1. "My experience in the john morse rm. this weekend"
Posted by can on Dec-21st-03 at 1:29 PM

Oh my god.  It was a complete flippin' disaster.  We were supposed to stay in the lizzie borden suite that had two beds in it - one for my 5 month old daughter in Emma's romm and Lizzie's bed for my husband and myself.  Apparently they have a rule about not having infants for fear of them crying but said that we could stay in the John Morse guest room so that the people staying in Abby/Andrew's room wouldn't hear her if she cried.  Well we agreed but found it funny because my daughter rarely cries.  Well, when we walked into the room
my daughter started screaming like you wouldn't believe.  Then we walked out of the room into Lizzie's room and she immediately stopped.  We then walked back into the John Morse room as an experiment and she at once started screaming and crying again.  After an hour for which she just flat out screamed and we just couldn't get her to stop we had to forfeit our deposit and leave.  My husband was willing to tough it out but said he definitely felt something very bad in that room and was so freaked by it that he sat in the chair and said he was not changing his clothes or removing his shoes - he was just gonna sit there all night wide awake.  It was then that I said to hell with it and we stayed at a ramada nearby.  I did get quite a bit of video taken and about 8 rolls of film.  I'll post them later.  I'd be interested to see if I captured any paranormal stuff on them.

I discovered a whole bunch of things though and some things clicked for me and I'm left with alot more questions. 

In the left far corner of the room (if you were standing in the doorway) of the Abby murder room there is the sewing machine.  In a photo in the room of different angles of Abby's body I noticed that they took in a wider range.  The pictures we see in the books are cropped.  In the photo her feet are one step from the chair of the sewing machine and there was a bolt of cloth on the machine as if she had been working on it.  She MUST have been working on it.  The chair 's angle was in direct allignment at her feet as if she had been sitting in it. I'm convinced she was sewing and turned around and tried to get up when she was struck (the flap wound) and then fell face down.  She was taken by complete surprise, there could have been no discussion between her and her murderer.  I'm convinced of this also, because the stairs are hardwood and very creaky/loud.  You DEFINITELY hear someone coming up them.  If someone came up them she would have seen them; therefore the person had to already have been upstairs and hiding.  This leaves the dress closet, Lizzie's room and Emma's room.  Unless of course the key was taken from the mantel and the person went up the back stairs and walked through lizzie's room and into emma's room and through emma/guest room door in order to avoid being seen coming up the stairs. 

Another fact:  as an experiment my husband raised his voice just slightly in the front parlor room and the sitting room where Andrew was murdered and in Lizzie's room with the door shut I could hear him.  If john morse had an arguement with andrew the night before I think Lizzie would have had no problem hearing what was going on. 

Another fact:  I stood in the kitchen and my husband jumped down on the floor once in the Abby murder spot (he did it softly) and I totally heard quite the thud.  He is the same weight as Abby.  Anybody in the kitchen definetly could have heard a loud thud of her hitting the floor enough so to ask yourself, "hmm... what the heck was that?."  enough so that a person's natural curiousity would have prompted them to investigate or inquire what the noise was.  He barely jumped and I heard it clear as a bell and back then they didn't have cars going by and the loud speaker from the bus terminal across the street. 

Another fact:  there is a closet in the back left corner of the sitting room facing andrew's murder couch.  It is a small closet in a place that is very unnoticeable.  I actually missed seeing it the first time I was in the house years ago.  Someone definitely could have been in there, grabbed andrew's coat and came out swinging at him.  It's about 3 steps from the couch.  It was august, there was no cause to have a heavy coat out and under his head for sleeping.  He could have grabbed a pillow for that.  The place must have been like an oven in that heat. No..He was awake.  The coat had to have been hanging up and taken out to sheild the murderer from the spattering then destroy the spattering marked evidence by letting it become engorged with blood from the head making it appear as though he had been sleeping. 

Another thing about Abby: if she screamed it would have been heard.  I heard my daughter crying up there when I was in every room of that house taking pictures from the basement to Bridget's room.  In the summer sun the windows must have been opened because it would have been absolutely stifling in the attic and second floor otherwise.  So if she screamed it would have been heard.  Therefore she couldn't have screamed.  She didn't have time to scream.  Yet another reason why it was a total surprise - it was just too quick.  From the door to the sewing machine it is a good 5-6 paces - enough time for a scream so the person must have literally charged at her quickly. When Lizzie stated in the testimony that she thought maybe perhaps she was doing a little sewing she was absolutely right.  She wasn't lying. So how could she have known this?  A. she heard the machine going (maybe not they were manually powered and very slow) B. She was told by the murderer (perhaps Bill Borden) that Abby was sewing (possibly) or C. she was the murderer. or D. She told the murderer (BIll) that she was up there sewing with her back to the door and to strike at that moment.  If D. were the case then she would have had to take the key from the mantel and opened up the Abby/Andrew locked bedroom and opened the connecting door and moving the furniture. 

Ugh.  I have too many questions swirling in my head right now.  Seeing it again really made me think harder/better about it.  I was totally convinced that Bill did it and that it was not supposed to happen but did so in a fit of rage.  But now I'm thinking that either A. he did it with Lizzie's help or B. she may have done Abby and he did Andrew. Andrew's wounds were too skilled for her to have done and if he was awake he could have easily overtaken her.  But I don't know how she could have gotten Bill upstairs before Abby went back up to sew. 

