Constance Marten and Mark Gordon #6

[KatieMorag]

It just sounds fishy to me that she couldn’t remember if he was awake or asleep when she told him Victoria was dead.
The most pivotal part of the whole scenario and she doesn’t know if he was asleep or awake.
Wonder if she was drinking a lot?

Very. And the fact he didn't believe her. What a weird reaction:

'I think he was asleep, and I told him that she wasn't moving, he didn't believe me. I told him baby I really don't think she's alive and he didn't accept it.'

Also - you would not believe the number or nonsense stories I've heard that start 'They took my kids away because... '

MY ARSE did they take the kids away because they thought-with-no-evidence that Mark pushed Constance out a window. As fricking if. What a stupid woman to think anyone will believe that. Or has she actually convinced herself of that too?! Nothing to do with the other severe chaos they were clearly living in (no medical care during pregnancies, houses trashed including urine etc, homelessness without reason, abandoning baby in the hospital, living in a tent with a baby surrounded by garbage and urine, unsafe sleep practices in foster care - and that's just what we've heard about!)

 

[heretoreaditall2019]

Once they had put the soil on top I suppose?

She said it was so heavy she sometimes had to drag it.

Just cannot rationalise it at all.

TW reference to a deceased child

Parking the emotionally disturbing side of dragging a dead baby behind you on the floor for a moment - why on earth would you risk that bag splitting open by dragging it?!!!

 

[Shinythings]

It annoys me how they are trying to perpetuate that the family court is just taking kids away willy nilly. There is a VERY high burden of proof to fulfill that the child is in greater harm remaining with parents than being removed and then on top of that you have legal boundaries and again to actually order a removal must be extremely high evidence.

No one is getting their kids permanently removed for no reason.

 

[Danica Catrick]

So in the podcast CM says when they were in London people were pointing at them and taking pictures. It’s so annoying that people do this instead of contacting the authorities. All it does is alert people that they are wanted!

It sounds highly unlikely that people would be pointing and taking pictures of them in London. I've never seen this happen to anyone, let alone a scruffy couple on the run. I doubt many people gave them a second glance to be honest.

 

[chocdrop]

So the discussions earlier were to agree the facts re previous SS advice?

Really interesting I must admit that until now I’d thought of her as a boho alternative lifestyle person- SS simply treated her as a homeless person. As she was. I guess we don’t need to second guess why they had involvement anymore- not the window falling, not carpets () but the obvious answer- they were homeless and having a baby.

It's very interesting that despite the trust, which would have allowed her to live a relatively comfortable, boho, alternative lifestyle; they were in fact living like homeless people.

How easy would it have been to have spent money on a good tent, a small heater and a moses basket or lived on a managed site with bathroom facilities and "complied". Or lived in the camper they owned somewhere cheap. Or rented a very remote property etc etc.

 

[Emsie]

weird, I immediately thought they were fleeing SS intervention. That says a lot about my view of the world!

Same. Lots of people I spoke to about it thought it was a coercive control thing and that CM had effectively been kidnapped my MG and was in danger but I've never really bought into that.

I remember raising that they had other children removed on one of the earlier threads and getting shot down I've always thought they were a danger to the baby and that's why the search was on. Otherwise who would care? What would be the urgency in finding them?!

 

[Allmyownopinion]

They are just utterly evil, I honestly believe that. Producing children just to discard them! That comment for their eldest child when they failed to show up to supervised visits desperately wanted to keep Victoria did they! It’s almost laughable; had all the means & resources to keep 4 kids yet deliberately abandoned them yet have the audacity to claim they wanted to be parents! Evil evil twisted game playing manipulative fuckers

 

[sebanna]

I do feel for Child FF and his siblings, at some point someone will need to explain all this to them. That their birth mum was from a very wealthy, upper-class family but couldn't provide the basics for them.

 

[heretoreaditall2019]

They are absolutely deluded. They really do believe that they did the right thing. How on earth do they think the way they acted - and the results of that - are okay.

Yep!! Like what a bizarre mindset where the most catastrophic outcome has happened and you’re not open to feedback or self reflection? My LO came home from nursery with an large unexplained bruise from an accident no one had witnessed and I went into panic safeguarding mode as did her key worker and we’ve been following up with actionable next steps all week as a result (she is fine and I feel her setting is safe!!). Comparatively they’ve caused the death of a newborn and then done awful things with her dead body & are like yeah and ofc the objective (wo)man will understand how this happens?! no sweetie we won’t!

 

[Lynn’ssnazzycardigan]

The social services carpet chat went off at a tangent! The original point was that people who have their children removed by SS often claim it was over some isolated detail (an example given was a woman who said it was because she couldn’t afford a new carpet when in reality it was general neglect). This corresponds to CM claims that SS were only involved because she fell out of a window. If the only thing wrong was bad flooring SS would absolutely help her sort it out, if the only problem was an unsafe window the same applies. Whether it’s getting money from the council (which they can) or signposting to agencies that help, SS work with the family to try and keep them together. It speaks to the fact that CM was of the deluded “SS are child snatchers on commission/out to get me for no reason” brigade.

 

[Ray_of_Sunshine]

(Quoting from the end of the last thread to reply here)

His past is a huge worry. I can understand why her family were concerned.

It’s also a puzzle because that was such a horrific crime, when he was so young, did he really just get deported back to the UK and get his head down and work? How do you go from violent rape at 14, to never in any trouble again? (Current case notwithstanding)

I still wouldn’t leave my children with him.

That’s got to have something to do with why the previous children were removed. I’d bet my life she was given the opportunity to put her children first and leave him in order to be with them and be their mother but she chose him over and over again. Even after losing some already. That is so unforgivable.

