1. "William A. Davis"
Posted by David on Mar-27th-02 at 4:02 AM

Last night I saw on the TLC channel "Lizzie Borden The Case ReOpened" with the McBain who used Evan Hunter as a pseudonym and with such talking heads as Michael Martins, George Quigley, and Len Rebello and with Bill Pavao, owner of the LB B&B, playing William Borden the illegitimate son. Anyway, I saw where they said that William A. Davis, son of a butcher from South Dartmouth and supposedly an accomplice with John V. Morse in the murders, had died of a tumor in his head and neck. I didn't quite catch the precise date of his death, and am itching to know. I conscientiously checked all the old messages in both the old LBS and the new LBS boards using the keyword search, but came up empty-handed. If anyone knows, please supply, thanks!

If you like, all I can refer you to is my post on the subject at :
Topic-  LIZZIE ANDREW BORDEN
Title: "Case Re-Opened Video",
second page of TOPIC.
I have since checked Knowlton, Hoffman & Rebello and none have a date or year of death for Wm. Davis.  I just don't know from where this *information* was obtained.  I had a similiar response to the news about the tumor, as you...kk

Not to be presumtous but William "Bill" Pavao is not the "owner of the L.B. B & B" his position is "Curator" and as I was informed this past weekend while staying at the B & B, Mr. Pavao does not spend a great deal of time at the Borden house.

As I understand it Bill Pavao initally lived on the third floor front bedroom for nearly three years as a "live-in" Curator.  But as all jobs go he soon began to loose interest in be a live-in and Ms. Martha McGinn and he agreed that he would not longer reside on the third floor.

This move allowed the B & B to have an additional bedroom for rent. BC

BC

Thanks, Kat and Bob. Bob, I already saw your post about your stay experience at the B&B this past weekend, and you mentioned there that the McGinns are the current owners, so by process of elimination I knew then that Bill Pavao isn't the owner. But thanks again, anyway.

william arthur davis was born on august 6th 1851,
and died on may 7th 1900.
he died of a brain tumor and cancer of the neck.

Huh!

HOW did you find THIs out?  Ask George Quigley?
Do you have a source?  This is most interesting...especially if he died at that famed 1900-1902 mark, when all the major players had died by, practically... no new case can then be brought, with most of the characters gone.

dear kat,
i got the information from the dartmouth city clerks office.
his death certificate lists him as a farmer.
his main occupation was "butcher".
william as well as john morse learned the butchers trade from william's father isaac case davis and william's uncle charles a. davis.

Thank you--That was well done.

Now, according to the theory on the video, CASE RE-OPENED with Ed McBAIN, we need to know if Wm. Davis "leaned a little to the left, when walking."  (I think it was Quigley's theory that the man was Davis and had died of a tumor of the neck etc., which caused him to lean...)  A suspect was seen that day, that "leaned to the left", Witness Statements, pg.40-42.  That St, Amant family met a man who offered four dollars to be taken by coal wagon to New Bedford at between 2:30 and 3 p.m., Thursday.

(Message last edited Apr-2nd-02  11:26 PM.)

dear kat,
i am looking into 3 clues in this case.
which are strong "circumstantial evidence".
i am also recieving a photo this week of william davis.
then i will go from there.
there is no direct evidence in the borden case.
but circumstantial evidence (when the pieces are all in place)in many cases will create the whole picture.
                                        many thanks
                                             jeffery

Jeffery,
If Wm. Davis was the Actual killer, are we talking *hit man*, here?
If so, Why would he still be hanging around Fall River at "2:30-3 p.m." at Pleasant St. looking for a ride out of town, per Witness Statements?
This is based on that theory in the video that the suspicious man leaned to the left, and now we hear that Davis may have died of a neck & brain tumor.
Also, if he did the deed, how did the conspirators keep him from talking, especially if his mind was probably degenerating over time due to his illness?

The simplest answer or question is this: why would Lizzie not tell on the murderer? "It wasn't Bridget or anyone who worked for Father". I won't even consider this speculation without any facts.

It is a self-serving statement for anyone to make such a claim "Jack the Ripper was my father/grandfather". I would question their sanity or judgment on this. Claim for fame, or help?

"Lizzie would not tell on the murderer" if she didn't know who it WAS, would she?  That's ONE intrepretation!
And Brown is "speculation" of the deepest sort!  It can't be both ways...

The Topic Title of This: "Stay To Tea With Wm. Davis" thread is SO SURREAL!

dear board members,
in the next few months, i am working with a friend of mine.
and we will be presenting once again "on the evidence" a theory presented on davis in past l. borden quarterly's.
including the clues that i have diligently looked into.
and we intend to either present it in either book form or an essay or on this board with the kind permission of the board addministration.
                                       once again many thanks,
                                                   jeffery howard

Dear Jeffrey,

I am always accepting articles for publication on my web site

http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com

If you wish, you can email me a copy of the article as an attachment. My web site has had over 800,000 hits to date in less than a year of being on line. While there is no money involved, you will definitely "get seen" and find fame (of sorts) with this avenue of publication.

Very interesting Jefferey. Will yr theory involve Morse? Perhaps a murder conspiracy between Lizzie, Morse, and Davis?

Your work will be read by the most amount of people here on Stef's kewl site, although u can even submit it somewhere if u prefer. The quarterly accepts theories, eg. the Carpenter article, but not if they involve Lizzie-as-the-killer, as I found out the hard way.

dear stefani,
i seek no fame or money in this.
there are 3 standpoints that i take in my approach to this case;
1-no personal fame,no personal glory.
2-truth
3-facts.
                                         thanks
                                         jeffery

But she would describe any strange person who she saw leaving the house, wouldn't she??? How many total strangers would visit a private house in the mornings, anyway? Then or now?
Keeping quiet about the mrderer implies she knows more than she told. It is a logical inference.
Like the "dog that did nothing in the night".

Apparently Andrew did business from his home at odd hours...whenever needed.
In the Witness Statements, Lizzie says that "a man came" to the front door Thursday morning who "spoke English" at 9 a.m.
Masterton believes this to be Jonathan Clegg.  So did Dave abut a year ago, before the Witness Statements were so readily available...I remember everyone in the discussion asked, "Why would Clegg visit, if he'd already been there that week, plus would be seeing Andrew downtown later that same morning?"
Well, Dave didn't have the documentation at hand, and had to *retire* from the discussion...but apparently he was right, according to what Lizzie told Fleet, August 4th, W.S., pg.2--if we *believe* Lizzie...
Also, Masterton believed it enough to suspect Clegg as the possible assasin, also per Dave (who, to be fair, could not cite source at the time):  here are the Masterton page numbers:  231-234.

Lizzie may not have *seen* ANYBODY....what she *heard* is another story...

(Message last edited Apr-8th-02  1:10 AM.)

Oops, I see Kat's post was moved here. I was referring to it in my last "My Book Published" post.

(Message last edited Apr-9th-02  3:40 PM.)

This post wasn't moved.
It was in direct reply to rays...always was here.
I was going to tell this story last week but I got busy.  I never forgot that time when source-less, you couldn't *prove* what you maintained.
On the other thread "My book"..since i read consecutively down the order of posts, I did not know what you were talking about.

A lot of people don't have many sources, that's why Stefani created her web-site...to share the resources available...and giving eveyone an *equal opportunity* to avail themselves of them...and therefore can *cite* references, or transcribe pertinate facts, to bolster their theory or just to keep up.

That *Clegg* thing happened in the Dark Ages, when we were all "Cellar Dwellers", whether we knew it or not...

I believe Lizzie did see the "visitor" but didn't know what he did - yet. She could have described him, but only ruled out the other obvious suspect "it wasn't Bridget". She was honest enought for that!

Some say they would never be tried for a crime they KNEW their sister did. But what if you only had strong suspicion? What were the moral rules of that era? "Don't be a squealer" was what I learned; see no evil, speak no evil, etc. I'm not talking about strangers here.

Does family connections count, then or now. Would you report someone who lived well with little income? Only if you suspected something?

I just read a spurious newspaper account of who came to the door that Thursday morning, in the Sourcebook.  It claimed Lizzie thought him to be the Portuguese who worked on the Swansea farm, wanting his wages..(.pre-shades of Bertha Manchester!!!)
So now I'm wondering if when she said "He spoke English", she didn't necessarilly mean he was British, only that he wasn't any kind of *foreigner*?

dear members,
i just found out that terence duniho's theory was that WILLIAM A. DAVIS was involved in the borden murders.
i am wondering what his book would have revealed?
i know in my heart of heart's that everybody here would love to see this issue finally put to rest.
because let's face it,none of us are getting any younger.
i keep hesitating to come out in either book or essay form with my research because no matter how much evidence or covincing you do,there will always be doubters.
and from all the research ive done so far,i am 100% convinced that l. borden,john vinnicum morse and william arthur davis CONSPIRED TOGETHER and carried out these murders on thursday August 4th 1892.
please let me know what you think.....
                                         thanks again
                                            jeffery

i have decided to share what information that i have here at the board.
i am talking to my friend in sweden and he is sending me a copy of his essay and i would like to know kat and stefani if it would be alright if i post it here soon and see what the other board members think.
more later......                  thanks jeffery

dear members,
i am still inviting responses to my last post.
ever since that day,there have been so many theories put forth.
she did it!emma did it!
morse did it!
bridget did it!
david anthony did it!
william s. borden did it!
it could only have happened one of 2 ways.
either she killed with her own hands or she had a confederate.
there is enough evidence to go in either direction.
there is only one point about william s. borden that i question,and that is william's birth cirtificate to show who his parents are.
(possibly illigitimate).
so i invite all board members to tell their theories and their basis for them.
                                        thanks jeffery

There were a series of articles by Fritz Adilz published in the LBQ over a long period. 
This was a most excellent  attempt to theorize a solution to the Borden murders, when, why, how, who, called AN ARMCHAIR SOLUTION.
You have reminded me of that.
Is this a basis for Your Theory of the crime?
If so, everyone should get out their copies and read then again, because you'll be in for "a bumpy ride!"

does anyone remember when george quigley used to put up post's about william davis at the darkrose message board?
especially the one where he says that in the 60's he had a coversation with a man named jacob manchester?
george stated manchester was well into his nineties at the time.
and that manchester knew william and his family well.
he supposedly told george that he and william were drinking at a pub in south dartmouth one day,
and that william told him he was only paid to kill andrew but wanted more money from l.borden and morse for killing abby.
i checked city directories and other documents to verify the existence of one jacob manchester.
and found no evidence that he existed at all.
george had the right suspect but made things up to support his theory.
he is doing well by the way.
i spent the afternoon with him a few months ago at his home in fall river.
and i kept asking him about what he knew about jacob manchester and he kept avoiding the subject.
as far as the armchair solution to the borden case in the quarterly.
i agree with most of his essay "on the evidence",but,when he talks about the reason why she bought the poison and when he speculates about conversations between l. borden and morse,william and abby in the guestroom,i disagree with those portions of his theory.
any comments are most welcome.
                                      thanks jeffery

Sounds interesting.
Did you see the thread I created for you, Jeffery, called "Witness Statements--HEAP, pgs. 40-42" with his notes as to the French group of witnesses?
This computer has some old archives stored from the LBMB, I'll take a look for ole' Quigley...may take a little while....kk

dear kat,
could you show me how i can get a look at all the messages from darkrose?
                                   thanks jeffery

I can't help with that...I have no answer.

Did you ever reach Lilly & Darryle?
Has anyone?       kk

(Edit Here--I have just now finished reading most of the threads that are stored in this computer from Winter 2000/Spring 2001 of the Lizzie Borden Message Board.  There is no Geo. Quigley, and no mention of Davis.  They're all fixated on Morse and a Will, with a little Billy Borden thrown in. 
It's amazing how quickly these otherwise interesting discussions degenerated into slam-fests!  Ick)

(Message last edited Jun-4th-02  3:02 AM.)

dear kat,
those threads of quigley's were done during the first year or two of darkrose.
the photo of william davis fits exactly the description given by the six people on pages 40-42 under the heading j.m. heap in the witness statements.
in the statement given by the 16 year old boy,he says, he overheard the man say to the frenchman;"take me to steep brook then"!
i looked thru several maps and an 1892 city directory,i found quite afew people surnamed davis living in steep brook and along wilson road,which leads east thru a wooded area to westport.
i have been constantly working on this clue for well over a month,trying to find any relation between william and one or more of these davis's.i am still working on it.it is my belief that when the frenchman declined to take william to the south part(padanaram village/south dartmouth)of new bedford.
then william asked to be taken to steep brook to one of his relatives to ask that relative to take him to south dartmouth.as to the time the stranger was picked up by the frenchman.in the witness statement of the frenchman,he states that it was between 2:30-3:00 p.m.;but i also saw it stated in more than one newspaper article that it was around 12:30 p.m.i have plenty more to share with you...........

Oh, O.K.
I couldn't figure out why an assassin would still be hanging around town at 2:30, trying to get a ride.
I figured a person who could commit a flawless murder would have set up an escape route or vehicle ahead of time, rather than taking the chance of being stranded.
If you have sources that say 12:30 that's a bit more believable, but which newspapers?
I suppose something could have gone wrong with his escape plan by 12:30, but 2:30 is too incredible.
So how do we see this photo?  And how can it be authenticated as Davis?

Obviously if the waiting buggy in front of the house left, the visitor ("Nemesis") would have to walk miles, or get a ride.

I believe the murders were an unforeseen accident, and not planned to get rid of Abby & Andy. Altho some of the evidence is open to that suggestion

mark chase,the proprieter of the livery stable (diagonally south) across the street from the bordens. testified, at the trial, that as he was walking across the street just a few minutes before 11 a.m. going towards wades store,he saw a horse and buggy with a (man occupying the seat), sitting in front of the borden home.
and when he returned a few minutes after 11a.m. the man and buggy were gone.
after william had murdered andrew he left by the side door and while he was halfway between the side door and the north gate,ellen eagan was passing and saw him there.the man waiting in the buggy was the getaway driver.when ellen saw william,the driver panicked and left him there.and if you read the essay about the hip bath collection in the book "proceedings",barbara ashton had the privelidge of looking into the thin red notebook owned by andrew jennings which contained witness statements taken by jennings during the investigation.
a lady named p.d. conant gave 3 statements.she said that a few minutes after 11 a.m. as she stood on the corner of city hall talking to her daughter minnie reynolds,she saw a man walking rapidly down second street and turned onto pleasant street and proceeded eastward.
he had the reddest looking face and he was of short\medium stature.
his eyes were protruding as if he were very scared about something.
and ray,i believe it was william a. davis and NOT william s. borden that she saw that day.
when you read the description of the man given by the 6 french-canadians given in the witness statements on pages 40-42 under the heading j.m. heap,they said he was wearing a frock coat.
i looked at several web sites with photos and descriptions of frock coats.
it is a long duster coat that goes well below the knees and is made of coarse material.

l. borden in her inquest testimony,testified that she had asked bridget to close the parlor blinds when she got through outside because the sun was so hot.
l. borden testified that the only rooms that she entered that day were the cellar,the kitchen,her bedroom,the sitting room and the dining room.
why the addmission to knowlton of her mention to bridget of closing the parlor blinds? when she never stated ever going into that room that day?
that's because william davis was in the parlor when andrew came home.
and the getaway driver was already outside waiting when andrew came home.
l. borden was an acomplice to andrews murder.
nothing more......

Wow, so Jeffery, do you think that Lizzie wanted Bridget to go into the parlour so that she would get "whacked" too? 

susan,
i was refering to the blinds(shutters)on the outside of the windows.

Oh, sorry, my bad. 

OK, maybe my memory is going.
But what possible reason or motive would Wm A Davis have for murdering both Abby and Andy? I want facts, not speculation after the fact.
I read a reference to "Oliver Twist" Sunday. Isn't that a story about an illegitimate son who does regain his inheritance? A recurring theme in 19th century stories?

What motive can Wm A Davis have in murdering Abby around 9:30, then Andy about 11AM? You can expect crazy things from a madman (Wm S Borden) but why would Lizzie not speak out (if she knew)?

I understand the "parlor game" some people play here (what if ...).

I don't think Jeffery is playing "what if".
It is my understanding that he has been spending time doing serious research, unlike us dillatante's.
His "theory" is not quite exposed yet, so we reserve judgement.  It is still a work in progress.
It does seem to follow along the lines of other published pieces, but I think he is re-forming it to make it uniqueqly (sp) his own.
It sounds as valid, so far, as any other...if not more so, as there are sensible points inherent that are better documented than other theories we could mention.  His scenerio seems to be credible based on already known facts, and not built on fantasy, or "what if's"...

I agree, Kat.  Jeffery has done some pretty detailed research.  Keep up the good work, Jeffery.  What you have done points out (at least to me) that Davis, Lizzie and either Morse or Dr. Bowen were involved in the murder.  I hope we can find that picture of Davis.

joyce g. williams,a casebook of family and crime,page 36:
A MAN WITH A CLEAVER-
griffith's bros.,the carpenters on anawan street,tell a story which may have an important bearing upon the terrible tragedy.
they were driving up PLEASANT STREET ABOUT 11:OO O'CLOCK THURSDAY MORNING when their attention was drawn to a man who was proceeding rapidly along the sidewalk in front of flint's building.
under his arm,with the handle down,he carried a cleaver entirely unlike anything they had ever seen.
it was the si(last letter of alphabet does not work on my computer)e
of the instrument that caused them to take more than a passing glance at it.to them it looked like a tool sometimes used by fish dealers.
it had a rusty appearance,as if it had not been used for some time.
the man was dressed very poorly.
he had no beard and was short in stature.
as the weapon with which the deed was committed has not been found,the carpenters venture the opinion that the cleaver they saw was the means by which mr. borden and his wife were killed.

"he leaned a little to the left when he walked"
gait-(gat)[MeSH:gait] the manner or style of walking.see also gait cycle. under cycle.
cerebellar gait.,a staggering ataxic gait,sometimes with a tendency to fall or lean to one side while walking,indicative of cerebellar lesions.
cerebellar lesions stem from either a primary(non-maligment/non cancerous)or secondary(maligment/cancerous)BRAIN TUMOR!at the time of the borden murders,william apparently suffered from a primary/non-cancerous brain tumor that caused him to lean a little to the left when he walked which eventually turned cancerous(secondary brain tumor)and took his life on may 7th 1900.
much more coming........
                                   thanks jeffery

Am I misunderstanding?
I checked the citation in William's CASEBOOK, pg.36-7, but it doesn't say he leaned to the left.

In Hoffman, pg. 145-6, it has essentially the same information.
However, it gives the source as the Fall River Herald, "the day after the Borden's died."

Have you looked up that paper item...is that where it says he "leaned to the left"?

I read that excerpt from the Casebook early on but didn't consider this person to be a serious suspect.  For one thing, if the Bordens had been killed with an old rusty implement like that, wouldn't it have been obvious?  We know there was some gilt on Abby's skull that appeared to be from a brand-new tool.  Wouldn't an old rusty cleaver (or whatever it was) have left rust?  Wouldn't the cuts themselves have revealed that the weapon used was dull?  As I recall, the medical experts thought a sharp implement was used.

Or, do you think what they perceived as rust from a distance was actually dried blood? 

kat,
in the witness statements on pages 40-42 under the heading j.m.heap,
six people stated that the man "leaned a little to the left when he walked".
there are no other reports.
and,in my last post i shared information that i have exaustively researched
as to what would cause him to walk that way.
i found it in several medical books and on several medical web sites.
......................

