NEW YORK — Cindy Sommer will be back in court Friday as her attorney argues that a pending murder charge should be dismissed with prejudice, meaning she could never face a retrial. Sommer was convicted of the arsenic poisoning of her husband, Todd, an active duty Marine, in January 2007. She was never sentenced to the mandatory term of life without parole because the judge ordered a new trial after finding her trial attorney made errors that tainted the process. The new trial was scheduled to begin last May but in April the San Diego District Attorney suddenly moved to dismiss the charges without prejudice. The mother of four had been in jail since November 2005 for a crime she says she did not commit. She was immediately released and has been living with relatives in northern California since then.

Earlier this year, in preparation for the new trial, the District Attorney had discovered more tissues from Sommer’s husband, taken at autopsy, and stored separately from tissues tested and used at the first trial. If Sommer had, indeed, murdered her husband by feeding him arsenic-laced food or drink, then these new tissues should have tested positive for arsenic. But they did not. There was no arsenic in any of the tissues which, incidentally, were taken from the same organs as those used at trial where arsenic was present. The difference was in how they were stored and where they were tested. Some samples were preserved in formaldehyde and others were frozen. The new tissues had been preserved in a third way, in paraffin blocks. The tissues used at trial were analyzed at a government lab. The new tissues were analyzed at a private lab in Quebec.The defense has always maintained that the samples used at trial were contaminated.

A new judge, John Einhorn, is hearing the motion to dismiss but Sommer’s attorney, Allen Bloom, wants the matter to go back to the original trial judge, Peter Deddeh, who is currently assigned to a different courthouse. The District Attorney’s position is that since the case was dismissed a few months ago there is no matter pending before Judge Einhorn and, hence, he has no jurisdiction to consider the motion. Sommer’s attorney, Allen Bloom, says that Einhorn or Deddeh has jurisdiction to hear it and that the court can consider not only evidence introduced at the trial but also the new evidence of arsenic-free tissues from Sommer’s husband that led to her release from jail.

–Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

NEW YORK — The Los Angeles District Attorney just filed a motion in Phil Spector’s pending murder case. The motion seeks to admit at the upcoming retrial yet another incident where Spector threatened a woman with a gun. Jurors in Spector’s first trial last year heard from five women who detailed remarkably similar experiences between 1988 and 1995.

 According to the filing, prosecutors learned about this new incident earlier this year. Norma Kemper had just been hired as Spector’s assistant in September 1996, a position she would hold for the next four years. Unlike one of Spector’s prior assistants, Dorothy Melvin, who also testified against him at last year’s trial, Kemper says she was never romantically involved with him.

The day after she was hired, Kemper was invited to dinner at Dan Tana’s with Spector and his friend, Jay Romaine. Kemper told investigators that Spector drank a lot during the meal and, at one point, leaned across the table to kiss her. When she rejected his advances, Spector allegedly opened his jacket and revealed a small handgun in a shoulder holster. He said: “You know I could kill you right now.”

An angry Kemper eventually calmed down. After leaving Dan Tana’s, they went to House of Blues, where seven years later Spector would meet Lana Clarkson. After some time, Kemper says she asked Spector to take her home. When he refused, she found a ride with a friend at the club.

Kemper told investigators that when Spector drank and took his psychiatric medications, his personality changed and he would become “mean.” It was established at last year’s trial that Spector was taking psychiatric medication on or about February 3, 2003 when Lana Clarkson died in the early morning hours by a single gunshot wound to the head. He had been drinking extensively throughout the evening.

The District Attorney wants to put Kemper on the stand to further establish Spector’s pattern of violence against women especially when he was drinking, was romantically interested in a woman who wasn’t necessarily interested in him and whom he wanted to control.

–Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

NEW YORK — Gerald Robinson, a defrocked Roman Catholic priest in Ohio, lost his first appeal last week. Robinson was convicted in May 2006 of the 1980 murder of Sister Margaret Ann Pahl. Pahl was stabbed 31 times in the sacristy of a chapel at Toledo’s Mercy Hospital. A suspect since 1980, Robinson was not arrested until 2004. In a lengthy decision, a three-judge panel of Ohio’s 6th District Court of Appeals rejected numerous claims by Robinson including ineffective assistance of counsel and improper arguments by the state.

