1. "Why not Pierre Leduc?"
Posted by harry on Jun-22nd-03 at 12:28 AM

It was alleged by a newspaper account that Andrew visited the barber shop of Pierre Leduc for a shave on the morning of August 4th.

I could only find reference to this visit in 3 documents.

1) Kent, "Forty Whacks", page 5: "His first call was to Peter Leduc's barber shop, where he was shaved about 9:30 o'clock. He then dropped into the Union Bank to transact some business and talked with Mr. Hart, treasurer of the savings bank, of which Mr. Borden was president." Kent is quoting from the first edition of the Fall River Daily Herald of August 4th.

2) Rebello, Appendix E, page 564, where he documents Andrews "Last Walk in Life": "..barber shop Peter Leduc reportedly shaved Andrew Borden the morning of August 4, 1892. The shop was located at 5 Main Street above Wood & Hall's."  He cites the same paper as Kent.

3) The Summer of 1999 Fall River Historical Society Report, page 12, shows a picture of Pierre Leduc with the caption: "Rare portrait of Pierre Leduc, the barber who had the distinction of giving Andrew J. Borden his last shave the morning of August 4, 1892."

Nowhere in the Witness statements, the Inquest, the Preliminary or the Trial is Mr. Leduc mentioned. The prosecution made every attempt to document Andrew's morning bringing in a parade of witnesses just for that purpose. But no Pierre Leduc.

Anybody have any ideas on why he wasn't called to testify?

It is so hard to realize that everyone is using the same source, which is one newspaper article.
I'm so glad you brought this up.

Here's something odd to go with your question:

"Mr. Morse had left the house yesterday morning and walked down to Leduc's barber shop where he was shaved.  He was in a hurry, he said, as he had an appointment to keep.  An officer stood on the sidewalk across the street and watched the shop.  Later Mr. Morse appeared in a carriage with Marshal Hilliard and entered the station house. "  -Evening Standard article, Thursday, Aug. 11, pg 2.

--Morse was soon on his way to testify at the Inquest!
Do you suppose he asked any questions of that barber before he was called to the stand?!

(Message last edited Jun-22nd-03  1:57 AM.)

Thanks Kat, good digging.  I haven't looked at the secondary documents yet. It just struck me as so odd that he wasn't called as a witness.

They were trying to pin down Andrew's movements minute by minute and here's this block of time ignored.

That's very interesting about Morse. That would have been an interesting conversation to hear. Barbers are like bartenders in that they hear a lot of things. Mostly gossip but still there's a nugget of truth dropped in now and then.

I will look for more sources on the silent Mr. Leduc.

I found two more references to the barber shop visit.

From Brown, page 59:

"The Fall River Daily Globe reported that Andrew went into Pierre Leduc's barber shop for his daily shave, presumably after leaving the National Union Bank."

Pearson, "The Trial of Lizzie Borden" footnote on page 133:

"(1) The time between 9.55 and 10.20 was probably spent at a barber's, where Mr Borden was shaved. The barber, for many years thereafter, treasured and regarded with awe-stricken veneration the shaving mug, inscribed in letters of gold: "Andrew J. Borden."

If Brown is correct then we have a second newspaper reporting his visit. Pearson does not cite a source.

There seems to be a bit of confusion as to the time he was there. The Daily Herald said about 9:30. Even more reason why Mr. Leduc should have been called.

That was good finding the other, secondary sources.  Thanks for taking the time.
In the timeline I made just from testimony, there is a gap of time from 9 - 9:30
a.m., when Andrew was not seen.  (It's possible there is Testimony to fill that gap but I haven't come across it yet).

I would think Andrew would go to be shaved first, before he made his rounds at the banks and the shop.  So that could account for that gap.  Otherwise Andrew could be killing Abby and Lizzie might be more correct than we thought by saying he left closer to 10 a.m.!  (Nah!  It's more likely he was shaved).