If it was ll:00 A. M. on August 4, 1892, the blood on the implement would likely have been wet and glistening.  (Unless this is one of those two-weapon theories, and the odd cleaver was used only on Abby.)Also, carpenters would probably be pretty expert at identifying rusty and disused tools, since they used many different ones in their work, though probably not cleavers.  Dried blood on a metal edge does look quite different from rust.  This is an easy experiment to try at home and doesn't necessitate murdering anyone.  A piece of raw meat will suffice.

I'll have to try out the raw meat experiment, Edisto.  Where and when I can, I don't mind trying out simple experiments. 

i would like to rewrite my earlier post;

Gait-the manner or style of walking.

a cerebellar gait-a staggering ataxic gait,sometimes with a tendency to fall or LEAN TO ONE SIDE WHILE WALKING,indicative of cerebellar lesions.

cerebellar lesions are a type of brain herniation.

this type of brain herniation stems from either a benign/non-cancerous
or a malignent/cancerous...........BRAIN TUMOR!

which in turn,can and will affect one side of the body......

due to this evidence,i am firmly convinced that mr. william arthur davis on thursday august the 4th 1892,was suffering from a benign brain tumor which eventually turned malignent and took his life on may 7th 1900.

william's death certificate listed cause of death as,deposit on brain(brain tumor)and cancer of the neck.

this post is one of several items  that i have spent considerable time looking into.

in the police report taken in the witness statements by officer j.m. heap,on pages 40-42,statements were taken from six french-canadians who lived in flint village.
at least 4 of them stated that"he leaned a little to the left when walking".

i have copies of two signatures of william's,when william,s father isaac case davis died in 1893(year after the murders)he appointed william as executor of his estate.
william signed the document twice.
i found out that william was LEFT HANDED.
more next time...........
                             thanks jeffery

Thanks, Jeffery, for the clarification.

Would you like the Witness Statements that I formed a Thread for, moved to this location?  Or would that clutter this spot?  kk

yes kat,that would help sort things out a bit.
and i would like to hear some response to this subject.
        once again many thanks jeffery

Jeffery,
Did BOTH William "Illigitimate" Borden and William "Butcher" Davis have a hand in the murder?  I have it in my head that they are connected to each other somehow.  I need to re-read Brown "The final Chapter".  Doesn't he make an inference to that?  I sure wish I had Brown's book at the moment.  So many questions, so few books.

(William was left-handed cont')

I copied this from the trial transcript today.
Attorney Adams questioning of Dr. Dolan.
Q: How do you account for the fact. if it be a fact, that there are no spots upon that small table that stood very near the front of the sofa and had books and other objects upon it?
A: In the first place I don't think the assailant swung the instrument in that direction.
Q: You think the assailant swung the instrument from left to right, dont you?
A: Yes, sir
Q: All those blows can be fairly accounted for by blows from left to right?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: That is to say it is a left handed blow?
A: in what sense left handed? delivered by the left hand?
Q: That it strikes the body in a left handed direction from left to right?
A: Yes sir. To a certain extent. Those that are most markedly from left to right are those that would come down directly as the head lies there now and give the direction of the left handed blow.
Q: And all these wounds can be fairly accounted for by blows from left to right?
a:yes sir.
Q:that is to say,by a left handed person?

A: Yes, by a LEFT HANDED PERSON!

Attorney Adams questioning Dr. Draper
Q: Does the fact that the spatters are on the wall to the left of Mr. Borden and that some of the blows have a tread from left to right indicate to you anything as to the direction in which the blows were given.
A: Yes sir.
Q: And does it indicate to you that they were from left to right?
A: THOSE BLOWS WOULD!
Q: from left to right?
Mr. Knowlton: Those blows what?
Mr. Adams: The bevelled blow and one other blow.

A: I think your question involved also the appearance of the blood spots on the wall?
Q: Yes sir. If there were no spots on the carpet in front of the sofa, and if there was a table standing within a short distance of the front of the sofa with articles upon it and if upon that carpet and upon that table were objects upon which no spot of blood were found, would that help you still further in your opinion as to the direction in which the blows were given?
A: In a measure. It would not be incredible though it would be extraordinary, I think, that the table and the articles on it should escape some spots of blood under those conditions.
Q: If the blows were given from right to left, would you not naturally expect the carpet and the table, in view of the fact, that these spots were found in such large numbers on the wall, would have been spattered?
A: I should think it would.

until next time......
jeffery

I was just checking the trial testimony you cited and I do not see where Dolan agrees that the wounds to Andrew are by "A LEFT-HANDED PERSON".  He does admit that certain one could be one-handed blow.

He says (934) the wound that bi-sects the eye (left to right...BUT) not a good deal of an angle, "not markedly."
The wound above the eye angles more markedly so than the other one (as left to right)...BUT it's a glancing blow and shaves off a piece of the eyebrow.   [This seems to imply less control of the weapon]

Dolan also says (946) (The assailant) "Stood behind the head of the lounge, that is between the parlor door and the head of the lounge."

(947)
Q:...from left to right?
A: Yes, sir, to a certain extent.  Those that are most markedly from left to right are those that would come down directly as the head lies there now, and give the direction  of a left handed blow.

(952)
Mrs. Borden left to right blows

(954)
Mrs. Borden top of skull wound right to left.

(960)
Mrs. Borden Q:( Left and right direction?) A: YES

(962)
"I don't think there is necessity to put it either way."

--here I think he is implying that Mrs. Borden's wounds were from different directions, not just left or right.  See Autopsey photo...

--Can you give the page where Dolan says the assailant is Left-Handed?

--BTW:  If Davis has a tumer on the left side of the head/neck, wouldn't it effect his right side?  And vice-versa?




A:

brown-(jennings hip bath collection)
for whatever reason,mr.arthur s. phillips in 1941 elected to comment on mr.jennings' collected hoard of evidence and the continued sequestration of "the mass of documents" by saying,"mr.jennings considered their secracy important to her defence should there be any new phases of police investigation."

mr. jennings as an attorney was well aware of the "double jeopardy" law that clearly states; that once aquitted,a client cannot be retried
for the same crime,no matter what evidence is brought forth against the client at a later date.
nevertheless said client can be later charged in same crime as either an accomplice or as a cospirator.
all depending on the evidence later brought forth.

jeffery
kat,i will clarify my last post and supply page numbers next time.

"brown-(jennings hip bath collection)"
Are you referring to BROWN, the author?

Phillips wrote a newspaper article in 1934 that addressed some of this.  However, after that time, the next thing published (by) Phillips was the History of Fall River, in volumes, 1944 & 1946., posthumasley (sp), which contained this article.
So I don't know what the date 1941 refers to?

Also, by 1903, a majority of the people involved with the murders, and their aftermath, were dead.  It would have been nearly impossible to re-try the case.
Phillips would and did know this in 1934--hence his article.
But of course no one knew this in 1894 or so...

kat,
yes,brown is the author i was refering to.
i believe that i also found this little gem in victoria lincolns book.

would you also be willing to share(post)the 1934 article written by phillips?

william davis died in 1900 and morse in 1912.
the borden trial ended in 1893,the police  could have re-opened the investigation after the trial,but,sadly did not.
why would jennings say it,unless he knew there was something amiss.

as a matter of FACT!
i did find it in lincoln's book.
and kat,it can be found on page 96 of arnold brown's book.

Mr. Brown does not quite quote that Phillips article properly, nor is the date specified correct.  He does tend to overdramatize an already dramatic case, in my view.

The article by Jenning's assistant Arthur Phillips was published in the New Bedford Evening Standard, of May 13, 1934.  Terence Dunihoe xeroxed it for myself and Stefani which culminated in his Lizzie Borden Quarterly offering last issue.  ("Arthur Phillips' Perspective on Lizzie", The Lizzie Borden Quarterly Vol.IX, No.2, April, 2002)

The newspaper account is very hard to read and is not scan-able, nor is it of a length to transcribe here.

However, if you happened to read Ter's article based on this retrospective of Phillips', you will find proofs that Phillips' memory of events and facts are certainly distorted. 

But, Phillips does say, "I entered into a study of the evidential details and of defense _____ under the leadership and direction of Jennings with all that energy which youth posseses____ ___ enthusiasm which exists when a man is released from his preparatory studies, has passed his admission tests and (attempts success?) in his chosen profesion (sic).  Yet during all this period of more than 40 years public consideration has been limited to such facts as were evidenced at the trial plus those disclosed by the prosecution and those revealed by press investigation."

--This does not sound like a man who, going young and fresh into practice, compromised his ideals by cover-up or falsifying information for his "hero" who was defending the Lizzie Borden Case, as Brown's "slant" would have us believe.  (96)

The quote DIRECT from the article as pertains to BROWN'S interpertation:

"The mass of documents and other evidence collected by the defense has never been disclosed or discussed, due to the fact that until the recent death of Miss Borden their secrecy was in the opinion of Jennings inportant to her defense.  He considered that during her life it was improper to disclose facts which were gathered in her interest, and which might by any possiblity be important if the crime were reconsidered  by the District Attorney."

--She paid for her defense.  She OWNED it.

It's my opinion that Jennings believed in her innocence.
Rebello, (296):

"CLUE WAS NO GOOD
Lawyer Jennings Still Unable to Solve the Borden Mystery, Fall River Daily Herald, June 6, 1894: 8"

"A dispatch from Washington, D.C., to the Boston Post says:  Andrew J. Jennings of Fall River, being interviewed about the Borden case, is quoted as saying:
'To this day it is a puzzling mystery, I have never yet been able to solve it.  Superintendent Byrnes of the New York police force said to me that it was a case altogether unprecedented in the annals of crime.  I have never been able to form a satisfactory theory as to the murderer of Mr. and Mrs, Borden.  I thought after the acquittal of Miss Borden that I had found a clue that promised to reveal all, but after working diligently on it for two months realized that it solved nothing.  Miss Lizzie Borden and her sister live very quietly in a house bought after the tragedy.  The former is not seen very much.' "

Hope the quotes can help.
I am not too familiar anymore with Arnold Brown's work. This is just research to share with you if it clarifies things.
My opinion is just my opinion.

This relates to Arnold Brown's work on the case and not specifically to Davis.  Over the weekend, I read an amusing piece in the "Proceedings" of the 1992 conference at Bristol Community College.  It's by one Paul Fletcher, who grew up Irish in Fall River.  In pertinent part, he says, "...a hive of Eagans and Petersons kept what they said was an open secret about old Andrew's alleged illegitimate son Billy Borden (the real murderer they say), and they passed the interesting but unprovable story to Arnie Brown for his recent book..."  This is a hint as to where that premise came from, perhaps.  I also saw some nice pix in an old LBQ of Arnold Brown on a visit to Fall River and the Borden house.  Apparently he was a very charming person and something of a jokester.

edisto,
i know he was not refering to davis.

What we would like to know at this point, does BillyBorden figure into your theory?
Edisto brought up his name, and someone else has wondered if he wil make an appearance.
Or are you dealing with Davis only?

The Phillips excerpt from his History of Fall River was "broken out" by Flynn and published seperately, for those who are interested.  It can be "downloaded" at :
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com
Click on Lizzie's Library
It is the last item listed.

There ARE differences in the news article compared to this work;  not too substantial, though.

Stefani wrote a "Forward" to it explaining it's inception.
Her theory that Easton, Phillips' brother-in-law, wrote the section enclosed within the History is Her Opinion, as the book was published after Phillips' death etc.

I think the news article IS the book section, with some editing by Easton.

no,nothing on william borden,just davis.
william's tumor was on the left side of his brain and affected his right side.

I can't immediately remember what parts of the brain are located in the right side?  What things are governed by that side...

Do you know WHY Davis would do this deed?  What does he Gain?

thanks kat,
you just gave me some homework.
ill post my findings hopefully tomorrow!
                    jeffery

victoria lincoln,page 210;
And fourteen years after Ms. Borden's death, his faithful Mr. Philips was moved to explain that the public had never seen "the mass of documents" because "until the recent (!) death of Miss Borden, " Mr. Jennings (who had predeceased her by five years) considered that "their secrecy was important to her defense." Not because they contained anything incriminating, but because "facts which were gathered in her interest" would "meet any new phases of police investigation" and be "important if the trial should be reconsidered by the District Attorney."
Poor honest, intelligent, sensitive Mr. Jennings! How he would have winced to see the cache in the hip bath thus published and quaintly explained away as a legal ignoramus' fear of double jeopardy for his ex-client! It would be a strange lawyer indeed who did not know that one acquitted of murder is acquitted for good and all, no matter what damning facts are later discovered.

as far as i know,jenning's grandson has the little thin red notebook,
which contains several witness statements relating to the stranger that people saw that day in the neighborhood.
and i also distinctly remember reading in browns book,to the effect that when jenning's daughter(mrs. dwight waring)donated the collection to the historical society that their were firm rumors and firmer denials that the family took back the thin red notebook at that time.

Apparently 3 authors had some access to the "Hip-bath" collection:
Radin
deMille
Ashton

This might help you determine more of what was in it?

i found this article at the new bedford library;
new bedford daily mercury;monday september 5,1892;
"the borden case"
fall river,aug 4,
new interest was awakened in pawtucket R.I. in the borden murder mystery friday.
when a story was repeated that was told by mrs. marshall.
widow of the late john marshall,the hat manufacturer,formely of fall river.
the story is to the effect that she was in fall river on the day of the tragedy.
she went out driving with a lady friend.
their course taking them past the borden residence.
and as near as she can estimate it.
when they drove past the house.
it was not far from the time the murders are thought to have been committed.
one object that attracted her attention,however,was a man who was leaving the house as the team rolled by.
the man is said to have been described by mrs. marshall as so repulsive and evil in appearance as to move her to turn to her companion and remark:"what a villainous looking man".
no more thought of the viscious looking individual by the ladies until,in driving homeward,they again passed the borden house,which was surrounded by people,talking about the murder.
and speculating on who the assassin was.
a reporter called at the residence of mrs. marshall on summit st.
on friday,but failed to get an interview with the lady.
her daughter told the reporter that,at the proper time,her mother, would tell what she had to say to the proper authorities.
but at present she had nothing to say for publication.

there was more to the article,but,i did not have time to write it all down.
there is also a reference to what she saw in hoffman's book under her name.

ellen eagen apparently was not the only person who saw the man coming away from the borden house right after andrews murder.

WITNESS STATEMENTS, pg. 33, Off. Medley:

Fall River September 2, 1892.
In pursuance of orders I this day visited Mrs. John Marshall at Pawtucket. I was unable to secure an interview with her because Mr. Jennings had telephoned to allow no one to see her until he came on. I waited until next day, when Mr. Jennings and I had an interview with her, and she made the following statement. She was out riding in company with Mrs. Robert Marshall in Fall River on the fourth of August. They were going south through Third street about eleven o’clock, or a few minutes after. When opposite Dr. Chagnon’s house, she saw a horse and top buggy, and a man standing beside it. He was not in a hurry, did not seem excited; no blood or anything on his clothing; nothing in his hands, but simply standing beside his carriage, and presently he got in, but did not notice which way he went. He had a red face. In concluding, she said “that is all I know.”

September 8. This day visited Mrs. Robert Marshall at the Melon House. She is what I consider a very upright conscientious woman. After calling in Asst. Marshal, Fleet that he might be a witness to what was said, I inquired of Mrs. Robert Marshall if she concurred In the statement made by her mother in law. She said “No, I cannot. I was with my mother in law on the 4th of August riding out. While I know it will make more or less feeling in my family, yet I must tell The truth, and I cannot say that I saw anything at all either on Third street, or anywhere else, that could be construed into a suspicious circumstance. While on Third street in front of Dr. Chagnon’s house, there was absolutely nothing at all; neither did she call my attention to anything at all. When we passed, the High School Building it was 10.45,she told me so herself. I am sorry I cannot agree with her, but it is my duty to tell what I honestly believe to be the truth.”

--I know my suspects and where to find them.
--Cool news article you cited.
--What do you think?

thanks kat,
i was going to make reference to this in my last post but did not have my copy of the witness statements handy!
are you planning to move the witness statements,pages 40-42 to this topic soon.
thanks jeffery

WITNESS STATEMENTS
pg. 40-42

'J. M. HEAP.

August 14th I saw Ronnald St. Amant. He said that August 4th he was coming from Atwater’s coal yard on Eight Rod Way with a half ton of coal at 2.30 or 3 o’clock. He met a man at the corner of Eight Rod Way and Pleasant street. “The man asked me if he could get in. I told him yes, come on then. He asked me if I could take him to New Bedford. I asked him why he did not take the cars. He said he wanted to go in a team. I asked him if he had a girl with him. He said no. He asked me how much I charge to take him to New Bedford. I said four dollars. He said all right. Then he kept kicking the horse. I made him understand that I had too much load to trot, and he stopped kicking the horse. I asked him what part of New Bedford he wanted to go to. He said the south part. Then he asked me if I could come back at four or five o’clock in the morning. I said it is too late, I want to come back at eleven or twelve. He said that all right, lets hurry up. He came to the woodyard on Jencks street. Before we got there he asked me if I had a buggy. I said no, I have got a carry all. I showed him the carryall. He said it was all right. He got into the carriage before I could hitch the horse to it; then he gave me a five dollar bill, I gave him one back. He wanted the reins, and kept saying hurry up. I saw that he was in a hurry, that I could not change my clothes, so I sent a boy after my coat and vest. The boy brought them. Then my wife came and asked me where I was going. I said, to take this man to New Bedford. She said, I dont want you to take that man to New Bedford. Then she said that there had been some one murdered in the city today. She said it might be bad to take that man to New Bedford. I told her that he had paid me. She said, give him back his money. I do not want you to go to New Bedford. I gave him back his five dollar bill, and he gave me my one dollar bill. As near as I could understand him, he said, I have paid you, and I want to go to New Bedford. I told him my wife did not want me to go. Get out, I dont want to see you here again.

41


Description. Age 28 or 30, height 5 feet 8 inches or 8 and 1/2; weight 175 or 180 lbs; dark complexion; full face; smooth shaven; a little round shouldered, and leans a little to the left when walking; a plain dark suit, cut away coat, a black stiff hat, white shirt and collar, and black bow; black hair.

Mrs. Exentive StAmant said that the man sat in the carriage, his head bent forward, and his hat drawn over his eyes, and kept saying hurry up and get in. When Mr. StAmant said here is your money back, the man said, aint it enough, will you take ten dollars. He took the five dollars and some silver from his pocket. Description. Age 30 or 35 years; height 5 feet 8 or 8 and 1/2 inches; weight 175 or 180 lbs; dark complexion, full face, smooth shaven, black hair, a little round shouldered, and leans a little to the left when walking, a plain dark suit, cut away coat, a black stiff hat, white shirt and collar, and black bow.

John St. Laurant, No. 59 Jencks street. “Saw the man when he came out of he wood yard. He asked me if there is a livery stable around here. I told him there is one on Flint street.”
Description. Age 25 or 30; height 5 feet 6 or 8 inches; weight 150 lbs. dark complexion, rather plain, dark clothes, frock coat, dark derby hat, tight fitting pants, and outing shirt, a little round shouldered, and leans a little to the left when he walks.

Francois Charret, Flint Street, works for Mr. St. Amant. “I was in the wood yard when Mr. StAmant and the man came in. I thought by the looks of the man’s hands and face he worked out of doors. They had the appearance of being sun burned. The inside of his hands was rough and hard, I saw them when he gave the money to Mr. St. Amant. He got into the carryall before we could hitch the horse to it, and kept saying hurry up. When Mr. StAmant said, here is your money back”, the man said “aint it enough, will you take ten dollars. He took the five dollar bill and some silver from his pocket.”
Description. Age 31 or 32; height 5 feet 8 or 8 and 1/2; weight 175 or 180 lbs. dark complexion, full face, smooth shaven, a little round shouldered, and leaned a little to the left when walking, a plain dark suit, cut away coat, a black stiff hat, white shirt
and collar and black bow.
“I saw the man go to Pleasant street. He stood at the corner of Pleasant and Jencks street a minute, then started towards New Bedford.”

