Forum Title: LIZZIE BORDEN SOCIETY
Topic Area: Lizzie Andrew Borden
Topic Name: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?

1. "Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Dec-26th-02 at 4:22 AM

Inquest
Lizzie
53

Q. When did Morse come there first, I don't mean this visit, I mean as a visitor, John V. Morse?
A. Do you mean this day that he came and stayed all night?
Q. No. Was this visit his first to your house?
A. He has been in the east a year or more.
Q. Since he has been in the east has he been in the habit of coming to your house?
A. Yes; came in any time he wanted to.
------
Q. How many times this last year has he been at your house?
A. None at all to speak of; nothing more than a night or two at a time.
Q. How often did he come to spend a night or two?
A. Really I don't know; I am away so much myself.

____________________

Inquest
Morse
96

Q.  How often did you come to see them after that?
A.  Sometimes once a week; sometimes once in three or four weeks; sometimes once in three months, just as it happened.

Q.  Did you often stay over night?
A.  Yes Sir, quite often.

Q.  Were on good terms with all the family.
A.  Yes Sir.
----------
Q.  Did you see much of Miss Lizzie when you came to the house?

97
A.  Sometimes; sometimes I did not see either of the girls, stayed a few minutes and talked with Mr. Borden, and went out.
------------
97, con't
Q.  Had you often stopped over night?
A.  Why, occasionally.

Q.  Had you seen much of the state of the domestic relations  in the family?
A.  No. I dont know but I saw.

Q.  So you could speak with any positiveness as to the relation between Lizzie and her mother?
A.  They were always on good terms, so far as I know.

Q.  I might make the same remark. Did you see enough of her, when you were there, and of her relations, to speak with positiveness as to what her relations were with her mother?
A.  I should think they were pleasant. She used to eat to the table with her, and I did not see anything.

Q.  Did she usually eat with her?
A.  Occasionally sometimes in the morning she would not eat there, probably would not be up.

Q.  The last three times you were there, you did not see Miss Lizzie at all?
A.  I don't think I did.
---------------------
98
Q.  When is the last time you remember eating at the table with Miss Lizzie, before, the tragedy?
A.  I don't know as I can call to mind.

Q.  You have done so?
A.  Yes.

Q.  Have you done so in six months?
A.  0, yes several times.
____________________________________

Morse had been to the Borden's house:

-1865 ?  "Just after the war ended".  (Inq. 95)

-1875 for a year  (Inq. 95)

-1877  (Inq. 95--says visited the year before the Centennial & the year after)

-1885  (Inq. 94)

-1889.5  visited when first came back from the west, "2 .5 years ago."

-Q.  On those visits did you come to the Bordens too?
A.  Always stayed there; ...

[In Oct. 1891 Morse moved in with the Davis family] (Inq. 94) :
Q.  What relation is Mr. Davis to you?
A.  None. Years before I went West, I worked for them in the meat business. I have always kept up correspondence since. It seems like home to me, and I like to stay there. Isaac C. Davis, his son [William], is in the meat business with him. The old man cannot see now, has a cancer. I stay there with them.

-(Morse seemingly is in a bind.  He sounds like he is trying to distance himself from Lizzie but also wishes to be a witness as to Lizzie's demeanor at the table towards her stepmother.)
-(Also note:  It is Isaac who has cancer.  We have been told his son Wm. also has cancer?  I'd like to know how old Isaac was?)

  >>>   >>>   >>>

When asked at the Inquest when Morse had come to visit, Lizzie is off, but not by much from the years approx. 1878 onward.  But she leaves out  1865 (if that is the year the war ended).  She would only have been 5.  She also leaves out 1889.5

Lizzie thinks Morse visited:
14 years ago and once since  (Inq. 53)

-14 years ago was 1878, but Morse was there in 1877.

And that he came "5 or 6 years , perhaps 6"( years ago)  (Inq. 54)

-1886 or 1887...but he was there 1885.

---At this point she definitely distances herself from ALL of his visits from 1889 on.  He has been "very little that I know of" to their house.  " I have been away a great deal in the daytime, occasionally at night...
Around town..."  Only away at night if "off on a visit."...But not more than a night or two since she came from abroad....and except when she was just away in New Bedford.  Both of them deny seeing the other during Morse's visits to Second Street:  (Inq. 96)
Near the end of June, 1892
July 10, 1892
And August. 3, 1892.

Then she says something curious:
Q. When did he come to the house the last time before your father and mother were killed?
A. He stayed there all night Wednesday night.
Q. My question is when he came there.
A. I don't know; I was not at home when he came; I was out.   (Inq. 54)

Q. When was it that you heard the voice of Mr. Morse?
A. I heard him down there about supper time---no, it was earlier than that. I heard him down there somewhere about three o'clock, I think. I was in my room Wednesday, not feeling well, all day.  (Inq. 55)

Q. Did you hear him eating supper?
A. No sir. I did not know whether he was there or not.
Q. You heard him in the afternoon?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Did you hear him go away?
A. I did not.  (Inq. 55)


--Morse arrived about "half-past one" on Wednesday, Aug. 3rd.  (Inq. 97)
But Lizzie says she did not know when he came because she was out.
Eli Bence tries to place Lizzie at the drugstore he worked at, Wednesday morning.

--I had figured, long ago, that Lizzie meant she was not at home when Morse came back from Swansea about "a quarter to nine."  (Inq. 99)

Morse arrived Wednesday about 1:30 p.m.  (Inq. 98)   And stayed until 3 or 4 p.m.  (Inq. 99).
Lizzie says she heard him about 3, but did not hear him go away and then is she saying she doesn't know when he came (BACK) because she was out (at Alice's)??

--This whole post was not designed merely to ask this question, though it is a query I've always had.  It is more in the way of getting this testimony down so it can be compared.



2. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Dec-26th-02 at 3:26 PM
In response to Message #1.

Could it be that Uncle John left in the afternoon to vist someone, and make an arrangement for a vist the next day? When was the scheduled visit of Abby B Whitehead cancelled that day?

It seems that both of them were heeding their lawyer's advice (?) to not say any more than they were asked, and to be as vague as possible. IMO.


3. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Doug on Dec-26th-02 at 5:04 PM
In response to Message #1.

My impression has been that John Morse, during the times he was "east" and staying in the Fall River-New Bedford area, was a frequent visitor at 92 Second St. as well as at the Swansea farm(s). Frequent enough that Morse may not have been able to tell exactly the number of times he was at the Borden house, either for a short conversation with Andrew, or for a meal, or for an overnight stay. I think it is possible also that Lizzie did not know how often Morse visited, at least short stops when she may well have been absent from the house.

I don't believe anyone who was living/staying at 92 Second St. on the day of the murders or just before or just after (Lizzie, Bridget, John Morse, Emma, Alice Russell) told everything they saw, heard, or knew about what happened on August 4. Each had their own reasons for remaining quiet. In the case of John Morse I have yet to be convinced that he was involved in planning or "executing" the murders. But I think he knew enough about the Borden family and Andrew's business that he quickly put two and two together and figured out who did commit the crimes and probably the reason. Why Morse was not forthcoming about what he knew or suspected remains one of the many puzzles of the case.

(Message last edited Dec-26th-02  6:09 PM.)


4. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Dec-27th-02 at 1:52 AM
In response to Message #3.

