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?

You’re giving a woman who discarded her dead baby in a plastic bag with dirty nappies a lot of credit.

The only question I had at the time was why they announced that Constance was an aristocrat but I’m guessing that Google would have told me that info if I’d looked.

Despite all that happened, this pair still love each other. I think that the idea that Constance would have come forward with the baby is completely unrealistic. Ideally she would have left the baby somewhere safe and the UK would have those safe haven baby boxes like in America but this is a pair fuelled by their hatred of authority and so self centred (and high on drugs?) that they wouldn’t have considered dropping off the baby somewhere safe or even offering their warm coats during freezing weather.

In an ideal world, Gordon would have remained in US jail but considering typical UK attitudes to foreign criminals, the idea that they might agree to recall him if he reoffends is overly optimistic. I know that Gordon was born in the UK but the point I’m making is that I can’t see UK agreeing to take back criminals who reoffended overseas

That's not true. There is always an attempt to support the mother to leave the perp before removing children.

I also saw some CCTV of when they were putting the baby in the pushchair. You don't handle a newborn like that. They were clueless on top of everything else.

Which podcast please

I do think she’s an anti establishment, thinks she knows best woman who would not prioritise her kids over her own selfish needs and wants.

the one thing though I read which gave me a little bit of sympathy for her was the fact that Constance’s own mother took Constance at the age of 18yo to some sort of weird Nigerian cult and left her there in Nigeria for months. Apparently the women had to be naked a lot,of the time and were punished if they weren’t. Sounds very disturbing. No idea why her mother thought this was a good idea, sounds like there may have already been some issues with Constance so not sure if she thought this was going to be some sort of boot camp for wayward teens.

But does not excuse her later actions, but did it fuck her up mentally? She had every opportunity to engage with social services and safeguard her kids. I feel sorry for the three older kids, who sound old enough to have realised they were being rejected and let down. Sounds like Grandma considered fostering them at some point but was then given access to their social services files and decided against it.

It was a trust fund

She chose a man over her children. It’s as simple as that.

She may not having known from the beginning about his past (which I actually doubt) but as soon as she had the information she could have cooperated with the police and social services and left him for good so she could stay with her children.

She decided to pick him over her kids. No sympathy for her, only her children.

This is really not "a few things" going wrong. This is a woman choosing to stay with a man with a history of violent rape, repeatedly putting him before her children even when he pushed her out of a window. Despite £2K being found in the car, they chose not to put the baby into coat and hat, and they repeatedly put their own wishes ahead of the baby's safety. Do you really think you would easily find yourself in this situation? If it was a choice between your baby being safe, warm and well cared for, or you going on the run in midwinter and keeping the baby inadequately dressed and wrapped up in a tent, what choice would you make?

That was probably the thrill for her. She joined a cult at 19 where sexual coercion was rife.

I don’t think that this level of detail even crossed their minds.
It was good old fashioned cuntinesss and not giving a single fuck about anyone but themselves.

What is the podcast referred to in this thread?

She claimed she fell out of the window so it either never went to criminal court or he wasn’t convicted of it. Family and criminal courts have different levels of certainty required.

From what I have read her parents likely wouldn't have passed assessments anyway, they sound neglectful themselves

But it’s the lesser of 2 evils.

If she had not had access to proper and competent legal representation she would have launched appeal after appeal.

If a justice system is to be worth to name the vilest of us need access to it.

The Daily Mail ran a daily podcast of the first trial

I have to disagree. Looking at the whole story, what sort of man he is, the reasons for their children being removed, her history, their history, the total lack of care for a newborn baby, the police could only have one aim which was to try to find the baby before she died. They did this in the only way they could, with urgency.

Probably because she would have ignored the ban?

in that scenario you’re relying on her keeping away from him, and reporting when he breaks the ban.

if she is actively engaging in a relationship with this man, a ban won’t stop her from seeing him, and giving him access to the children.

as people have pointed out, she had the financial means and family support to get away from him. She chose to stay in the relationship. If the children really mattered to her she could have arranged a new life anywhere.

even her family felt they could not keep the children safe which is why they were adopted rather than placed in kinship care.

when women repeatedly show they put their relationships above the safety of their children, they risk the children being removed.

It is on bbc sounds im sure its titled The Trial of..

@Simonjt if you think biting sarcasm is appropriate in this case then I’m not sure it’s going to be a conducive discussion tbh. Some things aren’t funny, they aren’t an appropriate place to be sarcastic or ironic or whatever.

You’ll of course note I wasn’t in a relationship with a rapist and on the run from the police either. But in general I think there is an argument about how to support mothers in abusive relationships and the irreversible and closed nature of adoption.

Indeed - that's what I took from it too.

Apparently he dragged her back into the house and wouldn’t let the paramedics inside to treat her.

She's been scared and desperate since 2017? Even when he was in prison, she couldn't work with services?
Is that what you think about all parents of dead children? Star Hobson, Arthur Labinjo-Hughes, Victoria Climbie, Peter Connelly, Daniel Pelka, Abiyah Yasharahyalah.
This was part of SW training, keeping the child's interests at the top and getting rid of bias. You cut the, trust fund, posh, mother no more slack, than the unemployed Mum from a sink estate, because it's about the child. There was no working with them. Services had tried for eight years.

Mums can be horrible people, too. Being pregnant or having children doesn't give you a halo and a get-out-of-gaol-free card.

Marten was actually thrown out of the cult after a few months. A cult that brainwashes their members. A cult that is happy to abuse their cult followers. A cult that totally control their followers every move. Sometimes even for years after they leave. Even those nutters didn’t want her says a lot in my view.