457: He Groomed Her For Years: 40K Texts, Wiped Phones & His Brother Sleeping with Her | Sandra Birchmore

I've never seen this happen before. Nearly four years later, the FBI comes up with a completely different conclusion. Authorities allege he used his badge as a way to manipulate, abuse, and eventually murder an innocent young woman by the name of Sandra Birchmore. Did she actually do that or did somebody have a part in this? No one heard from her again. Hey, true crime besties. Welcome back to an all-new episode of Serialist League. Hello, hello, hello, and welcome back to an all-new episode of Serialist League. With me, your host, Annie Elise. I hope you had a fantastic weekend. I hope you're having a great start. I hope you're having a great start to your week. You know what I'm going to say. Finish my sentence because I am for sure about to ruin it right now with the case that we are going to be talking about today. So hopefully you at least had a couple minutes or hours of zen because that's about to go right out the window now. Whether you are listening to this at home while you're cleaning, maybe you're in your car, maybe you're at work, secretly hiding away from your boss and listening with a coworker. I know a lot of you do that. You've told me. And look, I support it. I'm here for it. Wherever you are, I hope you're just like in the right state of mind to unpack what we are going to be unpacking today. And here's why. You may have seen some of this case already on your social media a little bit. I know I've seen bits and pieces on TikTok, but it's actually a case that I have followed for several years. But nobody, it's not one of those trials where everybody is following it in real time or there's clips of the trial. There's a trial on social media and one of those things where you can easily follow along all of the nuances of what's happening. And the reason why is because it's a federal trial and it's not being televised. So while some things have popped up on social media here and there, it's mainly after the fact when news reports come out about what happened. Sometimes people are going through the court record. It just really depends. But I had asked you guys last week, I think it was, or maybe a week before that. I was like, who here has been following the Sandra Birchmore case? And I know there's some coverage out there, but there's not a lot because it isn't a public trial. Do you want more information? Flooded in the comments and on the question box on Instagram with, yes, yes, yes, please do the deep dive. You know, we want to know more. Now, here's the thing. I, like I said, have followed this case for years now. So I've done the deep dive on here before. I think my most recent deep dive that I did was when I revisited the case about a year ago. So certainly have probably informed you if you've been a longtime listener at one point or another about this case. For my newer listeners, you might be a bit unfamiliar. Maybe you know a little bit of it. I promise you, even though I thought that I knew this case backwards and forwards, through this trial, there have been so many revelations, so many, I guess, you could call them bombshells of like what is really happening to where I've even kind of been taken aback. And I'm like, OK, we do need to talk about this because at the core root of this case is a young girl who was 12 years old when she first got introduced to these sick ass predators who had years of grooming, years of manipulation, being passed around to different police officers and then ultimately was killed. But officers who staged, as self-harm, as though she took her own life. And when you get into the motive of it, the 40,000 text messages, the two twin brothers involved in all of this, it feels stranger than fiction. It truly does. But this is Sandra's real life. This is what she went through. And that's why I do think it's so important that we talk about it. So what I really want to do is I want to go through, you know, everything that's happened in the trial, primarily like the bombshells, the new information, the text messages, as I said. However, before getting into that, because I know a lot of you either are newer listeners or maybe need a refresher on the case. I'm not going to do a full deep dive into the case. I'll link that in the show notes and you can definitely go back and listen to that. But I am going to give you a refresher on the case with some key dates, the key people involved, so that once we get into the diabolical sinister behavior that has now been exposed through this trial, that once we get into the diabolical sinister behavior that has now been exposed through this trial, it'll be easier for you to follow along. So first and foremost, let me start by saying this. The whole reason we're even talking about the trial is because for the past four weeks, the federal trial of Matthew Farwell has been unfolding in Massachusetts. And it's interesting too, because we know a lot of high profile trials have come out of Massachusetts, right? Karen Reed, Lindsay Clancy more recently, now Matthew Farwell. And although I would classify it as high profile, maybe it's not. Maybe other people wouldn't. But there are some layers that actually overlap with Karen Reed and some of the people who were involved in Sandra's case as well. And so I think in general, the sentiment has kind of been, what the hell is going on in Massachusetts? Why is there so much corruption? And what is going on within all of these different police departments? Because when I start telling you about some of these dirty ass officers, your jaw is going to be on the floor. So like I said, the trial, the trial is going on right now. And my question too, has been a little bit of like, why hasn't this case received more national attention? But that's again, why I'm here today. I feel like we need to platform Sandra's story and have people really be called out for their bad behavior and not just their bad behavior, their criminal behavior in all of this. So first I want to walk you through the case background just a little bit to kind of ground you on everything. And then we're going to get into what has been going on in this trial. So, Sandra Birchmore had joined the Stoughton Police Explorers Youth Program in 2010 when she was just 12 years old. And for context, in case you haven't, haven't ever heard about the Explorers Program, the program is basically a youth mentorship program. It's designed to guide teenagers and young adults who are interested in law enforcement careers. So then they have these mentors who are either volunteers or police officers who really guide them through different things, different steps. They have visibility to certain things. And it's, you know, a young program for young adults. So 12-year-old Sandra Birchmore and 24-year-old Matthew Farwell first met in 2010 when she first joined the program. At the time, he was a volunteer at the program. He later then became a police officer within the department. So they meet in 2010 while she's 12 and he's 24. Then the two of them started communicating two years later in 2012 after he became a police officer, which surely at that point, it's like he knows better. He's a cop. He also is 20, what, six years old at that point. She's 14. There's no business for you to be communicating with a 14-year-old girl, right? So they start communicating and then later they began a sexual relationship the following year when Sandra was only 15 years old. And again, I don't want to harp