UK - Constance Marten & Mark Gordon charged, Newborn (found deceased), Bolton Greater Manchester, 5 Jan 2023 #4

[JumpingFrog]

I agree that they were likely acting in a combination of fear, shock, grief and planned to take her with them, not bury her there. If people are hearing "London" on the audio, maybe it was a plan. I don't know this is only my opinion based on them running with her, which to me equals wanting to keep her.

 

[JumpingFrog]

Why might she have given birth in the car? It's hard to imagine this as the main plan. They had some money left, as we know from their later taxi journeys and the camping gear purchase. Giving birth in the car could have resulted from any of various different things going wrong. One of those may have been early labour. They don't let you stay in your car on a ferry.

This line of thought makes me wonder what the main plan actually was. If they were fleeing to Ireland, did they have accommodation arranged? For all we know, she may have been planning to go to an Irish hospital. The question arises of why they didn't go to Ireland earlier. But what if she was only 7 months pregnant?

This is complete speculation.

You may wonder about the car, but jmoo etc, if this was say a third or fourth (going off Facebook photos...) pregnancy or birth, babies tend to just fly out...very often in cars on route to hospital, in bathrooms, at home etc.

 

[kittythehare]

I agree with you about a week or so . Had they any contact with her after her decease the cadaverine emitted would have contaminated them ? That's a question btw . Going into shops etc. would alert other customers to that .

not in a sealed plastic bag.

 

[JTT]

Y'know the photo of Constance Marten that has been published in all the newspapers, showing her looking directly face-on to the camera, which some have suggested is a custody photo and others have observed might also be a passport photo?

Look at the attribution: "GMP". Likely to stand for Greater Manchester Police, surely? (JMO, other acronym decrypts are available, etc.)

Dad of Constance Marten speaks of 'immense relief' after she's arrested

Napier Marten said it is 'very alarming' that his daughter's baby remains missing

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

 

[JTT]

not in a sealed plastic bag.

Even a small amount detectable only forensically would explain why the police arrested them on suspicion of manslaughter having already held them for some time on suspicion of child neglect.

 

[JTT]

not in a sealed plastic bag.

Even a small amount detectable only forensically would explain why the police arrested them on suspicion of manslaughter having already held them for some time on suspicion of child neglect.

 

[iamshadow21]

not in a sealed plastic bag.

There speaks someone who's never had a sealed packet of chicken breast slide out of a grocery bag in the boot of their car and hide itself in a cavity out of sight, in an Australian summer. A plastic bag, no matter how sealed, hides nothing. Trust me. After a couple of days, it was obvious something was very wrong. We were just glad when we found the cause that it wasn't someone's pet that had hidden itself in the engine cavity to die. It smelt utterly rank.

MOO

 

[JumpingFrog]

Y'know the photo of Constance Marten that has been published in all the newspapers, showing her looking directly face-on to the camera, which some have suggested is a custody photo and others have observed might also be a passport photo?

Look at the attribution: "GMP". Likely to stand for Greater Manchester Police, surely? (JMO, other acronym decrypts are available, etc.)

Dad of Constance Marten speaks of 'immense relief' after she's arrested

Napier Marten said it is 'very alarming' that his daughter's baby remains missing

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

Could this be because it was GMP who initially triggered the missing persons alert, and had the authority to publish those photos?

 

[JTT]

Could this be because it was GMP who initially triggered the missing persons alert, and had the authority to publish those photos?

That's possible. And if it was a passport photo presumably it would be crown copyright anyway.

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

I think it’s the state the baby was found in, which is quite interesting and perplexing actually. Together they had this (much wanted?) baby, who then sadly passed away. They were obviously out and about. They were interacting with each other. They were moving about doing various jobs. They were next to an allotment with various tools.

Why didn’t they bury her? They had all the time in the world. At least 10 hours of daylight per day and it looked like they had been in that place several weeks, so what were they doing with all that time? I mean, even in the absence of tools they could have done it with their hands.

Trauma is a strange thing and I do think it’s part of this, but I just can’t quite get my head around it all. Why not just bury Victoria?

RBBM.
I think this is a key part of why they did not bury Victoria. JMO. Maybe, they could not let her go. After everything they went through to keep her, they just could not let her go.
Shock and trauma can be so invasive, and it can evoke survival mode, almost like an auto-pilot setting. It can also bring about disassociation, as far as my memory recalls.
If this is the case, it is very sad.

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

Why might she have given birth in the car? It's hard to imagine this as the main plan. They had some money left, as we know from their later taxi journeys and the camping gear purchase. Giving birth in the car could have resulted from any of various different things going wrong. One of those may have been early labour. They don't let you stay in your car on a ferry.

