1. "Fall River, 9 Oct. '02"
Posted by dnslilly on Oct-11th-02 at 9:46 PM

I apologize ahead of time for any periphrasticity on my part:

We arrived in Fall River around 5 p.m. on Tuesday, Oct. 8th and drove around according to the map I'd picked up at a visitor's stop.  Within about 30 minutes my wife (driving) knew how to get to (French St.) Maplecroft, 92 Second St., & the Historical Society.  Ready to "crash," crash=tourist-speak for settling into our room in New Bedford, we headed "home" for the night.  The next morning, however, we returned to FR, she w/camera, I w/camcorder & son with total lack of interest

  I did not attempt to get into Maplecroft (maybe next time...maybe not) but we got video & photos of it, including closeups of the still-promiment name at the top of the steps.  at some point in the video I can be hear commenting about the guy fixing the place up a bit, since he surely expects visitors...The only thing about the outside of 92 2nd St. that looks as it did in period photos is the house itself.  the side yard is now a driveway and the nextdoor printing business surrounds 1/2 of the house.  the house was not open, tho I peaked through the mail slot and the limited view of the inside was really interesting. Apparently it is a Bed & Breakfast during the summer season and open for tours only on weekends outside of summer.
...Not knowing that beforehand, we'd planned to be IN FR mid week because the Historical Society is open this time of year on Tues - Fri. & hoped to tour 92 2nd St. but not stay there. haha on us...

We arrived at the Hist. Soc. for the 11 a.m. tour, rang the frontbell at that time, and were greeted by, as I stated at the time, "hey, you're the guy from the A&E documentary."  Michael Martins informed us that the HS was closed for the week (for reasons I don't recall) so we couldn't tour that EITHER, but we did spend a while in the gift shop, browsing, and then found the cubbyhole where they keep all the Borden-related books & spent a very enjoyable and informative time conversing with Michael (don't know what I got on vid as we talked but I am hoping the camcorder picked up his voice clearly on the audio portion), who is a very pleasant, educated & interesting guy.  does he speak in person as in the documentaries? Yes.  I would love to spend an afternoon in dialogue with him.  I prefer not to say much about what he said - he knows of this board but doesn't look at it on account of he might be annoyed by some comments, as he's seen & heard it all already, concerning Lizzie - I also asked him what he thinks happened the day Andrew & Abby were killed.  he replied, "I have no idea.") maybe next time...and we DO plan on a next time.
Last stop was the cemetary. My wife shot several pics and I shot a bunch of video & traced "Lizbeth" with one finger on her stone.

I'll have to talk with Stefani about posting pics.  Anyone interested in seeing the video I shot of Lizzie-related stuff feel free to contact me off the list.  [NOTE: THIS OFFER IS NO LONGER VALID]
btw, one thing I regret not getting on film is a large business building called "Lizzie's Offices" or something to that effect. 
FR is a very interesting place, generally speaking.  However, it could take some time to learn where the stop signs are and where drivers have the right of way...

David

Boy, that must have been awful to get there & find out
everything was closed! What did you think of Maplecroft?
Was it impressive? Did it look like it could have been?
I think it is quite plain looking, did it rival any of the
others in the neighborhood? Your son didn't enjoy seeing a
world famous crime scene?

I've heard of this before...everything closed for some reason...but I didn't think they STILL did that!

Walt Disney would turn over in his Grave!
You just don't CLOSE, at least in Florida!
We know how to TREAT tourists who come to their idea of Mecca.
Hope you didn't get too much of Storm Lili, which was all I could think about the week you were gone.  Rain there, and rain back?
Were the leaves at least turning?

~that must have been awful to get there & find out
everything was closed!<<<

very disappointing, yes, but rather than get pissed off I made the best of what I had access to.

~ What did you think of Maplecroft? <<

it's in bad need of paint, but it was exciting just to be there and actually see it.  it is big but numerous other houses are more grandiose (tho I wouldn't want to have to keep them clean) and attractive.  However, I don't know if the other (fancier) houses were built prior to or after Maplecroft...MC might've been considered pretty fancy in the 1890's.

Your son didn't enjoy seeing a
world famous crime scene? <<<

We didn't actually get to see it cause the house was closed but the fact is that, other than Star Trek, he isn't interested in anything from before 1989 (his birth year).  he prefers all things "modern."