on this too much, but Matthew was a police officer. He was a volunteer for this Explorers program where kids are interested in law enforcement. He started, certainly knows right from wrong. He absolutely, in my opinion, is preying on this young girl, first talking to her when she was 12 years old and getting to know her, then started communicating with her more personally a couple years later when she was 14, and then started a sexual relationship with her when she was 15 years old while he's 27 years old. It is so sick. Now with that, now that you kind of know that piece of it, let's talk a little bit more about Matthew. As I said, at the time he was a 27 year old married police officer. I don't think I mentioned that married police officer and program instructor, and he now is currently on trial at 41 years old for committed aggravated statutory rape and also beginning an extensive sexual relationship with Sandra, which he maintained with her all the way up until she died, which was years. And we're going to get into all of that because obviously I know I just said 27 and it's a stark difference from 41, but that just shows like how long this was going on. How long he was grooming her and exploiting her and as I'll get to passing her around to his cop buddies, including his own brother. It is sick. So their relationship, which you can't even call it that obviously because she was a minor and he obviously groomed her, but it was clearly complicated and deeply unhealthy. However, what would unfold during the final few months before Sandra's death? That was on a whole other level because fast forward to 20 years ago, which is nearly eight years into the situation from when they first started communicating. Sandra was now 23 years old and Matthew was 35 years old and Sandra found out that Matthew's wife was pregnant with their third kid. As I had said, he was married. He already had children and he got married after he started communicating with Sandra. I believe he got married in 2013, which was also right when his sexual relationship. And again, I say relationship very loosely, but I don't know how, to describe it in context. context of the sentence. But when he started having sex and sexually assaulting Sandra, essentially, he got married that same year. And since then, he's had children with his wife. Now, fast forward nearly eight years later, he's having his third child with his wife while still continuing to have sex with Sandra and be in what she believes was a relationship. So when Sandra found out that his wife was pregnant with their third child, she straight up told him, you know, I'm over this now. You either agree to have a baby with me or I'm going to expose all of it, primarily the relationship that started with her when she was only 15 years old. And all of this information has actually come out through FBI testimony during the trial. So Sandra texted him and asked if it's okay if she gets pregnant because it seems as though there was some sort of agreement made from Matthew basically saying, okay, I will give you a baby to appease you, to keep you silent. And this is what the prosecutors allege, to keep you silent so that my whole life doesn't implode. So she texted him and says, okay, is it okay if I get pregnant? To which he wrote back, quote, not really, but you made it clear I don't have an option. So as I said, prosecutors say that he only went along with this so that he could keep her quiet and to stop her from exposing what he had done. Then in December of 2020, she officially tells him that she is pregnant. In fact, she even made her own pregnancy announcement to surprise him and share the news with him. However, it was not well received. He completely loses it and he texts her, quote, you blackmailed me into getting what you wanted. Then he calls her, quote, the worst person on the face of the earth, which I'm sorry, but you are arguably the worst person on the face of the earth. You didn't need to continue this situation with her. You definitely didn't need to groom her or prey on her for nearly a decade. Like, and now you're gaslighting her and making her feel like she's in the wrong for all of this? Absolutely not. So that's when the pressure between the two of them really began, particularly when it came to getting Matthew to sign the baby's birth certificate. Now this was before the child was even born. However, Sandra started bringing this up and it became a point of contention. She insisted that he be named as the legal father and also be present at the birth. And then later remain involved in the child's life, saying your kid should matter. Sandra also continued to threaten to expose his past crimes and their relationship if he refused to cooperate, which that completely shifted the dynamic between the two of them. Because for the entirety of their quote unquote relationship, again, it's not that situation ship, but that also kind of diminishes it there. This predator behavior throughout the entirety of that near decade, Matthew had previously been in control of the entire situation. She was the younger one. He groomed her. He preyed on her. She listened to him. But now Sandra was older. She was standing up for herself. She also was pregnant and had arguably the upper hand, which that left him increasingly panicked. So then fast forward about a month. And on January 20th, 2021, a friend of Sandra's contacted the police department to report the inappropriate relationship. Because Sandra wasn't exactly hiding this relationship from her friends or her co-workers necessarily. It's not like she was broadcasting it out there in a huge way, but she wasn't keeping it a secret. She was definitely confiding in people. And one of those friends was alarmed enough that they went directly to the police, which round of applause, that is absolutely the right thing to do in a situation like this. However, get this. Prosecutors allege that a dispatcher had tipped Matthew off about the report. Because it was all within the same police department. Now, once he was tipped off, that, of course, shattered his belief that this secret would remain hidden. And it also, in turn, as the prosecutors allege, gave him a direct motive to want to get rid of Sandra. Because his life was about to be destroyed. So then came the night, a few weeks later, of February 1st, 2021. Sandra sent Matthew a text that read, doors open when you get here. And just minutes later, he was able to get rid of Sandra. And he was able to get rid of her. And just minutes later, surveillance footage actually captures Matthew entering her Canton, Massachusetts apartment, where he goes inside and he stayed for approximately half an hour. And then, get this, after leaving Sandra's apartment, Matthew drove to the hospital, where his wife, Michelle, gave birth to their son, their third child. Which is so diabolical in so many different ways. Like, the audacity of this man. You're going to this young, young, once child who you groomed, and now side piece house to, and I don't say side piece as a derogatory way towards Sandra, but like, you have the nerve to go over there, then go to the hospital to be with your wife as she delivers your third child. It is just so disgusting on so many levels. Then, what's interesting, and here's where it starts to get a little bit weird and calculated, while at the hospital, Matthew sent a very unusual message to a former Stoughton police colleague, asking, hey, are you working on anything? Is anything happening right now at the department? And Matthew