Well, these replies don't really answer my question, but are interesting in that they are responsive in the way of telling what you-all think.  Thanks.

Did that one passage of Lizzie, where she says she was not at home when Morse came there, sound like she may have been out trying to buy cyanide?
If Bence had claimed a woman who looked like Lizzie came in to his store he worked at closer to 1 p.m. this might have been interpreted this way?
Instead he thinks she was there between 10:00 and 11:30?
So where could she be between 10 a.m. until 1:30, or just after, if she *slipped* back into the house AFTER Morse arrived but before 3 when she heard him?

Anyway, it's also interesting that Lizzie was reported at the Chicago World Exposition in Oct. 1893  (R. 187).  Wonder if she went to see Uncle Morse while she was in his neck o' the woods?

-Ray, Morse was supposedly gone to Swansea about 3:30 or so Wednesday, from the Borden house, and didn't return until 8:45 p.m. ("After dark").  (Inq. 99)
He could have been anywhere doing anything..

--I had just read a snippet of a theory that Lizzie "was set up".  I was trying to figure HOW this could be?  Wouldn't Morse be involved in That?

(Message last edited Dec-27th-02  1:59 AM.)


5. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Dec-27th-02 at 4:00 PM
In response to Message #3.

Doesn't AR Brown suggest that Uncle John was used to bring Wm S Borden in for that visit? John Morse was around long enough to know he was vulnerable to prosecution IF Lizzie talked.

All Lizzie had to say: "I thought my cousin Willy was to visit that morning" to solve the crime.


6. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Dec-28th-02 at 1:12 AM
In response to Message #5.

OK quick crime solvers:
Bridget says:  "Oh, John Morse never left that morning."
And meanwhile the Emery's have made a quick unscheduled visit to Canada.


7. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Dec-28th-02 at 12:25 PM
In response to Message #3.

One of my favorite authors (AR Brown or David Kent) suggests that the coolness between Uncle John and Lizzie was a put on to hide their concealed agreement in the cover up, and how they benefitted.

Its like at a corporte job. You may know that two people are having an affair from a chance obervation out of the office. But at work they act as if they were almost strangers! (If you ever were witness to such a thing; sooner or later they're found out.)


8. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by redfern on Dec-28th-02 at 12:35 PM
In response to Message #1.

I enjoyed the fact that she was out, yet also Wednesday, she was in her room all day not feeling well.
      RedFern


9. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Carol on Dec-28th-02 at 1:47 PM
In response to Message #3.

Doug said: "In the case of John Morse I have yet to be convinced that he was involved in planning or "executing" the murders. But I think he knew enough about the Borden family and Andrew's business that he quickly put two and two together and figured out who did commit the crimes and probably the reason. Why Morse was not forthcoming about what he knew or suspected remains one of the many puzzles of the case."

Do you also think that Lizzie, (if you don't think it was her who did it) figured out who did commit the crimes and the reason?  If so that would mean both Uncle John and Lizzie knew and neither told. If both new and didn't tell could that still mean that Uncle John thought Lizzie did do it, because he did let Lizzie be arrested and tried or didn't seem to do anything to stop it. Or were they both in league to cover for the real culprit?  


10. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Emma?"
Posted by Kat on Dec-30th-02 at 4:35 AM
In response to Message #1.

Inquest
Emma
112
Q.  How often has Mr. Morse been in the habit of coming to the house?
A.  Just as it happened.
Q.  That is sometimes oftener, and sometimes not so often?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  That is since he has been here this time?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  It was not an unusual thing for him to come and spend the night?
A.  0, no sir.
Q.  Did you know he was coming here this last time?
A.  No Sir.
.......
--OOO.  Wouldn't we like to know if she remembers all the visits of this very dear uncle of hers?  The questions are few because she wasn't there, and also because she feels unwell.  Emma is not a witness at the Preliminary, so it must be felt on both sides that she can't add anything to the story and she was away Thursday.  I would have liked a more fuller accounting of Emma at this point.  Her appearance at the trial probably became mandatory after the dress-incident was discovered and needed explaining.  Otherwise she may not have been called, and all we would have of Emma's words, under oath, would be the measley 12 pages of Inquest testimony!
____
. 113+
Q.  She [calls her Maggie] did not serve as a stand up waiter, did not stand behind the party. When you got home, was she at home?
A.  Thursday night, yes sir.
Q.  What did she tell you about it'?
A.  She did not tell me anything. I dont remember asking her but one question, two questions.
Q.  What was that, please?
A.  I asked her if she would stay with us.
Q.  If the other one has no more to do with this matter than that, I dont care for it.
A.  I asked her if she saw any boy come with a note. I  do not remember asking her any other questions.
.....
Q.  After you got home that night, you did not hear Maggie say anything about where she was when the thing happened?
A.  No Sir.
Q.  Nor have any talk with her at all?
A.  No Sir.
Q.  Did you see your sister then when you came home?
A.  Yes Sir.
Q.  What did she say about it?
A.  I dont know, there was so much going on.
___________

Inquest
Alice Russell
149+
Q.  At any time did you have any talk with the servant girl, that you recollect?
A.  I dont remember of ever saying a word to her.
Q.  Or of hearing her say anything?
A.  No Sir, I did not hear Maggie talk much, and I have not at any other time.
Q.  Did you hear Mr. Morse say anything about it at any time that day?
A.  I dont remember of anything; there might have been general talk; I dont remember of anything.
Q.  Do you remember of anything that Lizzie said about it, that remains in your memory?
A.  No, I have not asked her but one question all through it.
Q.  Will you tell me what that is?
A.  Yes Sir, I asked her what she went to the barn to do.  .....

--Can you believe that Emma didn't ASK or discuss anything about that grim day with BRIDGET, other than those 2 little qustions she admits to?!  *Will You Stay?*--THAT answer I would have liked to hear!  I'll bet it put "Pshawww" to shame!
--And that Alice never asked Lizzie or Bridget ANY QUESTIONS?!



11. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Emma?"
Posted by Susan on Dec-30th-02 at 9:33 PM
In response to Message #10.

I think that "I don't know, there was so much going on." is the understatement of the year!  Someone had to have told Emma about the note, John, Alice, Bridget, or Lizzie, for her to have asked Bridget about it.  Sounds to me almost like Lizzie told her about it and she checked with Bridget because it sounded fishy or something.

I think that both Emma and Alice thought of Lizzie as a poor little thing that day and were not looking at her as someone with the suspicion of guilt hanging over her head.  Had there been an inkling at the time, I'm sure at least Alice would have admitted to asking Lizzie some different questions.  In that highly codified society it must have seemed strange to Alice why Lizzie, a lady, would need or want to go out to the barn.  I can almost hear the question as "Why in God/dess' name were you out in the barn?  As for Bridget, I don't know why Alice didn't ask her anything, maybe you just didn't speak to other people's servants? 


12. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Emma?"
Posted by Kat on Dec-31st-02 at 2:49 AM
In response to Message #11.

Your last remark was the only thing I could think of.  That Alice would not deign to interfere with a Borden servant.
But why Emma didn't sit Everyone down and say "OK, what's been going on?!"   Makes me wonder if she didn't really want to know?  Maybe she figured the less she knew the less she'd have to prevaricate/evade?
And Morse only asks, "...for God's sake, how did this happen?"
And these people lived together for 4 days, with Bridget in & out?  They MUST have talked about something?
The whole town is talking about it, but not them?


13. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Emma?"
Posted by rays on Dec-31st-02 at 10:42 AM
In response to Message #12.

They probably did, but there is no record of anything.
Just like any death in the family today.


14. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Emma?"
Posted by Kat on Dec-31st-02 at 10:03 PM
In response to Message #13.

The remark that Emma made to the Mayor Saturday night, that *they* had tried to keep *it* from Lizzie as long as possible, infers *they* had discussed something about the case.  They were not forthcoming as to what *That* was, though, in their testimony.  AND it sounds like Emma & Morse, at the least. 
Also, Alice Has the Thursday newspaper in her room--the paper that had the most misinformation.  She must have been thoroughly confused.  Yet asks no further questions, and STAYS?


15. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Doug on Jan-4th-03 at 12:08 PM
In response to Message #1.

Lizzie is telling the truth when she says, "I don't know; I was not at home when he came; I was out." if she interpreted the question as asking when was the very last time John Morse entered the house before the murders. Morse said he returned to the Borden house around 8:30 or 8:45 on Wednesday evening and Lizzie did not return home until 9:00 PM or a little after.

If Knowlton's question ("When did he come to the house the last time before your father and mother were killed?") assumed John Morse's Wednesday visits (arriving at the Borden's in early afternoon then departing for Swansea and returning in the evening) were all part of "one" visit then we don't know whether Lizzie is being truthful.  My opinion is that Eli Bence was a credible witness and did see Lizzie in his pharmacy on Wednesday morning. We don't know when Lizzie arrived home from that shopping trip as she testified that she was home all day (during the day) on Wednesday "in my room."


16. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Doug on Jan-4th-03 at 12:45 PM
In response to Message #9.

My opinion is that Lizzie was the real culprit. I think Uncle John came to that conclusion pretty quickly, probably within a couple of days of the crimes. I also believe each of the other people present (Bridget, Emma, Alice Russell) eventually came to the same conclusion. For me the puzzle of this case is no longer the "who did it?" but the why, the how, and what caused those present at the house on August 4 to keep still, at least as much as they did. What did these four people know or suspect? Why did none of them ever outright accuse Lizzie, at least in a public way, of such brutal murders? 


17. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-4th-03 at 4:15 PM
In response to Message #15.

Yes.  This is my opinion too.
I can't quite decipher what the intent of the answer by Lizzie is, so tend to look at it both ways and try, at first, to give her the benefit of the doubt.
Since it can be interpreted in differing ways, I am now comfortable assuming what I wish, based on other evidence.


18. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Jan-5th-03 at 4:53 PM
In response to Message #16.

The 'best evidence' is in AR Brown's book (as to why they shut up). Or do you think that these church goers would conceal a murder?

Then or now (moot court in Calif 2000) LAB was found 'not guilty'. Nothing you can say will change this. It reminds me of those "Flat Earth Society" stories.


19. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-5th-03 at 9:14 PM
In response to Message #18.

There is no statute of limitation on murder.
That's what I hear every night on T.V.

I figure, if I can solve this thing, I am elligible for that $5,000 reward which must have accrued a LOT on interest by now!


20. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by harry on Jan-5th-03 at 10:03 PM
In response to Message #18.

First the mock trial in California was held in Sept. 1997, with Supreme Court Justices Rehnquist and O'Connor presiding.

Through the kindness of one of the members of this forum I have seen a video tape of the entire "trial". I found it interesting if somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

At the end the audience (some 700) acted as jury and voted by holding up fans when asked their verdict.

Attached is a document, that if you have a word processing program, you should be able to download and read. It summarizes the mock trial. It was originally on the internet but probably was pulled due to age.

There is another article which appeared in the New Bedford Standard Times, South Coast Today paper which can be found at:

http://www.s-t.com/daily/09-97/09-18-97/c01lo238.htm

(Message last edited Jan-5th-03  10:27 PM.)


21. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Susan on Jan-5th-03 at 11:23 PM
In response to Message #20.

Thanks, Harry.  Interesting reading, I still feel like theres one piece of the puzzle missing and if we find it, Lizzie's name would be cleared for good, or not. 


22. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-6th-03 at 1:04 AM
In response to Message #16.

I keep coming back to Judge Blaisdell's words as he proclaimed Lizzie "Probably Guilty" after the Prliminary Hearing:

"The long examination is now concluded, and there remains but for the magistrate to perform what he believes to be his duty. It would be a pleasure for him, and he would doubtless receive much sympathy if he could say 'Lizzie, I judge you probably not guilty. You may go home.' But upon the character of the evidence presented through the witnesses who have been so closely and thoroughly examined, there is but one thing to be done. Suppose for a single moment a man was standing there. He was found close by that guest chamber which, to Mrs. Borden, was a chamber of death. Suppose a man had been found in the vicinity of Mr. Borden; was the first to find the body, and the only account he could give of himself was the unreasonable one that he was out in the barn looking for sinkers; then he was out in the yard; then he was out for something else; would there be any question in the minds of men what should be done with such a man?"

Porter, 139+

--I think that "man" would have hung.  And I'm not referring to just any man, or to a fictious man, but to the "what-if" question exactly as the judge desbribed it--if Lizzie were that man...
When I try to find her innocent, I keep coming back to this....


23. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Susan on Jan-6th-03 at 11:57 AM
In response to Message #22.

Wasn't Judge Blaisdell supposed to be crying when he stated this to Lizzie or is that an author's invention?  I too come back to this whenever I try to picture Lizzie as innocent of the murders, obviously they felt they had enough against her to arrest her.  And had Lizzie been born the son that Andrew wanted to carry on the family name, oh boy, would he have a time of it! 


24. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Carol on Jan-6th-03 at 6:01 PM
In response to Message #22.

Judge Blaisdell's analogy is a little off and unreasonable itself because there wasn't a MAN living in the Borden house other than the victim, so no man would have been out in the barn looking for sinkers in any case. If all he was about was saying that either a man or woman could commit murder that's different, but it isn't what he implied.


25. " Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-7th-03 at 7:31 AM
In response to Message #24.

If one believes Lizzie was in the barn.
If one believes this person would be looking for sinkers at the moment of the hacking to death of the father.
If Lizzie had been a man, the same applies...if that man had no better alibi...if that man had the same apparent Motive...if that man was in *possession of the bodies* and in *possession of the premises*  which another judicial commentator describes the position this "survivor" was in.
So yes, what Judge Blaisdell makes sense, and in a most profound way.
He believed that charge so thoroughly, he lost his job over it!


26. "Re:  Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Jan-7th-03 at 1:01 PM
In response to Message #25.

So you're saying that Judge Blaisdell was rebuked by the voters for saying Lizzie was "probably guilty"? What does this say about popular opinion of the day? WERE judges elected then?

SO what he is saying is: Lizzie probably didn't do it!


27. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Jan-7th-03 at 1:01 PM
In response to Message #22.

NB The word is "hanged". A "hung" man is something else.


28. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by haulover on Jan-7th-03 at 1:13 PM
In response to Message #22.

Kat?

are you saying that a hung man has a lesser chance of receiving justice?


29. "Re:  Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-7th-03 at 4:28 PM
In response to Message #26.

