Throughout the trial, the Daily News has invited a panel of experts to comment on what is happening in the courtroom. The panel members are: Wendy Murphy, a former Middlesex assistant district attorney and current victim/witness advocate; John LaChance, a former federal prosecutor and current defense lawyer based in Framingham, and Steve Huff, a professional crime blogger who runs two Web sites. Check back often for our experts' opinions. And if you want to share your opinion, visit our blog.

 Expert Panel - 6/12/08

posted 6/12/08: Wednesday was a tough day all around. We heard the awful details of how Rachel and baby Lillian were found dead - cuddling in bed, with classical music playing in the background. Rachel had apparently just given the baby a bath because the upstairs bathtub was filled with water and baby toys.

After the Hopkinton "Welcome Lady" testified that Neil seemed to be the consummate doting father and one of Rachel's best friends agreed the couple was very much in love, the theme of Neil having "two sides" is getting stronger now that the gruesome facts about the murders are coming out. While most of us were on the verge of tears hearing about the bullet holes in Rachel's head and Lillian's chest, we're seeing images of Neil on the ATM surveillance video - cool as a cucumber trying to extract cash from the family's bank account as he made his escape to London.

Even if you wanted to believe the defense version - that Neil didn't kill his wife and baby - he just happened upon the murder scene and then he took off because he panicked, it just doesn't make sense that he would not call 911, and then calmly make his way to various ATM machines before hopping a plane to Europe. The defense may well argue that it isn't fair to infer guilt from Neil's behavior and that "there's no playbook on how a guy should act when he finds his wife and baby murdered." Maybe so -- but if there WERE a playbook -- his behavior wouldn't even be a footnote on the last page.

Wendy Murphy is an ex-prosecutor who specialized in child abuse and sex crimes cases. The first lawyer in the country to run a program to provide free legal services to crime victims, Murphy has been fighting for victims' rights for 20 years. Having served as a visiting scholar at Harvard Law School, Murphy now represents crime victims in civil and criminal cases and teaches an advanced seminar on sexual violence at the New England School of Law in Boston. As an adjunct professor, she also manages the Sexual Violence Legal News and Judicial Language projects at her law school and consults with crime victims across the country to help them achieve justice. Murphy, who lives outside of Boston, writes scholarly and pop culture articles, and lectures widely on victims' rights, sex crimes, violence against women and children, media coverage of crime and the criminal justice system.    

posted 6/12/08: Today was one of the more unsettling, chilling days in the trial so far, partly because of the defendant's breakdown. Neil Entwistle appeared to cover his face and sob while a video of the murder scene was played for the jury. Many questions arise from his behavior: was he putting on an act, or did the truth behind his wife's and daughter's deaths hit him for the first time today? There's just no telling how a jury might perceive such a thing.

Personally, I have trouble not thinking about similar cases from the recent past -- this time, Scott and Laci Peterson. Scott Peterson had a lot in common with Neil Entwistle -- both were outwardly nice-looking, golden boy types, the kind you never can believe would do such a thing. Both seem to have led secret lives where sex was concerned, Peterson more overtly through affairs, Entwistle with his visits to Adult Friend Finder and similar sites around the time his wife and child were murdered. And Scott Peterson wept, too -- on a national news broadcast, speaking to a famous journalist. The defendant's tears may make for a fascinating headline, but in truth, they don't mean much -- even middling actors can summon tears at will, and really, no one can truly know why the tears came in the first place. With Neil Entwistle, they may have been for his lost wife and child. They may have also been for himself alone.

I have to wonder if the jury noticed, and if it will make a difference, in the end. To those that remember Scott Peterson's crocodile tears, Neil Entwistle's breakdown in court today will have little bearing on estimations of his guilt or innocence. If viewed as an act, an attempt at manipulation, they will surely work against him.

Last year, blogger Steve Huff was featured in MyCase.com, a half-hour special about "cyber-sleuthing" produced for Court TV by Optomen Television. As a freelance journalist Huff contributed groundbreaking investigative articles -- including pieces about the Entwistle case -- to Court TV's CrimeLibrary.com. He currently writes about politics, crime and pop culture for Radar Magazine. Huff's active blogs are The True Crime Weblog and Random Lunatic News. Huff, who lives in Roswell, Ga., is also a classically-trained vocalist and has performed secondary tenor roles with the Atlanta and Knoxville Opera Companies. 

posted 6/6/08: I thought that (prosecutor) Mr. (Michael) Fabbri’s opening statement was well organized and designed for a circumstantial case such as this. He led with his strength, the words and actions of Neil Entwistle himself. This is important because you only have a limited time to catch the jury’s attention and have them view the evidence through the lens of the prosecution. The only problem I saw was the almost too quiet tone of the opening which muted the outrage which should exist just below the surface of the case.

The defense (Elliot Weinstein) opening provided an appropriate contrast to the prosecutor’s opening without disclosing either its specific theory of defense or details of the evidence will elicit both during cross examination of the prosecution witness and during their own case. By keeping their cards close to their vests while emphasizing the presumption of innocence and burden of proof, the defense retains a maximum amount of flexibility without telling the prosecution what the flaws in its case are before exposing those flaws to the jury.

Attorney John H. LaChance has more than 35 years of criminal trial experience in Massachusetts. He focuses his criminal defense practice on state and federal criminal charges, including drug, white collar, violent and sex crimes. LaChance spent four years as an assistant United States attorney for the District of Massachusetts. This experience helps him to understand the prosecution's way of handling both state and federal cases. He is board certified in criminal trial advocacy. In 1991, the Committee for Public Counsel Services presented him with the Edward G. Duggan Award for zealous advocacy and outstanding legal services.