logo
Constance Marten: ‘Callous and selfish' or grieving mother?

Constance Marten: ‘Callous and selfish' or grieving mother?

Yahooa day ago
Constance Marten was cast by the prosecution as a callous and selfish woman who put her relationship with Mark Gordon above all else, ultimately ending in the tragic death of baby Victoria.
Her former defence barrister insisted she was no 'monster' but a grieving mother with a deep love for all of her children, like a lioness for her cubs.
The Old Bailey heard how the closer she got to convicted rapist Gordon, the more remote she became from her family and the cosseted life she had once led.
Just how far the 38-year-old had strayed from her aristocratic roots was exposed in grainy CCTV images of the couple scavenging in bins for leftover scraps while on the run from authorities.
Mother-of-five Marten was born into a wealthy and influential family, although her parents split up when she was young.
Her paternal grandmother was the late Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother's goddaughter and childhood playmate of the late Princess Margaret.
Marten was privately educated, studied Arabic at Leeds University and travelled extensively in Africa.
Having trained in journalism, she worked for Al Jazeera, the Middle Eastern news station, before becoming a promising actor.
Marten had no criminal convictions although she had been given a fixed penalty notice in 2009 over an allegation of shoplifting.
In 2014, Marten met Gordon in an Indian incense shop in Tottenham, north London, and cemented their 'unlikely' coupling with a Peruvian marriage ceremony seven years ago.
She described Gordon as her 'daddy bear', her 'soulmate' and 'amazing' saying that they shared the 'same perspectives on life'.
Before secretly giving birth to Victoria, their four other children were taken into care, cementing Marten's anti-establishment stance.
She rejected a family court judge's finding relating to domestic abuse, saying her children were taken away after she accidentally 'fell from a window'.
According to Marten, she had a 'long history of issues' with her family, who never met Gordon.
She claimed that they disapproved of her partner and were 'embarrassed' they had children together.
Jurors heard her concerned parents had engaged private investigators to find her in the past and her father had applied for wardship in the family court.
In her evidence, Marten claimed her family were 'extremely oppressive and bigoted' and would do anything to 'erase the child from the family line'.
She told jurors: 'The problem I had was I was not just up against social services but family members who were very influential with huge connections in high places including Parliament.
'If they said to social services 'jump', social services will say 'how high'.
'They were highly embarrassed about the fact I had children with Mark and the fact they do not come from an upper class, privileged background.'
She added that the unnamed family members would go to 'any lengths' to get what they wanted.
Marten's family is understood to strongly dispute that they were 'embarrassed' by Gordon or concerned about his background in any way other than the fact he was convicted of rape and assault.
Marten's suspicions ran deep and appeared linked to financial arrangements for administering a trust fund from her late grandmother.
She complained it was 'cut off overnight' when she was expecting her first child but she was receiving £2,000 a month after the birth of her second.
In just over four months before her arrest, she was given almost £50,000 from the fund and had some £19,000 in the bank.
The financial Trust was not managed by Marten's mother Virginie and her family so they did not have control over how and when funds are allocated or distributed.
Despite Marten's harsh words towards her family, her mother and brother regularly attended court in her first trial.
But Marten appeared to avoid eye contact with them, instead looking to her partner, Gordon, for support in the dock.
Marten admitted telling lies, including affecting an Irish accent as she gave birth to her first child in hospital, claiming to staff she was from a Traveller community.
In a damning closing speech, prosecutor Tom Little KC told jurors: 'Lies fell from her mouth like confetti in the wind when she gave evidence.'
Detective Superintendent Lewis Basford, who led the Scotland Yard investigation, said Marten and Gordon lived 'in their own world of lies and beliefs'.
He told the PA news agency: 'There was no acceptance of society and standards that we judge ourselves against… Everyone is wrong, apart from them.'
Following a six-month retrial, Marten and Gordon were found guilty of the manslaughter of their baby Victoria.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

2 Missing Brothers Found Dead Near Rhode Island Coast After Falling into Water While Fishing: Reports
2 Missing Brothers Found Dead Near Rhode Island Coast After Falling into Water While Fishing: Reports

