GUILTY UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged in death of baby Victoria, Guilty on counts 1 & 5, 2025 retrial on manslaughter, 5 Jan 2023 #9

[StillDiggin]

Police are searching for a couple who have gone missing with their newborn baby after their car broke down on a motorway.
Constance Marten and Mark Gordon left the car near junction four of the M61 near Bolton on Thursday night and walked towards Anchor Lane bridge, Greater Manchester Police (GMP) said.
Officers believe Ms Marten had recently given birth and neither she nor her baby had seen medical professionals.
They are appealing for information.
The bridge the couple walked towards links the Highfield and Little Hulton areas.

Couple and newborn baby missing after M61 breakdown - police

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon went missing with their baby after breaking down on the M61.

www.bbc.co.uk

Thread #1
Thread #2
Thread #3 (thread pulled)
Thread #4
Thread #5
Thread #6
Thread #7
Thread #8

 

[Knitty]

IMPORTANT

Effective with the arrest in this case, sub judice is in effect and will be until a trial has concluded. For anyone not familiar with the judicial principle of sub judice, please review the following.

WS is based in the USA but we do try to manage the various discussions to comply with laws of other countries.

As this trial is in the UK, the case is under sub judice so please avoid anything that violates the following principles:

Basically anything that may prejudice the accused’s right to a fair trial
Any suggestion, opinion, or direct accusation that the accused is either guilty OR innocent
(i.e. the accused cannot be called "the killer"; use "the accused", "the alleged killer", or "the defendant")
A defendant’s previous history of any offences is off limits
Scandalizing the court (disparaging judges, lawyers, any officer of the Court) is off limits
Broadcasting anything about proceedings which happen in the jury's absence is off limits
Any non compliance with an Order of the court is off limits

Note in the event of an Appeal subsequent to verdict:
Appeals are usually heard by senior judges who are not likely to be influenced by the media, therefore responsible comment is usually considered acceptable once a trial has concluded, regardless of if there is going to be an appeal.

Posts that are determined to constitute a violation of sub judice will be removed. To avoid this, please review the following from the Victoria Law Reform Commission and post accordingly:
10. Sub judice contempt: restricting the publication of prejudicial information

 

[Sillybilly]

Please continue discussion here.

 

[Alyce]

I have just copied over your post Lucy, so I can respond on this new thread.

M's first victim - the woman that he raped -was his next door neighbour.
His second violent assault was on a male neighbour who lived 3 doors down.
Both victims identified him. I don't believe they would both make a mistake as to his identity.

 

[Alyce]

As the information has now been reported in the Court, I am linking this article from 2023,which gives more detail about the violent rape and assault carried out by MG.

Convicted rapist Mark Gordon’s sex crimes revealed

The Independent has obtained 23 pages of confidential US court documents on Mark Gordon, who served 20 years for rape and battery

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Alyce]

The victim of a convicted rapist who is on the run with his aristocrat partner and their baby today told how he threatened to kill her sleeping children during a four-hour attack in 1989.
The victim, now aged 64, anonymously told the Mail: ‘I stepped out of my room and he told me not to scream or he’d kill my kids.‘It was over four hours. ‘He’d been watching me for months from different places and he had it really well-planned.’

She said: ‘I’ve had post-traumatic stress disorder my entire life.
‘After this happened it was like my life stopped. I lost everything.
‘I lost my home because I wasn’t able to do anything or sell it. I was emotionally just not even there.
‘I couldn’t function. I couldn’t think.’

Gordon fled the scene following the attack on April 29, 1989, but within weeks he struck again, breaking into a second neighbour’s home.

She recalled: ‘There was another neighbour of ours and three weeks after he’d been in our house, he went to their house and broke in. ‘This time he expected the man to be gone and he wasn’t which saved the woman’s life.
Gordon battered Mr Nash around the head with the heavy shovel leaving him with serious head injuries before he fled the scene.

US police finally caught up with him a month later on June 13, 1989, when he confessed to both raids and was jailed for 40 years.

In 2010, having served half of his sentence, he was deported to the UK and put on the sex offenders register.

Mother raped by man on the run with aristocrat tells of her ordeal

Birmingham-born rapist Mark Gordon was jailed for 40 years after breaking into a neighbour's home in Florida in 1989, where he was living with his family aged 14. He is on the run with his partner and baby

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Re poster's previous question to me on last thread:

I think CM has got psychological problems and severe vulnerabilities. This does not relate to money or the price of the house one was raised in but whether receiving loving stable nurture from 'one good enough carer' is the minimum that psychologists usually say.

Sometimes wealthy kids are the most emotionally neglected, their parents may be A Listers or high flying business names, or international jet setters and yet they are barely raised at all, practically feral. Some sent to expensive boarding schools, some left drifting with 'staff', housekeepers, nannies, where unspeakable things can and do happen to them.

