UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged, Newborn (found deceased), Bolton Greater Manchester, 5 Jan 2023 #7

[Alyce]

3.59 pm

That is all for today​

The court is now breaking for the day and will not sit again until April 8.

Recap: Trial of Constance Marten and Mark Gordon continues

Live updates from the Old Bailey as the trial of Constance Marten and Mark Gordon continues.

www.theargus.co.uk

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Exactly what I thought. Presumably the people in Mongolia don't live in a festival style tent with a unicorn sleeping bag from Argos...JMO.

I'm not even joking when I say that I strongly feel traditional living peoples of Mongolia and all the other cultures that CM and her defence have referenced ought to be given the stand to point out what is wrong with the arguments put forth.

It's coming off as incredibly disrespectful and way off beam IMO, I'm even astounded these type of comparisons were considered admissible to be discussed in court.

Privileged wealthy white lady went on run with her black British husband in the UK in unlawful circumstances, having turned their back on interventions and assistance, and apparently they ended up with a dead baby because apparently in other cultures indigenous peoples live successfully on the land... Say what? In what bizarro circus logic fail universe is any of that making sense? How can anyone with a university education stand in a court of law and put forth such arguments. I'm so shocked.

JMO MOO

 

[JennieM]

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon: 'Unlikely' baby died of hypothermia, trial hears​

An infant health expert has told jurors it is "exceedingly unlikely" that Constance Marten and Mark Gordon's baby died of hypothermia.

[…]

Prof Fleming - professor of infant health and developmental physiology at the University of Bristol - told the Old Bailey: "I have seen no evidence of hypothermia as a cause of death.

"The description of how she was being cared for would make hypothermia exceedingly unlikely."

Prof Fleming later agreed that the account of how the baby was being cared for had been given to him by Ms Marten.

The expert witness said he had studied babies in Mongolia who safely slept in their mother's clothing when the "room temperature was commonly zero or below zero".

Judge Mark Lucraft asked: "Presumably they were wearing traditional Mongolian clothing?" Prof Fleming replied: "Correct."

[…]

Prof Fleming said a measurement of Victoria's foot length suggested she was not born prematurely and was about two to three weeks old when she died.

He added he could not confirm Victoria was eight weeks old when she died.

Prof Fleming said: "All the pointers suggest to me that she was much younger. The best fit is that she was two or three weeks."

[…]

Prosecutor Tom Little KC asked the witness what his response would have been had Ms Marten told him she was going to be sleeping in a tent in temperatures between 4 and 10 degrees, with only "a baby grow and a vest".

Prof Fleming replied: "I would say it would be inadvisable, but if you have to then keep your baby inside your coat."

Asked by the prosecutor what he thought of the £40 Argos tent the couple purchased to stay in, Prof Fleming said it would not be "ideal" accommodation.

The jury has heard that the couple kept Victoria's body in a shopping bag for days or even weeks after her death.

The judge asked Prof Fleming a question posed by the jury about what the optimum time after death to carry out a post-mortem examination would be.

"The sooner the better," Prof Fleming said. "Within 24 hours ideally."

[…]

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon: 'Unlikely' baby died of hypothermia, trial hears

An witness called by Constance Marten's lawyers said he did not think her newborn died from exposure.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Maryanna]

I'm not even joking when I say that I strongly feel traditional living peoples of Mongolia and all the other cultures that CM and her defence have referenced ought to be given the stand to point out what is wrong with the arguments put forth.

It's coming off as incredibly disrespectful and way off beam IMO, I'm even astounded these type of comparisons were considered admissible to be discussed in court.

Privileged wealthy white lady went on run with her black British husband in the UK in unlawful circumstances, having turned their back on interventions and assistance, and apparently they ended up with a dead baby because apparently in other cultures indigenous peoples live successfully on the land... Say what? In what bizarro circus logic fail universe is any of that making sense? How can anyone with a university education stand in a court of law and put forth such arguments. I'm so shocked.

JMO MOO

What were the unlawful circumstances in which they went on the run?

 

[Alyce]

Professor Peter Fleming, an expert on infant health,

He was asked if having a baby sleep face down on an exhausted mother under her coat could pose a risk.
Prof Fleming said: “I would say it is not desirable but I have no evidence it is dangerous



The prosecutor pointed out that the witness had not spoken to Gordon or seen CCTV footage of how the couple were treating Victoria before they went off to stay in a tent.

