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

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I sometimes wonder how heartbreaking it is that they had so many chances to save Victoria's life. By this I mean properly save her, keeping her alive warm and fed. Not the "saving" version of this deluded pair, ferrying her in winter, without as much as a hat.
There must have been so many moments when they should have stopped to think and realise how insane their plan was.

JMO MOO

IMO they were delusional and they were insane. I can't believe there's no reference to mental health problems from their defence.

It they're convicted, they'll have the benefit of a long slow recovery whilst incarcerated and they'll have no active case and no authority to rebel against. I believe they could get well and see their part in this madness. They're in full flight from reality, their behaviour is self-defeating, destructive, quite literally makes no sense and is the very definition of insanity itself.

I guess many criminals aren't making a great deal of sense and aren't very well.

JMO MOO

 

[Tricia]

Dear Websleuths members and guests,

Can you try to imagine not knowing for years what happened to your loved one? The person you love dearly just vanished. It is hard to wrap your head around that thought, I know.

You can help families with missing loved ones get the answers they deserve by becoming a subscriber to DNASolves.com

By becoming a monthly subscriber to DNASolves.com, you not only help families of the missing but also help keep those truly awful advertisements off of Websleuths.

CLICK HERE TO MAKE A MONTHLY DONATION TO DNASOLVES

Your monthly donation helps solve the mystery of the unidentified. Many of the cases in the image below were solved with the help of DNASolves subscribers, and your help is desperately needed.
If you have any questions, please
CLICK HERE!

Thank you,
Tricia

 

[Carriep]

IMO they were delusional and they were insane. I can't believe there's no reference to mental health problems from their defence.

It they're convicted, they'll have the benefit of a long slow recovery whilst incarcerated and they'll have no active case and no authority to rebel against. I believe they could get well and see their part in this madness. They're in full flight from reality, their behaviour is self-defeating, destructive, quite literally makes no sense and is the very definition of insanity itself.

I guess many criminals aren't making a great deal of sense and aren't very well.

JMO MOO

Last Thursday she said she was at breaking point. It could be that she is.

She sounded fully compos mentis in the interview she gave last month.

The term "firm view" was strange today. I'm not sure who those words came from.

Anything is possible in this case. Perhaps she'll call other witnesses and then return to the witness box herself. That's not something a barrister would be allowed to consent to be a part of, but if he doesn't know anything about it beforehand and then it happens, that's a different matter.

 

[Legally Bland]

Russell Bishop did exactly the same thing, refusing to testify part way through cross examination, but I'm struggling to find what the judge's instructions to the jury about it were. Or if there were any, either way it can't look good to a jury.

Russell Bishop trial: Convicted paedophile refuses to keep giving evidence after being questioned over his 'sexual interest in children'

As Russell Bishop repeatedly denied a sexual interest in children, he was confronted with explicit letters sent to a 13-year-old girl from prison

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Yellowbelly]

Russell Bishop did exactly the same thing, refusing to testify part way through cross examination, but I'm struggling to find what the judge's instructions to the jury about it were. Or if there were any, either way it can't look good to a jury.

Russell Bishop trial: Convicted paedophile refuses to keep giving evidence after being questioned over his 'sexual interest in children'

As Russell Bishop repeatedly denied a sexual interest in children, he was confronted with explicit letters sent to a 13-year-old girl from prison

www.independent.co.uk

There must be some negative consequence for doing so, otherwise every defendant would take to the witness box, put their side of the story to the jury, and then when the prosecution gets up to start the cross examination, say "no mate, I'm not taking any questions from you", and go back to the dock.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Last Thursday she said she was at breaking point. It could be that she is.

She sounded fully compos mentis in the interview she gave last month.

The term "firm view" was strange today. I'm not sure who those words came from.

Anything is possible in this case. Perhaps she'll call other witnesses and then return to the witness box herself. That's not something a barrister would be allowed to consent to be a part of, but if he doesn't know anything about it beforehand and then it happens, that's a different matter.

I have vast experience of a close family member who has a psychotic illness.

Sometimes, the issue with severely delusional people is they can have a very fixed belief in something and know that they must never let anyone notice or know.