~Rain there, and rain back?
Were the leaves at least turning? <<<

I unplugged this pc before departure cause it was storming here.  it rained part of the way to the coast but not ON the coast.  Leaves are turning colors & weather was gorgeous throughout Mass., RI & CT.  On the way back, it started raining in NYC and kept raining until Huntington, WV. But I'm one of "those people" that isn't bothered by rain.

We're planning another trip to FR w/o the lad since Sharon & I are equally interested in touring the Historical Soc. & INside the murder house.

Again, if anyone would like a copy of the vid of our recent sojourn, let me know.  [NOTE: THIS OFFER IS NO LONGER VALID]

David

To quote Harry (among others): "Deja vu all over again."
I'm really surprised the B&B was closed, because my one trip there (in 1998) was in the month of October, and I think it was open for guests all week at that time.  We stayed Friday night and Saturday night.  It was Halloween, and I've heard that's one of the most difficult times to get reservations.  We made ours months in advance.  There were day tours and a big Halloween party while we were there.  The party involved people who weren't staying at the house, as well as the B&B guests.  I believe they had guests in most of the guest rooms.  They did have one party cancel out at the last minute, but somebody else took their place.  When we arrived in the late afternoon, we knocked on the front door and got no answer, to our surprise.  We then went to the side door and knocked again, and again got no answer.  We went to a nearby phone booth and called the place.  Somebody answered right away but didn't explain why the door wasn't answered.  We went back and were admitted immediately and with warm hospitality.  We too had a problem with the FRHS.  We had planned to visit it on Saturday, only to learn on Friday night that it isn't open on weekends in the fall (or at least wasn't then).  I said something like, "You folks ought to get together with their management and at least try to get a private tour for your guests."  The response was, "They do not play well with others."  If it's true, it's a shame.  Also seems odd that Martins doesn't want to read what's on this board (or others?) because it could contain errors.  That would be a good opportunity for him to get the real truth out there!  I think maybe there's a little jealousy going on somewhere.  I know from experience that fall is a big tourist time in New England, because of the gorgeous foliage.  Seems like Fall River isn't taking full advantage of that.

(Message last edited Oct-12th-02  8:25 PM.)

That is so sad, driving all the way up there to find everything closed!  You would think these places would be open all the time, like the Historical Society, I mean afterall, it is for the whole town!  And the B&B was closed too?  I would think that fall would be a perfect time to run an inn in New England?  But, hopefully you did enjoy yourselves while there.

That is a shame David.  Not exactly a trip around the corner.  At least you did get to see the houses if only from the outside to get some perspective on their size.

How about the A J Borden  and Academy Music buildings?  Right across the street from each other on Main street.  There not public buildings but I think I would like to see them as well. 

I would love to meet Martins.  I like history and Fall River has quite a past even if you don't include Lizzie.  Lizzie is the icing though.

Edisto, I don't know if he was the originator of the "Deja Vu" saying but I learned it from that master of the English language, the great Yogi Berra, former catcher of the dreaded N.Y. Yankees.  As a Red Sox fan there was no one I feared more coming to bat than Yogi. Very hard to get out in clutch situations.

~seems odd that Martins doesn't want to read what's on this board (or others?) because it could contain errors.  That would be a good opportunity for him to get the real truth out there!<<<<<

I don't want to quote him (on exactly why he doesn't look at this board) until I am able to hear how the conversation came out on the audio portion of the tape.  He doesn't know what actually happened inside 92 2nd St. any more than you or I.  Remember, tho, there is more to the FRHS than the Bordens.  Lizzie is what gets the most attention, I'm sure, but there are other attractions there.
Before cars, it must've been a real blast to sled down some of those streets in The Hill.

~Not exactly a trip around the corner.  At least you did get to see the houses if only from the outside to get some perspective on their size. <<<<

Yeah, we originally planned the trip to see Monticello but somewhere along the line Sharon changed her mind and got excited about going to FR.  I'd also like to see Monticello but we do plan to return to FR when the house AND the FRHS are open.  I did peek in through the mail slot at the 2nd St. house.  lights were on and I could see a bit of the stairs - at which time I thought back to when Lizzie laughed as Bridgette had trouble unlocking the door.  have you ever WISHED you could see a ghost?  I did then.

