Therefore; logically; if there was some diddling between the 'marriage' and the 'annulment'; there'd be some FORNICATION to be forgiven!
That would seem to mean these were never married, and as about 50,000 annulments per year have been granted in the U.S, alone (including for such reasons as defective consent*), that would mean perhaps 50,000 RCs do not have valid marriages.
However, unlike suspected heretics in 13th century Inquisitions, besides her criteria allowing marriages in Scripture to be considered invalid, Rome rules that even if couples are later judged to be such, yet
“Marriage enjoys the favour of law. Consequently, in doubt the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven." (Canon 1060, Code of Canon Law; http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P3U.HTM)
Note also that " A valid marriage between baptised persons is said to be merely ratified, if it is not consummated." (Can. 1061 §1)
*68% of annulments today [dated] are granted because of "defective consent," which involves at least one of the parties not having sufficient knowledge or maturity to know what was involved in marriage. The ingenuity of judges in confidently asserting that such knowledge or maturity was lacking is amazing. Vasoli says that it is done by substituting "junk psychology" for sound psychology and psychiatry. He quotes the statement of one matrimonial judge: "There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid." (www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/28_Annulments.pdf)
BINGO.....in your world yes.....in the Catholic Church..NO