GUEST ENTRY by RITANITA!
July 1, 2008
Dear Blog Readers,
I want to give you all a warning. Don't ever become depressed. Don't go to see your doctor and say you are depressed. Don't ever take medication if you are depressed. You've had a baby and are suffering from postpartum depression? Don't give a hint of it to anyone. Most of all don't let your husband know if you are depressed. Should you come up dead, your murderer just may try the "suicide" theory.
Lana Clarkson had been depressed. She'd suffered a major setback in her career when she broke both wrists and couldn't go on auditions. By the time she died of an intra-oral gunshot wound on February 3, 2002 at the crumbling Alhambra Castle of media mogul Phil Spector, she was feeling a lot better. She'd gotten six new pairs of shoes for her new job at the House of Blues. Her wrists were weak, but healed. She was working on her career.
In her closing argument to the jury, attorney Linda Kenny-Baden claimed that Lana had committed "accidental suicide" due to her depression. There was no way, she stated, that Mr. Spector, with his history of drunken gun-slinging with women alone with him, locked in his house, would have harmed a flea. Oh, and Adriano de Sousa's excellent understanding of the English language made it impossible to believe that he'd heard Spector, gun in hand, say, "I think I killed somebody."
Nope, Lana was depressed and she committed suicide.
Even earlier, we have a Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin housewife by the name of Julie Jensen. She died in her bed on December 3, 1998. Her husband, Mark Jensen who went on trial in January 2008 claimed that his wife had come from an unfortunate family background of alcoholism, suicide, and depression. He claimed that Julie had suffered from bouts of major depression over the years. Even worse, he claimed that his wife plotted her suicide to frame him for murder.
Jensen's attorney Craig Albee fought mightily for the jury to overlook some "slight imperfections" in his client's character. The jury was to forget about all the pornographic photographs he left around the house to torment his wife. They were to ignore the thousands of penis pictures on his computer. They were to overlook the affair with Kelly LaBonte, his current wife.
No way did he feed his wife ethylene glycol. She was depressed and vindictive; she put the spotlight on her husband in her letter. She committed suicide so her husband could go to prison for life and Kelly could raise her children.
Next on the list of "depressed" women we have Rachel Entwistle. Well, perhaps she was depressed. Defense attorney Elliot Weinstein shocked the viewing audience in his closing arguments by stating that she was possibly depressed and killed her infant child and herself. It's possible she told her best friend Joanna Gately that she was depressed.
Of course, Mr. Weinstein wanted the jury to ignore a few facts. Neil was broke but was on a tremendous spending spree with an expensive house and BMW. He never spent cash; he just maxed out his credit cards. The jury was to ignore his kinky exploits and obvious fraud using the internet. The jury was to forget about the wallet and wedding ring tossed in the trash basket of the home. Heaven forbid any juror thought that Rachel had possibly told Joanna about her disillusionment with a husband who had lied to her throughout their marriage.
No way, Jose! Rachel was depressed and committed suicide.
Now we have another case in the same courthouse in Boston. 34-year-old James Keown is waiting for his fate to be decided by a jury. His defense? His wife, Julie was depressed because she had maxed out her credit cards and drank an ethylene glycol laced Gatorade to commit suicide.
Seems we've come full circle today. Will this jury buy the "she-committed-suicide-because-she-was-depressed" theory, or will they look to the lying, deceptive husband?
Let's hope today ends the waiting on this defense and we can move on back to the Spector case. Will his new attorney, Doron Weinberg be able to successfully foist the depressed woman defense theory on a second jury?
I hope not. Perhaps I've been a bit facetious here, but the fact remains that blaming depression as a cause for suicide in the face of obvious murder is getting tired at this point. For me, "I think I killed somebody." does the trick.
Sincerely,
ritanita
Thanks ritanita!
Showing posts with label Rachel Entwistle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rachel Entwistle. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Friday, June 27, 2008
The Entwistle Notebook
On one side of the notebook, he professes love for his "Orange Rose" and "my Lilly." On the other side, he drafted letters, looking to sell the story of their deaths to the highest bidder.
Entwistle had the notebook with him when he was arrested in London three weeks after the slayings. In it, he calls his wife his "soul-mate" and "very best friend." "As a husband, I could never dream for more."
He wrote of the pain of losing his wife and daughter in what "sounds" like a suicide note - "I miss my wife and daughter so much it feels like I am completely empty inside.”
"The void grows larger each day and I fear a lifetime of this can only bring more pain. I need to be with them again, my Orange Rose and my Lilly."
On the other side of the notebook, he drafted two letters to editors.
He described himself as a "close friend and confidante" of Entwistle, and says he wants to "tell his side of the story."
"What's of interest to us is what price you would be willing to pay for exclusive rights to the full story."
Yesterday, Priscilla said to a packed courtroom, "Suffering does not begin to describe what we have been enduring without our beloved Rachel and Lillian.”
"I have lost two generations of my family."
Entwistle had the notebook with him when he was arrested in London three weeks after the slayings. In it, he calls his wife his "soul-mate" and "very best friend." "As a husband, I could never dream for more."
He wrote of the pain of losing his wife and daughter in what "sounds" like a suicide note - "I miss my wife and daughter so much it feels like I am completely empty inside.”
"The void grows larger each day and I fear a lifetime of this can only bring more pain. I need to be with them again, my Orange Rose and my Lilly."
On the other side of the notebook, he drafted two letters to editors.
He described himself as a "close friend and confidante" of Entwistle, and says he wants to "tell his side of the story."
"What's of interest to us is what price you would be willing to pay for exclusive rights to the full story."
Yesterday, Priscilla said to a packed courtroom, "Suffering does not begin to describe what we have been enduring without our beloved Rachel and Lillian.”
"I have lost two generations of my family."
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Entwistle Sentencing
Entwistle doesn’t look so smug today.
Fabbri wants mandatory life consecutively.
3-5 years on lesser.
Priscilla Matterrazzo speaks and calls Neil, "low and despicable" for trying to blame Rachel for suicide.
Joe talks of the betrayal by Neil.
Jeremy, Rachel’s brother says they will never get to hear Lilly’s first word or take her first step.
ritanita says - Short and sweet. This family is all class.
Entwistle does not speak.
Kottmyer says 1st degree murder in Boston means life sentence with no parole. She basically says the consecutive sentences are redundant, so they run concurrent
Lesser charges, 10 years probation
Entwistle will not be allowed to profit from selling his story to any media outlets.
CNN.Crime
Fabbri wants mandatory life consecutively.
3-5 years on lesser.
Priscilla Matterrazzo speaks and calls Neil, "low and despicable" for trying to blame Rachel for suicide.
Joe talks of the betrayal by Neil.
Jeremy, Rachel’s brother says they will never get to hear Lilly’s first word or take her first step.
ritanita says - Short and sweet. This family is all class.
Entwistle does not speak.
Kottmyer says 1st degree murder in Boston means life sentence with no parole. She basically says the consecutive sentences are redundant, so they run concurrent
Lesser charges, 10 years probation
Entwistle will not be allowed to profit from selling his story to any media outlets.
CNN.Crime
Entwistle's Parents Statements On Verdict
~ Clifford and Yvonne
Entwistle
Yvonne Entwistle
“We know that our son Neil is innocent and we are devastated to learn that the evidence points to Rachel murdering our grandchild and then committing suicide.
I knew Rachel was depressed. Our son will now go to jail for loving, honoring, and protecting his wife’s memory.”
Clifford Entwistle
“From the moment Matterazzo’s spokesman Joe Flaherty stated, and I quote, “All we need now is the right jury pool.” We knew Neil would not receive a fair trial.
We will continue to fight for our innocent son with the hope that, one day justice will prevail. And our little granddaughter Lilly, may rest in peace.
We would like to take this opportunity to thank Elliot Weinstein and Stephanie Page and their defense team for the dedication and the massive effort they have applied to this case.
We are not making any further statements at this time and ask that you refer any queries to our lawyer in Boston, Peter Parker.”
Well, they're sure towing the Weinstein/Page line!
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Entwistle Verdict Is In!!!!
~Stephanie Page consoles Entwistle after his first degree guilty verdicts are read.
Updated3!
Jury Clock, 11:12:24 and stopped!
Intrepid says: What was the adage about jury deliberations usually lasting as many hours as there were days of testimony? Was it one hour for one day? I think I remember that correctly.
If that's correct, then there should be a verdict some time mid-afternoon. That's what I'm shooting for.
Stay tuned!!!!!
Update!
Good God! Neil is smiling as he enters the courtroom!
Murder first degree…guilty
Murder first degree…guilty
Weapon…guilty
Ammo…guilty
2nd update!!
Sprocket here: Donchais is on pins and needles waiting for the verdict.
I think it's guilty on first.
Neil comes into the room with a slight smile on his face.
It's like he is having a hard time keeping from smiling. He purses his lips together. Yep. He is having a hard time keeping from smiling!
Entwistles eyes wander around the room.
Guilty of Murder of first degree of Rachael Entwistle.
Guilty of Murder of first degree of Lillian Entwistle.
Guilty of poessing a firearm.
Guilty of poessing amunition.
So say you foreperson.
Yes.
So say you members of the jury.
Yes.
Even with the verdict read, that same expression, trying not to smile. Hie eyes still wander. OMG! Look at his mother.
Sentencing tomorrow at 10 am.
3rd Update!
ritanita brings us this tidbit from Fox News:Middlesex District Attorney Gerry Leone, members of the Middlesex County prosecution team, and family and friends of Rachel and Lillian Entwistle will hold a press conference today at 4:15 to discuss today's verdict in the case of Commonwealth vs. Neil Entwistle. The press conference will be held at 4:15 p.m.
CNN.Crime
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Neil Entwistle Murder Trial: Verdict Watch Day One
Updated!
The jury in the Neil Enwistle case went home today at 4:20 pm without reaching a verdict. While watching the live camera we were able to see the lovely Beth Karas come in and out of camera view for a few moments. The Judge instructs the jurors on not reading any articles, etc., as well as not deliberating until they return tomorrow and that's it. We hear "Court's in recess" and the gallery slowly exits the courtroom. Although the sound has been cut, we still see a few images in the courtroom of people leaving. And then the camera pans to the ceiling.
Verdict watch begins tomorrow at 9 am ET.
Update: 6:00 pm
A short note from one of our best trial watchers, ritanita:
Well, today we learned to keep an eye on the feed that shows the ceiling. Today it was the Fox station.
For those who didn't catch the action, the jury asked for the computer log-in records for January 20th.
A quick trip over to Joe Dwinell's blog at the Boston Herald site and I find out that the jury also asked for the Starbuck's receipt that Weinstein referred to in his closing statements.
I borrowed this from the Boston Herald to explain the significance of that receipt.
Thanks ritanita!
CNN.Crime
The jury in the Neil Enwistle case went home today at 4:20 pm without reaching a verdict. While watching the live camera we were able to see the lovely Beth Karas come in and out of camera view for a few moments. The Judge instructs the jurors on not reading any articles, etc., as well as not deliberating until they return tomorrow and that's it. We hear "Court's in recess" and the gallery slowly exits the courtroom. Although the sound has been cut, we still see a few images in the courtroom of people leaving. And then the camera pans to the ceiling.
Verdict watch begins tomorrow at 9 am ET.
Update: 6:00 pm
A short note from one of our best trial watchers, ritanita:
Well, today we learned to keep an eye on the feed that shows the ceiling. Today it was the Fox station.
For those who didn't catch the action, the jury asked for the computer log-in records for January 20th.
A quick trip over to Joe Dwinell's blog at the Boston Herald site and I find out that the jury also asked for the Starbuck's receipt that Weinstein referred to in his closing statements.
I borrowed this from the Boston Herald to explain the significance of that receipt.
- Weinstein said Neil stopped for two “lattes” at Starbucks Jan. 20 and paid $7.04 intending to bring one home for his wife.
- Fabbri said the coffee run to Starbucks was the day before and the receipt will prove it.
Thanks ritanita!
CNN.Crime
Entwistle Verdict Watch
They have waited almost 2-1/2 years for justice; I guess I can wait a little longer too.
With juror instructions running until 3:30 EST, Judge Diane Kottmyer appointed Juror #4 as the foreperson and then adjourned court for the day. The jury begins deliberations this morning.
Yesterday, after listening to another taped phone call between Sgt. Manning and Neil Entwistle, Michael Fabbri rested the case for the prosecution.
Elliot Weinstein then took to his feet and announced the defense rests! Well, what did they really have to work with?
During closing arguments – the defense went first – Weinstein claimed, "Everything Neil did after finding the bodies was because he loved them.”
Yup, you heard that right! He didn’t call 911, he didn’t call Priscilla and Joe, he fled to England – because he loved them!
Weinstein, standing at the podium reading his closing, showed little emotion or conviction. His closing was based solely on Rachel killing Lillian and then herself.
Fabbri listened to the entire defense closing with an incredulous look on his face.
Weinstein’s theory is that Rachel positioned Lillian against her so that the baby would be over her heart. When she didn’t kill herself with that shot, shot again and hit herself in the forehead.
Entwistle on the other hand, was portrayed as the loving, caring husband and father. In this first-time floated theory, Weinstein said, “He was protecting Rachel’s honor. He wasn’t going to tell Manning he returned the gun to Carver. Neil, committed to not betraying Rachel’s memory.”
It’s an age-old tactic, but how sad for Rachel’s family and friends to endure listening to the “smear the victim” fairy tale woven by the defense.
Michael Fabbri, animatedly laid out, point-by-point, all the red herrings in the defense’s closing. He dramatically picked up the .22 caliber handgun and physically tried to enact how Rachel might have shot herself in the head…much as ritanita did in her entry on Saturday. Pretty much impossible.
He implored the jury to pay particular attention to the notepad found on the defendant that states Entwistle was willing to sell his story, “to the highest bidder.”
The photos, the tapes, and the weapon…it’s all in the jury’s hands now.
Lilly waits, Rachel waits, Priscilla & Joe wait…we all wait for justice.
With juror instructions running until 3:30 EST, Judge Diane Kottmyer appointed Juror #4 as the foreperson and then adjourned court for the day. The jury begins deliberations this morning.
Yesterday, after listening to another taped phone call between Sgt. Manning and Neil Entwistle, Michael Fabbri rested the case for the prosecution.
Elliot Weinstein then took to his feet and announced the defense rests! Well, what did they really have to work with?
During closing arguments – the defense went first – Weinstein claimed, "Everything Neil did after finding the bodies was because he loved them.”
Yup, you heard that right! He didn’t call 911, he didn’t call Priscilla and Joe, he fled to England – because he loved them!
