Aristocrat Constance Marten has made headlines as she stands trial for the tragic death of her newborn daughter, Victoria. The spotlight intensified when Marten, aged 37, announced her refusal to continue cross-examination during proceedings at the Old Bailey. The prosecution led by Joel Smith KC claims that Victoria died from hypothermia or potentially smothering while co-sleeping in what was described as a "flimsy" tent. This arrangement was part of Marten and her 50-year-old partner, Mark Gordon's, decision to live "off-grid" in the South Downs, ostensibly to prevent their child from being taken into care—similar to their four other children.
The stark nature of the allegations only deepens the tragedy surrounding Victoria's death, as her remains were ultimately discovered in a shopping bag amid rubbish in a disused allotment shed. The couple stands accused of gross negligence manslaughter and causing or allowing their daughter's death, charges they vehemently deny. Last week, Marten expressed her disdain for the prosecution, referring to Smith as “diabolical” and "heartless" during a heated exchange that saw her break down under questioning. She indicated that the process of being cross-examined made her feel that her character was being defamed.
She described the situation with her daughter, asserting from the witness stand that she would turn back time if only she had known Victoria was in danger. The narrative she presented to jurors was one of parental love and selflessness, framing their decision to go on the run as a means to protect their child. “Mark and I don’t relish being on the move constantly... we did it because we love our daughter so much,” she testified, adding that the act was one of "parental love."
The ramifications of Marten's decision to halt her testimony will weigh heavily on the trial, as the Recorder of London, Mark Lucraft KC, cautioned the jury to consider the impact of incomplete evidence on their deliberations. Jurors were informed of the difficulties inherent in assessing the validity of the trial without fully completed testimony, a situation that leaves considerable uncertainty regarding the case's outcome.
In previous proceedings, Marten and Gordon were convicted of concealing the birth of their child and perverting the course of justice, culminating in a retrial that could take place as early as March 2025. The earlier jury’s inability to reach a definitive verdict on the more serious charges of gross negligence has led to further scrutiny of both their actions while on the run and the broader implications of their case on child welfare and parental responsibility.
The deep sense of tragedy surrounding this unsettling case is compounded by the societal implications it raises about vulnerable families and systemic failures that can occur in child protective services. While Marten views her actions through the lens of a mother’s fierce protection, the prosecution presents a stark contrast—arguing that their decisions led to a situation that endangered the very life they sought to protect. As this complex case unfolds, it underscores the intersections of love, desperation, and the harsh realities of law and morality.
Reference Map
- Information on Constance Marten's refusal to continue her testimony.
- Details about the prosecution's claims regarding the circumstances of the child's death and the couple's attempts to evade care services.
- Insights into the couple's previous convictions and the complexities of the ongoing trial.
- Marten's testimony about her feelings and perspectives around the events leading to Victoria's death.
Source: Noah Wire Services