Evening Standard
Friday, August 12, 1892  Page 1

..."Mr. Jennings then began to argue for the acceptance of his plea that his client should not be examined before the court where she had already been examined at an inquest.

Contrary to Law and Justice.

The proceeding was contrary to all law and justice.  He as attorney for Lizzie Borden had been refused permission to enter and guide his client while an inquiry was being made.
It was not to be expected of human nature that the same judge could act at an inquest and at a trial and decide fairly in both cases.  The proceeding was wholly unprecedented.

District Attorney's Demurrer.

District Attorney Knowlton entered a demurrer against the plea.  He said he knew more than twenty cases in his own career where similar proceedings were gone through with, and they failed to attract attention because the crimes were not attended by such extraordinary circumstances as those which preceded this arraignment.
The matters of an inquest and the matters of a trial were entirely distinct, and it was not complimentary to His Honor's judgment to say that he could not act fairly in both cases.

Sparring Between Counsel.

There was warm sparring between the representatives of the government and the prisoner, Mr. Jennings displaying his pugnacious powers to excellent advantage.

Government Sustained.

The government's demurrer was finally sustained, and Mr. Jennings filed an objection.  He moved for a trial at once.
District Attorney Knowlton objected on the ground that an inquest was still going on."

------

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

"Marcus G. B. Swift also served on a committee appointed to discuss accusations that Arba Nelson Lincoln had made against Judge Josiah C. Blaisdell. The Judge, of course, had presided at the inquest, this being the only forum where Lizzie Borden ever testified. Arba Lincoln, 5th cousin to Victoria Lincoln's father, lived at 25 French street. In March 1893, he was forty-three years old, a lawyer and Special Justice of the 2nd District Court. Judge Blaisdell was seventy-two. Lincoln resigned from his position with this court because "he failed to receive fair play" from the Judge and "he could not remain in his position as associate justice without violating his self-respect." Besides Marcus G. B. Swift, members of the committee also included Andrew Jackson Jennings, attorney for the Borden sisters, among others. On April 10, 1893, Blaisdell sent his letter of resignation to Governor William E. Russell (probably no kin to Alice - she was, however, only three years older than the governor). The committee met two days later. Blaisdell's resignation was effective nine days after that."

-------
Rebello
Pg. 152:

"He [Blaisdell] was appointed presiding judge at the Second District Court of Bristol County, Massachusetts, and city solicitor of Fall River from 1868-1874. At the age of seventy-two, he presided at the inquest of Lizzie A. Borden in 1892. Judge Blaisdell also presided at the preliminary hearing, a move that seemed quite odd since he had already heard testimony at the inquest. However, Judge Blaisdell's presence at the preliminary hearing was within the law of Massachusetts.
Judge Blaisdell resigned his position at the Second District Court on April 21, 1893, one month before the Borden trial. He cited ill health in his letter of resignation. In March 1893, Arba N. Lincoln, Special Justice at the Second District Court resigned and made several accusations against Judge Blaisdell. The local Fall River Bar Association met to discuss the accusations. However, no action was taken since Judge Blaisdell resigned in April."

--Here is info on the Blaisdell scandal.  I'm sorry but I do not understand the questions posted by Ray or by haulover.


30. "Re:  Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Susan on Jan-7th-03 at 9:48 PM
In response to Message #29.

I think they're kidding with you, that term, "hung", has something to do with male anatomy.  But, believe it or not, that term originated from men that were hanged, which would cause them to "rise" to the occasion, so to speak.  Its where the idea for autoerotic asphyxiation came from.....I know, I am just filled with irrelevant knowledge. 


(Message last edited Jan-7th-03  9:50 PM.)


31. "Re:  Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by kimberly on Jan-7th-03 at 11:50 PM
In response to Message #30.

Really?! That is cool! Um, I think.


32. "Re:  Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Carol on Jan-9th-03 at 3:43 PM
In response to Message #25.

If Lizzie wasn't in the barn then how could she have identified the items in the basket which she looked over while trying to find iron for sinkers?  Did she "remember" from when she was last in the barn say, 10 years ago?

If one does not know that anyone has been hacked to death or is being hacked to death inside one's house, then it is normal for one to be looking for something in another location.  It would be abnormal or a cover up if she knew her father was being hacked to death and went into the barn during or after that event.

That someone is in the barn, a building in use on a house lot where that person lives, then that alibi of being in that place is not an abnormal situation, any more than is Bridget's alibi of going upstairs for a lay down before she made lunch.  Both were either in and about the house or property during both murders. Judge Blaisdell didn't have the opportunity to use a better reasoning for his presuming Lizzie guilty because he didn't mention her in possession of a weapon, blood on her clothes, etc., etc., which would, had he had that information, made him sound more reasonable.  The attorneys at the inquest asked Lizzie certain questions, she could not give answers to other questions, more important ones, which were not asked.

Judge Blaisdell didn't loose his job over the Borden case problems. It was another event entirely.  He didn't lose his job in any case, he resigned his position. No one forced him out, no panel indicted him nor the review board told him to step down.  So I don't follow that he lost his job over the Borden case.




33. "Re:  Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-9th-03 at 6:21 PM
In response to Message #32.

Can you explain the situation that Blaisdell was in so that he had to resign?  (Forced to resign means losing one's job to me)

As to the last time Lizzie was in the barn she says at Inquest  "I don't know as I had [been in the barn] in 3 months". (70).  Of course that could mean 3 years and three months, but I doubt it.

She knew there was lead in the barn because she says her father told her so. (73)

We have a poster here who says that Lizzie mixed up the location of the *box* with the *basket* and I believe he is correct.

I don't know as I would call Lizzie's alibi *abnormal*, but you and the judge can decide that.

I agree with you about Bridget.


34. "Re:  Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Carol on Jan-10th-03 at 5:05 PM
In response to Message #33.

"Can you explain the situation that Blaisdell was in so that he had to resign?"  (Forced to resign means losing one's job to me)

No I can't explain the situation Blaisdell was in. It had something to do with one Arba N. Lincoln bringing charges against him, but your quotes didn't say what those accusations were exactly. If the charges were false the Judge could have refuted them, but it seems from what you quoted that he didn't and the people investigating the situation didn't accuse him further because he resigned. Do you know he was forced to resign, did someone come and require him to resign? If he resigned to cover up for his own misdeeds then we can look at this situation in a different light than Judge Blaisdell was a victim.
Don't peer review committees usually side with the peer?

Did the charges have to do with the Borden case?  That he would choose to relinquish his job (he was in his seventies) seems like a "no contest" type of reaction to an unpleasant situation not a forced resignation. But we don't know what went on behind the scenes. If the people investigating him came to him and told him it would be in his best interest to resign because they had this or that information then that sounds like a plea bargain. A person could look at it the other way by saying that because he resigned the truth never came out and he therefore covered up a messy situation. I don't know, I don't have all the facts and I don't care about Judge Blaisdell personally but I would like to know the truth.

"We have a poster here who says that Lizzie mixed up the location of the *box* with the *basket* and I believe he is correct."

Let's hear more about this. If she identified the items in the container from the barn which the police officer also identified as being there, then she could not have known that unless she had seen them as a collection with her own eyes. It wasn't a general statement about lead being somewhere in the barn which she got from her father.
I'll have to look this up in the trial transcript.



35. "Re:  Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-10th-03 at 5:35 PM
In response to Message #34.