Weinstein, standing at the podium reading his closing, showed little emotion or conviction. His closing was based solely on Rachel killing Lillian and then herself.
Fabbri listened to the entire defense closing with an incredulous look on his face.
Weinstein’s theory is that Rachel positioned Lillian against her so that the baby would be over her heart. When she didn’t kill herself with that shot, shot again and hit herself in the forehead.
Entwistle on the other hand, was portrayed as the loving, caring husband and father. In this first-time floated theory, Weinstein said, “He was protecting Rachel’s honor. He wasn’t going to tell Manning he returned the gun to Carver. Neil, committed to not betraying Rachel’s memory.”
It’s an age-old tactic, but how sad for Rachel’s family and friends to endure listening to the “smear the victim” fairy tale woven by the defense.
Michael Fabbri, animatedly laid out, point-by-point, all the red herrings in the defense’s closing. He dramatically picked up the .22 caliber handgun and physically tried to enact how Rachel might have shot herself in the head…much as ritanita did in her entry on Saturday. Pretty much impossible.
He implored the jury to pay particular attention to the notepad found on the defendant that states Entwistle was willing to sell his story, “to the highest bidder.”
The photos, the tapes, and the weapon…it’s all in the jury’s hands now.
Lilly waits, Rachel waits, Priscilla & Joe wait…we all wait for justice.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Entwistle Murder Trial – Closing Arguments
Judge: Now that the evidence of the case is completed, it's time for closing arguments. Closing argument is not evidence. It's for the attorneys to assert in argument what has happened in the case. If your memory is different you should disregard what the attorney says.
If they refer to their own feelings or thoughts, you must disregard that.
You may not take notes during closing arguments except, if one or both attorneys refer to an exhibit and the context of the argument that is made, you may write the exhibit number down so that you can evaluate it in the jury room, you may do so. With that, we'll being with the closing arguments.
Closing Argument: Elliot Weinstein for the defense.
Weinstein begins by quoting Spitz and Fisher about homicide vs. suicide. Everything Neil did after finding the bodies was because he loved them. The prosecution said it was because he visited websites. Lots of people do that.
(Speaking of the porn & adult sites) How many millions of people visit these sites each day? There's no motive, no motive to kill the woman that he shared a loving relationship. Why would he do that? Because he and Rachel had some debt? Because their Paypal account wasn't paying out? There was no insurance on Rachel and Lillian.
There is no evidence of insurance. Neil was a talented, well-experienced computer engineer. Debt was not a motive.
He mentions that if not Neil, “who.” Others’ alibis worked out. But things are not always as they seem.
He discusses how scientists and investigations are supposed to be open-minded. Dygan and other investigators left the house with Entwistle’s name already filled in. Filters only let in what you are seeking. Weinstein is again going over that the crime scene investigators are supposed to be neutral. Mr. Soares and Ms. Dygan unintentionally went in with the idea Neil was the suspect. They went in with the idea it was a murder. They did not consider it was a suicide.
Weinstein shows picture of bodies in the bed. The photograph shows the bodies were moved before the picture was taken. Neil saw the gun on the sheet, moved the bodies, to protect them.
Yeah, right!
Neil left the US because he had no one left there for him.
Human emotions are not predictable. Manning even says on the tape that “things just happen.” He goes on to say “who can say any reaction is appropriate or inappropriate.” Neil acted the way he acted. He was protecting Rachel’s honor. He wasn’t going to tell Manning he returned the gun to Carver. Neil, committed to not betraying Rachel’s memory, couldn’t answer Manning’s questions.
When Manning accused him, Neil never considered “what he’d be getting.” He states Neil’s reaction.
He couldn’t call 911 and have the police find Joe’s revolver on the bed.
Weinstein reads the duty of the pathologist is to prove the deaths are consistent with how the investigators report. He quotes again from Spitzer and Fisher.
GSR was found on Rachel’s hands. Dygan says that it only says it proves Rachel was in the room when the gun was shot. He goes on to point at Zane’s shortcomings.
Weinstein’s theory is that Rachel positioned Lillian against her so that the baby would be over her heart. When she didn’t kill herself with that shot, shot again and hit herself in the forehead.
Weinstein again stresses the gunshot residue on both of her hands. There is no evidence that Rachel did not fire the gun. They never tested for GSR on wrists, sleeves, sheet. It they were positive, it might be positive evidence she did not fire the gun, but they didn’t.
GSR requires a scanning electron microscope. He goes on to all the places they could have tested for GSR and didn't.
They could have test fired the 22 to measure GSR cloud. Therefore, reasonable doubt remains.
The investigators did not consider suicide and didn’t do the GSR tests.
Neil arrived home 11:00 - 11:30. Later he said he didn’t remember exactly why he remembers.
At 11:30, Neil was at Starbucks. It proves he bought 2 lattes to share with Rachel. He didn’t return to shoot her. He went to the computer first and checked for job information. (Indicating Neil came back at 12ish.)
He shows the picture of Lillian and says that Neil couldn’t have looked at that picture on his computer and shot his family.
Suicide is considered by many to be shameful. He attributes the statistics from DiMaio’s book to Dr. Zane and states, among other things, that 92% of women who commit suicide do so with a handgun.
Neil found Rachel and Lillian dead. He saw the 22 and knew what happened. He had to get the 22 back to Carver, and he didn't call the police because he couldn't tell him what they did. He wasn't thinking rationally. How could he?
He couldn't tell Pricilla and Joe what Rachel did. How could he? He had to be with his family.
The jury has to decide for themselves if the prosecution proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Weinstein says Neil wasn’t thinking rationally. He reiterates how he couldn’t bear tarnishing Rachel’s memory and returned the gun to Carver. He went home to his family, as he had nobody in the US.
Reasonable doubt requires and demands you find Neil not guilty.
Other evidence: Joanna Gately and her sister were supposed to be at the house for dinner at 5PM and arrived two hours late. The police entered the house and discovered nothing unusual. Joanna called Priscilla. She and her sister decided to stay in the car during the entire cold night. Weinstein opines that perhaps Rachel confided something to her best friend that Rachel hadn’t shared with her own family. That would explain Joanna’s apprehension.
At no time, did anyone, while searching for the family call Neil’s family to see if they knew where the family was. No one voiced any suspicions about Neil.
It’s not the defense’s burden to provide evidence of Rachel’s state of mind.
Weinstein points out that the investigators should have contacted Rachel’s doctors to discover if she was depressed.
Weinstein outlines Neil’s trip to Logan and on to England. It was not planned. He didn’t have a ticket, he had to get money.
His statement that he needed to be with his family was true.
The investigation wasn’t complete. There were failures to investigate. Why didn’t anyone tell the ME about the GSR testing?
Why no GSR testing on the fitted sheet?
Why didn’t the detectives go beyond 6-inch test for patterns of GSR?
They had the weapon since January 2006 and denied themselves, the ME, and the jury this information.
The “Neil did it filters” prevented a full investigation.
DNA sample from the muzzle wasn’t tested as to what it was. It could have been transfer DNA. Since there was only one swab, can’t really say what part of the gun it was on, the muzzle, or the barrel.
The “brown gel” wasn’t tested as to what it was.
Rachel was a potential DNA contributor on the black gun case.
Investigators didn’t investigate vaporous gunshot residue on pillowcase.
He goes on to mention other tests that weren’t done.
Her left hand was first seen under a pillow. Why didn’t they investigate? The position of the bodies in the photograph were not it the same position in which they were shot. Weinstein goes on to give examples of what should have been further investigated.
Addressing internet activity, Weinstein says it’s not a reason or motive to commit murder. The world has changed.
Financial difficulties. There was no evidence of financial problems. He mentions Rachel’s college debt, car, house.
He insinuates Rachel did the finances and searched for “kill” sites. He indicates the ENT account was the family account.
January 9, 2006 - Weinstein mentions the round-trip-flight for two adults from Manchester. He wanted his family to visit them.
Weinstein goes back to Dr. Zane and his lack of interest in GSR. His loyalty didn’t go to medical science; to the experts (that were quoted)... it didn’t go to a search for the truth.
We are now back to Neil struggling and grappling with this horrendous reality. He says we can’t understand the horror, the trauma of the situation. It was “trance-like.”
Weinstein discusses the funeral. Neil knew he couldn’t attend because he needed to protect Rachel’s memory. He went to the place he first proposed to Rachel.
If Neil did this, why would he leave his laptop behind? Why travel so openly to Carver?
Neil didn’t have a better story and made contradictory statements to friends? Why didn’t he have money, plane ticket, motive? Neil did not do this.
All of Neil's actions are excused because he had no motive for these killings. It may be very difficult for you to consider Rachel as a suicide, but you must. You must look at what was investigated and what was not investigated.
The deaths are an unimaginable tragedy and no one can bring them back. It’s a nightmare for everyone involved. The jury should not compound this tragedy.
Find Neil Entwistle not guilty.
Michael Fabbri for the prosecution
We agree that the burden is on the Commonwealth and you are duty bound to acquit the defendant if we didn’t prove the case.
You heard evidence that wasn’t in the courtroom.
Mr. Spitz and DiMaio weren’t in this courtroom.
We agree do not always appear as they are.
You heard a lot of testimony of the loving care Mr. Entwistle had for his family.
That don’t want you to think about and the evidence about the interview that never happened, but it was never set up.
He said it was canceled, but he never told his wife. What does that say about his loving and caring?
You heard about GSR on Rachel’s hands. 4 particles. GSR can be transferred easily. After Neil shot them and moved the bodies.
GSR is a red herring.
Let’s talk about this suicide. Is there any evidence that she wanted to commit suicide? She has a baby, a house, her family, and friends.
Because they couldn’t have sex in the Carver house?
The whole concept of shooting through another person makes no sense.
She’s holding the baby, through herself and there is no pain? It makes no sense.
Then hold the gun and shoot herself in the head? The photos would look very different. It’s another red herring.
Let’s look at the why. That a husband would murder his wife and child? It’s hard to look at it.
Neil Entwistle who claims to be the deep and loving husband and father. January 4th Neil is posting on Adult Friend Finder. “I’m looking for more fun in the bedroom?” What does that say about a loving husband?
You have this notepad where he explains his loss of Lillian and Rachel after several re-write. On the back you will see he wants to sell his story to the highest bidder. 2 weeks after finding the bodies of his wife and daughter.
Read the other story in here about looking up an old female friend.
He had no job, he was failing financially. When he talked to Sgt. Manning about suicide, he was talking about himself.
When they were at the Carver house on the 16th. They are trying to say Rachel did the searches for half priced escorts, violent death, eBay. She was in the house playing with Lilly and Priscilla.
January 19th the last day anyone spoke to Rachel. Priscilla, Joanna Gately.
Friday morning the defendant gets up. Leaves Rachel and Lilly. He decided enough is enough. Instead of going on that interview, he said he went on errands. He drove to Carver and got the gun.
When considering suicide, handle the gun. Try to configure the suicide if you can. The gun had Mr. Entwistle’s DNA all over it.
I suggest that Rachel didn’t use firearms. I doubt she even knew had to load it. But he did!
Rachel’s DNA is in and on that muzzle. You heard Trooper Walsh on back splatter. That’s how Rachel’s DNA got there.
He conveniently told Manning that he left the garage door open.
I got back, what have they been doing the last 2 hours. What does that tell you about how loving and caring?
He shoots Rachel first, shoots Lillian. The crying and screaming coming out of Lilly, he could not face it. That’s why he lays them out, puts the pillow, and covered them. He closed them off. He closed the door to the hose and walks out. He closes them off.
He didn’t even come back for the funeral. Talk about something incomprehensible.
That home, the belonging, the car, the wife the child…I have no interest. What does that tell you about the relationship he had with Rachel and Lillian.
He drives to the airport. Watch the videos. He's in terminal E and B walking around. Now he doesn’t know what to do. He drove and got gas. He leaves the car and the keys and closes them out again.
He tells Manning, I had to go home and be with my family. Why did he tell his friends another story?
Why did he tell Manning he saw blood bubbling out of Lilly’s mouth? Yet he doesn’t call 911.
He said he didn’t call because he didn’t have a cell phone. It didn’t take him long to get this cell phone in England.
He told his friends a different story that he called the police after finding the bodies.
The wallet with the ring, inscribed, “Always my orange rose, a little US money, some receipts is in a waste basket. Closing them off again.
The bodies and the scene showed the police the way to go. They turned over all the stones.
Entwistle asked Dash, is there another way to get off the platform. The bodies and evidence led all the way back to that platform and Mr. Entwistle.
This is not a murder suicide, this is a homicide. Put the Commonwealth to the test. We respectfully ask that you come back with a guilty verdict. Thank you.
Well, after the jury is given the instructions, we are officially on verdict watch.
Thank you so much ritanita, for all your help!
If they refer to their own feelings or thoughts, you must disregard that.
You may not take notes during closing arguments except, if one or both attorneys refer to an exhibit and the context of the argument that is made, you may write the exhibit number down so that you can evaluate it in the jury room, you may do so. With that, we'll being with the closing arguments.
Closing Argument: Elliot Weinstein for the defense.
Weinstein begins by quoting Spitz and Fisher about homicide vs. suicide. Everything Neil did after finding the bodies was because he loved them. The prosecution said it was because he visited websites. Lots of people do that.
(Speaking of the porn & adult sites) How many millions of people visit these sites each day? There's no motive, no motive to kill the woman that he shared a loving relationship. Why would he do that? Because he and Rachel had some debt? Because their Paypal account wasn't paying out? There was no insurance on Rachel and Lillian.
There is no evidence of insurance. Neil was a talented, well-experienced computer engineer. Debt was not a motive.
He mentions that if not Neil, “who.” Others’ alibis worked out. But things are not always as they seem.
He discusses how scientists and investigations are supposed to be open-minded. Dygan and other investigators left the house with Entwistle’s name already filled in. Filters only let in what you are seeking. Weinstein is again going over that the crime scene investigators are supposed to be neutral. Mr. Soares and Ms. Dygan unintentionally went in with the idea Neil was the suspect. They went in with the idea it was a murder. They did not consider it was a suicide.
Weinstein shows picture of bodies in the bed. The photograph shows the bodies were moved before the picture was taken. Neil saw the gun on the sheet, moved the bodies, to protect them.
Yeah, right!
Neil left the US because he had no one left there for him.
Human emotions are not predictable. Manning even says on the tape that “things just happen.” He goes on to say “who can say any reaction is appropriate or inappropriate.” Neil acted the way he acted. He was protecting Rachel’s honor. He wasn’t going to tell Manning he returned the gun to Carver. Neil, committed to not betraying Rachel’s memory, couldn’t answer Manning’s questions.
