True Crime Today | Daily True Crime News & Interviews

Police reports describing Sandra Birchmore’s death as a suicide were in the medical examiner’s hands before the examiner had investigated the death for herself. Dr. María del Mar Capó-Martínez testified that her office was not called to the apartment and that investigators reported no foul play. She initially recorded the manner of death as suicide in 2021.
Five years later, the Massachusetts medical examiner’s office changed that ruling to undetermined and revised the cause of death to asphyxia. The federal prosecution says a premature conclusion and missing information compromised the original inquiry. Matthew Farwell’s defense has contested the revision and maintains Sandra died by suicide.
The jury also heard testimony from William Farwell, the defendant’s twin. William, a former Stoughton police officer, acknowledged an intimate relationship with Sandra while on duty and testified under a grant of immunity. He placed that relationship in 2018, when Sandra was an adult. A separate message discussed in court described Sandra’s relationship with Matthew beginning when she was 15. William also testified that Matthew told him he had wiped phone data.
Matthew Farwell is accused of killing Sandra and her unborn child and making the scene resemble suicide. He has pleaded not guilty, and the government must prove its case. William’s admissions and the examiner’s amended findings are separate pieces of the record, not substitutes for that burden.
Tony Brueski examines both sets of testimony with defense attorney Bob Motta, retired FBI special agent Robin Dreeke, and psychotherapist Shavaun Scott. They look at what investigators communicated, what an examiner needs to reach a reliable conclusion, and how jurors should evaluate a twin brother’s account while considering the competing theories of Sandra’s death.
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/
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 #TrueCrimeToday #WilliamFarwell #MedicalExaminer #BobMotta #RobinDreeke #ShavaunScott #StoughtonPolice #FarwellTrial

Lindsay Clancy's first murder trial ended in an eleven-to-one deadlock. Eleven jurors favored finding her not criminally responsible; one juror believed the prosecution had made its case. Now the fallout from that single vote has created its own legal controversy.
Defense lawyer Kevin Reddington asked to examine holdout juror Michael Desronvil's jury questionnaire and phone records, seeking to test allegations about disclosure and cellphone use during deliberations. Desronvil's background became public, including a dismissed domestic violence charge and a restraining order. The publicity has prompted questions about whether jurors can safely vote against a majority in a high-profile case. But nothing in those reports, standing alone, establishes that Desronvil broke the rules.
His account also clashes with that of the foreperson. Desronvil says he never doubted Clancy was criminally responsible. The foreperson said he admitted doubt yet would not vote to acquit. Judge William Sullivan declined to remove him, instructed the jurors on reasonable doubt, and ultimately declared a mistrial September 4.
On October 21, Sullivan refused the defense's proposed post-trial inquiry, finding that information uncovered after the mistrial could not overturn the rationale for declaring one. Clancy's separate double-jeopardy motion seeks dismissal of the case and is scheduled for argument November 2. Prosecutors have not committed publicly to another trial.
Clancy has pleaded not guilty to murder charges involving her three children. The initial trial tested competing accounts of her mental state, including the defense claim of postpartum psychosis. The next chapter asks whether the mistrial should stand and what the law permits when attorneys question the lone juror who blocked a unanimous outcome.
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/

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.
#LindsayClancy #KevinReddington #TrueCrimeToday #MichaelDesronvil #Mistrial #DoubleJeopardy #HoldoutJuror #PlymouthCounty #JurorRights #TrueCrimeNews