Joseph Michaud, age 16, lives on Jencks street. “I saw the man in the team in the wood yard. When Mr. StAmant said he could not take him to New Bedford, he said, take me to Steep Brook then.”
Description. Age 40, dark complexioned, height 5 feet 8 inches, dark clothes, white shirt, and collar, black bow.

42


Alexander Cote lives on Jencks street, works at Arcand’s. “A man came to the stable August 4th at 3.30 o’clock P. M. and asked me if he could be carried to New Bedford. I Said no sir.”
Description. Age 29 or 30, height 5 feet 8 or 9 inches, weight 180 or 190 lbs. dark complexion, full face, dark cut away coat, no vest, no tie, an outing shirt. When he went from the barn, he went towards Alden street.'

Jeffery,
Here are 2 sites to visit if you like, that try to explain the "Left-Brain / Right- Brain" mystery.

If Davis had a tumor on his left neck and head then that would effect his right side of his BODY?  (If it WEAKENED the right side, he might lean to the ???)

http://www.viewzone.com/bicam.html

http://www.mtsu.edu/~devstud/advisor/LRBrain.html

kat,i found this news article yesterday;
new bedford daily mercury-
friday aug 24-
more theories
a reporter examines the scene of the tragedy;
on the door to the parlor there were still a few spots and others had been washed off.
on the carpet between the head of the sofa and this door was a single spot.
these spots on the dining room door case,parlor door and the carpet,were,in the opinion of the officers,drips from the hatchet or instrument with which the murder was committed.
nearly all of them are TO THE LEFT OF A PERSON STANDING IN THE POSITION ASCRIBED TO THE MURDERER!
could the executioner have escaped getting drops upon the clothing?
was the striking the act of a LEFT HANDED PERSON?
the direction of the cuts will be interesting testimony upon this point.

and when i recieve my borden case cd-rom hopefully next week, which includes the trial transcript,i will be able to clarify what i posted in relation to the testimony of dr's dolan and draper.

Well, I CAN say that the blood on the dining room door frame was discounted on the stand by Prof. Wood as not being blood after all, but something "yellowish" like soup or tobacco juice.

I don't know if it affects your theory or not;  it may not matter.

As to left-handedness, how do you know if Davis was left-handed?  I really was wondering about this aspect, mainly because we don't even know it about Lizzie, and she's more of a major character, if you know what I mean...(?)

I've always "understood" that Lizzie was right-handed.  Didn't the defense seem to be pushing the theory (without much success, I might add) that the killer was left-handed? Why would they have done that if Lizzie herself was left-handed?  I'll have to look in my trial testimony to see where I got that idea. Her handwriting might also hold a clue.  Having had two siblings who were left-handed, I've heard many comments about their handwriting looking "funny."  My mother (right-handed) always said they were writing "upside-down."

Yes, kat, I recall reading that too, Lizzie was a rightie.  Now, its just a matter of sifting through all my reference material and see if I can find it. 

a few years ago i was reading an issue of the quarterly volume v,number1,jan,1998.
on page 10 there is an article titled john vinnicum morse,
"i sat on his lap".
mrs. doris reed grimwade is the grandaughter of emma davis(tucker)
emma davis is the older sister of william a. davis.
i called her son mr. roger reed grimwade by phone and he sent me a copy of williams family tree.
we mantained phone and letter correspondence up untill a few months ago.
i wrote him and asked him if his mother knew anything about william.(she was 98 at the time.)
in his response, he said, that she knew some things about william.(but he did not tell me what they were,"strange")
so, i wrote him again, asking the same question.
finally, he responded and told me that she said,"oh,it's  nothing in particular,just that his family loved him.(so, it goes from several items to just this one.)
in the davis family tree i found out that william has a grandson named ramon winston davis.
i called ramon(and sent letters with no reply) and asked him what he could share with me about william.
and if he had owned,or ever saw a photo of william.
he replied that he knew NOTHING about his grandfather and has never seen a photo either.
william's widow sophia sanford wilcox davis,died in 1947.
issac case davis(william's son)died in 1966.
ramon was 25 when sophia died and was 44 when isaac died.
they all lived in the same house together for years.
not to mention william's daughter alice.
and are we to believe that when ramon was growing up in that house that his grandmother and his uncle among others never told him (stories)anything about his grandfather.

willam davis is buried in south dartmouth(padanaram cemetery)on elm st.in an unmarked grave.
so last summer mr. grimwade and mr. davis(who had not seen one another in 50 years) agreed to meet with me.
i met mr.grimwade at the cemetery and we looked at the plots of the family for awhile.
we then drove over to ramon's house.
when i met ramon,it blew me away,he looked just like the man in the photo(that i believe is william davis).
i am recieving my second copy of the photo next week by the way.
and the photo most definitly corresponds with the description given in the witness statements by the 6 people in flint village.

new bedford daily murcury-
who is this man?
the stranger who was so axious to reach new bedford.

fall river,aug,11;
the terrible looking stranger who overtook ramauld st. amant on eight rod way(now plymouth ave),last thursday afternoon,climed upon his heavily laden wagon and urged him to drive him to new bedford,at the same time thrusting money into his hand,was seen and perticularly noticed by several persons in flint village.
mr. st. laurent,a grocer,says he saw him coming from st. amant's wood yard on jencks street,after the latter,at the instance of his wife,had refused to carry the stranger to new bedford,and was struck by his appearance.
he was ghastly white and seemed much agitated.
mr. laurent was so much afraid of him that a sensation came over him when the man passwd behind him;that he looked mean enough to strike one.(in the photo of the man ,as you will see for yourself later,the man had an onery and serious look.)
the stranger asked him if there was a livery stable in the vicinity and st. laurent directed him to george e. arcand's place on flint st.
the man went to arcand's stable and hurriedly said:can i get a horse right away to go to new bedford?
but mr arcand's foreman,alex cote,refused to comply with his request,saying he did not let horses to strangers.
that was the last seen of the enquirer.
all agree that he was about 30 years of age and about 5 feet 6 high.
he was of dark complexion and his face looked newly shaved.
his clothing was dark.
he had a slight mark over the nose.
he seemed to have plenty of money,and his sole,absorbing desire seemed to be to get away quickly.
st. amant suggested that he go to new bedford by train,but the stranger remarked that he "did not have time".
the man in the photo is also clean shaven(95% percent of men at that time had either a beard,mustache or both.
ramon davis has blue eyes\and so does the man in the picture.
ramon is short/medium height(like the man in the witness statements.)
i have a whole lot more to write,but will take my time.
               thanks jeffery






 

Soup or tobacco stains on a door frame? Unbelievable!!!
Who would spit on a door frame? Or splash soup?
It sounds like some smeared blood stains to me. But I wasn't there to see it. What about any kind of scientific tests?

Jeffery, it is outstanding work you have done to unravel all that.  I can't wait to read more about this.  Thanks for your many posts about Davis.
jc

why did l.borden send bridget for dr.bowen and then alice russell instead of sending for the police after giving the alarm,agnus demille wrote in her book;a dance of death,that she had several interviews with eva kelly(daughter of dr. kelly.)
she says that mrs. churchill,neighbor on the dining room side of the house,was just returning from shopping in "stores like ovens,"and saw bridget rushing by in her shawl,saw l. borden fixed at the screen door,and after hastily putting down her parcels,called out to her.
l. borden made 2 or 3 noncommital remarks about the heat,about being alone,after which-but only after which-she said, "someone has killed father."
mrs. churchill did not officially report this significant delay.
she mentioned it only long after the trial to mrs. kelly.

l. borden did not anticipate mrs. churchill stumbling onto the scene.

i believe from the actions of miss borden that the only reason she did not call for the authorities right away was because she wanted to buy time for the killer to get away.

I thought Lizzie actually invited Mrs. Churchill over.  That's according to Mrs. Churchill, who probably wouldn't have had a reason to lie.  That wouldn't be quite the same as "stumbling on the scene," which would have been hard for Mrs. Churchill to do, given the fact that the crime scene was inside the Borden house.  When Mrs. Churchill asked "What's the matter, Lizzie?" the response could have been "Oh, nothing.  Hot, isn't it?  Seen any good stereoscope shows lately?"  -But Lizzie actually said (according to Mrs. Churchill, as I recall), "Oh, Mrs. Churchill, do come over.  Someone has killed Father."  I would consider that an invitation, even if it wasn't the most amusing one I'd received all season.

that's not what i meant.
mrs.churchill came into the picture,that's what i meant!

This is something I had always wondered about. 
In the CASEBOOK OF FAMILY AND CRIME, Williams, et.al., pg.17:

"Bridget left again to fetch the frail Miss Russell and was observed by Mrs. Churchill, the Borden's neighbor on the north side.  The sight of Bridget running to and fro, gasping, led Mrs. Churchill, who saw Lizzie standing inside the screen door, to use her neighborly prerogative and ask if there was any trouble.

Lizzie's answer was remarkable.  She made two or three comments about the heat, then said: 'Do come over.  Someone has killed father.'

...Mrs. Churchill hurried over...

...Mrs. Churchill took charge:  She crossed the street to the stable and asked for help..."

--There is a footnote at the bottom of this page:
"Mrs. Churchill did not tell the police or the court of Lizzie's inconsequential prelude to the news of her father's death.  Only after the trial did she tell the neighbor, Mrs. Kelly, these details."--Williams.

--As I thought about this, I realized other writers had also brought up this delay that supposedly was attested to by Mrs. Kelly's descendent.
They also have remarked that no one was really getting anything done about summoning real help, until Mrs. Churchill *took over*.  I suppose it depends on how one views the actions of that day, and how much believability to give to the daughter of Mrs. Kelly:  i.e:  Second Generational anechdote (sp).  (I'd look it up but I have an ice pack on my knee that I just bashed).
--I know I'm not telling Edisto anything she doesn't already know...but am filling anybody else in that hadn't heard this before.

Sorry to force another post on y'a'll right after one of mine, but I just received a photo I'd like to put here for Jeffery to examine: Is this the photo you had referred to earlier?

yes kat, this is the photo.
where did you find it at.
and have you heard anything about it.

Jeffery,
I don't mean to sound coy.
I really don't know anything about this photo.
It's been hanging around for a year or so.
It was "collected" and saved, without knowing WHOSE picture it really was.
I think it may have started out as a misrepresentation of another character in the case.
So now I'd like to ask YOU it's provenance...what do you know about it?  It's got to be more than I do.

I love that comment about "frail" Alice Russell.  Alice was born in 1852 (Hoffman), so she was 40 years old when the murders happened.  She came to the Borden house, which must have been a terribly scary place to spend even a few minutes.  She stayed there with the Borden sisters for several days, even going down cellar with Lizzie at night into the very room where the bloody clothing of the victims was reposing.  She was courageous enough to tell the story of Lizzie's dress-burning episode.  Unlike the Borden "girls," Alice always worked for a living and actually made some advances for herself in the working world.  She lived until 1941, which means she was 89 when she died - a very ripe old age in those days.  She may have been tall and skinny, but I'd hardly call her frail!  (This might mean we can't trust everything in the "Casebook" either.)

IMHO, Lizzie acted fairly normally with regard to getting an alarm out when she discovered her father's body.  She probably wasn't sure whether he was dead or just badly hurt.  There was no telephone in the house, so she quickly summmoned the only other person there (as far as we know) and sent her to get a doctor.  Although the doctor wasn't home, Bridget reported that he would be over as soon as he returned home.  Lizzie then sent for somebody responsible and level-headed who was close to her, Alice Russell.  Surely Lizzie realized either Dr. Bowen or Alice was likely to report the matter to the authorities.  In the interim, Lizzie invited Mrs. Churchill over, and when Mrs. Churchill suggested looking for another doctor, Lizzie didn't object.  I can't see that Lizzie made any effort to buy time or keep word from getting out.

It sounds as though Lizzie may have been in shock, or deep in thought.  To make a couple of comments about the heat and then, oh, by the way, father has been killed, do come over.  Thats what I get from Mrs. Churchill's later story.

I agree with you, Edisto, if she was trying to buy time and run around the house and hide incriminating evidence and such, I don't think she would have just stood in the back doorway and then invite Mrs. Churchill over. 

Living to 89 then or now is not overly remarkable. Partly genetic, partly on healthy eating, drinking, exercise, etc.

Did I once read where nuns tend to live longer than the avg woman? Does being unmarried and chaste improve your chances for long life? If so, is this some kind of weird joke where non-procreation helps the individual but is really bad for manking?

If you live healthily to 40, your chances improve for longer life.

But standing in the doorway (being a lookout?) could allow time for "somebody" to escape out the back cellar door?
I'm in favor of her innocence before the fact.

Oh, the CASEBOOK is not really reliable, you're right, Edisto.
For those not familiar with the book:
A percentage of it is based on newspapers and a percentage on Williams' reading of other sources (and attendant *filtering*), and a percentage of her interviews with descendants.  That's the 2nd and 3rd hand stuff we take with a *grain*...but there is also first hand accounts made by people who were mere children at the time of Lizzie's infamy, who may not have exact *recall*.

I've come to wonder about Mrs. Kelly from these type of sources.
Apparently she was in the inner circle of the *klatch*--those who were intimately involved with the aftermath of the crime, but who were not family.  There is the story that not only Mrs. Churchill told her things after the trial, but that Alice Russell did, also!  I have come to picture in my mind a *coffee-klatch* comprised of these 3 where they either gossiped or were virtually de-briefed at these sessions, a year or more after Lizze & Emma moved away from Second Street...

Do you think its possible, Kat?  I mean, after the trial, Lizzie and Emma both snubbed Alice Russell.  The "girls" left the area, and I'm sure inquiring minds wanted to know.  Can't you just picture one of the woman of the neighborhood, including Mrs. Kelly, asking Mrs. Churchill and Alice over to tea or coffee.  I can't imagine that they would hold their tongues forever.  There must have been some talk? 

I was waiting to respond until Edisto had a chance.  I thought her remarks would be very interesting, insightful.

Proceedings, BCC Conference, 1993.
Chapter Heading:  "They Would Like to Have Been Cultured Girls:  An Analysis of the Testimony of Alice Russell During the Prosecution of  Lizzie Borden."
by Robert T. Johnson, Jr., pg 225+

"That Alice knew more than she ever testified to is hinted at in her testimony and elsewhere.  Thus in testifying at the trial about the Saturday afternoon search, she said that 'they made a search, but they didn't search everywhere.' (T. 411)  She went on to say that they unlocked one or two of Lizzie's bureau drawers but did not search anymore there, that she did not think they searched very much in Lizzie's toilet room but instead 'just looked there a little,' and they did not search much in Emma's room, just looked in the cupboard and took the bed apart and 'that is all that I saw.' (T. 412)  According to Agnes de Mille, Alice later told the Borden's neighbor, Mrs. Kelly, that the search was not 'an entirely thorough search,' and 'they didn't search everwhere.' (D.o.D., 50).  Miss de Mille also reports that Alice told Mrs. Kelly 'that there were places she knew about they should have searched and things they might have found.'  (de Mille gives no source for this information)  We do not know if Alice ever told what else she may have known about the murders;  a cousin of Alice's told the author that Alice told the cousin's mother only that ' whatever Lizzie did was right in her own heart.'  "

--The main "talkers"of the town, were Eva Kelly Betz, Mrs. Dwight Jennings Waring, Mrs. Sylvia Knowlton Lewis, Victoria Lincoln, and Florence Brigham, and Mrs. Ellis Gifford.

--There seemed to be SOME kind of conferring going on with Mrs. Kelly.  I can imagine it...maybe it did happen?

Well, having lived in two small towns in my life, I can see how that happens.  One person hears something and next thing you know, everyone in town knows your business whether you wanted them to know or not.  Everybody loves a little gossip and I'm sure any insight anyone could give on the Bordens would be snatched up and spread quickly!!! 

It might seem like a meeting of Survivors of a Great Catastrophe, or a kind of *group therapy* of post traumatic stress disordered people:  Alice & Mrs. Churchill & Mrs. Kelly getting together AFTER trial, to compare notes...
These were common, everyday people like our own neighbors (tho admittedly less sophisticated), caught up in notoriety, infamy, murder, newshounds, gigantic rewards, C O U R T.  How did they ever overcome all this...how did they Learn to Deal With IT?

I especially like the last quote above...(notice, once again, it is from Alice's cousin's memory of what her mother always said...)--BUT, it seems the most believable and truthful sentiment of anything 2nd hand we've heard so far.  It's beautiful in it's loyal simplicity:
"Whatever Lizzie did was right in her own heart."

Alice sounds loyal to the end...

For years, I lived in a town in North Carolina that was comparable in size to Fall River.  Gossip was a big industry there.  I recall a story that once circulated to the effect that a passenger train had stopped near town.  Authorities had taken off a dead body.  The coroner found that the deceased person (a young woman) had died of multiple human bites.  Nobody seemed to know whether anyone had been charged with her murder.  Only a brief story appeared in the local paper, and it didn't mention human bites at all.  Years later, I had a job in the county registry of deeds, which was also the registry of death certificates.  I recalled the old story and looked up the woman's death certificate, which had been prepared and filed locally.  Yes, the body did bear several distinct human bites, according to the certificate, but they had been inflicted AFTER death.  That's probably even more bizarre than the story that had circulated, but in fact the gossip we had heard was off the mark.  (I guess it wasn't against the law to chew on a dead body in Cumberland County, NC.)  I mention this unpleasant and O/T story to illustrate how gossip often departs markedly from the truth.

Thanks, Edisto,
Your stories are always interesting and contain that needed grain of common sense.  It is always helpful for us to remember the role gossip plays in strange cases--and the role of reporters to fan that interest.

Jeffery:
That photograph displayed earlier was received as "WHO".jpg., and apparently it was NOT a "misrepresentation" of another character in the case (Now find out it was thought to be Andrew, young?), but rather a *mis-identified* photo belonging to the files of the FRHS. (?)  Maybe the FRHS can determine of whom this is a photograph.  Good Luck, and let us know if you find out anything...

l. borden was right handed and william davis was left handed!
it will cost ,but,i am in contact with several handwriting experts and will let you know the results.

im still waiting on my cd-rom,at which time i will clarify my earlier post relating to the trial testimony of dr.'s dolan and draper and their testimony regarding "from left to right" in the murder of andrew.




                                 

Conspiracy Theory
"Whodunit?: An Armchair Solution to the Borden Mystery," Ms. Borden Quarterly, vol.2, no.3, Summer/1994:11-12
"Whodunit-Part 2/ An Armchair Solution to the Borden Mystery," Ms. Borden Quarterly, vol.2,no.4/5, Fall Winter, 1995:12
"Whodunit?-Part3/An Armchair Solution to the Borden Mystery," Ms. Borden Quarterly,2,no.6, Winter/1995:4
"Whodunit?Part-4/An Armchair Solution to the Borden Mystery," Ms. Borden Quarterly, vol.3,no.1,January/1996:6
"Whodunit? An Armchair Solution to the Borden Mystery," Ms. Borden Quarterly, vol.3, no.2, April/1996:6
"Whodunit? An Armchair Solution to the Borden Mystery: Some Clairifications and Modifications-Part One,"Ms. Borden Quarterly, vol.4, no.2, April/1997:10-14
"Whodunit? An Armchair Solution to the Borden Mystery: Some Clarifications and Modifications-Conclusion,"Ms. Borden Quarterly, vol.4, no.3,July/1997:10-14
The Theory put forth these issues is that L.Borden, John Morse and William Davis conspired together to murder Andrew and Abby Borden, and William Davis did the actual killing.