So they could go about their day behaving perfectly normally whilst fully believing that they must do x, y, z in order to keep themselves safe or to fulfil a task instructed by god or suchlike. They can be acutely aware that being 'detected' by other people or noticed by forms of authority will thwart their goal. This could come off as being a criminal if one didn't know that they were under this internal drive. Also some of the beliefs and delusions are so bizarre and strange they are clearly obviously not intended as criminal but are a manifestation of mental health disorder.

If CM & MG firmly believed they must go on the run with their newborn to save her from a persecutory set of people who were all out to get them, including their own family who hired spies and hit men, at the cost of their own lives and at the cost of their own baby to relentlessly pursue that end goal, they are de facto delusional. If they truly truly believed they were saving the life of their child when in fact they were killing her, they are both profoundly mentally ill and not criminals IMO.

IMO, they are still the cause of death of the child and need dealing with appropriately (indefinitely removing from society until they are deemed no risk would be an idea) but this is hardly a case of criminally minded abusers who set out to harm and kill a child.

JMO MOO.

 

[Carriep]

I have vast experience of a close family member who has a psychotic illness.

Sometimes, the issue with severely delusional people is they can have a very fixed belief in something and know that they must never let anyone notice or know.

So they could go about their day behaving perfectly normally whilst fully believing that they must do x, y, z in order to keep themselves safe or to fulfil a task instructed by god or suchlike. They can be acutely aware that being 'detected' by other people or noticed by forms of authority will thwart their goal. This could come off as being a criminal if one didn't know that they were under this internal drive. Also some of the beliefs and delusions are so bizarre and strange they are clearly obviously not intended as criminal but are a manifestation of mental health disorder.

If CM & MG firmly believed they must go on the run with their newborn to save her from a persecutory set of people who were all out to get them, including their own family who hired spies and hit men, at the cost of their own lives and at the cost of their own baby to relentlessly pursue that end goal, they are de facto delusional. If they truly truly believed they were saving the life of their child when in fact they were killing her, they are both profoundly mentally ill and not criminals IMO.

IMO, they are still the cause of death of the child and need dealing with appropriately (indefinitely removing from society until they are deemed no risk would be an idea) but this is hardly a case of criminally minded abusers who set out to harm and kill a child.

JMO MOO.

I am careful to avoid projection and also congeries.

But if advising the prosecution you would say do not prosecute, because these two people are severely mentally ill and therefore not guilty? Would that be accurate?

They're not accused of trying to harm their daughter.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

There must be some negative consequence for doing so, otherwise every defendant would take to the witness box, put their side of the story to the jury, and then when the prosecution gets up to start the cross examination, say "no mate, I'm not taking any questions from you", and go back to the dock.

I suppose there's no way to force a defendant to speak out or answer questions. If they refuse to speak, they're failing to offer up any other explanation or argument against the charges and it would leave them wide open to being found guilty and could hold them in contempt of court, maybe even have their statements struck or ordered to be disregarded if they say something that's blatantly lying too.

JMO MOO

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I am careful to avoid projection and also congeries.

But if advising the prosecution you would say do not prosecute, because these two people are severely mentally ill and therefore not guilty? Would that be accurate?

They're not accused of trying to harm their daughter.

I think part of this case is it should be determined via the courts if they are profoundly mentally ill, ie holding a fixed delusional belief system that would correlate with a psychiatric diagnosis so that the judge can assess and guide the jury accordingly.

Also if perhaps one was in the thrall of another and was acting under duress, coercion, exploitation, or extreme co-dependence and didn't want to go along with the plan but was too mentally fragile and worn down also needs to be determined IMO.

There are cases where the perpetrators are declared as not having been well enough to be held culpable for their actions and not able to comprehend the consequences of their actions but are still ordered to be detained in a secure setting until considered well enough to be released into the community.

JMO MOO

 

[Nikynoo]

But if advising the prosecution you would say do not prosecute, because these two people are severely mentally ill and therefore not guilty? Would that be accurate?

