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

What is the logical chain of argument that works to the contrary of what CM's defence counsel is saying about the relevance of MG's convictions in the USA?

Is it

"MG was convicted of raping a woman when he was 14 in 1989, so this makes his wife more likely to be guilty of the gross negligence manslaughter of their baby in 2023?"

?
Not necessarily but it demonstrates that his evidence may not be entirely reliable.

“I am an empathetic man with respect for the law etc (paraphrased)” v “ the tent was warm and dry”

It also potentially illuminates the circumstances of the removal of the children:
“ man with convictions for sexual violence and assault in 2 countries 2 decades apart and another reported incidence of domestic violence “ v “children stolen by shadowy forces “

Paraphrased. JMOO
 
“It really boils down to what happened in that tent.”

For me, without benefit of the judges legal direction, it boils down to the decision to take the baby into that particular tent, with that particular kit, at that particular time of year, when exhausted and engaged in a deliberate unlawful act: the intention to conceal the birth of a child.
 
I dont understand why he is talking about MG at all. He is not his client. He tells us why MG refused cross examination but not why CM did. Very strange
Yes, true - he has no duty to MG or role in his defence whatsoever. But it could be (this is only speculation) that the crown in their closing speech bigged up MG's rape conviction from the 1980s and his later assault conviction in Wales as making it more likely that they're both guilty, in which case he could have been responding to that idea. Also it's possible he did address CM's refusal to continue cross-examination but what he said wasn't reported. I would say it is extremely likely that the judge will address her refusal in his summing up, so her counsel should surely cover it. (JMO.)
 



"""Wealthy aristocrat Constance Marten and her partner have been subjected to “relentless and dogged” attempts to tarnish their names, jurors have been told"""

My, my how dare anyone tarnish the very good name of these pillars of society?



""At the time, the defendants mistakenly believed they were “being watched”, as Marten’s parents had deployed private investigators in a “menacingly” named Operation Lynx in 2021, Mr Godfrey said""

So it was their paranoia after all.
Also, gosh how menacing was to call the operation Lynx! Were they planning to drop them in the savannah or something?



“This case is not about what could have been done differently.”

Is he serious? There is a deceased baby and we are not going to consider how things could have been done differently?



"news around the country” and the “country became obsessed”

Wow, fancy the country becoming "obsessed" about the safety of a new born baby who could be at risk!! Don't people have hobbies?


"Irrespective of the rights and wrongs"

The rights and wrongs are central to this case why irrespective? Seriously, this man.


“We say these convictions, and ones from Wales from 2017, are of no assistance whatsoever in determining how baby Victoria died"

And then why did MG go on about her nurse mother and her 4 houses?
What percentage of the 4.5 hours he spoke talk about Victoria dying?
It was all about them, wonderful and hard done by them.


"If there was a wall of silence being maintained they would say nothing at all. Nothing in interview and nothing in evidence. That is not the position here.”

Yes it is. They tried to control the narrative by choosing to say the bits that made them look good (in their deluded minds) and closed ranks when it was time for cross examination. Of course, it backfired for MG.


JMO MOO
 

"If there was a wall of silence being maintained they would say nothing at all. Nothing in interview and nothing in evidence. That is not the position here.”

Yes it is. They tried to control the narrative by choosing to say the bits that made them look good (in their deluded minds) and closed ranks when it was time for cross examination. Of course, it backfired for MG.
BBM
That's how criminal trials work in the English system, because it's adversarial not inquisitorial. Both sides try to control the narrative. Both sides big up what makes their case look good and the other side's case look bad. Happens in every seriously contested trial.

It's impossible to know from newspaper reports what the courtroom score between the sides is so far. Given the sheer amount of legal argument, I would imagine both sides have won some and lost some.

MG's rape conviction from the 1980s has been widely reported. The Wales convictions from the 2010s raise the questions of why MG and CM gave false names and why MG was prevented from returning to CM's bedside shortly after she'd given birth. The hit for the defence was more related to the notion of "seeking to mislead the court", not "he's got convictions". I doubt many thought butter wouldn't melt.

