The Freedom Bulletin

Jami Floyd from TruTV posted a great blog entry called “For the defense,” which I happen to agree with. Throughout the Neil Entwistle case, I have read comments online that Entwistle does not deserve a publicly-funded defense or even a trial. Such comments are simply un-American. The Constitution guarantees all defendants the right to legal representation and a fair trial by jury. The fact that there is a lot of evidence against a particular defendant, or that the defendant is widely hated, does not and should not change this.

I commend Elliot Weinstein and Stephanie Page for putting forth their best effort in defending their client. Although their murder-suicide theory did not ultimately succeed, it was a bold, ingenious move. I understand the pain that the Matterazzo family is suffering and why they are offended by the defense’s version of events, but no one should criticize Weinstein or Page for doing the best job possible for their client.

I generally support a small government with as few taxes as possible, but one of the few things I’m willing to pay taxes for is the protection of everyone’s constitutional rights. State-funded representation is often necessary to ensure that defendants receive fair trials. Providing a fair legal system is one of the most important duties (if not the most important) of the government. If you were accused of a crime, wouldn’t you agree?

Neil Entwistle was officially sentenced to life in prison today. Judge Diane Kottmyer sentenced Entwistle to two concurrent life sentences without parole for the murders of his wife Rachel and baby Lillian and also gave him 10 years of probation for possession of a firearm and ammunition, with the condition that he cannot make money from selling his story in any way.

Before the sentence was officially read, Rachel’s relatives gave victim impact statements. Her mother, Priscilla Matterazzo, asked the judge to impose two consecutive life sentences and called the defense’s theory that Rachel committed a murder-suicide “low and despicable.” Rachel’s stepfather, Joe Matterazzo, told Entwistle that “one day you will face the ultimate judgement for your horrific deeds.” Jerome Souza, Rachel’s brother, said that “each and every day we have to live with the heartache of Neil’s betrayal” and “we can only reflect on what Rachel did and speculate on what Lilly might have done.”

Entwistle did not react to the statements but smiled faintly at his parents and brother when he entered the courtroom and again when he left for the last time. He was given an opportunity to speak, but his lawyer Elliot Weinstein told the court that he did not wish to do so.

Judge Kottmyer called the crimes “incomprehensible” and “in violation of the bonds we recognize as central to our identity as human beings.” She had the option of giving Entwistle consecutive or concurrent life sentences, but decided on concurrent because consecutive life sentences might give the impression to those unfamiliar with the Massachusetts legal system that Entwistle might eventually be able to get out of jail. The decision was purely symbolic, of course. Unless he is successful in his appeals, Entwistle will be in jail for the rest of his life with no opportunity for parole.

Afterward, defense lawyers Elliot Weinstein and Stephanie Page gave a press conference outside the courthouse. They criticized the attitude that defendants should prove their innocence and insisted that the prosecution had not met its burden of proof in the case. “What I’m frustrated with is that so many people do not understand what a trial is,” Weinstein replied when asked if he was frustrated with Entwistle’s mother, Yvonne, for saying yesterday that she believes Rachel committed a murder-suicide. “It’s unfair to Neil, it’s unfair to the American citizenry to perpetuate this myth,” he later said.

So, one of the biggest trials in Massachusetts history is now over. Entwistle is now at MCI-Cedar Junction in Walpole, Mass., where he will serve his life sentence. I will continue blogging about the case whenever there is a new development. Until then, I’ll have to find a new trial to follow…

EDIT: The MetroWest Daily News has reported that contrary to what was said at sentencing, Entwistle will actually be held at Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center in Shirley starting tomorrow.

Neil Entwistle was found guilty this afternoon of murdering his wife Rachel and baby Lillian. The jury of 6 men and 6 women convicted him of two counts of first-degree murder and illegal possession of a firearm and ammunition.

It was announced at about 2:25 that the jury had reached a verdict, eliciting a stampede of reporters and spectators into courtroom 430. This was the first time the courtroom was completely full and people had to be turned away. Next to me a spectator and some reporters were squabbling over a space on a wooden bench. However, there were several bail hearings that had to be completed in the courtroom, so the verdict was not announced until after 2:45.

Neil did not show much reaction to the verdict. He smiled and nodded at his family as he entered the courtroom, and as he left he shrugged his shoulders and gave his family a sad look that seemed to say, “oh well.” Neither of the families reacted noticeably, either.

After the verdict, the judge thanked the jurors and alternates and she met with them privately in another room. Neil’s family, defense lawyers, Rachel’s family, prosecutors, and Middlesex District Attorney Gerry Leone all spoke to the press. Unfortunately, I missed the Entwistles and the defense team, who spoke outside the courthouse, but I was there for the D.A.’s press conference in room 730.