This leaves a fragility and desire to be loved that can transcend all material privilege. Look at what becomes of the people who take their own lives or end up in terrible addictions. Maybe this relationship is a form of addiction no better than if a person was using class A substances? Who knows.

CM has complained about her own background and alluded to serious trauma and M/H problems. She has dismissed all her representatives, I believe that is now more than five barristers. This is no mean feat. I'm sure all of them would have been offering up the suggestion that her best defence is to describe coercive control, violence, victimisation, perpetrated by her co-defendant and suggesting her various psychiatric evaluations.

Having said all of the above, the same could stand for MG, one could argue that his criminality and violence did not come from thin air and he too must be a victim of childhood trauma and abuse or it simply wouldn't be that a person could get so wrong headed. JMO MOO

 

[Carriep]

@jackal67

"But he cannot be guilty and she not guilty of the same crimes how does that work then?"

Impressions gained of the defendants in the witness box? I don't think a difference in verdicts would be considered so perverse as to be overturnable on appeal. JMO.

Not sure what the judge's instructions were on this last time, if any. But anyhow there's a right of jury nullification, so even if he says you gotta bring the same verdicts for both defendants and they don't, the verdicts would stand and I doubt an appeal against the guilty one on grounds of perverseness would stand. Again all IMO only. Little would surprise me in this case.

On another point:

Mark Gordon previously convicted of rape in US, Old Bailey retrial told

Gordon, who is on trial with his partner Constance Marten over the death of their child, was previously jailed in the US.

www.bbc.co.uk

"Mrs de Selliers hired a second company, Blackstone Consultancy, in 2021 to investigate the couple's "pattern of life". The resulting investigation, dubbed "Operation Lynx", lasted two months, and more photographs were taken."

What to make of the "dubbed 'Operation Lynx'" bit? That makes it sound as if a whole team was involved, not just one or two private tecs. Although it could also be self-aggrandisement I guess. Then again surely the agreed statement was lawyered up? Also what does it matter what a private company called their investigation or indeed whether they called it anything? And what does "pattern of life" mean? There's a big difference between one chap catching a train somewhere, staying in a hotel for a few nights, having received info about employment, car use, associations, or whatever from "sources", then returning to base, and a codenamed "Operation" lasting two months and maybe involving a covert camera team. The mind boggles. I wonder how long the final report was, how specific the questions were that were being investigated, and whether there were any interim reports followed by further instructions.

 

[Lucy6226]

I have just copied over your post Lucy, so I can respond on this new thread.

M's first victim - the woman that he raped -was his next door neighbour.
His second violent assault was on a male neighbour who lived 3 doors down.
Both victims identified him. I don't believe they would both make a mistake as to his identity.


View attachment 589742

Oh I 100% believe he was guilty of those crimes. But he wants the jury to believe it was a set up...but he is forgetting everything he has done since his release. What kind of man attacks police on a maternity ward?! That wasn't police corruption! That was all him.

 

[Carriep]

Would MG have much to lose now by going back into the witness box? He could 1. testify on new matters raised by the crown, namely relating to events in Florida and Wales, and 2. respond to questions put in cross-examination.

It's hard to see a downside unless he's scared he might say something that could lead to even more hitherto inadmissible evidence being admitted in rebuttal, or he thinks for some reason he might come across as a liar or nutter. IMO.

But my preference that as many witnesses as possible give evidence about as many relevant matters as possible may be somewhat naive...

 

[Cardgame]

Would MG have much to lose now by going back into the witness box? He could 1. testify on new matters raised by the crown, namely relating to events in Florida and Wales, and 2. respond to questions put in cross-examination.

It's hard to see a downside unless he's scared he might say something that could lead to even more hitherto inadmissible evidence being admitted in rebuttal, or he thinks for some reason he might come across as a liar or nutter. IMO.

But my preference that as many witnesses as possible give evidence about as many relevant matters as possible may be somewhat naive...

I feel he would be making a big mistake, on top of many massive mistakes. He probably needs to say as little as possible now. Can he still get a lawyer? I reckon he should do that! If he's allowed!

 

[Carriep]

I feel he would be making a big mistake, on top of many massive mistakes. He probably needs to say as little as possible now. Can he still get a lawyer? I reckon he should do that! If he's allowed!

He may or may not still have a solicitor who can advise although not appear in court. Yes, he could get another barrister. I reckon he needs a closing speech whether he delivers it himself or someone else does, and before then possibly a surprise, e.g. withdraw agreement not to challenge her parents' evidence.

