The Lizzie Borden Society archive

 

Forum URL:

http://lizzieandrewborden.com/LBForum/index.php
Forum Title: LIZZIE BORDEN SOCIETY
Topic Area: Archives
Topic Name: why kill andrew?

1. "why kill andrew?"
Posted by adminlizzieborden on Jan-8th-02 at 9:42 PM

By harry on Monday, 11/19/2001 - 11:51 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the things that has always bothered me is why Lizzie allegedly killed her father.

I know the standard reason is that she knew that Andrew would know she had killed Abby. I always thought there had to be something beyond that.

It seems to me she could have killed Abby and then left the house, say to visit friends in New Bedford or Marion, etc. No one could tell the exact time Abby was killed. Would the police have considered Lizzie a suspect? She could even have made a show of leaving, had a carriage waiting, arrangements made in advance.

It gets rid of Abby, locks the Borden fortune in, and all she has to do is wait until Andrew dies of a natural death. Or succumbs to a little poisoning spread out over a period of time. Certainly he wasn't going to re-marry again.

Just speculating out loud.

 
By dave on Tuesday, 11/20/2001 - 12:05 am [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harry, i got one word for ya "impatience" 

Lizzie wanted it NOW, she was entitled to it NOW, and heck, it was about time she got it . . . NOW 

She wasnt getting any younger or more patient, and the fear that Andrew might leave a nice chunk of the estate to Abby and Sarah Whitehead (or maybe she knew of such a thing in the works) and heck, she had to act fast! Greed and hate are powerful tools in a desperate situation.

Likewise, just speculating.

 
By harry on Tuesday, 11/20/2001 - 12:18 am [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave, Abby was already dead and thus out of the will. Assuming Andrew had one, I doubt if he would have put Sarah in it.

The chances she took by killing both at the same time are obvious. She would surely be the prime suspect.

What was Andrew, 70? Pretty old for a man in the 1890's.

Mmmmm...maybe a little fall down those back stairs from his bedroom would have speeded it up.

 
By dave on Tuesday, 11/20/2001 - 12:29 am [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
True, Harry. The thing about Andy is that he was a healthy 70. Couldve lived to 80 or possibly 90+ even in the Victorian age. That would try any heiress' patience.

I think Emma's/Lizzie's fear was that Abby would get a nice chunk, so lets "off" Abby. The rest (Andrew's murder) was just impatience. She wants it right away and look, heres a good opportunity. Bridget goes upstairs. Whack.

Alternative theories: an accomplice did it while Lizzie helped him not get spotted. OR Lizzie is telling the truth but has her story confused and had absolutely nothing to do with it. This seems like the unlikeliest possibility, but within the realm of possibility, if only just.

 
By kat on Tuesday, 11/20/2001 - 04:04 am [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
And why a hatchet, of all things!?
If you're ironing and blow your lid, you attack with an iron...
If you're a carpenter, you attack with your ever-present hammer...
If you're the COOK, you'd use a kitchen cleaver...or a poker...
If you're greedy and immature and crafty (and odds are, female) you'd use poison, while being somewhere else!
Why a hatchet?

 
By stefani on Tuesday, 11/20/2001 - 04:09 am [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Killing Andrew 1.5 hours (or so) after killing Abby is the oddest part of all. To keep a rage alive for that long would really tire a person out. And to have experienced the committing of a murder with a hatchet and then say to yourself, hell, that wasn't so bad, I think I can do that again - - - well, that is one of those things that my brain can't comprehend. Too horrible.

So, why Andrew, why a hatchet, and how can the killer wait so long to kill such a violent way again? Seems like a hit, doesn't it?

 
By bobgutowski on Tuesday, 11/20/2001 - 04:05 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, if you've never killed anyone before, and the hatchet seemed to work pretty well upstairs earlier that day, why not use it again?

 
By kat on Tuesday, 11/20/2001 - 10:23 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yea, but why the hatchet, Originally, upstairs with Abby? It's not exactly something a (young?) church-lady would have lying around her bed chamber. It's not even something a girl could be seen wandering around the house with without seeming suspicious...now, a nice big pair of scissors, I could see...like the cook with her kitchen knife.
We think of woodcutters or butchers when we think "hatchet".
Unless the weapon was planned and "planted" in advance to set up just such a mysterious controversy?

 
By kat on Wednesday, 11/21/2001 - 10:05 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The only reason for using a hatchet that I can think of, is because of the length of the handle the assailant is further away from the victim--less chance of a defense, and less chance of blood spatter. But then why not use an axe, which Stef tells me (by checking them out at the hardware section) have much LONGER handles: the difference being maybe 12" ?

 
By raystephanson on Sunday, 11/25/2001 - 06:06 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The hatchet was the current tool of a person (like Wm S Borden) who might always be on the look out for another job. Don't electricians have a standard belt with tools? Engineers with a slide rule (yes, I'm dating myself). Accountants with a pocket protector and loads of pencils?

You can read or re-read Arnold R. Brown's book.

 
By raystephanson on Sunday, 11/25/2001 - 06:09 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of the visit was to see Andy and get that little white package. They tried to get Abby out of the house so she wouldn't interfere.
That's my opinion from reading the books.
Once Abby was done, crazy Willy was angry enought to do Andy as well. No tapes of the meeting.

 
By kat on Sunday, 11/25/2001 - 10:56 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speaking of Billie Borden, welcome Ray!
In the October, 1993 issue of the LBQ, p. 9, there is a 1/4 page AD:
'COMING SOON...
In the 14th century, Chaucer wote:
"Mordre wol out, certeyn, it wol nat faille."
THE TRIAL OF BILLIE BORDEN
by
LEWIS PETERSON
and
ARNOLD R. BROWN

Watch for it at your favorite book store!'

--Can someone find out, somehow, what ever became of this book?

 
By dave on Monday, 11/26/2001 - 04:06 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL. Knowing Ray's dislike of "pranks", he wont like that one 

 
By kat on Monday, 11/26/2001 - 11:11 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean the book was a "prank"?
I thought with a co-author named, it might be easier to find out what happened to the release.

 
By raystephanson on Thursday, 11/29/2001 - 06:35 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This question has been answered before on the original board.
The killer waited to see Andy because he had a meeting with him! That was the purpose of his visit.
(I'm adding on to AR Brown's solution.)

 


LizzieAndrewBorden.com © 2001-2008 Stefani Koorey. All Rights Reserved. Copyright Notice.
PearTree Press, P.O. Box 9585, Fall River, MA 02720

 

Page updated 7 October, 2003