Leone had some harsh words for Neil. “I’d like to begin by thanking the jury and honoring the memory of Lillian and Rachel,” he said, surrounded by Rachel’s family and friends. He pointed out that Lillian would have turned three years old this April. “She should be here, talking, walking, and playing with her mom, Rachel, doting over her…and that’s not going to happen because of the reprehensible acts of Neil Entwistle.” He then praised Rachel’s parents, Joe and Priscilla Matterazzo, for their dignity in handling the tragedy. “At the same time that I commend Joe and Priscilla, I condemn Neil Entwistle,” said Leone. “A just verdict has been returned, an Neil Entwistle will spend the rest of his life in jail where he belongs.”

Then, Joe Flaherty, a spokesman for the family, thanked supporters, investigators, law enforcement, and prosecutors. “We do know that Rachel and Lillian Rose loved and trusted Neil Entwistle…Neil Entwistle will live with his evil deeds for the rest of his natural life, only to be judged again,” he said.

Joe and Priscilla themselves briefly thanked people for sending them cards and condolences, and then Leone and Assistant D.A. Michael Fabbri answered questions from reporters. When asked to comment on Neil’s family’s reaction, Leone replied, “I’d expect nothing less from the parents of someone who’s been convicted of first-degree murder…It was his cowardly, shameful, unforgivable acts that were the basis for this first-degree murder conviction.” When asked about Neil’s motive, he responded, “There are some acts that are so heinous, that are so shameful, there’s never a reason, let alone a good reason.” Fabbri, when asked what the most important piece of evidence was, said, “I think Neil Entwistle himself was one of the most critical pieces of evidence that we had.”

As for my opinion, I have a lot of respect for the jurors and their decision. I am honestly not sure what I would have done if I was on that jury. The defense’s suicide theory was certainly improbable, but I wouldn’t call it impossible. The DNA on the murder weapon was what clinched the prosecution’s case, but the gunshot residue (which was found on Rachel’s hands and nothing of Neil’s) made the defense’s theory look plausible.

There will be victim impact statements tomorrow at 10:00, and Neil will then be sentenced to life in prison without parole, the only option for first-degree murder. His case will automatically be appealed. I’m guessing the warrantless searches of his house and the widespread pretrial publicity will be big issues on appeal.

A jury deliberated Neil Entwistle’s fate all day today and will continue deliberating tomorrow. Reporters, spectators, photographers, and camera operators spent most of the day waiting for a verdict, reading, talking on cell phones, and typing on BlackBerries outside the courthouse and in the hall outside courtroom 430. Defense attorneys Elliot Weinstein and Stephanie Page hung out with Entwistle’s family in what I believe is the public defenders’ office. Peter Parker, the Entwistle family’s lawyer, also made an appearance.

Just after 3:30 the crowd, along with the lawyers in the case, the defendant, family members from both sides, and the judge, assembled in the courtroom because the jury had a question. It turned out that jurors wanted to see Entwistle’s computer records from January 20, 2006, the day of the alleged murders. Entwistle used the Internet around 12:30 that day to check on job applications.

The jury then entered at about 4:25 to let the judge know that they were done for the day. They will report back at 9:00 tomorrow.

It could be good for the defense that the jury isn’t rushing to judgemnt. There’s a chance they are leaning toward convicting Entwistle and are just waiting another day to be 100% sure, but there’s also a chance some aren’t convinced of his guilt. I think he has a chance of getting a hung jury, but it’ll depend on how stubborn the dissenting jurors are in sticking to their opinions.

Also today I stuck my head into courtroom 630, where James Brescia was just convicted of hiring a hit-man to kill his estranged wife’s boyfriend. I was there just as the guilty verdict was announced. Brescia was not present for the verdict because he suffered a stroke and was admitted to the hospital last night.

The case of Neil Entwistle is now in the hands of the jury. The prosecution rested its case today, and the defense decided not to present any witnesses. Both sides gave closing arguments, and then the judge gave instructions to the jury.

Defense lawyer Elliot Weinstein went first, arguing that Rachel Entwistle killed herself and her baby daughter, Lillian. He displayed a quote from a respected forensic pathology textbook on a monitor: “The distinction between homicide, suicide, and accident may be difficult or impossible, yet it is the first question asked by the investigator in every death involving a shooting.”

Weinstein argued that Neil had no motive to commit the murders. He had no insurance policy on his wife or daughter, his financial problems were not as severe as the prosecution claims, and his interest in sex sites was no reason to kill, Weinstein said. “How many millions of people visit these sites each day?” he asked.

