AP Worldstream
02-14-2006
Dateline: BOSTON
After finding his wife and baby daughter dead in their Hopkinton home, Neil Entwistle told police, he was so distraught that he drove 50 miles (80 kilometers) to his father-in-law's house to get a gun to kill himself.
He said he couldn't get into the locked house, but police later found keys to the house inside Entwistle's car.
Entwistle, who is charged in the Jan. 20 shootings of his wife, Rachel, 27, and 9-month-old daughter, Lillian, allegedly gave several other inconsistent statements to police and relatives in what could be a boon to the prosecution's case.
Defense attorneys, however, say they could be explained to a jury as simply the sign of a man in shock over the horrific deaths of his wife and daughter.
"They are not reliable statements because at that time, he was having a stressful reaction to finding his family slaughtered," said Boston defense attorney Jeffrey Denner. "They were the product of an unstable, erratic mind ... therefore they are not reliable."
Middlesex District Attorney Martha Coakley said authorities believe Entwistle used his father-in-law's .22-caliber handgun to shoot his wife and daughter, and may have planned to kill himself after becoming despondent over mounting debts.
But instead of committing suicide, Entwistle drove the gun back to his father-in-law's house, then fled to his native England, authorities allege.
Entwistle waived extradition and agreed to return to the United States. Neither British nor U.S. authorities would say when Entwistle is expected to arrive in Massachusetts.
Hopkinton Police Chief Tom Irvin said he expects Entwistle to be booked at the Hopkinton police station and held there until his arraignment in Framingham District Court.
In search warrant affidavits made public on Monday, authorities outlined their case against Entwistle, describing him as a secretive man who was sinking deep into debt and hiding it from his family. The documents say that in the days before the killings, Entwistle trolled the Internet looking for information on ways to kill people and commit suicide. He also looked up information about escort services and visited a Web site that offers help in finding sexual partners.
The documents also describe various statements Entwistle made to his father and a state police detective who called him at his parents' home in Worksop, England, the day after the bodies were found.
Entwistle allegedly told the state trooper that he left his Hopkinton home to do errands and returned two hours later to find his wife and daughter dead.
But Entwistle's father, Clifford, told Entwistle's father-in-law, Joseph Matterazzo, that his son told him he had been gone only 20 minutes when he came home to find Rachel and Lillian dead.
Clifford Entwistle also told Matterazzo that his son told him he called police after finding the bodies. But he told state police that he did not call for emergency assistance, instead covering the bodies with a comforter. He said he contemplated killing himself, but eventually drove to Logan International Airport because he wanted to go home to see his parents in England.
In Massachusetts, defense lawyers are given wide latitude to seek suppression of statements.
A defendant is entitled to a hearing on whether a statement was made knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily. Under that rule, defense lawyers could seek to suppress statements made to non-police witnesses, in this case, Entwistle's father.
Still, David Frank, a former state prosecutor, said the varying statements allegedly given by Entwistle could be a powerful tool for the state.
"It's great for prosecutors going into a trial to know that in a horrific case like this _ where an infant and her mother are murdered _ a jury is now going to hear that the person who is accused of committing the crime told inconsistencies and told lies in the aftermath of the crime," Frank said.
But defense attorneys say Entwistle's statements could also be used to his advantage.
"When someone is off-kilter because of what has happened, the argument is you cannot expect they are going to be consistent right down the line in everything they say," said Boston attorney Robert George.
"If the prosecution is going to argue that such statements are proof of incredibility," he said, "the flip side of that is that if someone tells the same story over and over again in exact detail at every level, that could be an indication of someone who is lying."
Copyright 2006, AP News All Rights Reserved
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий