Murder Trial and Murder - Case Study Example

Murder Trial and Murder Case The issues pertaining to the case were that an infant daughter (Lillian Rose) and her mother (Rachel Entwistle) were found dead, the reason for the death had been that of being shot by the same bullet. They were killed in their Cubs Path Home. Further the authorities have deduced that the father who was not home at that time and is still missing has been said to be a person of interest. The possible conviction of murder by the suspect and how the facts and the evidence had lead to such conviction had been resolved in the case. The murder case of Entwistle deals with an English man Neil Entwistle who was firstly established to be a possible suspect and was finally convicted of murdering his infant child and wife, Lillian and Rachel respectively. The brutal act had occurred on 20th January 2006 in the United States of America. The rented Hopkinton Massachusetts a place which had been rented out by the couple just ten days prior to the incident was where the bodies had been found on 22nd January 2006. The bodies were found in the bedroom. Rachel 27 and Lillian 9 months old had died due to wounds of gun shot on the head and stomach respectively. The trial for murder started on June 2 2008 and on 25th June 2008 Neil was found guilty of all the charges and was sentenced to life imprisionment the next day. The Circumstantial evidence that could be deduced was that of Massachusetts State Police chemist Deanna Dygan who in her testimony in the superior court held up the floral underpants of the Rachel stated that blood samples and sperm cells were found on the crotch area. However seminal fluid could not be tested positive. Further the shirt of Rachel which was covered with blood was found to have sperm cells and three holes out of which two had tested positive to lead which is present due to a gunshot. Finally it was found that the death of the infant had been caused due to a contact shot. The circumstantial evidence which had been put forward by Dygan was said to be inconclusive and thus was of not much help. The objectivity of the investigation was put into question by the lawyer of Elliot Weinstein who put in the relevant evidence that is if prior to or during the investigation Dygan had put in Entwistle's name in the suspect box on crime scene sheet. Dygan stated in the affirmative on which Elloit stated that this had affected the investigation procedure. Further he argued that the bullet wound had not been found on the crime scene and had been found during the autopsy, a vital element not noticed during the investigation of the crime scene. Finally when Weinstein asked if the bullet trajectory had been carried out which was answered in the negative by Dygan. The relevant evidence which had been established in the specific case led to the establishment of the fact that Dygan had been led to believe that Neil Entwistle the possible suspect was the culprit and so a biased opinion had been possibly established by the chemist. The direct evidence that was provided was that by Drugan, the senior chemist in the state police crime lab's arson and explosives unit who stated that the residue of gun primer was found only on the hands of Rachel. He went on to say that quite a few items of the BMW had been tested at the airport and it was deduced that neither the steering wheel, keys and a shirt had all been found to be negative when the tests for the gun primer had been carried out. Further eleven knives had been tested for the knife block but all came negative. The direct evidence that had been provided for by Drugan was in itself a bit inconclusive which led to a stronger case being established for the possible suspect. Further the items that had been tested had strengthened the case of the husband of Rachel. The testimonial evidence was provided by Trooper Stephen Walsh who is a member of the fire arms identification unit. He provided that he had tested a bullet which had been removed from the body of the victim Rachel's chest and had further removed two fragments of bullets. The objects that had played part in the act or in other words the physical evidence that can be deduced is that Walsh testified that he had fired bullets from all the weapons that had been possessed by Rachel's stepfather, Joe Matterazzo. The weapons which had been fired were .22-calibre Colt revolver, a .357 revolver, a 9-millimeter handgun and two .22 caliber rifles. What Walsh deduced was that the only weapons that could have been used to fire the bullets was a Colt revolver and the reason for this was the rotating groovs inside the muzzle. However a problem had arose, that is Walsh could not conclusively determine whether the specific Colt had been used, because of the sole reason, which was that the bullets had been severely damaged. Thus the evidence which had been presented by Walsh could in itself not form any conclusive evidence and vague. Thus possibilities of the gun which had been fired remained open, which did not help the trial to go into the beyond reasonable doubt situation required to prove the conviction of a possible suspect. However the physical evidence was found when the .22 handgun was tested and on which the DNA of Neil were found. Murder Case The crime scene investigated in the Entwistle murder case showed that two bodies had been found one of Rachel a 27 year old lady and Lillian a nine month old infant who had been shot with a gun. The bodies were found after the police were contacted by family members as well as friends of Rachel who stated that