Neil Entwistle

“Sometimes you just don’t know why … No ‘why’ would really explain this. There is no why.” Lead prosecutor Michael Fabbri, speaking about Neil Entwistle’s possible motive for the double murder. Jonathan Raban: Two Clicks, the Life of Neil Entwistle.

With the excitement of moving into their own home, Rachel Entwistle was looking forward to the weekend, planning to host her mother and her best friend. Full of anticipation, Rachel spoke with her mother, Priscilla, on the evening of 19 June 2006. It was the last time anyone had contact with Rachel. Within 24 hours, both she and her baby daughter would be dead.

Unable to get a reply, the frustrated visitors alerted the police, who visited the Entwistle house. Remarkably, they found nothing. When they returned a day later, they made a grim discovery: Rachel and Lillian Rose were lying on a bed in the top-floor bedroom as if asleep.

A single gunshot to the head ended Rachel's life. Lillian had sustained a fatal gunshot wound to the abdomen. Poignantly, it appeared that Lillian was killed while being cradled by her mother.

There were no signs of a murder weapon, an intruder, or a motive. The unexplained murders of the mother and child became one of the most mysterious cases in American criminal history. Newspaper headlines focused on the horror of the slain mother and daughter.

By the time the bodies were discovered by police, Neil Entwistle had flown thousands of miles to his parents' home in England.

“Looking back on it, I don't know why—why I did things how I did,” said Entwistle. “Once I kind of realized what happened ... you think in those situations I would just look and break down, but that's not what went through my head. Well, the first thing I wanted to do was to do something to myself.” Neil Entwistle speaking to Sergeant Robert Manning of the Massachusetts State Police about finding the bodies of his wife and child. The Telegraph, 21 June 2008.

His wife and child were dead, and Neil Entwistle was nowhere to be found. Initially, Neil was not considered a suspect, only a person of interest. This quickly changed as the police investigation gained momentum.

Detective Sergeant Robert Manning led the investigation for the Massachusetts police. After discovering Neil was missing, he phoned the Entwistle family home in Nottingham. It proved to be an unusual telephone call. During the conversation, later played at his trial, police asked Entwistle to explain the events surrounding the deaths. He said he returned from doing chores at around 11 a.m. on 20 January and found his wife and child dead in their home. He claimed he had no idea who had killed them and said his first thought was to kill himself. In a confusing decision, he did not call the police for help.

During the call, Entwistle told police that, after being unable to kill himself with a knife, he went to his in-laws' house looking for a gun. Intrigued by this admission, investigators spoke with his stepfather, Joe Materazzo, who confirmed that he had taught Neil to use their Colt .22 handgun. The investigation then made a breakthrough when the gun at the in-laws' house was identified as the murder weapon. Forensic testing revealed Neil's fingerprints on the firearm.

The investigation into Entwistle's personal circumstances revealed that he had been unemployed since 2005 and had accumulated $30,000 in credit card debt. Authorities suspected a financial motive for the killings. Even more concerning were his recent online activities. A search of Entwistle's computer showed that, days before the murders, he had visited a website describing "how to kill people" and had also searched for escort services.

The links between Entwistle and the murder weapon, together with his financial difficulties and promiscuous behaviour, cast doubt on his claims of having a perfect family life. Police concluded they had sufficient evidence to build a case against Entwistle for the double murder of Rachel and Lillian.

“Based upon forensic information late Tuesday afternoon that linked the .22 handgun owned by Joseph Materazzo both to Neil Entwistle and to Rachel, we believed we had probable cause to seek an arrest warrant for Neil Entwistle’s arrest."

Middlesex County District Attorney Martha Coakley told a press conference after Entwistle’s arrest. Boston Globe, Feb 9 2007

With a loving wife and new baby daughter at his side, good-looking and successful and living the American dream, it looked to the outside world as if Neil Entwistle had it all. But he was living a lie.

At a press conference after Entwistle’s arrest, Middlesex County District Attorney, Martha Coakley tells the waiting press about the lead up to the police’s move on Entwistle,

"On Thursday night (19 January 2006), Rachel was alive and had spoken with family members.At some time on Friday morning, Neil Entwistle — with a firearm we believe he had secured at sometime before that from father-in-law Joseph Materazzo — shot Rachel Entwistle in the head and then proceeded to shoot baby Lillian, who was lying on the bed next to her mother. We believe possibly this was intended to be a murder-suicide, but we cannot confirm that. Obviously the murder was affected, but the suicide was not.”

On 9 February, the Extradition Unit of London's Metropolitan Police arrests Neil at the Royal Oak underground station in London. When police make the arrest, Entwistle has three things on him which prove helpful to the prosecution: a one-page eulogy to Rachel, a draft of his bid to sell his story to the newspapers and third is a page torn from the Daily Sport, advertising the services of prostitutes and escort agencies.

On 15 February, Entwistle is taken into the custody by US police and flown back to the United States after he waives his right to fight extradition.

On 28 March, US police indict Entwistle on two counts of murder.

“Our dreams as a parent and grandparent have been shattered by the shameful, selfish act of one person, Neil Entwistle.” Victim-impact statement from Rachel’s family read to Middlesex Superior Court at Neil Entwistle’s sentencing. BBC News Online, 25 June 2008

Neil Entwistle’s trial begins in courtroom 430 at the Middlesex Superior Court on 2 June 2008. He is on trial for his life: the charges are first degree murder of his wife Rachel and 9-month-old daughter, Lillian Rose. He denies all charges.

Michael Fabbri, Assistant District Attorney, leads the court through the case against Entwistle. During the course of the trial, the prosecutor brings over forty witnesses before the court, taking 12 days to set out their case.

The defence rests without putting any witnesses on the stand.Entwistle does not give evidence in his own defence; the only time the court hears his voice is in a recording the police conversation makes between Neil and Sgt. Manning. Entwistle’s reaction to the news that Rachel and Lillian’s deaths are being treated as foul play surprises the detective: “OK” says the newly bereaved husband and father.

The court hears compelling witness testimony. In a haunting day of evidence from Rachel’s step-father, Joe Matterazzo, he tells the jury how in conversation about funeral arrangements in the days after the murders, Entwistle asks that Rachel and Lillian Rose be buried together, “Because that’s the way I left them...”Rachel's stepfather reports another troubling thing to come up his conversation with the newly bereaved Neil: "I don't know how it got this way. I was only gone for a couple of hours. Someone shot them.”

The jury sees crime scene photos and is told that a post-mortem examination found Mrs Entwistle was shot in the forehead at close range and Lillian was killed with a bullet which passed through her abdomen and lodged above her mother's left breast as she cradled her on the bed.

The jury takes two days to find Entwistle guilty of the double murder. He is sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. As with his demeanour throughout the trial, on hearing he will die in prison, Entwistle shows no emotion.