1. "conspiracy !"
Posted by jeffery on Feb-25th-03 at 6:49 PM

hello agagin,

glad to be back.

a few weeks ago,
i was able to locate the property in westport where the horse traders
were keeping camp.

morse kept his horses on the farm of mr. stephen p. kirby,
on drift road in westport,ma.

sheriff kirby(albert crary kirby)of westport is the son of stephen.

it was this sheriff kirby who gave a paper interview,regarding the horse traders in westport.

also,if you look in your copy of; did she or didn't she, tuesday, june 6, 1893,
in the little sketch photo,you will notice deputy sheriff albert c. kirby of westport,leading miss borden into the court room.

more about that interview next time....
                                           

Evening Standard, June 6th:

"...At three minutes of 9 o'clock Deputy Sheriff Kirby arrived with his charge.  She looked none the worse for her night's rest.  Sheriff Wright made a wise selection when he appointed Mr. Kirby to look after Miss Borden.  He has attended to his duties faithfully.  His charge has proved most retired, and although the two have set side by side in court, but once in that time has she spoken to the official, and then only to ask for a drink of water.  On the way to and from the court house she has kept the same reserved demeanor, commenting once on the excessive heat of the day while on her way to prison yesterday afternoon.  The carriage in which she rides to court enters the jail yard, when Miss Borden is turned over to the Deputy Sheriff by Keeper Hunt."

--Hello Jeffery!

--Thanks Harry, for the newspaper articles from The Evening Standard.  They are welcome, and very useful!

If there was "excessive heat" in the first week of June, how hot would it be by August?

Are you implying that paying off the father of the sheriff was the price for those "horse traders" to avoid any official investigation?

This was the following year,1893, and we know how the weather patterns can change from one year to the next.
Especially in the Northern states...August can seem almost like Fall, some days.

Here's the June 6, 1893 sketch from the Evening Standard showing Kirby and Lizzie entering the courtroom.



(Message last edited Feb-27th-03  7:55 PM.)

Thanks, Harry.  I've never seen that illustration before and come to think of it, it looks like the first pic we get of Lizzie with someone else where we can judge her height and weight.  She looks average, not the thick through the waist, chunky woman shes usually referred to as.

Thanks for the scan Harry!
That is a good addition here.

In the Sourcebook we saw all kinds of Lizzie's--short, stout, lovely like a bar-maid or merely pleasant -faced...taller, slimer, and those HATS!
She looks here like she has a shawl over her arm...for those chilly mornings?  (Were there chilly mornings?)

All those drawings could represent the sketch artist of the particular newspaper it was printed in!!! And the point of view they were pushing.

We know that one FR newspaper was anti-Lizzie, while the other two were pro-Lizzie (class loyalty?).

I could see an artist pushing their own point of view as to sketching Lizzie for the paper, but I can't (and don't wish) to imagine an editor or publisher pressuring their artist on the scene to depict a pre-conceived notion of what her appearance was!  *Draw a pig-faced woman*, they were ordered?  *Make her look like a hooker because we are anti-Lizzie here*, they are told?
Do you really believe that?

BUT OF COURSE!!! You must believe that an editor does not just sit behind a desk, but DIRECTS or manages his employees. You can often get the editor's point of view from the cartoons, and not just the editorials. Note that a good cartoon may sell itself.
What's your opinions on this from your local newspaper?
Was there any changes when a corporate chain bought up your local newspaper?

Duplicated and deleted.


(Message last edited Mar-1st-03  11:14 AM.)

Duplicated and deleted.

(Message last edited Mar-1st-03  11:14 AM.)

If you're asking me for real, I am allergic to newsprint and some book print and haven't been in a room with a newspaper in it for 10 years. (other than briefly the Library.)
Why is the world you see so full of machinations and conspiracies and pre-conceived planning and all about power & corruption?  Because you look for that?  In your own life on your own block, is it also like that?