Okay, I've written too much.  One last thought - Was Lizzie left or right handed?   

Thanks, Can.  As far as I have read, Lizzie was right-handed.  I have never seen those uncropped photos of Abby, thats really interesting, Abby was literally a step or two away from the sewing machine?!  I for some reason always got the impression that the sewing machine was in the corner closest to the door of the guest room.  So Abby could have been sewing while attacked, hence all of Lizzie's talk about sewing.  I'm surprised that none of the police or doctors noticed that the machine was all set up to sew something, or in the process of having been used.  Odd.  I did an experiment like that falling on the floor of a friends house while she was downstairs and not telling her what I was doing.  She heard the thud and wanted to know what I was doing.  I too am under the belief that Abby's fall would have been heard.  I've always wondered, in the mindset of trying to believe that Lizzie was 100% innocent, that if she heard the thud of Abby's falling body down in the kitchen, did she not care or hate the woman enough not to go and investigate or at least call up the stairs to see if Abby was okay?

Can't wait to see your pics. Thats too bad about not being able to stay the night, I'm sorry. 

  

That is an interesting personal observation. Others may wish to commment on your suggestions.

But is the street outside as noisy as it was 111 years ago? How many horses and wagons passed by? Remember their creaks and clip-clops?

Wow, Can, thank you for sharing your experiences.  That is facsinating
about your baby crying in the John Morse room but not in Lizzie's room.  Plus all your other observations, thanks!  Did you go in the
basement?

Thanks for all the first-hand info!

Susan, I found testimony of Dolan at the Prelim as to where the sewing machine was located at the time 198 (and all the incidental chairs):
A.  No Sir. I am glad you spoke of that chair that is lacking from the photograph. There was a kind of a camp chair, you might call it, an upholstered chair between her head and the east wall; and the feet of that were covered with blood.
Q.  What has become of that chair?
A.  It was in the house on Second street the last time I was there.
Q.  It was not taken away?
A.  No Sir.
Q.  Whether there was a chair at the end of the bureau between the bureau and the window, when you saw that room the first time?
A.  I think there was a cane seated chair.
Q.  Was there any chair near it?
A.  I could not tell you.
Q.  Was this a chair with ordinary legs, or legs with a rocker?
A.  That I would not say.
Q.  You do not recollect whether it was a sewing chair, or not?
A.  No Sir.
Q.  Do you remember any work basket being there?
A.  Yes Sir, immediately in front of this chair.
Q.  What was this work basket resting on?
A.  On the floor---- no, I think it was a rocking chair up against the bureau, and then the basket was sitting on the other ordinary cane seated chair, opposite.
Q.  You mean the rocking chair was up against the bureau at the end of it, between that and the window, in that space?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  The other chair was on the other side of the window in front of it, having the work basket on it?
A.  Yes Sir, and the sewing machine behind it.*
Q.  Is that in the photograph?
A.  No Sir.


* So that sounds like the northwest corner of the room, rather than the south west.  I do recall it was mentioned here that the washstand was over by the door?  Could that be the recollection?

Can, I have a feeling that you saw a stage-set with that bolt of cloth being out.  There's no testimonial evidence that Abby was sewing.
The room was supposedly finished and the door closed, awaiting company [it's possible].
Also there are 2 closets in the floorplans in the sitting room, one under the stairs and the other opposite it across the room by the southeast kitchen wall.
Bill Pavao measured the width of the sitting room and it is 14' 4".  That is more than 2 or 3 steps I think from that corner to the sofa?

Would you be interested in Bill Pavao responding here if he was willing?

Thanks, Kat.  I was trying to post that one uncropped photo of Abby with all that stuff in the glare of the window, but, I can't get it for some reason?  I have a copy that I've been playing with trying to clarify what is there, there is definitely a chair and what looks like it might be the sewing machine behind it.  Lets see if I can post it.



(Message last edited Dec-21st-03  11:41 PM.)

How'd you do that?!  That's pretty good!
When we see the set-up now from Can, we'll get to see how close you were to the recreation!

Thanks, I just took a copy of the photo, blew it up so that the pixels were HUGE and colored in the darker ones black and the medium ones gray.  So, basically I just outlined what was there but wasn't very visible in the smaller photo.  I'd love to be able to see that corner without all that bright light, get a real feel of what else the Bordens had in their home and how it was set up.  Theres that chair with a pillow on it, and that scrolly thing that looks like the side of one of those old sewing machines.  Theres something dark hanging there, material, a dress, I don't know, it looks like its fabric, its all the way to left behind the chair.  If you could post the original without my enhancements we could compare, for some reason I get a notice saying that I can't view the photo in a larger size on the LBVM&L site because of something with my credentials? 

(Message last edited Dec-22nd-03  3:18 AM.)

YES!!!  That is what was there.  It was a much better photo in the room however and alot more detail.  You can't see it in this photo shown here but in the house the photo shows the legs of the chair in front of the sewing machine and it is pointed in the direction of her body; meaning that she had been sewing and then turned the chair to get out of it, took about one step and then was down on the ground.  Also, in the mirror, you can see the camera and to the left of the camera is a wash basin.  When I stood in the same position the mirror reflected that the wash basin would be in front of Emma's door leading into the john morse room.