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

2 Missing Brothers Found Dead Near Rhode Island Coast After Falling into Water While Fishing: Reports

Two men were reported missing in Little Compton, Rhode Island, on the morning of Saturday, July 12 The victims' families identified them as brothers Aldino A. Centeio, 27, and Valdir A. Centeio, 31 The siblings, who were reportedly fishing in the area, were found dead on Sunday, according to local media outletsThe bodies of two men who went missing while fishing near the coast of Rhode Island have been found, according to reports. At around 8:30 a.m. local time on Saturday, July 12, police received a 911 call from the Warren's Point Beach Club on Atlantic Drive in Little Compton alerting them that a man had fallen into the water and another man had jumped in to save him, CBS News and NBC 10 WJAR reported. A third unidentified person also entered the water but was unsuccessful in retrieving the two men, according to the outlets. "We saw one gentleman standing on top of the rock behind me, screaming and yelling, waving his hands, sort of prostrating himself on the rock, crying,' witness Bill Lancaster said, per CBS News. 'We figured, obviously, someone had gone over into the water." The two men were found at around 11:15 a.m. on Sunday, after the search was suspended overnight, according to the outlet. Family members identified the pair as brothers Aldino A. Centeio, 27, and Valdir A. Centeio, 31, local outlet WPRI reported. The pair, who were both from Stoughton, were allegedly found not far from the rocks where they were last seen fishing, per the outlet and NBC 10 WJAR. Local Rhode Island dive master and scuba instructor Chris Trainor said a probable explanation for the tragedy could've been 'tough conditions' in the water. He told NBC 10 WAJAR that there was a lack of visibility in the area. The victims' family spent over six hours watching the search for the missing brothers from the shore on Saturday, according to WPRI. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer​​, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Little Compton Fire and Rescue was joined by the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (DEM) amid the search. According to NBC 10 Boston, Middletown, Tiverton, Newport, and Little Compton marine units also assisted. 'The members of the Little Compton Fire Department would like to thank the Warren's Point Beach Club for providing sandwiches for our members and mutual aid partners during the marine incident this afternoon,' the Little Compton Fire Department wrote on Facebook. 'We would also like to thank all of our mutual aid partners for assisting us during the search,' they concluded. Little Compton Police Department, Little Compton Fire Department and the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management did not immediately respond to PEOPLE's request for comment on Tuesday, July 15. Read the original article on People

What we know as MasterChef's John Torode addresses racist language claim
What we know as MasterChef's John Torode addresses racist language claim