said that he was, quote, bored as hell sitting in the hospital, which, first of all, I have a problem with saying that. Like, your child was just brought into the world, and you're complaining, saying you're bored in the hospital. And I get it. Maybe it's not fun in those first few hours. The baby's getting cleaned up. You're doing that. But like, hello, you should be over the moon that you have a healthy child that you just welcomed in. So like, that's already a huge strike. But also, more than that, it's the intent of this message. Almost trying to suss out what is going on. Is there anything going on in the department? Are you working on anything? Trying to almost, in my opinion, get a tip off of someone discovering Sandra at her apartment and what had happened. Because meanwhile, and I'm going to get to all of that, meanwhile, as this is happening, Sandra's friend, Jason, had texted her, are you okay? But he received no response. Then, two days later, on February 3rd, Sandra failed to log into work remotely. A co-worker's message to her also went unanswered. Which this was all very suspicious, because Sandra was constantly on her phone. She regularly would text message with her friends, which made everybody increasingly concerned about the situation. By February 4th, which was three days later, Sandra still hadn't shown up for work. So a co-worker contacted the police, and they requested a wellness check. And when officers arrived at her Canton Woods apartment, they knocked for several minutes at the door, but received no response. So they eventually used a facilities key to enter and get inside. And when they arrived inside her apartment, the officers found her place disheveled, unkept, two cats running around. And when they opened Sandra's bedroom door, the lights were completely off. They found her seated on the floor near her closet with a duffel bag strap, wrapped around her neck, and attached to the closet door handle. Which, on the surface, looked like she had taken her own life. That she had hung herself from this doorknob. However, go back to what I had just told you about that text message he sent in the hospital, asking, oh, are you working on anything? Anything going on? Anything going on in the department? As if wanting to get clued in on if anyone had discovered Sandra at that point. Because here's where it gets interesting. Sandra's death, as I said, at the surface, it looked like self-harm. So it was initially ruled a suicide. But the people who loved Sandra never accepted the self-harm ruling. Her family maintained that she did not have those types of ideations, and they never believed that she would have taken her own life. One of her friends even testified that she went to the police after Sandra's death was discovered and urged them to investigate Matthew in all of this. So that's the end of the story. Where I first started researching this case and covering it was right when it first happened. I was like, there's something that just does not smell right here. Something is going on. First of all, very rarely do you hear of a hanging in that manner. Usually you're suspended, and I'm not going to get too graphic into that, but generally you're suspended because you need the reflex to not kick in to fight it. Whereas if you were seated on the ground, it's easier for your reflexes to kick in and to fight yourself on that. And it does still happen. I'm not saying it never happens that way. But more than that, her coworkers were speaking out. Her family was speaking out, being like, no, she was excited about this baby. She was very happy in her life. She never would have done anything like this. And so it felt very, I don't know what the word is, very, I guess, suspicious from the get-go. But then, in a detail that not many people did see coming, in September 2022, following an 18-month internal affair, investigation, the Stoughton police chief, Donna McNamara, announced that three officers had been involved in a sexual relationship with Sandra. Not just Matthew, but three. Number one, of course, Matthew Farwell. Investigators determined that he had began an inappropriate and highly exploitative sexual relationship with Sandra starting back in 2013. But also, William Farwell, who is Matthew's twin brother, who, by the way, was also a police officer within the department. also found to have had separate inappropriate sexual relationships with Sandra. And then third, and I don't want to say the most upsetting, equally upsetting, but very disturbing, was Robert Devine. And Robert was a former deputy chief who was also the head of the Explorers program. He was also found to have engaged in inappropriate behavior towards Sandra, including grooming behaviors, which this shocked a lot of people. Because while people at this point had already heard rumblings about Matthew, the fact that this young girl at 12 years old joined this junior police academy of sorts, this Explorer program, and she was groomed and preyed on by two police officers and the head of the program itself, those are supposed to be the people you trust the most, right? That you would trust with your child that are teaching you how to do it. And so he was found to have engaged in inappropriate behavior towards teaching them about law enforcement, how to have a career in that, right from wrong, your moral compass, how to be a good judge of character. And instead, they use it as an opportunity to prey on these young, trusting kids who are coming in. It's just, it's heartbreaking. It really is. Now, Chief McNamara's revelations didn't end there with only those three people involved in sexual relationships with Sandra. She also dropped an even bigger, bombshell, revealing that she no longer believed that Sandra's death was self-harm. In fact, she had come to believe that Sandra had been killed and that Matthew was likely responsible. So eventually, federal investigators took over the case in 2024. And on August 28th of that same year, Matthew ended up being arrested at his home by the FBI and a SWAT team. After he was placed into custody, he was formally indicted and a federal grand jury charged him with two primary charges. He was charged with two primary charges, and he was charged with two primary offenses. Count one, killing a witness or a victim. Prosecutors alleged that Matthew had killed Sandra to prevent her from sharing information about his crimes, the sexual relationship, the grooming, and sharing that with federal law enforcement or a judge, like going to them directly. However, that would mean that during the trial, they would have to prove that he was covering up a federal offense, multiple federal offenses, including abusing his authority as a minor, and also wire fraud. Which honestly, especially watching all this trial go down, it should be pretty easy because this sicko was allegedly also even having sex with Sandra while he was clocked in for the police department, collecting money from the police department, and sometimes even in his police cruiser. Now, count two was causing the death of a child in utero. And this charge, it is a little bit different than a typical homicide charge because this specific charge is a little bit different than a typical homicide charge. This specific charge allows federal prosecutors to separately charge someone for causing the death of an unborn child when a pregnant woman is killed. Now, because both charges ended in death in this whole situation, Matthew faces a maximum penalty of life in prison. So as you can imagine, this