~How about the A J Borden  and Academy Music buildings?<<<

Didn't notice the latter but I saw the former.  If his name is still on it, I didn't see it.  I assumed I didn't see it cause it is no longer there.

~I would love to meet Martins<<<

I enjoyed it a great deal, tho I anticipated a firmer handshake from someone as professional & confident as he.  Frankly, if he'd had a couple of hours just to converse, I would've been glad to.

David

Yes, one has only to read "Victorian Vistas" to realize the Lizzie Borden story is a rather minor footnote to Fall River history -- at least in the minds of many people.  It must have been a pretty exciting place to live in those days.  There's a wonderful newspaper story in one of the volumes about a visit by none other than Winston Churchill, for whom the creme de la creme of Fall River came out.  Young Winston had already made a name for himself as a war correspondent, among other things.

I guess I can tell you a little about our trip to FR on August 22.  In the first place, neither my wife nor I had ever been there before.  We managed to find FR off of I-95 heading down from 494 from Worcester.  And we drove through FR for about a half-hour -- totally lost -- trying to find the LB house.  Finally, I spotted a mailman and he gave us some convoluted directions heading back a couple of miles the way we had come from along some quite narrow streets.  And, whoopee-dee!  We just happened to drive past the FRHS.  Stopped there.  An elderly gatekeeper was on the phone and, (honest!) spent at least 1/2 hour explaining to the voice on the other end about the virtures of FR and it is not all to to with (she smugly said) Miss Borden! She finally got around to telling us there was no tour that day, so we left.  Continued to drive, and WOWEEE!  We found the Post Office, went around one of those %%#$?*!! New England rotaries a couple of times.
And, then, lo and behold, there it was, across from the Dr. Bowen city bus station!  Beware of the parking meters when you go there.  I think ours was broken.
Anyhow, we managed to park and went into the printing shop where we were greeted and told that the guide for the day would be back at 1 pm.  It was about 20 minutes to 1, so we looked at the various and sundry touristy things....sweatshirts, t-shirts, shot glasses, bumper stickers, etc.  (no books, unfortunately).
Our guide showed up and let us in throught the front entrance.  SHEEESH!  The same door as Lizzie came in and out of and the same one that Bridget let Andrew through that morning!  I looked at the locks as we were ushered in.  I'm not sure why, but I was turned around!  It all looks so much different than the pictures or the floor layouts.  And BIGGER!  The rooms were huge compared to what I had been led to believe.
That poor guide started on her speil and I asked her if we could ask questions and take pictures.  No pictures were not allowed, but questions were encouraged.  I said, so this is where such and such happened and, generally, tried to blow her mind with facts and speculation for a few minutes.  She was convinced that I knew enough about the murder and the house to keep her mouth shut and wait for us to comment or ask questions. Then we got along just wonderfully and she let me take as many pictures as I wanted.
One comment:  the chill of being there!  No ghosts, no spirit movements.  But when we left, I tingled with excitement.    My whole body was TINGLING!
Back to the inside.... We went through the parlor, the dining room, my camera clicking the whole while.  Then upstairs (and no, I don't think I would have bothered to notice Abby's body from the steps).  Saw the loo (once known as the clothes closet), the guest room, Lizzie's bedroom, Emma's room, Mom & Dad's room, Abby's dressing room, upstairs to Bridget's room and her little sitting room, downstairs to the kitchen, saw the back door.  I got an unauthorized peek down the basement stairs, but we couldn't go down there. Anything but that. Saw another loo (once called the pantry).  And that was that. It was over. We had spent over an hour with our guide bacause there was nobody else for her to guide.
It was a WONDERFUL, MEANINGFUL EXPERIENCE for my wife & me!
One more thing:  we were hungry, so we looked for a place to eat.  There is a Portugese restaurant just down the hill on 2nd St.  Had fish and chips and bottled water.  Darn nice place.

more about all this later.

Joe

Joe, you apparently had a similar experience to mine, in that I expected the house to look a lot more crowded and dark inside than it actually is.  I also had that sensation of being turned around.  Every time I look at that picture of Andrew on the sofa, I have to remind myself that the sitting room (in which we spent most of an evening) is on the south side of the house, and that Andrew's head is toward the front (west) end.  For some reason, I want to put everything on the other side of the house and reversed.  I have a poor sense of direction anyway.  It appears that it's a lot easier to see things in Fall River if one goes in the summertime. 

