EXCLUSIVE: Sandra Birchmore Death Case Erupts in New Subpoena Fight as Stoughton Officials Push Back

Sandra Birchmore's death remains at the center of a new legal battle as Stoughton officials fight subpoenas seeking testimony and investigative records.
Nov. 5 2026, Published 9:05 p.m. ET
A new legal battle has erupted in litigation connected to the Sandra Birchmore death investigation, with Massachusetts town officials fighting subpoenas seeking testimony and investigative records, RadarOnline.com can reveal.
According to court documents obtained by Radar the Town of Stoughton filed an emergency motion on November 4 seeking to quash subpoenas issued by Police Chief Donna McNamara's attorneys in her ongoing lawsuit against the town and Town Manager Thomas Calter.
The dispute centers on an outside investigation conducted by the Davis Group, with town officials insisting that a final investigative report has not been completed or provided to them.
Town Officials Fight Eight Depositions

Stoughton officials are fighting subpoenas seeking testimony in a lawsuit connected to the fallout from Sandra Birchmore's death.
In the filing submitted to Norfolk County Superior Court, attorneys for Stoughton accused McNamara's legal team of scheduling eight depositions without coordinating with opposing counsel.
The town argues attorneys representing both Stoughton and Calter are unavailable on the proposed dates because of existing professional and personal commitments.
Among those targeted for depositions are Stoughton Select Board members, human resources officials and Assistant Town Manager Mark Tisdelle.
The town is asking the court to block the subpoenas, arguing that the accelerated discovery schedule is unnecessary because discovery remains open until July 2028.
Missing Investigative Report Sparks Dispute

Stoughton attorneys claim an outside investigative report sought by Police Chief Donna McNamara has not been finalized.
The most significant disagreement involves an investigative report prepared by the Davis Group.
McNamara's attorneys have sought records and correspondence involving the outside investigation, which relates to complaints against the police chief and her employment status.
However, Stoughton's attorneys insist the final report remains unavailable.
The filing states that the Davis Group's report is "not yet finalized" and has not been provided to the town.
Town officials also dispute McNamara's alleged demand for a due process hearing, arguing that placing her on paid administrative leave during an outside investigation does not automatically require such a proceeding.
Attorneys Clash Over Records

McNamara's attorneys are seeking investigative records, emails and testimony from multiple town officials.
Exhibits attached to the motion reveal contentious exchanges between attorneys over deposition scheduling and access to investigative materials.
McNamara's legal team is seeking correspondence involving Calter, Select Board members and the Davis Group, along with investigative reports, invoices and communications.
The subpoenas also seek testimony from multiple town officials regarding matters potentially relevant to McNamara's claims.
Stoughton's attorneys argue that the document subpoena improperly attempts to accelerate discovery by demanding records within 11 days, despite a Massachusetts procedural rule requiring at least 30 days for compliance with such a subpoena.
The town maintains that McNamara's attorneys are attempting to obtain the same materials already requested through ordinary discovery procedures.
Birchmore Investigation Remains in Spotlight


Former Stoughton police officer Matthew Farwell remains at the center of the criminal case involving Sandra Birchmore's death.
The latest filing adds another legal dispute to the controversy surrounding Stoughton's police department following Birchmore's death.
McNamara's lawsuit concerns her treatment by town officials amid investigations and internal disputes connected to the department.
The new subpoena fight could determine when town employees must testify and when requested investigative records must be produced.
For now, Stoughton is asking the court to intervene and quash the disputed subpoenas.
The November 4 memorandum does not establish that the judge has ruled on the request.