This line of thought makes me wonder what the main plan actually was. If they were fleeing to Ireland, did they have accommodation arranged? For all we know, she may have been planning to go to an Irish hospital. The question arises of why they didn't go to Ireland earlier. But what if she was only 7 months pregnant?

This is complete speculation.

This is along the lines that I have thought. I have always thought that they were trying to get to Ireland but something happened along the way and she went into premature labour. I do not think it was intended for her to give birth in the car, unless they had been living in the car for a period of time?
JMO

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

I am in no way a paeds specialist, but my cousin's wife gave birth to twins at around seven months gestation due to life threatening circumstances (they're fine, now, they're high schoolers) and they were absolutely teeny tiny, hold in one hand babies. As far as I know, there's no way Victoria would have survived without medical intervention if she was that early (my cousin's kids were permanently in the NICU for months), and even if she had had lived long enough to get to the south coast, her body would be obviously different to that of a full term baby.

Very much my opinion only.

This makes sense to me.
I had my fourth child at 28 weeks (Severe Pre-eclampsia plus IUGR, in uterine growth restriction, and scary dopplers). She was less than 2lb and would not have survived for long without the medical intervention that also kept me alive.
JMO and experience.

ETA: She was also a fighter and it's smacking me in the face during the teens

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

Y'know the photo of Constance Marten that has been published in all the newspapers, showing her looking directly face-on to the camera, which some have suggested is a custody photo and others have observed might also be a passport photo?

Look at the attribution: "GMP". Likely to stand for Greater Manchester Police, surely? (JMO, other acronym decrypts are available, etc.)

Dad of Constance Marten speaks of 'immense relief' after she's arrested

Napier Marten said it is 'very alarming' that his daughter's baby remains missing

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

To be honest, I have always assumed is WAS her passport photo.

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

There speaks someone who's never had a sealed packet of chicken breast slide out of a grocery bag in the boot of their car and hide itself in a cavity out of sight, in an Australian summer. A plastic bag, no matter how sealed, hides nothing. Trust me. After a couple of days, it was obvious something was very wrong. We were just glad when we found the cause that it wasn't someone's pet that had hidden itself in the engine cavity to die. It smelt utterly rank.

MOO

RBBM.
I had this but with old coffee in a semi-travel cup (didn't seal) that rolled deep under a seat, it smelled so so bad for weeks until I found it. I know it is not the same as 'meat' but I get exactly what you mean.

 

[DizzyBee]

This makes sense to me.
I had my fourth child at 28 weeks (Severe Pre-eclampsia plus IUGR, in uterine growth restriction, and scary dopplers). She was less than 2lb and would not have survived for long without the medical intervention that also kept me alive.
JMO and experience.

ETA: She was also a fighter and it's smacking me in the face during the teens

Babies born between 34 and 37 weeks quite often only need feeding support and temperature maintenance. She may not have been SUPER early. If she ‘started showing symptoms’ in September, when they went in the run, it may have been that this is the stage where it was starting to become difficult to hide. She may already have been 16-20 weeks or so and would have been 34/35/36 weeks when delivering. Her lungs would have been mature enough to cope, she may have had some energy stores, but feeding may have been difficult. Skin to skin would have helped with temperature maintenance. Sadly she could have become very dehydrated and malnourished due to feeding issues, she would have been very likely to develop jaundice, she would have been susceptible to infection, she would have been very vulnerable to hypothermia. Even without hospital care; clean, warm conditions, feeding support and clean feeding equipment would likely have been enough for a late preterm/early term baby. It’s heartbreaking.

 

[sunnynz]

Babies born between 34 and 37 weeks quite often only need feeding support and temperature maintenance. She may not have been SUPER early. If she ‘started showing symptoms’ in September, when they went in the run, it may have been that this is the stage where it was starting to become difficult to hide. She may already have been 16-20 weeks or so and would have been 34/35/36 weeks when delivering. Her lungs would have been mature enough to cope, she may have had some energy stores, but feeding may have been difficult. Skin to skin would have helped with temperature maintenance. Sadly she could have become very dehydrated and malnourished due to feeding issues, she would have been very likely to develop jaundice, she would have been susceptible to infection, she would have been very vulnerable to hypothermia. Even without hospital care; clean, warm conditions, feeding support and clean feeding equipment would likely have been enough for a late preterm/early term baby. It’s heartbreaking.

Yes I was thinking about if the birth happened in the car, unprepared. The risk of infection would have been huge. Keeping the stem of the umbilical cord clean is a biggie in that first week or two. Presumably whatever was used to cut the cord wouldn’t have been sterilised. So many possibilities for what could have gone wrong. It’s terribly sad.