I thought you said it was another event entirely, that caused Blaisdell's problems.
I figured that meant that you knew the details.
I admit I also am not totally clear on the details.
Thought you could clear that up.

[Edit Here: Jan.19,03--Please see Link to Blaisdell *Scandal*:
http://www.arborwood.com/awforums/show-topic-1.php?start=1&fid=27&taid=1&topid=1062
Just created.  Thanks. ]

Well, actually Lizzie said she found that out about the lead because she had been asking about nails.
Could that have been About 3 months ago?
About the time the barn was broken into?
Or maybe a year ago June, when the house was broken into and Lizzie says she found a nail in the door?
Curious.
Inquest
Lizzie
73
Q. You were searching in a box of old stuff in the loft of the barn?
A. Yes sir, up stairs.
Q. That you had never looked at before?
A. I had seen them.
Q. Never examined them before?
A. No sir.
Q. All the reason you supposed there was sinkers there was your father had told you there was lead in the barn?
A. Yes, lead; and one day I wanted some old nails; he said there was some in the barn.
Q. All the reason that gave you to think there was sinkers was your father said there was old lead in the barn?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Did he mention the place in the barn?
A. I think he said up stairs; I am not sure.


(Message last edited Jan-19th-03  1:40 PM.)


36. "Re:  Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Carol on Jan-11th-03 at 4:50 PM
In response to Message #35.

When I said it was another event entirely I was going by what you quoted.  You said:  "--- http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Swift.htm
.....accusations that Arba Nelson Lincoln had made against Judge Josiah C. Blaisdell....Lincoln resigned from his position with this court because "he failed to receive fair play" from the Judge and "he could not remain in his position as associate justice without violating his self-respect."

Judge Blaisdell was within his rights to sit as Judge in both the inquest and the preliminary hearing, therefore, I "assumed" that Lincoln could not have meant that that had anything to do with whatever specific accusations he himself brought against Judge Blaisdell. From the above quote it appears it had something to do with Lincoln himself, i.e., the Judge did something which caused Lincoln to think the Judge was discriminating against him and that blighted his position. 

If I run across some author who has looked more into this I'll post what I find out.

About Lizzie and the barn loft basket I researched and found out:

Lizzies testimony Inquest page 69(26):
Lizzie tells the attorney yes, there was some pieces of lead by the open door of the barn, "but there was a box full of old things up stairs." She goes on to say this box was on the work bench upstairs.

Page 72(29) she is asked if she examined the lead that was downstairs near the door.  She says she did not.

Page 73(30)She is asked if she searched in a box of old stuff in the loft of the barn.  She says yes.

same page--She says on the work bench in the loft "there were some things lying right on the side that was not in the box." She goes on to say the box was covered with lumber. Then she describes the box but we are not given number dimensions. 

Page 74 (31) She is asked what is in the box.  She says "Nails, and some old locks, and I don;t know but there was a door knob."  Also describes "some pieces of tea lead, like." They were "flat pieces of lead..some doubled together."  She goes on to say she did not look "anywhere for lead except on the work bench."

Page 77 (34) She says the work bench was on the south side of the loft.  And she had to pull over "quite a lot of boards in looking."

to be continued... 


37. "Re:  Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Carol on Jan-11th-03 at 5:02 PM
In response to Message #36.

Previous post continued:

In the trial testimony of the officers several of them mention the barn search. They make a distinction between a box that was downstairs and a basket that was upstairs.  What Lizzie called a box, they called a basket.

Page 483/1504 Fleet says he saw a basket on a bench upstairs on the south side in the barn with pieces of iron and lead in it.  Downstairs he saw a box but didn't examine it.

Page 680/1701 Francis Edson says a box filled with lead was found on the south side of the barn door in the carriage room. (downstairs)
Upstairs in the loft was found a basket with nails, paper and pieces of lead on the carpenter's bench.

Just after this Moody says: "I would like to show these two boxes to the jury so they can see what is in them and the basket found upstairs containing the nails mixed with a few screws, paper, underneath two pieces of lead pipe and three pieces of sheet lead."

The attorney's were questioning Edson about the hatchet box where the handless hatchet was found in the cellar, therefore he is showing the jury also that box, which is why he says two boxes and one basket. This is somewhat confusing because he is jumping around.

Page 571/1572 Harrington says he did see a basket containing something in the loft on the worktable. He didn't know what was in the basket.  He did not notice any box downstairs in the barn.

Page 705/1726 Medley did not go into the loft except for a couple steps during his dust test on the floor.  He did see the bench on the south side of the loft however with a large basket but he didn't know what was in it. 

So most everyone was aware of two containers in the barn which contained lead.  Lizzies statements are consistent with the police officers who were aware of the basket upstairs, which she called a box. She identified items in the basket and that there were boards around the basket as well.  To me she is too accurate to have not been upstairs looking into that basket.  Her testimony on this, inquest, came before the officers trial testimony.

I would like to know what it is that makes anyone think Lizzie mixed up the box downstairs with the basket upstairs?



38. "Re:  Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-12th-03 at 11:36 AM
In response to Message #37.

"Why Lizzie Is Guilty Of Swinging The Axe"--thread, quote from haulover, who has been immersed in  testimony lately:
"she screwed her barn story up badly.  the box she says she went upstairs to look through was actually downstairs near the door.  it was a basket upstairs."  (Sorry haulover--I hope you don't mind?  I did verify immediately what you stated and it sounded true to me, as you described, so I referred to your post.  If you would prefer that I didn't, in future, please tell me..thanks)

Even after all you looked up, Carol, which makes definition between basket upstairs and box downstairs, I don't understand how you can still ask that question?
You have verified that there were 2 containers and that Lizzie confused the two. 

Inquest
Lizzie
73+
A. I think he said up stairs; I am not sure.
Q. Where did you look up stairs?
A. On that work bench, like.
Q. In anything?
A. Yes; it was a box, sort of a box, and then some things lying right on the side that was not in the box.
Q. How large a box was it?
A. I could not tell you. It was probably covered up with lumber, I think.

--*I think*he said upstairs--she's covering herself in case they didn't find it upstairs.
--a *sort of* box--she's covering herself in case they say it was not a box.
--*it was Probably covered with lumber*...???
--"I THINK"...?
----Sounds like she was in there 3 months ago, to me!


--this is pretty good stuff, haulover!


39. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by harry on Jan-12th-03 at 12:01 PM
In response to Message #1.

I can think of no reason why Lizzie could not have made one or more secret trips to the barn within days or weeks of the murders.

I believe it's less than 30 feet from the side door of the house to the side door of the barn.  Even less from the cellar door to the side door of the barn.  Using the cellar door would even reduce the chances of her being seen from the street.  She would have more than enough time to see what was in boxes, baskets or whatever upstairs or downstairs. A trip to privy in the cellar would have covered her time away.

If you believe Lizzie guilty certainly a lie about visiting the barn pales in comparison to the crimes.

(Message last edited Jan-12th-03  12:02 PM.)


40. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-12th-03 at 12:34 PM
In response to Message #39.

What do you think she was doing if she made secret trips to the barn?
Did she lie in the hay/
Was she looking for something?
Is the *lie* that it was 3 months since she had been out there?
More, please may I have some more?


41. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by harry on Jan-12th-03 at 12:45 PM
In response to Message #40.

