I believe the statement by the SW re sleeping with baby is an agreed set of facts as reported by The Argus in @Alyces first post. If the facts are agreed by both the prosecution and defence there is no need to interrogate the witness.
It sounds like they were warned about all the things that ultimately contributed to Victoria's death. Their alternative lifestyle was more important. It wasn't ignorance. It wasn't mental illness. It was hubris. They should and hopefully will be judged. JMO.Previously, concerns had been raised when Marten presented at a hospital six months pregnant having sought no NHS antenatal care.
At the time, she said that she and Gordon had been living in a campervan.
Months later, social services issued a national hospital alert to locate the couple.
When Marten went into labour with Child FF, she and Gordon gave false names at hospital, the court was told.
She claimed she had travelled to “avoid her family”, spoke with a “fake Irish accent” and claimed to be from the travelling community.
After their real identities were established, Marten told social workers they had been living in a campervan after being evicted from a flat.
A care professional said social services “had a number of concerns, including falsifying of names and that Ms Marten and Mr Gordon had been living in a tent”.
Marten said it had been her idea, that she would engage with care professionals and her child was her priority.
However, she was informed: “Some babygrows and nappies is simply not enough for a newborn baby to be safe.”
Marten was advised to reach out to her family and try to get housing but “due to her homelessness and inadequate preparations for a baby, a court order would be sought if she were unable to establish a suitable home for herself and (Child FF)”.
Social workers found Marten’s tent was “festival-style” and unsuitable for sleeping in during cold weather.
After visiting the tent, a social worker spoke to Marten about the “unsuitability and discomfort” of their situation.
The social worker stated: “I explained to her that it was winter, the conditions were freezing and the cramped space would be wholly inappropriate for a baby to live in.”
Marten accepted it was “challenging” but made clear that she and Gordon had an “alternative lifestyle” and not to judge her for it.
The social worker explained her “primary concern” was the wellbeing of Child FF and it was their role to assess the risk.
The court heard an interim care order was made for Child FF who was placed in temporary mother and baby placements with Marten.
Constance Marten warned of sleep risk before baby’s death, court told
Marten and her partner Mark Gordon deny manslaughter by gross negligence.www.theargus.co.uk
So they couldnt even be bothered to keep up contact visits says it all really!!Just copying in an updated section I didnt see earlier.....
The couple went on to have three more children and “interacted well” with them during supervised contact sessions.
But their attendance was “inconsistent”, leaving the children distressed and unsettled, the court heard.
One of the children became quiet and withdrawn, telling staff: “Mummy and daddy cancelled again.”
The child was described as “inconsolable” when the parents failed to turn up at the contact centre.
Jurors heard of an incident of domestic violence in 2019 and a judge found a “risk of harm to the children by being exposed to physical violence between the parents”.
All four children were made subject to care and placement orders in January 2022.
Constance Marten warned of sleep risk before baby’s death, court told
Marten and her partner Mark Gordon deny manslaughter by gross negligence.www.irishnews.com
www.bbc.co.uk
Bit more context about leaving the baby at hospital from the BBC article from today:
‘At one point the couple left a child behind in hospital in order to attend a Family Court hearing, even though they had been offered a video link.’
Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial: Four children taken into care
A jury hears Constance Marten claimed she had not been to school - but was in fact from a wealthy family.
I hope they get the book thrown at them and get given appropriate sentences. If they are ever allowed to get back together this will all happen again and again and againBit more context about leaving the baby at hospital from the BBC article from today:
‘At one point the couple left a child behind in hospital in order to attend a Family Court hearing, even though they had been offered a video link.’
Constance Marten and Mark Gordon trial: Four children taken into care
A jury hears Constance Marten claimed she had not been to school - but was in fact from a wealthy family.
I agree with this! I think we should remember that in her initial police interview CM even said that MG may say something differing from her account of how Victoria died. It was obviously something they had discussed at great length between themselves prior to arrest. Falling asleep with the baby on her is something that had been flagged up to CM, so perhaps she thought it would be the least awful / most acceptable 'accident'. Although as has already been said - the very fact she had had it flagged to her before means it was wilful neglect anyway.
By festival tent I think they mean the cheapest and most disposable kind! The kind that are left behind in their hundreds after Glastonbury!
As has been said upthread tho ,it depends on where you live .
The subtlety will be around the circumstances - did CM sleep this way intentionally , or did she fall asleep accidentally?
Giving free rein to their joint fantasy of being travellers ? To the point of inventing false names .
The advice was possibly about sleeping position. After studies were done, advice changed to do with sleeping. Young babies should sleep on their backs, no pillow, unnecessary fabric and toys removed from cribs, don't use rocking cribs that can tilt with the baby's weight, the mattress must fit snugly...and so on.
That would be either manslaughter or causing or allowing the death of a child, both of which carry a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. It would also (IMHO) make her a psycho - really seriously mentally ill at a level which she may not be. If she is that ill, it would probably have come out in other behaviour.
It could be the shed is abandoned, as in the person doesn't use it anymore, but still uses the rest of the allotment