Yep, Edisto. Very true. Glad I'm not the only one who had that experience. That "everything is backwards" scenario might have been the spookiest thing about our LB house visit.

One thing that has helped get me straightened out on this "reversal" business is that my own house, while very different from the Borden house and in an entirely different sort of setting, has the same orientation as the Borden house.  It kind of gave me chills when I first realized that.

I really loved your report, JOE!

What's this *backwards* feeling you guys got?
Do you think if you all had entered from the Side Entrance, you would have been orientated properly?

MY problem was always SEEING in my mind, the stairs on the Left. I saw those stairs on the Left for 20 years and it took Stef going there and bringing back pictures before I could *re-orient* myself.

Did the movie "Legend" have anything to do with it?

I think it was the staircase on the right of the entry door and the parlor left of the entrance that threw me.  Even though I had seen the layout sketch many times, that layout "looks" to have things out of perspective.  In my head, I had the front entrance coming directly into the parlor or the sitting room.  It's hard to explain.  I may have been corrupted by Legend, but I don't think so.
My head says that Bridget opened the door for Andrew, he took a couple of steps into the sitting room and put his key on the fireplace mantle.  Uh-uh.  He had to walk quite a ways to the fireplace.  Things like that got in my way.  And that darn parlor!  Not sure what it is about the parlor.  I thought it should have been in front of the sitting room. 

As I recall, we did enter by the side door, after having played musical doors and getting no initial response from the staff.  That actually might be what caused me to be turned around.  When I last visited Fall River, I had read only Arnold Brown's book, although I had seen the Legend movie several years earlier (and prior to that as well; think I saw it when it was new).  I'll have to look at the movie again and see if it contributed to that strange "reversed" feeling.
I've mostly lived in older houses with rather small rooms, so that may be why the house seemed roomy to me.  As in most Victorian-era houses, the ceilings are high, which contributes to the feeling of space.  

I honestly did not expect to see a room to my left when we entered the front door, even though I knew it was there.  The room, of course, was the parlor.  That threw me!  I fully expected to go immediately upstairs or into the sitting room.

It might be that the print shop next door got in the way of my perspective.  THAT should not have been there.

Edisto, I tried to kill Andrew from the dining room door, too, and I agree with you.  Easy to sneak from dining room with that door open and just two steps and "squish" and "smash".  But, I also get the feeling that the killer stood more to the front of the sofa and to the rear of snoozing Andrew.  That, too, would have been easy to do from the dining room, but more likely from the front entry.  There is a lot of space from the entry door to the sofa.  Difficult to creep over to the sofa, but only a second to run there.  Only a few steps.

When I tried to "talk" to Lizzie when sitting in the sitting room, I really, truly do not believe she done it.  She let someone in.  does anybody remember seeing that coat closet next to the door/stairs that isn't in the diagram?  I do, and I checked it out.  Big enough to hold a person perhaps?  I think so.

And how in the world could Bridget hear Lizzie laugh from the stairs with the stairs in a different room?  The house was virtually soundproof!  (I think a while back Rays & I had a thread about the virtues of lathe and plaster walls).

~I really, truly do not believe she done it.  She let someone in.<<<

That's my opinion too...and even the first time I read about Lizzzie laughing as Bridgette had trouble with the door, I wondered if she giggled cause she knew Abby was dead.

I s'pose this discussion should move to the LAB section rather than stay here. 

David

I think maybe I'm still confused.  Wasn't Bridget in the foyer, letting Andrew in the front door, when she had trouble with the locks and said "pshaw," or whatever she said?  --And wasn't that when she claimed she heard Lizzie laugh upstairs?  I guess they were technically in different rooms, because Lizzie might have been in the upstairs hall or on the landing and Bridget downstairs.  However, there probably wouldn't have been any walls between them, would there?  Maybe I've always had the wrong understanding about their relative positions.  --And I believe there were some experiments with that closet off the foyer, and it was proved that a man could have hidden there.  Of course, that's no proof that a man DID hide in there.