But I don't trust Brown to get his source right, plus that paper could have picked up the story and repeated it from the Herald (or vice versa...I know you know their capacity to do this.  Good 'ole Brown give a date for his Globe item?  That's all rhetorical, sorry)

Anyway, Both those times are wrong, Brown & Kent,  cited in those sources, according to testimonies.
Andrew was at the bank* at 9:30, for "5 minutes" (Prelim. 203-4), and then saw E. Cook** from 9:45 a.m. until 9:55 (Prelim. 205), THEN there is another gap (for a shave?) at 9:55 to 10:20 a.m., between Cook and Clegg's sightings of Andrew. (Prelim. 212), which does match Pearson's gap and supposed filling of it at the barber's.  But why would a man get shaved after the bank but before the visit to Clegg's store?.  Is that merely proximity?

* Hart at Union Savings Bank
Burrell at National Union Bank--Both in same Building.

**E. Cook at First National Bank.

--Both Hart and Burrell give the opinion that they heard hearsay later that Andrew returned to their location.  This came out in questioning, but no direct witness at the Prelim.,as to when or where they got this info.
Someone checking the trial may find something about this *return* as to when?

Harry -- I'm so glad you found that Pearson reference to the mug!  I remembered that bit -- but of course not where to find it.  

And Kat -- it does make sense that Andrew would shave before he went to the banks etc. But here's where we run up against that frustration again.  We just will never know for sure!  Maybe he went in at 9:00 and Leduc had another client in the chair.  After all, Morse popped in on his way to the Inquest (and this is a man who supposedly never changed his suit!) -- so if a frugal man like Andrew -- and someone like Morse, who obviously cared little about his appearance spent money and time on barbers, barbershops were probably busy little places.  Isn't it possible that Andrew came in a little past nine -- sat for a bit, maybe spoke to the men there -- and then decided (or arranged) to come back in an hour?  So he was there during both those 'gaps' in his morning.

It does seem strange though, if Leduc did see Andrew that morning, he wouldn't have been called as a witness -- or at least interviewed by the police and appeared in the witness reports.  They interviewed and summoned a lot of people who saw him for a much shorter time. 

I guess I'm just not sure we can trust those newspaper reports. 

This is very frustrating, why didn't they question the barber?  Did Morse pay him off to keep his mouth shut?  And I do recall seeing somewhere a picture of Andrew's shaving mug, did someone post it here awhile ago?  I just went on a search of 1890s barbershops to see if it was an everyday occurance for a man to go there to be shaved or not.  Found this little nugget of info:

In the twilight of the 19th century, American men went to barber shops furnished in golden oak and brass to get their hair trimmed and their faces shaved clean. The horns and heads of deer and bison were often mounted to the walls of these shops. To prevent the spread of disease regular customers often kept in a case their own shaving brushes and porcelain mugs with artwork marking their trade.

If you look to the left of the barbershop in this pic you can see a shelf with small cubbies filled with shaving mugs.

I also found out why barber poles are red and white, ew!

Why does the barber's pole have red and white stripes?

Before the 1700s, in addition to cutting hair, barbers throughout Europe pulled teeth, performed minor surgery, and practiced bloodletting.  During bloodletting, patients squeezed a pole to allow their blood to flow more freely. The pole was often painted red to mask bloodstains.

At the end of the operation the pole was wrapped in the white bandages used during the operation and put outside the shop to air. As a result, a red-and-white pole became associated with barbershops and barber guilds adopted it as their trademark

I just re-read my copies of the Fall River Daily Globe
from August 5 & 6, 1892. Although they are very long
and detailed articles, there is no mention of Andrew
stopping at the barber or the name Pierre Leduc mentioned.
It says "he was on a trip downtown to deposit the money
and checks received Wed..." and "at 10:30 Mr. Borden was on
Main St...a score of citizens can testify to that fact..
he could not have reached home before 10:45.."
  Not that he didn't go to the barber, just that the Globe
doesn't mention it in these 2 editions.

Thanks for the info Susan. Never knew any of that about the pole.

I agree if he went there at all it makes sense that he would go before he went to do his business rounds. Rebello on page 565 shows the barber shop as Andrews first stop. No time is mentioned. He then shows Andrew going to the post office next and then to the banks.  All these different places are within 3 or 4 relatively short blocks of each other so he could have been up and down Main St. several times.

Barber shops were informal places, no appointment necessary. I don't think I ever went to a barber shop and didn't have to wait. Of course this was a Thursday morning and most men would have been at work. I still would think there would be other customers in the shop who saw him there.