Another observation I had last night while I was thinking about everything was her constant changing of where she was when all of this was going on.  I sat down and started to write down some thoughts and all of a sudden the pen just took off and I felt like it wasn't even me writing it.  It doesn't even look like my writing and some of it was in the first person.  I don't know what to make of it and it's freakin' me out.  The gist of it was this.  That she orchestrated everything.  She set it up have john there to get in touch with bill borden over the will change.  They showed up the night before and when all was asleep had a pact in the front downstairs parlor to off Abby because Andrew was leaving the bulk of the money in the will to abby and Bill wasn't getting anything.  LIzzie offered to pay bill off when she received her inheritance that she would get since abby would be dead.  The plan was to have him slip in early, kill her, meet john morse at the stable at lunch time (each swearing they were together the whole time being each other's alibi) and meet with andrew to discuss the will and all three then discover the body.  Andrew wouldn't want the police to know Bill was there meeting him hence admitting he had an illegitimate son so he would simply try to brush the whole thing under the carpet.  And since she was nobody it would go away as a portugese that previously robbed them returned for more.  THat night Bill slept in the barn.  In the morning she sets abby up doing some sewing for her in that room - the pillow shams that were never found was a lie to cover up the fact that she orchestrated abby to be there up there sewing by her own request.  She knows she's there and the sewing machine noise along with the street noise (that room is sooo noisy you can hear everything on the street) she wouldn't hear bill coming up the stairs I think.  Lizzie goes down to the basement, opens the door, let's him in and goes outside by the pear tree till it's done.  He comes out a while later and basically states she better pay up.  She walks in and is like, holy crap, what the hell happened?  Father wasn't supposed to be home till lunch time.  He came home early because the mutton was making me sick and he thought he'd come home early to take it easy.  Bridget goes to the front door and hears a giggle on the stairs and it's bill not lizzie (when lizzie hears bridget say this to the authorities she thinks, crap, now I gotta put myself in the house upstairs somewheres and pretend that I was giggling to cover up) but then she goes on to fabricate things because she seriously doesn't know what happened and has to do damage control to save her ass. (hence saying she took dad's shoes off and then later realized she screwed that one up too cause his shoes were actually on) Meanwhile dad comes in with bridget goes to mantel and goes upstairs to put the will up in his bedroom and bridget states abby went out with a note and lizzie mentioned about buying some fabric and she's gonna take a nap.  He goes upstairs puts the will away and comes back down to put the key back on the mantle.  Bill meanwhile comes downstairs and hides in the closet in the sitting room facing the couch.  Andrew comes down and bill, who has time to look around the closet notices his dad's coat, tries it on, in his deranged state thinks he should have a nice coat like this and why the hell should he have to wait for his money.  He wants it right the hell now and then andrew pops back in the room and he comes out and whacks him.  After he's done he takes the coat off, wipes the blade puts it under the head to engorge with blood and removing splatter marks and in his state leaves by the side door instead of the basement, whereby ellen eagen sees him and he goes around back.  Lizzie has a word with him and he's gone.  She had no feeling about anything because she was doing damage control.  She put herself in so many different places in the house and the barn because she didn't know what to do since bonehead didn't stick wiht the plan.  John comes back after bowen calls him and he's thinking something went wrong better memorize the trolley numbers to cover his butt.  When he's home they hatch a plan that night to cover it all up.  Ta Da!!

What do you think? 

[i]Q.  The other chair was on the other side of the window in front of it, having the work basket on it?
A.  Yes Sir, and the sewing machine behind it.* [\i]

THere are three windows in the room.  Here is what I think he meant.

                                 window
               sewing machine            bureau
              chair for machine
window   chair                            Bed
         w/basket
                                                     
window                                     wash basin  door
                                      Door


[i]Also there are 2 closets in the floorplans in the sitting room, one under the stairs and the other opposite it across the room by the southeast kitchen wall.
Bill Pavao measured the width of the sitting room and it is 14' 4".  That is more than 2 or 3 steps I think from that corner to the sofa? [\i]

Okay. What is there now, don't know about back then, but there is the closet on the stairs (if you were sitting on the couch it would be the back right hand corner) and a built-in book case on the back left hand corner where you say the other closet was.  Either way, I don't know if it makes a diffence.

The room may be 14ft. long but neither person was standing at the edge of the room the full 14ft.  If you are putting the key back on the mantel from being upstairs that's almost a third of the distance. When a person is coming upon you quickly with an ax I'm sure he wasn't taking small dainty steps but rather larger quicker steps.  When he was hit first I'm sure he stumbled backwards a step or two and fell on the couch and eventually slumped to the side as perhaps he tried to get back up and fell off to the side perhaps.


Just a side note:  Years earlier I took a picture of the engraved first step of "maplecroft" on the house she lived in on French st. on the hill.  Going back now, years later, the owners have put a plank covering it up.  I suppose they had too many LB fans bothering them.  The statue is still there though - the one of a mother and child.  I'll post it later.

I think it is a novel solution to the crime that incorporates parts of an earlier book. But I don't want to spend too much time analyzing it. The question is: just why did you pick these reasons?