Wasn't Bridget in the foyer, letting Andrew in the front door, when she had trouble with the locks and said "pshaw," or whatever she said?  --And wasn't that when she claimed she heard Lizzie laugh upstairs?  I guess they were technically in different rooms, because Lizzie might have been in the upstairs hall or on the landing and Bridget downstairs.

I'm not even certain what a foyer is...but the way I understand it is that Bridgette was fumbling with the lock(s) on the front door because Andrew was home and wanted to come in - while Lizzie was at the top of the stairs OR in the upstairs hallway and giggled.  If that is accurate, they were probably only about 20ft away from each other - 25 ft. tops.

I also think big daddy was attacked from behind - he never knew what hit him.  'course, that is just IMO but it's a decent theory.

Dave

Joe, do you mean Lizzie laughing on the Front stairs, when Bridget let in Andrew?  Or are you picturing her on some other stairs?

Yes.  That's what I meant, but confused myself.  Right-o, Maggie let Andrew in the front door, heard Lizzie laugh when she said "Sh..!" or something like that.  That would have been in the same room, cuz the stairs are really in the same room as the front door.  So if LB laughed, she sure would have heard her.  Oops.

But do we have ANY "documentary proof" that Bridget used the S-word?

My common sense, from reading the trial transcript (Bridget pauses to think up an answer), is that was the word. Haven't we heard it so many times nowadays it fails to register?
Thirty years ago when visiting a relative I used the S-word, and her little girl heard me. So she started to repeat the word, even as I said not to!!! I decided to leave immediately. Another unsolved mystery? Where did you learn that word? (Not that her older brother didn't use it.)

(Message last edited Oct-16th-02  4:46 PM.)

Oh Joe thank you so much for clarifying.

It's odd to imagine, though, if one of them is lying, "which stairwell" could become moot, anyway!

I have read before that an author thought it possible that Bridget was remembering Bowen's visit on Wednesday morning, and confused the days.

In the Prelim, pg. 408, Dr. Bowen specifies that he was let in the front door in the morning, Wednesday by Bridget,  as someone he thought was Lizzie was going up the stairs. (paraphrased)
The timing, etc. seems coincidental.
As Lizzie says she is a later riser than the rest of the family, she may have turned around on the stairs and headed back up when Bowen rang, because she might have been embarrassed to be caught by a visitor in her dirty Bedford Cord.
(Who knows...maybe she giggled?)

(Message last edited Oct-17th-02  1:18 AM.)

~Thirty years ago when visiting a relative I used the S-word, and her little girl heard me. So she started to repeat the word, even as I said not to!!!<<<<

11 yrs. ago when my boys were 9 & 2, 4 of us were in a small car w/o A/C, in a traffic jam on I70 in Ohio, on the way to NJ, and the guy in the car next to us was blaring rap music.  hot & frustrated, I said, "turn that damn thing down!" and don't you know that's the main thing the older boy (then a budding Charles Manson, now reforming) remembered from that trip?
anyway, I know I agreed with someone here that Lizzie did not wield the murder weapon(s) but withheld info & did let the murderer in - the question is who DID she let in?  Bill Borden?  Uncle John? Emma? Dr. Bowen? OJ Simpson's grandfather?

Dave

Witness Statements:
pg.2:  Lizzie being questioned by John Fleet, Thurs., Aug.4th:  "A man came here this morning about nine o'clock, I think he wanted to hire a store, talked English.  I did not see him;  heard father shut the door, and think the man went away."

Lizzie doesn't testify to this at the Inquest.

Masterton believes she means the man spoke with an English accent. You probably know one of his suspects is J. Clegg, and he bases some of his suspicion on this 9 a.m. meeting...(?)

You're right, that is odd, Kat.  I'm looking at your posting here and comparing it with  your message #245 in "Speaking of Miss Emma" ...

If, as Fleet claims in the statement he took on August 4th, he was told by Lizzie on her own about the angry man who came to the house about two weeks prior to the murders; why would he then bring Alice Russell into the picture at the Prelim. and indicate that she urged Lizzie to "tell him about the man"? Why suggest that Lizzie held back this information when she hadn't?