trial, it really has become an extremely high stakes legal battle. Unlike though, as I mentioned at the beginning of this episode, unlike Karen Reed and Lindsay Clancy, which were both very heavily covered in Boston, this courtroom has a very strict no camera policy, also no audio recording policy. So that means the public can't see or hear what is happening inside the courthouse. But don't you worry because I have been following every update closely. I have been pulling the court transcripts. I have been researching everything and putting together all of the information so that we can really piece together not only the shocking revelations that have come out in the courtroom, but also some of the bombshells that even come out of the court by surprise. So now that I've given you a bit of context in the backstory of the case, let's get into the trial and what really has come out since then, because it's even worse than what we already have heard. Now, to start, it's important to understand that both sides are using a massive archive of over 40,000 text messages, and they're using those text messages to tell two very different stories about what happened between Matthew and Sandra. And at the it's, of course, control, desperation, and ultimately, Sandra's death. Now, we got our first real look at where each side stands during the opening statements, which started on October 9th, 2026. Assistant U.S. Attorney Tori Cummings made it pretty clear from the very start what the prosecution believed happened. During her opening statement, she pointed directly at Matthew across the courtroom, and she stated, the fake life, I should say, that he had built. She told the jurors that Sandra was excited about her pregnancy. She was looking forward to becoming a mom, but she was also putting a lot of pressure on Matthew, who, remember, was married, already had children, had another baby on the way, but she was applying pressure for him to step up and take responsibility. According to the prosecution, Sandra was threatening to expose the years of sexual assault that allegedly began when she was just 15 years old. She said, And they didn't dance around this theory either, which I really appreciated. They fully believed that Matthew knew that if Sandra told people what happened, his entire life would fall apart. So, he decided to silence her before she had a chance to do that, and he would use his experience as a police officer, along with his size and his strength, to do so, to kill Sandra and make the scene look like it was self-inflicted. And the prosecution didn't stop there. They also said that Sandra was the only person in the apartment to support his story, and deliberately wiped information from his cell phone as well, all of which was, of course, an attempt to make it harder for the investigators to figure out what really happened. And what I also really appreciate in all of this is the prosecutors didn't hold punches. They had really harsh words for the original state police investigation. They argued that the troopers working with the Norfolk District Attorney's Office did, quote, very little to actually investigate Sandra's death. They also said that the investigators were way too quick to accept the self-harm ruling and the explanation that she had done this herself, and that they pushed the medical examiner toward that conclusion instead of taking a closer look at whether something suspicious had happened. Now, this seemed pretty clear-cut, cut-and-dry, right? And also, in my opinion, like the more plausible situation and what likely happened. But the defense obviously had a very different stance on things. Matthew's attorney, Kimberly Stevens, started her opening statement by standing right beside him. Her arm even was draped over his shoulder. And her message was pretty clear. Matthew may have, yes, had an affair and made what she called regrettable human mistakes, but he did not murder Sandra. The defense described Sandra's death as an impulsive act of despair. And they really leaned into that theory. They portrayed her as someone who struggled with depression, isolated, who was under a lot of financial stress as well. And they didn't stop there. They also made a point of telling jurors that Sandra had spent both Thanksgiving and Christmas alone, and that she was worried about whether her pregnancy was viable or not. So really just trying to illustrate this situation of this young girl who's depressed, who's confused, who's alone and isolated. She doesn't even know if the pregnancy is viable, and that all of that despair just swallowed her whole. And she had no other alternative in her mind than to take her own life. According to the defense, Matthew went to Sandra's apartment on February 1st, 2021, for one reason and one reason only. It wasn't to kill Sandra, but it was to end their relationship. And that after calling things off with her, Matthew told Sandra, that's not my baby. And he left. And the defense's main argument is that when Sandra heard that Matthew was ending the relationship and also denying being the father, it became simply too much for Sandra to handle, and that she decided to take her life after that. And they doubled down on that theory too, and spent quite a bit of time during opening statements discussing Sandra's phone activity on the morning that she died. They told jurors that she had searched for suicide ribbons, and that she had viewed dark imagery online related to wanting to die. They also pointed out that there were no defensive injuries or obvious signs of a struggle inside the apartment. So from the defense's perspective, they were not sure if they were positive. That information, those searches, support their argument that she died self-inflicted, that she took her own life, and that she was not murdered. So right there, just through opening statements, you have two very different versions of what happened that night. You have the prosecution, who was saying that Matthew killed Sandra to keep her from exposing his alleged crimes. Yet the defense is saying, oh no, he simply ended the relationship and left. Sandra's death happened afterward. It was her own choice, her own doing. So both sides are, of course, now asking the jury to look at all of the evidence and reach two very different conclusions. But as we get into the evidence, I'm curious to know what you think, where your mind wanders. So over the course of the 18-day federal trial, the jury heard testimony from exactly 50 witnesses. The prosecution called 38 witnesses, while the defense called 12 expert and fact witnesses, all in an effort to argue that Sandra had tragically taken her own life. Now, I don't have the time, and I'm sure you don't have the time, to go through every single witness and every single detail of the testimony. So I'm going to walk you through the testimony. you through some of the biggest revelations and get you caught up with everything. One of the first people to take the stand was the police chief, Donna McNamara. She testified about how she was familiar with Sandra through the department's Youth Explorer program. She also confirmed that she was the one who immediately launched an internal affairs investigation after learning about Matthew Farwell's involvement with Sandra. And honestly, I think that Chief McNamara's decision to take action did play a major role in bringing the department's internal misconduct to light. Had she not pushed for that, I don't know that they would have discovered the truth not only about Matthew, but about