Suggest using rubber gloves (can be washed) to handle newspapers.
How will you get an idea about what is going on??!!

If you are not a grown up, you will soon learn about the "Easter Rabbit" and "Santa Claus" conspiracies. (Ha-ha-ha.)

So what is going on in business and government? Do things there "just happen"? (Ha-ha-ha.)

Read Jim Marrs "Rule by Conspiracy" for an education. I can say it is mostly correct for the 20th century. He may be right about earlier times as well. Ever read about the Federal Reserve, for example? Do interest rates move by themselves? You must continue your education.

I have to cover my face not my hands, but thanks anyway.
I've tried to continue my education for the past 30 years.  I don't think I particularly need newspapers for that.
I get my news on the computer, from T.V., from my neighbor and from my sister who is in touch with everything.
BUT, I don't think I need to be immeresed in conspiracies and power-brokerage to become an adult.  Why would I want to know about that?  What would it do other than give me a stomach ache, if I even believed half of it?
Have you ever traveled?
I think THAT is the best extended education...

(Message last edited Mar-3rd-03  1:02 AM.)

Surely Kat you must know that everyone is a crook, all news is slanted, all photos are doctored and all history is not to be believed.

Now Arnold Brown and O.J. are different. Believe EVERY word they say.

Kat, I say this publically, you are one of the brightest, knowledgeable, and helpful persons I have had the pleasure to know.  You need no guidance from anyone on this forum. All of us are in your debt for the hundreds of posts supported by real facts not just opinions. Stay the way you are.

I most heartily agree with Harry.  I know I am relatively "junior" in this group, but I must state my distaste with any tendency of one poster to systematically "correct" other posters.  Why should this become a realm for dogmatics? Keep going, Kat.

I would like to know just who this person is, so I can correct their opinion! Or do you trust everything you read, especially when you were a witness and know better?

I do appreciate my Knights in shining armour here!
You guys are wonderful.  Thank you.

I will say that I never have believed Ray points any derogatory posts at me personally, and if it seems as if he did, I doubt he meant it to sound that way.
Sometimes, too, it's not so clear, but he may be including all of us!

ray, may i ask what research you have done to check the credibility of arnold brown's theory?

hope to hear from you soon.........

Ray, I have heard now for the third time from the third person (all three of whom are closely related to the study of case in major ways) that Arnold Brown made up his entire book and did it to yank the chains of all Borden researchers and authors. He invented the story, which was suggested to him by someone else. I have also heard from a good authority that Brown, before he died, admitted his ruse verbally to several people.

I was enthralled with his theory when I first read his book. I loved the way he wrote the story, completely convincing me of his theory. For that alone, he deserves high praise.

Unfortunately, his main motive was to use the guise of research to trick the world into believing his claims. There is NO evidence to back up his assertions, no birth certificates, no death certificates, no second book.

He was upset with the "know-it-alls" who populated the study of the case and wanted to put them in their place by writing a best seller. And in that he certainly succeeded. People eat up conspiracy theories. The only problem with them is that it requires that a great many people keep their mouths shut forever. And we all know that this is almost impossible! But it does make interesting gossip.

I think he will eventually go down in history as one of the great hoaxers of all time. A little Orson Welles (war of the worlds) mixed with Clifford Irving (fake Howard Hughes biography) or the guy who wrote the fake Hitler diaries.

When you read his own words as published in the LBQ through the years (which are reprinted on the Lizzie Borden Virtual Museum and Library at http://lizzieandrewborden.com/BrownControversy.htm) you will hear a man who wants to stir things up, who asserts the stupidity of anyone who does not buy into his tale. That attitude alone should be a signal. This man had issues!

I am anticipating your counter argument that of course those close to the case would say that Brown made it up and that PROVES that he didn't! Please don't go there and turn the tables that way. You see, Brown is laughing on the other side. Splitting his sides, probably, at the perfect mess he left behind. If anyone discounts his story or professes an alternative view they are feeding into his theory---that the conspiracy still exists! The perfect paradox. Kudos to Brown!

