MyFox
 

Bob_Ward's Blog

by Bob_Ward from Dedham

Last Post 5 days, 21 hours Ago


Count me as one of those people who thought these deliberations wouldn't take long. I didn't think there'd be an immediate verdict, but I thought it was possible to have something by the end of the day.

Wrong.

The jury called it a day at 4 p.m. It will resume deliberation 9 a.m. on Wednesday.

There is no way to tell how long this is going to take. The only insight we have is the pair of questions the jury had for the judge this afternoon.

The jury wanted information about a receipt recovered from Neil's BMW and about computer activity recorded on Neil's computer on the morning of the murders. It looks like the jury wanted to examine these two pieces of evidence, rather than rely on memory of the testimony.

The computer evidence is interesting. The state's computer forensic witness said that on January 20th, someone using the "ent" log-on, accessed Neil's computer at about 12:30 p.m.

The trouble for Neil is that he told Trooper Manning he found the bodies of his wife and baby at about 11 a.m. So an hour and a half after discovering the bodies, Neil Entwistle doesn't call 911, but he checks his e-mail.

Now, in closing, Neil's lawyer suggested that Neil was wrong about his times. That he returned to his house after the errands later than he thought and accessed the email just before he found the bodies.

The trouble for me is that on the Manning tape, Neil is clear about times, where he was and when. He's also clear about what he did when he walked into the quiet house. He even remembers getting annoyed with Rachel because the kitchen was still dirty ("what was she doing for two hours?"). Yet he says nothing at all about checking his computer.

This issue of changing the timeline only exists in the defense's closing on Monday. There's no other evidence for it.

The fact that this jury didn't return a quick verdict is a sign that the jurors are taking very seriously their duty to go over all of the evidence. Remember when Elliot Weinstein said it's impossible to seat a fair and impartial jury in Middlesex County before the trial started? It's obvious to me now that this jury is doing what it is supposed to do: weigh the facts, consider the evidence, and work through it all.

The only other thing I can tell you is that when the jury entered the courtroom and exited the courtroom at the end of the day, not a single juror looked at Neil. In fact, they were all grim faced, and most craned their necks to purposely look away from him. I don't think that's a very good sign for Neil. But that's just me. Someone else will probably say that body language means nothing.

So I'll be back here again Wednesday morning, along with Ted Daniel and a team of Fox25 photographers and technicians.

We are expected to get a five minute heads up when the jury reaches its verdict.

And yes, I'm going to guess that we'll have something by the end of Wednesday. But don't bet on it. My track record predicting this jury isn't exactly on target!

I'll see you tomorrow.

Let me know what you think. Both Ted Daniel and I are reading all of your responses. Ted's been better at responding to them than I have been, but I'll try to catch up. Just want to let you know I am enjoying all of your views and all of your input.

Bob Ward
24 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 24
Page 1 of 2
1
Last
LMo1974 read my blog
Jun 24, 2008 | 9:40 PM

Bob,

I was in the courtroom yesterday & noticed the EXACT same thing about the jurors as they walked by Neil Entwistle. They made a point *not* to look at him. I wonder if they were instructed to do that, or if they're just not comfortable looking him in the eye. Although, after closing arguments finished, one juror did glance at him on his way out.

I think a verdict will come late tomorrow/early Thursday.

justwondering67 read my blog
Jun 24, 2008 | 10:02 PM

I'm glad the jury is taking its time and reviewing the evidence presented. This way there will be no mistrial or appeal issues at least on this issue, but I'm sure EW will include it anyway. The prosecution has an overwhelming case and Neil's inconsistencies will come back to haunt him. Was it his email account for adult friend finder that he checked on the 20th? For me, his conversations with Trooper Manning sealed his fate, but that and all the other evidence presented. I especially liked how Fabbri mentioned in his closing that NE originally opened the Adult Friend Finder account just after Rachel and Lilly left for the states. Shows a real loving and caring husband.