When Manning accused him, Neil never considered “what he’d be getting.” He states Neil’s reaction.
He couldn’t call 911 and have the police find Joe’s revolver on the bed.
Weinstein reads the duty of the pathologist is to prove the deaths are consistent with how the investigators report. He quotes again from Spitzer and Fisher.
GSR was found on Rachel’s hands. Dygan says that it only says it proves Rachel was in the room when the gun was shot. He goes on to point at Zane’s shortcomings.
Weinstein’s theory is that Rachel positioned Lillian against her so that the baby would be over her heart. When she didn’t kill herself with that shot, shot again and hit herself in the forehead.
Weinstein again stresses the gunshot residue on both of her hands. There is no evidence that Rachel did not fire the gun. They never tested for GSR on wrists, sleeves, sheet. It they were positive, it might be positive evidence she did not fire the gun, but they didn’t.
GSR requires a scanning electron microscope. He goes on to all the places they could have tested for GSR and didn't.
They could have test fired the 22 to measure GSR cloud. Therefore, reasonable doubt remains.
The investigators did not consider suicide and didn’t do the GSR tests.
Neil arrived home 11:00 - 11:30. Later he said he didn’t remember exactly why he remembers.
At 11:30, Neil was at Starbucks. It proves he bought 2 lattes to share with Rachel. He didn’t return to shoot her. He went to the computer first and checked for job information. (Indicating Neil came back at 12ish.)
He shows the picture of Lillian and says that Neil couldn’t have looked at that picture on his computer and shot his family.
Suicide is considered by many to be shameful. He attributes the statistics from DiMaio’s book to Dr. Zane and states, among other things, that 92% of women who commit suicide do so with a handgun.
Neil found Rachel and Lillian dead. He saw the 22 and knew what happened. He had to get the 22 back to Carver, and he didn't call the police because he couldn't tell him what they did. He wasn't thinking rationally. How could he?
He couldn't tell Pricilla and Joe what Rachel did. How could he? He had to be with his family.
The jury has to decide for themselves if the prosecution proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Weinstein says Neil wasn’t thinking rationally. He reiterates how he couldn’t bear tarnishing Rachel’s memory and returned the gun to Carver. He went home to his family, as he had nobody in the US.
Reasonable doubt requires and demands you find Neil not guilty.
Other evidence: Joanna Gately and her sister were supposed to be at the house for dinner at 5PM and arrived two hours late. The police entered the house and discovered nothing unusual. Joanna called Priscilla. She and her sister decided to stay in the car during the entire cold night. Weinstein opines that perhaps Rachel confided something to her best friend that Rachel hadn’t shared with her own family. That would explain Joanna’s apprehension.
At no time, did anyone, while searching for the family call Neil’s family to see if they knew where the family was. No one voiced any suspicions about Neil.
It’s not the defense’s burden to provide evidence of Rachel’s state of mind.
Weinstein points out that the investigators should have contacted Rachel’s doctors to discover if she was depressed.
Weinstein outlines Neil’s trip to Logan and on to England. It was not planned. He didn’t have a ticket, he had to get money.
His statement that he needed to be with his family was true.
The investigation wasn’t complete. There were failures to investigate. Why didn’t anyone tell the ME about the GSR testing?
Why no GSR testing on the fitted sheet?
Why didn’t the detectives go beyond 6-inch test for patterns of GSR?
They had the weapon since January 2006 and denied themselves, the ME, and the jury this information.
The “Neil did it filters” prevented a full investigation.
DNA sample from the muzzle wasn’t tested as to what it was. It could have been transfer DNA. Since there was only one swab, can’t really say what part of the gun it was on, the muzzle, or the barrel.
The “brown gel” wasn’t tested as to what it was.
Rachel was a potential DNA contributor on the black gun case.
Investigators didn’t investigate vaporous gunshot residue on pillowcase.
He goes on to mention other tests that weren’t done.
Her left hand was first seen under a pillow. Why didn’t they investigate? The position of the bodies in the photograph were not it the same position in which they were shot. Weinstein goes on to give examples of what should have been further investigated.
Addressing internet activity, Weinstein says it’s not a reason or motive to commit murder. The world has changed.
Financial difficulties. There was no evidence of financial problems. He mentions Rachel’s college debt, car, house.
He insinuates Rachel did the finances and searched for “kill” sites. He indicates the ENT account was the family account.
January 9, 2006 - Weinstein mentions the round-trip-flight for two adults from Manchester. He wanted his family to visit them.
Weinstein goes back to Dr. Zane and his lack of interest in GSR. His loyalty didn’t go to medical science; to the experts (that were quoted)... it didn’t go to a search for the truth.
We are now back to Neil struggling and grappling with this horrendous reality. He says we can’t understand the horror, the trauma of the situation. It was “trance-like.”
Weinstein discusses the funeral. Neil knew he couldn’t attend because he needed to protect Rachel’s memory. He went to the place he first proposed to Rachel.
If Neil did this, why would he leave his laptop behind? Why travel so openly to Carver?
Neil didn’t have a better story and made contradictory statements to friends? Why didn’t he have money, plane ticket, motive? Neil did not do this.
All of Neil's actions are excused because he had no motive for these killings. It may be very difficult for you to consider Rachel as a suicide, but you must. You must look at what was investigated and what was not investigated.
The deaths are an unimaginable tragedy and no one can bring them back. It’s a nightmare for everyone involved. The jury should not compound this tragedy.
Find Neil Entwistle not guilty.
Michael Fabbri for the prosecution
We agree that the burden is on the Commonwealth and you are duty bound to acquit the defendant if we didn’t prove the case.
You heard evidence that wasn’t in the courtroom.
Mr. Spitz and DiMaio weren’t in this courtroom.
We agree do not always appear as they are.
You heard a lot of testimony of the loving care Mr. Entwistle had for his family.
That don’t want you to think about and the evidence about the interview that never happened, but it was never set up.
He said it was canceled, but he never told his wife. What does that say about his loving and caring?
You heard about GSR on Rachel’s hands. 4 particles. GSR can be transferred easily. After Neil shot them and moved the bodies.
GSR is a red herring.
Let’s talk about this suicide. Is there any evidence that she wanted to commit suicide? She has a baby, a house, her family, and friends.
Because they couldn’t have sex in the Carver house?
The whole concept of shooting through another person makes no sense.
She’s holding the baby, through herself and there is no pain? It makes no sense.
Then hold the gun and shoot herself in the head? The photos would look very different. It’s another red herring.
Let’s look at the why. That a husband would murder his wife and child? It’s hard to look at it.
Neil Entwistle who claims to be the deep and loving husband and father. January 4th Neil is posting on Adult Friend Finder. “I’m looking for more fun in the bedroom?” What does that say about a loving husband?
You have this notepad where he explains his loss of Lillian and Rachel after several re-write. On the back you will see he wants to sell his story to the highest bidder. 2 weeks after finding the bodies of his wife and daughter.
Read the other story in here about looking up an old female friend.
He had no job, he was failing financially. When he talked to Sgt. Manning about suicide, he was talking about himself.
When they were at the Carver house on the 16th. They are trying to say Rachel did the searches for half priced escorts, violent death, eBay. She was in the house playing with Lilly and Priscilla.
January 19th the last day anyone spoke to Rachel. Priscilla, Joanna Gately.
Friday morning the defendant gets up. Leaves Rachel and Lilly. He decided enough is enough. Instead of going on that interview, he said he went on errands. He drove to Carver and got the gun.
When considering suicide, handle the gun. Try to configure the suicide if you can. The gun had Mr. Entwistle’s DNA all over it.
I suggest that Rachel didn’t use firearms. I doubt she even knew had to load it. But he did!
Rachel’s DNA is in and on that muzzle. You heard Trooper Walsh on back splatter. That’s how Rachel’s DNA got there.
He conveniently told Manning that he left the garage door open.
I got back, what have they been doing the last 2 hours. What does that tell you about how loving and caring?
He shoots Rachel first, shoots Lillian. The crying and screaming coming out of Lilly, he could not face it. That’s why he lays them out, puts the pillow, and covered them. He closed them off. He closed the door to the hose and walks out. He closes them off.
He didn’t even come back for the funeral. Talk about something incomprehensible.
That home, the belonging, the car, the wife the child…I have no interest. What does that tell you about the relationship he had with Rachel and Lillian.
He drives to the airport. Watch the videos. He's in terminal E and B walking around. Now he doesn’t know what to do. He drove and got gas. He leaves the car and the keys and closes them out again.
He tells Manning, I had to go home and be with my family. Why did he tell his friends another story?
Why did he tell Manning he saw blood bubbling out of Lilly’s mouth? Yet he doesn’t call 911.
He said he didn’t call because he didn’t have a cell phone. It didn’t take him long to get this cell phone in England.
He told his friends a different story that he called the police after finding the bodies.
The wallet with the ring, inscribed, “Always my orange rose, a little US money, some receipts is in a waste basket. Closing them off again.
The bodies and the scene showed the police the way to go. They turned over all the stones.
Entwistle asked Dash, is there another way to get off the platform. The bodies and evidence led all the way back to that platform and Mr. Entwistle.
This is not a murder suicide, this is a homicide. Put the Commonwealth to the test. We respectfully ask that you come back with a guilty verdict. Thank you.
Well, after the jury is given the instructions, we are officially on verdict watch.
Thank you so much ritanita, for all your help!
Entwistle Murder Trial – Day 12
Sgt. Manning is back on the stand – we are getting ready to hear the second taped phone call…transcripts passed to the jury.
January 24th, 2006 call:
Thanks for calling. We go the results back from the ME today. This call is recorded, is that ok? Yeah, uh well no…
The cause and manner of death…both Rachel and Lilly died of a gunshot wound. We’re considering it a Foul Play death. Basically; a homicide. Ok.
May I ask you some questions about when you came up to the bedroom? Ok.
What did you see and remember? I walked in…I could see Rachel’s head. She was just there. I walked further in and saw Lilly. When I saw Lilly, I could see what had happened. There was blood around her mouth? Yeah and in it.
How did you determine she was shot? I saw a hole…a burn hold. You could see that from standing on the side of the bed? Yeah…but…yeah…no.
Did you move the arm? No. I pulled the covers over. I know I didn’t touch them.
How close did you get to the bed. I think my arms were on it. What did you notice about Rachel. I did…ummm.
How did you know she was dead? There was just no question about it.
You said you saw a bullet hole on Lilly. Yeah? What did you see on Rachel? Did you know she was shot? That’s what I thought. When you put it like that…
I saw it on Lilly…I don’t think that’s strange. Around the ribcage.
Did you see any trauma to Rachel. No. I didn’t…no it was all on Lillian. I don’t think….I think there was blood on the covers…on the sheets.
On the covers they were lying on or the ones you pulled up? Yeah, You think you remember? Yeah…ummm I don’t know if there was or not. I haven’t thought about it.
Were there any pillows around…Uhhhh I think maybe Rachel was on a pillow.
You saw nothing on Rachel….I ummm think uhh yeah, no.
We found the BMW…ok good.
I think there were some of the keys on the keychain that were to the House in Carver. Oh, you think so? I’m not certain, but I think so. Oh, ok.
I’m not 100% sure, but I think the Carver house keys are on it. Maybe for Hopkinton house. I don’t…no that’s not right.
On Friday, does the trash come on Friday? Yes, but we didn’t put it out. Does it come in the morning or afternoon? I don’t know…ummm I think it comes in the morning.
And you couldn’t get in Joe and Priscilla house? No, I couldn’t.
Did you use your credit cards on Friday? I first used it in the car park and then bought gas after.
You didn’t carry a lot of cash? No.
The Staples you talked about, is there a Starbucks? Umm yeah and a bookstore.
Was there a Homes Good stores? The have candle holders, furniture. Oh yeah. There’s a long line of stores.
You moved into the house on the 12th? It was a Thursday. Not many people knew you lived there? No.
There wasn’t any disagreements with friends or Joe and Priscilla? No, everything was good.
You remember the garage door being open? Uh, yeah.
There is nothing you can think of as to why this might have a occurred? No. I shouldn’t have happened.
Your right, it shouldn’t have happened. We are trying to look at every situation we can. Ok.
Joe’s guns. He has a bunch of guns in the house? Yeah.
You said the reason you want to Joe’s was to get a gun and hurt yourself? Yeah.
But you could get in the house? No.
Had you ever used the guns? I went with Joe once.
Did he have to teach you about the guns? Yeah. You don’t know about guns? No, I don’t really like them.
When you went, what guns did you fire? We fired a small handgun. Did you ever touch the handguns? Yeah, yes I touched the. You touched them at the house? No, at the gun club.
If I get Joe’s guns, would there be any reason for your prints on the guns? I wouldn’t…I don’t now how long they last. I would say no.
I’m going to ask a number of people, not just you. That seemed to upset you. Well, he may have cleaned them.
I think I had the rifle…
Part of the ME exam, we do toxicology. What’s that? They test for drugs and alcohol and it will take a couple of weeks.
Rachel and Lilly died from gunshot wounds. That’s definite? Yes. Oh, ok.
We are going to keep on the investigation. Ok. You have any questions at all? I…ummmm did it take long for them to die? I’m not a doctor, the ME could answer that. Well you know with Lilly and the state of the room…I don’t think they suffered.
What do you mean by the state of the room? Ummm, the blood and all.
I can check with the doctor. It’s almost like piece of mind? Ok, I’d appreciate that.
Oh yeah, there was one thing…do you know the time? The exact time they died? Yeah. This is not like TV. Yeah, that’s where I got that from. They can’t give the exact time. I talking about the timeframe you gave me.
It doesn’t comfort any way, it doesn’t change things.
No doctor could give you the exact time.
Have you talked with Priscilla and Joe? You spoke to them before you talked to me?
Are you staying there for a while? Now that I’m coming to terms with it…it’s the journey back that I’m not looking forward to. When can we begin the funeral arrangements? The bodies can be released now.
Where was Lilly born? In England.
Yeah, the bodies are ready to be released do you want the number to the ME’s office? Yes.
Manning gives him the number.
Anything else? No, I don’t…no…it’s shock. You don’t want to know what’s happened, but when you do you cn deal with that.
Have you told them? We’ll take care of that, I’ll tell them.
Will you be there for a while? Yeah, till we work it out. Work what out? The funeral arrangements.
In the weeks and months after the conversations, Manning and his colleagues did further investigation into the trial.
Cross - Weinstein
No questions
Yikes, no questions!
Long pause, bet the prosecution is going to rest!
Wonder what Weinstein is going to do.
THE PROSECUTION RESTS!
Judge and attorneys are going over jury instructions.
Judge will give standard instructions with function of judge, jury, evidence, credibility. She will also give limiting instructions modified from what was already said to the jury.
Fabbri suggests on p. 13, prior bad acts include "relevant to prove state of mind, intent, identity, etc.
The identity of person/persons operating the computer may be of issue. They should be expanded to include identity.
Judge: Pattern of conduct, yes. Prior bad acts?
Page: There has to be a finding that they believe it is the defendant.
Judge: Judge looks at case law. She will check on it to make sure it encompasses preparation, plan, identity.
Fabbri: Mainly concerned with identity.
Judge: Next, p. 18. She won't instruct on extreme abuse, atrocity. (The perpetrator tended to maximize suffering)
Bottom of p. 21: Is directly from the model instruction. If so, it is consistent with the instructions the judge sent.
Page: Objects under due process, it invades the province of the jury to exercise their own discretion.
Judge: The jury must find for the most serious crime the Commonwealth has proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Voluntariance is not an issue. Next instruction mentioned will not be given.
Judge Request from the defendant: the admissibility of material from a learned treatise. DiMaio, Spitz The witness acknowledged both treatises are reliable and relied on by those who practice in the field of pathology. The jury can consider those statements as evidence.
Defendant: Failure to test. There is no such thing as a Bowden instruction.
Page: There were normal procedures that weren't done by the ME. Not just a minor instance, the ME was never told about GSR. Page says it is a major, major factor.
Judge: There is no such instruction, not that it isn't an appropriate for argument.
Fabbri: Council must be able to argue the issue is inappropriate.
Consciousness of innocence vs. guilt. Fabbri states case law. It is in the model jury instructions. There may be innocent reasons the defendant did what he did and this may be mentioned to the jury. Consciousness of guilt will be included as per standard charge.
Page: P. 20 "Firearm is a dangerous weapon" invades the province of the jury. May argue after given to jury.
Page mentions another one which is about finding a defendant guilty even without intent. She has no case law.
Fabbri: 1st degree - only first prong of malice applies
2nd degree - others apply
Page: Wants involuntary manslaughter included. Will not be given.
The judge must give 3rd prong of malice.
If 2nd degree verdict, the judge will ask about which prong(s) of malice proven.
Fabbri: Wants to know if there will be mention of circumstantial evidence.
Judge: Cites what she sent to attys. "Whether the evidence is direct or circumstantial or a combination of the two, the jury can find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Page: Wants instruction for ? Will be included in "housekeeping matters." This is something about the defendant not testifying.
Page objects to language about finding the defendant of the highest charge as mentioned earlier.
Judge will define "possession" in terms of ammunition.
4th element - possession of the firearm outside the residence or place of business is required in this case.
Operable firearm below 16 inches, outside of home and possessed. In reference to ammunition.
Judge: "Accused does not have a license to carry."
This is a little hard to follow!
Verdict slips will reflect:
Not guilty
Guilty 1st degree
Guilty 2nd degree
Other charges will be
Guilty
Not Guilty
Closing arguments at 11:15 EST!
January 24th, 2006 call:
Thanks for calling. We go the results back from the ME today. This call is recorded, is that ok? Yeah, uh well no…
The cause and manner of death…both Rachel and Lilly died of a gunshot wound. We’re considering it a Foul Play death. Basically; a homicide. Ok.
May I ask you some questions about when you came up to the bedroom? Ok.
What did you see and remember? I walked in…I could see Rachel’s head. She was just there. I walked further in and saw Lilly. When I saw Lilly, I could see what had happened. There was blood around her mouth? Yeah and in it.
How did you determine she was shot? I saw a hole…a burn hold. You could see that from standing on the side of the bed? Yeah…but…yeah…no.
Did you move the arm? No. I pulled the covers over. I know I didn’t touch them.
How close did you get to the bed. I think my arms were on it. What did you notice about Rachel. I did…ummm.
How did you know she was dead? There was just no question about it.
You said you saw a bullet hole on Lilly. Yeah? What did you see on Rachel? Did you know she was shot? That’s what I thought. When you put it like that…
I saw it on Lilly…I don’t think that’s strange. Around the ribcage.
Did you see any trauma to Rachel. No. I didn’t…no it was all on Lillian. I don’t think….I think there was blood on the covers…on the sheets.
On the covers they were lying on or the ones you pulled up? Yeah, You think you remember? Yeah…ummm I don’t know if there was or not. I haven’t thought about it.
Were there any pillows around…Uhhhh I think maybe Rachel was on a pillow.
You saw nothing on Rachel….I ummm think uhh yeah, no.
We found the BMW…ok good.
I think there were some of the keys on the keychain that were to the House in Carver. Oh, you think so? I’m not certain, but I think so. Oh, ok.
I’m not 100% sure, but I think the Carver house keys are on it. Maybe for Hopkinton house. I don’t…no that’s not right.
On Friday, does the trash come on Friday? Yes, but we didn’t put it out. Does it come in the morning or afternoon? I don’t know…ummm I think it comes in the morning.
And you couldn’t get in Joe and Priscilla house? No, I couldn’t.
Did you use your credit cards on Friday? I first used it in the car park and then bought gas after.
You didn’t carry a lot of cash? No.
The Staples you talked about, is there a Starbucks? Umm yeah and a bookstore.
Was there a Homes Good stores? The have candle holders, furniture. Oh yeah. There’s a long line of stores.
You moved into the house on the 12th? It was a Thursday. Not many people knew you lived there? No.
There wasn’t any disagreements with friends or Joe and Priscilla? No, everything was good.
You remember the garage door being open? Uh, yeah.
There is nothing you can think of as to why this might have a occurred? No. I shouldn’t have happened.
Your right, it shouldn’t have happened. We are trying to look at every situation we can. Ok.
Joe’s guns. He has a bunch of guns in the house? Yeah.
You said the reason you want to Joe’s was to get a gun and hurt yourself? Yeah.
But you could get in the house? No.
Had you ever used the guns? I went with Joe once.
Did he have to teach you about the guns? Yeah. You don’t know about guns? No, I don’t really like them.
When you went, what guns did you fire? We fired a small handgun. Did you ever touch the handguns? Yeah, yes I touched the. You touched them at the house? No, at the gun club.
If I get Joe’s guns, would there be any reason for your prints on the guns? I wouldn’t…I don’t now how long they last. I would say no.
I’m going to ask a number of people, not just you. That seemed to upset you. Well, he may have cleaned them.
I think I had the rifle…
Part of the ME exam, we do toxicology. What’s that? They test for drugs and alcohol and it will take a couple of weeks.
Rachel and Lilly died from gunshot wounds. That’s definite? Yes. Oh, ok.
We are going to keep on the investigation. Ok. You have any questions at all? I…ummmm did it take long for them to die? I’m not a doctor, the ME could answer that. Well you know with Lilly and the state of the room…I don’t think they suffered.
What do you mean by the state of the room? Ummm, the blood and all.
I can check with the doctor. It’s almost like piece of mind? Ok, I’d appreciate that.
Oh yeah, there was one thing…do you know the time? The exact time they died? Yeah. This is not like TV. Yeah, that’s where I got that from. They can’t give the exact time. I talking about the timeframe you gave me.
It doesn’t comfort any way, it doesn’t change things.
No doctor could give you the exact time.
Have you talked with Priscilla and Joe? You spoke to them before you talked to me?
Are you staying there for a while? Now that I’m coming to terms with it…it’s the journey back that I’m not looking forward to. When can we begin the funeral arrangements? The bodies can be released now.
Where was Lilly born? In England.
Yeah, the bodies are ready to be released do you want the number to the ME’s office? Yes.
Manning gives him the number.
Anything else? No, I don’t…no…it’s shock. You don’t want to know what’s happened, but when you do you cn deal with that.
Have you told them? We’ll take care of that, I’ll tell them.
Will you be there for a while? Yeah, till we work it out. Work what out? The funeral arrangements.
In the weeks and months after the conversations, Manning and his colleagues did further investigation into the trial.
Cross - Weinstein
No questions
Yikes, no questions!
Long pause, bet the prosecution is going to rest!
Wonder what Weinstein is going to do.
THE PROSECUTION RESTS!
Judge and attorneys are going over jury instructions.
Judge will give standard instructions with function of judge, jury, evidence, credibility. She will also give limiting instructions modified from what was already said to the jury.
Fabbri suggests on p. 13, prior bad acts include "relevant to prove state of mind, intent, identity, etc.
The identity of person/persons operating the computer may be of issue. They should be expanded to include identity.
Judge: Pattern of conduct, yes. Prior bad acts?
Page: There has to be a finding that they believe it is the defendant.
Judge: Judge looks at case law. She will check on it to make sure it encompasses preparation, plan, identity.
Fabbri: Mainly concerned with identity.
Judge: Next, p. 18. She won't instruct on extreme abuse, atrocity. (The perpetrator tended to maximize suffering)
Bottom of p. 21: Is directly from the model instruction. If so, it is consistent with the instructions the judge sent.
Page: Objects under due process, it invades the province of the jury to exercise their own discretion.
Judge: The jury must find for the most serious crime the Commonwealth has proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Voluntariance is not an issue. Next instruction mentioned will not be given.
Judge Request from the defendant: the admissibility of material from a learned treatise. DiMaio, Spitz The witness acknowledged both treatises are reliable and relied on by those who practice in the field of pathology. The jury can consider those statements as evidence.
Defendant: Failure to test. There is no such thing as a Bowden instruction.
Page: There were normal procedures that weren't done by the ME. Not just a minor instance, the ME was never told about GSR. Page says it is a major, major factor.
Judge: There is no such instruction, not that it isn't an appropriate for argument.
Fabbri: Council must be able to argue the issue is inappropriate.
Consciousness of innocence vs. guilt. Fabbri states case law. It is in the model jury instructions. There may be innocent reasons the defendant did what he did and this may be mentioned to the jury. Consciousness of guilt will be included as per standard charge.
Page: P. 20 "Firearm is a dangerous weapon" invades the province of the jury. May argue after given to jury.
Page mentions another one which is about finding a defendant guilty even without intent. She has no case law.
Fabbri: 1st degree - only first prong of malice applies
2nd degree - others apply
Page: Wants involuntary manslaughter included. Will not be given.
The judge must give 3rd prong of malice.
If 2nd degree verdict, the judge will ask about which prong(s) of malice proven.
Fabbri: Wants to know if there will be mention of circumstantial evidence.
Judge: Cites what she sent to attys. "Whether the evidence is direct or circumstantial or a combination of the two, the jury can find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Page: Wants instruction for ? Will be included in "housekeeping matters." This is something about the defendant not testifying.
Page objects to language about finding the defendant of the highest charge as mentioned earlier.
Judge will define "possession" in terms of ammunition.
4th element - possession of the firearm outside the residence or place of business is required in this case.
Operable firearm below 16 inches, outside of home and possessed. In reference to ammunition.
Judge: "Accused does not have a license to carry."
This is a little hard to follow!
Verdict slips will reflect:
Not guilty
Guilty 1st degree
Guilty 2nd degree
Other charges will be
Guilty
Not Guilty
Closing arguments at 11:15 EST!
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Neil Entwistle Trial: Recap for Day 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11.
Trial Recap for Day Seven: Prosecution Witnesses
Deanna Dygan is back on the stand under direct. She introduces more evidence exhibits such as a pillow case taken from the bedroom, swabs from the bedroom walls and Rachael, Rachael's clothing, Lillian's clothing, etc.
30. John Drugan: A chemist for the State Police crime lab. His area of expertise is explosives; gunshot residue (GSR). He testifies about the properties of GSR.
31. Sgt. Stephen Walsh: He is a MA trooper in the firearms identification unit. He explains how each firearm has unique internal marks and they are imparted to the projectile when fired. He tested all the guns collected and compared the bullet retrieved from Rachael's breast to test firings.
Trial Recap for Day Eight: Prosecution Witnesses
32. Laura Bryant: Bryant is the DNA expert. At the state crime lab she compares DNA evidence to known DNA. She is also a supervisor of the lab. She testifies to various items collected from the scene that she tested for DNA. She testifies that a swab from the gun’s trigger lock shows DNA from Entlwistle as the major contributor and two minor contributors.
33. Debra Egan. She owns a florist shop in Plymouth. Her daughter Kelly works there also. She testifies that she took an order from a younger British male. The person asked for orange roses or lilies. He wanted a single rose and lily in a bud vase. She also took an order for a funeral spray.
34. Kelly Egan: Debra’s Egan's daughter. She testifies she took the info from Entwistle for what was to be written on the card. She also took a second order from Entwistle, and then a third on the 31st.
35. Benjamin Prior: He is from London. He knows Neil from University, since 1998. They were on the rowing team. He, Dash Munding, Neil and Rachel were all good friends. He testifies to calling Entwistle and Prior in February to ask how they were. He testifies as to what Entwistle told him about finding Rachael and Lillian's bodies after coming back from shopping. He also testifies that Entwistle told him that he BOUGHT the Hopkinton house with a 100% mortgage. He also told them they bought the BMW. Prior testifies that Entwistle said Rachel wanted all the money for the new house and the baby and they were struggling and living by credit cards mostly.
36. Dashiel Munding: This is another friend of Neil and Rachel. He testifies that he's known them since 1998 from University. He testifies that Neil called him in February, and he picked up Entwistle and met Entwistle with Prior. He testifies that Entwistle told him he drove to Priscilla’s office and called the police from there (after finding the bodies). Munding testifies that Entwistle said he left the office and drove for a while and then went to Logan so he could fly home to be comforted by his parents.
37. Urooje Sheikh: Det. Constable from London. He’s in computer forensics. He testifies that EnCase is a forensic tool used to image a computer. The forensic image takes a copy of the data on the computer. No changes are made to the original hard drive. He testifies that he took forensic images from 3 computers. RJP 3 and RJP4 were imaged and then he write blocked the drives so they couldn’t be altered.
38. Lawrence James: He is employed as a police office with the city of Medford. He works the computer crime unit and does data forensic examinations. He testifies that he examined three computers as well as three other computers sent over from the UK. He testifies to the Internet history (16,000 pages) on the hard drive from a laptop hard drive, submitted into evidence. He identifies a Google search by a user "ENT" with the words "How to kill with a knife."
Trial Recap for Day Nine: Prosecution Witnesses
A witness is brought in out of order, #39.