Robinson claimed his attorneys failed to file a motion to dismiss before trial because of preindictment delay since nearly a quarter of a century had passed from the murder to the indictment. During that time, police reports were lost and witnesses died. In a thorough analysis of the record and the law, the appeals court found no error in the failure to dismiss the charges on the grounds of delay.

The appeals court also rejected Robinson’s argument that the state improperly injected Satanism into the case as a motive. Robinson took issue with the state’s explanation for a round mark of blood on the Sister Margaret Ann’s forehead. The state argued that Robinson anointed her using her own blood after first dipping in blood the round end of the letter opener used to stab her. The state also argued that the victim’s body, covered with an altar cloth, was stabbed nine times in the form of an inverted cross. A witness for the prosecution explained that this behavior made a mockery of the rituals of Catholicism.

Twenty-two more stab wounds were also inflicted to the neck and face. Sister Margaret Ann’s lifeless, exposed body was found on the floor of the sacristy. Her stockings and undergarments had been rolled to her ankles and her dress and brassiere were pulled up.

Robinson has always denied killing Sister Margaret Ann on Holy Saturday, April 5, 1980. He intends to appeal last week’s decision to the Ohio Supreme Court.

–Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

WOBURN, Massachusetts – Something was wrong in the Entwistle household in December 2005 and January 2006. At least that’s the impression eBay fraud investigator Jeremy Roybal gave jurors as he detailed buyer complaints about a non-responding seller, Neil Entwistle.

As I write this, jurors still don’t know what was being sold on eBay but they learned that the five accounts were opened between 2003 and 2006. The last account was established on January 5, 2006-apparently the only one in Rachel Entwistle’s name.

The DA says that financial troubles were a motive for defendant Neil Entwistle in the killing of his 27-year-old wife and 9-month-old daughter. The Entwistles had relocated to the U.S. from the U.K. in the fall of 2005. By mid-January 2006, Neil Entwistle was still unemployed and whatever income he generated from online sales had apparently dried up.

Enwistle’s mother, Yvonne, lost her composure in court last week as she watched her son sob while viewing the crime scene video that included the bodies of his wife and daughter in their new home. Friday, she sat stoically in court with her husband, Clifford, and younger son, Russell. On the other side of the courtroom, equally stoic, sat Rachel Entwistle’s mother and stepfather, Priscilla and Joe Mattarazzo.

Testimony continues today.

–Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

WOBURN, Massachusetts – At the trial of Neil Entwistle today, the Hopkinton police officer who found the bodies of Rachel and Lillian Entwistle on a Sunday evening in January 2006 testified that a strong, foul odor led him to the second floor master bedroom. According to prosecutors, the bodies had been there since Friday morning. Entwistle is charged with killing his wife and daughter. The defense has painted Entwistle as a doting father who would not harm his family.

Jurors listened attentively as Sergeant Michael Sutton described how he carefully lifted a corner of the comforter and saw a foot. Sergeant Mary Ritchie of the Massachusetts State Police testified that she processed the bedroom crime scene later that night. She described to a hushed courtroom how the bodies were uncovered. Rachel lay on her left side with her right arm over her 9-month-old daughter cradled against her body. There were no signs of a struggle. The baby had been shot in the chest. The bullet appeared to have passed through the infant and into the mother.

Elsewhere in the large colonial home, bathwater was drawn in a tub, classical music played in the baby’s room, and the television blared downstairs in the living room.

Rachel Entwistle’s mother and stepfather sat through today’s testimony. Neil Entwistle’s mother, Yvonne, however, left before hearing the description of the bodies.

The day ended with Sergeant Ritchie displaying a .22 caliber Colt revolver. Jurors will soon learn that this is the gun allegedly used to kill Rachel and Lillian.

–Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

WOBURN, Massachusetts –The Commonwealth called a parade of witnesses today to corroborate prosecution witness Joe Matterazzo’s alibi for Friday, January 20, 2006–the day 27-year-old Rachel Entwistle and nine-month-old Lillian Rose were murdered. Matterazzo, Rachel’s stepfather, is the owner of the .22 caliber revolver used to kill Rachel and her baby. His whereabouts that day were fully accounted for, according to co-workers.