SBM - this is not how the law works in relation to capacity. I dare say that if found guilty, the judge will order sentencing reports, which, I speculate, would include assessments for any MH issues.

 

[Alyce]

CM was witness 25. This must be the next witness for her defence case.

www.thelawpages.com

 

[Carriep]

SBM - this is not how the law works in relation to capacity. I dare say that if found guilty, the judge will order sentencing reports, which, I speculate, would include assessments for any MH issues.

Thanks for this. I stand corrected. The CPS Code does say they need to decide there is a realistic prospect of conviction, but there's a footnote saying

"For the purposes of the Code for Crown Prosecutors, “conviction” includes a finding that “the person did the act or made the omission” in circumstances where the person is likely to be found not guilty on the grounds of insanity."

The Code for Crown Prosecutors | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

Not that there has been a single thing (IMO) in any report of this trial that suggests that such a verdict is remotely likely, but on the legal point I acknowledge that I was mistaken.

 

[Alyce]

Today's full schedule



www.thelawpages.com

 

[Alyce]

Going off-grid and sleeping in a tent in the middle of the winter with a newborn baby is not “a reasonable parenting decision”, an infant sleep expert has told a jury.
Professor Helen Ball, an expert in safe baby sleeping practices from Durham University, told the Old Bailey that newborn babies are “helpless” and must be kept “warm” and “fed”.
Asked by prosecutor Joel Smith KC if guidance to parents on safe sleeping extended to those living in tents, Prof Ball agreed, and said “parents should plan ahead about where a baby is going to sleep”.

It is also alleged that Victoria was inadequately clothed in a babygrow and that Marten had got wet as she carried the baby underneath her coat.
Questioned about keeping a baby in a coat, she said: “I would be concerned about a baby that was zipped completely in a coat because you wouldn’t be able to monitor it”.
Professor Ball told the court that in CCTV footage she had seen of the couple’s time on the run, Victoria seemed to be “flopping around”, and was not being supported properly by her mother.
Asked if it was advisable to keep a baby in a tent in the way Marten and Gordon are accused of, Professor Ball said no, adding: “It does not seem to be a reasonable parenting decision.”

Jurors were sent away until Thursday when the Old Bailey trial will continue.

Sleeping in tent with new baby ‘not reasonable parenting decision’, court told

Baby Victoria died from hypothermia or was smothered while co-sleeping in a ‘flimsy’ tent with Constance Marten and Mark Gordon, it is alleged.

www.standard.co.uk

 

[dotr]

re-post, refresher.
"I did nothing but show her love"

Jan 30, 2024
New CCTV has been released showing a brief glimpse of Constance Marten’s newborn baby during the aristocrat’s trial at the Old Bailey.The 36-year-old and her partner Mark Gordon, 49, are on trial accused of the manslaughter of the newborn baby.A dark-haired infant moving her arms around dressed in a babygrow is visible in footage shown to the jury on Tuesday 30 January 2024.They were arrested in East Sussex last February and the body of Victoria was later found in a Lidl supermarket bag covered in rubbish inside a disused shed.

Constance Marten baby head flopping - Google Search

 

[Alyce]

Today's schedule


www.thelawpages.com

 

[Alyce]

Friday May 16, schedule so far. My guess would be witness 27 has finished.




www.thelawpages.com

 

[Alyce]

www.thelawpages.com

 

[Zuleika]

Is my recollection correct , or not?
Did CM say somewhere a.ong the way that she had kept the body of her daughter with the intention of trying to find out what she had died from ?

 

[dotr]

Is my recollection correct , or not?
Did CM say somewhere a.ong the way that she had kept the body of her daughter with the intention of trying to find out what she had died from ?

Jury in Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial shown how police found baby

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon deny the manslaughter of Victoria, whose body was found in a shed.

www.bbc.com

'Officers found baby Victoria under some rubbish in a Lidl bag for life in a shed in Brighton on 1 March 2023.
Ms Marten told police she had kept her body because she wanted an "autopsy" and "proper burial", the court heard.'

"I kept the body because I wanted to have an autopsy done. I didn't bury her because wanted her to have a proper burial but I couldn't get a proper burial until I had an autopsy."