his twin brother and about Robert Devine, the guy, the one who was the leader of the program. If she didn't decide to follow up on that information, truth is, I don't think Matthew would ever be facing life in prison. So she kind of cracked this case wide open, which again, huge round of applause for someone doing the right thing for once and pushing a little further when things look suspicious. Because had she just accepted the same ruling that the state police had accepted, there would not be any sort of question right now about, there would be no trial and it would have all just kind of been case closed and done. So the prosecution brought up handfuls of law enforcement officers in the first few days of trial, including some familiar names that you might remember from the Karen Reed trial. Jessica Hyde, Nicholas Guarino. But the testimony that really caught my attention through all of this was the Stoughton police sergeant, Robert Kuhn. Robert is the one who reviewed the apartment building surveillance footage and the person who identified Matthew. And he pointed out that Matthew was wearing a COVID mask in the video and that that was unusual because according to Robert, Matthew openly despised masks and he refused to wear them. So why would he now be wearing it? entering her apartment building, knowing I'm sure that he was on camera, unless it was done intentionally to disguise his face. He also testified that Matthew's drinking had increased significantly before Sandra's death. However, what really stood out to me was something that happened right before Robert took the stand for his second day of testimony. Because as he walked into the courtroom, Robert allegedly told someone who was with the prosecution, quote, I can't wait to crush this motherfucker. And that comment, ended up actually resurfacing during cross-examination. The defense asked, you took an oath to tell the truth here today, didn't you? Which Robert replied, yes. And when he walked into the courtroom, you said to someone with the government, I can't wait to crush this motherfucker. And Robert kind of had a mic drop moment and he said, yep, I did say that. And then left the stand. Which maybe that isn't the smartest strategy in the sense of if you're going into a testimony and you're testifying and there's a precursor of saying, I can't wait to crush this motherfucker. And then I think people could potentially misconstrue that your testimony is going to be biased and that maybe you're not going to be fully fair. And I think that's why it was brought up during cross as well to show that to the jury to hopefully plant a little seed of doubt. But also, I do kind of love it in the sense that like this guy sees another officer who was a predator and prayed and groomed this young girl, passed her around, exploited her for nearly a decade. And so he's saying like, fuck this guy. I can't wait to crush this guy. Which like, good. Finally, people standing up for what is right and not just trying to collude and cover up for everyone, right? So once the prosecution was done with the law enforcement witnesses, they moved on to both Matthew and Sandra's inner circle, including family and friends. And this actually where shit kind of hits the fan and gets a little bit crazy. Leslie Davis, Sandra's close friend, took the stand and she testified. And in her testimony, she said that Sandra told her about the sexual relationship with Matthew when she was just 15. She also recalled that Sandra had said that they had sexual encounters inside Matthew's police cruiser. She went on to describe how excited Sandra was about becoming a mother and that Sandra had even asked her to be the baby's godmother. However, the most important part of her testimony is when she told the jury that Matthew once violently pushed Sandra to the ground during an argument over whether or not he would sign the unborn baby's birth certificate. And the reason that piece of testimony was so incredibly important is because that was the first time that the courtroom heard that there had already been an established pattern of physical abuse in the past between Matthew and Sandra. That the night of her death wouldn't have been an isolated incident and that there was actually history there. So then prosecutors continued building their case against Matthew. And they did this by calling three, get that, three of his former affair partners to come in and to testify. And this was something that the courtroom probably wasn't expecting, considering the judge had initially barred prosecutors from bringing up Matthew's other extramarital affairs. However, the door was opened because, during opening statements, the defense is the one who ended up actually opening the door when they argued that Matthew wore that COVID mask to Sandra's apartment lobby specifically to keep the affair hidden from his wife. Not to be disguised, not to have his identity not known, but to keep the affair hidden from his wife. So that being brought up during opening statements from the defense, that gave the prosecutors an opportunity to bring the other relationships into the trial, which brought up three of his former affair partners, Sarah, Samantha, and another fellow Stoughton officer named Sheena, which I don't know. I don't know if there's something with this guy, if he's like super anal and type A, but the fact that four of the women that he cheated on his wife with that we know of all start with S, I think is kind of interesting, right? Sandra, Sarah, Samantha, Sheena. I don't know. Maybe it's just a coincidence, but like four people and they all have an S name. I did find that a little bit interesting. So all three women testified that just like the police sergeant had said, Matthew never wore COVID masks and he never wore disguises around them and never asked them to delete their text messages like he did with his phone. And like we will learn was also deleted with other communications. And this kind of went to illustrate that he was a bit brazen with his affairs. Like he wasn't trying to be overly hidden discreet with them, which obviously the defense argued that he was trying to be discreet from his wife, which is why he wore that mask. But everybody else is saying, no, he never wore masks. He never asked us to delete anything from our phones or keep it quiet. And Sarah even recalled him openly kissing and touching her at an event where his wife was even present at the event. Now, if you're wondering why hearing from his former mistresses even mattered in all of this, it absolutely did because it showed the jurors how differently Matthew handled his relationship with Sandra versus the other women that he had cheated with. It was showing that, oh no, he tried to isolate her. He tried to silence her. He tried to delete the text message history and keep it private, arguably because to our knowledge and what's public right now, she's the only one that the sexual relationship started when she was a minor. The other women were adults and it could be consensual where she was obviously sexually assaulted and groomed. So it makes sense why he would treat that dynamic differently than the other three. Now, Jason Pickard, a U.S. Army recruiter, also provided some of the most significant testimony in the trial. He testified under a federal grant of immunity and Jason gave jurors a closer look at Sandra's final moments, her excitement about becoming a mother, and the complicated relationships surrounding her pregnancy. Jason testified that he met Sandra back in late 2019 