AFAIAA it is not known what the alleged domestic violence incident was about. Quite possible he was not the alleged perp. Possible too that he was. Not clear at all whether this has been ruled inadmissible or if so whether anything has changed on that score as it seems to have changed with Florida and Wales.

The crown may want to finish fast. They won't necessarily get what they want. JMO.

 

[Maltesepuppy]

Oh I 100% believe he was guilty of those crimes. But he wants the jury to believe it was a set up...but he is forgetting everything he has done since his release. What kind of man attacks police on a maternity ward?! That wasn't police corruption! That was all him.

These two have taken deflecting to Olympic sport proportions.
The degree to which they are unable to take any responsibility for anything is shocking.
Reasoning with a brick wall would be more productive than with these two.
JMO MOO

 

[Maltesepuppy]

Would MG have much to lose now by going back into the witness box? He could 1. testify on new matters raised by the crown, namely relating to events in Florida and Wales, and 2. respond to questions put in cross-examination.

It's hard to see a downside unless he's scared he might say something that could lead to even more hitherto inadmissible evidence being admitted in rebuttal, or he thinks for some reason he might come across as a liar or nutter. IMO.

But my preference that as many witnesses as possible give evidence about as many relevant matters as possible may be somewhat naive...

BBM

Being cross examined is being challenged. These two don't want to be challenged because it ruins their deluded fantasy that they are good empathetic humans; good parents; victims of her family's prejudice and just an innocent "little family" hounded down by the nasty SS and police.
They'd much rather remain in their little bubble and are narcissistic enough to believe the prosecution shouldn't anything "bad" about them.

JMO MOO

 

[Obergine]

Oh I 100% believe he was guilty of those crimes. But he wants the jury to believe it was a set up...but he is forgetting everything he has done since his release. What kind of man attacks police on a maternity ward?! That wasn't police corruption! That was all him.

I agree. I also believe he could have been a victim of rough justice at the time if treated as an adult in police custody or the courts. This would help him with the mental gymnastics needed to write his victim narrative and downplay (to himself and others) the severity of his crimes.

 

[Alyce]

www.thelawpages.com

 

[Carriep]

Summing up has begun. The prosecution goes first. Then one defendant. Then the other. Then the judge. It is possible, though perhaps unlikely, that the jury will start considering its verdicts this week. (There are four to bring.)

From thelawpages.com :

 

[Carriep]

I agree. I also believe he could have been a victim of rough justice at the time if treated as an adult in police custody or the courts. This would help him with the mental gymnastics needed to write his victim narrative and downplay (to himself and others) the severity of his crimes.

Does he admit to committing the crimes in the first place?

He pleaded guilty to the rape, then later changed his plea to not guilty. Even if he subsequently re-confessed, that may have been required as a condition of release. (Speculation.) I have no idea what he says now if somebody asks whether he did it. That would be important info IMO regarding what kind of guy he is now, when he's in his 50s.

From the Argus:

Constance Marten’s partner was convicted of rape in US aged 14, retrial told

Mark Gordon was convicted of raping a woman in the United States when he was 14-years-old and received a prison sentence of 40 years, jurors have…

www.theargus.co.uk

"Jurors were also told that on December 17, 2019, Mrs Justice Judd sitting in the England and Wales High Court Family Division made an order, following an application by Napier Marten, that Marten and Gordon’s two children were made wards of the court and their parents prohibited from moving them out of the jurisdiction of the court.

The wardship proceedings finished in January 2020, meaning the order was not in force from that date."

That's not exactly clear. Could it be that the wardships and travel ban were only in force for less than six weeks?

 

[Alyce]

This looks hopeful - am guessing Judge's initial remarks followed by Tom Little ( Pros )


www.thelawpages.com

 

[Alyce]

On Monday, prosecutor Tom Little KC said: “The one thing that these two defendants have not done is have their account tested, have they?
“They’ve acted as a team… refused to have their accounts tested and probed.”
Baby Victoria “never stood a chance”, the prosecution added.

Mr Little told the jury the defendants “sought to mask the reality to you” and were “picking and choosing what questions to answer”.
“In short, hoping, we would suggest, to trick you,” he said.

Of Marten, Mr Little said “lies fall from her mouth, we suggest, and have always done, like confetti floating in the wind”.

The prosecution said baby Victoria “would still be alive if the defendants had not gone on to the South Downs”.
He said: “Had these two defendants stayed at the side of the M61… the baby would still be alive.”

Mr Little said: “This case is about very serious failings to look after a baby, this case is about significant risks.”

Constance Marten trial: 'Had you stayed at the side of M61 - the baby would be alive'

Wealthy aristocrat Constance Marten and her convicted rapist partner “sought to mask the reality” to the jury and were “picking and choosing what questions to answer”, a prosecutor has said.

uk.news.yahoo.com