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

[Carriep]

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?

To appeal, a defendant must have applied for and received leave to appeal, yes. To appeal against a guilty verdict, they must apply within 28 days of conviction - unless they are submitting that there is new evidence, when there is no limit. You are right that this could be a leave hearing. I guess that would count as a "case fixed for hearing" and show up on the webpage. Leave isn't always subject to hearings. The appeal or application for leave to appeal could also be against the decision to remand them in custody, so perhaps it isn't against the verdict. There are other possibilities too that are very unlikely.

It may be relevant that 27 February 2025 is exactly two years since the day they were arrested. If sentenced after that date to imprisonment for four years or less, they'd be released. To put it another way: if they'd been found guilty on all five charges last year and jailed for four years, they'd be released next Thursday.

EDIT
Their CAO (Criminal Appeal Office) reference numbers both end "B1". According to the Guide to Proceedings in the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, "The CAO reference looks like 202301234 A1. Conviction cases are managed by B group (B1 to B5). Sentence cases are managed by A group (A1 – A4)."

 

[CaptainNancy]

To appeal, a defendant must have applied for and received leave to appeal, yes. To appeal against a guilty verdict, they must apply within 28 days of conviction - unless they are submitting that there is new evidence, when there is no limit. You are right that this could be a leave hearing. I guess that would count as a "case fixed for hearing" and show up on the webpage. Leave isn't always subject to hearings. The appeal or application for leave to appeal could also be against the decision to remand them in custody, so perhaps it isn't against the verdict. There are other possibilities too that are very unlikely.

It may be relevant that 27 February 2025 is exactly two years since the day they were arrested. If sentenced after that date to imprisonment for four years or less, they'd be released. To put it another way: if they'd been found guilty on all five charges last year and jailed for four years, they'd be released next Thursday.

EDIT
Their CAO (Criminal Appeal Office) reference numbers both end "B1". According to the Guide to Proceedings in the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, "The CAO reference looks like 202301234 A1. Conviction cases are managed by B group (B1 to B5). Sentence cases are managed by A group (A1 – A4)."

Thank you for excellent information Carriep - so (for my legally deficient understanding) does your last para imply that the appeal is against conviction?

 

[CaptainNancy]

The court listings are showing Marten and Gordon appearing on Monday 24th "For application to break fixture" at 10am

What does that mean?

 

[bobbymkii]

The court listings are showing Marten and Gordon appearing on Monday 24th "For application to break fixture" at 10am

What does that mean?

I think it means that one or more parties are trying to get the trial delayed for some reason.

 

[CaptainNancy]

Thank you Bobby.

Maybe because they are trying to argue that it should wait until this appeal issue is dealt with?

 

[Carriep]

Thank you for excellent information Carriep - so (for my legally deficient understanding) does your last para imply that the appeal is against conviction?

Hi. No it doesn't. We don't know how cases that aren't against either conviction or sentence are classified. There aren't very many of these, but when they happen they might be put in A, B, or under some other heading. (If someone who works at the CACD is reading this... ) For what it's worth, all the cases on that page are A or B. All we can say is that this appeal or leave to appeal is not against sentence, which we already knew.

 

[Carriep]

Thank you Bobby.

Maybe because they are trying to argue that it should wait until this appeal issue is dealt with?

I would have thought all parties would agree to that and there wouldn't have to be a hearing, but goodness knows what's happening in this case, or what has happened since last June.

Perhaps it's barrister non-availability?

 

[bobbymkii]

I would have thought all parties would agree to that and there wouldn't have to be a hearing, but goodness knows what's happening in this case, or what has happened since last June.

Perhaps it's barrister non-availability?

I'll say it again and again until something is finally done about it (which it probably never will). The lack of transparency in the criminal justice system in England & Wales, TERRIFIES me.

 

[Carriep]

If (this is a big Spartan if!) the total concurrent sentence if found guilty on all charges would be imprisonment for no more than four years, the prosecution might find it hard to argue against their being granted bail after next Thursday, when they will have been in custody for two years. That's how long a defendant will serve if they are handed a four-year sentence, assuming they keep their nose clean in prison.

With the usual proviso that there are many possibilities regarding what's going on or has gone on in this case that hasn't been made public, as far as is publicly known they have never jumped bail, although MG has missed appointments relating to being on the SOR. The prosecution would have to argue there was good reason to think they'd fail to turn up in court despite the position being that if they did turn up and all the verdicts were guilty they would still be able to walk free out of the building, with no fines imposed or any orders made restricting their behaviour after that point. (From a legal POV they'd have fully paid their debt to society.) So the defence would say there's no clear reason why they might not turn up. And there are options involving electronic tags and bail hostels etc.

PS What was this thing about a "travel ban" that CM alleged at the trial?

Custody time limits.

National standards for the management of custody time limits.

 

[Scorpiette]

If (this is a big Spartan if!) the total concurrent sentence if found guilty on all charges would be imprisonment for no more than four years, the prosecution might find it hard to argue against their being granted bail after next Thursday, when they will have been in custody for two years. That's how long a defendant will serve if they are handed a four-year sentence, assuming they keep their nose clean in prison.

With the usual proviso that there are many possibilities regarding what's going on or has gone on in this case that hasn't been made public, as far as is publicly known they have never jumped bail, although MG has missed appointments relating to being on the SOR. The prosecution would have to argue there was good reason to think they'd fail to turn up in court despite the position being that if they did turn up and all the verdicts were guilty they would still be able to walk free out of the building, with no fines imposed or any orders made restricting their behaviour after that point. So why wouldn't they turn up? And there are options involving electronic tags and bail hostels etc.