Several months ago, I read that the framework of the "Billy Borden" story was rumor in Fall River's Irish community 'way before Arnold Brown published it.  The piece that I read seemed to be written in a somewhat jocular vein, and I'm not sure its author meant it to be taken seriously.  (I'll search for the reference.  Believe I remember where I read it.) It made me wonder if Arnold Brown himself might have been the victim of a hoax and then decided to expand on it.

Why you can ask that about every other poster at this site!!!
The 'Acknowledgements' tells who helped with his book. How many other books have such a large list of referees? Not V Lincoln's book. Getting other opinions is one way to check or verify an article. In one sense, we are all doing this to each other. It is fun, and legal and moral.

As I've said before, I read all the other available books, and compared. AR Brown alone show his experience etc. in discussing the politicians' actions. How your local government really works: its not altruism, folks.

(Message last edited Mar-5th-03  1:21 PM.)

The proof is this: it is the 'best evidence' to provide a solution to this crime. It explains the gaps in our knowledge, and why Lizzie wasn't guilty but the trial was fixed. But this basically is an opinion from experience.

I have never heard anyone PROVE that this was a hoax by AR Brown. It has the ring of truth. That's all I will say, this was covered months earlier. The disproof of the hoax is that this claim was made after Brown died.

I won't call it a 'hoax' but Masterton's book seems like wishful thinking to me. The test is how well an explanation fits the known facts. AR Brown book works best for me.

[The 'proof' for me is that his book originally ran for 1100 pages, but was cut down to 350 for salability. I got the impression that he skipped over certain areas. You all do know about the trade-offs in publishing? A 600+ page book sells far fewer than two 300+ page books? In my opinion.]

(Message last edited Mar-5th-03  1:36 PM.)

As for the impossibility of keeping a secret, that was done by the group behind the JFK assassination. Because of the consequences. Note how many witnesses to the event died soon afterwards? Or was that a coincidence, not a conspiracy? You have to read a couple of books and decide for yourself. I understand about 75% believe in a conspiracy, but it doesn't matter; all those involved are now dead. They did it and got away with it.

Didn't AR Brown quote Henry Hawthorne (name?) that he told people about this for many decades, but was met with disbelief?
Didn't other books find out that he did exist?
About "illegitimate children": is this a rare occurrence then or now?

(Message last edited Mar-5th-03  1:37 PM.)

I love Brown's book. I just don't believe Brown's book. Let me get out my copy and look at his references and I will get back to you.

I do agree, Ray, that he has just as much right to say what he says and state his theory as V. Lincoln and Hunter and Radin and the rest. I also think these works are hooey. There is no evidence to support the incest, the epileptic fits, and the lesbianism. Just as there is no evidence to support Billy Borden.

What gets me is he calls his book non-fiction, while the others are writing an admitted fictionalized account of the events.

That is the hoax. That it is THE TRUTH and THE FINAL CHAPTER when it is essentially a very entertaining work of fiction. A theory unsupported but possible I guess. Possible. Not in truth the truth.

I agree with Rays, Steph.  At the risk of sounding obtuse, I think that Brown has a pretty good theory.  It is akin to jeffery's battering about regarding William Davis.  Now I don't necessarily ascribe to Brown's "Billy the Bastard Son" theory.  It is a fascinating, but, perhaps, unprovable theory.  I do, however, go along with the "pale-faced man" seen outside on the sidewalk during the commitment of the crime.  And, I go along with Masterton's forensic "evidence" regarding the timespan between Emma's and Andrew's murders.
There are so many theories out there.  Lincoln, in my opinion doesn't cut it, nor does Hunter's fictional account.  I vote a combination of Brown, jeffery and his Swedish friend and Masterton:
"Sombody" killed Emma and Andrew shortly before 11:00.  It might have been Davis the Butcher (jeffery), Billy the Bastard (Brown), the disgruntled clerk (Masterton) Uncle John (me), but not Lizzie.  "He" left via the front door or the screen door without being seen and went merrily on his business.
Joe

Just one question: how many of you have a relative that is crazy, and maybe put in a hospital? Did you go around and tell the neighbors, or put an ad in the local newspaper? OF COURSE NOT!!!

