UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged, Newborn (found deceased), Bolton Greater Manchester, 5 Jan 2023 #6

[Baby baby Jane]

“We are looking at this from a Western perspective.

“There are people around the world who live in tents, there are children who live in igloos as long as you give them warmth and love and food… I would have preferred not to be in a tent.”

Access Restricted

Um. Maybe a Western Perspective is appropriate here, on account of YOU being a white Western woman who grew up in a massive stately home, not an igloo.

JMO.

While there may be truth to her statement, what other people do, in other places, is irrelevant to her case. Her information of these non-Western people is from X, news programs, simple video from afar, does she really know how they are caring for babies?
Did they get the idea of urinating into bottles from Calais?

 

[Sherlockhames]

But that is still not relevant to the charges. The first four children were not removed because they were neglected.

If the court reports are accurate and she is on the stand saying she was there practically every day but that the record shows they frequently didn’t turn up or give any reason for absence then shows she is lying about her commitment to her children? If it’s not addressed but the prosecution know she is on the stand lying then maybe they consider that relevant/admissible that she is not accurately representing the situation on the stand.

(Although she does also say, according to the Argus live feed, that she doesn’t feel the SS reports are accurate hence why she wouldn’t attend visitation if there was no CCTV - I think she believes that SS were somehow in league with her family to prevent her seeing her children. Which I tend to think ventures into conspiracist thinking as I imagine SS have far better things to do and are overworked enough to not be making things up in conjunction with her wider family. Surely they would only be looking at the responsible parents in front of them.)

Access Restricted

Recap: Constance Marten cross-examined at baby death trial

Constance Marten is to continue giving evidence in the trial centring around the death of her baby daughter

www.theargus.co.uk

4:10PM

Marten had not visited children when in care​

Mr Smith next asked Ms Marten why she and Mr Gordon had not visited their children when they were in care between October 2021 and January 2022.
She replied: “We had very positive contacts with our children for almost two years.”
But reading from one of the social services reports, Mr Smith said the couple had a “long history of inconsistent attendance”.
He said the reports suggested there had been a “huge number of contact sessions that were missed without explanation”.
The case was adjourned until 11am on Monday when the cross examination will continue.

 

[jackal67]

'We wanted to move abroad but we were unable to do so because a member of my family took me to court.

'We thought it had been lifted but it put a stop on our travelling so we had plans but they fell through.’

Constance Marten breaks down in court as she denies killing baby

Aristocrat Marten, 36, and her partner Mark Gordon, 49, are on trial over the death of baby Victoria while living off-grid in a tent on the South Downs in wintry conditions last year.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Confused about this

 

[Baby baby Jane]

I get this sense too. But see it more as a persecution complex. That everyone in the world is out to get her. Do we know if it’s actually true for instance that she was hounded by private investigators to the extent they were bugging her phones etc? It could well be true - in which case her family are also as nuts as she is. Alternatively they could have been trying to save her from herself, but she doesn’t see it that way. But I don’t think any of that evidence is admissible in this case - although if I was on the jury these are the questions I would want answers to. And I wonder if many of the “legal matters” that we’ve heard so much about were dealing with this sorts of matters too? JMOO.

Bugging her phone for what purpose? If they are bugging it, then they know where she is.
Her family would probably try to help her live a more Western life, support her.
if they are trying to do anything, it would be to try to protect her from herself.
I do see some parallel between CM and her dad, erratic, unusual behavior, with a dash of delusion. Perhaps rather than trauma, there are genetics within the family.

 

[DavidAT]

“I don’t think lying is particularly bad.
“I think sometimes you might be in a position where you have to.”
She added: “To save my child, for myself and my family, I will do anything.”

Remove the words "my child" from the above. I hope the jury are as disgusted with her as I am.

? Her children are part of her family.

Why do some people view CM as extremely selfish, only interested in her relationship with her partner, using her fertility as a weapon, etc.? (That last one isn't made up - I've seen that exact expression used on another site. As for the second one, if that what she was like she could have had the baby in hospital and said bye-bye baby, babies aren't for me, I prefer to have my partner all to myself, none of this nappies stuff for me - but clearly she isn't like that.)