An Armchair Solution to the Borden Mystery.
John V. Morse gives a similar reason at the pre-trial:
Q:Did you have some business of Mr. Borden over there (at the farm)?
A:Yes, sir.
Q:I do not care to go in for particulars of it. You had some business relating to Mr. Borden at the farm?
A:Yes, sir.
Q:Something about hiring a man,was it not?
A:I went more particularly over there that day to see about some cattle I bought of him. I thought I would make arrangements to take them.
Now Mr. Morse has giaven two reasons, one supplanting the other, for coming to Fall River, information about a man to hire and buying cattle. He has given one reason for going over to the Borden farm, making arrangements to take the cattle. After asking about other things, Mr. Knowlton returns to Mr. Morse's visit to the farm.
Q:Did you give(Mr.Eddy) and message from Mr. Borden?
A:No, sir.
Q:Or tell him Mr. Borden sent you over there?
A:No,sir. There was one thing I forgot: I got some eggs from there for Mr. Borden;that is all.
In the abovementioned interview with Mr. Morse on August 4, he is quoted to have said, when talking of his visit to the farm:"(Mr.Borden)asked me to bring him over some eggs from his farm, which is there located.
Mr. Eddy is quoted to have said the following when questioned by State Detective Seaver on August 11: "(Mr. Morse) said Mr. Borden sent him over to see how I was and get the eggs," Mr. Eddy said that Mr. Morse stayed just ten to fifteen minutes. During this period it was Mr. Eddy, not Mr. Morse, who raised the question about the cattle:"I said to him, after he got the eggs,'How about the oxen Mr.Davis of South Dartmouth was to have to use?' 'I am going back to see Mr. Borden, and think we will make arrangements to get them back over Saturday morning,'was the reply.
Then Mr. Eddy gives a very interesting piece of information. He says according to Mr. Seaver:"Since hearing of the murder, it has seemed to me a singular coincidence that he should have come that night for the eggs for, had he not, I should have taken the train and gone to Mr. Borden's Thursday morning, arriving at the house about quarter to eleven or eleven." Mr. Eddy also said that he always had eaten dinner with the Bordens, when he went to Fall River, unless he did not come too late for that.
One has to agree with Mr. eddy, that it was really a singular coincidence-unless it was part of a plan, of course-that John Morse should come for the eggs, thus preventing that Mr. Eddy went to the Borden house, for had he done so, he would have ruined the day for the killer.
I think Mr. Morse found out about the eggs, either because it was a fixed routine, as so many other things in the Borden household, that Mr. Eddy should bring eggs every Thursday forenoon and because Ms. Borden told him about this routine, or because he learned that Mr. Eddy was expected the next morning during the converstation he had with Mr. and Mrs. Borden before going to Swansea. He knew he had to go out there and fetch the eggs himself...or the morrow's plan would be overthrown.
Incidentally, what happened to the eggs? I suppose Mr. Morse brought them back in the "rattan basket" in which he carried the pears for Mr. Eddy. But Mr. Morse did not mention the eggs and neither does Bridget.
I find it suspicious that he denied that Mr. Borden had sent him to Mr. Eddy for the eggs at the pre-trial. He apparently wanted to give the impression he went to Swansea to arrange for the cattle transfer and that Mr. Eddy took the opportunity to give some eggs for Mr. Borden. But this does not tally with Mr. Eddy's statement. Well, he was probably truthful insofar that Mr. Borden did not send him. He went on his own initiative.
Another suspicious thing is the cattle transfer. Mr. Morse said at the pre-trial that the reason for going to Swansea that day was to make arrangements to take them. But what arrangements did he make? When Mr. Eddy brought the matter up, Morse just said he would see Mr. Borden about taking the oxen on Saturday morning. (Why was the necessary? He just came from Mr. Borden.)
According to Mr. Eddy, Morse stayed about ten to fifteen minutes. Why should it be neccessary to travel some twenty miles, half under a hot sun, just to informa Mr. Eddy that Saturday morning would be a good time to get those oxen over to Mr. Davis? Why not just call him-I believe there was a telephone at the farm-or send him a "postal?" Or just wait until Saturday? The obvious answer are the eggs.
I think Mr. Morse's statements and actions discussed here cast a strong suspicion that he had a hand in the murders.
John Morse had an airtight alibi. He left the Bordens at about quarter to nine (he looked at his watch). He went to the post office, left by the north door, walked up Bedford street to Third street and then via Pleasant street to Weybosset street. He left the Emery's (the family he was visiting) at about 20 minutes past eleven(he again,looked at his watch). He took a street car down Pleasant street, got off at Second Street, and walked up to the Borden home. The street car conductor could identify him, as could the conductor of a passing street car.
To Be continued......

Continued from the theory.
That both conductors and especially the one in the passing car could remember Mr. Morse indicates that he must have acted in such a way as to attract attention to himself. David Kent and Victoria Lincoln both say that Mr. Morse also had remembered the number of the street car as well as the number on the conductor's cap.
If Ms. Borden and her uncle had an agent committing the murders for them, one would expect them to have as airtight an alibi as possible.
I think Mr. Morse's alibi is too good and therefore casts suspicion on him.
When John Morse left the Borden home Thursday morning Mr. Borden called out to him:"John, come back to dinner with us!" That was overheard by the maid. Mr. Morse said he answered:"Yes." He also said he had told his hosts on Weybosset street this:
Q:Did they ask you to stay to dinner?
A:Yes, sir. I told them I had another engagement.
Q:The engagement you had was that engagement to dine with yoru brother? (Brother-in-law, I assume he meant).
A:Yes.
When Officer Medley questioned Mrs. Emery on August 4, she told him she had asked Mr. Morse to stay to dinner, "but he declined, saying something about going to New Bedford, to which place they understood he was going after leaving the house."
Victoria Lincoln says that Bridget, unlike her friends, got all Sunday and Thursday from just before dinner off. As far as this Thursday is concerned, her statement is born out of her own testimony.
Q:What was Ms.Borden saying?
A:She asked was I going out this afternoon. I told her I did not know now, I might and I might not...
Mr. Borden was to be killed after he returned to dinner, which usually took place around noon. Bridget wuld then be out or possibly in her room.
John Morse, who knew Mr. Borden was not feeling well, must have calculated with both possibilites, either that his host would return around noon as usual, or that he might come home some time earlier, and he must have made his plans accordingly. If the deed was done early, he would go back to the Borden house. Therefore, he had to get some kind of signal, so he would know. Such a signal could have been in form of a call at the door or on the phone.
A confusing statement is made by Officer Medley. He says Mr. Morse told the reporter Edwin Porter of the Daily Globe that the first he knew of the murders was when he was telephoned for. Could it be that Mr. MOrse made a slip of the tongue? Or did he never say this? Mr. Porter does not report on this in his book.
In case there was no signal, Mr. Morse would leave the Emery's at an appropriate time before dinner to catch a train back to New Bedford or South Dartmouth and wait for intelligence there. As he had brought no luggage with him, he would not have to go back to the Borden's. (And he had come by train, so he had no horse team to fetch).
Now, let us assume that Mrs. Emery invited Mr. Morse to stay for dinner before he got his signal. That would create a dilemma for him. If he accepted and then got his signal, he would have to excuse himself to go back to the Borden home. That would seem peculiar to his hosts. If he declined, saying Mr. Borden expected him for dinner and he did not get the signal, he could not go back there and must go directly to New Bedford.
The coming investigation would surely attract suspicion to him.
to be continued......

sorry,i was supposed to put this first.

as many writers of the borden case have pointed out,
the borden sisters uncle john v. morse is a great mystery.
much of what he said and did in connection with the murders is littered with question marks.
i think it is difficult to find a common denominator to all these oddities other than the presumption of his having a hand in the murders.
i will now discuss the links i consider the most important in a chain of circumstantial evidence leading to my belief in his guilt.
since morse had come back east in april,1890,he had been a fairly frequent visitor to the borden home.
in his inquest testimony he says that he came"sometimes once a week,sometimes once in three or four weeks,sometimes in three months,just as it happened,"and that he quite often stayed overnight.
the last time he had been there before august 3 was around july 10 and before that at the end of june.
now he came on wendsday august 3rd,the day before the crimes.
if it was not part of the plan,it must be looked upon as a coincidence
strange enough to raise an eyebrow.
so why did he come?
he gives two different reasons.
in his inquest testimony he offers as an explanation that he had,on mr. borden's request,been looking for a man to take charge of the latter's farm in swansea and that he now knew someone who would fit and offered to send this man over.
but mr. borden wanted to see morse first.
as proof of what he said,mr. morse produced a letter,dated july 25th.
Q:you came partially in responce to that request?
A:yes,sir.
partially or not,no other reason for his coming is hinted at in this interrogation which took place on august 10th.
the fall river herald published an interview with mr. morse on august 4th.
he is quoted as saying the following:"I had come to fall river for one reason.to buy a apir of oxen for butcher davis,with whom i lived.
he had wanted them,and i had agreed to take them on a certain day,but had not done so.andrew told me when i was ready to go after them to write him(mr.eddy)at the farm,which would save (mr.borden)bothering in the matter.
to be continued.....

an armchair solution to the borden murders con't....

if on the other hand he declined the invitation,saying,that ha had things to do in south dartmouth and then got his signal,he he would simply take leave and go back to second street.
if he was questioned about why he had told mrs. emery he was going to new bedford,he could say that he had suddenly remembered mr. borden's invitation.
that would perhaps not be very polite towards mrs. emery,but it would certainly not cause any suspicions.
as it happened mr. knowlton never got wind of this excuse.in any case he did not follow it up.
if he did not get his signal he would proceed from the emery's to new bedford or south dartmouth,and if questioned about it later,he would say that he had simply forgot about mr. borden's invitation.
and as has already been said,he had no luggage and no horse and buggy to pick up.
i find it very suspicious if mr. morse told mrs. emery he was going directly to new bedford,when he had already accepted an invitation from mr. borden.
the rumor of the murders began to spread at about 11:15,when john a. cunningham phoned marshall hilliard at the fall river police station.
when mr. morse arrived at about 11:40 there was a crowd outside in the street.
there were also people in the yard and charles sawyer stood guard at the back door.
mr. morse ignored all this and went through,right into the back yard where he picked up some pears.
can there be any comprehensible explanation at all of this seemingly
strange behavior of mr. morse?
he said himself at the inquest and the pretrial that he had not seen anything to"attract my attention at all".
this seems to be in direct conflict with assistant marshal fleet's report of the conversation he had with with mr. morse on the day of the murders.
according to this mr. morse said the following:"saw a number of person's around the house and was told that mr. and mrs. borden were killed.
first of all,was there a crowd when mr. morse arrived?
dr. dolan,arriving some minutes before or after morse saw  acrowd.
Q:then in consequence of what somebody said to you,you went into the house?
A:in consequence of what i asked,i was driving by and saw...
here he was interrupted by mr. adams but there can be no doubt that he meant:"i was driving by and saw all those people and i stopped and asked what had happened".
i think we may safely assume there were people there,both in the street and in the yard.
and mr. sawyer stood at the door.
well,he willfully chose to ignore it.
but does that show that he had a guilty conscience?
i think it does!
as has already been said,anyone in his right mind would have asked what was going on the very first thing.okay,assuming this,how can his attitude be explained?
well,there can be one of the following explanation:
1)when returning and seeing so many people he was overwhelmed and felt he had to go over once more what he was going to say and how he was going to act before stepping into the line of fire.
he took the necessary time by going into the back yard and eating some pears.
2)it is not unusual that a pyromaniac returns to the scene to admire his own creation,the fire he had caused.
could something similar have happened to morse?
david kent says(K230that mr. morse"picked up several pears and nonchalantly leaned against the corner of the barn".
there he stood eating the pears,while looking at the commotion.
there are signs that mr. morse felt overconfident after the murders.
he was seem talking freely and volubly to the reporters.
one of the first answers he gave at the inquest also shows self confidence.
Q:I hallhave to ask you many questions.
A:I shall answer any questions.
but there are also signs to, the opposite.
one reporter thought his manner of talking as being furtive and unhappy.
and one reporter,maybe the same one,reports of mr. morse's performance at the pretrial "...the tall,awkward,ill-looking old man,who shuffled on to take the witness stand..."
and he"made his replies in a voice so indistinct that he had to be repeatedly admonished to speak louder"and "mr. morse was dreadfully ill at ease during district attorney knowlton's examination.
he wrung his hands and twisted and untwisted his long gray-trousered legs in excessive nervousness.
when he passed into the hands of the counsel for the defence,
however,he seemed to take heart,stood straightly,spoke up and faced the people."
if morse showed overconfidence right after the murders through the inquest,can there be any explanation why he seemingly had lost his nerve,when testifying at the pretrial?
yes,there can.
in the time between the inquest and the pretrial things had not gone so well for the conspirators,ending with the arrest of miss borden and putting her on trial(pretrial).

to be continued......

an armchair solution to the borden murders continued....

3)there is however one more possibility,which i think is the real one.
one could ask oneself:what was the only tangible result from his picking up pears in the backyard?
the answer is that he thereby placed himself in the only area,from where he could see the cellar door and later testify that it was open.
if the cellar door was found open it would suggest that the assassin could have entered by it.
then it would be impossible to to say exactly when he had gotten into the house.
for all anyone could tell he could have entered during the night before(wendsday).
it is interesting to note that,according to asst. marshal fleet,mr.morse asked him if he suspected that the murderer could have been concealed in the house during the night.
to me it was rather a shock when i read this because because in my theory miss borden and her uncle had done just that.
taking advantage of the fact that they had the whole western part of the house to themselves,they had brought william in during the night before, through the front door.
and now this question!
could the man be really innocent after all?
for he could not have had the nerve and arrogance to plant a seed that could eventually lead the police onto the right track,a track leading to himself and miss borden.or could he?
i had thought the plan was to create the impression that the murderer had sneaked into the house and killed both victims,while miss borden was out in the barn.
in reality,though,mrs. borden was to be killed at the first opportunity after mr. borden had gone out and with bridget washing the windows.
the murder of mr. borden would take place after he had come home for dinner.
if he had not been early that could have meant a time difference as much as three hours.
and morse,having experience from the "meat business" must not he have realised that such a time difference would show in a medical examination?
if he did,it would be essential for him to suggest a possibility that the killer had entered the house earlier.
and thats where the cellar door comes into the picture.
and as has been said already,if it was found open,there would be no telling when the assassin had entered the house.
so therefore the plan was that the cellar door should be found open!
but how was that to be accomplished?
well,there were several possibilities.
one was that miss borden was to leave for the barn through the cellar door but she bungled that by leaving through the kitchen entry.
the stress of the moment taking its toll.
and there are other possibilities as well.
now,morse returning from the emery's,is axious to see for himself that the plan had been adhered to.
so he walks directly into the back yard.
to his utter dismay he finds the cellar door closed!
now,what is to be done?
he sees no immediate solution so he eats a couple of pears,while thinking.
finally,he gives it up and goes to the back door and identifies himself.
it should be noted that in spite of everything he tried to repair the damage by telling mr. holmes and and maybe also to mr. fleet that the cellar door had been open,when he was in the back yard.
and his question to mr. fleet is in line with all this.

to be continued....

victoria lincoln has made a very fine and thorough analisis of this part of miss borden's testimony,she say's" her testimony,so calm and well controlled at the start,fell abruptly apart into panic and chaos at the bare mention of uncle john."
as she has no suspicion of a conspiracy between miss borden and morse,ms. lincoln is genuinely surprised at what she sees as an overeaction from miss. borden.
why on earth should she panic?
for these questions did not directly concern the murders-only uncle john morse.
miss. borden and mr. morse were both behind the murders.
the evidence-though circumstantial-shows this beyond a reasonable doubt.
but,neither of them killed in person.
therefore,they must have had a confederate.(william a. davis"butcher.")

to be continued.....

an armchair solution to the borden murders continued....

the selection of the murder day

two criteria had to be met:
1)mr. borden must go about his  banking business
2)bridget must be out of the way

the only day that met these criteria was thursday.
on thursdays bridget had the day off as soon as she had prepared for dinner which was served at noon.
the question is if the fact that bridget washed the windows was a condition undr the second criteria.
could the conspirators have known beforehand that bridget would wash the windows on this particular thursday?
bridget's own testimony given at the pretrial seems to con tradict that.
Q:did you have any usual time to wash the windows?
A:no,sir.
Q:how often did you used to wash them?
A:sometimes once a month and probably twice a month.

but in her inquest testimony,her neighbor,mrs. churchill says differently.
do you remember how long before that time she had been out washing the windows,whether that same week or the week before?
A:i don't think she washed windows but once a week,and thursday was generally the day.
Q:it was the habit to wash the windows once a week?
A:she generally did.

it is to be believed that the conspirators knew well in advance that bridget was to wash the windows on this thursday and that that fact was part of their plan.

the murder of mrs. borden:
the question is,how could l. borden be sure that abby would not make the guest room before her father left for his morning tour,and if she did,how could l. borden be sure that she would go back there?
if she didn't the murder could not take place.

another question.
in her inquest testimony,miss borden said that,when she met abby,after coming downstairs,abby told her she had already made the bed.
she also told mr. fleet that she had actually seen abby in the guest room making the bed as she was going downstairs.
she never repeated this statement.
if it was not true,why did she lie about it?
the reason the conspirators knew that abby would not make the guest room too early was a simple one.
the guest room was the girls' responsibility,not mrs. borden's.

at the inquest,emma said:
A:i always took charge of the parlor,my sister and i,we always took charge of the guest chamber and our own rooms.
Q:that is,you and your sister did that?
A:yes,sir.
Q:not your seperate duty,but yours and hers?
A:i did most of it,sometimes she assisted.
Q:did your mother never have charge of the guest chamber?
A:i did not know that she ever did.when i was home i don't think she ever did.
Q:you don't know how it happened that she was having the work of the guest chamber on this morning that she died?
A:no,sir.

and bridget said at the pretrial:
Q:you had nothing to do with the work in the spare room?
a:no,sir.
Q:do you know who did do the work in the spare room?
i did not know as mrs. borden ever done it before,excepting her own friends were there.
Q:whether she did that morning,you don't know?
A:no,sir.

it then follows that abby would not go to do work in the guest room.
that left the timing entirely to l. borden.
but what about the question that abby allegedly told her that she had made the bed in the guest room,when they met downstairs?
why would l. borden lie about it?
there is an answer.
if they had met downstairs and then abby had gone to the guest room to do the work,miss borden might have feared that the police would think that she had deliberately sent her stepmother to her death.
but if miss borden was faced with a fait accompli when coming downstairs,or in other words,if abby told her that she had already made the bed,the it would be a different matter.

mr.jennings sent the pinkerton detective o.m. hanscomb to Iowa to check up on john morse.
in connection with this visit,an Iowa newspaper published john v. morse as known by his far western neighbors.
according to the paper,mr. morse's half sister mrs.davidson claimed that john morse was a man who would never forgive when crossed!

i have plenty more to add at a later date.....
thanks jeffery

Wow, fascinating reading, Jeffery.  Thank you. 

the cellar door:
the cellar door plays an important part in the drama.
the plan was that it should be found unlocked.
one possibilty to achieve this would have been for miss borden to leave for the barn through the cellar door.
that may have seemed simple enough but it didn't happen that way.
officer f.l.edson reports from his visit to the borden home on august 5th at about 7:15 a.m.that bridget and morse were in the kitchen,l. borden came in.
she said "maggie,are you sure the back cellar door was fastened?"
bridget said,"yes,marm."
morse or miss borden unlocked the cellar door either the night before or the morning of the crime.
but why was it later found locked?
because bridget,accidentally discovered that the door was unfastened and she then fastened it.
why didn't she say so,why did she keep quite about it?
to answer this question you have to put yourself in her shoes.
she knew that the last person to use the cellar door was probably herself when she hung the washed clothes out.
that happened on tuesday the 2nd.
when she now saw that the cellar door was unlocked she must have had a shock.
had she forgotten to lock it?
what a luck mr. borden hadn't discovered that!
then she was in for a far greater shock.
her employers had been murdered and there was considerable fuss over how the assassin had gotten into the house.
was she responsible?
had her negligence enabled the killer to get in?
what if the police would think that she had deliberately helped the murderer to get in,that she was in fact an accomplice?
she decided to keep her mouth shut.
if questioned she would maintain that she had locked the cellar door on tuesday.
then mr. morse came and said that he had seen the cellar dooor open when he returned from the emery's.
bridget must have realised that she was making things worse for miss borden by not admitting that the cellar door had in fact been unlocked.
what would she have done if miss borden had been covicted?
it seem as if bridget tried to make amends at the pretrial.
she then repeatedly declared that she had not noticed if the cellar door had been unbolted or not.
compare this with her firm assertion in the presence of officer edson that the cellar door was fastened.