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

What we know as MasterChef's John Torode addresses racist language claim

John Torode has identified himself as the person accused of using racist language in the MasterChef report. MasterChef production company Banijay UK commissioned law firm Lewis Silkin to do a report into the historic behaviour of presenter Gregg Wallace on the show. Wallace said he was "deeply sorry for any distress caused" and he "never set out to harm or humiliate" after the report found 45 out of 83 allegations were upheld. The "majority of the substantiated allegations against Mr Wallace related to inappropriate sexual language and humour", the report found. Wallace's return to MasterChef is "untenable", it concluded. There were two standalone allegations against other people that emerged in the report. MasterChef presenter Torode said there is an allegation that he made a remark using racist language in 2018 or 2019 and that he apologised immediately after. He added: "I do not believe that it happened." The Sun claimed Torode was asked to resign and to blame mental health, but he refused. The TV chef has been a presenter on MasterChef since 2005. BBC News reported that "BBC insiders distanced themselves from that claim" on Monday night. Yahoo UK has reached out to John Torode and BBC representatives for comment. Torode has said he is "shocked and saddened" by the allegation. In a statement, he wrote on Instagram on Monday night: "Following publication of the Executive Summary of the Investigation into Gregg Wallace while working on MasterChef, I am aware of speculation that I am one of the two other individuals against whom an allegation has been upheld. "For the sake of transparency, I can confirm that I am the individual who is alleged to have used racial language on one occasion. The allegation is that I did so sometime in 2018 or 2019 in a social situation, and that the person I was speaking with did not believe that it was intended in a malice way and that I apologised immediately afterwards. "I have absolutely no recollection of any of this and I do not believe that it happened. However, I want to be clear that I've always had the view that any racial language is wholly unacceptable in any environment. I'm shocked and saddened by the allegation as I would never wish to cause anyone any offence." BBC has yet to confirm whether Grace Dent will replace Wallace on the main MasterChef series. Dent was announced as Wallace's replacement on Celebrity MasterChef while he stepped aside for the investigation last year. Filming for the reality series has now wrapped, but it has yet to air on TV. She said: "I've been watching MasterChef since I was a girl sitting with my dad on the sofa. My whole family watches it. It's all about uncovering and championing talent – and to have ended up in this position, is more than a dream to me. "I'm so excited that I can't eat, which is severely detrimental to a restaurant critic. I feel very lucky to be stepping in for the next Celebrity MasterChef. I can't wait to meet the fresh celebrity faces for 2025." It also remains unknown whether Dent will step into the same role on MasterChef: The Professionals. In the wake of the MasterChef report, Wallace has said he is "deeply sorry for any distress caused" and that it was "never intended". He said, "For eight months, my family and I have lived under a cloud. Trial by media, fuelled by rumour and clickbait. "None of the serious allegations against me were upheld. I challenged the remaining issue of unwanted touching but have had to accept a difference in perception, and I am deeply sorry for any distress caused. It was never intended. "I'm relieved that the Banijay report fully recognises that my behaviour changed profoundly in 2018. Some of my humour and language missed the mark. I never set out to harm or humiliate. I always tried to bring warmth and support to MasterChef, on screen and off. "After nearly 20 years on the show, I now see that certain patterns, shaped by traits I've only recently begun to understand, may have been misread. I also accept that more could have been done, by others and by myself, to address concerns earlier.' "A late autism diagnosis has helped me understand how I communicate and how I'm perceived. I'm still learning." He added: "To those who've shown kindness, thank you. It mattered. This has been brutal. For a working-class man with a direct manner, modern broadcasting has become a dangerous place. I was the headline this time. But I won't be the last... "There will be more casualties if the BBC continues down this path, where protecting its legacy matters more than protecting people. For my part, with full legal support, I will consider my next move."

Why Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek's doping cases hang over Wimbledon champions
Why Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek's doping cases hang over Wimbledon champions

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Why Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek's doping cases hang over Wimbledon champions