I'm not sure what your point is regarding Operation Lynx. The private detectives gave their operation a codename, which suggests they had an organised team rather than one guy with a macintosh staying in a Travelodge. Where does the mental illness of paranoid delusion come in?

On a side note: lynxes mostly don't live on savannah. Their main habitat is forests.

It's starting in the afternoon today? Since the judge has to sum up the evidence for both sides as well as give legal directions, I doubt he'll conclude before lunchtime tomorrow and if he doesn't he'll probably leave a bit for Monday morning. But sometimes things can go quickly in trials where they've dragged a lot, so who knows.

My guess is the defendants are pleased they're being tried at the OB rather than in Lancashire or Sussex. JMO.
 
Last edited:
I am interested to know more about how these targets work. What I know from studying mis and disinformation is that the most successful types take something that is true and then misrepresent it. So, it could be that SS have targets to remove children when it has been established that they are at risk of harm, is misrepresented as SS have targets to remove children...
 
Am I recalling correctly that MG needed to regularly attend police stations as conditions of ?? Likely needing to advise of address and moves??

His sex offender status? Did this follow him to UK?
Or
Related to the assaults on officers af maternity ward?

Asking because his having to be monitored for public safety would certainly prevent him from being “private”
 
Am I recalling correctly that MG needed to regularly attend police stations as conditions of ?? Likely needing to advise of address and moves??

His sex offender status? Did this follow him to UK?
Or
Related to the assaults on officers af maternity ward?

Asking because his having to be monitored for public safety would certainly prevent him from being “private”


Yes he is a registered sex offender - based on his US criminal convictions.


Gordon has been a registered sex offender in the UK since 2010, having been convicted in Florida of a rape he committed aged 14.

He served some 20 years in prison in the United States before being deported to Britain





 
Yes he is a registered sex offender - based on his US criminal convictions.


Gordon has been a registered sex offender in the UK since 2010, having been convicted in Florida of a rape he committed aged 14.

He served some 20 years in prison in the United States before being deported to Britain






Registered Sex Offender

(IMO he was not released from USA prison early, he was deported. America just put him to the curb out for collection)
 
Registered Sex Offender

(IMO he was not released from USA prison early, he was deported. America just put him to the curb out for collection)
He got a 40 year sentence in the USA for a rape committed in that country when he was 14.
He was released after serving 20 years, or 22 years according to some reports, but in any case after considerably less than 40 years and deported to his home country. He was free from that point and not required to serve the remaining years of the sentence. Therefore he was released early. His home country put him on its sex offenders register and this comes with monitoring requirements AIUI but nothing custodial.

Worth remembering that in the case being tried he is not accused of violence or brutality and it has not been suggested that the death of his daughter even may have resulted from violence or brutality (i.e. murder). On the contrary it is suggested by the prosecution that it resulted from his and his wife's negligence. This is not MO but it is a fact as indicated by the name of the offence they are charged with: gross negligence manslaughter.
 
Last edited:
He got a 40 year sentence in the USA for a rape committed in that country when he was 14.
He was released after serving 20 years, or 22 years according to some reports, but in any case after considerably less than 40 years and deported to his home country. He was free from that point and not required to serve the remaining years of the sentence. Therefore he was released early. His home country put him on its sex offenders register and this comes with monitoring requirements AIUI but nothing custodial.

Worth remembering that in the case being tried he is not accused of violence or brutality and it has not been suggested that the death of his daughter even may have resulted from violence or brutality (i.e. murder). On the contrary it is suggested by the prosecution that it resulted from his and his wife's negligence. This is not MO but it is a fact as indicated by the name of the offence they are charged with: gross negligence manslaughter.
He was not “free” in America …. He was deported.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
184
Guests online
535
Total visitors
719

Forum statistics

Threads
625,479
Messages
18,504,648
Members
240,802
Latest member
10 :)
Back
Top