through his work as an Army recruiter. Their relationship eventually developed into a 14-month long sexual relationship and also a close friendship. Then on December 28, 2020, when Sandra was already pregnant and knew that she was pregnant, Sandra texted Jason to tell him she was pregnant. And his response was, congratulations. Then sent another one, me? Sandra replied, nope, we weren't in my fertile period. Jason said that Sandra repeatedly told him that he was not the baby's father and also indicated that Matthew was the father, just as she had told Matthew. She told Jason that she was trying to get Matthew to sit down and discuss child support and just to take responsibility and be an active participant in this child's life. Jason also testified that Sandra had confided in him about her relationship with Matthew. He said that she told him that Matthew had taken her virginity when she was just 15 years old and when she was still involved in the police youth program. So he had encouraged Sandra to report Matthew for all of this after she confided in him, but she refused. When he was asked why he never reported what Sandra had told him, Jason was pretty candid about his reasons. He said, quote, I was afraid. I was a married man. I was a recruiter and she was a recruit. I knew what it would do to my marriage, my children, and my career. Which like, I'm glad that he's finally coming forward now and testifying, but also he's only doing it under the federal grant of immunity. Also, it's like, what is with all of these married men cheating with these impressionable young children and women? I get that at this point, she was a legal adult, but still, she's impressionable. You're the recruiter. She's the recruit. There is a boundary there that you definitely should not cross, not to mention you're married and you have kids. What are you even thinking? Which it all just kind of blows my mind that there is so much criminal and bad and deplorable behavior with like this circle of men and officers and men in trusted positions of power. One of the most important parts of Jason's testimony involved Sandra's emotional state during her pregnancy. As I told you, the defense had portrayed Sandra as severely depressed, isolated, struggling with the pregnancy. But Jason described something very, very different. He testified that Sandra was ecstatic, upbeat, and so full of joy and happiness about becoming a mother. According to him, she couldn't stop talking about her excitement and plans for the future. And just three days before Sandra died on January 28th, 2021, Jason said he visited her apartment and helped her baby proof it. However, what's weird in hindsight is that during that visit, Sandra had mentioned that Matthew had recently been looking very closely inside her bathroom and her closet. She had assumed that he was just checking the space to figure out where the baby supplies might go. But now, knowing what happened a few days later and that she was attached to her closet door, it makes you wonder if he was casing the scene, trying to figure out how he could plan something, get away with it, and what that would look like. However, everything kind of then got thrown for a loop during cross-examination because the defense introduced a phone call from January 28th, 2021. And in that conversation, Sandra told Jason that her doctors had adjusted her conception date. They moved it back to earlier than expected. But she also, in that call, I guess, referred to the information as our secret. Which, what I gather by that is that, okay, her doctors say, oh no, you're really not 12 weeks, you're 13 weeks, or, you know, whatever that may be. You're further along than you think, which would then, of course, change the date of conception. But then, by her saying it's our secret, I think it's open to interpretation. But I would say it's safe to assume maybe at that point she was starting to believe that it's a possibility that Jason could be the father. But that they'd keep that their secret so she wouldn't implode on his life and that she wanted Matthew to be the father. So let's keep this between us. And it was never concrete proof, obviously, that Jason was the father at that point. But the fact that she referred to the and maybe yours goes differently. You tell me. So with that, the defense, of course, used that conversation to suggest that Sandra may have suspected that Jason was the father. But Jason maintained that she never actually told him that. However, then came the big reveal that shocked the courtroom. Jason testified that he provided a DNA sample to the FBI back in 2025. And that established that he was actually the biological father of Sandra's unborn baby. And that he had only learned about a year earlier that he was the baby's father. And that was a huge piece. Because we learned, gosh, when was it? Before the trial. About, was it six months ago? Maybe a year ago was when we first learned, the public, that Matthew wasn't the father. Which I remember being like, oh my god, my mind is spinning right now. This guy, seemingly the motive was to silence her, to kill her before she gave birth. The baby was his. He needed to keep her quiet. Come to find out the baby wasn't even his. This idiot just threw away his whole life, even though she probably still would have exposed him. But like, then I remember kind of my jobbing on the floor, like, what do you mean it's not his child? Like, that seems like that's what the motive was. That's the only relationship at the time that anybody knew that she had been in. And like, what do you mean? And so now, through the trial, they back into the timeline of when that discovery was made. Jason's testimony was also followed by forensic evidence from state crime lab scientists who testify that the DNA from multiple individuals was not the child's. And that's when they found out that the baby wasn't the father. was found on Sandra's clothing and body. Both Matthew and Jason's DNA profiles were identified on Sandra's underwear. However, Matthew was identified as the primary DNA contributor on the duffel bag strap that was involved in the staging of her death. And the reason all of this was talked about is, again, because it was like, you're trying to create doubt. You're trying to create confusion. If he was the child's father, could he have had a motive to silence her? He was the army recruiter. He was married. He had kids. He was the father of the child. He was the father What DNA do we find? They lifted DNA from both men. However, Matthew's was the primary source of DNA on the duffel strap, even though both men's DNA was in her underwear. And again, it goes to strategy and trying to create reasonable doubt. However, next up in the Farwell freak show was Matthew's identical twin brother, William, also known as Billy. He also testified under a federal grant of immunity. And he had quite a few things to reveal. Now, to start, Billy admitted that he also, too, had a brief sexual relationship with Sandra and saying that it started back in 2018 when she was now legally considered an adult. He also said that sometimes when they would have sex, he was on duty and they would have sex in the back of his police car, which it seems like that's kind of a reoccurring theme, right? They're all trying to, like, secretly do this thing. And so they're all having sex in the back of their cop cars, which I feel like now, anytime I pass a cop who's pulled over on the side of the highway or parked in a residential street for no reason, I'm going to