39: Michael Fee, Esq.: Attorney who advised the Puig's, owners of the house at 6 Cubs' path. He testifies that he helped the Puig's recover some property. Fee identifies a CD that has a recording of a conversation he had with Entwistle. The CD is entered into evidence and played. On the CD we can hear Neil saying he has no interest in anything in the house anymore. He wants any money returned and the possessions in the house should be taken care of by Rachel’s family.
38. Lawrence James is recalled to the stand. He testifies to more of the Internet searches that were performed by "ENT" on the laptop specifically the "How to kill with a knife" search, "search for "knife in neck kill," search for "quick suicide method," several local escort services, a graphic image from adult friend finder, Entwistle's Paypal account, a genealogy site, hosting web sites as well as searches for purchasing a flight online. James testifies that some of these searches occurred after Rachael and Lillian were killed.
Trial Recap for Day Ten: Prosecution Witnesses
38. Lawrence James returns to the stand. James testifies to more Internet activity on the laptop. There was activity on "Adult Friend Finder," with a free trial membership and a paid membership.
40. Dr. William Zane: Medical Examiner. He specializes in forensic pathology. He’s performed 6,000 or more autopsies. 500-600 homicide victims and gunshot wounds. Zane testifies that Rachael had two bullet wounds. One to her left breast (this is the bullet that went through Lillian first) and one through the skull back in the hairline. The head wound showed no stippling; it was a non contact wound, as was the wound to her chest. Zane testifies that Lillian was moved. There was lividity on the front of her body and she was found on her back with a pillow over her.
In cross examination of Dr. Zane, defense attorney Page brings up suicide, parent/child suicide specifically and quotes from Vincent Di Maio's book, Gunshot Wounds.
It's like a nightmare deja vu with Di Maio's book being brought in as "expert" opinion.
Page gets Dr. Zane to admit he did not know that Rachael's hands had GSR on them.
While this is going on, the T&T trial watching gang becomes hopping mad at Page's cross of the ME. It was back during the Robert Blake criminal trial that I first learned how unreliable GSR testing can be. It basically will only tell you that an individual was in the vicinity of a weapon that was fired. Heck, it could mean that someone was just in the same room as another individual who was carrying a weapon.
41. Sgt. Gary Flood: UK subject, he works for the extradition Unit with Scotland Yard. The unit seeks out fugitives from countries they have extradition agreements with. He testifies that he received information about Entwistle. His unit contacted British Airways to see if Entwistle arrived in the UK. Entwistle was located on a train. The train was stopped and Entwistle was taken into custody in the UK. Sgt. Flood testifies that on February 16th, Entwistle was taken to Gatewick airport and transferred to the custody of US Marshals.
42. DC Ron Hay: He works in the extradition unit and assisted Flood in arresting Entwistle. Hay describes how Entwistle was located and arrested.
43. DC Richard Potter. Employed by the Metropolitan Police Extradition Unit. He works with Flood and Hay. Potter testifies to searching Entwistle's parent's home and the evidence collected from their home, including two computers.
Trial Recap for Day Eleven: Prosecution Witnesses
44. Trooper Michael Banks: Works for the homicide unit. Banks testifies that on January 22, 2006 he was sent to Hopkinton, 6 Cubs Path at 8pm and then returned to the station. He then returned to the house with crime scene investigators. He testifies to any procedures he was involved with in photographing the house and removing items as outlined in the search warrant. Banks also testifies to the execution of the search warrant on the BMW as well as search warrants for financial records.
45. Sgt. Robert Manning: With MA State Police assigned to the DA’s office in homicide. He testifies to interviewing Entwistle over the phone. The interview is entered into evidence and played for the jury.
This is the first time that we hear Entwistle tell his story as to how he discovered Rachael and Lillian's bodies, what he felt and what he did afterwards.
I'd like to give a shout out to a blogger in the UK who is doing an excellent job covering the Entwistle case. She's an aspiring writer and quite good. Check out her blog, 'thecrimewriter,' here.
CNN.Crime
Deanna Dygan is back on the stand under direct. She introduces more evidence exhibits such as a pillow case taken from the bedroom, swabs from the bedroom walls and Rachael, Rachael's clothing, Lillian's clothing, etc.
30. John Drugan: A chemist for the State Police crime lab. His area of expertise is explosives; gunshot residue (GSR). He testifies about the properties of GSR.
31. Sgt. Stephen Walsh: He is a MA trooper in the firearms identification unit. He explains how each firearm has unique internal marks and they are imparted to the projectile when fired. He tested all the guns collected and compared the bullet retrieved from Rachael's breast to test firings.
Trial Recap for Day Eight: Prosecution Witnesses
32. Laura Bryant: Bryant is the DNA expert. At the state crime lab she compares DNA evidence to known DNA. She is also a supervisor of the lab. She testifies to various items collected from the scene that she tested for DNA. She testifies that a swab from the gun’s trigger lock shows DNA from Entlwistle as the major contributor and two minor contributors.
33. Debra Egan. She owns a florist shop in Plymouth. Her daughter Kelly works there also. She testifies that she took an order from a younger British male. The person asked for orange roses or lilies. He wanted a single rose and lily in a bud vase. She also took an order for a funeral spray.
34. Kelly Egan: Debra’s Egan's daughter. She testifies she took the info from Entwistle for what was to be written on the card. She also took a second order from Entwistle, and then a third on the 31st.
35. Benjamin Prior: He is from London. He knows Neil from University, since 1998. They were on the rowing team. He, Dash Munding, Neil and Rachel were all good friends. He testifies to calling Entwistle and Prior in February to ask how they were. He testifies as to what Entwistle told him about finding Rachael and Lillian's bodies after coming back from shopping. He also testifies that Entwistle told him that he BOUGHT the Hopkinton house with a 100% mortgage. He also told them they bought the BMW. Prior testifies that Entwistle said Rachel wanted all the money for the new house and the baby and they were struggling and living by credit cards mostly.
36. Dashiel Munding: This is another friend of Neil and Rachel. He testifies that he's known them since 1998 from University. He testifies that Neil called him in February, and he picked up Entwistle and met Entwistle with Prior. He testifies that Entwistle told him he drove to Priscilla’s office and called the police from there (after finding the bodies). Munding testifies that Entwistle said he left the office and drove for a while and then went to Logan so he could fly home to be comforted by his parents.
37. Urooje Sheikh: Det. Constable from London. He’s in computer forensics. He testifies that EnCase is a forensic tool used to image a computer. The forensic image takes a copy of the data on the computer. No changes are made to the original hard drive. He testifies that he took forensic images from 3 computers. RJP 3 and RJP4 were imaged and then he write blocked the drives so they couldn’t be altered.
38. Lawrence James: He is employed as a police office with the city of Medford. He works the computer crime unit and does data forensic examinations. He testifies that he examined three computers as well as three other computers sent over from the UK. He testifies to the Internet history (16,000 pages) on the hard drive from a laptop hard drive, submitted into evidence. He identifies a Google search by a user "ENT" with the words "How to kill with a knife."
Trial Recap for Day Nine: Prosecution Witnesses
A witness is brought in out of order, #39.
39: Michael Fee, Esq.: Attorney who advised the Puig's, owners of the house at 6 Cubs' path. He testifies that he helped the Puig's recover some property. Fee identifies a CD that has a recording of a conversation he had with Entwistle. The CD is entered into evidence and played. On the CD we can hear Neil saying he has no interest in anything in the house anymore. He wants any money returned and the possessions in the house should be taken care of by Rachel’s family.
38. Lawrence James is recalled to the stand. He testifies to more of the Internet searches that were performed by "ENT" on the laptop specifically the "How to kill with a knife" search, "search for "knife in neck kill," search for "quick suicide method," several local escort services, a graphic image from adult friend finder, Entwistle's Paypal account, a genealogy site, hosting web sites as well as searches for purchasing a flight online. James testifies that some of these searches occurred after Rachael and Lillian were killed.
Trial Recap for Day Ten: Prosecution Witnesses
38. Lawrence James returns to the stand. James testifies to more Internet activity on the laptop. There was activity on "Adult Friend Finder," with a free trial membership and a paid membership.
40. Dr. William Zane: Medical Examiner. He specializes in forensic pathology. He’s performed 6,000 or more autopsies. 500-600 homicide victims and gunshot wounds. Zane testifies that Rachael had two bullet wounds. One to her left breast (this is the bullet that went through Lillian first) and one through the skull back in the hairline. The head wound showed no stippling; it was a non contact wound, as was the wound to her chest. Zane testifies that Lillian was moved. There was lividity on the front of her body and she was found on her back with a pillow over her.
In cross examination of Dr. Zane, defense attorney Page brings up suicide, parent/child suicide specifically and quotes from Vincent Di Maio's book, Gunshot Wounds.
It's like a nightmare deja vu with Di Maio's book being brought in as "expert" opinion.
Page gets Dr. Zane to admit he did not know that Rachael's hands had GSR on them.
While this is going on, the T&T trial watching gang becomes hopping mad at Page's cross of the ME. It was back during the Robert Blake criminal trial that I first learned how unreliable GSR testing can be. It basically will only tell you that an individual was in the vicinity of a weapon that was fired. Heck, it could mean that someone was just in the same room as another individual who was carrying a weapon.
41. Sgt. Gary Flood: UK subject, he works for the extradition Unit with Scotland Yard. The unit seeks out fugitives from countries they have extradition agreements with. He testifies that he received information about Entwistle. His unit contacted British Airways to see if Entwistle arrived in the UK. Entwistle was located on a train. The train was stopped and Entwistle was taken into custody in the UK. Sgt. Flood testifies that on February 16th, Entwistle was taken to Gatewick airport and transferred to the custody of US Marshals.
42. DC Ron Hay: He works in the extradition unit and assisted Flood in arresting Entwistle. Hay describes how Entwistle was located and arrested.
43. DC Richard Potter. Employed by the Metropolitan Police Extradition Unit. He works with Flood and Hay. Potter testifies to searching Entwistle's parent's home and the evidence collected from their home, including two computers.
Trial Recap for Day Eleven: Prosecution Witnesses
44. Trooper Michael Banks: Works for the homicide unit. Banks testifies that on January 22, 2006 he was sent to Hopkinton, 6 Cubs Path at 8pm and then returned to the station. He then returned to the house with crime scene investigators. He testifies to any procedures he was involved with in photographing the house and removing items as outlined in the search warrant. Banks also testifies to the execution of the search warrant on the BMW as well as search warrants for financial records.
45. Sgt. Robert Manning: With MA State Police assigned to the DA’s office in homicide. He testifies to interviewing Entwistle over the phone. The interview is entered into evidence and played for the jury.
This is the first time that we hear Entwistle tell his story as to how he discovered Rachael and Lillian's bodies, what he felt and what he did afterwards.
I'd like to give a shout out to a blogger in the UK who is doing an excellent job covering the Entwistle case. She's an aspiring writer and quite good. Check out her blog, 'thecrimewriter,' here.
CNN.Crime
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Ritanita on the Entwistle Murder Trial
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Medical Examiner Dr. William Zane
testifies about Rachel's bullet wound and the path it traveled.
GUEST ENTRY BY RITANITA!
Logic to the Wind – by ritanita
Stephanie Page's cross-examination of Medical Examiner William Zane on Thursday, made my blood pressure go off the charts. It's natural for a defense attorney to paint an alternate picture of a case, but in this situation, Ms. Page managed to throw logic to the wind and attempt to browbeat a witness.
However, my first thoughts go to Rachel's family and friends. In her attempt to explain Neil Entwistle's "innocence", Page turned Rachel Entwistle into a baby-killer; a murderer. She further made Rachel a suicide. What a terrible thing to do to the memory of a loving daughter, sister, and friend.
Against all the testimony as to Rachel's state of mind, Page insinuated that she “might” have been suffering from postpartum depression. One wonders where this talk of depression comes from. There were no questions from Ms. Page concerning depression when she questioned her mother, her stepfather, and her friends.
Then, we can look at the forensic evidence. According to the ME, Rachel's toxicological screens came back negative for drugs of abuse and alcohol. She wasn't high; she wasn't drunk. She was a new mother with a precious child she loved.
There's the matter of the gun itself. The weapon, a 6-inch barreled target gun was presented into evidence earlier this week. Joseph Matterazzo testified that Rachel never showed any interest in the guns. He never took her out shooting. Why are we to think she would take the gun from the Carver home and kill her child and herself?
Just imagining these shootings can boggle the mind. Imagine Rachel clutching her baby to her breast and attempting to fire that gun, at that angle through the child. Physics says it can't happen. The barrel is just too long. Rachel was only 5'2'' and there is no way, that arm could reach out around the child so the bullet would also hit her in the breast. Likewise with the shot to the head. Put an imaginary gun with a 6-inch barrel to your head in the manner depicted in the chart. It's not going to happen!
Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab Forensic Chemist Deanna Dygan explains the tests she ran on the gun entered into evidence as the murder weapon, during the murder trial of Neil Entwistle at Middlesex Superior Court, in Woburn, Massachusetts, June 16, 2008
Rachel did have a few specks of gunshot residue (GSR) on her hands. Ms. Page made such a big deal about it. We learned about GSR in the Spector trial. It's unreliable. In fact, the FBI no longer tests for it. On the May 26th, 2006 Georgia Criminal Law Blog, it states, "the FBI has distanced itself from another test once regarded as a reliable test. They will no longer be performing gun shot residue analysis.” In addition, earlier testimony pointed out that gunshot residue was easily removed and transferable. The fact that there was a tiny amount of GSR on Rachel's hands, means nothing. She was shot, there was a gun in the room, and there were armed police officers in the room. For Ms. Page to attempt to indicate it was significant is totally disingenuous.
Finally, I think that, as Ron Kuby puts it, "impeachment by learned treatise" is a cheap shot. Ms. Page read pieces of information from Vincent DiMaio's book on gunshot wounds and Spitz and Fisher's tome on forensic medical investigation and asked Dr. Zane to answer, "Yes" to all the questions. When Dr. Zane answered "No," he became the target of rather acerbic comments. I only wish that the prosecutors had been able to elicit more complete explanations from this ME.
It was an awful experience to view this and I hope the jury feels the same as I do and has the wisdom to see the facts - not the things that definitely are what they seem to be.
Thank you very much ritanita!
Friday, June 20, 2008
Entwistle Murder Trial – Day 11
~ Neil Entwistle
Jury hears the taped conversation, that may seal his fate.
On the stand – Trooper Michael Banks, homicide unit.
January 22, 2006 he was sent to Hopkinton, 6 Cubs Path at 8pm. He returned to Hopkinton Police Department.