Has any other books mentioned William S Borden by name or position? Given what I know from AR Browns' book, this seems derivative. But even Brown does not attempt to provide their thinking; he knows his limitations. (I hope my memory is correct.)

I don't have any reasons for why I wrote what I did; I don't understand it myself.  I sat down last night and my husband says I was in a trance for quite awhile and just kept writing.  I think they call it automatic writing.  It certainly didn't feel like I was writing it; alot of it was in the first person.  I'm catholic and not supposed to believe any of that crap. I'm about a third of the way through a screenplay on it and it wasn't the direction I had been writing either.  So now I don't know what to do.  I have to go back and check some of Bridget's testimony.  I need to verify if Bridget really did have any contact with Lizzie when her father came home.  Does anyone have testimony of Bridget handy?  What book did you read that sounded like it?  I haven't read anything regarding what I suggested so far.  I believe Bill did it but now I'm thinking Lizzie orchestrated it.  I'm starting to think Brown hit only part of the iceberg. I have a very uneasy feeling that is still lingering from Saturday. Don't know why. 

This "theory" doesn't allow for the rather long time interlude between the two murders.  Sounds like Lizzie went outside to wait for Billy to kill Abby and then went back inside to find her father home.  How can this be?  Did it take Billy that long to kill Abby (roughly 1 hour-and-a-half)?

i stuck my foot in my mouth and now i'll have to pry it out.

i've become lop-sided in my borden thinking, trying to find a "proveable fact."  obsessed with it lately, i suppose.

i do understand and appreciate the subjective experience.  you can't really judge that of another.  of course, i know that.  i must have been in a bad mood last night -- and/or there was something in my frame of reference that got me overly critical of what i do know in fact know so well--the value of the personal private experience and the truth within the subjective.  i apologize for my disparaging tone.  that was one of my "bad moments" that is really not like me.



(Message last edited Dec-23rd-03  9:58 AM.)

you sure are cynical haulover, at least you admit it!  I personally
want to hear the experiences of anyone staying at the B & B and their
impressions.  Can gave an honest, free wheeling impression and her
feelings, as we asked her to report.  Thank you Can for your thoughts
and theories, we may not all agree with you but I for one appreciate
the input. 

The theory for the long interval is simply this:
1) WSB was hidden away in the unoccupied guest room for his meeting w/ Andy (who went to the bank for a "small white box".
2) Abby accidentally discovered WSB in hiding (no spider hole here), and told him a thing or two. Enraged, WSB used his skills.
3) When Andy came back home something happened at the meeting to set WSB off again for the second murder.

William of Occam: usually the simplest explanation is the truth.

Thanks, Haulover for your kind assessment of my level-headedness.  Perhaps I am not quite as cynical as you, though I see what you mean.  For me, it's not so much the "trance-writing" that Can talks about, but the "theory" itself that is presented that doesn't sit right with me. The greatly oversimplified time-sequence is just one of the pieces that doesn't fit.  THere is, of course, that same old nagging question which I really wish someone could answer, namely, DID BILLY BORDEN REALLY EXIST?  And if so, was he the "illegitimate" (I hate that word referring to people) son of A.J. Borden?

Well, I wasn't going to reply because I think can had a completely subjective experience.  It didn't happen to me, is what I mean.  The experiments were interesting as I said earlier, like the creaking front stairs.
I'm wondering about that "clear" photo on the wall of Abby dead in the guest room.  We have now been told that the sewing machine and chair in front of it are obvious in that picture and that it seems probable that Abby was sewing when attacked.
That is what I asked Stefani- if she remembered such a clear uncropped photo in the room,  She didn't think so, but said she really didn't recall.*

The first post about this sitting room distance said the murderer was hiding in that little closet and it was but 2-3 steps to kill Andrew.
I checked the floorplan and posted the room is over 14' deep (not long) and pictured the mrderer, as previously described, popping out of the closet (as she said) and rushing almost 14 feet across the room to get to Andrew on the couch.  So now I hear Andrew was standing at the mantle and was attacked there and that is  only a couple of steps from that closet.  But diagonally across the room , from the far right (S.W.) corner out of a closet- to the far left side of the room at the doorway to the kitchen (N.E.) sounds like more than a few steps and there was furniture there as well.

This all is in my head as I read, but I have not been in the house, and can has.  That's why I have offered to contact Bill Pavao - if can would like to hear an experts interpretation of her experience.
......

*from the site- see guestroom photo on wall.  It's the feet-up view of Abby.  Unless that picture has been changed there is no sewing machine there.  This is confusing to me.

Gee, I slept like a baby there!

***THere is, of course, that same old nagging question which I really wish someone could answer, namely, DID BILLY BORDEN REALLY EXIST?  And if so, was he the "illegitimate" (I hate that word referring to people) son of A.J. Borden?***

see #36 in "theories" thread.

apparently, it's in the linkage to andrew that is the leap of faith.