This year's Wimbledon singles champions are Iga Świątek and Jannik Sinner. Świątek routed Amanda Anisimova of the United States 6-0, 6-0 in the first 'double-bagel' Grand Slam final since 1988, while Sinner beat his nearest and only real rival, Carlos Alcaraz, 4-6, 6-4, 6-4, 6-4. Świątek now has six Grand Slam titles; Sinner has four. They are both first-time champions at Wimbledon — and they have both received suspensions for anti-doping violations in the past 12 months. It is also the first time in Wimbledon history that both champions have served anti-doping suspensions. Advertisement Sinner, the men's world No. 1, was suspended for three months between February and May this year after twice testing positive for a banned anabolic steroid. Świątek was suspended for a month at the back end of 2024 after testing positive for a banned heart medication. The International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) and the World Anti-Doping Authority (WADA) have both determined that Sinner and Świątek did not intentionally dope. But their victories at the All England Club have reopened a debate in tennis and the wider sporting world about their cases. What happened in Sinner's case? Sinner twice tested positive for clostebol in March 2024. In August that year, the ITIA announced that an independent panel found Sinner to bear 'no fault or negligence' for those positive tests, so he could continue playing tennis. ITIA investigators and the independent panel accepted Sinner's explanation: that he had been contaminated by a healing spray that his physio, Umberto Ferrara, had purchased. Advertisement Sinner's physiotherapist, Giacomo Naldi, used the spray on himself to treat a cut on his hand. Naldi subsequently treated Sinner, and contaminated the player in the process. Sinner was provisionally suspended for each anti-doping violation, but he successfully appealed both suspensions, which were imposed in April 2024, within 10 days. In line with ITIA regulations, his successful appeals meant that the suspensions were not made public. In September 2024, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) announced that it would appeal the 'no fault or negligence' ruling at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). WADA, which sits above the ITIA, sought 'a period of ineligibility of between one and two years,' because it believed Sinner should bear some responsibility for the actions of his team members. It, like the ITIA, also accepted that Sinner did not intentionally dope. Before the CAS hearing could take place, Sinner and WADA entered into a case resolution agreement, in which he received a three-month ban. The ban ran from Feb. 9 to May 4. Sinner missed six tournaments, but he did not miss a Grand Slam before returning to competitive tennis at his home event, the Italian Open in Rome. Advertisement WADA determined that it 'would have been very harsh' for Sinner to receive a longer ban, spokesperson James Fitzgerald said in a statement in February. What happened in Świątek's case? Świątek tested positive for trimetazidine (TMZ), a drug normally used as heart medication for its ability to enhance blood flow, in August 2024. The ITIA informed her of the positive test one month later, and on Nov. 27, 2024, it issued Świątek's one-month ban, at the lowest end of the 'no significant fault or negligence' range. Like Sinner, she was given a mandatory provisional suspension. Like Sinner, she appealed that provisional suspension within 10 days. Her appeal was ultimately successful, so it was not disclosed, but she missed three events while provisionally suspended. Because the length of any ultimate ban includes time served under a provisional suspension, her ban was lifted Dec. 4, 2024, six days after it was made public. Advertisement The ITIA accepted her explanation that a TMZ-contaminated batch of melatonin, a supplement that she uses to manage jet lag, was the source of the positive test. Melatonin is a regulated, non-prescription medication in Poland. Świątek submitted her medications and supplements to independent laboratories, alongside unopened containers from the same batches and hair samples. Two independent laboratories and a third WADA-accredited laboratory confirmed the contamination explanation. WADA declined to contest the ITIA's one-month ban. External legal counsel 'considered that the athlete's contamination explanation was well evidenced, that the ITIA decision was compliant with the world anti-doping code, and that there was no reasonable basis to appeal,' it said in a statement. How similar are the two cases? No two cases are the same, and conflating cases leads to confusion and misinformation. Advertisement There are key differences. One is the 'no significant fault or negligence' verdict in the Świątek case, compared with the 'no fault or negligence' in the initial Sinner verdict. This is why Świątek was given a ban, even though it was short, while Sinner, initially, was not given one at all. Świątek also provided laboratory analysis and a hair sample to prove that she did not intentionally dope. Also, WADA's appeal in Sinner's case could have led to a one- or two-year suspension. Świątek's case involved a contaminated medication, while Sinner's defense was contamination, but the product involved had a banned substance as an ingredient. This is why WADA's appeal — and the subsequent CAS hearing that never happened — could have led to a lengthy ban. They've served their time and due process was followed, so why do frustrations linger? Shortly after Sinner won the Wimbledon title Sunday, 2022 finalist Nick Kyrgios posted an asterisk on X. Kyrgios is one of several active players who have criticized the handling of the Italian's case — he called the initial verdict 'ridiculous' last summer. Advertisement Denis Shapovalov and fellow one-time top-10 player Lucas Pouille also hit out, with the former posting: 'Different rules for different players.' The frustrations are tied to a perception of other players going through longer processes, with worse