 

[tedtink]

There speaks someone who's never had a sealed packet of chicken breast slide out of a grocery bag in the boot of their car and hide itself in a cavity out of sight, in an Australian summer. A plastic bag, no matter how sealed, hides nothing. Trust me. After a couple of days, it was obvious something was very wrong. We were just glad when we found the cause that it wasn't someone's pet that had hidden itself in the engine cavity to die. It smelt utterly rank.

MOO

Haha, glad I'm not the only one! I lost a whole chicken under the passenger seat. Humming after 2 days, even in the UK climate.

 

[JTT]

On the "concealment of birth" charge:

1. This is not the same as a charge of non-notification. (I'm not even sure a mother can be guilty of non-notification. Certainly in the Notification of Births Act 1907 the duty to notify falls on the father if he's living in the house where the birth takes place and on "any person in attendance upon" the mother. But anyway. Perhaps that statute has been amended. It doesn't matter, because failure to notify isn't what they've been charged with.)

2. They have been charged with concealment of birth. This is an offence under s60 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861. The offence can only be committed after a child has died. It is to do with disposing of a dead body. Here is the statute that codifies the offence:

"If any woman shall be delivered of a child, every person who shall, by any secret disposition of the dead body of the said child, whether such child died before, at, or after its birth, endeavour to conceal the birth thereof, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years."

3. Since practically the whole country has known since the police issued their appeal on 18 January that a baby was born to Constance Marten and Mark Gordon earlier that month, how can anything they did or didn't do later amount to an endeavour to conceal the birth? The police and CPS may have messed this charge up. (JMO.) The police tell the world "CM and MG recently had a baby. Have you seen them? If you think you have, call this number." And then two months later they charge CM and MG with concealing a birth?!

4. There is a common law offence of preventing the lawful burial of a dead body. (It's no surprise that getting rid of a dead body without telling anyone is against the law.) This doesn't require the intention of concealing a birth. But...this isn't what CM and MG have been charged with either. This is what Hans Rausing was charged with in 2012. (He pleaded guilty and got a suspended sentence.) According to the Guardian, the most recent case reported before Rausing was in 1986, when the defendants also pleaded guilty. (For some discussion of an earlier case from the 1970s, see here.)

 

[rightsaidfred]

On the "concealment of birth" charge:

1. This is not the same as a charge of non-notification. (I'm not even sure a mother can be guilty of non-notification. Certainly in the Notification of Births Act 1907 the duty to notify falls on the father if he's living in the house where the birth takes place and on "any person in attendance upon" the mother. But anyway. Perhaps that statute has been amended. It doesn't matter, because failure to notify isn't what they've been charged with.)

2. They have been charged with concealment of birth. This is an offence under s60 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861. The offence can only be committed after a child has died. It is to do with disposing of a dead body. Here is the statute that codifies the offence:

"If any woman shall be delivered of a child, every person who shall, by any secret disposition of the dead body of the said child, whether such child died before, at, or after its birth, endeavour to conceal the birth thereof, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years."

3. Since practically the whole country has known since the police issued their appeal on 18 January that a baby was born to Constance Marten and Mark Gordon earlier that month, how can anything they did or didn't do later amount to an endeavour to conceal the birth?

The statute doesn't require them to have successfully concealed the birth; indeed those who conceal the birth and death of a baby successfully are never prosecuted.

The law only requires that they endeavour to conceal the birth - that is, try to. Given that they had successfully concealed the pregnancy and the birth was only discovered because of the placenta in the car, I'd say there was evidence of them  trying to conceal the birth, just being thwarted by the car fire.

The law has to be seen in its context; in 1861 Victorian Britain, infanticide was rife and acted as almost a form of contraception. The law as it stands is a direct descendant of 1623's "An Act to prevent the Murthering of *advertiser censored* Children"

Concealment of birth - Wikipedia

It must have been much easier to prosecute for concealing the birth, without having to get into an argument about whether the infant was stillborn or killed shortly after birth when post mortems were not as advanced as they now are

 

[JTT]

Regarding gross negligence manslaughter:

Gross Negligence Manslaughter | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

"In cases where there has been an omission to act, the prosecution must prove that the negligent failure to act was a substantial cause of death. Where there is evidence that after a certain time the deceased, regardless of any intervention, was more likely than not to die anyway, then failures to act beyond that point (i.e. the point when his condition became irreversible) cannot establish causation. In R v Misra [2004] EWCA Crim 2375 the Court of Appeal cited the summing up of Langley J with approval. Langley J said:

"If you are not sure that [X] would have survived at all, either however well he had been treated or - because he might not have received appropriate treatment, then the prosecution has failed to prove its case on this aspect and that is the end of the matter." "

BBM - two conditions that are not the same.