Thanks, Haulover.  Now I'm even clearer about the fact that there was a William Borden, but nothing and no one has proved that he had anything to do with A.J. Borden or the murders.  Unlike rays, I do not think "nemesis" was an intruder; I think "nemesis" lay within someone as a dark side of HER personality!  BTW thanks, too, for your attesting to my sanity!!

isn't it odd how the bill borden theory just substitutes a maniacal male version of lizzie borden?  i mean, the parricide, the "bad family feel", the money,, etc. is the same as with the original lizzie borden legend.  i think the answer to the author's construction somehow lies right there -- it's like admitting what the story is really all about in a way that allows for finding lizzie innocent.  but really, much as you implied, this bill borden bastard son of andrew is nothing more or less than lizzie's dr. hyde?  this is  all very "freudian" huh?  lizzie jeckyl -- and billy hyde?  i like that as a way to explain the whole book.  that would be a great title for someone who wants to write the de-construction of the brown theory:  Lizzie Jeckyl & Billy Hyde.  ah-- but see how brown discovered truth there he didn't realize?

you know, this reminds me of something else -- whenever i've tried to see someone else there hidden and doing the actual murders -- this phantom person -- there alongside lizzie -- i think of as some sort of beast that she has on a leash and she can unleash it at will.  for example, when andrew knocks on the door, and lizzie peeps down from upstairs, she then has the beast on the leash; as soon as she gets bridget upstairs, she then goes up and turns this beast loose again, upon andrew.  what i'm trying to say here is...i have a hard time seeing how another person is there interacting with her when these murders happen -- as an intelligent human being, anyway.  i see the "other thing" -- the monster, the beast within -- but another individual? 

No need for fantastic theories. The simple truth is that neither Lizzie or Bridget could have done both murders, or one each.

Unless you are convinced against the evidence and the jury verdict.


This is getting tiresome!

The jury's verdict is not evidence of anything.  It is a collective opinion.  Not evidence.  Got that, Ray?

The simple fact is this: There is not one piece of evidence for proposing that William Borden is the "illegitimate" sone of A.J. Borden.

Right on, Haulover! There simply is no need to hypothesize that someone else committed the murders. Lizzie and Bridget had the time and opportunity. Of the prime suspects, Lizzie alone had the motive. Emma could have been involved somehow.  And, remember my nutty description of John Morse as an "evil cheerleader?" You're right, haulover, when you put in William Borden, you are now creating another "myth." I cannot for the life of me buy the convoluted conspiracy theory that Brown proposes--it's much too complicated, risky, unwieldy, and, in the end, unnecessary.  For those who stand on the verdict as "proof," I say: you have no evidence to offer for your theory that William Borden committed the murders except possibilities, conversations based on long past memories, and creative thinking.

YOU have deliberately erred by claiming I said the jury verdict was evidence. Read it again with your glasses on, please.

The jury is responsible for finding the facts in a dispute. "The Best Evidence" is what the jury finds as fact. You can look it up.

The "evidence" is the fact that Andy Borden gave valuable property to his "nephew". When did he ever do that?

The AR Brown solution is simple, not convoluted.

Wm S Borden was there for a secret meeting, arranged thru JVM.

WSB flew into a rage and killed Abby.

Later he also killed Andy.

Lizzie and others merely didn't tell all they knew.

Surely you know of cases where family secrets were kept from the public? Can you think of any from your own experience?

The proof is this: no one has ever written any book to dispute AR Brown's solution. (Yes, its a negative proof.)

Well when you guys get done outdoing each other and congratulating
on each other's sanity or insanity....maybe you could think about
being a tad more sensitive?  We probabably lost Cans here, who was
excited and refreshing in her enthusiasm and willing to share.
 

Ray, Will you give the name and date of this deal so it can be verified, please?

(Message last edited Dec-24th-03  1:24 AM.)

i appreciate your consistent concern about people's feelings.  and i do regret the way i expressed my observation of the post you're referring to.  but have you seen post #15?  if you can think of anything else i can do, please let me know.

Please refer to Arnold R Brown's book, the only known source of this deal. (Does David Kent cover this at all?)

NO, the "Billy Borden" theory just attempts to use the known facts to solve an 111-yr old murder that will never be solved officially.

Are you saying that ALL the siblings in a family are the same? Surely your own experience can tell you they are not all "peas in a pod"?

Ray, I was reading between the lines, recalling the times you've held up the jury's verdict as a reason we should believe Lizzie innocent, so there!

Nevertheless, Merry Christmas, you maddening man.  You certainly keep my blood running!

Nero, I hear you, but, on the other hand, if someone can't stand the heat, they should get out of the kitchen.

This is a discussion group, not a support group, no?

(Message last edited Dec-24th-03  10:47 AM.)

I tend to agree with Bob especially on the last point. We are discussing an issue that is controversial and there are going to be times when things will get heated.

YES, but the fact IS that the jury said "not guilty". Jury decisions as to facts can not be disputed legally, only mistakes in law.
Rightly or wrongly, a jury decision is usually final. Appeals courts can only search the transcript for mistakes in law, application of it.

I certainly would not say they're always perfect. But is there any better system for deciding the "facts" in a case? Too many jurors would likely lead to a split decision, and be less cost-effective. Too few may lead to mistakes if a strong personality overrides the others judgments. Your comments?