If he did spend 25 minutes there (9:55 to 10:20) it was not his first stop, and it was the longest period of time he spent in any one place  and only 25 minutes before his arrival home. Since Andrew was a regular customer with his own cup he may have felt at home there and talked a little more freely.

I guess it's another paragraph to be added to the Borden mystery.

Apparently Wild Bill loaned Stefani the book Sherlock Holmes And The Fall River Tragedy, by Owen Haskell, and I just started it a bit ago.  The first scene that takes place once Holmes reaches town (from Tibet!) is enacted in Leduc's Barber shop!!
The customers are lined up in seating , the chair next the barber chair is first client, next chair away from the barber is 2nd client, etc.  As the next man is taken into the barber chair each man moves closer, taking the next seat.

I can't believe the synchronicity as to this topic and this book.
I had tried to get it through interlibrary loan twice, over a year ago, and did not succeed!
Thanks Bill.  That is amazing.

You're welcome, Harry.  I am still curious if Andrew went to Leduc's to be shaved every day or just when he felt like it?  I've heard that those old straight razors were referred to as cut-throat razors as it took a very steady hand not to cut yourself whilst shaving.  And at Andrew's age I'm not sure as he had a very steady hand or not, was the visit to the barber's one of necessity?

I think I also posted on this before, but, women didn't start shaving until about the 1920s with the advent of shorter skirts and sleeveless tops.  But, by then the safety razor was already around.  Just the thought of trying to shave my legs with one of those straight razors makes me flinch, I can imagine cuts apleanty! 

MORE ON BARBERS:

--A member tells me there wasn't any "sliding over on chairs" -- the barber would call "Next!" and the hierarchy observed protocol, naturally. 

These next 2 letters from the Knowlton Papers collection are about *Suspect Carpenter* who was also shaved in Fall River and it became an important aspect of the Borden case. 

Knowlton Papers:

" #HK098
Notes, handwritten in lead.

Joe Carpenter, about 35.
Stole from Borden & Almy.
Family in F. Riv.

Once in Binghampton, N.Y.
Last known in Holyoke
Peddling ink &                       before murder!

Man shaved him in Fall Riv Monday Aug. 1 -
(Pete Driscoll, barber.)

Geo. W. Barney is his father in law-
School teacher in F R named Dean knows that Carpenter was in F.R. Aug
4th & left with his wife next day."
............

" #HK099
Letter, typewritten.

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S DEPARTMENT,
COMMONWEALTH BUILDING,
Boston, Nov. 22, 1892.

My Dear Knowlton:-
Jennings was here to-day, evidently indisposed to consent at first, but more inclined to before he left, I think. He went away saying that he must see Adams, and that he would let us hear from him as soon as possible.
      
Jennings tells me a story about one Joe. Carpenter, who had a grudge
against Borden, who he says ought to have been looked up. He says Pete
Driscoll a Fall River barber shaved Carpenter in Fall River Monday,
August 1st. He is a son-in-law of George W. Barney, of Fall River, and is
known there as a rather shady character. Have you ever heard of this; or
has anything been done about it?
     
Yours truly,

Attorney General

Hon. H. M. Knowlton," (sic-comma)
............

Knowlton Papers Glossary:

"BARNEY, GEORGE W. 1817 - 1893: born in Newport, Rhode Island, son of Rufus and Lydia Barney. He first appears in the Fall Rivet", Massachusetts, city directory circa 1869. A grocer by profession, he was employed in that capacity until 1888, when he appears to have retired from active business. He married Miss Esther Rose of Newport and resided with her in Fall River until his death. Their daughter, Annie, was married to Joseph W. Carpenter,
Jr."

"DRISCOLL, PETER M. 1853 - 1899: born in Boston, Massachusetts, son of Patrick and Ellen Driscoll. Employed as a hairdresser in Fall River, Massachusetts, he became a partner in the firm of Driscoll and Sheffield, Fashionable Hairdressers, in 1880. This partnership dissolved in 1882, at which time he continued in the same profession under his own name for the next sixteen years. He married Miss Harriet A. Read of Westport, Massachusetts, and, following her death in 1882, Miss Hattie D. Vadenais of Fall River, who died in 1898. He followed her to the grave only one year later in Taunton, Massachusetts, the cause of death acute melancholia. His claim that he had shaved Joseph W. Carpenter, Jr. in Fall River on August 1, 1892, cast suspicion on that man, as he was known to be an enemy of Andrew J. Borden."