There would’ve been a long and drawn out process from her falling pregnant to the first child being removed. Unfortunately I know a very violent rapist and as well as that horrific crime he is also convicted of sexually assaulting a child - but has incredibly gone on to father multiple children quite freely. In my experience authorities are very sluggish when dealing with him - in fact they won’t deal with him at all when I, myself, have made multiple reports and contacted them directly (not even anonymously!) with details, evidence and addresses I find myself thinking the sex offenders register isn’t as robust as people are lead to believe, the prison system is shit - no-one is being rehabilitated, the probation service is even worse and children’s services are no longer fit for purpose. I hold a very dim view of the police also That’s why I think these two are going to be out in no time at all, having more children and they’ll be free to do so as is their human right, right!? They can’t and won’t be stopped and they know it. They don’t give a fuck, they are not remorseful and this is all just a mere formality. In my opinion.

 

[blueblue]

That detective interviewing him deserves a medal for his restraint.

 

[InTheDollsHouse]

They could have had paid assistance with the money she was receiving to help them, were they like class A drug users? Or just fucking useless selfish twats?

I’m going with useless selfish twats. Only because the prosecution would have been all over any sign of drugs.

 

[Hyacinthsquash]

I'm inclined to believe the window probably came later and was a significant catalyst to the actual physical removal of the children, not the reason as such but the straw that broke the camels back.

This. Its strange how those who are anti SS, and have involvement with them, always fixate on one thing as being the reason their kids were taken away rather than seeing the whole picture. Maybe the window thing did contribute but I bet that wasn’t the ONLY factor.
I went to school with someone who had heavy Ss involvement with her kids as she just couldn’t cope. When they finally got taken away she posted on Facebook about them being taken because she couldn’t afford new carpet but in reality it was their living conditions being absolutely awful. They were never clean or looked after, house an absolute state as she was more interested in finding new men. But no, they were only taken because she couldn’t afford new carpet in her eyes.

 

[lampielooloo]

What you’ve suggested doesn’t make any sense- if you wanted to hide evidence she would’ve continued with the cremation plan. She actively chose to hold onto evidence.

She refused to answer the questions on where the child was, during and after arrest. That fits the bill for 'hiding evidence'. Victoria was also wrapped up in a blanket and a plastic bag, inside another bag, covered in rubbish and earth and leaves, inside a closed shed. Hidden, you might say.

 

[Ittybittytittyclub]

Just to add a little bit insight from my own experience. My children were removed to the care of family members (who had to register as foster carers with the local authority). Prior to this the LA had to meet a legal threshold to say I was unfit in order to place an interim care order. I then had to follow a programme set out by the family court (FDAC) to show I could achieve and maintain abstinence from alcohol. During this time I was allowed supervised access visits and these took place at the foster carers homes and also days out. I have photos from this time where we look like a normal family. The carers had to observe and write reports on how I presented and how the children responded, along with daily reports on how the children were doing. I was told and checked on (drug/alcohol testing, conferences with the judge and other professionals) that if I didn’t stick to the agreed behaviour the children would be handed over to my relatives under special guardianship orders, meaning I would lose parental responsibility. During proceedings I had shared PR with the LA. This meant I could have a say in things like schooling and medical care. I was given support and time to make the changes and even when things didn’t go well it was always the aim to reunite the family. I didn’t have to be a perfect parent, I just had to demonstrate I would make a life for them that was safe and that’s what I did. They would have been given ample opportunities over what looks like years to secure accommodation and establish a support network if they wanted to care for their children. They weren’t constrained by finances by the looks of it. I just think they have refused to compromise on their chaotic lifestyle and would not swallow their pride to admit their way of parenting was not safe or acceptable.

Well done! I can’t imagine how hard it is to beat an addiction, let alone whilst fighting for your children and all the emotions and stress that brings, yet still staying away from alcohol. You really are amazing! I hope you are proud of yourself because you blooming should be! Wishing you and your family lots of love xx

 

[SoOverIt84]

I wonder if we will get any more details as to why her other children were removed. There is surely no way SS removed four children because their mother once fell out of a window.

Nope, removals because someone ‘fell’ wouldn’t happen. Wouldn’t even meet the threshold to call a pre legal planning meeting to get advice from the LA solicitors. However, we work on risk rather than the criminal conviction threshold so if there’s been umpteen police call outs related to domestic abuse but never progresses to conviction, the call outs are sufficient to say on probability the child/ren are experiencing significant risk of harm due to domestic abuse. We’d also have to evidence all we’ve tried to do to reduce risk and support offered because the court has to be sure that nothing else but immediate removal will do to keep the children safe.

 

[Hotchips]

As someone who has camped before in very basic conditions tho it was not winter, i cannot fathom how anyone could fall asleep upright in a tiny 2 man tent with nothing to lean against or support their weight. If this where to be true, she either slid backwards and the baby rolled off her onto the cold ground or she slid forward or to her side on top of her suffocating her. This pair were simply just unfit parents, they had no clue. No issue with people living an alternative lifestyle as CM/MG call it but living in squalor without basic necessities is not an alternative lifestyle. They deliberately chose to live like a homeless couple, why i dont think we will ever know!

 

[Hotchips]

You would wonder what she was spending it on if she apparently wasnt paying rent anywhere they lived. MG was prob in receipt of benefits too if he wasnt working.
Those monthly sums were more than adequate to have help such as a cleaner and even part time help with the children. It beggars belief really.

 

[Asterix]

So MG's masterplan, according to CM, was to tell the police that the baby had been put down to sleep and was then found deceased on her front. Babies can't roll for months. I'm not convinced they ever had full time care of any of their children. How else does a father of 5 not know that newborns pretty much stay where they're put.