I almost missed that, mentioning Nero my
hero and fellow orchid lover/detective.  Nancy Drew meets Nero Wolfe
and the rest is history....and they live happily ever after trying
to solve the Borden mystery!
(sorry guys for being a B**** it's that time of the year!)  I'm past
my "monthlies" so I only have one shot...

okay, the property gift you referred to is to be found only in brown's book?  that's self-explanatory.

i'll say this again:  THIS jury, this board, is under no orders or restraints.  for example, lizzie borden's jury could not include her inquest in their decision.  however, i can.  of course, you know this anyway.

merry christmas, by the way.

again, by the way, would it actually kill you to consider the problems in "believing" the brown theory and examine the evidence instead?

and in the spirit of christmas, let us not worship authors (brown, lincoln, radin, etc.).  please.

oh, you're not a bitch at all.  you're a nice lady who wants everyone to be nice.

it can't work that way all the time, though.

***This is a discussion group, not a support group, no? ***

thank you.  that is an elevating statement. 

if you receive a negative critique, a cutting statement, something "nasty" -- don't cut and run.  stay aboard and ride the storm.  something constructive awaits.  we need to be tolerant and persistent.

And when one makes a mistake in a post about a technical point in the case (we know who we are) and says so, that is human nature and accepted and please don't worry about it!
Mistakes are par here and should not chase anyone away either.
I'm the only one with the long memory and I understand, because it happens to me too.   But I keep cranking away.
I have to talk about this case.

Surely AR Brown would not have included this property transfer w/o checking the official records (going back before the Revolution) himself or having one of his many helpers do it? "Acknowledgments".

Also, if anyone wants me to read "another book" please go to your public library and make a list of what they have. Then note which of these would you recomment. By the 1980s I realized my home could never match the resources of a library, so I stopped buying but continued reading even more. (Personal considerations too.)

YES!!! I'll bet neither Andy or Lizzie would take it lying down (no pun intended).

Andrew's land transactions are listed in the back of Rebello's book.  Since I had asked this question of you before, I thought you might be prepared with the answer.  It's a big job to wade thru all those pages of transactions but I recall nothing was found the last time.

I guess we are at Stalemate.

OK, I'll gues I'll have to review AR Brown's book on the Liberty St property transfer and note it down.
Does anyone here think Brown made it up?
Does anyone think this gift of valuable land "just happened"? If not to a "natural child" (French term), then because of some debt?
...
So when did Andy ever owe anybody money?

(Message last edited Dec-27th-03  3:53 PM.)

Thanks for that.
Andrew did take mortgages out so in essence he owed money at times, and was owed as well.

AR Brown's book: Index under "Gammons, Rebecca Frances" refers to this. It is part of the Finale, Chapter 19, where AR Brown gives his explanation of the event. You should read the book before the last chapter.

"The farm at 39 Liberty St in East Taunton ... in 1872 ... was deeded to Lewis B. Gammons, the father of Rebecca." Two years later Rebecca was legally married to William S. Borden. Just a coincidence?

Henry Hawthorne's parents were employed as farm workers, so the belief that WmSB "owned" it seems believable. It would make sense to deed it to a guardian rather than a mentally-impaired young man. (Could this have been some sort of dowry or marriage arrangement?)

The claim that WSB owned it seems to be not 1000% accurate, as some have said. So just what is the history of ownership for that land?

Words to live by!

I am looking at that area of information in the book and it says the land was deeded but it didn't say by whom? 

More importantly, it did not mention the sale price. Brown's book says Andy spent his life buying up property to become a rich landlord. I think he would rather rent land to a sharecropper than sell it. Maybe "The Borden Encyclopedia" (Rebello's book) has this?
...
Didn't it say Andy deeded it to Rebecca's father two years before Rebecca married WmS Borden? And WmSB was soon sent to the madhouse?

(Message last edited Dec-30th-03  1:15 PM.)

Where would I find that?  Do you have the book?

NO!! Come to think of it, giving it to the father of the betrothed of William S Borden would be a way to "launder" this "money". Like a gift to the child put into the parent's name. Ever do this?
...
It may be a crazy idea, but what if Rebecca was the "natural child" and she turned William S Borden's mind to anger about her lost inheritance? (Forgive me for asking this speculative question.)

(Message last edited Dec-31st-03  12:18 PM.)

You sold your copy of Brown?
Why speculate about any child-out-of-wedlock of Andrew?  He was a Virgo- that is the sign of the Virgin- and I doubt he had a huge sex-drive.  I've never known a Virgo to be looking at other than their spouse.
You're talking about a Quaker here.
With Puritan background. In the mid-1800's.
I prefer not to have my mind dragged down to Mr. Brown's lascivious level.
As well as a few other authors, Elizabeth Engstom, Evan Hunter.
Been there, read that, don't need to dwell there.

(Message last edited Dec-31st-03  6:57 PM.)

Read previous message: Chapter 19, the "Finale" where AR Brown sums it all up.
Was the land solf for "One dollar"? What are the implications of this?

You seem to have led a very secluded life. Do you really know what your "pillars of society" are doing in their spare time?

Some here may have criticized Clinton for his recreation in the Oval Office. But they must have totally ignored the history of other presidents, like Warren Harding, who did the same in the White House. Was it the book "Glass Houses" that says special offices are hidden away in Congress for the private use of Congressmen?

Was it just a coincidence that Senator Bob Dole was hired to be the Viagra spokesman? Do you know what his insider reputation is?