look and see, is anybody in the front seat? And then I'm going to, like, closely creep and slow down next to him and be like, is anybody in the back seat? Like, what's going on back there? This seems like it's way too common. Like, I never would have thought that would be happening. Plus, like, I don't know if you've ever been in the back of a cop car. I have once, not because I was being arrested, but because they were giving me a ride somewhere. And the seats, I don't know if it's like this for all cop cars, but the seats are literally, like, plastic and hard. And they're not comfy. So, like, I don't know. Not that, obviously, that matters if you're trying to conceal your sexual relationship with someone. But, like, I don't know. It just doesn't seem like the ideal place logistically, legally, morally, any of that. Now, the most significant part, I think, about Billy's testimony involved what Matthew told him about Sandra's pregnancy. Because Billy testified that in December of 2020, shortly after Sandra discovered that she was pregnant, Matthew arranged to meet up with other officers at a local bar. And he said, Before the others arrived, though, Matthew was alone with his twin brother. And he told him, Other officers then soon arrived and interrupted the conversation before Matthew could explain exactly what kind of help he needed from his brother. But Billy testified that he immediately understood that Matthew was referring to Sandra's pregnancy. Which, before I go any further with that, I want to just pause, too, and say, like, Billy is having sex with Sandra. While he knows that his brother is also having sex with Sandra, and has been having sex with her for years. Not to bring in bro code or anything like that, but, like, there are so many women, young women out there, even, like, there are so many people out there, because she was a legal adult at this point, according to Billy, there are so many other options you have out there. You don't need to be sleeping with the same person your brother is sleeping with, who, by the way, he groomed since she was a child. Like, plenty of fish in the sea. What, and, like, isn't that disgusting? What do they call it, like, tunnel brothers? Like, what are you even doing? What are you even doing? It makes no sense to me. Like, what a freak. And, like, what kind of kink fetish do you have? It is just sick. Now, as all of this pregnancy conversation is coming into play, and Billy is sharing that Matthew obviously needed help regarding the pregnancy and all of that, to give jurors a better understanding of just how Matthew felt about the pregnancy, the prosecution introduced a text exchange from when Sandra officially told him that they were going to have a child. Sandra had sent Matthew a photo of this handmade poster that was decorated with cartoon animals and things like that, and it read, congrats, we're going to be parents, which Matthew's immediate response was, you are truly the worst person on the face of the earth. Because remember, earlier I had mentioned there was the text exchange, too, where he was like, you blackmailed me into having a child, and this and that, which, but then the prosecutors also allege that he had agreed to give her a baby and impregnate her in a way to silence her and appease her. So it's like, you know, I don't feel bad for you, bro. I don't feel bad for you at all. So after presenting 38 witnesses over 12 days, the prosecution finally rested its case. Now it was time for the defense to start calling their witnesses. And like I said, most of the defense's witnesses were experts or fact witnesses. However, there was one notable exception. Sandra's former boyfriend, William Kilroy, was called. And William Kilroy was the one who called Sandra's former boyfriend, William Kilroy. And William testified that he had dated Sandra in 2016, when they were both students at a community college. Their relationship had began shortly after Sandra's mother passed away. And just weeks later, Sandra's grandmother also died. William had described Sandra and her grandmother as being two peas in a pod. And he briefly discussed Sandra's difficult childhood and home life. He testified that she had a strained relationship with her extended family, and that alcoholism was also a significant problem in her household. He also shared a very disturbing allegation about Sandra's biological father. testifying that he had allegedly tried to sell her as a child to settle outstanding drug debts, which, if that is true about her father, that he had tried to sell her in exchange for his drug debts, it's an allegation at this point. We don't have verifiable proof. But that just breaks my heart even more for Sandra. She was let down from day one from men in her life that should have protected and loved her. Her own father trying to sell her, then going into the Explorer program at 12 years old, only to be targeted and groomed. And just this continuous history and pattern of abuse to where I don't even know, because those are such formative years, did she even know that what was happening was wrong? Or was she so used to it at that point? Which is devastating to think about, that all of these people who were in positions of trust and power and should have been protecting her. Or failing her and exploiting her. It's so sad to think about. The defense then introduced a journal entry that Sandra had written in 2017 during a period when she was dealing with all of her significant grief. William identified the handwriting at the bottom of the page as his own and described it as chicken scratch. And he explained that he had written the words, I'm wonderful and I'm amazing, to try to comfort Sandra and remind her of her worth. William also testified about the difficult end of their relationship, near the end of 2017, and their attempts to fully separate in early 2018. He described Sandra as becoming very upset when he tried to cut ties. He also testified about a pregnancy that Sandra told him that she had experienced, which she said ended in a miscarriage. So the defense used William's testimony and that journal entry to try to give jurors a look at Sandra's emotional struggles over the years, and years leading up to her death. However, during Cross, prosecutors pushed back and said, Under questioning from the prosecution, William admitted that Sandra had never actually made a self-harm attempt during the years that he knew her. He also acknowledged that he was never genuinely worried that she would ever harm herself. The prosecution ended by asking William whether Sandra was a fighter, strong, and resilient, and whether she was a bubbly person who always pulled through and made jokes. Which William answered yes to every single one of those descriptions. So the defense officially rested its case on Wednesday, November 4th, 2026, bringing eight intense days of testimony and very conflicting arguments to a close. The final day of testimony ran past normal court hours, and it included something that we hadn't seen before. Matthew speaking directly in the courtroom. Before the final defense witness was called, the judge addressed Matthew after the jury had left the room, and Matthew stood and formally told the judge, I do not elect to testify. Not that I think any of us thought that he would, because I feel like he would get destroyed on Cross. So since Matthew exercised his right not to testify, closing arguments served as each side's final opportunity to bring everything together and explain how they believed the jury should