autumn80
Jun 24, 2008 | 10:05 PM

Hello Bob,
How are you doing? I thought too that they might be back pretty quick with this verdict. I am happy to know that the jury is looking into all the evidence and really taking their time and not making any rush judgements which is what i thought they would do and like i said am so glad they did not do that. As for the jury not wanting to look neil in the eyes today when they entered and exited the court room is hard to say what that might be about maybe they just are not comfortable at looking at him because they know that right now his life is in their hands, that would definately make me a little uncomfortable.

heatherfont read my blog view my photos
Jun 24, 2008 | 10:36 PM

Hi Bob,

Every time I think a jury is going to come back quickly, and they don't, I get the "O.J. fear." I was thinking they might have a hold-out or two. I would have been willing to consider the thought that it was a suicide, if it weren't for the glaring evidence to the contrary. I am always careful about judging reactions to tragedies, but in this case, I think Neil's actions (or lack thereof) speak volumes about his ability to at least WITNESS horror, and keep his cool. I found his conversation with the police bizarre. There is no way that I would not be asking the police what evidence they had, who they thought was involved, etc. He seemed like he was having a casual conversation with a buddy.

Thanks for keeping us up to date, and keep up the great work!

JTMS
Jun 24, 2008 | 10:44 PM

No doubt in my mind NE is guilty,but not sequestering the jury? GOD help us if there's a miss trial.

fenwaydav read my blog view my photos
Jun 25, 2008 | 1:24 AM

Bob, I say Thurs. You guys did a great job keeping us posted. Thanks.....

Chip read my blog view my photos
Jun 25, 2008 | 6:15 AM

Bob, Have you ever been on a jury? I was a number of years ago. I ended up foreperson...one of the most unenviable jobs I've ever had. Try to get a dozen people to agree the sun sets in the west.....go figure!!!

And you know my opinion: Spark 'm up!! I'm convinced by the evidence your guys have reported (and trust both of your reporting to be fair and impartial, not common praise from THIS address....).

But I am equally as glad that the jury is being prudent. It will give a final verdict credibiity if it is guilty.

But, I have a question for you and the other bloggers: Is our constant looking back at OJ simiar to our frenzied "milk and bread buying" when snow was predicted after the Blizzard of 78? Has that verdict so tainted our trust in juries?

THAT, my friend, would truly be a shame!

jovanone read my blog view my photos
Jun 25, 2008 | 7:41 AM

Chip, This is what I said on Lynn’s blog (LMo 1974) pertaining to the OJ trial.

I know we would all love to pull the switch on this cold hearted Bastared, but I still think back to the OJ trial. Extremely over whelming evidence in that case and he walked, can history possibly repeat itself? Lets hope not, but all the defense has to do is create reasonable doubt, did they?

All the defense has to do is plant that seed in one or two of the juror’s minds and then who knows what the jury will think and take into consideration? I don’t think he’ll walk, but he may not get first degree murder either, he may get second degree murder with a chance of parole. Who knows? Strange things happen in these types of cases. I would not want to be a sitting juror in this case.

The reason why I mentioned the OJ case is because it left such a bad taste in all of our mouths and we would hate to see that happen again. I think it’s hard to ignore it when OJ keeps rubbing our faces in it. I want to say I would not be surprised to see a hung jury in this case, but who knows? There’s so much evidence to consider we can only hope that this jury gets it right. The judicial system is the only one we have so we have to have faith in it. I also said on Ted’s blog; watch how quickly the defense files motions for appeal because the jury was not sequestered. Let the appeals process begin.

paulnofsky read my blog
Jun 25, 2008 | 7:49 AM

Bob while the defense lawyers have to try every aspect to prove their cleients innocence what entwistles lawyers did accusing the victim of an murder/suicide shows why lawyers are the lowest pieces of scum on the scale of life next to politicians and some members of the media(not you of course)

iamthinking read my blog
Jun 25, 2008 | 8:32 AM

Bob, thanks for the updates.

Do we know what occurred on his computer that day? I don't recall that testimony.

Question - why was Neil able to join his lawyers during the sidebars? I have never seen the defendant join their attorneys during these discussions with the judge.

Hope you can answer that.

I believe they will return today with the guilty verdict.

