Inside the Chaos: Constance Marten and Mark Gordon’s Trials Were Unlike Anything the UK Has Seen
After covering countless court cases, I can say with certainty: the trials of Constance Marten and Mark Gordon were truly without precedent. Not just for the seriousness of the charges — including the death of their newborn baby, Victoria — but for the chaotic, often surreal behavior the couple displayed inside and outside the courtroom.
Their bond was unshakable. Gordon once told police he was “obsessed” with Marten, claiming he would do anything for her. During their retrial, he described her in court as his “noble” and “beautiful” wife — calling their relationship “love.” Whenever they were brought up from the cells, Marten’s face would light up, and she would blow him kisses. They hugged, held hands, exchanged “I love yous,” and looked visibly comforted by each other’s presence — even as they stood trial for manslaughter.
But behind that affection was a courtroom unraveling at the seams.
Repeated Disruptions and Legal Sabotage
From the very start of the legal proceedings in early 2024, Marten and Gordon disrupted the process repeatedly. They changed legal teams frequently, with Marten going through a staggering 14 barristers during the two-year period. Some were sacked, others walked away and at times, neither had legal representation.
At one point, Gordon even opted to represent himself, despite having no formal legal training. The result was prolonged delays, disjointed arguments, and long courtroom rants that pushed proceedings far past schedule. Judge Mark Lucraft KC became visibly frustrated, at one point remarking, “Do you want me to adjourn for three years while you do a law degree?”
The couple’s behavior worsened as the retrial continued. They frequently refused to appear in court, citing illness, stress, or mistreatment — only to be found medically fit. Marten once stayed away, claiming severe tooth pain, yet refused the treatment offered. On another day, Gordon arrived in a prison-issued escape suit after his trousers were lost in transit, delaying the session again.
Judge Lucraft didn’t mince words: “This trial has had so many delays, and quite frankly, it is an insult to this court and to the jury.”
A Moment That Nearly Collapsed the Trial
One of the most explosive moments came when Marten blurted out in front of the jury that Gordon had a previous rape conviction — something the court had deliberately shielded from jurors under a reporting restriction.
Judge Lucraft immediately cleared the jury from the courtroom. “This is plainly a deliberate attempt to sabotage the trial,” he said. The prosecution echoed that sentiment, describing it as “a wrecking ball” thrown into the justice process.
Despite the outburst, the retrial continued. Gordon pleaded with the judge not to be retried separately: “I can’t do another year in prison,” he said, before declaring his readiness to proceed only to later ask for more time, access to law books, and equipment used by barristers.
A Love Story Intertwined with Tragedy
In the courtroom, their bond remained visibly strong. When Gordon cross-examined Marten — a rare and deeply personal legal moment he asked tender questions:
“Who was hands-on and gentle with the children?”
“Both of us,” Marten replied. “Especially you.”
When Marten spoke about their other four children (all removed from their care), she broke down in tears. Gordon responded gently: “Alright, babes.”
But when the prosecution questioned her, her tone changed bristling with defiance and cutting short her time on the stand.
The Verdict and Final Outbursts
When the jury finally delivered its verdict guilty of gross negligence manslaughter for both the couple refused to stand. Marten crossed her arms, Gordon leaned back and shut his eyes.
Then came the final act of defiance.
“It’s a scam,” Marten shouted.
“It was an unfair trial,” Gordon added.
Yet, as they were led away, Gordon turned to thank a court usher, saying: “It’s been a pleasure.”
A Relationship That Overpowered Reality
Throughout the proceedings, their emotional bond appeared to blind them to the gravity of the charges. Their affection for each other while at times moving was also deeply detached from the tragic reality of why they were there: the death of their baby daughter, Victoria.
The court and the jury saw through the disruption, the theatrics, and the manipulation. In the end, what sealed their fate wasn’t simply legal argument or forensic detail. It was the undeniable truth that their chaotic and dangerous choices led to the preventable death of their child.