 

It is a fantastic speculation, and armchair detecting.
It is also wrong (I don't believe it), but I don't have all that time for details.

First and foremost, no one around at the time claimed such a thing (unlike the letter sent to the DA and Police Marshall about Borden's illegitimate son). You also have to weigh the evidence against the rumors. AR Brown used the testimony of people who were around at the time (however some may question it).

Why was Lizzie present? Her absence could have given her a perfect alibi (like Emma or Uncle John). And let the maid explain it.

I think there was some property to be transferred. Uncle John happened to meet Lizzie and Emma, and said something. Lizzie cut short her vacation (Emma stayed on her rare trip) to come back.

Who could have opened the door to let Wm A Davis in? The same scenario would also apply to Wm S Borden.

I don't believe LAB was a conspirator before the fact, or Emma. But they would cover it up when it came to uncovering a family scandal.

If anyone believes this theory, they can really invest time and money into publishing a book, if they think it will sell to the general public (the ultimate jury in these things; not always right). Or is the belief in LAB's guilt the final solution?

Lizzie would have the perfect alibi if she showed up at a drugstore(s) between 9:30AM and 11AM that day and tried to buy cyanide w/o a prescription. Make a fuss so people there will remember.

Because she stayed at home, and shielded Bridget and the workers, I think she had no part in these accidental murders.

Jeffery,
Is the assasin to kill both Bordens with premeditation?

What is the motive to kill Abby?

What is the pay-off?

kat,
may i request your e-mail address,there are several things that i need to talk to you about.
                            thanks
                                  jeffery

kat,
to answer your last post;question 1-
Q:"is the assassin to kill both bordens with premeditation"?
a:"yes"!

question 2-
Q:"what is the motive to kill abby"!
A:"the farm ran by mr. eddy"!

question 3-
Q:"what is the pay-off"?
A:"money"!

Thanks for returning and answering.

Well, how many people, then are IN on this?  And how is the secret kept all these years?

[I've been wondering lately why the girls didn't just give up the 1/3 widows portion, rather than have to kill Abby.
There was still a lot of money left.
And look at what they ended up paying out in legal fees!  Surely they would have taken That into consideration?

Just thinking aloud--this last part.  Need not reply to that..].

victoria lincoln stated that her grandfather(leotine lincoln}sat on some of the same banking boards as andrew.
and it had got out through a leak in banking circles that a few weeks before the murders that andrew was planning to sell the farm to morse but for some reason he had changed his mind and decided to put the farm in abby's name.

those involved in premeditating the murders were;
l. borden,j. morse and w. davis.

you ask how could they remain silent all those years?
first-they never expected miss borden to become a suspect!

and the reason i interviewed the family of william davis is because i firmly believe that william had told his wife sophia when he was dying of cancer in 1900 that he had killed the bordens.
(even though i never realistically expected any of them to just come right out with it even if they knew.)
when i told william's grandson that i believed that his grandfather was involved in the borden murders,his response was "maybe, couldbe"!
his response shocked me.

i would like to post a question here;
why is it that after all these years with the mountain of  descrepencies and questionable actions of john morse given to us.
how can anyone not say that he had a had in these murders.

Uncle John obviously showed up for a meeting with Andy. He was to arrange something for somebody; no testimony for this. He had no suitcase because he didn't expect to spend the night IMO.

He was on his way home when recalled by Lizzie's msg (carried by Dr Bowen). His trip back suggests he first visited H Harrington's stable before walking to the Borden's house.  His first recorded talk was "How in God's Name did this happen?". This suggest it was as much a surprise as it was to everyone. Even Wm S Borden, since I believe there was no planned murder. Wm "flew off the handle" and committed the murders. The rest covered this up to keep the family scandal secret. And it did, until AR Brown's story was published; he did say that H Hawthorne had told many about this since the 1940s(?). This is the optimal solution, since it explains what would otherwise be a mystery.

AR Brown is the first and only to explain Knowlton's question "How many children has your father?" What else is the purpose of this question?
Like Knowlton's saying "if I knew what was discussed the night before I would be able to solve the crime". He suspected, but had no evidence. Once everyone clammed up, the crime could not be solved.

I hope you have benefitted from my comments over the last years.

i had the privilidge afew years back to exchange several phone calls with both arnold brown and lewis peterson.
mr. peterson told me that he was very upset with mr.brown, because, mr. brown had changed a large portion of the information that mr. peterson had given to mr. brown.

i also will restate my firm belief that it was william a. davis who ellen eagen saw  in the borden yard that day and NOT william s. borden.

lets take up the issue of steep brook for a second;
steep brook is located in north fall river.
it is where the body of william borden was found hanging from a tree.
it is where the manchester murder took place.
it is where joseph lemay(at the trial)said that he met a man sitting on a rock with a hatchet in his hand.(nearly 2 weeks after the crime).

and last, it is where the man(william a. davis)wanted to be taken by the frenchman from flint village on the day of the murders.
and like i stated in an earlier post, there were many davis's living in steep brook in 1892.
i believe that when davis could not convince the frenchman to take him to the south part of new bedford,that he asked to be taken to steep brook.
because davis had relatives living there of whom he could ask to take him thru the woods on wilson rd., proceeding thru westport and on to his home located on dartmouth st.in south dartmouth in padanaram village.
his house is located at 771 dartmouth st.
this is where the south rd of new bedford meets the north rd of south dartmouth.
this home used to be called the point house,because the trolly cars used to turnaround and head back toward downtown new bedford in front of the house.

Keller, Jon. N. "The Mysterious William S. Borden." Lizzie Borden Quarterly, Vol. II, No. 4/5 (Fall/Winter 1995): 15-18.  [A copy of the Taunton State records]:  LABVM/L

"....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."

--If William Borden was 20 when he married, 8 weeks before his confinement, then at the time of the Borden murders he would have been born c. 1855, and be 37 in 1892.  Kind of a late homicidal bloomer, for one who was always considered mentally ill?
---------------------
From where do we know Borden died at Steep Brook, please, and what would be the significance of these events all happening there?
I think it's interesting that Davis may have told his wife.  This makes sense...more so than everyone keeping a secret...

the reference to the death of william borden is found in arnold browns book.
bertha manchester was killed by manuel corriero.
the only thing i question is the testimony of joseph lemay.
while it is true that the defence produced a letter during the trial stating that a man named samuel robinsky had an encounter with a suspicious man.
many have thought that the letter was made up by the defence to cast doubt.
but in the case of lemay,he actually showed up and began to testify at the trial before his testimony was objected to by the prosecution and then the objection was sustained by the court.
but why would there be someone still roaming around with blood spots on their clothing in the steep brook area some 11 days after the borden murders,carrying a hatchet exclaiming;"poor mrs. borden"!

Witness Statements
A. Perron, notes
Pg. 44+

"August 18, 1892. 8.30 o’clock P. M. Joseph Lemay of North Steep Brook reports that about 5.30 o’clock this afternoon, while in the woods about a mile form his house, he heard somebody say “too bad about Mrs. Borden.” Looking around to his left, he saw a man sitting down on a stone. Mr. Lemay asked him if he was tried. The man made no reply, but took up a small hatchet and commenced to grind his teeth. Mr. Lemay says that “he had some spots of blood on what was once a white shirt, three drops.” His coat sleeves were pulled up, so that the wrist bands of his shirt could be seen, and there was some blood on both of them. They looked at each other for some minutes, when the man got up, jumped a wall, and went in a northerly direction.
Description. 30 or 35 years of age, height about five feet three inches, 140 pounds weight, brown mustache, quite good size, face looked as though be bad not been shaved in two or three weeks. Dressed in black coat, dark pants, laced shoes, black derby hat, torn on top. Looked as though he had been having hard times recently, as he was a hard looking customer. Investigated by A. Perron, August 17, 1892, and finds it as reported as above."
....................
I remember that Robinsky letter as we discovered that every source looked at had a different version.  The police believed , in their inner circle...including Boston Police, that the letter was a hoax, and sent to Emma.  Probably a lot of letters were sent to the girls, as there was a sizeable reward offered, correct?

For a minute there I thought you would determine there were homicidal Davis' running around Steep Brook through the years.  Not funny, I realize, but I couldn't figure out what connection Steep Brook had.

Does this Lemay character he recollects match the description you are looking for?

I suppose Brown got his extra info from the papers.  He does cite
The Fall River Herald -News, The New Bedford Standard-Times, The Boston Globe.

no,the man that lemay had seen was not the same one i am reffering to.

the only refference i made was davis having relatives in steep brook  of whom davis had give him a ride to south dartmouth.
(which they may not have.)

this man that lemay saw does not fit the description of either william davis or william borden.

could you post the description of william borden(suicide articles)located in the back of browns book?

Anyone with the Brown book may...
Personally I don't really feel like it right now, to be honest.
Nothing to do with Brown or You... 

Rochester, Monroe, NY
Democrat & Chronicle
Monday, August 8, 1892

Article dated:
Fall River, Aug. 7
... "The police are investigating a clue in the direction of New Bedford which may yield something tangible. A Frenchman whose name the police will not divulge says that on Thursday between 12:30 and 1 o'clock, he was driving toward Westport and was accosted on the outskirts of the city by a well dressed man, whose description he gave, who wanted a ride to Westport.
  The man gave the Frenchman $1 to take him there, but the fellow seemed so anxious to get away unobserved and acted so queerly that the Frenchman returned the money and refused to carry him. The description of this man tallies perfectly with the description of a stranger who called on Mr. BORDEN last Monday. The police claim to have discovered that this man belongs to a gang of horse traders, and that MORSE has had some connection with the band. That may or may not have some bearing on the case.
  A Westport clerk says he sold a member of the horse traders' band a hatchet on Wednesday, and his description again tallies with that of the mysterious strangers who visited Mr. BORDEN on Monday and who was so anxious to get out of town on Thursday, just after the murder."

Is this your guy?  Did this account get anything wrong?

--Rochester News items courtesy of Harry Widdows.

Is this the description you were looking for Jeffery?

From the Fall River Daily Globe article, April 17, 1901:

     When Medical Examiner buck had finished his customary examination Inspector Shea compiled a description of the dead man and his clothing, and by the means of which it is hoped to identify him.  The inspector believes the man to be about 50 years of age and in life measured about 5 feet, 9 inches in height.  He had a light complexion, with brown hair and moustache slightly mixed with gray, and blue eyes.  His clothing was almost new, and had probably not been worn but a few times.  A black overcoat covered a brown suit with a small check and he wore a pair of congress shoes.  The discarded hat was a brown soft one.

in response to kat's last post.
"did this account get anything wrong"?

yes, in that it differs on a few points with the witness statements,
pages 40-42,taken by j.m.heap.

1-"he was driving toward westport".
the witness statements say that the frenchman was driving toward his home on jenks st. in fall river.

2-"he picked up a man who wanted to a ride to westport".
the w.s. say that he wanted to be taken to the south part of new bedford.

3-"the man gave him $1 to take him there".
the w.s. say that he gave ramauld st. amant(the french-canadian)$4.

4-"the description of this man tallies perfectly with the description of a stranger who called on mr. borden last monday".
the description given of the man on monday in no way resembles the man picked up by the frenchman according to the witness statements.

5-"the police CLAIM to have discovered that this man belongs to a gang of horse traders."
a paper reported that the police found the leader of the gang who fit the description of the man (bearsley cooper)and that he provided a satifactory alibi.
he said he was in new bedford selling a horse to a prominent resident.

6-"a westport clerk says he sold a member of the horse traders a hatchet on wendsday and his description again tallies with that of the mysterious strangers who visited mr. borden on monday and who was so axious to get out of town on thursday,just after the murder"
again i reiterate point 4.

So WHY didn't Lewis Peterson document his differences? It sounds like sour grapes to me. It always easier to criticize someone's work than to write a better book. Don't you all agree?

Not that AR Brown's book mentions the many contributors who helped him. (Just like upper management to use many to do the work then profit from this?) Did ANY of these ever criticize his work? I think they all supplied parts of the facts (or statements) that went into it. Remember, this forum is a very tiny self-selected group. I do believe that AR Brown's book IS the best book of all that I read on this case (but that is not the fictional works).

This assumes that any description of the strange, unknown person is 1000% correct! Don't you all know that then or now, eyewitness identification is VERY unreliable. (Except maybe when the person was known to the witness). Few people are trained observers.

F Lee Bailey says "whenever you read about a person convicted solely on eyewitness testimony the person is probably innocent". Read "Defense Never Rests" for some good examples, or your newspapers.

Thanks for taking the time with that, Jeffery.
So that newspaper was pretty off-base.
Makes one wonder what is believable anymore.  I did remember the $4 tho, and the wife said "No way, give him back his money!"

I also remember Bearsley Cooper as he and horsetraders are on my Suspect List.  Do these horsetraders enter into the story as you know it?  Did they have any connection to Davis or Morse?
Or was the suspicion of them more like prejudice?

Was the description Susan transcribed for you the one you wanted?  If not, need a page #, please.

Since Lizzie said "it wasn't Bridget or anyone who worked for Father" it must mean she saw who the visitor was. Saying this seems improbable IF she was part of a conspiracy; she would want suspicion placed elsewhere, away from herself.

It also seems improbable for her to clam up if she wasn't hiding some family secret; why do it for a stranger? AR Brown's solution of an illegitimate son meets both objections. Someone she knew, but also she would protect.

She WAS outside at the time of Andy's killing (Hyram Lubinsky), so she really didn't see anything that she MUST report; only circumstantial evidence (at least that's what Uncle John must have said).

Some may not accept this, but nothing else can explain it.

yes,i do believe that one of these horse traders was the getaway driver for davis.

i believe the driver was situated outside the borden house a few minutes before andrew came home(according to mark chase.)

and that william was in the parlor waiting for andrew to come home.

andrew came home usually around 11:00 at which time he would recieve business calls in the sitting room before dinner.

they met in the sitting room,started talking and then the first blow came from the front.

morse asked asst. marshall john fleet, if he thought the killer had slept in the house the night before.
fleet said "no"!

i believe that the pounding on the fence the night before was davis letting morse and miss borden know that he was there.
and they let him into the house.

Those Chagnon ladies said that pounding lasted 5 minutes, but I never believed that.  I figured they were inexperienced witnesses and probably had no Idea how Long 5 minutes of pounding really is!

But their dog didn't react.

Did he sleep in the barn?
Did he come for prior conferences those times "the barn was broken into"?  Or is that a red-herring?

I wonder which horse dealer was the get-away-driver...this name may never be known?

That horse-trading stuff sounded suspicious to me...& those guys that hung around Westport.

Anyway, the get-away driver obviously fails in his job as look-out if he left and Davis had to plead with French strangers to get him out of town.  That might make him really conspicuous.
Was Davis affected by his tumor to act this way, or did that come later?  (Sort of like not being responsible for his actions because his mind was unbalanced by the illness...)

the chagnons testified that the pounding was on and off for five minutes.
not cosistently.
and that it sounded like pounding on wood and that it came from the direction of the borden fence.
i agee with you kat,i dont believe the pounding went on for 5 minutes.
(just 2 or 3 perhaps.)

the new bedford standard times wrote that morse recieved visitors from south dartmouth,messrs. davis and howe.
the davis reffered to in the article i believe was issac and not william.
william was never heard from or reportedly seen or conversed with by  investigaters or reporters  during  the investigation of morse.
why not? they were best friends!
naturally, one would think they would want to speak to him about morse!
when the reporter went to the davis home to interview the family about morse,where was william?
they only talked to his father isaac!

if you look under the subject of the will in the arnold brown book.
the paper article says that detectives frank hathaway and john parker were employed by the government(marshall hilliard and mr. knowlton.)
to interview the occupants of the davis cottage about morse.
an out of town source said that the detectives had retrieved considerable information for the government.
but where is that information......
it was never presented at the trial.
its not in the witness statements.
and if its not in the upcoming hilliard papers,then,where is it?
where could it have drifted off to?
i talked to a detective from the new bedford police dept. who said that he was certain that he had photos of both parker and hathaway on a disk.
but when i called him back,he said that he did not have them!
but,ill keep on looking into info on these two!
 

Did She Or Didn't She?  is the title of this over-sized soft-back book that reproduces the newspaper articles from the Evening Standard, beginning Aug.4th, 1892.

From Aug,5th, 1892 :4 , FRIDAY (remember the press was chaotic at this time):

"THE SUSPECTED MAN
__________________
John V. Morse, a Well-to-do Western Land Owner
__________________
He Lived in the Family of Isaac C. Davis of South Dartmouth
__________________
Spoken of as a Man of Excellent Character
__________________

......John V. Morse (who was located at South Dartmouth), a relative of the murdered man, had been living for a year with Isaac C. Davis, and that he had gone to Fall River the day before the tragedy.

Calling upon Mr. Davis, who lives on Potter's Hill, just before entering the village of South Dartmouth, much was learned concerning Morse, who in fact has been a member of the Davis family for about a year.  Mr. Davis, who is a butcher, is blind, and he has unbounded faith in him.  For that matter Morse has been his adviser in affairs of business, and with his son William a close relationship has existed for some time.

Mr. Davis greeted the STANDARD man kindly and furnished much material that has hitherto been unknown to the public.

John Vinecum (sic) Morse, he states, was born in Fall River, and about 30 years ago came to South Dartmouth looking for work.  He was given a job by Mr. Davis, and proving to be a steady and industrious young fellow the family soon learned to think a great deal of him..  After working for Mr. Davis a few years he packed up his clothes and went West.  At first he settled in Illinois, buying and selling land.  In this he was very successful and is supposed to have accumulated wealth.  Finally he settled in Hastings, Mill County, Iowa.  About two years ago he came East with a large number of horses of his own raising, and after disposing of many of these animals at Warren, R.I., where he has an uncle, he made his appearance at Padanaram.  There he disposed of the remainder of the horses, and about a year ago took up his residence at the house of Mr. Davis.  As before stated, Mr. Davis is blind and Morse has been his adviser.  His judgement in matters of business was considered good, and in nearly every particular his advice was asked.

Upon being questioned, Mr. Davis said that for several weeks he had talked of purchasing a pair of cattle of Mr. Borden, and on Thursday (sic?), after shaving Mr. Davis, he (Morse) started on foot to take the electric car for the city, intending to take the train for Fall River.

A daughter of Mr. Davis, who was present during this conversation, stated that Morse wore a light gray suit and that it was his intention of returning home last night. (Thursday?)