So too the fact of an illegitimate child is also hushed up among normal folks (show business people excepted, of course; this includes sport stars too).

So what is your personal experience with these "family secrets"?
(I happen to know of a relative with an illegitimate child from a  married woman; nobody ever talks about it. The only reason I know this is that his grandma talked to my Mom about this many years ago.)

So you are saying that the fact that there is no proof is proof? My poor head is spinning!

Silence about a supposed insane illigitimate child does not mean there was one. Silence may also mean that there never was one so there was nothing to hide.

I like Brown's theory. As I said, it was an entertaining work of fiction. I devoured it when it first came out, as I recall. It was interesting and fresh and just as possible as the other theories. But I still have to assert that without facts, all Brown has is a theory. Unsupported with evidence.

Evan Hunter certainly wrote fiction. Victoria Lincoln (a novelist) wrote from "in-group gossip". E Radin was a reporter who covered hundreds of murder trial; his expose of the Lizzie typed confession may have set him on a re-investigation of the case.

AR Brown tells it all in his book. He did list the many who worked on this book, as references.

william s. borden was born on april 20, 1854 in fall river,ma.

his parents,charles l. borden and phoebe hathaway lived at 19 ninth street in fall river.

william later moved to taunton,ma and married rebecca gammons.

william is buried in an unmarked grave at king's furnace cemetery in east taunton.

his wife's grave has a headstone.

william's house still stands on liberty street in taunton.

his name and residence are listed on a map of taunton,listed in the 1895 bristol county atlas map book.

william's 4th great grandfather is joseph borden.

joseph was born in portsmouth,r.i. on 12-3-1680.


joseph had a brother named richard.

richard was born on 10-25-1671.

andrew j. borden is the 3rd great grandson of richard borden.

william s. and andrew j. borden are second cousins(i believe.)

andrew borden married sarah anthony morse on 12-26-1845 in fall river.

they had emma lenora on 3-1-1851.

their second child, alice esther was born on 5-3-1856.


(on the flip side)


charles l. borden married phoebe hathaway on 10-16-1836.

they had 1) charles a., born on 11-27-1837.

2) amanda m., born on 12-20-1841.

3)hannah h., born on 9-24-1844.

4) e. ann., born on 5-23-1850.

are we to believe that when andrew's daughter emma was just two years old,he went and had an affair with phoebe hathaway(married)and birthed an illigitamate son with her.

What's a "Lizzie typed confession"?
Is that the Tilden-Thurber hoaxed "confession?"
If so, maybe this could have been explained in the message text so people are not confused?
What do you think?

http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/BrownControversy.htm

Also, author to LBQ, Jon Keller, did acquire Taunton State Asylum records of a Wm. S. Borden discharged 1875, 17 years prior to the murders.

But did he return for safekeeping?

Arnold R Brown says it best in his book on the children of the parson and Phoebe / Peace Borden. No need to repeat here.

Read his acknowledgements etc in his book. Nobody cited there questioned his book then. Did the residents of Fall River have anything to say in 1991-2 when it was published?

Brown's acknowledgements seem pretty standard to me.
Several Libraries (which imply newspaper articles--UH-OH!),
Vital Statistics, Town Clerk, Registry of Deeds, Dept. of Mental Health, a Superior Court Judge: Chief Justice, newspaper researchers and curators, a Mrs. Marion Sherman of Westport provided insight and support, and Florence Brigham & Michael Martins of the FRHS.

So what's the big deal?