It would seem to me that if she was going to use the barn story for an alibi during the slaying of Andrew then it behooved her to know what was in there.

She could have seen the boxes containing the lead, nails, etc.  It may have stayed in the back of her mind such things were there. All I'm saying is that she didn't just have to be in the barn on the morning of the murders to have known what was there.

Didn't she also go in the barn in May when she went to look at the paint being mixed and to approve the color?


42. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Carol on Jan-12th-03 at 1:45 PM
In response to Message #41.

The barn was in family use, if not daily, (Andrew's washing out of his slop pails) and there is no reason to not include in reasoning that Lizzie, if innocent, might have thought of looking into it for lead that morning because she saw that her father had perhaps even left the barn door partly open or the lock not put on right (she could have seen this while picking up pears in the yard) and that inspired her decision to look for the sinkers for her upcoming fishing trip.

However, as Harry says, IF she was guilty of something then it would behoove her to know what was in the barn.

"Even after all you looked up, Carol, which makes definition between basket upstairs and box downstairs, I don't understand how you can still ask that question?  You have verified that there were 2 containers and that Lizzie confused the two."

No, I did not say Lizzie confused the two, nor verified that. Lizzie simply used a word to describe what was the container upstairs on the workbench that was different from that used by the police. One officer stated (Edson) that it was a willow basket.  Lizzie said, it was a box, SORT OF, which is entirely consistent with it being some kind of container made of twigs wound about in a rectangle or square shape most likely without a handle, that resembled a box to her.

You keep bringing up that Lizzie had heard from her father there was some lead in the barn and it appears you say this is why she told her story about the search for the lead upstairs.  The fact that Andrew told Lizzie that there was lead in the barn doesn't discount the fact that she was upstairs looking through the "sort of" basket/box herself (a tightly woven twig basket in a square shape is a sort of box) She says it is upstairs on the workbench, exactly like the police say, it contains flat pieces of lead, like the police say, she says there are boards nearby some of which she had to move, like the police say. 

The difference between your thoughts and mine on this issue probably turn around the idea that I am more likely to credit Lizzie as having done what she says and you think it is a ruse to cover her tracks.

That's my story but I'm not stubborn enough to stick to it if it proves wrong.


43. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-12th-03 at 3:18 PM
In response to Message #42.

A difference is you may prefer to give Lizzie the benefit of a doubt.
I have tried that for 2 years and it gets us nowhere.
If Lizzie is believed 100% then we are back in 1892 and have proceeded no further.
Also, the benefit you give her extends to letting her desribe a *basket* as a *box* and implying that is what she really meant,,,going so far as to describe it's look and how it was made...
A difference is you proclaim a speculation as to the *family use* of the barn as if this is fact.
The difference is in trying to examine Lizzie's actual words and not what we think she means.  If we assume what we think she means, then her words are imbued with the person's own intent, and becomes subjective....like a speculation that Bridget heats her dishwater and therefore washes those dishes over by the table and the stove.
The difference is in the interpretation, and actually I prefer the exact words of Lizzie as oposed to a person's filter of them.
Lizzie can speak, or mis-speak all on her own.
If a person uses  *maybe* or *what if*, or *suppose*, then this type of speculation becomes more tenable.
Sometimes it actually seems as if there are 2 separate sets of source documents.
[edit here:  I just heard a good analogy on the playoff football game:  "it can be a matter of two opposing coaches and they both are good, they just have different play philosophies...]

Back to the barn.
Prelim., 33, Bridget says she has not seen Lizzie going to the barn since the horse was gone...a year.   And that the girls did not use the privy in the barn.
That sounds like Lizzie was not a habitual visitor to the barn or at least not for quite long periods.  If she did, then maybe it was not seen by Bridget.  Again, pg 72, at Inquest, Lizzie says "I heard father say, and I knew there was lead there."
--Something odd also, she says [the box] "was not nearly as full as it could have been." (Inq. 74)

(Message last edited Jan-12th-03  3:46 PM.)


44. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by augusta on Jan-12th-03 at 10:59 PM
In response to Message #40.

Thanks, Kat,  for posting haulover's previous information about Lizzie mixing up her barn facts.  That was highly interesting. Yes, it does sound very much like Lizzie was using her memory from a prior barn trip. I hadn't pieced all that together before, tho I was always thinking I smelled a bowl of rotten mutton somewhere ...

Bridget was asked how often the barn was used and if anyone had occasion to go in it during the past year and she said a "no" to that one.  Maybe Lizzie was going by only what she heard Andrew say.  Like Harry said, certainly Lizzie could have went out there with no one seeing her.  Who knows?  But it doesn't sound like she went out there that day, does it?

I always thought Lizzie probably hid the stuff from the daylight robbery in the bahn.  Just a thought.


45. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Susan on Jan-13th-03 at 2:22 AM
In response to Message #44.

Then what of Mr. Lubinsky's testimony, does everyone think he was mistaken as to seeing a woman that wasn't Bridget come back from the barn?  I wholeheartedly agree with Harry that what Lizzie gave as testimony about her trip to the barn sounds like it was from memory and not from an actual trip there to scrounge around that day.  But, was Lizzie actually out-of-doors that day?  Did she make a quick trip to the barn to dispose of the hatchet or hide bloody clothing?  Or, did Lizzie kill Andrew and make a pretense of going outdoors and made as much noise as possible when she came back in the house so that Bridget heard her and therefor had some sort of alibi?  Mr. Lubinsky's testimony always throws me off, did he really see Lizzie or did he mistake Bridget while she was out cleaning the windows? 


46. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Edisto on Jan-13th-03 at 10:19 AM
In response to Message #45.

Well, Lubinsky did testify that the woman he saw wasn't Bridget, whom he knew by sight.  However, I agree that his testimony is highly suspect.  The police apparently discounted it from the get-go, and he never identified Lizzie as the woman he saw.  There was also the disagreement about the hat, which Lizzie claimed she was wearing and which Lubinsky said she wasn't (if indeed it was Lizzie he saw).


47. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-13th-03 at 5:44 PM
In response to Message #46.

We all, along with William's research, pretty much discredited Lubinsky as a witness to anything.
He had an empty wagon and a fresh team headed downhill AND he was late.
The one second he had to see anyone would have to have been after he passed the tree and he would have had to turn in his seat to do it.
I do not believe Lubinsky saw what he claims he saw when he saw it.


48. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Susan on Jan-13th-03 at 8:49 PM
In response to Message #47.

Which makes me wonder why he went through all that trouble then to perjure himself?  The poor man could barely understand english, do you think he wanted his 15 minutes of fame?  Or, was it maybe because Bridget was nice to him and he wanted to help the family out?

Or, then there is the thought that popped into my mind, what if he did see some strange woman walking towards the house that wasn't Lizzie or Bridget, perhaps the murderess? 

I was wondering how fast the carriage was going, like 30 mph?  We could try experimenting driving past someone's driveway with a similar setup and see how much can be seen over your shoulder as you go by for that 1-3 second margin.    This is not to say that I don't believe William and the rest of the gang, but, it helps me to actually act stuff out in little experiments and see what my findings are so that I understand them better.

(Message last edited Jan-13th-03  8:50 PM.)


49. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by diana on Jan-13th-03 at 9:20 PM
In response to Message #47.