He met with several officers and Sgt. Manning and some civilians. He left at 1am and went back to 6 Cubs Path with a number of officers and crime scene services.
Banks and Manning followed crime scene services into the home. He describes the crime scene services video-taping and process the bedroom.
The bed was photographed and as the layers were pulled back it was also photographed.
Banks saw Rachel lying on her side. The pillow seemed to peel of Lilly’s face due to a dried substance. Banks identifies a photo of the bed and Rachel and the baby faces.
Banks remained in the bedroom for a short time
Sidebar
Banks left the house while the house was processed. The bodies had been removed by the ME’s office.
They re-entered the house did their own photos and removed several items from the home per the search warrant.
They removed a Feline’s receipt and a shaving kit from the master bedroom bathroom. Banks identifies the items and they are marked.
They proceeded to the family room. The TV was on. They found a cordless phone and a cell phone next to the coach. Banks identifies the phones and they are marked for identification.
The dinning room had a table and numerous papers, mostly mail and a family photo.
The kitchen looked like a meal had been finished, but not cleaned up. They saw a camera, a desk. They saw a phone that was disconnected. On a shelf they saw 2 house keys. He identifies the keys in a photo. It is marked.
They took custody of the key and brought them to the DA’s office. He opens an evidence bag and identifies the keys, which are marked.
Next they went to the basement. The room on the left had a number of boxes as of someone was just moving in. Another small room off that contained a computer and some tools. He identifies photos of the computer and tools.
Banks is shown the laptop and he identifies it as the one they took into custody.
Banks is shown a photo of the cell phone in the TV room, which he identifies.
In the den, they went through the boxes that were there and he identifies a photo. There was a black document bin that contained various financial documents.
Banks says he spent a couple of hours at the home.
January 24th, he executed a search warrant on the BMW that was still at Logan. The vehicle was processed, Banks seized a garage door open, Dasani water bottle, a garage ticket, and keys, marked BMW and house keys. A sponge and another set of keys.
Banks opens a bag containing the keys they collected from the BMW and identifies the items.
Later, he went to the home in Carver. They interviewed Joe and Priscilla and removed the guns, ammo can, computer, rifles, gun case, and a document.
Banks identifies photos of the ammo can, gun case, computer, and the document they recovered. He now identifies the ammo can and pistol box and the .22 colt.
All the items closed and locked up in the home. He transported the to the evidence locker. The next day he took them to the crime lab. The lab inventoried the items.
January 26th, a second warrant for financial records at 6 Cubs Path. Banks identifies the documents that were seized.
He identifies documents pertaining to setting up a corporation, that he seized.
January 28th and the 31st he delivered search warrants to Larry James to examine the computers recovered from Carver and 6 Cubs Path.
Feb. 8th, he returned to 6 Cubs Path. They seized the butcher block of knives two pillows and map quest documents.
They checked the GPS on the BMW – found nothing of use.
March 2nd, he met with Gary Flood and received the evidence recovered in the UK and they had a debriefing.
March 14th he received trigger lock keys from Joe and Priscilla. He identifies them
March 21st, Banks went to the UK and he collected the records the DC’s had seized and conducted interviews. They gathered various business records. He identifies the records – subpoenas…Yankee Candles and Exxon Mobile, Capitol One, Citibank credit card account, Washington Mutual PayPal credit card account.
MBNA records on an account opened by Rachel, 911 calls for Hopkinton Police on January 20, Carver Police, and State Troopers Barracks. Comcast for service at 6 Cubs Path.
Getting into geography here: Hopkinton to Carver about 60 miles – Carver to Braintree, 40 miles…they cover a bunch of destinations…
April, Banks went to Logan and photographed ATM’s in terminals E & B as well as the #666, walk-up pay machine in the garage. Banks identifies the photographs.
Sidebar
No more questions.
Weinstein – cross
The laptop your retrieved from 6 Cubs Path, ever send it to be tested for fingerprints? No.
No more questions
Next witness – Robert Manning, Sgt. With MA State Police assigned to the DA’s office in homicide. He went to Hopkinton, 6 Cubs Path; then he went to the Hopkinton Police Department. We go through the same group of people. He spoke with Priscilla and Joe Matterzazzo.
He spent about 2 hours at 6 Cubs Path. He received a call from Joe at about 11:30am. He then returned to the station. At 1-1:30 on the 23rd, Manning called Clifford Entwistle and Neil. He spoke to Neil at 1:30. They spoke for 2 hours and the call was recorded.
Manning identifies the CD’s made of the phone call and they are marked as an exhibit.
Court on recess –
Transcripts are given to the judge, clerk and defense and jury. They jury will not have the transcripts in deliberations.
Tape being played – Manning tells Neil his wife and daughter, are deceased. Neil says he knew.
He knows the call is being recorded.
Neil says he went out on Friday morning. They got up at 7 and he fed Lillian. He went to the store for some computer equipment. He put Lilly back to bed at 9. He thought Rachel was awake.
He came back at 11; he called out to them and got no reply. He got a few things together downstairs. He heard no noise and he went upstairs and found them. He looked and saw what had happened. He had to get out of the house. He had no numbers to call the in-laws. So he decided to drive to their house. First he went to the kitchen and got a knife, but couldn’t do it. He got in the car and drove to Carver. He knew Joe had guns in the house and he thought he could finish it. He got to the house and the house key wasn’t there…Rachel must have removed. He decides to go to Priscilla’s office, but he couldn’t remember how to get there. He went to Logan Airport because it was the only place familiar. He wanted to let the emotions out, but they wouldn’t come out. He walked around a bit, but it reminded of being there with Rachel and Lillian. He got back in the car and drove around and got lost a bit. I couldn’t face going back to the house. Then I felt lost.
I drove around and stopped for gas, somewhere in Boston. I don’t really know my way around…I just followed signs.
The state that I’m in I know I didn’t do the right thing. I just couldn’t get it right in my head.
He went in Lilly’s bedroom and they weren’t there. He went to the master bedroom and he saw Rachel on the bed…he starts crying. It looked like she was asleep. The covers were partially up. They were half covered. I didn’t see Lilly right away. I couldn’t understand why Rachel was still in bed. Rachel was pale and then I saw Lilly. I pulled the covers back and that was when I saw…Lilly was such a mess. There wasn’t any blood on Rachel, it was all on Lilly. Her mouth and nose were covered by like bubbles. It’s obvious they weren’t alive anymore. Looking back I don’t remember seeing the house disturbed.
It was a small amount of time that I was out. There was no work pattern so it was erratic when we were in and out.
He says he came in through the garage. The front door would have been locked. The garage door I left open. The inside door wasn’t locked.
You left the door up? Uhh no, I closed it. When I got to the house it was open. I thought omg she’s going yell at me for forgetting to close the door.
The front was locked…I know it was shut…I don’t know if it was locked.
I called to let them know I was back. I have given Lilly breakfast and I was surprised all the things were out. I was a little mad at Rachel because why hadn’t she gotten up and cleaned the kitchen?
We had a set routine with Lilly…she'd get up at 7 and back to bed at 9 for a 1/2 hour and then back down at 12. I always fed Lilly and sometimes Rachel stayed in bed or went back to bed at 9.
I put Lilly in bed with Rachel before I went out. I don’t know if Rachel was asleep. When Lilly is in bed, she moves around a lot and I figured she would walk Rachel.
He wanted to go to Staples and Wal-Mart. I never found the Wal-Mart. I went to Staples where the big Stop and Shop. On Route 9? Yeah.
Did you buy anything? No, I figured I could get it cheaper at Wal-Mart.
Neil gives a rambling account of the shopping area and can’t say what town…Westborough? He was gone for a couple of hours.
He drove up and down Route 9 a couple of times. You just ran errands. Did you go to work? No, it didn’t work out. I didn’t even tell Rachel…I knew she’d be disappointed.
He says he was working for himself. Small bits and things.
Oh, the Staples where I was at, was next to Intrinsic. Their office is just next to Staples, but it didn’t work out.
I was pushing to get a permanent position. We just got the house.
I looked at Staples, but thought I could get it at Wal-Mart, but I could find it. When I didn’t find it, I thought we could go out together and get it. I got back to the house at 11. I’m pretty sure. I felt that’s when I got back.
Did you talk to Rachel by phone? No. We have a cell but it’s Rachel’s.
Saturday she planned on Priscilla coming over and they had friends coming that night. Neil says Rachel didn’t have plans on Friday or she wouldn’t have gotten up.
He says the car is at Logan. The plate is 65KW78…a white BMW, SUV.
You didn’t see anything at the house that alarmed you except the door was up. I know Rachel yelled at me the last time I did it. I do know that was open. I think the other door was shut.
For breakfast we hadn’t had anything and I thought we would have it later. Yeah, I fed Lilly her breakfast. Oatmeal, prunes, and pears mixed in a bowl. After breakfast before you brought her upstairs, was she playing in the playroom at all? She was fussing so I gave her some Cheerios.
Was the kitchen relatively clean? It wasn’t mucked up. Maybe one or two things from the night before. Some things on the counter. The house didn’t look any different.
You found them in the bed and there was some blood on your daughter. I didn’t see anything on Rachel.
What do you think happened to them? I don’t know…I been trying…it seems so clean cut…there isn’t.
Did you shake them? Obviously Lillian. I leaned over Rachel…it was just obvious.
Have you ever seen anybody dead before? No, only on TV. But, it was obvious. Did you touch them? No, I pulled the bed sheet over them to cover them up.
Why? I don’t know…it just seemed…it almost seems like I was closing them off.
You just moved into this house? Do you know about 911? Yeah, I did. Did it ever cross your mind to call 911? Looking back I don’t know what I thought. You’d think I would look at that and break down. But I just didn’t.
The first thing I wanted to do was be by myself. Were you in shock? I don’t know.
I pulled the covers over them, I pulled out the wide meat knife and pointed it toward me, but I knew it was hurt. Then I thought to get to Priscilla because I knew she would help me. I don’t know why I didn’t to call you.
I didn’t think to call the neighbors. I didn’t think they would be home anyway.
I didn’t call Joe or Priscilla because I don’t have their numbers. I just started driving. I went to Carver to get one of Joe’s guns to hurt myself.
I went to the garage…I don’t know if I locked the door. I just left with what I was wearing…what I’ve got here. Wearing blue jeans a blue sweater and a gray coat.
So you wanted to hurt yourself? You didn’t call anybody, 911 or grab a neighbor? No.
What happened at Carver? The house key was on the car keys ring, but when I got there it wasn’t on the ring.
Do you have the keys with you? No, they are in the car.
Did you know where Joe kept the guns? I knew they were in the bedroom. I drove down to the barn, I thought maybe there was a gun in the barn, but it was locked too.
What did you think happened to Rachel and Lilly? They had been shot? I saw a hole in Lilly…didn’t see anything on Rachel…I just assumed. There was so much blood on Lilly’s chest. Rachel had her arm across Lilly.
Did you move Rachel’s arm? No. So you don’t know if they were slightly breathing? No.
Did you leave the house right away? Yeah.
What happened when you couldn’t get into Carver? Well I was kinda coming around and I thought I would go see Priscilla in Braintree, where she works. I drove up there, but I couldn’t find it. I’ve been there many times, but I never drove there. I don’t know how long I drove around. Did you make any calls? No, I didn’t have anything with me. I didn’t stop to call.
What time did you get to the airport? It was dark. Did you get out? I kinda sat there for a while. I don’t know what was going on in my head. Yeah, I got out and just wandered around.
Did you get a coffee or something to eat? No, I don’t think so. Pretty sure not.
Did you ask for help? No. Did you talk to anybody? No. Did you call anybody? No.
It had been a while at this point. I go back in the car to go home and do something about it. I got lost. I filled up for gas. You don’t know where? I don’t.
You stop for money? No. Did you have any money? Maybe a little. I must have paid for gas with a credit card.
You never made it back to Hopkinton? No, I just drove around frustrated. Scared or frustrated? Yeah scared.
I decided I needed to be with someone. Who? My parents. Did you call your parents? No.
Did you call your folks when you got to London? No, I rented a car to drive up and see my folks. Did you talk to any friends? No, I’ve only spoken with my parents.
Are they helping you? Yeah, they know how long it’s been. Did you call Joe and Priscilla? I’ve tried several times and got the answering machine. You haven’t spoken to them? My dad did and then I spoke with Joe.
He asked what happened and I told him what I told you.
Did you tell him Lillian and Rachel were dead? I think my dad may have. I thought they knew. I don’t even know how they found out.
You came to this country, why? We wanted…Rachel wanted to be closer to her mom. We wanted Lilly to be raised in the US. Things were going ok? Yeah, fine. Things were going fine.
What are you going to do now? I don’t know.
How did you know to go to the house? After so many days nobody had heard from them. Ok.
What are you going to do about funeral arrangements? Did you think about that? No.
Are you going to stay in England? I don’t know what I’m going to do. I don’t know in terms of getting back to the States.
Because of what you saw you felt you needed to be with your parents? Yes, I feel sorry for Joe and Priscilla. It was wrong.
For you to go to England? That’s not for me to say.
We're just glad you are ok. I never thought of that. That Joe and Priscilla wouldn’t know where I was.
When you found Rachel and Lilly, did it ever cross your mind to call 911? No.
The bodies will be taken to the ME’s to try and determine how they died. Ok.
You’re going to stay with your parents? Yeah I have nowhere to go. I have no idea what I’m going to do.
Anything else you can tell me. You left at 9 and came back 11? Yeah, yeah.
Who knew you lived there? Just some family…we didn’t know the neighbors yet. We met the hospitality lady. She knew we moved in from the landlady.
Anything going on in business that may be why this happened? No.
Rachel didn’t have any situations that would make something like this happen? No.
The house wasn’t disturbed. I didn’t see anything.
Were there any disagreements with the family? No family was great.
Are you under a doctor’s care? No.
You’re not depressed? No, I see what you mean.
I haven’t even cried yet, not properly. I shed a few tears. It doesn’t seem real.
Let me tell you it is real, buy I have a hard time understanding why you didn’t call 911. Yeah, I can see that.
When two bodies are found, the police investigate to see what happened. I wish you were here so I could talk to you in person. Yeah.
I like to throw out there; something out of character occurred? Something out of character?
You said you wanted to hurt yourself right a way? Yeah.
I’m trying to understand why you said that. I don’t get what you mean.
I’m wondering was there a situation that happened that was out of character. That I wanted to kill myself?
No, that’s not what I’m saying; I’m asking why you wanted to harm yourself? It just went through my mind after seeing that. Almost like I wanted to be with them.