A federal court filing in the Anna Kepner cruise ship murder case says Timothy Hudson’s attorneys cannot make a final plea decision until one pending issue is addressed. The filing does not describe the issue. That is the specific gap in the public record, and it is the reason the defense asked for more time.
Kepner was 18 when she died aboard the Carnival Horizon in November 2025. Her body was discovered under a bed in the cabin she shared with her stepbrother and another teenager. Hudson, then 16, is now being prosecuted as an adult for first-degree murder and aggravated sexual abuse. He has pleaded not guilty, and the government carries the burden of proving its case.
Judge Beth Bloom granted the October continuance without an objection from prosecutors. Hudson’s guilty-plea deadline is January 15, 2027, and his trial is scheduled for January 25. The case previously had September and November trial settings. The defense has also told the court that family circumstances have made parts of its preparation especially difficult.
The potential sentencing consequences explain why a plea decision cannot be treated like a routine scheduling matter. Hudson faces a possible life sentence if convicted, while juvenile sentencing protections may require a separate individualized review. Some commentary has floated a 24-to-30-year plea range. That number is not a confirmed deal in the public material reviewed.
Bob Motta and Robin Dreeke join Tony Brueski to compare what the judge actually ordered with what commentators have inferred from the delay. A plea would spare the parties a trial, but it would also require major decisions about guilt and punishment. With the unresolved issue unnamed, the most important distinction is between what defense counsel disclosed and everything outsiders are guessing.
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/
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.
#AnnaKepner #TimothyHudson #TrueCrimeToday #CarnivalHorizon #FederalTrial #PleaDeal #JuvenileJustice #BobMotta #RobinDreeke #TrueCrime

In the federal murder trial of Matthew Farwell, prosecutors called a witness with a direct connection to both the accused and Sandra Birchmore: Matthew’s twin brother William. Under a federal immunity agreement, William acknowledged that he had sexual contact with Sandra while he was on duty as a Stoughton police officer.
The admission came October 26, 2026. William told jurors the relationship began in 2018, when Sandra was an adult. Prosecutors have made a separate allegation against Matthew: that he started exploiting Sandra when she was a minor involved in the Stoughton Police Explorers program. Matthew denies the murder charge, and his defense says Sandra took her own life in 2021.
The case reaches far beyond the courtroom testimony of one brother. Sandra joined the police youth program when she was about thirteen. A subsequent department investigation identified inappropriate relationships involving Matthew, William, and former deputy chief Robert Devine. Civil litigation and public reporting have raised questions about access to young participants and the accountability of officers who held positions of trust. The existence of those findings does not determine guilt in Matthew’s federal trial.
Criminal defense attorney Bob Motta and retired FBI agent Robin Dreeke examine how the prosecution might use William’s on-duty admission, why the defense may challenge his credibility or relevance, and how immunity affects testimony. We also examine the uncomfortable institutional question behind the case: why did oversight fail to protect someone who came into contact with these officers through a mentorship program? A murder verdict, whatever the outcome, will not on its own answer every question about the department’s responsibility.
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/
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 #TrueCrimeToday #WilliamFarwell #StoughtonPolice #FarwellTrial #PoliceOversight #BobMotta #RobinDreeke #TrueCrimeNews

Then there is a custody-case document attributed to Melani’s later husband, Ian Pawlowski. It describes Melani recounting a belief that Brandon was no longer himself and might need to die as part of a religious plan. The filing also says she did not expect anyone to act. Melani’s representatives disputed accusations in the custody proceedings. Ian later testified about the influence Lori and Chad Daybell had over Melani, describing what he came to see as manipulation.
In October 2019, someone fired at Brandon Boudreaux outside his home in Gilbert, Arizona. Investigators identified Lori Vallow Daybell’s brother, Alex Cox, as the suspected gunman. A jury convicted Lori in June 2025 of conspiring to kill Brandon, and she received a life sentence in Arizona. But this combined episode turns to someone who was much closer to Brandon: his then-wife, Lori’s niece Melani Pawlowski. Melani has not been charged in the shooting and has denied any involvement.
At Lori’s trial, prosecutors pointed to Melani’s connections and questions about the timing of communications. An FBI agent testified, according to the episode’s reporting, that Lori’s phone and Melani’s were connected in a 35-minute call around the time of the shooting. The content of that call has not been publicly established. We also examine the address Melani reportedly sought before the attack, the morning park handoff, and phone activity involving Cox. Each detail calls for context; none on its own proves Melani participated in a conspiracy.
Retired FBI agent Robin Dreeke and I compare the phone evidence, the custody filing, and the statements given to investigators. The distinction matters: Lori’s conviction is established; Melani’s alleged knowledge and involvement remain disputed. Gilbert police have said their investigation is active, and Melani has not been charged in the attempted killing. What can the available record actually show about what she knew before Brandon was shot at?
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/
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.
#LoriVallow #MelaniPawlowski #TrueCrimeToday #BrandonBoudreaux #LoriVallowDaybell #ChadDaybell #IanPawlowski #AlexCox #TrueCrimeNews #Arizona