With regards to Lubinsky's statement.  I'm sorry I have to disagree with the premise that he was driving too fast to see what he claimed to see that day.  He says twice during his testimony that he was not going fast.  Initially he says: "just trotted a little: not fast" and later says his team was trotting "easy". He also explains that due to the nature of his business it behooved him to be constantly on the watch for customers and so he always looked around, into yards, etc.

Lubinsky's story is simple. He saw a woman, who was not Bridget, walking from the Borden barn toward the steps at the side of the house a few minutes after eleven. And when questioned, he says the woman he saw was not wearing a hat. 

We have only Lizzie's word that she had a hat on that day.  If she did commit the murders and went out to the barn to clean up or dispose of something connected with them, putting on a hat would not be high on her list of priorities. (And would she risk getting blood on yet another article of clothing?)

I have always wondered why, if the prosecution did not consider Lubinsky's testimony valid, Knowlton spent so much time trying to break him.  If you read the Lubinsky's testimony in it's entirety, it becomes obvious how many times Knowlton attempts to trip him up and confuse him. At one point says: (and I'm pretty sure he would be close to shouting here so I'm putting it in caps.)"DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND THESE QUESTIONS I PUT NOW?  DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND ALL I AM SAYING?  DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND I AM ASKING WHAT PART OF THE STREET YOUR TEAM WAS ON?" 

I really feel that Lubinsky was unduly harassed by Knowlton when he was questioned at trial. And having tutored many students with English as their second language, I see a lot of passages that would give Lubinsky trouble.

For example, asking someone who struggles with English the question, "Had you got by the house when you saw her?" is just ridiculous.  It would be very difficult for someone who is not familiar with the languge to draw meaning from that syntax.  To give Lubinsky credit, he answers: "I don't know what you mean."  To which Knowlton actually replies: "Why?" [!]

I can see that it wouldn't serve the prosecution's purpose to have Lizzie out in the barn for any length of time. But why didn't they entertain the notion that maybe Lizzie was in the barn for some nefarious purpose and knew she'd been seen coming back from there?  Maybe she saw Lubinsky when he saw her. She panicked at first ­ then tried to think of legitimate reasons she could give for being in the barn. 

And, if she was in there and up to no good, did she see the same item that Officer Medley saw on his inspection of the barn on August 10th?  i.e.: "a box of leaf lead, weighting perhaps 15 lbs. at a distance of about 3 feet 2 inches from the door on the ground floor of the barn? As Medley said in his Witness Statement: "This lead was in full view, and could readily be seen by anyone. I saw this lead also on the afternoon of August 4th."  And did Lizzie concoct her oddly implausible alibi from this lead? And if she did, think how she must have squirmed during Alice Russell's repeated assertions under oath that Lizzie told Alice the lead was to be used to fix a screen when Lizzie claimed in her own testimony that she wanted the lead for something else altogether.

[This post is way too long, isn't it.  Sorry. I got a little defensive there about poor Mr. Lubinsky.]


50. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-14th-03 at 4:21 PM
In response to Message #49.

Forgive me.  I did not mean to imply that Lubinsky was going fast.
I don't think I stated that.
He was late and going downhill.
Late means to me "distracted".
Empty wagon means to me no product to sell...so why is he looking around?
You take that tree away, and I would agree that maybe he saw what he says.
He would have an extra second to see that person just a few steps from the side steps.
I also do not claim he perjured himself.  Why would anyone want to insinuate themselves into this mess?  (Tho the McHenry's and Mr. Trickey did).
I think Lubinsky was simply mistaken.
I don't think he saw what he thought he saw, at least on that day or that place.
My opinion.
Anyone else have a view?
Also, I believe a carriage out on the open roads would be moving at a decent clip at 8 miles an hour--if the road was good.

--Btw:  It was nice to see a long post from you, Diana.

--The *getting blood on another article of clothing* question as to why Lizzie says she had a hat...
The public seemed to think it would be more understandable for Lizzie to have had her head or hair covered in some way if she did splash blood around.
Didn't they name a hood of some kind as needed to protect her hair?

(Message last edited Jan-14th-03  4:23 PM.)


51. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Jan-14th-03 at 4:40 PM
In response to Message #46.

If it wasn't Lizzie, who else could it have been?
Chaim L did say he didn't know Lizzie.

Proper ladies wore a hat when they went out, so Lizzie said this, or as she remembered it. Lubinsky was an objective witness.

(Message last edited Jan-14th-03  4:41 PM.)


52. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Jan-14th-03 at 4:43 PM
In response to Message #41.

Anyone who lived there for many years should know what was in the barn, whether she was there at that time or not.
Just as I know what is in my cellar or garage (today's barn?).


53. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Jan-14th-03 at 4:46 PM
In response to Message #47.

If you think a young man doesn't have the time look at a young woman, then or now, you may be quite mistaken.
Probably no different than today, when guys would rate strange woman in a sexual way: yes, no, maybe. IMO

(Message last edited Jan-14th-03  4:47 PM.)


54. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Jan-14th-03 at 4:50 PM
In response to Message #48.

Aside from the speed limit, you can't drive a horse like a machine. Maybe 15 MPH tops?
(I'm not an expert on a horse-drawn wagon, except its faster than a walking man 3-5 MPH.)


55. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-14th-03 at 4:52 PM
In response to Message #52.

I don't know whether this helps or hurts my own view of the Barn thing...
But I don't know what's in my garage!
7 people used to live here.
There is stuff around here in closets, high up on shelves, stashed in brown paper bags or inside someone's old trunk that I can't even imagine.
And I have a better idea than the rest as to what IS here.
When there are 4 or 5 people living somewhere for 20 years, I think they tend to ask each other, "Did you see that lately?"  or
"Where do you think that is?"

I was just thinking about this yesterday, you have read my mind Ray.
I was fgetting out the vacuum cleaner and there is a very high shelf up there and I actually muttered aloud, "I wonder what's up there?"
If asked, some member of the household could probably provide an answer.


56. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Susan on Jan-15th-03 at 12:24 AM
In response to Message #55.

Boy, that just gave me a flashback to the basement in my old family home, years of everyone's stuff stored away down there!

I always kind of think of the barn as Andrew's domain, his workshop and bench in there, his wagon and sleigh, etc.  But, then theres those pigeons that may have been Lizzie's or they may have been Andrew's and she just visited them.  Oh, and of course, there was the horse that was sold off that Lizzie used to visit.  So, it sounds as though in recent past she used to visit the barn on a fairly regular basis and probably got to know what was in there by sight; the horse being downstairs and the pigeon coop upstairs in the back.  With the exception of a few items, I would think everything else in there was Andrew's, he alone would probably hold the key as to all that was out there.

But, I'm rambling, I think that may have been part of the reason that Lizzie's barn story was distrusted from the word get-go, a young lady going into a man's domain to dig through a man's stuff in that time period.  I think that may have even been why George Robinson changed the story to Lizzie sitting under a tree in the back yard to enjoy the shade of a tree after her hard morning's work of ironing 4-5 hankies. 


57. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Jan-15th-03 at 1:15 PM
In response to Message #55.

I have lived in this house for over 20 years.
It is a very good idea to investigate what was left behind, just in case it could be dangerous. Stories about WW II grenades, ammo, etc.
If you have no need for it, sell it or junk it. If you may have a need (winter coats) save it or donate it. IMO

KEEP ALL FINANCIAL RECORDS FOR AT LEAST TEN YEARS!!!
This includes tax returns. A box (like from 10 reams of paper) should hold a lot of returns. Old bank statements shredded or burned before discarding. Identity theft is a big problem.



