Family missing with newborn....

[ChocChocYum]

www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/23233264.bolton-m61-appeal-help-finding-missing-family-newborn-baby/

Where are they? How can they go missing? Hope they are ok

There's clearly a lot more to the story than the police are saying. They're drip feeding information. I guess the rape conviction is already in the public domain, so that's now been released in an attempt to get people snitching.

The father's appeal today included:

"I beseech you to find a way to turn yourself and your wee one into the police as soon as possible so you and he or she can be protected. Only then can a process of healing and recovery begin."

Why does she need to turn herself in to the police? Is he (both of them?) wanted for a crime, but that information hasn't been released?

I'm guessing the are either human rights privacy issues or a fear of prejudicing a trial.

The police don't normally name people until they've been charged. Until they're found, they can't be charged.

It's all very strange. Hope the baby is okay.

They definitely do put out appeals for "wanted" people such as
fb://photo/3464276543856251?set=a.1620494538234470

As well as missing appeals such as
fb://photo/3469731273310778?set=a.1620494538234470

At the moment there might not be enough evidence to charge him (e.g. it's not kidnap if she went willingly, and we don't know if any harm has come to the baby)

Knowing you're going to be arrested the moment you show up though is hardly going to encourage anyone to give themselves up.

I wonder if they know she’s given birth but there has been no sightings of the baby?

Tamarindtree · Today 13:12

Yes that’s her father. He left the estate to one of his sons and went off leaving it all behind.

Napier didn’t leave the estate to one of his sons - it didn’t belong to him. When his mother died the house and estate were left to two of his sisters who sold the house and estate for a huge sum of money which was shared out amongst the 6 siblings.

Napier didn’t leave the estate to one of his sons - it didn’t belong to him. When his mother died the house and estate were left to two of his sisters who sold the house and estate for a huge sum of money which was shared out amongst the 6 siblings.

From the papers I'm getting :

1996 gives it to Max (son)
2010 sold after death of mother and proceeds distributed

No, house contents sold in part and then 2013 sold outside the family to an American businessman Richard Chilton

Not sure if already mentioned not read the full thread

But there was discussion elsewhere about a possible 'cult' involvement

May explain the 200 officers being on the case!

We need to be careful of speculation or this thread will get deleted like the other one today

From what I gathered in the papers Mark has been in prison for 20 years from the ages of 14 to 34?

He spent a large part of his teenage years and most of his young adult years in prison.

I watched a documentary about American prisons, they are rough.

I am not defending what he did, but I don't know how ANY person can turn out normal after spending two decades of their formative years in such a place

From the papers I'm getting :

1996 gives it to Max (son)
2010 sold after death of mother and proceeds distributed

The papers are wrong. It never belonged to Napier and it was left to Charlotte and Georgina who then sold it.

I think that's coming from the fact that on her LinkedIn it says she pitched an idea for a documentary on a Nigerian cult to Al Jazeera in 2012/13. There's no evidence that she was in any way involved with a cult herself.

Indeed cults normally involve rather more than two people, and they seem very isolated as a couple.

Mark Gordon's mum has issued a rather less eloquent statement saying he's a good boy, she doesn't know what it's all about and perhaps they've both been kidnapped by a third party According to her they also married in secret some time ago.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11654811/amp/Mother-sex-offender-missing-aristocrats-daughter-claims-married-secret.html

(Apologies for the DM link)

Details of his horrendous crimes have now been released www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11655511/Sex-offender-missing-new-mother-kept-neighbour-hostage-sexually-assaulted-aged-14.html

OMG

I know they are supposedly off grid because they are paying in cash for everything but where are they getting the cash from? Unless they are walking around with a gym bag full of £50 notes they must be withdrawing it from a bank or somewhere? Especially given that they supposedly lost all of their belongs in the car fire. And what about buying nappies and food? They must be on CCTV somewhere surely?

They might have already left , I'm sure constance could pay a smuggler to traffic them out of the country many people with less wealthier means do the same thing.
What I don't get is why her family let the existing children be taken into care they have huge means and wealth they could have just got nannies and later boarding school if they weren't interested in day-day parenting.

Do you really think nannies and boarding school is in anyway appropriate for children who will have suffered trauma, neglect and likely have attachment difficulties?

Do we even know as fact that the children are in local authority care? Surely all we know is that they are not with their parents. They aren't even mentioned in any of the news reports or appeals in msm

Poverty is a major factor in child abuse and neglect, though, @Simonjt

Not because poor people are inherently bad at parenting, but those with money can and do throw money at the problem. There are probably a fair few drug addicts and alcoholics in the aristocracy: their children will be well cared for because they’ll pay someone else to do it. I interpreted the PPs comment in that way.

From his history I wouldn't be surprised if it's an abuse coercive situation.

Because those children are being protected. Other than providing context, they are not relevant to what is happening now with their mother. If she had left them at home or failed to collect them from school the appeals would be to her to come back for them.

We have no idea where those children are. Which is as it should be. There is certainly a possibility that one of her family has taken them in.

Utterly chilling reading the details of this man’s criminal history. He should ever have been released.

Because those children are being protected. Other than providing context, they are not relevant to what is happening now with their mother. If she had left them at home or failed to collect them from school the appeals would be to her to come back for them.

I know that and I wasn't questioning why it wasn't reported - but people are talking like it's fact they are in LA care which we absolutely do not know (nor should we) also people on the post talking like they know for a fact that they don't have access to family money because she's been cut off (even though police obviously believe different). I just think it's really strange the way people state things as absolute fact so confidently when all there is to go on are these extremely vague reports.

Do you really think nannies and boarding school is in anyway appropriate for children who will have suffered trauma, neglect and likely have attachment difficulties?

The question still stands: why did the family let her children go into care (supposedly)? That's no way to treat traumatised children either who have better outcomes with other family members