Update, November 10, 2026. Reaction. “It is the outcome Sandra, her unborn child, and her family have deserved for more than five years,” Stoughton police acting Chief James O’Connor said in a statement, WCVB reported. “What happened to Sandra is a profound betrayal of the trust every police officer is sworn to uphold.” Outside the courthouse, a cousin of Birchmore’s said, “We finally got justice,” NBC10 Boston reported. Sentencing date. WCVB and Boston 25 reported that Farwell will be sentenced February 3, with Boston 25 reporting the judge said he and his lawyers can address the court that day. NBC10 described February 3, 2027 as a presentencing hearing, with the sentencing hearing to be scheduled later. A presentence report will be prepared.
Update, November 10, 2026. Farwell will be sentenced on February 3, WCVB reported.
He was never charged with murder. DNA showed he was not the father of the baby. A day earlier, the jury said it was hopelessly stuck. And on Tuesday, November 10, 2026, a federal jury found Matthew Farwell guilty on both counts in the death of Sandra Birchmore and her unborn child, Boston 25 News and WCVB reported.
Each of those facts sounds like it should have helped the defense. None of them did. Here is how a case built on an unusual federal statute produced a conviction, and why the paternity result never mattered the way it seemed it would.
Fact 1: He was not charged with murder
Farwell “was not charged with murder, a crime that in this case would be brought in state court,” NBC10 Boston noted Tuesday. He was charged with two federal crimes:
- Count One: killing a witness or victim, 18 U.S.C. § 1512(a)(1)(C).
- Count Two: causing the death of a child in utero during that crime, 18 U.S.C. § 1841, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.
The jury convicted on both: “Count 1: GUILTY Count 2: GUILTY,” Boston 25 reported from the courtroom.
Count One required more than a killing. The superseding indictment, which we read when we previewed the trial, charged that he killed Birchmore “with the intent to prevent the communication by any person to a law enforcement officer of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a federal offense.” The jury had to find that purpose beyond a reasonable doubt, and it did.
Fact 2: The federal crimes she could have reported included wire fraud
The witness-killing law only works if the information being hidden is about a federal crime. The indictment named three:
- Deprivation of rights under color of law, 18 U.S.C. § 242.
- Coercion and enticement of a minor, 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b).
- Wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1343, based on the allegation that he claimed pay for police shifts he spent with Birchmore instead of working.
That last one sounds minor next to a homicide. It did real work: it was one of the federal offenses Birchmore could have reported, which made her a potential federal witness and brought her death within § 1512.
Fact 3: He was not the father, and it did not matter
“DNA evidence later showed that he was not the father of the unborn child,” NBC10 reported. In an ordinary murder case built on a motive of hiding a pregnancy, that would be a gift to the defense.
This was not an ordinary murder case. The indictment never alleged Farwell was the father. It alleged that “Birchmore told FARWELL that he was the father of the child.” NBC10 summarized the accusation as strangling Birchmore after she told him she was pregnant and that he was the father. Under § 1512, what matters is what Farwell believed and why he acted, not the biology.
Count Two did not turn on paternity either. Section 1841 attaches to causing the death of “a child in utero” during the underlying federal crime. Whose child it was is not an element.
Fact 4: The phone call twelve days before
The government’s theory came down to a short window. According to the indictment, on January 20, 2021, a friend of Birchmore’s called the Stoughton Police Department and said Farwell had been having sex with her, and a department employee then told Farwell about the call. On February 1, 2021, the indictment alleged, he strangled her and staged the scene as a suicide.
Prosecutors told jurors that video showed Farwell entering Birchmore’s apartment building at 9:14 p.m. that night and leaving at 9:43 p.m., three minutes after her phone recorded its final movement, WCVB reported. The defense argued he went there to end the relationship and that she took her own life.
Fact 5: Deadlocked Monday, guilty Tuesday
On Monday afternoon jurors told Chief U.S. District Judge Denise Casper they were “in a deadlock that looks like it will not change any time soon,” WCVB reported. Casper said she did not think deliberations had been “so long,” Boston.com reported, and on Tuesday morning she told the jury to take the time it needed, according to NBC10. No Allen charge, the special instruction for deadlocked juries, was reported. Shortly before 2 p.m. the foreperson announced a unanimous verdict, and all 12 jurors confirmed it when polled, Boston 25 reported.
We do not know what changed in the jury room, and no juror has spoken publicly.
What he faces now
Section 1512(a)(3)(A) sets the punishment for a killing as the punishment in 18 U.S.C. §§ 1111 and 1112. Under § 1111, first-degree murder is punished “by death or by imprisonment for life,” and second-degree murder by “any term of years or for life.” The Justice Department told the court in December 2025 it would not seek death. Section 1841 says the unborn-child count carries the same punishment as if the harm had been to the mother, and bars the death penalty. We read each statute at govinfo.gov and Cornell’s Legal Information Institute.
Judge Casper will set sentencing later. The defense has 14 days from the verdict to file for acquittal or a new trial under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 29 and 33, and can appeal to the First Circuit after judgment.
What else is still open
- The civil suit. Birchmore’s estate has sued the Town of Stoughton, Farwell and others, and that case is set for a hearing after the federal trial, NBC10 reported.
- Stoughton. The town’s police chief and town manager are both on leave amid an outside investigation, NBC10 reported.
Frequently asked questions
Was Matthew Farwell convicted of murder?
Not by that name. He was convicted of killing a witness or victim under 18 U.S.C. § 1512 and of causing the death of an unborn child under § 1841. Murder charges in this case would have been brought in state court, NBC10 noted.
Was Farwell the father of Birchmore’s baby?
No. DNA evidence showed he was not, NBC10 reported. The indictment alleged only that Birchmore told him he was the father.
Why did paternity not matter?
The witness-killing count turns on why Farwell acted, and the unborn-child count turns on the death of a child in utero during that crime. Neither requires that he be the father.
What sentence does Matthew Farwell face?
Up to life in prison. The government is not seeking death. No sentencing date had been reported as of Tuesday afternoon.
How long did the Farwell jury deliberate?
About 10½ hours through Monday, Boston 25 reported, plus Tuesday morning before the verdict shortly before 2 p.m.
Sources: Boston 25 News, WCVB and NBC10 Boston, November 10, 2026; WCVB and Boston.com, November 9, 2026. Superseding indictment, United States v. Farwell, No. 1:24-cr-10259-DJC (D. Mass., October 28, 2025), as quoted in our September 18 preview. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1111, 1512 and 1841, read at govinfo.gov and Cornell’s Legal Information Institute. General information, not legal advice.