Just WHERE in Arnold R Brown's book is there "lasciviousness"?
Surely you jest? Given the behavior of other rich men, would Andy be much different from the men of his day, or now? Do not compare the 70-year old Andy with someone half his age.

I say lasciviousness because it is a preoccupation with sex and that Brown book has Andrew fornicatng outside his marriage and hiding the bastard son of the fictitious union.   He imagined That.

(Message last edited Jan-2nd-04  11:13 PM.)

Kat, I am a Virgo and I have a strong sex drive even at 40. so I don't know if Andrew's sign would have anything to do with his sex drive (or lack thereof). However, based on what I've read about Andrew, I cannot picture him fooling around, especially while married. His strict morals, the attitudes of Victorian society, and the lack of birth control make an affair an impossibility IMO.

Wake up and smell the brew. A rich man who doesn't try to take advantage of others? THAT would be unique for his time. Remember Grover Cleveland and his "mistake"?

Didn't this happen about the time that Sarah (?) was with child? Didn't Uncle John say Abby desreved more than the widow's third because she was more frugal and chaste than Andy's first wife?
Does a wife's spending sometimes reflect a cheating husband?
What have you heard?
...
I do not keep a ready reference by the keyboard. YOU know what I meant.

(Message last edited Jan-4th-04  3:55 PM.)

Yes I think it has to do with modesty more than sex drive tho it is a bit different in male Virgo's than female ones.
I think the Virgo has to be comfortable with the partner because of an inante sense of modesty.  That implys monogamy.

Ray has offered the opinion, in the past, several times - whether his or Brown's, I do not know - that Andrew took advantage of his female tenants when their rent was late and didn't I know powerful men can do this?
I was taking that stance into consideration when I wrote my reply.  Sorry, I edited it.  I was contesting a Virgo who would rape his tenants and have an affair which produced an illegitimate child.
Thanks for your take on the matter.
BTW:  Virgo's are certainly attrative to the opposit sex.

I have read this post many times in 3 years or so, and I'm really tired of it.
I even proved that quote of yours supposedly by Andrew about Abby/Sarah is wrong, and I refuse to do it again.  You don't even know Andrew's sister's name!  You don't even check that.
"You can look it up", if you want some verasity here.

That facet of Andy is strictly my own, based on what I heard from various men. Would you believe a teen-age delivery boy being propositioned by a customer? (I heard this from a former co-worker.)
Was it just bragging? (No, it wasn't "Mrs. Robinson".)
...
Printed books do say that Andy personally picked up the rent money, and also "sold" his cracked eggs for a higher price than good eggs at the store. This implies it was "buy from me" or get kicked out. I can also see him taking advantage as the case arose. Its just "human nature", isn't it?
...
Kat's assumption was that Andy was a SAINT!!! Which book says that? Where in the Inquest or Trial does it say that?
AR Brown calls Andy a "loathsome miser", and that sounds 100% right to me. Remember how he tried to trick his sister into paying $3 for a water bill when Abraham's (?) house was sold?


(Message last edited Jan-4th-04  3:57 PM.)

You make some valid points Ray.  I was picking up on Kat's Virgo
perception and trying to understand Andrew. My son is a typical
persnickitty Virgo, faithful and not mushy type emotional,
but very loving in his heart to those who know him.  (That is how
I had pictured Andy's character.)  On the other hand, my brother is
also a Virgo, and a very sexual type man.  (he would take advantage
of a young lady in a heartbeat, but still be a gentleman and kind
soul!)  So I find this interesting, and Yes you are right about very
rich men getting their way, it is a good point.  

"Didn't Uncle John say Abby desreved more than the widow's third because she was more frugal and chaste than Andy's first wife? "

No, Morse did not ever say this.  Prove he did.  "You can look it up".

This is my main objection here.  It's irresponsible.
Now you have today edited your prior post to which I was replying.
It's not what you think I know you mean- it's what a couple of hundred people who don't know you, think you mean.

We just need to factor in that Andrew was of Quaker stock and living in a Puritanical time - growing up in the 1830's, born 1822.
That kind of social conditioning is hard to overcome.
Right now I'm reading a book on Victorian marriages, and it's interesting how sexless some of them were.

Yes, I forgot the name of Andy's first wife. It was Sarah, not Lenora (his sister) or Lorena (another case). Sorry, but I do reserve the right to correct my mistakes when they are pointed out to me.

That is why I sometimes quote others.

I'm not sure what you mean by your last paragraph.
I am not trying to mislead anyone either.

Well, no.  Andrew's sister was Lurana (which was apparently a family nickname, a version of Laura Anne) and his daughter was Emma Lenora.

It IS hard to take your many, many, many assumptions seriously when you don't even bother to get the basics correct.

That was my point. Andrew would not have been inclined to have an affair.

Now, I'm probably going to raise Rays' ire by saying this, but did William S. Borden even exsist? The only source where I've seen him mentioned is the Brown book.

Keller, Jon. N. "The Mysterious William S. Borden." Lizzie Borden Quarterly, Vol. II, No. 4/5 (Fall/Winter 1995): 15-18.