The witness was challenged on an assertion in his report that the defendants bought warm clothing for themselves and Victoria before leaving London for the south coast.
Mr Little said: “Are you aware there were no items of clothing bought for Victoria before they left?”

The witness replied: “No, I was not aware of that.”

‘Exceedingly unlikely’ baby Victoria died from cold, Constance Marten trial told

Victoria’s badly decomposed body was found inside a Lidl bag on an allotment shed

www.standard.co.uk

 

[EricAcaciaAvenue]

The judge asked Prof Fleming a question posed by the jury about what the optimum time after death to carry out a post-mortem examination would be.

A question which would worry me if I were the Defendants

 

[Maryanna]

The judge asked Prof Fleming a question posed by the jury about what the optimum time after death to carry out a post-mortem examination would be.

A question which would worry me if I were the Defendants

Surely the answer is as soon as possible?

Fleming's areas of expertise:

Directory of Experts

"My clinical practice is in the fields of newborn intensive care, developmental assessment and investigation and care of children with sleep-related disorders, particularly involving breathing.

My research is in the areas of developmental physiology, mother/baby interactions (particularly during sleep) and large scale studies of factors contributing to sudden death in infants.

I also have a particular clinical and research interest in the provision of bereavement care to parents after the death of a baby or child."

 

[CaptainNancy]

<modsnip>

Was CM asked about matters such as boiling water? Not only in relation to keeping Victoria clean but also in relation to having some hot food which helps keep a person awake.

This is all JMO but I would say the prosecution need a bit more than just "The defendants chose to live in a tent when it was cold".

Their choice has in any case to be considered in the context of their circumstances (the same as with anybody's choice if it's alleged to be criminal), and their whole relationship with social services was part of their circumstances.

The defendants made the decision to take their newborn into the woods in a cheap small tent in January with no sanitation, they were travelling from hotel to hotel, driving 12 hours a day, according to CM in court, within days of her giving birth. She was so exhausted (understandably, IMO) that she was unable to stop herself falling asleep on the tiny baby stuffed inside her coat. She said in court that her body ‘shut down’ due to exhaustion. How can anyone safely care for an infant in that state?

I have no doubt that the fear of losing your child is an intense primal fear.

But when you care for a tiny vulnerable newborn, you have the greatest responsibility in the world.

Either they put their child’s life at risk or they didn’t.

If they did the context may be used in mitigation but it doesn’t change whether the actual actions were right or wrong. IMO. And in the decision the jury will be asked to make.

 

[Maryanna]

The defendants made the decision to take their newborn into the woods in a cheap small tent in January with no sanitation, they were travelling from hotel to hotel, driving 12 hours a day, according to CM in court, within days of her giving birth. She was so exhausted (understandably, IMO) that she was unable to stop herself falling asleep on the tiny baby stuffed inside her coat. She said in court that her body ‘shut down’ due to exhaustion. How can anyone safely care for an infant in that state?

I have no doubt that the fear of losing your child is an intense primal fear.

But when you care for a tiny vulnerable newborn, you have the greatest responsibility in the world.

Either they put their child’s life at risk or they didn’t.

If they did the context may be used in mitigation but it doesn’t change whether the actual actions were right or wrong. IMO. And in the decision the jury will be asked to make.

Agreed it certainly is the greatest responsibility.

The jury will have to decide whether their choices caused the accident and were unreasonable in the circumstances.

I wish strength to all of the jurors. I bet most if not all of them wish they'd been assigned to a different case.

 

[CaptainNancy]

I know the jury is something of a lottery, but I do not see how the charges of
manslaughter by gross negligence and perverting the course of justice and concealing the birth of a child and the other charges will be proved.

Concealing the birth of a child is pretty much in the bag, surely? All of their actions were in pursuit of concealing the birth of a child. And I don’t know what the legal definition of perverting the course of justice covers but I would guess that not reporting the death of a child might be included? To the extent that when police repeatedly beg you to say where the child is you refuse to answer and takes police 2 days to find her body? Is that not perverting the course of justice?

I must admit I am surprised that the charges do not include concealing the death of a child. Maybe someone with more legal experience than me could explain?