Thanks again.

kayleisnana read my blog view my photos
Jun 25, 2008 | 9:17 AM

Bob, I have never been so anxious about a verdict as I am with this one. I, too, thought for sure this was going to be a quick verdict! I am thoroughly convinced of his guilt. I can't recall a trial where I was as convinced of a person's guilt as I am with this one. I do trust our jury system; I don't believe they are as tolerant as as they were in the "OJ trial!" NE is an odd duck, but, even odd ducks have more compassion than he has shown. NO ONE "discovers" their wife and infant daughter dead, and just covers them up and then flees the country! Not an innocent man, anyway! Thanks, Bob, and Ted, for your compassionate, unbiased updates. As always, I always enjoy your writings. Looking forward to the verdict! I don't think our jurors will let us down. I am Keeping my fingers crossed!!!!!

TheEliteOne read my blog
Jun 25, 2008 | 9:34 AM

In a murder trial, most juries will refrain from looking at the defendant near the end of the trial. Especially filing out for deliberations, eyes staight ahead. Not looking at a murder defendant, is not always an indicator on what the jury is thinking.

bostonrob
Jun 25, 2008 | 9:53 AM

Bob, I know you approached the Matarazzo family the other day in the parking lot. You apologized for interrupting them and gave them your card for when/if they want to talk. They were very appreciative of your respecting their privacy and not pushing the issue. The family will make a statement when this is over.

Again, thanks for your professionalism.

Bob_Ward read my blog view my photos
Jun 25, 2008 | 11:43 AM

Hi Chip,

Yes I have been on a jury, and I don't know how this happened, but I was the foreman.

It was an interesting case. And it was good for me to see the dynamics involved.

After it was over I was happy for the experience, and I'm not anxious to do it again.

BW

laurzwales
Jun 25, 2008 | 11:45 AM

Im from the U.K and this case has been covered on the news channels here. Thanks for this blog. I think the jury will come back with a guilty verdict in a matter of time. I hope the jury is looking at all the evidence and are deliberating well.

Bob_Ward read my blog view my photos
Jun 25, 2008 | 11:47 AM

Hi iamthinking,

The computer records pertain to Neil's entries on January 20th, 2006 the day of the murders.

The computer was accessed at 12:30pm. Neil told State Police he found the bodies at 11AM.

Neil's lawyer says Neil has his times mixed up.

As for the sidebar, it's very unusual, but that was worked out before the trial started.

Your guess is as good as mine about why they wanted that.

BW

evadiva2008
Jun 25, 2008 | 11:48 AM

I've been following this story since day 1 and the stories that Neil was telling about the time/hours what he was doing has been so inconsistent. If he logged on to his computer after discovering the bodies then it's so obvious that he had commited the crime. How can anyone think of leaving the country and not call 911. I can't conceive that thought.

jbus04
Jun 25, 2008 | 11:58 AM

While I'm pretty sure he's guilty as sin, I'm glad the jury is doing what they are supposed to do - examining every piece of evidence. It can't be an easy decision to make when a man's fate is in your hands - I certainly wouldn't want to be in their position. That being said, I really hope they come back with a guilty verdict considering the evidence... not to mention his actions!!

Bob_Ward read my blog view my photos
Jun 25, 2008 | 12:00 PM

Hi Elite One...

I agree there are a few ways to look at it.

All I can say is that when I served on a jury, and it felt like we might convict the defendant, I had a hard time looking at him when I walked into the room.

It was just a simple human emotion.

But, again, I agree, it's dangerous to get inside someone else's head. I just thought I'd mention it.

BW

iamthinking read my blog
Jun 25, 2008 | 12:13 PM

Bob, thanks for your reply.

I have served on a few juries, I agree with you it was hard to look at the defendant when we were working towards a guilty verdict.

It was very stressful and emotional when the verdict was handed down.

Any updates for today? Are they deliberating through lunch or taking a break....??

Page 1 of 2
1
Last


Write your comment below:




Bob_Ward

I am a reporter/anchor specializing in crime and regular features such as New England's Unsolved and Mass Most Wanted.

Member Since: 10/16/2006