Man who killed wife, baby loses appeal in Mass.
Recent Cases
The highest court in Massachusetts rejected the appeal of a British man convicted of killing his wife and baby daughter in their rented home, saying in its decision released Tuesday that warrantless searches of the home were justified because those inside might have been in danger.
In arguing for a new trial, lawyers for Neil Entwistle said evidence obtained during the warrantless searches of the Hopkinton home while police were looking for the missing family should have been dismissed at trial.
They also argued he was denied a fair trial, claiming that "saturating and inflammatory" media coverage tainted the jury pool and the judge refused to question prospective jurors more deeply about how publicity may have biased them.
The court rejected the arguments, concluding that Entwistle "received a fair trial that was ably tried and judged."
Entwistle was convicted of the 2006 shootings of his wife, Rachel, and their daughter, 9-month-old Lillian. He is serving life in prison without the possibility of parole for their murders.
Related listings
-
Peter Madoff pleads guilty in NYC, blames brother
Recent Cases 07/01/2012In pleading guilty to criminal charges, Peter Madoff portrayed himself as a victim of a domineering older brother who he revered right up until an evening in December 2008 when his sibling revealed that his wildly successful investment business was a...
-
Court: Madoff's brother to plead guilty in NY
Recent Cases 06/27/2012The brother of Ponzi scheme king Bernard Madoff will plead guilty on Friday to conspiracy and falsifying records, admitting his role in the multibillion-dollar fraud that destroyed the savings of thousands of investors, prosecutors told a judge on We...
-
Supreme Court says tribes must be fully reimbursed
Recent Cases 06/18/2012The Supreme Court says the government must fully reimburse Native American tribes for money they spent on federal programs. The federal government had agreed to fully reimburse money tribes spent on programs like law enforcement, environmental protec...
What Is Meant by ‘No-Fault’ Workers’ Compensation in Illinois?
If you were injured in a work-related accident and have been researching workers’ compensation, you may have seen it described as a “no-fault” system. One of the most important things to understand about the workers’ compensation system in Illinois is that it is based on a “no-fault” system. What does this mean, exactly?
Most employers in Illinois are required by law to have workers’ compensation insurance. And the workers' compensation in Illinois is a “no-fault” system, which means that any worker who has been hurt on the job is entitled to workers' compensation benefits. If you have been hurt on the job, you are entitled to workers’ compensation benefits no matter whose fault the accident was.
A no-fault insurance system, such as workers’ comp, works by paying claims regardless of who is to blame for an accident. This provides an important layer of protection for injured workers, sparing them from having to through additional litigation and the through the additional burden of proving who was at fault before receiving benefits.
In Illinois, even though you don’t have to prove that your injury was your employer’s fault, you do have to prove that your injury happened at work or as a result of work. If you would like help to file your workers' compensation claim, Krol, Bongiorno, & Given’s experienced workers' comp lawyers are here to help. With over 60 years of combined legal experience, the KBG law firm is a leader in the field of workers’ compensation law and we have earned the reputation as aggressive advocates for injured workers before the IWCC.