Continuing, Mr. Davis said Morse was to have purchased additional cattle while away, and that he also expected to run over to Warren to see his uncle.  His purchases were to be brought home with him.

After rehearsing the above facts the scribe was questioned as to the cause for such an earnest inquiry into the particulars of Morse's career.

'Has he been hurt?'  'Has he met with an accident?'  were questions asked.  They had read the particulars of the Borden tragedy as printed in the third edition of the STANDARD, but never for a moment dreamed that their friend was suspected of the crime.

When told of the true situation of affairs each and every member of that household were completely surprised.  The first to recover from this startling intelligence was one of the daughters.  'It's nonsense,' said she, 'John Morse thought too much of his brother-in-law to do such a thing as that.'

'You are right,' replied the aged father,  'He's too upright a man to harbor even such a thought.  Why, sir, he thought as much of Mr. Borden as the day he married his sister who has since died, and he frequently spoke of his brother-in-law and nieces in endearing terms.  No sir, John V. Morse never committed that crime.  It's an awful mistake.  Why, I would have trusted him with everthing in this world, and would as soon think of my own son doing the deed.'

It was in a like matter that the daughters spoke of Morse.  Davis, and in fact everyone present, gave him an excellent name, and felt confident that he would be able to clear himself from the terrible suspicion which at present is hanging over him.    If it should prove that John V. Morse is in any way connected with this murder it will be as great a surprise to the members of the Davis family as was the finding of the murdered man and woman yesterday.

Morse is said to have cousins residing in this city [New Bedford?-kk], and he seems to be very little known by the townspeople  residing in Padanaram.  To them he has been looked upon as a mystery, as they term it, simply because they have known nothing about him.

Morse, who is supposed to have accumulated wealth, had  repeatedly talked of retiring from active business, as being a single man he had enough to live on the rest of his days.

Morse is a good looking man over 6 feet tall and will weigh about 200 pounds."

Evening Standard
Monday, August 8, 1892  Page 2
"Friends From South Dartmouth.

.. .It was expected that morbid curiosity would fill Oak Grove Cemetery with crowds of pedestrians yesterday, but for some reason or other there were fewer visitors than usual.  A friend of the Borden family called during the day, and two of John Morse's acquaintances from South Dartmouth, Messrs. Davis and Howe, paid him a visit."

Im trying to find mention of "Hathaway", other than in Brown.  He's supposedly in the Globe, but I don't have access to that paper.  I checked the Evening Standard, the Witness Statements, The Rochester N.Y. papers (courtesy H.W.)...no "Hathaway".  Then I figured since Porter worked for the Globe I'd check Porter's Fall River Tragedy.  There was a brief mention.  Would like to see the Globe article, tho...

Porter
Pg. 38 on disc
"Notwithstanding the fact that Mr. Morse had clearly established an alibi there were those who insisted that he knew more of the murder than he had made public. Proceeding on this theory the officers took up the task of investigating Mr. Morse. Officer Medley was given the work, and in company with Inspector Hathaway of the New Bedford police, he discovered that Mr. Morse had lived, as before stated, in Dartmouth."

Brown
pg. 117
..."Also revealed in the second article [of Aug.18-kk] are the names of inspectors John Parker and Frank Hathaway who, it is said, were engaged for the purpose of digging into the details of Morse's frequent visits to Fall River and of Emma's most unusual trip to Dartmouth (a town near the Davis cottage where Morse lived) and Lizzie's rumored trip to the same area. There was no danger in releasing information about these travels, for it would become public knowledge the next week anyway. What is strange is that Parker and Hathaway, who were said to have worked on the case for more than two weeks and had 'been able to give the government considerable valuable information,' were never called to testify. Their names are never mentioned again. In fact, there is no proof they ever existed."
???





(Message last edited Oct-26th-02  2:11 AM.)

I remember ? a "Henry Hathaway" mentioned in AR Brown's book, but doesn't this refer to a Fall River resident?
[If only in AR Brown (?) does this mean he did better research?]

(Message last edited Oct-26th-02  4:41 PM.)

Well it means he could pick & choose his souces and what part of the sources he wanted.
As I said, I have no access to the FR Globe.  I wouldn't depend on a transcription of an article in his book unless I could compare to the original.  That applies to most transcriptions published.

This Investigator Hathaway was mentioned in Porter, so Brown is not the *only* place.

(Message last edited Oct-27th-02  3:50 AM.)

Harry led me to another reference to the Inspectors:

New Bedford Evening StandardMonday, August 22, 1892  Page 1:

"...Visiting New Bedford Druggists.

A short time previous to the Borden murder, Lizzie Borden spent several days in this city, as has been told.  It was decided to make an investigation, to see if she sought to buy prussic acid here.  Inspectors Hathaway and Parker with City Marshal Hilliard of Fall River have visited all the drug stores in the city, and the registering of sales of poison at the various stores has been carefully examined.  No prussic acid sales on the days investigated were found, although one druggist had a recollection that it was called for and refused.  No tangible evidence resulted."

Seems as if it might have been a good idea for the druggists in Massachusetts to keep a record of all the people who TRIED to buy poison, not just those who succeeded!

Get out your copy of the Bertha Manchester Slaying, from the Evening Standard because on page 12 (printed out) is mentioned a sighting of a "Will Davis" very early on the morning of the murder.  All the descriptions in this thread are confusing to me...
(I'm only on page 12--I helped with this series of articles  by Harry, but I'm re-reading it now).

kat,
i have seen that article about a "will davis" several times.
if you post the article here,i will see what i can come up with.
seeing that i live in fall river,it is an avantage i must say.

sorry i have been away for so long....
just getting started on the book(chasing clues)etc...

last week i had the privilidge of speaking with mr. edward waring(grandson of andrew jennings.)
i was trying to locate that little thin red notebook of jenning's.(he has it.)unfortunately,he would not send me copies of the contents.

but,he did say that he was in the process of writing a book on the borden case.
but, doubts he will ever finish it.
i also talked to professor starr's with an offer to attempt to exume the bordens for forensic tests.
nothing fruitful yet.
                                         howard

Special Dispatch
Fall River, June 1
TRIED TO AVOID RECOGNITION.

Strange Action of a Man on the Road to
Fall River.

Superintendent of Construction Slade, of the Rotch mill in this city, reported today to Captain Allen of the police that about 6:15 o'clock yesterday morning he was coming to this city and when on the new road west of Smith Mills village and near the ledge he passed a man going the other way.  This man, Mr. Slade says, is named Will Davis, and he was brought up on the Somerset poor farm.  He knows him well, and what surprised him was that when Davis approached he hung his head, did not once look up, and seemed desirous to avoid recognition.  Mr. Slade has not previously seen the man for two years.  He describes Davis as 30 years old, five feet eight inches tall, dark moustache and quite a good build.  The police here have telephoned the account received from Mr. Slade to the Fall River authorities.
__________
Monday, June 5, 1893  Page 2

"IN CUSTODY.

Evidence Strong Against Jose
Correiro"
etc.

"...One More Capture.

William Smith, one of the trio of lunatics who have been at large, spent Sunday in the Central police station, Fall River." 
etc.....
"....There remain wandering around one Davis, who escaped from Taunton a few days ago, and an insane man named Holland, who was wanted at the Bridgewater asylum. "
????

Well, it's nice to see you back!

This Manchester series of Articles, collected by Harry, also has a page where Mr. Manchester says his first wife was a daughter of Benjamin Davis.

You did warn us of lots of Davis' around those parts!

in june of 1893,william a. davis was 41.
the borden murders occured two days before his 41st birthday.

yesterday afternoon,i finally found what i was looking for in steep brook pertaining to william davis and his remark to romauld st. amant on august 4th.
sorry,that's all i can say for now.
                                     jeffery

Okey-Dokey, Thanks!

it looks as if no tests will ever be done on the skulls of the victims.

when i talked with professor starrs,i asked him why he was unable to exume the skulls of andrew and abby.

and he said it was because he had recieved numerous letters in protest from borden family members, and he lacked finances at the time.
there were other reason's,but,i won't mention them.....

The most obvious reason, aside from justification, is that it would prove NOTHING in a court of law. What is the "chain of evidence" for that hatchet? Could it just be another replica?

Jeffery, did you ever verify that questionable photo as to whether it WAS Wm. Davis or not?
Why would he have his portrait taken?
Anyway his upper shoulder area (the man in the picture) seems a bit mishapen.
And I would like to know if the sources confused the son's cancer with the father's, Isaac?  Or, did both have a cancer?

no,i have not been able to identify the photo as william davis!

but,i am 100% convinced that it is him!

william died of a brain tumor and cancer of the neck!

william's father isaac, died of cancer in 1893.


kat, you stated that the shoulders(or one of them) of the man in the photo were mishapen!

could you explain in a little more detail!

kat,would it be possible to post a full screen view of the photo here,
so that we may gain a better view of the man.

                                      thank you,
                                            jeffery

I was looking at his photo last week when I was changing my index settings, making photo's easier to find.
I always had the impression that this man had a strangely shaped upper body and the photographer compensated for it by having him turn slightly.



He has no neck, to speak of, and his right shoulder seems higher than the left.
Either that, or it's a really bad suit!

(Message last edited Feb-26th-03  10:57 PM.)

great news!

i found the getaway driver!!!!!!!


but, sad to say, my lips are sealed for now!


reason being,i am in a struggle whether to write a book or to just go ahead and share what ive found with all you nice people!


john vinnicum morse was a scheming liar!

over and over and over again, this man contradicted himself,lied to the authorities,reporters,and pulled the wool over the eyes of all truth seekers for 110 years!

Thanks for the update!
Do you have anyone advising you as to what you might do with all your research?

I would hesitate to post more here. 
I would ask the opinions of  living authors maybe.
Masterton, Rebello, Maynard Bertolet as editor of the LBQ, without giving away your ideas.

If you have no one to advise you please contact Stef.

I hope you will respond.  If you like, please "Leterbox" me, privately.
I would need your address, anyway if Stef is to print you out that photo.

the chances of that photo being someone other than william

a. davis are a million to one!

would you be willing to post the photo of the other man that was

given out at the same time.

the young man with the mustache.
.........

This is interesting, hope to hear more...

(Message last edited Mar-18th-03  9:51 PM.)

how old does this man appear to be ?

i am also wondering what that item is, on his lapel.

My first thought was about 28.
I think it's possible he's a bit younger.
It looks like a flower.
Do you know who he is?

Also, if you're not sending me a private e-mail, I'll ask you here...do you want my notes on what you wrote so far...are you going to do anything with all this?

yes, please send the notes.

thank you so much for taking the time to do this.

i believe i know who the man in the photo is !

but, i won't say for sure just yet.

will check into it more next week!

I had a very early 1900's portrait of my grandparents on their wedding day.  The faces were photographed, and the clothing, but the studio painted it to spruce it up a little.  They tinted the faces and I remember a fake looking flower on my grandfather's lapel.  I think that's what happened to both of these photos - that they may have been artistically altered. 

Good point, Augusta.  Photo retouching hasn't always been the domain of Photoshop.  Photographers in Victorian times were very artistic, & their job was to make the subject look as attractive as possible.  People invested good money to have their portrait done for posterity (rather like folks in the pre-1840s would commission a once or twice in a lifetime portrait to be painted by an artist). 

Commenting re the 1st photo...if the man indeed had some kind of physical abnormality, it would be the photographer's job to do all he could to minimalize its presence. 

the man with the clean shaven face appears to have dark hair(along the sides and the back)- any opinions !

I thought he looked like a red-head!
His complexion looks like it would "mottle" when angry...you know, get red spots?
Are we talking about the "possible" Davis picture?

It's funny but I thought the mustachiod man also looked auburn-haired, tho otherwise they do not look similar.

his hair toward the back does not seem dark ( black )to you.

correct?

I'm almost done reading this thread, Jeffrey.  It is really interesting!  It fits.  There are a few things I wanted to comment on.  I'll wait till I'm done reading the whole thing, tho.  I've learned a few new things reading it.  Like Lizzie hesitating before she tells Mrs. Churchill to come over that morning.  Gee, no wonder the ladies later dumped Lizzie.  Your interviewing the Davis descendants was real good.  And your talk with Petersen about AR Brown.  Were you able to figure out which grave was Wm. Davis's, since it was unmarked? 

Do you want me to post my comments here, or send them to your private mailbox on here?  I've sent two messages to your private mailbox and don't know if you got them or not.  Please post and let me know if I should post my concluding comments or send privately.  And thanks for turning me on to this thread.  It's been fantastic!

If he has to be dark-haired to be the murderer, I'd say he could easily have dyed his hair black for any witnersses.
But, no, I personally don't think this man has dark hair, but someone with a better eye than mine might be able to say.

Other's have an opinion?
Would really appreciate another opinion.

I'm with Augusta, (and joe) this thread has been really interesting.

hi augusta,

please post your comments here.

Maybe he could have easily dyed his hair black today, gone
to Foodtown and bought a box of Nice n'Easy, but back then
I doubt dying hair was an easy thing.
I agree he looks red/strawberry blond.  Very interesting!
Can't wait to read more here..

I've heard of people using "shoe black" back then to dye things.  But I think that was really messy, and with the "work" Davis might have been doing I'd think it'd get all over.  I suppose it's possible he used something else, maybe coloring his hair the day before.  They had dyes for fabrics back then and natural dyes.  I dunno.  This Davis guy seems like a very good suspect. 

Since most men always wore hats (until the 1960s), it might not matter much what "color" his hair was? Black or dark brown, etc.

Finally tonite I was able to read this thread in its entirety, as I had been intending to do before.  Some parts of it, I must admit, made me shiver.  Something re JVM & horses always strikes me with suspicion, tho I have nothing solid to back this up, other than "gut"...anyway, I digress...

A few questions Jeffery --

Your basic conspirators are Lizzie, J V Morse & William Davis.  If the main issue is JVM wants to prevent Andrew from putting the farm in Abby's name, why enlist only Lizzie?  Have you ever thought of Emma being part of this group?  I always connect Emma more with JVM (more so than with Lizzie) because she admits (& so does he) they correspond thru letters.  I maintain that if yr theory is correct (& I have very strong "gut" you are certainly onto something close here); I had to put in my 2 cents that Emma was backing this too, but chose to play a less active role.  Believe me, if Emma was upset re Andrew giving Abby that 1/2 of the Whitehead house, surely she would not turn her back on this one.  I really think you should factor this in.

Personally, I think both "girls" were supposed to be out of town at the time...but that's another story...

Interesting Tina-Kate, I agree maybe Emma was not so innocent..

I've read the 164 posts (72 pages) I printed out of this thread.  It is fascinating.  You might have hit upon the answer, Jeffrey.  It's a good, solid theory. 

I agree when you said that it could only have happened two ways.  Either Lizzie did it or had a confederate.  Because of the absence of blood on her, and her behavior after Andrew's assault, I lean towards her having some third party.  But the piece always missing was WHO.

Morse, I contended, had something to do with it.  He was totally suspicious, as most of us agree. 

I think Emma knew about it.  If she didn't, I think she pretty much figured out that Lizzie had something to do with it. 

Yes, Morse's trip to the Swansea farm that afternoon before the murders on Wednesday - I think you're right.  It was to get the eggs so that the guy at the farm wouldn't make his usual trip to the Borden's house the next day and screw things up. 

I've read these witnesses telling their stories about this man - who you think is Wm. Davis.  I'd think 'That guy sounds like he had something to do with the murders.'  But I had no suspect in mind.  And I never noticed before how so many talked about him leaning like he did because of his tumor. 

Being a butcher explains so much.  They're used to killing, so perhaps this man could kill a person dispassionately.  And a butcher would know that once the heart stopped pumping, the blood would not spurt.  And a butcher would know how to get the blood off himself - what to wear - perhaps how not to get it on the floor or walls as he walked thru.  (I never thought of that last one before.  Hmm...)

The photo of him definitely looks like he has a mis-shapen shoulder.  It looks like even touched up by the photographer, they could only do so much with the picture. 

Being left handed, I don't know if that plays into it too much.  The testimony showed blows going either way.  I do think that left-handed people have more of a tendency to be ambidextrous (able to use both hands).  Just a guess from what I've observed in my lifetime, with me being left-handed. Well, look at baseball players or baseball cards.  You often see "bats left; throws right".  Do we ever see "bats right; throws LEFT"? 

The science of handwriting analysis is not exact.  I don't know if I would use an expert in that field, unless I had to authenticate something historical.  I can't find your reason for using one.  Maybe that is it - to compare a signature?  (Sorry, after this many threads you kinda lose track of a few things    )

As far as Jennings retaining some notes in case Lizzie got tried again, I think that could have happened.  She could have been tried as an accomplice later, I believe.  That's different than being charged with the actual murder, and I don't think it would fall into the 'double jeopardy' category.  Just my thinking.  I would ask an attorney before I published a book (or anything) on this.  It'd be a highly interesting thing to add, but you need an expert opinion to be sure it could have happened.

I don't know if Jennings KNEW Lizzie was involved somehow.  I felt he really believed in her innocence.  After she went thru her Tilden-Thurber mess, he told his family he was through with her.  But then, don't all defense attorneys SEEM to believe in their client's innocence?  Jennings, tho, was a longtime friend of the family.  Robinson, on the other hand, who knows?  But my point is, that even if Jennings did not suspect Lizzie of being involved somehow, he was a darned good lawyer.  And he was just smart to not release those notes while she was still alive.  (They could release them now, tho!  Hello, Waring Family!!) 

Soup or tobacco stains on the door frame - I remember reading that before.  That's what they said it was at the time.  It could have been some body fluid.  They were only guessing soup or tobacco.  If they had the ability, or the incentive, to test it they would have said which it was - and not just say, "Oh, well, that's, uh, probably some soup.  Maybe tobacco," in what sounds like an offhanded way.  I wouldn't discount it being from the body.

I totally agree with your post #82, Jeffery.  I had not known that Lizzie stalled before telling Mrs. Churchill to come over.  That fits.  But your main point in that post is that Mrs. Churchill was not expected to stumble onto the scene (true) and Lizzie was trying to buy time for the killer to escape (it's gotta be, in my opinion).

Edisto's post #89 on Alice Russell really makes sense.  Referring to her as "frail" does seem ridiculous after you think about it.  "Plucky" perhaps.  I wouldn't have stayed in that house after those murders for anything, and I've got a lot of nerve, or so they say   .  Then there's Rays' post (#92) saying that nuns tend to live longer.  Hmm...  Well, it's too late for me!

I had no idea Morse's visit to the Swansea farm was so suspicious.  That just adds frosting to the cake. 

There is a piece that is bothering me.  And that is Dr. Bowen's supposed phone call and /or visit to the house on Weybosset Street.  Did he or didn't he?  And how does that fit in with Morse? 

I read one theory, perhaps it was in Masterton, that said that Bowen and Morse happened to be outside together early Thursday morning and Morse mentioned he was going there.  The author surmised that maybe Bowen, who was shook up by the murders, called or flew over there to tell Morse.  But why would they both deny it later?  The woman who owned the house did say Bowen came to see her sick child (in the witness statements if I'm remembering correctly).  If Bowen did this, or called Morse to tell him, why the cover up?

The cellar door:  Was it Bridget or Andrew that locked the cellar door last?  Andrew always took the clothes line in after the wash was dry.  I think that's in the Preliminary Hearing under Bridget's testimony.

Yes, Morse did have his panties in a knot over that cellar door.  You have a good theory on that.  But I would check and see if it was not Andrew who locked it last.  It still wouldn't ruin your theory. 

I never noticed that Lizzie fell apart during her inquest testimony when Uncle John was brought up.  Hmm..  Interesting.  I'll re-read it.  'Course that's Victoria Lincoln's book, which turned out to be kind of 'hysterical fiction'.

