GUILTY UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged in death of baby Victoria, Guilty on counts 1 & 5, 2025 retrial on manslaughter, 5 Jan 2023 #8

[Sillybilly]

“Our focus has always been, and remains, securing justice for baby Victoria.”
~Detective Superintendent Lewis Basford

​

 

[Kemug]

Such a loving couple. And now so cruelly parted. Just like Fred and Rosemary West, Lori and Chad Daybell, and many many others. Doesn't your heart bleed for them?

 

[Maltesepuppy]

Such a loving couple. And now so cruelly parted. Just like Fred and Rosemary West, Lori and Chad Daybell, and many many others. Doesn't your heart bleed for them?

A modern day Romeo and Juliet story, practically.

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

Do we know if they are still in jail? Or any next legal moves from either side?

 

[CaptainNancy]

Do we know if they are still in jail? Or any next legal moves from either side?

Held on remand on the manslaughter charge until the retrial - so we wouldn't hear anything publicly as that charge is sub-judice until any further court decision were to be made. They weren't sentenced for the charges on which they were found guilty, not sure of the legal complexities of that but would guess that would come at the conclusion of the re-trial. Set for March 25 I think. By which time if they are not found guilty of further charges its possible they may be found to have served sentence on those charges as they have been on remand since their arrest in early 2023.

 

[bobbymkii]

Oh:

10:45 am

For Application to Extend Custody Time Limit

CP Case

GORDON Mark

01RG1007723

CPS

 

[pokerowan]

Oh:

10:45 am

For Application to Extend Custody Time Limit

CP Case

GORDON Mark

01RG1007723

CPS

Hiya Bobby! Can you explain this one a little if poss? Can't get my head around what this means....

 

[bobbymkii]

Hiya Bobby! Can you explain this one a little if poss? Can't get my head around what this means....

well (IANAL) but I know that in England & Wales jurisdiction you can't just keep someone in custody forever awaiting trial without good reason (although we know they have both been formally convicted of at least some of the offences they stood trial for the first time around). So the Crown do have to apply to keep a defendant in cutody for longer that usual. Do they have good reason to keep Mark (and Connie for that matter) in custody longer than the usual limit? Yes IMO

 

[pokerowan]

well (IANAL) but I know that in England & Wales jurisdiction you can't just keep someone in custody forever awaiting trial without good reason (although we know they have both been formally convicted of at least some of the offences they stood trial for the first time around). So the Crown do have to apply to keep a defendant in cutody for longer that usual. Do they have good reason to keep Mark (and Connie for that matter) in custody longer than the usual limit? Yes IMO

Right! Cheers for the clarification, you're in the know far more than me I assume this was something that had to happen given the new trial date and the original time period has simply expired. Seems routine or expected based on your explanation!

 

[CaptainNancy]

I wonder why just him though?

 

[Smccat]

I wonder why just him though?

Excellent question captain.

 

[bobbymkii]

I wonder why just him though?

Connie has probably had/is going to have a similar hearing at some point. Probably on a day when I'm not noseying around on Courtserve!

 

[Nikynoo]

Hiya Bobby! Can you explain this one a little if poss? Can't get my head around what this means....

Speculating here- it could be just MG because it is in relation to the 'non-attendance' charge he faces, and perhaps that cannot be heard until the main trial is over?

 

[CaptainNancy]

Speculating here- it could be just MG because it is in relation to the 'non-attendance' charge he faces, and perhaps that cannot be heard until the main trial is over?

Oh, well remembered!

 

[pokerowan]

Two years since this all kicked off... I hope this is the year that justice for Baby Victoria is recognised.

 

[Carriep]

Any news on this case? Retrial due to start on 3 March??

 

[dotr]

Any news on this case? Retrial due to start on 3 March??

Welcome to Ws @Carriep!

Court of Appeal cases fixed for hearing (Criminal Division)

Cases provisionally fixed for hearing in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division.

www.gov.uk

Marten

Constance

202402280 B1

27 February 2025

4

10:30am

This case involves reporting restrictions

Central Criminal Court

Gordon

Mark Alton

202402289 B1

27 February 2025

4

10:30am

This case involves reporting restrictions

Central Criminal Court

 

[Carriep]

Welcome to Ws @Carriep!

Court of Appeal cases fixed for hearing (Criminal Division)

Cases provisionally fixed for hearing in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division.

www.gov.uk

Marten

Constance

202402280 B1

27 February 2025

4

10:30am

This case involves reporting restrictions

Central Criminal Court

Gordon

Mark Alton

202402289 B1

27 February 2025

4

10:30am

This case involves reporting restrictions

Central Criminal Court

Hi @dotr and thanks for this. So they have appealed. This must be against the verdicts, given that they haven't been sentenced. With the appeal to be heard on the Thursday before the Monday that was scheduled for their retrial.

 

[Carriep]

Main possibilites:

I. Prosecution contests the appeal.
1. Appeal denied, retrial goes ahead on remaining charges.
2. Appeal allowed, retrial ordered for the offences they were convicted of, leading to those charges being added back on to the indictment, retrial goes ahead on all five original charges.
3. Appeal allowed, acquittal, remaining charges dropped.
II. Prosecution does not contest the appeal.
4. Appeal allowed, acquittal, remaining charges dropped.

There are other possibilities, but are there any apart from those four that have a substantial chance of happening?

From the POV of the appeal effort:
1 - failure
2 - limited success (sentences if found guilty unlikely to be higher than they would have been)
3 - success after prosecution put up fight
4 - success

 

[CaptainNancy]

Bizarre if the appeal is against the verdicts as they were the most obvious guilty verdicts ever, surely? They did conceal the birth (and explained in detail in court why and how they attempted to do it), they did conceal the death and body (and again gave an account in court as to why / how that came about) which I assume amounts to perverting the course of justice?

Is there anything else they could appeal over? Could it be being held on remand / in custody for so long?
Again, given their flight history to evade the authorities surely that is a non starter?

Maybe it is an appeal against prison food? Not enough mayo?

I thought defendants had to be given permission to appeal - have they been granted such permission? Or is the hearing to ascertain whether they can be given permission?