Constance Marten case — I feel the police have some responsibility too

[Siff]

I know Constance Marten and her partner made dangerous and illegal choices, and I’m not excusing that — a baby died and that’s heartbreaking. But I can’t stop thinking about the way the case was handled and whether the police have some responsibility in how things unfolded.

As a mum of four who’s struggled mentally after birth, I keep thinking: if I had just given birth, was vulnerable, and felt like the whole world was hunting me down — would I have thought clearly? Probably not. The media coverage was intense, and the police were everywhere. The pressure must have been overwhelming.

I honestly believe the fear created by the police operation pushed them into making more and more desperate and risky decisions to stay hidden. It wasn’t just a search — it felt like a witch hunt. No safeguarding, no attempt to reach her as a vulnerable mother, just a hard push to capture and punish.

I think that approach had consequences. The police must take some responsibility for creating the kind of fear and pressure that led to this tragedy. The way they went about it likely made things worse — not better — for the baby.

It’s easy to say she was selfish or unstable, but mental health in the postnatal period is fragile. People don’t always think rationally when terrified. I just wish there had been more humanity in how it was all handled.
Anyone else feel the same?

Surely if you were a parent it wouldn’t be you and your feelings as a priority at all, it would be the abuse, neglect and terror your children had suffered as your first and strongest thoughts.

What I keep coming back to is this: the police and media didn’t need to broadcast a full-scale manhunt in the way they did. Publicly, they could’ve taken a softer tone — something like: “We are not pursuing this as a criminal matter. We just want to make sure mum and baby are safe. Constance, you’re not in trouble, please come forward.”
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, they could’ve still been actively tracking them.

And how long would you take this softly, softly approach for with a couple who are known to have harmed four other children, concealed a pregnancy and gave birth with no medical assistance?

She’d been through the system and knew this baby would, rightly, be removed. Saying “you’re not in trouble” when she absolutely knew the outcome of this process would be at least temporary removal is disingenuous. There’s a point when, as an adult, you can’t escape the consequences of your own decision making. I have no sympathy here other than for the child who lost their life and the four other traumatised children left in her wake.

"That kind of messaging could’ve made the pair feel safer and less hunted — possibly leading to calmer, more rational decisions. Instead, the aggressive public manhunt likely pushed them deeper into hiding. It’s what led them to sleep in a tent in freezing conditions with a newborn. That didn’t happen in a vacuum — it was a reaction to fear."

I don't think that's true. They were wanting to avoid social services in anyway they could. They had tried moving around before in b&bs and short term accomodation before with their previous children and it hadn't prevented social services finding them. I think their plan is was to go abroad (Constance had done that before with a previous child) but they couldn't because her passport was left in the car that caught fire. They'd also camped previously to disguise the fact that Constance was pregnant.

I think they'd of made that decision regardless of what the police had done. I think the police knew what danger the baby was in and that's why they were so aggressive at trying to find them. Constance and Mark had so many chances to do right by their children and didn't. The blame lies with them.

I think that - given the loooong history now disclosed of abuse & neglect & violence & lies & off-grid living including taking a previous baby to a tent by a motorway, & extreme refusal to cooperate in any way with police & social services - the police had absolutely no other option and that this is unreasonable. They would have been (justifiably) severely criticised had they adopted the gentle approach suggested.

This is not a case of a traumatised mother feeling nervous & driven by police heavy handedness to behaviours that she would not otherwise have adopted. This is a case of parents who are almost certainly very heavy drug users, who have an established pattern over years of extreme neglect, lies, risk taking behaviour, & complete refusal to take any responsibility or cooperate. A previous baby was taken to live in a tent when a family trust had offered to buy a house for the parents to live in - dangerous off grid living with kids was a choice persistently made, not one they were driven to.

If a maniac kidnapped a child you would not expect the police to do less than mount a full scale hunt, & this is no different.

2 people are at fault here- the appalling parents of these 5 children. No others.

Well, hopefully the lesson for you has been to do some research before you post opinions apportioning blame.

You know the police are people too, right? Trying their best in challenging circumstances and without doing any real research or knowing the facts of this case you've blamed them for the death of a baby.

Shame on you.

The thing with this case was that the authorities were in possession of far more information than was made public at the time and during the first trial, so as not to prejudice the outcome. Since their conviction it is patently obvious why the police took the stance they did. Everyone knew, immediately, that this baby was in danger.

They lived an 'alternative' (aka chaotic) lifestyle that was incompatible with safely raising children. They barely turned up for contact sessions with their first children (leaving the poor kids distraught), and Mark likely threw Constance out of a window while she was pregnant - no evidence because they corroborated each other's stories.