"5821——William S. Borden Act. 19 Married Fall River Labour.
F.——Taunton 4 weeks Hereditary. 2 Sisters and 2 Aunts insane.
Dec. 8th——Sister no. 4822, Loss of employment had a depressing effect.
1874——Melancholy, Suicidal. Went into the pond this a.m.
Prob. Ct.——Wil. S. was married eight weeks ago. Temperate. at entrance
quick-depressed.
Wife——Dec. 2nd 1875. Patient was quite depressed and very quiet through the
East——winter. Towards spring he began to wake
Taunton—up and become very active. Early in
Mass.——March was at work in the laundry. In April was allowed his parole of the
Father——grounds. he went everywhere, and was
Charles—— up to all sorts of mischief When shut in
hall he became quite troublesome and
Fall River——destructive and was secluded in a screened room for a fortnight. In May
Sister——he eloped, and was gone 24 hours —
Eliza A.——went to Fall River and New Bedford. —
Borden——returned voluntarily — sent to rm. 8
#10,232 R—— Early in August he was up to all the
#12,310 R—— mischief possible — breaking glass,
#13,570—— tearing off window casings, digging off mortar etc.
Tried belts, straps, seclusion
Sister—— etc. with little avail. Learning that an
Amanda—— iron crib was being constructed for his
Taylor—— especial benefit, he desisted — saying he
#4822—— did not want to get into anything that he
#11,255—— could not get out of. Oct. 20th. he eloped,
was gone a week and then brought back
on the 27th of Oct. has been doing very
well, Has worked out some. Always
inclined to get into trouble striking with
very little provocation. Was discharged
to go by himself
Dec. 2nd 1875. Discharged Recovered p. 286
5821 (p. 287) William S. Borden Act. 19 Married
May15-01 A few days ago the above patient Wm. S. Borden
committed suicide by taking carbolic acid, and afterwards
hanging himself to a tree by the roadside."

--From the Museum Library/ New Research-
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/NewResearch/BrownControversy.htm

Keller points out that he found the commitment papers for a William Borden's stay at Taunton-- why did Brown make such a mystery of it?

I think if you do a "SEarch" here on the Forum you will find a bio posted not long ago.

Please ammend your notes.  Here is the cite (again) for the erroneous quote you make.  It is from Brown, and it is Brown quoting a newspaper.  There is not anything I have read in the primary sources which substantiates this claim:

"However, knowledge of Lizzie's inquest testimony was not available to the readers of the Globe articles.

August 17, 1892

VERY IMPORTANT MOTIVE IN THE
UNMADE WILL. 

Developments of a most startling nature are promised for the preliminary trial.

The State will, THE GLOBE is informed on very good authority, prove that
Andrew J. Borden did and was making preparations for the drawing of his will.
It may be shown that he talked to several persons interested and also to some of his personal friends about the will which he intended to make.

The making of that will could not possibly affect anyone except Lizzie and Emma Borden and other persons connected to them by blood relationship [italics mine-Brown]. When all the evidence is in it will be seen that to some of those with whom he talked about the making of this will Mr. Borden said that his second wife Abbie had been a faithful and devoted wife and a loving and careful mother to Lizzie and Emma.

A better mother than they had had before and a woman who was as such entitled to more recognition in the will than that of a widow's dower. That Mr. Borden was devoted to his second wife there are none who will deny."

-- Brown, Arnold R. Lizzie Borden: The Legend, the Truth, the Final Chapter. Nashville, TN: Rutledge Hill Press, 1991, pg. 112 hardbound.


(Message last edited Jan-6th-04  4:19 AM.)

Sure, feel free to question ANYTHING that ANYBODY says on this board. But you will be better served by first reading all the books you can find, then making up your own mind as to their worth.

Don't we all learn best by doing?

I recently read a reference to "Peyton Place" (on TV over 40 years ago). About the goings on in a small New Hampshire town, based on the novel. I heard about it, but never read the book. Does anyone remember it?

The point it that even in a picturesque village, emotions can run rampant. Was Hawthorne's "The Scarlet Letter" just fiction? Anyone know of unprincipled ministers then, or now.

Speaking of basics, just where is that article that disproved Patricia Cornwell's book on Jack the Ripper?
I don't know myself, just know that a publication that promotes a book (same corporate ownership) is unlikely to dump on it.

Since this case is not my obsession, please pardon any minot mistakes about a person who was long dead in 1892. Its not like I made it up.

Was the Globe the newspaper that was FOR Lizzie? I understand that all those who knew Andy were in favor of Lizzie's innocence. And what does this say about Andy's business associates?
Or could I be wrong in this important detail?
...
I can imagine that all who had to put up with a bullying tyrant and schemer could only have sympathy for his orphan. Or am I being too gallant? (Did you ever know any misers?)


(Message last edited Jan-6th-04  7:47 PM.)

You're welcome.
Hope you ammended your notes.

Maybe "not inclined" but do you really know every hour of his life?
Can you say that Andy NEVER did anything immoral in his life?
Would a greedy miser take advantage of an opportunity?

Good points Ray, It reminds me of when I worked in a Lawyers office
our boss was an Andrew-type, but us women in the office suspected
he was having an affair with a client.  There were 2 camps "NEVER"
he would never do that and cheat on his wife. The other camp just
said he's a man and "he has one". 

Don't forget to consider his age at the time. Is it only males who do things in their 20s that they would never do in their 50s?
"Errare human est", or, we're all a little bit like Andy.
My translation, of course.