--"Leduc"  is not in Knowlton Papers Glossary

--LBQ, April, 2003, article by Mel Disselkoen,  "Joseph Carpenter- Once More With Feeling", pg. 19:
"Also it was Knowlton and Marshall Hilliard who questioned Peter Driscoll, the barber, about whether he shaved Joseph Carpenter on August 3rd, 1892."

On pg. 10, Mr. D, states, about Masterton's "Lizzie Didn't Do It!" (pg. 230), "I think it should read that barber Peter Driscoll shaved Carpenter on August 3 instead of 'August 1'."

And:
"Small wonder Harrington couldn't figure it out in a week.  Carpenter had no alibi, in Albany, on the 4th of August, whereas two professional persons saw him in Fall River.  Barbershops were open until 9 or 10 P.M. In 1892..."


--There are no footnotes or references.  Can anybody point out these "two professional people" who supposedly saw Carpenter, in order to change his shave date from the 1st of August, to the 3rd of August?
And Where is the source for the statement that Knowlton & Hilliard questioned Driscoll?  (Other than letter #98 which does not state that?)




(Message last edited Jun-23rd-03  6:48 PM.)

No luck on my searches Kat. Were there any footnotes in the Disselkoen article?

Mr. D. gave no footnotes, sources cited or references or Biliography.  But if you have the article he wrote in the current April LBQ, it might help you with something I missed.  Plus he does mention other LBQ articles on the subject of Carpenter, if that helps.

I can't find much either, Kat.

We went over the Carpenter/Harrington/Driscoll connection on the forum last July -- and at that time Stefani posted a newspaper article about Carpenter being cleared of suspicion.

The article is dated July 9 (1893?)-- This would have been just after Lizzie's acquittal and around the time Carpenter's wife wrote that suspicious-sounding letter to say he could come home now. 

The article says in part that: "Carpenter proved an alibi by hotel clerks and registers.  One fact caused Miss Borden's lawyers to be persistent in their search for him.  It was positively stated by one Peter Driscoll that he had shaved Carpenter in the barber shop at the Wilbur house a day or two before the murders were committed. This story, the police say, was totally unfounded."

Perhaps the "day or two" reference is what led Mr. Disselkoen to bump up the shave from the 1st to the 3rd? 

As far as the 'professional' people -- could one of those be the schoolteacher named Dean who is mentioned in those pencilled notes in the Knowlton Papers?

(Message last edited Jun-23rd-03  7:29 PM.)

The January 2003 LBQ article by Rebello/Caplain, page 8, has this entry:

"Marshall Hilliard and District Attorney Knowlton made a prompt investigation of the claim of Pete Driscoll that he had shaved Carpenter about the time of the tragedies. They were satisfied that Carpenter was not the murderer they wanted."

No source is given. Disselkoen may be echoing that.  There was nothing in that article about two professionals though.

I think Caplain uses newspapers.  I often wish he would give his sources.

Thanks so much you guys!  You're my hero's.

According to Diana,one of the 2 professional people might be Dean the schoolteacher and I suppose the other is Driscoll the barber.  Not quite the calibre of profession that it first sounds like.

No wonder Mr. D.'s article confused me from the first.

You, Harry, were asking all along *In what document is Leduc questioned-- and why didn't he testify?*
Now we also have another famous barber query: *Where does it show Driscoll was questioned?*

(Message last edited Jun-23rd-03  7:44 PM.)

Thanks all for the interesting read!  The thought going on in the back of my mind as I scrolled through the posts was if it was Joseph Carpenter why didn't he kill Lizzie too as she was Andrew's own flesh and blood?  Was anyone else thinking along these lines?  Or, would you suppose that he left Lizzie to live as the fallguy (gal)? 

I'm now trying to figure out where Dr. Hoffman got the info that Carpenter embezzeled $ from Andrew Borden in the first place.
Ter wrote an article, rough draft which I have here and finally published in the LBQ, and his source for the embezzelment was Hoffman.
It is there, under *Carpenter* but he gives no source!
I looked at his Bibliography and he cites all the authors as well as newspapers, Lincoln, Brown, Kent, Spiering, Sullivan, Martins Knowlton Papers,Pearson, Porter, Williams, Flynn, Rebello.
This may take forever!