Social services simply didn't believe that Constance would end the relationship in order to protect the children, and that is why they were removed. He's clearly an incredibly dangerous man, and she has repeatedly chosen him over her children. I understand that she's likely a victim of DA and coercion, she probably did have an emotionally bereft childhood, she probably is vulnerable. But there comes a point when, if a parent is unable (for whatever reason) to raise their children in a safe environment, then the authorities must step in.

Imagine if they'd all continued to take a softly softly approach, and it then came to light several years down the line that the child had been subjected to horrendous abuse and neglect (there's already a huge list of such cases) before dying, and without adequate intervention from authorities. We'd all be rightly saying "why wasn't more done?" Constance is still under his spell even now, after everything that's happened.

But the parents were encouraged to have contact with their children. They didn't turn up for the contact sessions.

Speaking as someone who has a child in their extended family who's bio dad is constantly cancelling at the last minute, the effect on a young child of that repeated cycle of hope and then disappointment, over and over again, is devastating.

But the final nail in the coffin of my having any sympathy at all for Marten is the fact that when Gordon was released from prison, she immediately travelled to see him, leaving her newborn alone for 17 hours. Even without all their other failures, and regardless of her mental health, that is the behaviour of a narcissistic, unfit mother. There is no way she could ever be trusted to care for a child.

I absolutely agree with this

I think the Police did everything they could reading the articles. The only thing is they could have issued a national Missing Persons maternity alert in December 22!but it probably wouldn’t have made any difference given they weren’t accessing any services anywhere.

Well, hopefully the lesson for you has been to do some research before you post opinions apportioning blame.

👆This.

She needs to be locked up until she reaches menopause .. she’s an absolute danger to any of her children.

Her parents had looked at fostering the children, but were so worried about her & her partners behaviour, that they didn’t think they would be able to keep the children safe, and away from them. … which is one of the reasons they were adopted out.

Some children are just better off away from their birth parents.

Having read about their behaviour during the trial. The only people who have responsibility for this is themselves.

They were desperate to get the baby away from the violent rapist as soon as they could. The neighbours heard Constance screaming before she was pushed or jumped out of the upstairs window when pregnant. The police believe it more likely she was pushed. He didn't call an ambulance and dragged her back inside. She was screaming "Help me help me" and he refused to let paramedics in. The baby was at risk with him around.

But despite this, she [the judge] formed the view that it was Marten who was the "dominant personality".

Would be good to know how the judge formed this view.

I guess if she was lying for him and lack of other evidence, CPS would have found it hard to secure a conviction.

Exactly this.

Exactly they knew for more than we did about the danger that baby was in. I have no sympathy for ‘mums post natal hormones’. They knew exactly what they were doing.

As a semi-grizzled hack, I would say to you that when there is a missing child, the media and police work together. The media will be told more than they publish to ensure they do not put the operation at risk by inadvertently publishing something which risks safety. The media will also publish things which the police think are helpful.

In this case there was a tiny baby in the hands of a couple of deeply antagonistic, unstable people. The police will have taken advice from psychologists. It seems likely the advice will have been - nothing you do will persuade them to come forward, best do all you can to get to the baby as fast as you can.

I think it’s deeply unhelpful (and unfair on the police) to be an armchair general in a case like this. There were no easy answers. Sometimes in real life there’s only the least worst option.

I thought the same reading it. I am sure there’s a paranoid psychosis order there of some sort whether cannabis induced or post partum.

No, the police aren't responsible for 2 parents who yet again chose to prioritise their relationship over their responsibility to their children.

A mother who willfully treated her children like shit, abandoning a new baby to go and visit her rapist violent thug of a partner isn't one I waste my sympathy on.

Don’t work well for whom? There are a number of adoptive parents in this thread including myself. My kids would be dead if left with their birth family. Adoption has given my children the chance to have a life, to be loved and cared for, to thrive in all kinds of ways. It is working well for them, with lots of therapeutic support to overcome the harm done to them.

It may not work for the birth parents, but giving them repeated opportunities to traumatise their kids and undermine their new life isn’t in the children’s best interest. Sometimes ongoing contact can work well, it often doesn’t. I do think there needs to be better support for parents who have their children removed but not at the cost of those children.

I can only assume the OP had read hardly anything about this case before starting this thread.

Both parents deserve extremely long sentences.

Those poor children.

The parents didn't turn up for the supervised visits anyway so would be unlikely to remain in touch during an open adoption I suspect. In one of the articles I read today it said the older child told her nursery worker 'mummy and daddy cancelled again'.

It's really distateful the aristocrat thing. As if we should care more/ be scandalised because she had some posh relatives.

I feel very sorry for her other children who had a terrible start in life and I have limited sympathy for the fact she kept having them to be honest.

Please read all the articles so you understand the back story on this pair