interpret the four weeks of very emotionally charged and highly technical testimony from the 50 different witnesses. And despite everything that we learned throughout the trial, and even the backstory and the deep dive, if you have any questions, please feel free to ask them in the comments. And if you have any questions, please feel free to ask them in the comments. listen to that episode and the countless hours of testimony, it all came down to one central question. Was 23-year-old pregnant Sandra strangled to death by Matthew, or did she die by self-harm? And on Friday morning, November 6th, 2026, just a couple days ago, the federal trial of Matthew Farwell reached its final stage at the courthouse in Boston. And because this was a federal case, there was a specific structure to how the arguments unfolded. There was a specific structure to how the arguments unfolded. Each side had 90 minutes and one final opportunity to explain the evidence and convince the jury that its version of events was the right one. And here's how that final phase played out. Because the prosecution, as we know, carried the burden of proving Matthew's guilt. So they presented their case first, and they also got the final opportunity to respond after the defense had finished. So the prosecution organized its argument around three major points. Motive, timeline, and forensic evidence. Focusing on the three-minute timeline. Prosecutors focused heavily on the timing of the building surveillance footage and the Apple Watch data. Their argument was that Sandra's device activity stopped at approximately 9.40 p.m., just three minutes before Matthew was seen leaving the building. So they used that timeline to challenge the possibility that either someone else had entered the apartment and committed the crime, or that she had done it after Matthew left. In a moment of despair and being distraught, because it actually happened, the activity stopped before he even left. They also pointed to the evidence of the staged scene. Prosecutors revisited Dr. William Smock's testimony about the forensic evidence, including hair that was found tangled inside the duffel bag strap, inside the knot in the duffel bag strap more specifically, and an imprint left by the strap's metal buckle. They argued that these findings supported their theory that Sandra had been strangled. And that the scene was then staged to look like a hanging. They then, of course, pointed to the motive. And this was kind of the final moment in the whole presentation to wrap it all up in a bow. They connected Matthew's deleted Google searches about statutory law and erasing phone records with testimony from his own twin brother and Detective Barrett. And they reminded jurors of testimony that Matthew had described as having a career-ending problem and said he was going to make sure that it, quote, took care of itself. And I know we didn't go into a ton of that detail in this episode. I wanted to do more of like the revelations, the bombshells. But there was this extensive history of phones being wiped, deleted messages, incriminating searches, and all of that is in the deep dive. Now, the defense's closing argument focused on the gaps, assumptions, and the mistakes made by the local investigators, which their goal was to convince jurors that the So they focused on four main points. The burden of proof, because the defense placed heavy emphasis on the legal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. They argued that if even one piece of technical evidence supported the possibility of self-harm, then jurors were legally required to acquit Matthew. They also focused on the medical disagreement. The defense relied heavily on its final witness, Dr. Thomas Andrew, who testified that this was absolutely not a manual strangulation They presented Sandra's death as a tragic self-harm following the sudden and devastating emotional rejection of Matthew ending the relationship and denying that he was the father. They also focused on that suicide ribbon search. They emphasized that Sandra had searched for that awareness ribbon on the morning that she died. The defense argued that her digital activity reflected her state of mind and was independent of Matthew's presence at the apartment. And then lastly, they argued evidence contamination. The defense also reminded jurors that local police had crumpled the duffel bag strap into a ball, and they argued that this mishandling made the state crime lab's DNA findings an unreliable source because of possible cross-contamination. So once closing arguments concluded on Friday morning, the judge gave the jury its final instructions, and the jurors began deliberating. Now, at the time of this recording, we do not have the verdict yet. Maybe it will come in quickly, and we will have it within a couple of hours, or maybe it will come in at the time of this release. But I wanted to give you everything that we knew that brings us right to Verdict Watch. So in the event that there has been a verdict or that there is a verdict today or tomorrow, that information, not only the verdict, but what we learn after the verdict, because there's always other little nuances that come into play, that will all be included this Thursday in Headline Highlights, which for my new listeners, Headline Highlights, will be included this Thursday in Headline Highlights. So I will certainly be giving you an update during that episode. But for now, that is where everything landed. Again, the deep dive into the whole sordid history is available for you to go and listen to to get fully caught up on everything involved in the case. I will link that in the show notes. And I'm curious to know what you think. Even if you haven't been following this case or this trial, or if you have, what are your thoughts? Was this murder, or was this self-harm? Let me know in the comment section below. I'm curious to see. And maybe we'll do a poll too. Let me know what you think. And if you do think it was murder, what do you think the motive was? I mean, in my mind, the motive would be pretty clear, right? She's going to destroy his life. I think he fully believed that the baby was his and that that was going to be a problem for him. And so he used his connections, his power, his strength, his wits, which clearly didn't work out very well for him, to stage the scene. That's what I believe. But was there enough reasonable doubt between Jason being the father, between the searches on that Sandra allegedly made that morning, to where this could have been a moment of despair? Again, let me know your thoughts in the comment and what you think. Murder or self-harm? Thank you for tuning in to another episode of Serialistly. As a reminder, please, if you're watching this on YouTube, take a quick moment, like the video before you go, share it with a friend, subscribe to the channel if you haven't already, so that you don't miss new episodes. If you're listening on the podcast, please follow so you don't miss new episodes. And I have a brand new deep dive for you tomorrow on my second true crime podcast feed, 10 to life, one zero to life. So between the two, you get new episodes every Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday. So make sure you're following both. They also all get posted to my Annie Elise YouTube channel in video format. Thank you so much. And until the next one, be nice, don't kill people, and don't be a creep, okay? And don't have sex with whoever your brother's having sex with. It's freak behavior. All right, bye. Bye.