On the fourth day of testimony in the Matthew Farwell trial, an FBI digital forensic examiner told jurors that on February 9, 2021, eight days after Sandra Birchmore died, an iPhone linked to Farwell was used to search Google for “can you revoke consent in massachusetts.” That was the same day Farwell handed his phone to State Police. The examiner also read from a note on Birchmore’s phone listing baby names, a list that included Matthew, and said her phone was last unlocked at 9:13 p.m. on February 1, 2021, the night prosecutors say she was killed.
Friday, October 16, 2026 was the fifth day of the trial. Farwell, a former Stoughton police detective, is charged in federal court with killing Birchmore, 23, and her unborn child and staging the scene as a suicide. He has pleaded not guilty and is presumed innocent. His defense is that Birchmore took her own life after he went to her apartment to end their relationship. This account covers testimony reported through the lunch break and is drawn from NBC10 Boston, Boston 25 News, WCVB, Boston.com and 7News. Testimony continued in the afternoon, and we will update this post.
Brian Holmes on cross: the January 20 call
Holmes, now Kingston’s police chief, was Stoughton’s deputy chief in 2021 and ran the department’s internal affairs investigation after Birchmore’s death. He finished testifying Friday morning under cross-examination by federal public defender Joanne Daley.
- The call. Prosecutors say a friend of Birchmore’s called the Stoughton station on January 20, 2021 to report the relationship. Holmes described the call as a hypothetical question about whether someone could get in trouble for an extramarital affair, and said it did not mention sex with a minor, Boston 25 and Boston.com reported. He said the caller only partly cooperated with the internal affairs investigation. The recording was not retained; Holmes said he tried to find it through IT staff and a vendor the town uses, Boston.com reported. On Thursday he testified that it “automatically purged.”
- The heads up. Holmes agreed that Lt. John Fanning of the State Police told him and Chief Donna McNamara that Farwell had been at Birchmore’s apartment before investigators spoke with Farwell, NBC10 and Boston 25 reported. He said he did not remember suggesting where to confront Farwell.
- The laptop. Holmes said the only instruction he got about Birchmore’s laptop was to keep it off WiFi, NBC10 reported. The defense asked whether he understood how reviewing a computer can affect its data.
- Meal breaks. Holmes said the department’s comp time system was “antiquated,” with paper forms that did not always reach the chief’s office, Boston 25 reported. Asked about meal breaks, he said officers could go home with a supervisor’s approval but had to stay in “a situation of readiness.” Prosecutors allege Farwell met Birchmore for sex while on duty.
FBI examiner Christopher Beckstrom
Beckstrom, a master digital forensic examiner assigned to the New England Regional Computer Forensics Laboratory, was the trial’s 13th witness, Boston 25 reported. He reviewed Birchmore’s iPhone and MacBook, devices first imaged by State Police, and several phones tied to Farwell.
Birchmore’s phone and laptop on February 1
- Last unlocked at 9:13 p.m. Birchmore’s iPhone 12 was last in an unlocked state on February 1, 2021 at 9:13 p.m., Beckstrom testified, according to NBC10, Boston 25 and Boston.com.
- Movement at 9:40 p.m. Activity data showed the phone recorded steps and traveled about six meters around 9:40 p.m., NBC10, Boston 25 and Boston.com reported. The outlets’ accounts of the exact step counts differ.
- The laptop. The last user action on the MacBook came between 8:50 and 9:10 p.m. that night, Beckstrom said, according to Boston 25 and WCVB. WCVB reported he said the last data, at 9:10 p.m., was a chat between Birchmore and Farwell.
- Pregnancy apps. Apps used to track ovulation, cycles and pregnancy, including Flo and Ovia, appear to have been downloaded in October 2020, Boston 25 and Boston.com reported.
- “Names for baby 2021.” Beckstrom read an Apple Note from Birchmore’s phone listing names including Madelyn, Nicchole, Lilly, Cayden and Matthew, Boston.com, WCVB, Boston 25 and 7News reported. Boston 25 dated the note January 27, 2021; WCVB described a January 27 entry and a February 1 note.
Farwell’s devices
- The February 9 searches. Records from an iPhone XR that Boston.com reported was linked to an email address for Farwell showed two Google searches on February 9, 2021. The first, Beckstrom said, was “can you revoke consent in massachusetts,” WCVB, Boston 25, Boston.com and 7News reported. The second asked whether deleted messages could be recovered by Cellebrite, a forensics company whose tools law enforcement uses to extract phone data. The outlets transcribed the wording of the second search slightly differently. NBC10 reported that the searches appeared to line up with the timing of Farwell’s interview with State Police.
- The iPhone 11. Beckstrom said he reviewed data from the iPhone 11, a device acquired by another agency, starting around October 2 of this year, and did not believe it contained messages between Farwell and Birchmore, Boston 25 and WCVB reported. Asked whether he could have reviewed it earlier, he said, “I could have reviewed the data.” The judge sustained defense objections when prosecutors asked why he had not, Boston 25 reported.