That's true - Bridget had Thursday afternoons off.  Hmm... Good thinking.  Who knows?  Maybe Lizzie made a comment about the windows being dirty, which could have set Abby about to giving the order to have them washed. 

Another good point, that Abby never did the guest room unless her own friends were there.  She was expecting company on Monday.  Morse was expected to leave some time Thursday, and she wanted the bed redone for her upcoming guests.  I THINK.  She could also have just been remaking the bed to be tidy and in case Morse stayed another night.  I guess it would be up to her to do if Morse stayed, since Andrew was the main one he came to see, and Lizzie supposedly never talked to him at all.  The "girls" used that room as their parlour for their guests usually.

Morse's half-sister saying Morse never forgave when crossed ... Hmm ... Highly interesting.

Rays posts in #118 that Morse had no suitcase upon his arrival Wednesday at the Bordens.  He never had a suitcase!  The guy wore the same suit for two years.  Unusual for US, yes.  For Morse?  No!  He told the clerk at the court when he went to collect his mileage reimbursement for the trial that he never had his laundry done - that when his shirt was soiled he just bought another. 

I don't think that Lizzie would risk her life and let herself be tried in court to save Wm. S. Borden's / Andrew's secret from coming out. 

Do you think Davis slept in the barn the night before?  There was an indentation they talk about in the hay.

The pounding being Davis letting Morse & Lizzie know he was there.  Could be.  It was about 11 pm, wasn't it, and both Morse & Lizzie were in.  Kinda risky, though.  Wouldn't Andrew and Abby hear it, too, then?  With Andrew's penchant for possible prowlers, I would think he'd be the first one out there:  "Who's it?  Who's there?  Hand me my bat, Abby!"

Re:  Posts 140 & 141:  It doesn't mean anything that no sales of prussic acid were recorded.  That was just dumb of the cops, druggist or reporter - whoever was responsible for that gem. 

There was a newspaper article about someone answering Lizzie's description trying to buy the poison in New Bedford the same day she was shopping for that dress pattern she said she purchased that day. 
But like the Fall River incidents, it got overlooked or swept under the rug by Lizzie's Dream Team.

Jeffery:  Your post #144:  Is this YOU talking, where you say you talked to Edward Waring and he says he's writing a book about the Borden case?  It's signed "Howard", tho. 

Don't you remember when Professor Starrs came to Fall River and tried to exhume the Borden bodies?  I have an article on it I can post here if you want to see it, even tho you got to the bottom of it.  No, he won't be coming back to Fall River again. 

Prof. Starrs was trying to prove that the murder weapon that's in the FRHS was (or wasn't) the weapon by doing modern forensic testing on it and the wounds.  If he could have proven that axe did those killings, he really would have had something.  So yes, he could have proven something by exhuming the bodies.  (Rays post #150 did not think it could prove anything.)

Well, Jeffrey.  I have to commend you on the research you have done on this!  It's logical.  It explains several things that didn't quite fit, but we knew had some part in this.  Totally explains Lizzie. 

I would look for proof of motive for Davis and Morse.  You can go just by theory - there are some things that just can't be proven in the case for whatever reason.  But I would try to find some kind of proof. 

I would not be dismayed if descendants tell you nothing, and seem to know something.  I have members of my own extended family like that - and there isn't anything major to hide.  Keep trying.  Maybe you'll discover another relative you never knew about before.

You definitely have a book here.  It should be the best one since ... uh, the last best one was written! 

Thank you for turning me on to this thread.  It was exciting!  And I learned quite a bit!  GOOD LUCK!  And please check your private message for a note from me.

WOW, this last post made me read all the previous posts,
good stuff here, yawn, I am only 1/4 through... I think Jeffrey
has a good book to write!

Regarding your message #176, paragraph 11, the Judge in his charge to the jury included the point that if they found that Lizzie was an accomplice they would also have to find her just as guilty as if she was the murderer.  So I don't know if she could have been later tried as an accomplice being that the jury did not so find.

dear board,

i have decided to go ahead and post what i have written here.

of course,that's if i can find a way to take it from my disk to

post it here.

there will be plenty for you to read.

it is what i firmly believe to be the end of this case.

every piece fits another to form the picture as a whole,

as to why mr. and mrs borden were murdered on thursday, august 4th

1892.

Maybe it should go into the 'Privy' for limited access?
Or to the main site for widest access?

Wow, this is exciting!  Thank you so much for thinking of all of us, Jeffery. 

mr. davis was seen in fall river on the day after the tragedy as well. according to a paper article i found( as you will see very soon.)how the police overlooked this one is beyond me.

the only people who testified at the trial who claimed to have seen a strange man in fall river on the day (or day after) the murders were : mrs. manley, mrs. hart, dr. handy, and mr. chase.

the "stranger" that these four individuals had seen on august 4th, loitering around in front of the borden house was the getaway driver.

dear board members,

this will be my last post here at this forum.

for reasons that i will not say.

it was pleasant meeting each and every one of you.

i will continue to lift you up in my prayers, and always remember, "

jesus loves you v-e-r-y much !

                                jeffery howard

                  

Jeffrey will be missed. What's going on here.  Jeffrey disappears, and also a recent subject title regarding e-bay sales and copyright infringements has disappeared too, the whole topic & posting. 

I was wondering the same thing, I'm new here so I don't
know Jeffrey but it seems like a hoax or goof type thing,
did Stefani ever get an email or was that all a sham.  Seems
weird to me. 

I got Jeffrey's email with its attached article but the article was in a format my computer could not read. With help, I was able to create a readable file. It now has to go through a formatting process as there are no capital letters in the entire work and there are paragraph breaks every 15 or so words creating a document of about 480 pages (none of these problems are Jeffrey's fault but the fault of the conversion to Word).

I wrote Jeffrey yesterday, soon after his post about leaving, and asked him if he would like to tell me or us the particulars of his decision, but he has not responded. I will assume that he would like to keep the reasons to himself. He is welcome back here any time.

I can't explain his decision, nor can I venture a guess as to what he meant in his farewell post. I haven't corresponded with him at all and I don't know really know him. Perhaps once I can read his article I might get closer to his theories of the case.

As to the other question regarding the thread that disappeared ----- it was moved to the Privy for a day and then removed. There was a complaint about it being a flame. I thought it best if I removed the offending post, since I was the one who wrote it. My intentions were to share the truth of my experiences. I meant no harm or foul.

I hope everything is okay with Jeffrey, it almost sounds as if there might be some sort of personal problem?

And not to sound shallow, but, did he leave permission to post his document despite his leaving?  I would still like to view it unless he left instructions otherwise. 

jefferey emailed me once what did i think of his theory.  but i've been unable to find it outside of posts back and forth about it. which was disappointing.

I too got an email about the theory, and I responded that I didn't agree with it but that I thought it a worthy theory and one that might make a good book.  I myself have done some thinking along the lines of the Davises being involved in the Borden murders, chiefly because they seemed to be butchery.  In general, however, I don't think there was a conspiracy -- at least not one involving more than a couple of people.

The person who complained may not understand what a "flame" is.  IMHO, when we simply make a statement of facts about an individual (such as an eBay seller), that isn't flaming.  It might serve as a warning to others to be very careful in dealing with that person, and that's useful information.  "Flaming" as I understand it usually involves making a negative comment directly to a person, such as, "You are ignorant and shouldn't even bother to post here."  Or it can involve making a  caustic comment about a person who is likely to read it, such as: "Barbara is an ignorant so-and-so and shouldn't even be posting here."  (In case I get complaints about flaming, it happens that my own name is Barbara, and that's the "Barbara" I mean.)
I sho' don't think the information that vanished constituted a flame.

Perhaps a short 500 word essay would have been a good idea. ANYONE can advance a theory, but when publishing a book (or maybe an article in a general magazine) that's where the rubber hits the road.
Editors can ask a lot of probing questions, and test the author.
...
The problem with any NEW theory is this: how come the police on the spot didn't figure this out, with all the information available to them? They did investigate 50-60 men.
AR Brown's explanation of a hidden murderer answers this, and also why Lizzie and Uncle John kept the secret.
Note Lizzie's first answer "I was in the back yard eating pears" was later changed to put her up in the back of the barn. After talking to Uncle John, and considering what she was saying?

(Message last edited Apr-26th-03  2:52 PM.)

Jeffery,
I've been following this thread more than any other on the forum.  I'm sorry to see you go.  I know I will miss your theory and your very interesting posts.
Take care,
joe

Hey joe!

Yes this has been very interesting.

The document that Jeffery delivered, however, has not been read in it's entirety, yet.
3 people have been working over it to decipher the content, only because the form in which it came was not compatible.

If Jeffery would like to get in touch that would be great!
I hate to think he is waiting without knowing what is taking so long.  Interest has not flagged. As yet, tho, there is not a viable document.

Jeffery last contacted the forum saying he would no longer post on April 24, so I also wonder, along others here, if he authorized the posting of his article. It seems that no one has been able to contact him since April 24 yet there are people working on his piece trying to change it from one format to another. If he has withdrawn his postings how can you still post it.  An inquiring mind would like to know.

I'll assume that "Jeffery" is correct in his claims.
But to tell people that he's solved the crime, but cannot tell about it (even in a 1000 word summary) suggests a hoax. What do you think?
Remember "Billy Borden"?

(Message last edited May-13th-03  12:42 PM.)

hello everyone,
jeffery here.
i have not studied the case since my last post.
now, i will state for the record that the info that i was intending to send to stefani, was a 100 to 150 page short book on my theory
on this case.
sadly, it is gone.
i will post here as often as i can until i get my new computer next month.
i will give you what i can to provide motive, as well as the who,
when,where and how.

the motive for john v. morse and william a. davis was the borden farm
in swansea. located on gardners neck road.

the motive for lizzie was her fathers upcoming will.

i will be more specific on this later!

the murder of andrew and abby borden was a conspiracy on the part

of lizzie,morse,davis and howe.

george edward howe was the getaway driver and was cousin to john morse.

he was the mr. howe mentioned in the papers who accompanied mr. davis to visit mr. morse at the borden house, two days after the murders,
just a few hours after the funeral.

the visit was a prearranged meeting between the three of them.
mr. morse had arranged it on friday morning,the day after the crime.
the witness statements said that mr. morse had left the borden house shortly after 8 a.m. on friday morning to mail a letter to william a. davis in south dartmouth, "in haste".
he first went to the post office and then he croosed the street to one of the two boarding houses, located across the street(bedford street)to purchase a two cent stamp from george e.howe.

and to that have one question.

why did morse not purchase a stamp while at the post office, which would have been the most logical place in the universe to buy one.

sorry, i have to go now, will post again in a day or two and continue with this line.

Well hello Jeffery!
Thanks for coming back!

The most important thing is to make backups to floppies. NOTHING else will survive a dead hard drive. My used, larger hard drive worked find on my old 386/486 for two years, then one day it died w/o notice. Usually it starts to make noises, like clicks or squeals.

Also, save your work in a format like RTF or SAM, since it is near text. 100 pages is about 50,000 words. That's a lot of typing.

Most editors ask for a short outline of the case. You should consider this. Example, outline just what you want to prove, like the opening speech at a trial. Keep the details on the side until needed.

I didn't read Rebello's book (700 pages?). I think it should've been in two part: 320 pages for salability, the 400+ pages on a downloadable version for details that would be appreciated by a "small circle of friends".

Most important, you should be able to "prove" why ALL OTHER authors were wrong.

Lots of Luck!

I personally knew a number of people who carried postage stamps in their wallet or purse. Then there are pre-stamped envelopes.
I'll bet thrifty Uncle John borrowed his stamps from Andy (he didn't need them anymore). Wouldn't Andy do this?

Do not fear Jeffery. I have kept your book safe and sound. When you get your new computer I will send it back to you. I emailed you four or five times since you sent it to me. If you have been having computer troubles, then that would explain why you never replied to me. Welcome back.

I, too, am very glad you're back, Jeffery!!  I am curious to see if Morse, Davis, and Howe did in fact benefit in any way from the murders.  What became of the Swansea (or Swanzey) farm?  Did Lizzie share any of her new-found wealth with these guys?  On the one hand, your hypothesis is truly intriguing and seems to answer a lot of hanging questions; on the other hand, it also opens up more questions!! Egad, won't we ever solve this case?!       

Monday night I had at least a 2 hour conversation with our lawyer in her office about things Borden, etc.
She was very interested in Alice and the club under the bed, and her assistant was very interested in Morse.  Assistant had seen the T.V. movie, Legend and remembered there was no Morse.
These are legal eagles, and impressed with the conspiracy theory of Morse & Davis.
But they wanted to *follow the money*.
They wanted to see a swelled bank account or property changing hands or someone *getting the girl* in the old movie sense of the phrase.
Like, what was their reward, and show me the $.

I was thinking about that club when I was poring over Fleet's trial testimony the other day.  Wasn't there some speculation that the club was placed there after the murders? 

Fleet adds some weight to this surmise.  He claims that three officers searched the Borden bedroom and looked under the bed on August 4th -- and they did not "find any implements under there that could murder anybody". (Trial, 521)  You'd think he'd mention the club ... if it was there.

That's VERY good Diana.
I think I will send that along and get them thoroughly hooked!

I knew to say that it was not mentioned as being found in our (so far) surviving documents.

You point out a negative!  The *not finding* of it...

(Message last edited Jun-18th-03  9:55 PM.)

Here are the faults with this theory.

1) AR Brown solved this case w/ his 1991 book. His was the optimal solution that fit the known facts. Optimal because it explains not only who the killer was, but why the judges bent over backward to see Lizzie freed. I can believe they would take a payoff to see an "innocent" person go free, but not to let a multiple murderer off. That's my opinion, of course. We should never underestimate the corruption possible in any courtroom.

2) This unpublished solution is a derivative copy of AR Brown's  solution. It does not have the eyewitness' comments from that time, but somebody's opinion of what was done then. Where is the factual foundation? Is it only the personal speculation of someone who wants to invent a new theory for the crime?

Oh you figured out that's what Brown did?

Reading the Knowlton Papers, that *theory* of Brown's is in there.  A letter from a nut!  Amongst the ramblings of psychics and Ouija Boards.
So is the *Lizzie Did It In The Nude* theory which the Legend movie made known to the T.V. watching public.
There's nothing new under our sun, you know that...

In Gerald Green's essay "Materpieces of Murder" he concludes that if neither Lizzie or Bridget did both murders, then they must have shared in the murders (witnesses who place them outdoors).

He then says the only other possibility was a madman who was concealed inside the house that morning. This sounds to me like he heard the rumor, but didn't bother to investigate it. Didn't AR Brown say that H Hawthorne told of this solution since the 1950s?

I don't know- did he?
This sounds like a pre-recorded message.
I can only hope you are having a blast in Tahiti right now while some dial-up service posts for you.

Just where is your citation that that letter is from a "nut"? (Did they even use that phrase then?) Why does D Kent find this so important that he includes it, aside from all the others, in his book?

To me, it sounds like the kind of anonymous letter sent to 1) argue for Lizzie's innocence (sent by an accomplice?); 2) put the police and mayor on the right track. NOTE that this was sent to both, not just to the police. The author KNEW where political power resided!

I hope Jeffrey continues to post, I agree with his theory,
it is in line with AR Brown and the "madman" theory also.
Basically that it was NOT Lizzie who did the axing.  I am
interested to hear these theories.  The saying "the eyes are
the window to the soul" I look in Lizzie's eyes and don't see
a brutal axe murderer. Spoiled, arrogant, greedy, jealous,
resentful, self rightous and self centered, all of that but from
what we know of her personality and life after the crimes, I can't
belive she could have possibly done the deed herself.  I am
anxious to hear Jeffrey's whole story!

Gimme your page and I'll give you mine.  Fair?

jeffrey:

you emailed me here long long again what i thought about your theory.  i could not reply since i then did not know a thing about it.  what i gather here is choppy.  i'd appreciate anything you'd like to share with me.

or if you would like to just clarify the subject in general.  obviously you're working on something now.  i just mean i'm a willing listener to what you may have or how you  may want to air it.  i want to support in any way i can any actual work anyone is doing.

pm me if you'd like with whatever it is you can share.

What does *pm me*   mean?

Private Message.

Thanks.  I've been wondering.

(Message last edited Jul-18th-03  12:08 PM.)

Dear Bill,
My name is Kat and I would like to welcome you here for a visit.
I was the one who got together the Word doc. to send you the feed-back from our discussions here on your great interview.  I also made the "evil Cheerleader-Morse" picture and I created the portrait of you , fake foto, framed, in oval, in Andrew Borden's bedroom.  (Which I had arranged to send to you privately.  Such a good picture- a Lot of personality showing there!)

I would like to take a moment to introduce you to BobCookBobCook.  He's so nice we named him Twice.  He also has a lot of personality.
Really, he is a good guy, and I'm sorry his post from a year ago got your attention in that way.  If he was in error and found out, he would be the first to make it right.  I am only describing him here because he's not often here with us.
He is jolly fun, and full of enthusiasm.  He was born on Andrew Borden's birthday yet he is generous.  He is a firefighter in Attleboro, and drives a firetruck there.  I know he would give you no disrespect.  When he was staying at the B&B he met Len Rebello and was wholly WOWED!  He definetly would revere your work and what you aim for.
It's always unfortunate when second-hand info goes awry.  We do make a practice of correcting each other here, so your response is welcome to setting the story straight.
Please find no motive of anything negative in what you read by BobCookBobCook.  He would never mean that toward you, I know.  And he surely would love to have info directly from you...as we all would, if you are willing.
You also sound generous in offering.
Thanks!
Kat K.

(Message last edited Jul-4th-03  6:54 AM.)

Hey, hey family have been away for a few (vacay at Myrtle Beach, wicked kool city on the ocean) but I'm back for a few and as always I like to begin my session here in the family forum with a "search" of keywords "bobcookbobcook" and I found something new.  But it appears that I missed an all important July 4th message from our own local celeb Mr. Bill Pavao. 

Kat's reply is all too flattering (you're too much Kat) but alas Mr. Pavao's message has been edited on July 18th...did he erase it?? What did I miss loved ones, what did I miss?? 

I did have the esteem pleasure of meeting Mr. Pavao this past winter, albeit rather informally and ultra casual, the happenstance meeting was at the Dartmouth Mall in the Sears Roebucks store.  He was in the company of Mr. Len Rebello (who did remember me from our previous meeting at the B & B in March of 2002).

Of course many of you know I am wicked huge fan of Len and his book and when I "bumped" into he and Bill....well you know my tale.  So what happened to Bill's message and what was it??  The mystery continues...anyway...I'm back for a while (uh,ah...vacations...it's hard to get relax out of my blood).

BobCookBobCook

Since I did not know the whole Pavao post was edited by him, my message still stood.  There was no longer a reason for it, obviously.

You BCBC, had answered David at the beginning of this thread that Pavao was not the owner of the B&B, which was that poster's misidentification.
You then explained a convoluted story about Martha and Pavao (Which sounded second-hand toward you, and then third-hand to Us) and his leaving due to his losing interest in the job and opening a room up for rent after he vacated.
Pavao's response was that yes you're right he doesn't own the B&B but would love to...would adore to, would...well, you get the picture.
He never lost interest and still walks the halls (oops, no halls!) I mean still likes to walk around there as he finds the place so interestining.  And is still Curator.  He offers his direct involvement if questions arise about the house, here, as he would prefer that to second or third hand info which we all know from studying this case, can lead to error.
He had Written Stefani and is on good relations with her and asked how to rescind his reply here as he thought he had overreacted.  He was very fair & square about it and she only told him how to edit.
If I had only known...

Oh well, we may benefit from Pavao's offer of help and this would be all to the positive!