New information came out today from Matterazzo. It turns out that Entwistle called him daily from England for four consecutive days after the murders–January 23 through January 26. On one of those days, Entwistle told Matterazzo that he wanted Rachel and Lillian to be buried together “because that’s the way I left, I mean, I found them.” Entwistle never admitted to killing them but he did say to his father-in-law: “Joe, I don’t know how things got like this.”

Rachel’s mother, Priscilla, and her husband, Joe Matterazzo, sit in the front row of the public gallery on the opposite side of the courtroom from the Entwistles. I’ve seen no interaction between the families.

–Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

WOBURN, Massachusetts – It’s still morning on day three of jury selection and nine jurors were just seated: five women and four men. It’s back to individual questioning of jurors before the remaining seven can be seated. The prosecution exercised five of its 16 peremptory challenges; the defense exercised seven. In the past two days, more than 100 potential jurors were excused for various reasons. By the close of business yesterday, twenty-four had made it to this morning’s round but one of them was excused before court today because the juror knows a court officer on the case. So, of the 23, nine are jurors.

The last time I recall a Briton was on trial for murder in Middlesex County was in 1997 when Louise Woodward was tried for the murder of infant Matthew Eappen. Woodward, the nanny, was convicted of second degree murder. The trial judge, Hiller Zobel, reduced it to manslaughter and gave her time served. I understand Woodward is a dance instructor today. One man was excused from Entwistle’s jury pool yesterday after he announced that he was a witness in Woodward’s case.

Entwistle’s trial is not taking place in the same Cambridge courthouse as Woodward’s. That courthouse is closed for the time being — and it could be a long time — for asbestos removal. The Middlesex Superior Court is now located in Woburn, Mass. This is the town that was featured in the book, A Civil Action, by Jonathan Harr and the movie, starring John Travolta and Robert Duvall. The book and movie are about a true story: a protracted personal injury lawsuit by residents of Woburn who claimed their water was contaminated by toxins that caused the deaths of many Woburn children. I know it was a long time ago but I’m erring on the safe side–it’s bottled water for me.

– Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

WOBURN, Massachusetts – Neil Entwistle’s parents, Clifford and Yvonne, and his brother, Russell, are in court today. They are seated in the first row of the public gallery, directly behind the defense table.

Neil Entwistle smiled at them when he came into court this morning. He sits, again, to the far right of the defense table in a dark suit and pink shirt. The defense team brought the freshly-laundered shirt into court this morning and had it delivered to Entwistle in his holding cell. Defense attorney Elliot Weinstein passed on my request to meet the Entwistles; they declined “at this time.”

As I watch jury selection, author and radio host Michelle McPhee is sitting next to me. I happen to be reading (though not in court) her book about the Entwistle case, “Heartless.”

As of the lunch break, nine men and eight women have been qualified to sit as jurors. Excused jurors include a man whose wife was also summoned to jury service in this case and is among the eight women qualified thus far. Another has a friend who knew Rachel Entwistle. A third said he would hold it against Entwistle if he didn’t testify at the trial.

The attorneys are expected to begin exercising peremptory challenges tomorrow. Each side has 16 of them. Opening statements and testimony from the first witnesses could happen by Thursday.

– Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

WOBURN, MA – Neil Entwistle’s murder trial began in earnest Monday morning after several continuances in the past two years. After nearly 170 jurors completed a 17-page questionnaire, the first 60 were told to remain; the rest were sent home and told to call in at 3:00 p.m. for further instruction.

Sixteen jurors will be seated; four of them will be alternates. The judge is doing all the questioning of jurors who are brought into court individually. The first juror, a woman, came into court at 12:35 p.m. She basically answered yes or no to a series of questions, assuring all that she can be fair. She and another juror made the initial cut, but the next four were excused for cause, including a man who said he just cannot be fair. I just received word that, before the lunch break, the judge and attorneys will hear from 15 jurors who want to be excused.

The rather large public gallery is about one-quarter full, mainly with members of the media, British print and broadcast journalists.