You took an awful lot of steps not to be with them. I don’t know what you are trying to say.
You drove to Carver which is 40 miles away. You wanted to talk to Priscilla and Joe because something bad happened? Did a situation take place at house? You mean did I have anything…. No, no.
No because, no. That... no, I couldn’t do that. Why would I do that?
I’m not saying you did it. Just asking what happened? It was just a normal day.
Sometimes something crazy happens. I’m just asking…you’ve done a lot of things not to be with them? I see what you’re saying. I don’t know what to say to you.
We need to find out what happened. Yeah.
You find your wife and daughter like that, you don’t call the police, her mother and father or any friends. You grabbed a knife to be with them but, you took a lot of steps not to be with them. I was scared; I knew it would hurt.
You didn’t do anything to help them? I didn’t think there was anything to help them.
You didn’t bother to see if they were alive…you didn’t call for help. Is there anything thing you can tell me? I see what you are saying. I never considered someone would think I did this.
Surely, I just don’t know why…they were just like I left them.
You talked to Rachel before you left? Yeah.
Did Rachel take Lilly from you? Yeah, I think Lilly was playing.
What was Thursday like with you guys? You’ll have to give me a while.
When you went to bed on Thursday we’re you guys ok? Yeah…I stayed up watching TV. Oh I was reading in the small living room.
What time did Rachel go to bed? Around 11pm. Yeah we watched a bit of a movie. As the news started I picked up my book again. I was maybe going to bed a 1/2 hour later.
When you woke up Friday morning, you grabbed Lilly and went downstairs; did you play, watch TV, and eat? We got up at 7, Rachel breast-fed her and then I brought her to the small room, but it was cold. I went to the living room and we played there. I should have turned the heat on. Was the TV on or off when you left at 9am? I don’t know.
What can you tell me to help me out? I wish I could tell you…I don’t…I don’t know who…I don’t understand…there’s no on person…that aren’t any cross words…I’ve been talking to my parents…I don’t know what else…I can only guess…
You want me to keep in touch and let you know what’s going on? Yeah, I’d really appreciate that.
Manning gives him a bunch of contact numbers here.
Sound bites on the tape:
ritianita: He says he left the garage door open. He told his friends he left the back door open.
He knows there is a hole in Lilly's jammies... only way he could know that was if he lifted Rachel's hand. So much blood on Lilly. He didn't move the arm! Guilty!!!
Notice, no mention of all his attempts to get cash out of the ATM's.
Am I alone in thinking Neil is trying so hard not to understand when Manning is obviously saying he suspects him of murder?
Intepid: He's so very detached sounding, isn't he? Totally disconnected emotionally from his dead wife and child.
Kitty Malone: it sounds as though he is faking emotion. His little whimpers won't be winning any Academy Awards!
He stumbles and sighs so much - he sounds so guilty. What he says and how he says it speaks VOLUMES!
He is totally making this up as he goes. A person telling the truth would not stall and stutter as much as he does! Especially when the questions posed to him are fairly simple questions. HE CONTINUALLY hesitates!
Manning on the stand and relates a phone call he had with Neil the next day:
Manning received a call from Neil Entwistle on January 24, 2006. Since the call was to his office, he was unable to tape it. He informed Neil he would be taking notes and he agreed.
He stressed to Neil he didn't want to go into the finding of the bodies. He just wanted to talk about Neil's activities on the 20th.
Neil reviewed with him the information he had given him the day before.
He didn't buy anything in Staples, was shopping for wireless computer gadget.
Matterazzo home in Carver: Neil said he didn't get in and didn't have key on BMW keychain. He said Rachel had lost it after they had taken over the Hopkinton residence but still living in Carver.
Did he have a spare key? In doghouse on Carver property. Rachel knew about the key.
BMW: Where were keys to BMW? Neil said they were in the armrest.
Why did he leave the keys there? So he would have them when he came back.
When was he coming back? He'd spoken to Joe and thought he perhaps should be there.
Funeral arrangements would be made.
Thursday, Jan. 19 activities.
Neil told him they were home all day Thursday and how they'd given Lilly a bath at bedtime. He explained about the music they played while she went to sleep.
After Lilly went to bed they watched TV and Rachel went to bed first and he went to bed later. Rachel "kind of" woke up, they cuddled a while and they went to sleep.
Last time he had sex with Rachel was on Wednesday and he didn't want to go into too much detail and he wasn't comfortable discussing it.
Asked if he had ejaculated when he had sex. He said he did not, something to do with birth control. He said he did not ejaculate at all.
Friday morning prior to 9 AM. He awoke, Lilly awoke, Rachel breast fed her, he took her down and fed her cheerios and some other cerial. She didn't eat much. He took her to toy room and played a while, got cold, went to TV room. Close to 9, he put Lilly in with Rachel and washed up. He went out.
On return from his errands, he came back to the house (said they don't have to go into finding bodies). He didn't call 911 and went to Carver. He didn't get in again, needed time to clear his head, drove around, tried to find Priscilla at work.
Asked if he tried to call Priscilla or Joe. Neil said he didn't call. He only acknowledged knowing the Carver home.
Joe Matterazzo's firearms: Neil said he went to Carver home to get Joe's gun. He assumed they were in the bedroom. If not, they'd be in another room.
Condition of guns: Neil knew the guns had locks on them and he was with Joe when he bought the locks. He knew Joe kept them in a black bag. Neil knew about the keys and was aware that the keys were somewhere in the house, knew what they looked like and could have found them.
Finances: Neil told him what credit cards. He said they had money they brought over from England. Rachel had an account with Priscilla. They were getting on track in US.
They spoke about medical exams to be done, and Neil said that he could call any time.
Jan. 24, about 7:30. Manning called Neil. The call lasted about 45 minutes.
It was recorded.
Sidebar
Tape of the next conversation:
Results from ME, he reminds Neil he is recording the call. Neil has no problem with it.
Manning: Doctors determined cause and manner of death. Both Rachel and Lillie died of gunshot wounds. Manner is still suspicious.
It's hard to hear Neil.
Death is Foul Play.
The tape is too difficult for the jury to hear, so the judge adjourns court till Monday. (They were going to end the session at 3:30 today, anyway.)
Have a great weekend and watch for a special blog edition over the weekend!
Thanks for co-reporting ritanita, as always.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Entwistle Murder Trial – Day 10
~ Defense Attorney Stephanie Page floats theory that Rachel killed herself and her daughter.
James returns to the stand.
Pages 1 through 16 of the computer history –
1/19/06 the last use of the computer was at 19:10:38.
Another document shows ent use. The last login 1/20/06 at 12:39:05. 5 seconds before that, an incorrect password was supplied for the ent account.
From 12:35 onward, the internet activity was relative to e-mail being viewed.
Would it have been possible for someone to walk up to the computer and view the e-mail? No, a password for the ent account had to be put in.
Any internet activity from 9am and 11am? No.
Between 11 and 12? No.
Sidebar
What a cold-hearted SOB! Calmly reading e-mails while sitting feet away from the bodies of his wife and daughter. Yup, he was sure distraught and panicked.
Now they have the custodial records from Adult Friend Finder and the court marks them.
A printout from SR Pub at Adult Friend Finder is on the screen. It reads, women for one on one sex.
I am an Englishman just moved to the US and am looking for relations with American woman….
I am looking to meet American woman of all ages. I need to confirm what friends have told me you are much better in bed than woman across the ocean…
Adult Friend Finder has 2 accesses, a free trial membership, or a paid subscription. Paid subscriptions are paid for by credit card,
The report says a credit card number was used. The name Entwistle and a UK address are on the report. Payment was for $19.95. It was on 12/21/05. 1/21/06 is when the account expired!
No further questions!
Cross - Weinstein
He was asked to assist by somebody from within MA State Police? No.
DA’s office? Yes, but doesn’t know why.
He’s the guy who learned End Case and Net analysis. Yes.
He’s one of the few who are trained in this? Yes.
It’s not unusual? No.
Who gave him this computer? State Police, Troopers Banks and Manning.
He’s only talked about the laptop? No, two.
Did he clone other hard drives? Yes, made forensic duplicate.
Was he given a computer from Atty. Michael Fee? No.
Did you know there was a hard drive that came out of a box at 6 Cubs Path? No.
Referring to date 1/20/06 - a user logged on and the user visited different sites, and that some of the sites related to e-mail and the visits to the computer had to do with job searches and the e-mails had to do with job searches? Yes.
Laptop from 6 Cubs Path - you had a computer monitor and you could view things on the screen in front of you? Yes.
You could see things generated from the copy of the hard drive and could see it as seen on the original laptop? No, not exactly.
Windows EP - what does that mean? Login screen.
The login screen indicates 3 accounts? No.
Wallpaper? It was a photograph? Yes (shows picture) He doesn’t recall the image of the wallpaper. The picture doesn’t help him recall it, but he could remember if he produced a print screen image. Pros. stipulates to photo.
Weinstein puts of photo of baby Lillian.
He asks if it’s the image stipulated to? Yes.
Does he recall looking at other photographs memorialized on the hard drive of that computer? Weinstein shows James a photo.
Sidebar
Photos stipulated to that they came from the hard drive.
Weinstein shows a series of photos from the hard drive, but are not being shown on the video stream.
1/9/2006 - He was talking about the computer user searching travel sites? Yes
There were several travel sites? Yes
Airline information, reservation information, Manchester... Yes
You referred to computer activity 1/9/06 - access to Last Minute.com seeking information seeking round-trip air travel. Doesn’t know
You’ve interpreted a lot of information off this documentation, this access 1/9/06 related to a flight from Manchester to Boston for two adults, no children or infants, 4/6/06-4/18/06.
Weinstein is pointing this information out to James, bit-by-bit.
Weinstein then puts the exhibit back on the Elmo and runs through the information once again.
No more questions.
Re-direct
None
Well, it appears Mr. Weinstein did his homework. He found one site that wasn’t about a one-way ticket to England.
Next witness – Dr. William Zane, the ME. He gives his CV. He specializes in forensic pathology.
He’s performed 6,000 or more autopsies. 500-600 homicide victims and gunshot wounds.
January 24, 2006 he performed the autopsy on Rachel. Rachel was 62 inches and 159 pounds. Trooper Julie Mosley and the State Police photographer and several other police and Troopers were present.
The external examination is done head-to-toe, front to back.
Rachel had a gunshot wound to the left breast. The shape of the wound was irregular. It wasn’t immediately visible if it was a gunshot until it was cleaned. An x-ray did reveal a projectile.
There was irregular abrasion around the wound. This could be from a bullet tumbling or passing through another target first. The bullet did not penetrate the chest wall or bone or arteries.
Zane identifies a photo of a small caliber bullet that was recovered from Rachel.
The bullet was given to Trooper Steve Walsh.
Rachel’s body showed lividity in the back – left side and a contusion.
Zane then examined Rachel’s head. He noticed skull hemorrhage and a defect wound in the center of the head. It was a gunshot wound. They shaved the skull at the hairline and exposed the wound. The area was documented and photographed.
Rachel’s face didn’t contain traces of powder. There was no stippling on Rachel. It was a non-contact wound.
The internal examination of the head showed defect in the brain and a broken apart bullet in the brain. The bullet traveled downward and front-to-back. It passed through the frontal lobes. The frontal lobes control higher thinking and personality. The lower part of the lobes control breathing and other body functions.
Zane identifies the bullet fragments.
The chest and abdominal examine showed no damage.
The evidence kit was used prior to any incisions being made and given to LE. Swabs, etc.
Zane's "ah" speech patterns and intonation don't fill me with confidence. He sounds hesitant and unsure at times. He also uses a lot of vague words where a scientist should be using precise language.
Fabbri puts up body diagrams and has Zane point to and mark the areas of the wounds.
Sidebar
The wound to the chest of Rachel was not a contact wound.
Zane identifies a photo of Rachel’s shaved scalp and the bullet wound. Marked into evidence.
The photo is shown to the jury by the court officer – it is not up on the ELMO.
Sidebar
Based on your examination were you able to determine a case of death. The gunshot wound to the head and the perforation of the brain. Death was immediate.
Zane cannot determine day or time of the death. Decomposition was probably occurring 3-4 days when the autopsy was done.
The autopsy on Lillian was then done.
Lilly was 28 inches and 21-1/2 pounds.
There was darkening of the skin and decomposition. Nothing significant about her head.
Lividity was present on the front of her body.
Then Lilly was moved! She was found on her back, with a pillow over her face…
He found a gunshot wound to Lilly’s chest. No powder or stippling.
The wound was consistent of a contact wound.
Her back had a defect on the right.
The internal exam showed a bullet had passed through the chest plate. Damage was by the fourth rib. Damage to the diaphragm and damage in the abdomen. The liver was also damaged – perforated, through and through.
The kidney was also was macerated. The 11th rib was fractured and broken apart. The muscles were lacerated and torn.
The perforation to the diaphragm could affect breathing. A small injury wouldn’t necessarily cause death. Blood could accumulate and cause the lung to collapse.
The liver and kidney damage could cause death fairly rapidly.
LinZbee let us know - Listening to TTV talking legal heads and they ALL have absolutely no arguments to hold up the defense side! I've never seen this situation before here. They ALWAYS argue the most ridiculous ways to try to defend the defendant, but they are speechless here. It is just so satisfyingly funny to witness. Ha!
The external exam of Lilly and the lividity – did you review the photos and your reports? Yes.
Where was the lividity? It was on the back!
OFGS! This guy is a moron. No wonder why he was banned from performing autopsies.
Zane is marking the injuries Lilly sustained on a baby diagram.
During the autopsy Zane was, with photos and probes, able to place Lilly against Rachel and match up the wound through Lilly’s back into Rachel’s breast. The baby’s front would have faced the same direction as Rachel facing.
Lilly’s cause of death was a gunshot wound to the abdomen. Lilly probably died with in minutes. Actual date and time could not be determined, but it appeared to be 3-4 days prior to autopsy.
Zane prepared death certificates and identifies copies that he is looking at.
No further questions.
We are a bit stunned that cross is being done by Page, not Weinstein.
Cross - Page
You never went to 6 Cubs Path, ever? Correct.
You were never able to see the two bodies before they were photographed, before and after police entered. Yes.
You don't know if the bodies were moved before/after police arrived. Yes.
First saw them at ME office? Yes.
No firsthand knowledge? Yes, just from history.
Came from Hopkinton PD, State Police, DA? Yes.
He signed death certificates and autopsy reports? Yes.
Contained everything you saw? It should.
You never added anything? No addendums or reports.
Objectivity, neutrality are needed? You are an independent investigator? Independent physician.
