaviour was his past behaviour, and that has stuck with me.'



more at the link...........

Mark Gordon's rape victim recounts horrific ordeal in new Mail podcast

Following Constance Marten and Mark Gordon's convictions for gross negligence manslaughter, a new Mail podcast reveals never-before-heard details about the couple.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Legally Bland]

‘A relentless, destructive energy’: inside the trial of Constance Marten and Mark Gordon

The long read: How did the daughter of an aristocrat end up at the Old Bailey with her partner, charged with killing their two-week-old baby?

www.theguardian.com

 

[Alyce]

This is a very long read but well worth it. A fascinating first hand report of the trial, day by day.

‘A relentless, destructive energy’: inside the trial of Constance Marten and Mark Gordon

The long read: How did the daughter of an aristocrat end up at the Old Bailey with her partner, charged with killing their two-week-old baby?

www.theguardian.com

 

[Alyce]

Oh snap Legally ! I didnt refresh before seeing your link. It is such a good read

 

[Yellowbelly]

‘A relentless, destructive energy’: inside the trial of Constance Marten and Mark Gordon

The long read: How did the daughter of an aristocrat end up at the Old Bailey with her partner, charged with killing their two-week-old baby?

www.theguardian.com

I was hoping that we would find out how Lucraft advised the jury with regards to CM and MG refusing cross examination. Now we know.

"If they wished, however, the jury could interpret Gordon and Marten’s refusal to be cross-examined as the defendants having no answer to the prosecution case. But the jury could not convict either defendant because of their refusal."

 

[Blue-moon]

Does anyone have the links to the Family Court judgements re CM and MG? I can see they have become public after the trial as they’re quoted in some of the media reports, but I would be interested to read the whole judgements if they are available.

 

[MrsWatson]

The Guardian article is excellent. So much more crazy involved than I even imagined.

ETA: They still don't seem to think they did anything wrong.

 

[Legally Bland]

Does anyone have the links to the Family Court judgements re CM and MG? I can see they have become public after the trial as they’re quoted in some of the media reports, but I would be interested to read the whole judgements if they are available.

Just had a look for this and they've published the appeal judgement from CM and MG's earlier convictions.

R -v- Marten and Gordon - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Following the conclusion of the retrial at the Central Criminal Court, the Court of Appeal’s judgment in R -v- Marten and Gordon, dated 27 February 2025, can now be read below. Neutral Citation Number: [2025] EWCA Crim 241Case No 2024/02280/B1 & 2024/02289/B1 In the Court of Appeal Criminal...

www.judiciary.uk

 

[Alyce]

The appeal ( unsuccessful ) made by c and m just prior to the second trial.

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/R-v-Marten-and-Gordon.pdf

 

[Skigh]

Baby killer Constance Marten set to appeal

Aristocrat Constance Marten is set to appeal her conviction for killing her baby in a case which has already cost taxpayers over £2.8million.

www.dailymail.co.uk

In an extraordinary farce, Marten is expected to appeal on the basis that the trial judge did not warn the jury quickly enough to ignore her own words after she blurted out that her lover Mark Gordon, 51, was a convicted rapist.

The Mail understands that her lawyers will contend that the Recorder of London’s handling of Marten’s bombshell admission unfairly prejudiced the jury.

Gordon is set to follow suit, despite praising the fairness of Judge Mark Lucraft during the trial and promising he would ‘waive’ his right to appeal.

The Old Bailey retrial almost collapsed when Marten revealed that Gordon had spent 22 years in prison for a knifepoint rape in Florida.

Judge Lucraft had previously imposed reporting restrictions on Gordon’s convictions as a teenager for armed kidnapping, four sexual assaults, armed burglary and aggravated battery.

But Marten ignored the ban, claiming that police were out to get them when officers launched a national manhunt to find the couple after they went on the run with their fifth baby Victoria, causing her death in a freezing tent in 2023.

 

[Lucy6226]

‘A relentless, destructive energy’: inside the trial of Constance Marten and Mark Gordon

The long read: How did the daughter of an aristocrat end up at the Old Bailey with her partner, charged with killing their two-week-old baby?

www.theguardian.com

As linked above further details about the house they left...the video was not seen by the jury.

'Every screen in court flashed with footage of a house in a terrible state: the kitchen barely visible under dirty dishes, full black bin bags in the corridors, clothes all over the floor, a sense of lives that had unravelled'

 

[Maltesepuppy]

Baby killer Constance Marten set to appeal

Aristocrat Constance Marten is set to appeal her conviction for killing her baby in a case which has already cost taxpayers over £2.8million.

www.dailymail.co.uk

In an extraordinary farce, Marten is expected to appeal on the basis that the trial judge did not warn the jury quickly enough to ignore her own words after she blurted out that her lover Mark Gordon, 51, was a convicted rapist.