I remember some people said they were disgusted by CM and MG because they imagined that what looked like cat litter was really crystal meth, not even considering that they may have had a cat, even though looking after a cat is the normal use for cat litter. I don't mean to be insulting but some people seem to prefer the feeling of being disgusted - at people they perceive to be disgusting and dirty people - to the use of normal everyday logic.

I hope if they are acquitted they manage to get their cat back.

Also I hope all the jurors realise they are not supposed to reach their verdict on the basis of what disgusts or excites them or makes them feel any other emotion. If they think CM fell asleep on top of Victoria and accidentally suffocated her, one of the questions they will have to ask and answer is whether there is sufficient evidence to prove the level of criminal culpability ("gross negligence") required for a guilty verdict to manslaughter. I would say (JMO) that being dog tired after all the movements to evade the hunters was a far bigger factor in the accident than being in a tent rather than a hotel room or flat or mansion. This is not to say that even when dog tired and hunted by hundreds of state officials (although not for any crime) a person is excused from knowing that in such a condition it's easier to fall into a deep sleep such that you don't wake up when your body position puts your baby in trouble, but it sounds as though she is aware of that more than anybody (having even considered doing away with herself) and ... manslaughter??

 

[dunkley]

I would just like to point out that any details of courses/qualifications/employment etc listed on platforms such as LinkedIn should be taken with a bucket of salt as the person listing them is CM herself. I have close personal knowledge of a profile that was so edited and contrived it was closer to a fairy story than a CV!

 

[Baby baby Jane]

I would just like to point out that any details of courses/qualifications/employment etc listed on platforms such as LinkedIn should be taken with a bucket of salt as the person listing them is CM herself. I have close personal knowledge of a profile that was so edited and contrived it was closer to a fairy story than a CV!

Thank you for this - was wondering if any of the details about CM life and accomplishments were fact checked. If they came from LinkedIn, agree not reliable.

 

[DianaWW]

I’ve not seen this reported anywhere else yet. The account also has some updates of today.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1766133079381287234

 

[rightsaidfred]

Asked about why she had given a false name to the hospital when she gave birth to her first child in 2017, she said: “I had to escape my family as my family are extremely oppressive and bigoted and they would not allow me to have children with my husband and they would do anything to erase that child from the family line.”

Access Restricted

That's a strong implication that the family are racist (and by implication MG is really just the male equivalent of Meghan Markle). I cannot think of any other explanation given the reference to not wanting the children in the family line.

I wonder if the prosecution barrister is aware that her elder brother married a black woman, had the wedding featured in Vogue magazine, and was still bought a house...

Which is going to make her thinly veiled accusations of racism look rather implausible.

 

[Mirabel091]

I remember some people said they were disgusted by CM and MG because they imagined that what looked like cat litter was really crystal meth, not even considering that they may have had a cat, even though looking after a cat is the normal use for cat litter. I don't mean to be insulting but some people seem to prefer the feeling of being disgusted - at people they perceive to be disgusting and dirty people - to the use of normal everyday logic.

I recall this discussion and I think most people were genuinely bemused by the cat litter, because at that time we didn't know they did have a cat with them. A lot of cats don't travel well and can't be allowed to roam freely in unfamiliar territory, and they were on the move a lot, so it just seemed relatively unlikely, compared perhaps to if it had been evidence of a small dog. There were quite a few other suggestions as to what the litter could have been used for that had no implications of them being dirty or disgusting people. But as it turned out they did have a cat.

 

[Alyce]

She could have utilised the video link they offered her to attend the proceedings and not left the hospital. It wasn't an either/or situation. She didn't have to choose between her children!.

Well exactly - how bizarre - sacrifice one to get three back - sounds like some bizarre game

 

[Rolypolyoly]

Access Restricted

That's a strong implication that the family are racist (and by implication MG is really just the male equivalent of Meghan Markle). I cannot think of any other explanation given the reference to not wanting the children in the family line.

I wonder if the prosecution barrister is aware that her elder brother married a black woman, had the wedding featured in Vogue magazine, and was still bought a house...

Which is going to make her thinly veiled accusations of racism look rather implausible.

That's her only tool though isn't it? She can't exactly say that her family wouldn't "let" her have children with him because he is a convicted violent rapist still on the sex offender's register, unfortunately neither can the prosecution.