And why add at the Prelim that Lizzie said the angry man who was at the house two weeks prior to the murders was a stranger, somebody out of Fall River?  This is not in his original witness statement. Was he confusing this person with the man who "talked English" that Lizzie told Fleet came to the house around 9 a.m. on the morning of the murders? (witness stmts/ p.2)

[I do think it's probable that the Aug. 4 man had an accent of some sort -- otherwise why say "he talked English"?  It's unlikely that Andrew would be able to converse in any other language.]

I think these discrepancies show how memory alters the truth over time.

It is especially odd and that's what threw me off track until Harry pointed me in the right direction to verify what Carol had been saying all along about Alice in the room Aug. 4th.

Now, Fleet's notes as to that interview with Lizzie are all-important--as they are closest in time to the deed, and also are touted in the Casebook (Williams) as the BASIS or foundation of all the witness statements that followed.
What I mean is that when Casebook came out, that FLEET statement was aLL there was of any witness statements, according to Williams.  Confusing.  She calls the Fleet Notes "the only known record" as of the publish date of the book which is 1980.
See pg.s 18 & 19.
No mention of Alice.
I didn't really draw the conclusion you did, but your interpretation is interesting.

Here's where I might get into trouble but I'll say it anyway.  I think Fleet himself lost that trial from the state's perspective.  If any single person screwed up royally it'd be Fleet.

I think Hilliard has to bear some of the blame as well.  He didn't bother showing up at the house until around 3 in the afternoon if I remember correctly.  I don't know what could have been going in Fall River more important than a double hatchet murder almost with shouting distance of City Hall.

He should have taken charge and sealed the house ASAP, ordered the household to a hotel and conducted a thorough search the first hours.

 

I'm not sure why this discussion is on this thread -- but I'm just following Kat around, I guess. 

I'm really confused, now.  I must be missing something. Kat, in your post you say "Harry pointed me in the right direction to verify" that Alice had been in the room on August 4th.  Do you mean Mr. Hoffman's LBQ article where he says: "Later that day when Assistant City Marshal John Fleet was interviewing Lizzie in her bedroom, Alice was present ..."?  Is there a primary document that backs this up?  Was Mr. Hoffman perhaps going by Fleet's prelim. or trial testimony that puts Alice there? Because otherwise, I agree with Williams et al in the Casebook when they say that Fleet's handwritten notes are the only known records of the police investigation on August 4.  And on that day (according to his notes) Lizzie tells Fleet on her own -- in answer to his question as to whether she has any idea as to who could have done this -- about the angry man who came to the house two weeks previous.

There is no indication from Fleet that Alice had to urge Lizzie to tell him about this until he brings her into the picture at the preliminary hearing.

I feel like I'm fixating on a minor point, here. I tend to do that.  Never been much of a 'big picture' person, unfortunately.

I don't think you're missing anything.
I think you've taken your interpretation farther than I was going at the time, that's all.
I Can see that it looks the way you described.
I figured, tho, that if Fleet testified to this enhanced version at the Prelim and at the Trial, that if it were Not true about Alice, then we would know about it ....those lawyers seemed to manage just fine getting stuff into the record that had no business being acceptable to the court standards..so Lizzie would have found a way, thru Jennings or more probably Robinson, even in Closing, to tell her side if Fleet was lying.
I also think Alice would have badgered someone into sticking up for her if, again, his testimony was untruthful.
Is this what you mean.?
That you do not wish to rely on Fleets New & improved memory?
Because, if so, I will think about what that would mean to the Trial...like conspiracy to change evidence...
I am open to this somewhat right now, after reading Fleet and Mullaly at trial...the 2 stooges?  The contradictions...Fleet's surliness and defensiveness after he is "resumed."...[T, 505]

--What Harry pointed me to was the testimony.  I thought "It Couldn't BE there...it's Not in his Witness Statement." That's all that meant.  But there it was.  And I found that Fleet was really loose with his evidence.
I have not yet received the LBQ, so Dr. Hoffman's article is still a mystery to me.  If that is worth discussing we can move over to a new thread?

Thanks, Kat.  That clears it up for me.  You make a good point.  There would have been opportunities to challenge Fleet's inclusion of Alice if it didn't happen.  It's possible that his written notes were condensed -- and that he went into more detail about the incident at the trial.  I'm content to leave it at that, anyway.