The Mail understands that her lawyers will contend that the Recorder of London’s handling of Marten’s bombshell admission unfairly prejudiced the jury.

Gordon is set to follow suit, despite praising the fairness of Judge Mark Lucraft during the trial and promising he would ‘waive’ his right to appeal.

The Old Bailey retrial almost collapsed when Marten revealed that Gordon had spent 22 years in prison for a knifepoint rape in Florida.

Judge Lucraft had previously imposed reporting restrictions on Gordon’s convictions as a teenager for armed kidnapping, four sexual assaults, armed burglary and aggravated battery.

But Marten ignored the ban, claiming that police were out to get them when officers launched a national manhunt to find the couple after they went on the run with their fifth baby Victoria, causing her death in a freezing tent in 2023.

The mental gymnastics these two are capable of to refuse to take accountability for anything, and to see themselves as victims, is staggering.

 

[AcerPacer]

In an extraordinary farce, Marten is expected to appeal on the basis that the trial judge did not warn the jury quickly enough to ignore her own words after she blurted out that her lover Mark Gordon, 51, was a convicted rapist.

Oh my!
I really hope there were court cameras capturing her at this point and the judge can watch her facial expressions as she says the words and immediately after them having left her mouth and until something else (by whoever, the first voice) is said! She knew EXACTLY what she was doing by bringing this information to the jury, I'm hoping the look on her face is akin to Duper's Delight..

Ebm to make sense

 

[Skigh]

Oh my!
I really hope there were court cameras capturing her at this point and the judge can watch her facial expressions as she says the words and immediately after them having left her mouth and until something else (by whoever, the first voice) is said! She knew EXACTLY what she was doing by bringing this information to the jury, I'm hoping the look on her face is akin to Duper's Delight..

Ebm to make sense

Absolutely agree. She knew exactly what she was saying.

 

[Legally Bland]

Even CM's lawyer didn't think it was prejudicial to her case.

Over the next two days, the trial seemed to waver on the verge of collapse as the barristers worked through the fallout of Marten’s revelation. Femi-Ola still wanted the jury discharged but Fitzgibbon, to Marten’s audible fury, said he felt the bar hadn’t been met in her case. Fitzgibbon and Marten’s relationship had often felt strained – his methodical approach at odds with Marten’s cavalier tendencies. Now, she stared at him with blatant animosity.
...

Sure enough, the following day, Femi-Ola announced that his client wanted to continue. Marten, still apparently incensed by Fitzgibbon, sacked him.

‘A relentless, destructive energy’: inside the trial of Constance Marten and Mark Gordon

The long read: How did the daughter of an aristocrat end up at the Old Bailey with her partner, charged with killing their two-week-old baby?

www.theguardian.com

 

[bobbymkii]

The Guardian article is incredible (that's a phrase I have never said before, and probably never will again!). There are many incredible parts, but this is probably my favourite bit:

But Gordon persisted: he was without representation; he hadn’t realised what he was doing.

“As I’ve pointed out,” said Lucraft, “you have chosen to represent yourself. It was not forced upon you, that was your choice.”

“If I was aware that this was how self-representation was conducted,” said Gordon, “I probably wouldn’t have done it.”

Mark Alton Gordon. A man who once gave "the 31st of April" as a fake date of birth to two police officers, before assaulting them, in a maternity ward. And this guy thought he had the intellect to act as his own legal representative!?

 

[GreekGal]

Oh my!
I really hope there were court cameras capturing her at this point and the judge can watch her facial expressions as she says the words and immediately after them having left her mouth and until something else (by whoever, the first voice) is said! She knew EXACTLY what she was doing by bringing this information to the jury, I'm hoping the look on her face is akin to Duper's Delight..

Ebm to make sense

In one of the online write ups which I read today, it stated that after she blurted out his previous conviction, you could have heard a pin drop..There was a long silence. As she did not receive the reaction she had anticipated, she repeated the sentence. All accidentally of course.

 

[AcerPacer]

In one of the online write ups which I read today, it stated that after she blurted out his previous conviction, you could have heard a pin drop..There was a long silence. As she did not receive the reaction she had anticipated, she repeated the sentence. All accidentally of course.

Exactly, a long silence, I expect it was long enough for her to have perhaps said "ooopps, I said that out loud? This topic is banned in this court isn't it? Forgive me for saying that, perhaps the jury can understand I am under great duress and I apologise for being a prize idiot, please disregard that comment"
Except she didn't..
She said it again for those at the back!