More on Ter's view of Carpenter  later...watch this space.  I may be able to find it in archive.  Anyone is also welcome to try.

Found in Archive.  I remembered the title.

Here's a part:
Yesterday In Old Fall River
Paul Dennis Hoffman, 2000

"Joseph W. Carpenter, Jr.  (1855-1899):
Carpenter was an early suspect in the killing of Andrew and Abby Borden.  He was cleared when his claim that he was far away from Fall River on the day of the murders proved true.

Carpenter had been a bookkeeper for the undertaking firm of Borden & Almy.  He was caught embezzling money from the firm in an amount of $6,700 over a period of years, a lot of money in the late 1800's.  Carpenter was arrested but the charges were quietly dropped.

After Andrew's death, a rumor circulated that Carpenter threatened to tell of dishonest practices such as how the firm cheated clients...Since Carpenter later paid  the firm back at least some of the missing funds, it is more likely that he and the company reached an out-of-court agreement to have the charges dismissed.

A New York publication, Once A Week, offered a $500 reward for the missing note that Lizzie said Abby received on the day of the murder.  Among other responses, the New York paper was told that Carpenter, who had left Fall River before fully repaying Almy and Borden, was seen in the city shortly after the killings.  Peter Driscoll, a Fall River barber, also said he saw the ex-bookeeper in town at about that time.

In August 1892, Carpenter was living in Albany, N.Y., and was on a sales trip far from Fall River.  This was verified by Mrs. Victoria Foreman, Carpenter's landlady.  When Mrs. Foreman told her story to Fall River police officer Phillip Harrington, Carpenter was no longer a suspect.

Carpenter was born in Fall River and worked there until fired by Borden and Almy.  He and his wife Ann relocated to Holyoke, Mass., until Ann moved back to Fall River alone in 1882 to live with relatives.  Carpenter, meanwhile moved to Buffalo, New York and then to Albany as a traveling salesman for an ink manufacturing company.  He died in Worcester, Mass., at the home of his sister."

--Terence Duniho had a long feature article on the subject of Carpenter as a suspect and his relationship to Phillip Harrington in the LBQ:
"Friends from Boyhood, A Police Officer and an Embezeller", July, 2001.

For more please see:
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Archive203/Lborden/LBcarpenter.htm
BTW:  This was a year ago!

Ter had a strange *aside* he added to the draft we have:

He reckonned Lizzie might have arranged the death's of Harrington in Oct. 1893, and Carpenter in October, 1899, thinking they had caused the deaths of the Bordens.
"This would then explain her [Lizzie] not looking any more for the murderer."

(Message last edited Jun-24th-03  2:40 AM.)

Masterton also includes the embezzlement story.  He writes that when Almy and Borden were dissolving their partnership, "an auditor found that Joe Carpenter had embezzled $6,000 from the firm.  Borden and Almy agreed not to prosecute if Carpenter made restitution for the money he had stolen, which he did.  It turned out, however, that much of the money Carpenter returned to the firm was in the form of mill stock which became worthless when the mill failed." (Masterton, 230)

Masterton's account varies in some aspects from Hoffman's. Hoffman describes Borden and Almy as an "undertaking firm" -- whereas Masterton says they dealt in furniture (including coffins).  Also Hoffman says Carpenter embezzled $6700 -- Masterton's figure is $6,000.

And Hoffman concludes that although Carpenter was arrested, the charges were probably dismissed in an out-of-court settlement when Carpenter paid back some of the money -- while Masterton says that Andrew insisted Carpenter be arrested and then dropped the charges when Carpenter threatened to expose some of Borden and Almy's unsavory business practices.

So because these reports differ slightly in minor details -- these authors may have used different sources for the embezzlement story.

Thanks Diana!
I see we leap-frogged each other.
After reading archive I see you are one of the best people here to lay our foundation on the Carpenter subject.

[Edit here:]  It seems Masterton and Hoffman were both published in 2000.
Hoffman gives no reference to Masterton in his Bibliography.

(Message last edited Jun-24th-03  2:51 AM.)

I went back in the archive and reread the posts on the Carpenter subject.  Thanks, Diana, for all your info, then and now! 

