Farwell’s Twin, Strap DNA and the Guilty Verdict

How does a jury evaluate a death once labeled suicide when the defense points to an untested DNA comparison and prosecutors point to a total break in communication? A federal jury convicted former Stoughton detective Matthew Farwell on November 10, 2026, of killing Sandra Birchmore and causing the death of her unborn child. The verdict came after jurors briefly reported being deadlocked. His lawyers had argued that Sandra died by suicide after Farwell ended their relationship; the jury rejected that account. He has not yet been sentenced.

Now go back to the evidence the jury heard. William Farwell, Matthew’s twin brother, testified under immunity that he too had a relationship with Sandra. The defense raised an unanswered forensic question: the state lab linked Matthew’s DNA to the strap around Sandra’s neck but had not compared William’s DNA against that sample. A defense expert testified that testing William could affect how the mixture was interpreted. That is a point worth scrutinizing, not a finding that William was involved in Sandra’s death. Then there is what was missing.

Prosecutors described Sandra as someone who messaged people constantly about the smallest parts of her day. Their case emphasized that she sent no goodbye note and did not reach out to anyone after Farwell left her apartment. The defense argued that silence could fit a suicide, too. A pattern is not a stopwatch, and no single missing message proves a killing. The jury had to weigh that absence against the rest of the record. Tony Brueski brings together criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor Eric Faddis, Defense Diaries attorney Bob Motta, and retired FBI behavioral expert Robin Dreeke.

Eric tests the defense’s strongest points against what prosecutors actually had to prove. Bob separates the proof of a killing from the federal question of whether Farwell acted to stop disclosure of crimes. Robin looks at the relationship dynamics without pretending to diagnose anyone from a text message. Prosecutors argued Farwell strangled Sandra in her Canton apartment in February 2021 and staged the scene to resemble a hanging. Farwell maintained his innocence through trial. His conviction was for killing a witness or victim and causing the death of an unborn child under federal law.

The separate witness-prevention element matters: prosecutors had to show not only what happened, but why. That difference is where the lawyers’ debate gets especially revealing.

Listen Anywhere You Get Podcasts: https://pod.link/1655749292

Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod?sub_confirmation=1

Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/

Watch Robin Dreeke’s MasterClass: http://masterclass.com/robindreeke

Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/

Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/

Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod

X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod

This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.

#SandraBirchmore #MatthewFarwell #HiddenKillers #FarwellVerdict #WilliamFarwell #EricFaddis #BobMotta #RobinDreeke #StoughtonPolice #TrueCrime