 

[Alyce]

I think this section explains the reasoning - if the offence can be covered within one of the main charges, then it is not shown as a separate, stand alone, charge.



Perverting the course of justice covers a wide range of conduct. A charge of perverting the course of justice should, however be reserved for serious cases of interference with the administration of justice.

If the seriousness of the offence can properly be reflected in any other charge, which would provide the court with adequate sentencing powers, and permit a proper presentation of the case as a whole, that other charge should be used.

Public Justice Offences incorporating the Charging Standard | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

 

[CaptainNancy]

The Argus:

• “Marten, 36, is on trial over the death of her newborn daughter Victoria while on the run from authorities with her partner Mark Gordon, 49”

No; Marten AND Gordon are on trial over the death of their newborn daughter.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Concealing the birth of a child is pretty much in the bag, surely? All of their actions were in pursuit of concealing the birth of a child. And I don’t know what the legal definition of perverting the course of justice covers but I would guess that not reporting the death of a child might be included? To the extent that when police repeatedly beg you to say where the child is you refuse to answer and takes police 2 days to find her body? Is that not perverting the course of justice?

I must admit I am surprised that the charges do not include concealing the death of a child. Maybe someone with more legal experience than me could explain?

I'm really baffled as to why there's no charges in relation to failing to report the death, covering up a death, hiding / concealing evidence, and also tampering with a corpse or whatever it's defined as, denying a decent funeral, etc

JMO MOO I am not a lawyer

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

The Argus:

• “Marten, 36, is on trial over the death of her newborn daughter Victoria while on the run from authorities with her partner Mark Gordon, 49”

No; Marten AND Gordon are on trial over the death of their newborn daughter.

Please tell me the authorities have actually done a DNA test to prove that MG is definitely the father?

 

[Nikynoo]

I'm really baffled as to why there's no charges in relation to failing to report the death, covering up a death, hiding / concealing evidence, and also tampering with a corpse or whatever it's defined as, denying a decent funeral, etc

JMO MOO I am not a lawyer

These are the charges in addition to GNM. cruelty to their baby; concealment of the baby's birth; causing or allowing her death; and perverting the course of justice by concealing the body.

In answer to your question, concealment of Vs birth and perverting the course of justice cover your above.

 

[BreadnLumpit]

Concealing the birth of a child is pretty much in the bag, surely? All of their actions were in pursuit of concealing the birth of a child. And I don’t know what the legal definition of perverting the course of justice covers but I would guess that not reporting the death of a child might be included? To the extent that when police repeatedly beg you to say where the child is you refuse to answer and takes police 2 days to find her body? Is that not perverting the course of justice?

I must admit I am surprised that the charges do not include concealing the death of a child. Maybe someone with more legal experience than me could explain?

As I understand it, concealing the birth of a child is an offence that only comes into play *if* that child has died.

I know it sounds nonsensical, but it's a law dating back to 1861 and, rather than relating to birth registration or notifying authorities of a birth, it is in reality the crime of covering up the death of an infant by hiding or attempting to hide the body, in order to prevent investigation.

It's a slam dunk on that one IMO.

 

[CaptainNancy]

Please tell me the authorities have actually done a DNA test to prove that MG is definitely the father?

Well… it hasn’t been reported in court afaik, so who knows?

 

[OrangeCash]

The Argus:

• “Marten, 36, is on trial over the death of her newborn daughter Victoria while on the run from authorities with her partner Mark Gordon, 49”

No; Marten AND Gordon are on trial over the death of their newborn daughter.

I agree, if they're going to assign the child to CM, they also should to MG within the same sentence

Please tell me the authorities have actually done a DNA test to prove that MG is definitely the father?

I don't think anyone is questioning who the father is. MG isn't. And forgive me, I don't see how it would affect them being on trial for murder? Or did you mean something else?

MOO

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

I'm still here. I do not have much more to say than I have already. I feel it is in the jury's hands now, I know the closing speeches have not been done, but I don't see there is much more to say from either side.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I agree, if they're going to assign the child to CM, they also should to MG within the same sentence


I don't think anyone is questioning who the father is. MG isn't. And forgive me, I don't see how it would affect them being on trial for murder? Or did you mean something else?

MOO

MG often calls their children 'her children' or 'her baby' etc.

Since there was the same use of 'her baby' in reporting, I wondered if anyone had ever tested to prove.