The witness list has 164 names on it; 28 are from the United Kingdom. Entistle’s parents, Clifford and Yvonne, are not on the list though the word around the courthouse is that they are here or at least en route to Massachusetts from England. Rachel Entwistle’s mother, stepfather and siblings are on the witness list.

Entwistle sits to the far right at the defense table with his attorneys, Elliot Weinstein and Stephanie Page. He’s in a dark suit and appears to listen attentively to the answers prospective jurors give Judge Kottmyer. Occasionally, he speaks to Page. Entwistle is 29 years old now and, if convicted, faces life without the possibility of parole.

– Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

SAN DIEGO, California – When I interviewed Cindy Sommer at the Las Colinas Women’s Detention Facility here a week ago, neither one of us had any idea that she was spending her last days behind bars. She was a free woman four days later.

I traveled to San Diego to interview Sommer on April 13 in preparation for her retrial in mid-May. She had been convicted of the arsenic murder of her husband, a Marine, but that conviction was thrown out on the grounds she received ineffective counsel.

The women’s jail looks deceptively small from the outside. The one-story building in rural Santee where visitors can spend 30 minutes with an inmate is actually one of a hidden compound of buildings that houses about 750 inmates. I expected that we would go through a rigorous security screening but, surprisingly, there was none—not even a metal detector. As it turns out, there are no contact visits at the jail; hence, little need for such security checks. Immediately to the left off the entrance hall is the visitors’ room. There is a row of 19 metal stools bolted to the floor. Each stool is in front of a window. A wooden box around the window gives a semblance of privacy. There is a telephone receiver on the wall to speak to the inmate.

Our interview was scheduled for 9:15 am. At precisely that hour, Sommer suddenly appeared before me on the other side of the window. She was wearing prison garb and smiling widely. Her face was made up and “camera ready.” We grabbed our receivers but they hadn’t been turned on yet. All telephones were then activated simultaneously and our 30-minute chat began. Almost all the visitors’ stools were occupied so the din from multiple conversations made it a challenge to hear each other.

Sommer was remarkably optimistic about her upcoming retrial. She always maintained her innocence. She cried when talking about her children and all the milestones in their lives that she had missed in more than two years’ incarceration. She emphasized that she hoped the truth would come out this time—that she did not kill her husband. The interview ended mid-sentence when the phone lines were cut 30 minutes after they were activated. We just looked at each other and waved goodbye. I thanked her for the interview and said I’d see her in court next month.

I returned to New York the next day. Three days later, I was back in San Diego, this time speaking to Sommer as she dined on shrimp with family and friends just hours after her sudden release. Sommer didn’t sleep that night. She sat next to me the next morning on air with In Session. Still reeling from her release, Sommer was exuberant. She said she was angry with the prosecution but her anger certainly didn’t manifest on our air. Watch the interview

As I look back on the developments in her case from her conviction in January 2007 to her release last week, lessons come to mind from my years as a DA in Manhattan. A senior DA took me aside during my first year and told me to watch the old Western movie, “The Oxbow Incident,” which deeply moved him. In the movie, based on the book, three innocent men were lynched by a mob when law and order were abandoned.

My colleague wanted me to understand the immense power of a prosecutor and the need to reign in a “rush to judgment” mentality. He emphasized that doing justice doesn’t always mean trying to secure a conviction but doing what’s right whether it’s lowering the charges or dismissing them outright.

Sommer’s case may not have been a classic rush to judgment since there wasn’t even a criminal investigation until 15 months after Todd Sommer’s death. Moreover, Sommer wasn’t arrested until November 2005, more than three years after her husband’s death. Despite the holes in the prosecution’s case—the most glaring being no link between Sommer and arsenic—a jury of twelve San Diegans found her guilty. She was facing a sentence of life without parole.

San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis says the system worked in Sommer’s case. When they recently found more tissue samples of her late husband, the D.A. sent them for testing at a private lab. The absence of arsenic in the tissues led to Sommer’s release last week. The most Dumanis will now say is that there is reasonable doubt. She won’t go as far as Roy Cooper in North Carolina when he declared the three former Duke lacrosse players innocent. But in the eyes of many who followed her case closely, Sommer has now been totally exonerated.

– Beth Karas, In Session correspondent