If an expert wasn't objective, neutral, it would weight on the credibility? Yes.
You are experienced pathologist, physician? Yes.
Keep up with advances in field? I didn't say that.
You should? Yes.
You want to do as complete a job as you can? Yes.
You are a member of a number of forensic societies? No, only one.
You have attended very scientific meetings, in-house meetings? Yes.
You rely on sources for information such as "Medical and Legal Investigation of Death," by Spitz and Fischer? Yes.
It's the "bible"? I used it for the boards, he uses it extensively, doesn't know if other doctors consider it a "bible."
Zane goes through the structure and basic content of the book.
Dr. Vincent DiMaio? He is familiar with his book.
He has a sub-specialty in gunshot wounds? Yes.
DiMaio's done quite a bit of research and published beyond his book? Yes.
The American Journal of Forensic Pathology deals with issues he deals with every day.
In order to do your job, you need knowledge in a number of areas? Yes.
Trace evidence? No. (She goes on to give example where he did)
Police at autopsy can collect evidence? I can't tell what they're thinking.
If you have clothing that may contain trace evidence, you'd want the police to examine it before you remove it from the body? Yes.
He would mention existence of evidence of clothing in his report if it mattered.
He needs a working knowledge of ballistics? Define "working".
It is the ME's job to confirm or refute information received.
It is his duty to review new information if it is brought to his attention.
He agrees it is important to get a history on the person involved.
The autopsy is his main laboratory tool.
He relies on information given to him by investigators and decides if a case needs more investigation.
He agrees with Spitz and Fischer that homicide, suicide, or accident can be difficult to decide.
The fact that someone died of a gunshot wound cannot tell if it was a homicide. You base it on history, investigation, etc.
It can't say who fired the weapon.
He needs to rule out accident and suicide. He points out difference between cause and manner of death, and you need to look at the situations.
He says he's not really an expert on guns but he can recognize a bullet hole, recognize entry, and exit wounds.
He needs to know what kind of evidence guns leave on bodies.
Page reminds the witness that things may not be, as they seem.
Sometimes determining the manner of death relies on more than what he sees on the table.
He tries to find out as much as he can about the persons life? No.
Page explores this further. She reviews his testimony and says he knows he's done more autopsies on suicides than homicides.
DiMaio mentions that there are many things to look for to determine homicide.
Sidebar
Handguns are used more than rifles in suicides.
92% of women shoot themselves with a handgun according to studies.
Women use handguns more than men? I’m pleading ignorance.
Page shows him the book.
What’s happening here is that Page is quoting from DiMaio’s book and attempting to get this information into testimony. She reads statistics and asks Zane to agree. When he can’t, she shows him the book and has him read the statistics. In this case, the “fact” that in DiMaio’s book he states that studies show 72% of women who commit suicide shoot themselves in the head.....
OBJECTION to that.
Kitty Malone is freaking out! Why is she bringing up suicide? Please don't even THINK about going there defense team! If she committed suicide - where's the FREAKING GUN? DID SHE RUN IT BACK OVER TO HER PARENT'S HOUSE AS SHE WAS DYING??!!! I can't imagine what they are thinking because I'm sitting here SHAKING MAD!!!! This is why defense attorney's get the bad rap most of them deserve!!! WHERE'S THE GUN, PAGE?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOULDN'T IT BE LYING BESIDE HER AND THE BABY IF SHE OFFED HERSELF?!!! IDIOT!
Page then tries to get Zane to say he agrees. Zane doesn’t quite agree. He relies on Dr. DiMaio as a reliable authority.
Page now asks him to agree that the majority of people who commit suicide don’t leave a note. He agrees, but doesn’t specifically know the 26% she quotes from the book for a fact. Page again hands him the book to peruse.
Sidebar
Yikes, our folks here are totally losing it! LinZbee: They have gone mad! WHAT HAPPENED TO THE GUN if Rachel did it????????????????????????? Lame, lame, lame! Aren't these def attorneys embarrassed? Oh, I forgot, they will say ANYTHING. I'm sick. Kitty Malone: I'm coming UNGLUED here! More so than I did during the PS trial! This is just ridiculous!!!!
On to gunshot residue –
Presence on a body could be a factor in determination of suicide. You can’t see it with the naked eye and swabs are taken? Yes.
Page is browbeating Zane asking question he doesn’t want to answer yes or no.
If a suicide is suspected, there are things you’d want to know? Yes,
If a person was depressed? Yes.
Postpartum depression, easy access to guns, prescriptions and their side effects? Yes.
Define a bruise. Caused by a blunt impact with an object that causes the crushing of the underlying tissue to cause bleeding under the skin.
The heart needs to be pumping to cause a bruise?
The breast wound to Rachel? The wound was non fatal; never entered the torso, no GSR? It didn’t break bones, no muscles were torn.
There was a bruise around the wound the heart was still pumping when the wound occurred so the bruise indicated the person was still alive.
There was only one wound t the baby. It occurred sometime when the baby was up against the adult body near where many believe the heart is. The adult female’s wound was also to her left side. He described the path of the baby’s wound as front to back.
There was lividity on the back of the baby that indicates the baby was on her back after death.
The path of the bullets can’t tell you how the gun was held? No.
He can’t say whether the gun was held by one or two hands.
It can’t tell you who fired the gun? Yes, no…he changes his mind.
Page – You’ve changed a lot
Objection
Page states there’s no place in his report that documents where the bullet fragments were found. Zane goes to his report. He did not document it.
Page points out he’s have to have some pretty concrete facts – Zane says he knows where the fragments were.
Page wants the data and says it doesn’t exist.
He says it does exist; it is on his diagram, but not in words in his report.
Page suggests they break for lunch.
Back to bullet fragments. Page says he has precise notes in his notes? No, but he has a diagram.
It doesn't have any measurement, depth, directionality? No
Time of death. It's not possible to get a precise time of death? Yes
Your opinion was good for a range of 3-4 days, plus, minus a day. It could be from Thursday to Saturday? Yes
Page gives specific times. He agrees.
Looking at death certificate - Date of Injury, unknown. Hour of death, unknown.
In terms of photographs. They were a little darker than his memory. Some of them were.
There appeared to be injury to the baby's face? Not to me, to a lay person, yes.
Why does the face appear bruised? It has some darkening because it's been exposed to air and the skin darkens when exposed to dry air, due to decomposition and lividity. Fluids are purged from the mouth. Purging is natural leakage from the body after death.
No evidence of trauma or violence except for the gunshot wound.
The baby could have died within seconds. Could be minutes or minutes.
He was able to track the wound from the baby to the mother but you can't track the wound. He tried to do this during autopsy. He positioned the bodies in a number of ways to see if the wounds matched up. Page mentions the positions.
There was no way for Zane to know exactly what the positions the bodies were in when they were shot. He still had no idea where hands or the female head were.
He had seen photos of the two bodies in the bed. The baby had a lot of lividity on the back side. The baby was on her back. He doesn't recall if that was reported to him.
The baby's right back would have had to been up against the left breast.
No investigation is always over. There may be facts that become available after the autopsy, after signing the death certificate.
If he received information that would change his mind, he would have an obligation to consider it.
He would never turn a blind eye to evidence that came in later.
He expects others to share information with him and vice versa.
From information from the police and DA, he never had a reason to investigate Rachel's life. No reason to question about depression or difficulties in her life.
After 6/15/06, was he told by the pros. office that the gunshot residue tests had come back? No From the police? No
Was he ever told that Rachel tested positive for gunshot residue on the front or back of her hands? No
Rachel's position... one hand stretched out, one over baby? Didn't remember.
Photograph of bodies by police. Page points out position of one arm, other not visible.
Page is trying to elicit that the hands couldn't have been in that position when the gun was fired.... doesn't get in.
Zane learned today on stand about the gunshot residue results. In his meetings with pros. and Trooper Manning, Fabbri never told you they had a test that showed Rachel had gunpowder residue. He says he doesn't remember.
Page points out this is important. He says "NO" He did say it could indicate a person shot a gun, that it's difficult to prove murder or suicide? He says the test wouldn't necessarily have helped him.
He says IF he had asked to see it, he would have been shown the tests if it was appropriate for him to see it.
Page is indignant about this and asks if he shouldn't have been told? He says no.
He works for the Commonwealth and usually called to testify by the prosecution.
Why doesn't he just say that gunpowder residue is an unreliable indicator?
He can't recall what he said this morning about the importance of gunshot residue evidence.
Spitz and Fischer: "Hands suspected of firing a weapon should be tested for gunshot residue" Zane doesn't agree.
Page is outraged and says "Oh, my goodness!"
We go on and on about this issue.
Sidebar
If evidence existed in a case where you had the responsibility to determine cause of death, that would be important information? It depends on the case, he doesn't know in what case it would be helpful in. It could be helpful if it answered a particular question.
Page repeats that he was not informed.
Re-direct
What type of information
It would tell me if someone was inside a room where a gun was discharged.
Can it tell if someone fired a gun? Not equivocally.
Can it tell you under any of the 3 circumstances? No
Knowing her hands tested positive, does it make a difference in your opinion? Not with regards to the findings he has.
It only tells him that the adult female was in the room when the gun was discharged.
Toxicology results? Yes
Rachel: Blood, urine, fluid from eyes. Negative for drugs of abuse, alcohol.
Reports and diagram of fragments: recovered from the substance of the brain, in downward, front-to back location. Indicated location on the diagram.
He is shown a standard diagram. It has a stamp with Rachel's name and case number. It documents the injury to her brain. He x'd in an area of the brain for entry point and marked out the areas where the fragments were. He indicated the direction and angle of the path of the projectile with an arrow.
Based on his training and experience he can state that contusions could occur after death and there can be evidence of contusing after death.
There are pain receptors in the muscle tissue, surrounding the muscle tissue, connecting tissue. There are some in/around organs of the body. Examples: heart attack, appendicitis, stomach pain.
Injuries to the torso result in pain.
If one were to sustain a self-inflicted wound to the torso vs. a gunshot wound to the head, which would cause death faster? Head
Suicidal gunshot wounds generally occur to the temple, mouth, chin. Usually contact wounds.
Do people attempt suicide by shooting through another person? No
Re-Cross
There are parent/child suicides? Yes
Page again goes over the diagram or chart and asks if he accurately described the paths... did he describe it in more detail that coloring in? No
The breast is mostly fatty tissue? Yes
That's where the bullet ended up? Yes
Not debilitating injury? Yes
Did he indicate in his report that the bruise around it came after death? No
Gun residue on Rachel's hand would not change his opinion.
Page asks who Rachel's doctor was, where she delivered the baby? Doesn't know
Page goes into examples of how Zane doesn't know any details about Rachel's life other than what the Police or the Prosecutors told him.
Zane says he didn't call her doctor.
Page asks a number of questions which are objected to.
Next witness -
Det. Sgt, Gary Flood with the extradition Unit with Scotland Yard. The unit seeks out fugitives from countries they have extradition agreements with.
He received information about Entwistle. They contacted British Airways to see if Entwistle arrived in the UK.
On January 26th he met with police from Hopkinton and MA state police.
Sidebar
On February 8, 2006 did you seek anything? Yes, a provisional arrest warrant at 9:30pm.
They contacted Entwistle’s father, Clifford. They told him the warrant had been issued for Neil’s arrest. They asked him to call Neil and have him call the police.
Clifford gave them Neil’s cell phone number that they called, but it was turned off.
They went to Dash Munding’s home. There was no answer. They called his cell and spoke with him and then went to Ladbroke Station – the tube.
He met Munding outside the station and they had a conversation.
They searched the platform and stopped a train, 2 stations down. They drove to the Royal Oak station.
They searched the train and located Neil Entwistle. They had that one train door opened and they told Entwistle and they removed him from the train.
They identified themselves and told him he was under arrest. They asked him his name and date of birth, which he confirmed.
Neil had a blue bag with him. They searched him for weapons and handcuffed him.
They brought him to the police station. He was booked and they searched further. His clothes were taken and pockets emptied.
February 16th, Neil was still in custody and they brought him to Gatwick airport and he was turned over to US Marshals.
They are looking at a map. York and London are 210 miles apart. Manchester to London is 200 miles. Worksop is 160 miles to London. Worksop to York is 60 miles.
Budget Rent A Car has offices at the airport, near York, Manchester and Sheffield, outside of Worksop.
Nothing more, no cross.
Next witness – DC Ron Hay, worked with Flood in arresting Entwistle.
February 9th, 2006 he was on duty with Flood.
He describes going to the train station around 11:35. They met Dash.
He says they drove to Royal Oak station. They entered they station. There was a stopped train in the station. They spotted Entwistle on the train.
This is a repeat of Flood’s testimony.
Entwistle had a bag that he took possession of.
At the police station he conducted a search. The bag had clothing toiletries and correspondence. He had identification on him and in the bag.
Hay found Entwistle’s UK driver license in the bag. Hay found a notepad. The notepad is identified.
Hay found a newspaper cutting and a lease for a property in the US. Hay identifies the items.
The items are published to the jury.
The newspaper clipping is from The Daily Sport, a United Kingdom publication.
Hay identifies a cell phone that Entwistle had in his pocket.
A phone charger was in the blue bag.
Hay identifies a piece of paper with writing on it that Entwistle had in his pocket.
Hay now identifies a black leather wallet that contained cash, 7 credit cards, correspondence, and a metal yellow ring. There was just under $500 pounds. The US value was about $1,000.
Entwistle’s coat, sweater, jeans and boots were taken into custody by Hay. Eventually they were turned over to the US.
Cross - Weinstein
Packet with ring in wallet. That was one of two rings he had? He doesn't remember the ring on his finger. He doesn't know where it is today.
Maybe he wasn't wearing a ring on his finger?
Next witness - DC Richard Potter, Metropolitan Police Extradition Unit. He works with Flood and Hay.
He went to the Worksop police station on the 9th. He went to Neil’s parent’s house to search it. The parents were home and they had a conversation.
They searched the bedroom and found a wallet in a small waste bin. It was a small black wallet containing $7 US – correspondence, a phone number and a PayPal credit card and number of receipts from the US and Britain.
He identifies the wallet.
He identifies the credit card.
He identifies the receipts.
He identifies the paper with the phone number.
They also took 2 desktop computers from the bedroom.
They searched the other rooms and the garage. They also took custody of a laptop.
On February 13, he turned the computers over to DC Sheikh.
Sidebar
Potter is shown a number of documents collected from Budget Rental and Holiday Express and HSBC bank that he identifies.
No further questions.
Court adjourned. Tomorrow they will end the day at 3:30.
Thanks ritanita!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