He theorized that Rachel held Lillian where she thought her heart was, and fatally shot Lillian, wounding herself. Then, according to the defense, Rachel shot herself in the forehead and died instantly. “You know the breast wound was the first wound because of the bruising,” he said. While this was going on, Neil was running errands. At 11:30, Weinstein said, Neil bought two lattes from Starbucks, and at 12:31 he checked his email on the computer in the basement after entering the house through the garage. Then he went upstairs, found the bodies in bed, saw Joe Matterazzo’s .22 revolver on the sheet, and “knew instantly what had happened.” He then covered the bodies with a blanket, returned the gun to the Matterazzos’ Carver home so that the police would not know what Rachel had done, and went to England to be with his parents. Neil did not call 911, get help, or tell Sgt. Manning about the murder-suicide because he wanted to protect his wife’s reputation. “His foremost purpose was to protect Rachel’s memory, to protect her honor,” said Weinstein. “Human emotions are not predictable, and you know that in your own life experiences.”

Weinstein criticized investigators for having “filters on their view of evidence” that caused them to assume Neil was the culprit. “No one was open to even considering the possibility of suicide,” he said. Specifically, Weinstein mentioned that no one had tested Rachel’s wrists, sleeves, or the fitted sheet on the bed after her hands tested positive for gunshot residue. Additionally, investigators did not test the crime scene extensively enough for occult blood, did not test the murder weapon to see its gunshot residue dispersement pattern, and did not look into whether Rachel suffered from postpartum depression. Nor did they test Neil’s laptop for fingerprints to determine whether or not Rachel used the computer. “That is not fair to you, and that isn’t fair to Neil,” he said.

Furthermore, Weinstein pointed out that Rachel’s DNA may only have been found on the inside of the revolver, and that investigators swabbed two locations on the gun with the same swab, potentially contaminating the evidence. Also, Neil did not dispose of his laptop or the gun or prepare a convincing story for the police, friends, and Rachel’s relatives, which he would likely have done if he were guilty.

“There is no evidence to support the prosecution’s theory that Rachel did not fire the gun,” Weinstein said. “Please do not compound this tragedy,” he told the jury at the conclusion of his argument.

Next, assistant district attorney Michael Fabbri went to the podium to give his closing argument. He pointed out Neil’s alleged visits to sites about killing and sex and held up a newspaper clipping with ads for escorts, asking “What does that say about the depth of his relationship with Rachel and Lillian?”

Fabbri called the gunshot residue on Rachel’s hands a “red herring” and said that the defense’s scenario was impossible. “The whole idea of committing suicide by shooting through another person makes no common sense,” he told the jury. Instead, Fabbri pointed to the fact that Rachel’s DNA was found only on the barrel of the gun, while Neil’s was found on the grip.

According to Fabbri, Neil “shoots Rachel, he shoots Lillian, the crying and screaming coming out of Lillian, I suggest he could not handle or tolerate…he could not face that. That’s why he lays them out, that’s why he puts the pillow, that’s why he covers them up.” He called it “unimaginable” that Neil had not called for help and pointed out that he had rented a car, driven 800 miles, and spent a night in a hotel in England before going to his parents’ house.

Fabbri argued that Rachel had no motive to commit a murder-suicide. “She had her home, she had her car, she had her family, she thought she had a loving husband,” he said. Neil, on the other hand, “was the one who came here, did not have friends, did not have family…he was failing to provide for his family.” According to Fabbri, Neil “got to the tipping point” and “just maybe, the statements he made to Trooper Manning about suicide, he was talking about himself.”

Fabbri also disputed Weinstein’s assertion that Rachel may have performed internet searches for killing and suicide, since she spent most of her time caring for Lillian and “trying to set up her home.” Additionally, he said that the Starbucks receipt that Weinstein mentioned was actually from January 18, not the 20th.

Pointing at Neil, Fabbri said “He is the one who pulled that trigger twice…unfortunately, it was a homicide committed by a husband against his family.”

Earlier in the day, the court heard the rest of Sgt. Robert Manning’s testimony, which consisted of a second recorded phone conversation between him and the defendant. During the call, Neil reiterated his version of events, and Manning informed him that the keys to the Matterazzos’ home were on the keychain that was found in his BMW, contrary to what Neil had previously said. Neil repeatedly asked how long it took for Rachel and Lillian to die and what time they died. “I don’t think they suffered a lot,” Manning replied. Toward the end of the conversation, Neil said, “It’s a shock…You don’t want to know what happened, you don’t want to believe what happened.”

At the end of the day, Judge Diane Kottmyer gave the jurors detailed instructions, and they were released at 3:30 so that the lawyers and judge could make sure all exhibits were in order. The jury has the option of finding Entwistle guilty of first- or second-degree murder. They will begin deliberating tomorrow morning.