And thank you too, Kat!  Very interesting reading, all of it.  So, whats your take on it, still think he might be a suspect? 

(Message last edited Jun-24th-03  3:04 AM.)

But these stories agree in the main. The bookkeeper embezzled funds (about $6000 a huge sum in those days!), but escaped arrest by paying it back (lost his house?) and threatening to expose Andy.
Didn't AR Brown say Andy was openly charged with padding bills for services not rendered?

Don't you all know that "eyewitness identification" is usually suspect, unless the witness knew the person well?
Especially in those days, and even now. Do you know anyone, brothers or cousins, who resemble each other?

Ever see the 1947? movie "A Christmas Carol"? Does it show how Scrooge and Marley bought control of the firm by making good on the embezzlement of another?
Do such things happen only in the past?

These stories are Not Sourced in Hoffman or Masterton.

It is frustrating.
Masterton doesn't even give his reference.  He repeats the story and no one gives a newspaper article date or name, if that is where it comes from.

We don't even know IF Carpenter stole $ to begin with from Andrew.

Rebello, pg. 133, has some bio info on Carpenter, but seems to show Carpenter as "dismissed" from his employment with Borden & Almy, but not Why.

Here, finally, are some News citations:
Rebello, 133-4

"Sources
'Another Fake / Trying to Throw Suspicion From the Real Murderer of Andrew J. Borden,' Fall River Daily Globe, July 8, 1893: 7.

'Come Home / Suspicious Letter Picked Up at Rome, N. Y. / It Points to a Guilty Relation to Borden Murders,' Fall River Evening News, July 8, 1893: 1.

'The Carpenter Letter / It was Addressed to Joseph Wilmarth Carpenter, Jr., Whom Marshal Hilliard Says Is Satisfactorily Accounted For,' Fall River Evening News, July 10, 1893: 1.

'Joe Carpenter and the Borden Murders / Story of Capt. Harrington's Hunt in New York State, and the Establishment of an Alibi By the Suspect,' Fall River Daily Globe, July 10, 1893: 7.

'Obituary: Death of Joseph W. Carpenter,' Fall River Daily Globe, February 26, 1894: 7.

'Obituary: Death of Joseph W. Carpenter,' Fall River Daily Herald, February 26, 1894: 7.

'Obituary: Joseph W. Carpenter,' Fall River Evening News, February 26, 1894: 8.

Martins, Michael and Dennis A. Binette, eds., The Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs. Lizzie A. Borden: The Knowlton Papers, 1892-1893, Fall River, MA: Fall River Historical Society, 1994, 99, 100, 153, 154, 416.

Also:
Fall River City Directories
Fall River Index of Births, Marriages and Deaths
Oak Grove Cemetery Records"

--If this is the thread where nj got out her cache of newspapers to look up a citation and it wasn't found, I meant to thank her very much for that attempt.

Here's something else odd about this *picture*.
In 1854, Abraham, Andrew's father, married for the second time.  His new wife was a *Wilmarth*.

The other, and more odd thing, is that Rebello's references to Joe Carpenter's Obit are dated 1894, but Knowlton Papers bio has his death year as 1899, which Hoffman repeats.  ????

This is frustrating isn't it?  I guess we have to wonder about the source for Knowlton's pencilled notes. 

If they're chronologically placed between the two letters as they appear in the Knowlton Papers -- then in November of 1892, Knowlton was mulling over the notions that Carpenter stole from Borden and Almy ... that Peter Driscoll shaved him in Fall River on Aug. 1 ... and that the schoolteacher Dean said he'd seen Carpenter in Fall River on August 4th. 

But where was he getting this information?

The source for the stealing and a verified amount of stealing would be very helpful.
Finding this Dean would also be helpful.
What do you think about the death dates not matching?
Who do you guess is in error?
Maybe Carpenter faked his death and lived large until much later under an alias?  (Joking)

OK it's not just Hoffman and the Knowlton Glossary -- Rebello also claims Carpenter died in 1899 -- in Worcester, Mass. on October 30 at the age of 44.(page 133)

But doesn't it seem hard to believe that Rebello could cite three newspapers obituaries incorrectly? And, even if he typo'd up on the year and put 1899 instead of 1894 -- if Carpenter died in October, why would these obituaries all appear on February 26. Odder and odder.