Welcome back from vaccy, BobCookBobCook.  Stef just returned as well and that's why That post wasn't edited until July 18 after Mr. B.P. consulted with Stef on how to edit himself..

(Message last edited Jul-20th-03  9:27 PM.)

Well, well, well....go figure....I just "re-read" my post of March 2002 (talk about history) and frankly I don't see anything inflammatory about my posting.  Mr. Pavao must have read into the posting, big time.  Oh, well...nobody's perfect.  To bad though that he chose to edit the entire message by completely erasing it, I would have loved to have read his over-reaction.

I must have hit a nerve but I will never know, will I?  Too bad because like many of us in here I like to defend my words and most certainly would afford Mr. Pavao an apology if so warranted.  It is sad that this forum sometimes becomes a "battle ground" for ones sensitivity but that's life, I guess.

Not that I feel I truly need to do this but:  "Mr. Pavao if you should come back and view any of these posting let me offer you my most humble and sincere apologies for any harm I may have caused you to suffer in professional capacity as Curator of the Lizzie Borden Bed and Breakfast.  It was never my intention to imply that you were no longer an active part of the museum/bed & breakfast, I was merely repeating what I had been made aware of during my stay in March 2002. I hope you will accept my apology as I do not wish to be known as a person of whom the likes would keep you from being a part of this forum."

And to all my fellow Bordenites and forum writers I hope my posting of March 2002 and the subsquent fall out with Mr. Pavao does not jepordize the relationship between he and the Administrator of the great forum.  Thank you all so much for your understanding.

BobCookBobCook

Those who post their opinions here must have a "thick skin". Even a polite demurral will upset those who think very highly of themselves.

Probably the thing that would irk me the most is any claim that misquotes me, or says something I didn't say. (I can't help some people from imagining things in my posts.)
...
IF you are going to respond to an annoying letter, be sure to copy it into your post so it can't be erased or changed.

(Message last edited Jul-23rd-03  2:36 PM.)

Hello everyone!!!

Well...this situation seems to be way out of hand and I feel that I am somewhat to blame. Therefore, please accept my sincere apologies for what may have been an overreaction to statements made on this forum concerning me by BC. However, I will address this shortly.

As you know, I am completely new to this forum (or any other forum for that matter). I only ever posted one message on the old message board several years ago. I only went on this forum to read feedback concerning my recent interview with Stefani. I discovered that I could simply put my name in the search engine and "up" would come all references. This is much easier than having to read each message.

Well...the message from BC appeared. I did not notice the date (my fault completely). I wanted to reply to what he had said. I thought that when I posted a reply to that specific message, that my reply would be attached only to that message. I had no idea my reply would be placed in the order of the date it was posted. Therefore, I have inadvertently brought attention to this issue in a much larger fashion than had been my original intention.

I chose to edit my posting by erasing it completely. After much thought I felt that I may have overreacted and felt that it was best to simply delete the entire posting. Others felt that my statements were appropriate. Perhaps deleting my response was also a mistake given the "interesting" responses by BC. I am simply not doing well here, am I?????

After my interview with Stefani, I told so many people to go to this site and read it. Naturally, I was very excited. Some of these people include my supervisors, friends, co-workers, and most importantly, my students. You can now see why I would find BC's posting to be unfair and inappropriate.


Mr. Cook, I feel that I owe you an explanation about why I was angered by your posting. I did not "read into the posting, big time" as you wrote. I merely read it as it was written.

1. It is absolutely true that I do not own the B & B. I am the curator of the museum only. I am glad that you corrected that misinformation. However, I would have preferred it if your posting had stopped there.

2. I did not appreciate the statement concerning the amount of time I do or do not spend at the house. I understand that an employee at the house told you this (which was inappropriate on his/her part). However, I cannot figure out why you would want to put that in print on a public forum as though it was fact. Certainly, you must concede that this statement does not make me or the Borden House appear in a positive light. In all truthfulness, the statement is false.

My position at the Borden House is and has always been strictly voluntary. I love the house and the history behind it. However, there is not much curatorial work that needs to be done there at this time. The house does not have a large collection or massive archives. Therefore, my position does not necessitate my on-sight presence every day.

I usually go into the house to work when the house is empty. In this way, I will not disturb guests, tourists, visitors, tours, employees, etc.  Therefore, some of the employees would not see me and would not really have any knowledge of my having been there. For example, I have not seen our overnight manager in a very long time. He works nights and mornings when he cooks breakfast. I am not in the house at night or early in the morning. However, this does not mean that I am not around. Very often I will go into the house simply to walk through the rooms just to be sure that everything is alright and in its proper place. 

Over the past six years, I (as well as so many others) have put countless hours into the Borden House to make it as accurate as possible. Much of my personal collection (as well as Len Rebello's) adorns the walls of what was the Borden's home.

I am not happy that an employee made this statement to you (a guest) which was totally inappropriate on his/her part.  Although, I can understand why he/she may have believed that to have been true (as explained above). My issue has to do with having it printed on a public forum for others to read and believe.

3. I did live in the Borden House, but not for three years. I lived there from August 1998 - February 2000. My bedroom was the Hosea Knowlton Room. It was a room that was rented to guests before I lived in the house and then again after I moved out.

4.I have to say that the statement that personally bothered me the most was (again on a public forum)"But as all jobs go he (referring to me) soon began to loose (sic) interest in be (sic) a live-in and Ms. Martha McGinn and he agreed that he would not (sic) longer reside on the third floor". 

Even if this is what you were told, you have to admit that this is not a fair or appropriate statement to restate (especially on a public forum) because it is calling into question my professionalism, integrity, and dedication. Again, I am saddened that an employee told you this, however it is important to consider the source.

My issue with this statement is that I feel it is an embarrassment to me. I NEVER lost interest in my position at the Borden House.My moving out of the house in no way implied a loss of interest. My reasons for moving were of a personal nature and had nothing to do with my level of interest in my position. Also, Martha McGinn (who I love dearly) had nothing to do with that decision.

After reading your statement, I felt it was necessary to explain as I have above. 

Perhaps I overreacted in my initial response, perhaps not. That is why I chose to delete it. Basically, it said what I have printed above.

Please put yourself in my position. Comments were made about me and my job performance on a public forum that were not flattering, nor factual. If this situation were reversed, I am sure you also would not be amused.

I have no intention on making this forum, as you said a "battle ground for one's (my??) sensitivity". You did not "hit a nerve". I simply feel that what you wrote was not true and inappropriate given where it was posted.

I have enjoyed my relationship with Stefani thus far and expect that it will continue. I wish my best to all those who dedicate time, energy, and interest towards furthering our understanding of the Borden case. I wish everyone the very best.

Sincerely,
Bill Pavao  



(Message last edited Jul-24th-03  5:38 PM.)

Bill, thank you for taking the time to post again on the forum.  We hope you do not leave us.

I will not comment on this situation and sincerely hope that it is settled and that you and Bob reach an understanding.

Now about those front steps ......  I had posted a message at this location inviting your comments.  The reply I am referring to in that message was the reply you gave in Stefani's June newzletter.

http://www.arborwood.com/awforums/show-topic-1.php?start=1&fid=27&taid=5&topid=1403#36

(Message last edited Jul-24th-03  7:05 PM.)

Hi Harry!!!!

Thank you for the nice wishes!! I am truly grateful.

Well...I have read what you have said about the front staircase in the Borden home. I found your comments very interesting. I certainly hope that in the future you are able to visit the Borden house in person so that you can better visualize the interior.

I can assure you that the front interior staircase is original to the house (1845). These are the reasons why I say this:

1. Greek Revival Style homes (which is the architectural style of the Borden house) often had curved staircases in the front entry. This can be seen in architectural plan books and also in the homes themselves. The curved staircase was often a feature of this style.

2. The front entry is really not that large. It may appear larger on the floor plans than it really is. There really is not much space wasted here.

3.The front staircase of 92 Second Street is similar to those in plans in architectural plan books (popular during that time period).
[I have always wondered if the Borden house was built according to one of these plan books.]

4. Many of the tenements in Fall River have entry halls and curved staircases. Several of these are actually three families. There are several like this near the Borden house.

5. There is no physical evidence (ie. scarring on the walls) in the house (beneath the wallpaper) which would lead one to believe that the staircase is not original.

6. There is no documentation suggesting that the staircase is not original and/or that Andrew Borden had it installed.

The Greek Revival Style was very popular in the United States from about 1820 until around the beginning of the Civil War. In fact, anything Greek was popular (ie. Greek haircuts, vases, furniture). Greece was where democracy originated and therefore to have a Greek Revival Style home or building symbolized democracy and/or democratic ideals. The architectural style was so popular that it was often referred to as the "American Style".  This is why banks, government buildings, etc... are often in that style. Typically, buildings of this style were painted white with green trim.

Oh....I was not aware of the existence of a bell on the second floor of the house which you mentioned. I cannot recall if you said it was in the Bordens' bedroom or not.

I hope that I have been of some help to you.

All the best!!!!
Bill Pavao

(Message last edited Jul-24th-03  10:08 PM.)

Hi Bill, thanks for the reply and information.  I think it was the size of the foyer, or what I perceived as the size, that threw me.  That puts that question behind me.

As for the bell, it's mentioned in the trial transcript, page 267. Robinson is questioning Bridget:

Q.  There is a bell that hangs there in Mrs. Borden's room, I suppose you know?
A.  Yes, sir.
Q.  An old bell?
A.  Yes, sir; I have seen it.
Q.  But that is not connected with the front door knob, is it?
A.  I don't know anything about it.
Q.  Did you ever hear it ring up there?
A.  No, sir; I don't remember.
Q.  The bell you did hear ring was downstairs?
A.  I didn't hear any bell that morning.
Q.  No, I don't mean any particular time.
A.  No, sir; in the kitchen.
Q.  But while you were there was that bell upstairs, to your knowledge, ever in use?
A.  No, sir; I don't know anything about the bell upstairs. Always the bell I heard was in the kitchen.
Q.  Well, that is it. All the bell you ever heard was in the kitchen?
A.  Yes, sir.

Unfortunately Bridget can't tell us anything about it other than she never heard it.  She doesn't even seem to indicate she heard the front door bell ever ring.  I'm assuming the bell she refers to hearing in the kitchen is from the dining room when they want her to come in. At times Bridget's answers rival Lizzie's in difficulty of understanding. However we do know she answered the front door bell in the absence of Mr. and Mrs. Borden by her own admission.




(Message last edited Jul-24th-03  10:44 PM.)

Hi Harry!!!!!!!!

Thank you so much for the information about the bell in Mrs. Borden's room. [I wonder if this refers to the dressing room or to Mr. and Mrs. Borden's bedroom? My guess would be the bedroom.]

I was so interested in this that I called Len Rebello and left him a message about it. Very interesting!!!!

I have read the trial transcripts, but every time I look at the document I learn something new. This was a perfect example.

Thank you for taking all your personal time to type the testimony. I really appreciate it!!!

In Friendship,
Bill

Yes, that bell is curious.  I don't think it's mentioned anywhere else that I know of. It makes you wonder why Robinson even brought it up.

It will be great if Mr. Rebello has any information on it.

As for the trial transcript, it was a simple copy and paste.

Harry, speaking of cutting and pasting from the documents, how do you do it?  I've tried highlighting passages to copy and it won't.  Something else that you do?  It would sure save me time when I try to pull testimony to put here. 


Oh, and I forgot to add, Welcome to the forum, Bill Pavao! 

(Message last edited Jul-25th-03  3:55 AM.)

Harry has the Original WORD document because he created it by typing the whole trial himself, and it is copyrighted to him.  That is the first time that has been done in the history of this case since the original transcript of 1893!

So he can copy-paste.

What is downloaded at the LABVM/L is in PDF format, I believe, and is considered a *locked* document.

(Message last edited Jul-25th-03  4:15 AM.)

Oh, well that explains it!  Thanks, Kat.  Guess I'll have to do it the old fashioned way. 

Hello, Bill.

Welcome to this forum.  I enjoyed the interview very much.

I have a question.  This is a relatively minor thing, but since you're intimate with the house, you probably know.  there's some confusion among us about why the couch in the sitting room is flush with the doorway into the dining room -- as opposed to being more centered against the wall.  in the crime scene photo i can make out what looks like a throw rug before the door to the kitchen; i've wondered if it was simply to make room for that.  (i understand the door between sitting room and kitchen opens into kitchen?)

Oh thanks for asking haulover!  I wanted to ask the same thing!
Would the 7'1" sofa* of Andrew fit centered on that wall during daily family use and could it have been moved during or after the murder to that odd position it has in the photo's?
I guess Bill Pavao can tell us the exact room dimensions of the sitting room and that wall, particularly.
-*(Trial, Kieran, 114)

Hello!!!

Great question!!!! The sitting room sofa was located against the door jamb leading to the dining room in 1892 as it is today. The reason for this is that if you were to center the sofa, you could not get into the kitchen easily.

I, along with Len Rebello tested this very idea. We moved the sofa to the center of the wall. We quickly realized that the fireplace mantel "juts out" just far enough to make it difficult to get in and out of the kitchen doorway. This is why the sofa was moved against the door jamb leading to the dining room.

Also, remember that the Bordens usually kept the door between the kitchen and the sitting room closed. They would typically (not always) walk from the kitchen and then through the dining room. however, they must have used this doorway often enough to necessitate locating the sofa further down along the wall.

Great question!!!! I hope that I have been of some help to you.

Bill

(Message last edited Jul-25th-03  9:20 PM.)

Oh Jeesh!  YES YesYes!
Thank you Bill Pavao.
We suffer for our interest in that we stumble along valiantly trying to find out the small details, in the dark somewhat, as you may notice.
To have an instant answer, I'm afraid I will get spoiled!
Thank you so much!
K.
Oh, do you happen to have room dimensions and is the Parlour bigger than the sitting room?

(OOO-I love this!)

Yes, thank you for the info, Bill.  I have a question about the Borden house.  In Lizzie's room and in the sitting room are these built-in things, in the sitting room its a bookcase.  In Lizzie's room its this dresser, shelving, hutch combo thing.  I was curious if these were original to the house or added on at a later date as every house plan I've ever seen drawn of the Borden house shows these as closets?  The trim certainly matches the rest of the house.  Thanks.

Wow!!! Great observation!!!!

You are correct. According to the 1892 floorplans the built-in shelves in the sitting room and in Lizzie's room were closets at that time.

The area in Lizzie's room that is now a hutch was a closet in 1892 without a door. Lizzie had a curtain hanging in front of it. If my memory serves me correctly, the curtain was red. Inside this open area is where Lizzie kept her washbowl and chamber pot.

I will have to look-up the dimensions of the sitting room and the parlor. I have them here in a folder.....I'll let you know. Interestingly, the ceilings on the first floor are higher than the ceilings on the second floor by several inches (I want to say six or eight inches, I cannot remember off the top of my head.)

Thanks!!
Bill

Yes Bill, I echo Kat's post - great response! 

Do you know of any drawing or floor plans that show the dimensions of the rooms?  I'm a visual type person and need to see it that way.

Edit here -  Sorry, I missed the last two posts and am just catching up.

(Message last edited Jul-25th-03  10:12 PM.)

Thank you, Bill, that answers that, always wondered.  So, thats where lizzie set up her washbasin, I just checked Alice Russell's testimony and she refers to it as Lizzie's toilet room.  I always got the picture in my mind that Lizzie covered a corner of the room with a drape and had her washstand there.  Thanks, another misconception laid to rest.

Thats odd about the ceilings on the first floor only being a few inches taller than the upper floor's ceilings.  From what I know about Victorian architecture, the first floor is usually where the public rooms of the house were and the ceilings were made higher to impress guests with the size of the home, etc.  The upper rooms were for family and weren't as formally done up.  But the Borden's ceilings were only a few inches higher, interesting.  Thanks again, Bill! 

Hello!!!!

I have been looking through my files for the dimensions of the rooms in the house. Len Rebello and I measured each room when he was working on the floorplans for his book. However, I cannot find what I am looking for.


I will be at the Borden house several times this week in preparation for the August 4 anniversary. I am going to bring a copy of the floorplans and label the dimensions right on the paper. I will e-mail them to Stefani so she can post them (I do not know how to do that myself yet).

I should be able to do this sometime within the next week or so. I would like to measure the rooms when the house is empty so as not to be in anyone's way. I'll be more than happy to share the information with everyone.

Bill

Bill, that would be absolutely fantastic!  We have had a general idea of their sizes but it would help greatly to know the exact dimensions.

Rebello's book has a map of the Borden property which gives the dimensions of the outside of the house as 47' by 27'.

I have several floor plans but they are not alike in some respects and do not give dimensions.

Hi Harry!!

Personally, I would really trust Len's floorplans. I went over the entire house with him (room by room) after he got the initial drawings (rough drafts). We made all corrections, additions, etc. He went to such great lengths to verify their accuracy.

I will take the floorplans and Len and I will write down the measurements for each wall right on the paper so everyone can see the exact dimensions.

Thanks again for the information on the bell. As I mentioned, I had called Len about it. He remembered it and thought that it was interesting that the bell was located in the back of the house. However, when the house was a two family, the bell would have been located in what was a kitchen. Ah ha!! Well....when we go to the house to take the measurements, we will look outside the back door for any sign (scarring) of a doorbell. I'll let you know.

Oh....I am impressed by your dedication in typing the entire trial. Wow!!! Many years ago, my friend Ed Thibault made a hand-held "contraption" using a small light bulb. He used this to transcribe the entire trial from microfilm. He gave me the original typed copy he made at that time.

I am always so impressed with people such as yourself who go to such lengths to become better informed about this case (or any other topic/interest). Way to go!!!

Bill

Bill:

thank you!  so THAT's it!  i hadn't even considered it.  one idea we've had floating was that it was moved for the photographer, but i couldn't quite accept this.  my instinct was there had to be some simple practical reason.

how wonderful to get an answer just like that.  that's the type of detail that enables us get closer to them as they had to live in that house.

i'm sure i speak for all when i say how valuable it is to have a resident of the house right here with us!  and a distant relative of lizzie herself to boot!  and good luck on your book!  and i hope you can find our efforts, arguments, and occasional insights helpful.

Thanks for the page number (49) in rebello on the floor plans. I had forgotten all about them.  Those are quite detailed floor plans.

Thanks also for the kind words on the trial.  It was a lot of work but well worth the effort.  The ability to search on documents cannot be over  estimated.  Having all the prime source documents in that format saves a lot of time and enables whole passages to be posted with just a few clicks of the mouse. 

So it was Ed. Thibault who scanned the microfilm and that is what has generated our hard copy (paper) of the trial!
We thank him for that.  That then was typed by Harry and I think it took almost a year.  And it became a computer document.
BTW:  Harry has been proofing it and Stef now has it available at the Museum/Library for download.
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/TrialTranscript.htm

You could use a photo enlarger to print each film, then make copies of the prints on a copying machine. This could be more exact than copying, as it allows a second or third pair of eyes to inspect the result.
...
Best to then use a scanner to read it into the computer, if possible.

(Message last edited Jul-31st-03  6:08 PM.)

Hello everyone!!!!

I hope life is treating everyone well tonight!!!!

Harry- I located the floorplans of the Borden house we had "talked" about. I took these measurements about five years ago. I am going to rewrite the dimensions because I wrote all the numbers in pencil. I want to be sure the copy that Stefani posts is clear and easily understandable. I will forward scans of the floorplans to Stefani and she will post them. I hope they help everyone.

All the best!!!
Bill

Thanks for the good news Bill.  I'm looking forward to seeing them.

I guess next week on the 4th will be a busy day at the B&B.  Have fun and don't go in the guest room alone!