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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #81
The Argus look to be using their live feed on something else just now. There's a police presence at an incident on the A259 in Brighton.
 
  • #82
"I don't think she's done anything wrong, actually" (and the general tenor of MG's statements) suggests to me that he either believes or wished to imply that CM was solely responsible for the baby, that all decisions relating to her care and their movements were hers. She's the mother, I'm just the husband.

The role of father, of his having any agency to house, clothe, carry, clean, care for his daughter himself, doesn't really come up, does it? MOO
 
  • #83
  • #84
“She’s a very special person” says MG … she is literally his mobile money tree. He can access money with no need for job, no need sign on for benefits … her no-strings money allows him to give the finger to everyone and do exactly as he likes.
 
  • #85
Last edited:
  • #86
  • #87
  • #88
  • #89
  • #90
The ArgusFeed:
The court is hearing that Marten received a £2,500 monthly stipend from the "Sturt Trust".

Marten is heard to have contacted the trustees to receive advances on the allowance as well as ad hoc payments from the trust.

That's a significant amount of money each month so why did she need advances and extra ad hoc payments? My thoughts immediately turn to either drugs or she is giving the money to another person / organisation possibly through coercion JMO
 
  • #91
  • #92
InstantCoffee said:
The ArgusFeed:
The court is hearing that Marten received a £2,500 monthly stipend from the "Sturt Trust".

Marten is heard to have contacted the trustees to receive advances on the allowance as well as ad hoc payments from the trust.

That's a significant amount of money each month so why did she need advances and extra ad hoc payments? My thoughts immediately turn to either drugs or she is giving the money to another person / organisation possibly through coercion JMO
Click to expand...

It started in September, IMO around the time she realised she was pregnant. My bet is it was essentially a 'war chest' for going on the run, possibly abroad, in the anticipation that they might not be able to access the bank and / or the family might have stopped additional funds.

What slightly mystifies me is why the family didn't use the trust fund to purchase a flat during the stable 2012-16 years when she was living in London. It would have stopped her haemorrhaging money on rent and provided security from the sort of landlords that will no fault evict if you even look at them funny.
 
  • #93
InstantCoffee said:
The ArgusFeed:
The court is hearing that Marten received a £2,500 monthly stipend from the "Sturt Trust".

Marten is heard to have contacted the trustees to receive advances on the allowance as well as ad hoc payments from the trust.

That's a significant amount of money each month so why did she need advances and extra ad hoc payments? My thoughts immediately turn to either drugs or she is giving the money to another person / organisation possibly through coercion JMO
Click to expand...

It's not really a great amount of money to be fair, especially if they had no other monthly income.
 
  • #94
Rolypolyoly said:
It's not really a great amount of money to be fair, especially if they had no other monthly income.
Click to expand...
Monthly, no...but extra payments requested in a 4 month period that equates to £47k between Sept-Jan (see above)
 
  • #95
Rolypolyoly said:
It's not really a great amount of money to be fair, especially if they had no other monthly income.
Click to expand...

No, it's not huge - but if they were living in Ilford in Essex then rent shouldn't have been more than around 1k a month. Then if they had no commute costs, no dependant children etc it should be perfectly adequate. Didn't their landlord say there was unpaid rent and CM had debts to the tune of £25k? If that's the case, then where was the 50k she received in the space of 4.5 months going?
 
  • #96
JumpingFrog said:
Monthly, no...but extra payments requested in a 4 month period that equates to £47k between Sept-Jan (see above)
Click to expand...

Yes, sorry I should have stated that I meant the monthly stipend. Definitely agree about the extra payments!

I agree with others here, I think she was building a nest egg to disappear with.
 
  • #97
Trusts and trustees are generally bound by guidelines / rules. Not sure if the Trust “rules” are public, but have known people to have Trusts and they are often “designed” to encourage/support certain behavior (education, employment, marriage), & not give too much in younger years and designed to last until old age.
£2,500 a month doesn’t seem to be “designed” to fully support CM & a family, but rather supplement an income.
Trusts (not an expert but) can have a favorable tax position, if they are discretionary, that the Trustees make the decisions, not the beneficiary (CM). The Trust may not have the discretion to simply buy CM a home.
In a lot of ways, CM situation is like being “on benefits” but the payer is private.

Her income also likely made/makes her ineligible for benefits/housing support/legal aid.
 
  • #98
Last edited:
  • #99
InstantCoffee said:
No, it's not huge - but if they were living in Ilford in Essex then rent shouldn't have been more than around 1k a month. Then if they had no commute costs, no dependant children etc it should be perfectly adequate. Didn't their landlord say there was unpaid rent and CM had debts to the tune of £25k? If that's the case, then where was the 50k she received in the space of 4.5 months going?
Click to expand...
IIRC they were in a property at Coldharbour estate for two years or so before moving in August/September 2023. I think it likely it would be bigger than 1 bedroom. I would estimate rent to be 1800-2000 per month, then you have council tax and utilities on top. The stipend may have covered these but what about food etc? If CM was in receipt of that stipend and other trust monies, then would she be entitled to any benefits?
 
  • #100
rightsaidfred said:
What slightly mystifies me is why the family didn't use the trust fund to purchase a flat during the stable 2012-16 years when she was living in London. It would have stopped her haemorrhaging money on rent and provided security from the sort of landlords that will no fault evict if you even look at them funny.
Click to expand...
This is MOO, but probably as they could already see a flat wouldn't be treated well / fit with an itinerant, dysfunctional life. Or the trust may not have had the funds or discretion for a large pay-out. Equally CM could have used it to pay a mortgage but didn't....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged, Newborn (found deceased), Bolton Greater Manchester, 5 Jan 2023 #7
48 49 50
Replies
994
Views
94K
Knitty
Knitty
S
  • Locked
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
67 68 69
Replies
1K
Views
111K
Sillybilly
Sillybilly
S
GUILTY UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged in death of baby Victoria, GUILTY on all counts incl retrial on manslaughter, 5 Jan 2023 #9
48 49 50
Replies
989
Views
53K
Lucy6226
Lucy6226
S
  • Locked
UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged, Newborn (found deceased), Bolton Greater Manchester, 5 Jan 2023 #5
49 50 51
Replies
1K
Views
97K
Knitty
Knitty
S
  • Locked
UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon & Newborn (found deceased), Bolton Greater Manchester, 5 Jan 2023 #2 *Arrest*
49 50 51
Replies
1K
Views
182K
MadMcGoo
MadMcGoo

Members online

... and 73 more.
Total: 2,791 (members: 74, guests: 2,717)

Online statistics

Members online
74
Guests online
2,717
Total visitors
2,791
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
633,176
Messages
18,637,004
Members
243,435
Latest member
neuerthewall20
Back
Top