I wish I knew how to access any of these papers -- the Globe, the Herald, or the Evening News for Feb. 26, 1894.

Rebello also prints newspaper items of August 22,1892 outlining a tip surrounding a bookkeeper who embezzled from Borden and Almy however the newspapers don't mention Carpenter by name. (p. 132)

I wonder if Carpenter was investigated as a result of this rumour?

I've been looking at the last pages of Masterton over & over tonight.
He talks about a man named Palmer who embezzeled from a Bank and supposes that possibly Andrew caught him out or even blackmailed Palmer.
I suppose that leads to this Palmer killing Andrew but it doesn't allow for the killing of Abby.
It is very confusing because the story is similar and this Palmer was apparently not investigated in the crime of murder and Jennings was his lawyer, 1893.

There's more coincidence/synchronicity.

Some of you may remember a discourse between Edisto and myself where she inspired me to leap to a conclusion which satisfactorily (to me) explained what paper it was which Dr. Bowen burned in the stove Thursday at the Borden's.  I decided it made sense that Bowen had written the word Emma on a note he already had to himself to arrange the pick-up or arrival of his daughter who was due in on the train, to give him the written information noted there as to where or how to reach Emma at the house where she was staying when he went to send  Emma a telegram.
In the event that he had returned from that errand and was near the stove in the Borden kitchen, he absently tore the note or somehow managed to put the note or pieces of the note into the fire.

In the book:
Haskell, Owen. Sherlock Holmes and the Fall River Tragedy. Lazarus Press, 1997...
Author Haskell has precisely the exact same explanation!

The Author also has Bowen as accomplice, which I had remarked upon...a chance of that because I noticed Lizzie would not let anyone into the sitting room until Dr. Bowen had come.  That also is part of Haskell's script!
He also, along with me, posits that Lizzie did come downstairs about 5 or 10 minutes after Andrew came home, and I had asked all of your opinions as to the exact reading of the testimony.  He also says Lizzie could have entered from the front foyer after waiting in the parlour, which was also on my list of posted possibilities.

For only ever getting my hands on this book the last few days, I could think I wrote it!
I don't know what to call it?  ESP?

They don't mention any name for the same reason nowadays: Libel Law. IT would be different if he was convicted. Do you see this in today's newspapers, where they omit names but print the "rumors"?

I personally know of a case where a distant relative died in March, but the obituary and grave site service was held in May. Maybe you'd see something similar if you read the Obituary Notices?
...

(Message last edited Jun-25th-03  1:29 PM.)

You can consider it Fiction, on my advice. Masterton's book seems to have been created to dispute the known blood evidence that Abby was killed "about an hour" before Andy, since it also applies to the event of June 13, 1994. Red liquid blood say freshly killed, not TWO HOURS earlier. Masterton didn't do his homework!!!

Masterton talks about slain Red Army soldiers whose blood was still liquid. He didn't know that they had a "grog ration" (100 grams of vodka, about 3.3 ounces) each day. THAT will keep blood liquid longer. You can look it up.

William of Ockham, Doctor Invincibilis, said "entities must not be multiplied needlessly" (the simplest explanation is likely to be true). NOW we have to have Dr Bowen as part of a criminal conspiracy?

On the other hand, AR Brown's description of Andy as a "loathsome miser" may have generated sympathy for poor Lizzie by Dr Bowen (you do know what happened the day before?).

Yes, if a person was a crime victim, maybe the death notice would be months different from a funeral notice as they hold onto the body, maybe.
Also if a body was to be shipped, or had to travel a long distance.  That all makes sense.
However, in this case the difference in death year is one source says 1894, and another, 1899.  Enough difference to be either about a different person entirely, or a misprint multiple times.

Did you read Masterton?
It's been a while for me.
Some members have read it more recently.

(Message last edited Jun-25th-03  6:01 PM.)

Diana, we had figured out that Knowlton got info on Carpenter from Jennings but wondered where Jennings got info.
See "Hip-bath Collection", William's Casebook:

"p.  Clarkson Alfred--exam(?) told me about Joe Carpenter." --Jennings' notes

Now we dig up Clarkson.
As I recall, Ter & I were looking for all Clarkson references not long before Ter died.

Is this Alfred Clarkson, the plumber, who was a witness at the Prelim? (p.468)