- Facebook. Facebook records showed Farwell sent Birchmore a friend request on October 28, 2012 that she accepted, removed her as a friend two months later, and declined a friend request she sent in April 2015, NBC10 and Boston 25 reported.
- Volume. Beckstrom said Birchmore’s phone held about 240,000 communications and that roughly 10 percent, about 24,000, were with Farwell, Boston 25 reported.
Cross-examination
- The suicide ribbon search. Daley asked about a search on Birchmore’s device at about 7:49 p.m. on February 1, 2021: “what color is the suicide ribbon,” NBC10 and Boston 25 reported. Beckstrom agreed Birchmore typed the words, and that it was not a click or a prompt. He said image cache data showed a purple ribbon, then a search for a purple ribbon, then the suicide ribbon search, Boston 25 reported. Asked about other references to self-harm, he said there were some references to suicide on her devices.
- Who sent more. Beckstrom agreed that Birchmore sent many more messages than Farwell did, Boston 25 reported. The defense also asked about communications between Birchmore and Farwell’s twin brother, William, and Beckstrom said his count was based on Matthew Farwell’s phone number.
- Anxiety. Beckstrom described a March 2020 Facebook message in which Birchmore apologized to someone for a bout of anxiety she said came from “a bunch of little things,” NBC10 reported.
Why the consent search matters
What Farwell agreed to when he gave State Police his phone on February 9, 2021 was fought over before trial. As we reported when jury selection began, prosecutors said he consented only to a search for his texts with Birchmore, while the defense said the written consent form covered any evidence related to her death. After the defense took that position in court on October 2, MassLive reported, prosecutors said they re-searched the phone and found what they called incriminating evidence. Beckstrom’s testimony that he began reviewing the iPhone 11 around October 2 fits that timeline. On Thursday, State Police examiner Nicholas Guarino testified that the 2021 search of Farwell’s phone was limited to texts with Birchmore and found none.
The legal rule behind the fight comes from the Supreme Court. In Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248 (1991), the Court held that the scope of consent is measured by “objective” reasonableness: “what would the typical reasonable person have understood by the exchange between the officer and the suspect?” It added: “A suspect may of course delimit as he chooses the scope of the search to which he consents.” A person can limit what police may look at, and the limit holds.
Jurors were not told whether Farwell ever tried to revoke his consent, and no outlet reported that he did. The search terms are evidence the government offered; what they show about Farwell’s state of mind is for the jury to decide. The defense had not been reported addressing them in court as of the lunch break.
What the day added
The government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Farwell killed Birchmore; the defense does not have to prove suicide. Friday’s prosecution evidence aimed at timing and state of mind: a phone that went still after 9:13 p.m., a list of baby names, and Farwell’s searches about consent and data recovery eight days later. The defense used cross-examination to put Birchmore’s suicide ribbon search, made earlier that evening, in front of the jury, along with other references to suicide on her devices and gaps in how the Stoughton department handled the January 2021 call. FBI agent Heidi Kelsch was also expected to testify Friday. The trial is expected to last about five weeks.
Frequently asked questions
Who testified on day 4 of the Farwell trial?
Kingston Police Chief Brian Holmes, a former Stoughton deputy chief, finished his testimony, and FBI master digital forensic examiner Christopher Beckstrom took the stand. FBI agent Heidi Kelsch was expected to follow.
What did Farwell search after Birchmore’s death?
According to the FBI examiner’s testimony, an iPhone XR linked to Farwell was used on February 9, 2021 to search Google for “can you revoke consent in massachusetts” and whether deleted messages can be recovered by Cellebrite. That was the day Farwell gave his phone to State Police.
When was Sandra Birchmore’s phone last used?
Beckstrom testified that her iPhone was last unlocked at 9:13 p.m. on February 1, 2021, and that it moved about six meters around 9:40 p.m. Her laptop’s last user activity was between 8:50 and 9:10 p.m.
What was the suicide ribbon search?
On cross-examination, Beckstrom agreed that at about 7:49 p.m. on February 1, 2021, Birchmore typed the search “what color is the suicide ribbon.” He also said there were some other references to suicide on her devices.
Can you limit or revoke consent to a police search?
Under Florida v. Jimeno (1991), a person “may of course delimit as he chooses the scope of the search to which he consents,” and the scope is judged by what a reasonable person would have understood from the exchange with the officer.
Sources: NBC10 Boston, Boston 25 News and Boston.com live coverage, October 16, 2026; WCVB and 7News WHDH, October 16, 2026; MassLive, October 2026, as cited in our earlier coverage. Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248 (1991), read on CourtListener. Quotations are as reported by those outlets; where they differ, we say so. Matthew Farwell has pleaded not guilty and is presumed innocent. General information, not legal advice.