I'm sure the prosecution know exactly who her brother is married to and will be very shocked of they don't say so!

 

[Alyce]

Confused about this

I think it's this Jackal - Napier applying put a hold on their ability to travel ( in case they tried to take the children out of the country presumably )


A second child was born in 2019.
Months later Marten's father, Napier Marten, applied for wardship of both children. A judge ruled there “had been an instance of domestic violence” in Marten and Gordon's relationship.
A third child was born in 2020 and an emergency protection order was obtained by social workers.

Constance Marten trial: aristocrat ‘posed as Irish Traveller’

All four of her older children were put up for adoption because of fears of physical violence between her and Mark Gordon, court has been told

www.thetimes.co.uk

 

[crespo29]

I thought there was a question about the cars where she indicated they had been through 14 cars and did she imply strange things had happened to all of them?! Not sure what the suggestion was here but the seed was planted that there were problems w all the cars.. anyone seen anymore it’ll that! Is nyine inferring something here ???

yes watching from the gallery court number 5.

I might pop down for the closing speeches, what do you think are the chances of getting a seat?

 

[rockthecasbah]

That's her only tool though isn't it? She can't exactly say that her family wouldn't "let" her have children with him because he is a convicted violent rapist still on the sex offender's register, unfortunately neither can the prosecution.

I'm sure the prosecution know exactly who her brother is married to and will be very shocked of they don't say so!

Exactly, MG is hardly anyone's dream son-in-law.

 

[rockthecasbah]

I’ve not seen this reported anywhere else yet. The account also has some updates of today.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1766133079381287234

What does this mean?

 

[Leannaf2721]

She is objectively right, wherever she comes from, whatever her skin colour is, and however she grew up.

I mean true but they don’t have the other options she had. I dont understand why she didn’t go somewhere more remote where you can check in with no ID and not even meeting anyone. I know of places I have stayed in Wales for example, on remote farms you literally just go to the property and let yourself as the key is left in the door. No one to report to and no one even comes to says hi, no id needed. I guess maybe it would be an issue using a card so they would be using cash? Maybe that was the issue. I still think they went from Liverpool to London as they either thought they may get help there or they had exhausted all other options and just wanted to be somewhere they were more familiar with.

I recall this discussion and I think most people were genuinely bemused by the cat litter, because at that time we didn't know they did have a cat with them. A lot of cats don't travel well and can't be allowed to roam freely in unfamiliar territory, and they were on the move a lot, so it just seemed relatively unlikely, compared perhaps to if it had been evidence of a small dog. There were quite a few other suggestions as to what the litter could have been used for that had no implications of them being dirty or disgusting people. But as it turned out they did have a cat.

Yeah but to be fair the fact people thought they were making crystal meth is far more unlikely

 

[Skigh]

What does this mean?

I read it as the judge telling the juror ,who is leaving to go on holiday, not to speak with the remaining jurors and letting them know if they would go for a guilty or not guilty verdict.

 

[dunkley]

Access Restricted

That's a strong implication that the family are racist (and by implication MG is really just the male equivalent of Meghan Markle). I cannot think of any other explanation given the reference to not wanting the children in the family line.

I wonder if the prosecution barrister is aware that her elder brother married a black woman, had the wedding featured in Vogue magazine, and was still bought a house...

Which is going to make her thinly veiled accusations of racism look rather implausible.

Quite. IMO it has absolutely *nothing* to do with colour, and *everything* to do with behaviour.

 

[DianaWW]

What does this mean?

The juror mentioned is no longer on the jury basically. As mentioned above, they're not allowed to discuss the case with the other jurors, and don’t get a say in the verdict.

So the remaining jurors will continue as 11. I believe that 10 jurors must be in a agreement for a majority verdict to apply, so whereas previously this would mean 10 would have to agree and 2 could disagree for a verdict to be reached, this is now down to 10-1. (Assuming that the judge will accept a majority verdict).

As long as a jury doesn’t drop below 9, then it is still possible for a lawful verdict to be reached.

Jury Trial - law, procedure and how a decision is reached - VHS Fletchers Solicitors

A lot is said about the benefits of a jury trial. What is the law? How does a jury reach a decision? What if there is deadlock? What is a majority verdict?

vhsfletchers.co.uk