Custody Time Limits | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

https://www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/legal_guidance/National-Standards-for-the-Management-of-Custody-Time-Limits-2020.pdf

If there's a fresh guilty verdict, wouldn't this NOT be concurrent with the others so sentence would start afresh?

 

[Carriep]

If there's a fresh guilty verdict, wouldn't this NOT be concurrent with the others so sentence would start afresh?

I don't think so. In the scenario that a judge is sentencing them for 3 (2?) G verdicts that have just come in, and for 2 (3?) that came in last year, all relating to the same events, the fact that the counts on which they were found G were split between trial and retrial wouldn't affect the decision as to concurrency.

 

[CaptainNancy]

SURELY the court and the CPS were aware of this time restraint when they scheduled this trial so close to the two year cut off? And allowed leave to appeal ? (if that is what has happened) (rhetorical q).

And maybe the application to beak fixture is an attempt at filibustering.

The CPS should get extra time, as in a football match, to claim back the delays in the original trial due to fires and other hoo ha.

WRT MG am I right in thinking that he is still 'on licence' or similar following his conviction and sentence in the U.S? So surely having been found guilty of two offences from the first trial he would normally be recalled to prison?

 

[Alyce]

The court listings are showing Marten and Gordon appearing on Monday 24th "For application to break fixture" at 10am

What does that mean?

Here's the Court Serve listing at The Old Bailey.


www.courtserve.net

 

[Alyce]

SURELY the court and the CPS were aware of this time restraint when they scheduled this trial so close to the two year cut off? And allowed leave to appeal ? (if that is what has happened) (rhetorical q).

And maybe the application to beak fixture is an attempt at filibustering.

The CPS should get extra time, as in a football match, to claim back the delays in the original trial due to fires and other hoo ha.

WRT MG am I right in thinking that he is still 'on licence' or similar following his conviction and sentence in the U.S? So surely having been found guilty of two offences from the first trial he would normally be recalled to prison?

WRT MG am I right in thinking that he is still 'on licence' or similar following his conviction and sentence in the U.S? So surely having been found guilty of two offences from the first trial he would normally be recalled to prison?


Yes, far as we know he is. The 40 year sentence is due to expire in 2030 - so, presumably he is going to end up with some kind of prison sentence, even if he gets NG verdicts on the charges from this second trial.

 

[Carriep]

SURELY the court and the CPS were aware of this time restraint when they scheduled this trial so close to the two year cut off? And allowed leave to appeal ? (if that is what has happened) (rhetorical q).

And maybe the application to beak fixture is an attempt at filibustering.

The CPS should get extra time, as in a football match, to claim back the delays in the original trial due to fires and other hoo ha.

Perhaps it's the CPS who are applying to break the fixture. But the assumption is they've got the same case as before - and it's in their interests not to have lengthy delays, because witnesses can become frail, forget, emigrate, die, etc. It's a mystery why there needs to be a hearing on an application to break fixture only two court days before the hearing in the appeal court. Presumably a number of days have been allotted for the appeal hearing (possibly only one), and anyhow it's only right that both sides have a few days afterwards to consider the appeal court judgment before they crack on with the retrial. (This is assuming the decision in the appeal court isn't an acquittal on all 5 charges.) I would have thought postponing the start of the retrial was a no-brainer. But clearly it isn't. What is tomorrow's hearing about? Who is applying and on what grounds? Beats me. But it must be about something.

 

[jackal67]

Perhaps it's the CPS who are applying to break the fixture. But the assumption is they've got the same case as before - and it's in their interests not to have lengthy delays, because witnesses can become frail, forget, emigrate, die, etc. It's a mystery why there needs to be a hearing on an application to break fixture only two court days before the hearing in the appeal court. Presumably a number of days have been allotted for the appeal hearing (possibly only one), and anyhow it's only right that both sides have a few days afterwards to consider the appeal court judgment before they crack on with the retrial. (This is assuming the decision in the appeal court isn't an acquittal on all 5 charges.) I would have thought postponing the start of the retrial was a no-brainer. But clearly it isn't. What is tomorrow's hearing about? Who is applying and on what grounds? Beats me. But it must be about something.

What is the appeal about please?

 

[CaptainNancy]

WRT MG am I right in thinking that he is still 'on licence' or similar following his conviction and sentence in the U.S? So surely having been found guilty of two offences from the first trial he would normally be recalled to prison?


Yes, far as we know he is. The 40 year sentence is due to expire in 2030 - so, presumably he is going to end up with some kind of prison sentence, even if he gets NG verdicts on the charges from this second trial.

What is the appeal about please?

We don’t know yet.

 

[Carriep]

What do you want to view from Royal Courts of Justice?

www.gov.uk

The hearing in the appeal court is listed for tomorrow, 27 Feb, in front of the Lady Chief Justice (the head of the judiciary in England and Wales) and two other judges. So it is almost certainly not a first leave hearing, because they're almost always heard by a single judge. It could either be a renewed application for leave or a hearing of the actual appeal, leave having been granted earlier.

 

[Carriep]

Can someone remind me please? If they have appealed against convictions for concealing the birth of a child and perverting the course of justice and their appeals are allowed, do any of the other charges fall? I can't remember what the trial judge's instructions were about which charges depended on which.

 

[Yellowbelly]

Can someone remind me please? If they have appealed against convictions for concealing the birth of a child and perverting the course of justice and their appeals are allowed, do any of the other charges fall? I can't remember what the trial judge's instructions were about which charges depended on which.

From what I remember, it was only the causing or allowing the death and manslaughter charges that were connected in the judge's instructions. The other charges were 'stand alone', as it were.