outcomes, for superficially similar cases. But as with comparing Sinner to Świątek, the comparisons do more harm than good, leading to more confusion and consternation. Britain's Tara Moore said last September: 'I guess only the top players' images matter.' Moore, who tested positive for nandrolone metabolites and boldenone in April 2022, served a 19-month provisional suspension before an independent panel convened by the ITIA found her to bear 'no fault or negligence.' Unlike Sinner and Świątek, Moore did not appeal her provisional suspension, so it spanned the duration of the investigation. In February this year, 24-time Grand Slam champion Novak Djokovic said in a news conference following Sinner's ban: 'It's not a good image for our sport.' He added: 'A majority of the players feel like there is favouritism. It appears that you can almost affect the outcome if you are a top player, if you have access to the top lawyers.' Advertisement Tim Henman, the former world No. 4 and a member of the All England Club board that runs Wimbledon, told Sky Sports the timing and duration of the ban seemed 'a little too convenient' and had left 'a pretty sour taste for the sport.' Serena Williams joked in an interview with Time magazine in April that she would have been 'in jail' if she had failed a drugs test like Sinner. 'If I did that, I would have gotten 20 years. Let's be honest. I would have gotten Grand Slams taken away from me.' Is there favoritism? The ITIA strenuously denies any preferential treatment, and the feelings of favoritism are more tied to tennis being a two-tier sport in other ways. Sinner and Świątek can pay for top lawyers and bespoke laboratory testing because they have the resources to do so, which they have earned through their success and the prize money — and sponsorship deals — that come with that success. As the best players in the world and the biggest attractions at tournaments, they also get the court allocations they want, the biggest appearance fees, and innumerable other favors, including better facilities to train, first dibs on practice courts and so on. Players already frustrated by these discrepancies would look at perceived ones in anti-doping protocols and see even more unfairness. Advertisement There is further frustration for some players because of the effort required to avoid being sanctioned. Players have to give their whereabouts every day for testing, and many told this year about how paranoid they are about missing a test (whereabouts rules dictate a starting ban of two years for three missed tests) or ingesting a banned substance. Australian Open champion Madison Keys talked about being moved to tears by the stress of it. U.S. Open finalist Jessica Pegula said that she knows 'there are a lot of girls who don't sleep,' while Ons Jabeur talked about being 'traumatized' by the early morning ring of the doorbell from testers. What does it mean for tennis and where does the sport go from here? Few believe that Sinner and Świątek are anything but worthy Wimbledon winners. A bigger issue for tennis is the one that all sports face, which is how to catch those who are trying to cheat without there being collateral damage along the way. Advertisement In December 2025, WADA will confirm or reject proposed changes to its code on which the tennis anti-doping regulations are based. One of the proposed changes covers contamination. Only anti-doping rule violations linked to a contaminated substance not on its prohibited list are eligible for a reduced punishment. This is what happened in Świątek's case: her melatonin, which is not on the prohibited list, was contaminated with TMZ, which is. In Sinner's case, the substance with which he was contaminated was banned at first principle. This is why WADA originally sought a one- to two-year ban, before deciding that 'would have been very harsh.' Under the proposed reforms, the language in the code would change from 'contaminated product' to 'source of contamination.' The 'unforeseeable' presence of a banned substance in an athlete's body, whether from food or exposure via a third party, would be grounds for just a reprimand or a shorter, proportional ban if successfully proven. 'We're racking up positives that have nothing to do with intentional cheating,' Travis Tygart, the USADA chief executive, said in a phone interview in May. 'It's hard for people who understand the system and those who live within it to comprehend why we continue to have rules that are behind the science that don't stop doping, but knowingly punish innocent people.' Advertisement Fitzgerald said via email at the same time that: 'Anyone who claims there is a straightforward solution to this issue is not being honest. This is a complex and nuanced area of anti-doping in which WADA always strives to strike the right balance for the good of athletes and clean sport.' At a Sports Resolutions conference in March, Tygart, who was a key figure in exposing the Lance Armstrong doping operation, praised the ITIA for its handling of the Sinner and Świątek cases, because of how due process was followed. Where innocent explanations are more likely, Tygart would like to see cases for trace amounts of certain substances reported initially as atypical findings. The athletes should then be properly investigated, but the starting point would be different from the current protocol. At the moment, positive tests involving trace amounts — like those in these two cases — are reported as adverse analytical findings, which, for purposes of strict liability, shifts the burden to the athlete to have to prove their innocence, with a potential four-year ban the starting point for punishment. As Sinner and Świątek have discovered, a positive test is, in some people's eyes, a permanent stain on an athlete's reputation, irrespective of whether it was deemed to have been intentional doping. This article originally appeared in The Athletic. Sports Business, Tennis, Women's Tennis 2025 The Athletic Media Company

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store