they were unable to contact the family. On the night of the murder a dinner had been arranged for friends by Rachel, however when they reached the place they saw that it was dark and it seemed like no one was present inside the house. Thus the family member and friends who got worried called the police on Sunday and stated the situation. The police on a routine well being check went inside the house and found the two dead bodies in the bedroom and it was stated that the bodies had been covered in blankets. The police had no impression that a murder had taken place when they entered the room. Further the police did not say any stains of bullets and at first were unable to discover the bullet wounds. An autopsy of the bodies found in the house was carried out and the floral underpants of Rachel underpants were given in for testing. A test to ascertain whether there were any blood stains and sperm cells was carried out and it was found that they indeed possessed such elements. However it was noticed that there was no seminal fluid present and thus the test turned out to be negative. The result were found to be admissible by the courts. Moving on the shirt of Rachel was tested and it was found to have sperm cells, blood and three holes. Out of the three holes two were tested positive to consist of lead which is found when a gunshot is fired. Finally a test on how the infant was shot was carried out and it was found that it was due to a contact shot. The test used was of DNA along with the detection of lead. The evidence was allowed in court as the presence of lead would lead to the gun which was used. Moving on a the computer of Entwistle was searched into and encrypted and it was found that a few days before the murder, a site which described how to kill people had been looked into by Entwistle and further a search on escort services had been made. This evidence was found to be admissible in the court as a possible data providing that a planned murder had taken place. However to ascertain on such evidence alone would be difficult, but still it was seen that the court did take into account of this evidence found by the researchers and the police department who suspected that financial constraints had motivated Entwistle to kill his wife and child. However this was unclear from the evidence. Further evidence was provided by Trooper Stephen Walsh member of the fire arms identification unit, who stated that he had removed bullets from the body of Rachel and had made tests on ammunition by carrying out the bullet research and to ascertain the type of bullet which had been used so as to make it clear as to the type of gun which had been used. He went on to state that the gun that had been used was a Colt revolver. Neil's representatives argued that the evidence that had been obtained from the matrimonial home should be inadmissible as he had not given an express authority to the police to enter the apartment. However the courts did allow the evidence on account of a warrant that hadd been obtained.This evidence was admitted as it helped in establishing the fact the gun which had been used by the suspect was that of his father in law. He went on to say that he had removed two fragments of bullets from Rachel's body which were allowed as evidence. The gun used was recovered from his father in law and so Entwistle was charged with the illegal possession of fire arms. Thus forensic information proved the fact of the gun that had been used, that is a .22 handgun. Further the DNA test which was carried out on the handgun showed that Entwistle's DNA was present on the gun. Additionally the gun's muzzle had the DNA of Rachel. Finally, in the BMW (which Neil had left at the airport when he left for England) there were found the keys of Materazzo's (Neil's father in law) house. The evidence of key was allowed in the court. This showed that Entwistle had visited his father in law's house and picked up the gun from there. In the court when Entwistle denied that he had not even touched the gun it showed that Entwistle was clearly lying as by performing the test of finger prints it was known that Entwistle had grabbed that gun. It was not however clear that the bullets found in the body of his wife and child were shot from that gun, the lie made it more clear that Entwistle was trying to cover up his case. The clothes of the Rachel and Lillain were bloodied and the bullets were fired from a gun similar that of the one which had the finger prints of Entwistle. Entwistle was found guilty in June 2008 of first degree murder as the jury decided that the case against him was strong enough. Bibliography "Neil Entwistle Is Charged with Murder." People Weekly. (2006): 73. McPhee, Michele R. Absolute Evil. London: John Blake, 2008. McPhee, Michele. Heartless: The True Story of Neil Entwistle and the Cold Brutal Murder of His Wife and Child. New York: St. Martin's Paperbacks, 2008. BBC News Briton denies US family murders < http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4718570.stm> BBC News Neil Entwistle murder trial verdict < http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7471964.stm> Times Online The Neil Entwistle case: Searching for an answer < http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4666653.ece> Fox News Neil Entwistle Charged in Wife's, Daughter's Deaths < http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184309,00.html> Fox News Britain Native Neil Entwistle Convicted of Murdering Wife, Baby Daughter < http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,371261,00.html> Read More