(Message last edited Jan-15th-03  1:17 PM.)


58. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Carol on Jan-15th-03 at 5:27 PM
In response to Message #43.

A difference is I can't say Lizzie is guilty when she hasn't been proven so nor call her a liar without proof and I don't interpret everything she says as a lie.  Nor do I think everything she says is the truth.  In this case, I think she did not lie.

Regarding giving Lizzie the benefit of the doubt (which you think I might have been doing)regarding her knowledge of the barn containers you say, "I have tried that for two years and it gets us nowhere." It may get you nowhere but this board is filled with over a hundred people and who knows what might get someone somewhere in the case.

"...you proclaim a speculation as to the *family use* of the barn as if this is fact."  Please re-read my post and you will see that what I said was "The barn was in family use, if not daily,..."  Was not the barn in family use? The exact dates we do not know, right? Was it not possible for it to be in family use daily? 

I do need to correct that it was most likely that she was alerted to the use of the barn that morning BECAUSE the barn was brought to her attention by Lizzie's own conversation with Bridget that Bridget would get the water for the window washing from the barn if Lizzie decided to latch the screen door. 

I also have to correct one other point in my post, and that is that I don't think that regarding the two boxes that Mr. Moody referred to in addition to the basket in the barn, that one of the boxes referred to the handless hatchet box.  I think it was a hatchet box but I don't think they ever found the handless hatchet box.  Maybe one of you men who are good at technical reading can ferret out which other box the attorney meant that he showed the jury at that time.

I don't think the privy was in the barn, wasn't it just outside in back of the barn. 

Regarding the issue of Lizzie being seen by H. Lubinsky, great post Diana. Excellent thoughts, well put. That was refreshing.

I don't think Lizzie said she was wearing the hat, I think she said she put the hat on the dining room table. Which is why Lubinsky didn't see the woman coming back from the barn with a hat on. She probably had it in her hand at that point.  I can't find it in the Inquest test. just off hand, the search mechanism is reading hat for (that, what, etc.) But I bet if you look it up she isn't actually saying she is wearing a hat.


59. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-15th-03 at 6:31 PM
In response to Message #58.

I have to say that I don't think the barn was in family use daily.  At least not for around three monrths, since Lizzie thought she might last  had been out there.
I don't see any pressing need for Lizzie or Abby or Emma to go there.  I only ask if you have knowledge of this since it sounds stated as fact.  If it is a supposition I would welcome that definition by you.  If one is supposing it might be best to just point that out.  Then one can *suppose*  happily forever, without confusing facts.  [In this case by *facts*, I mean what is known, as opposed to what is not known...that's all]
And yes it has been proven to us here by testimony that the privy is IN the barn...the back of the barn.  You may look at the photo's.  I believe there is ONE that will sort of show this.

I don't call Lizzie a liar.  I don't give her that title.  People here have convinced me that not telling everything is not lying.
I admit tho that I prefer to believe that simply because I have at times not told all I knew to keep from hurting someones feelings for instance, and I prefer to think of myself as not a liar.  But I really do not know what I would do if it was a huge police case and I was trying to protect someone by not telling all I knew.  I may consider Myself in those circumstances, under oath, as lying, because I had given my word  to the State toTell.

I really meant, about gving Lizzie the benefit of the doubt, (which I think you do, and maybe someone has to), to ALL her Inquest testimony...not  just limited to her barn story.
I did try reading the Inquest as if she is lying about everything.  Then I tried reading it as if she is telling soley the truth.  Then I have tried reading it picturing her drugged.  Then I have read it picturing her telling some falsehoods and some truths.  I have read it every way except aloud, tho bits of it that have confused me I HAVE read aloud over and over.  And then, if 2 years of her testimony STILL confuses me, I come here and ask.  Then I get the benefit of other's interpretations and it helps to clarify things for me.  I'm not here to state my unmovable position and I hope that is not how I am perceived.

I also am not convinced Lizzie is guilty of doing the deed. {If I was convinced I would NOT be here asking questions, and I do appreciate everyones contributions.)  I've never said that Lizzie is guilty...do you really think that?  I think there is a very high probability that she knew all about it tho, either just before or way before or just after.
If I can go to Ace hardware and heft hatchets I actually cannot envision Lizzie doing such a thing.

I think her testimony MUST lie in between the truth and the either *untruth* or the unspeakable.  It would be nice if the over-one-hundred people would also give us the benefit of their considered opinion.


60. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by harry on Jan-15th-03 at 6:42 PM
In response to Message #1.

I don't know what Lubinsky seen but he had a hell of a short time to see it. I've been doing some calculations and my numbers indicate he had at best 2 seconds but far more likely only 1 second to see the person he claims at the foot of the side door steps. 

Attached are 2 documents. The first of 92 Second St in 1892 at the time of the murders. The 2nd is a plan of the area. I have indicated by dotted lines the field of view from the street to the position of the person at the steps. If you measure the distance between the dotted lines on Second St. it is approx. 15 feet taking into account the shrubbery by Mrs. Churchills. Excluding the shrubbery it's a maximum of 30 feet.

Traveling at 10 mph is equal to 14.67 feet per second. At 15 mph is 22 feet per second.

Take also into account the unsteadiness of a wagon jostling along a road.

I don't know how much anyone can see and remember in one second when you would have no reason to try to remember at the time.

Note to William:  Bill, what did your calculations show?

(Message last edited Jan-15th-03  6:42 PM.)


61. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-15th-03 at 7:09 PM
In response to Message #60.

That's good Harry.  I actually went to sleep this morning trying to picture your picture you created !
I envisioned a schematic drawing of the line of sight and who maybe stood where etc.
You read my mind.

The bannister and rail are awfully high and it even looks in your pic , Harry, as an optical illusion, that the top part of that railing to the side steps looks like a person standing there to me right now.  But my eyes aren't very good, tho.

Also, noting the photo below we do not know if it was optimum viewing time of day, either.  Since this tree is in leaf I can assume it was not taken in winter but would someone be able to understand the shadowing as to approximate time of day considering the  way the light falls and knowing the positioning of the house coordinates?

For all we know (yet) THIS may have been Lubinsky's *view*, notwithstanding that he did have a fresh *TEAM*.  I was pictuing a fresh team and the strength and concentration needed to keep them in control on a street that is partly residential.  These were not plodding tired horses.
I wonder what the true definition of *trot* is?  That was as fast as Lubinsky admits to.






(Message last edited Jan-15th-03  7:10 PM.)


62. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by harry on Jan-15th-03 at 8:37 PM
In response to Message #61.

It would appear as if that picture was taken in the afternoon. The front of the house faces west and the light appears to be coming from that direction.


63. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-15th-03 at 8:51 PM
In response to Message #62.

Thanks!
So the light at 11:04, say, in August, would be a lot different?
More directly overhead?
No EDST?

I just looked up TROT in my 1897  dictionary.
It is considered a relatively fast pace and the oddity of the manuever is that for 1/2 the total stride no foot touches the ground.
There was a LOT more but no speed noted (mph)
I still see 2 bright horses trotting, needing guidance.

(Message last edited Jan-15th-03  9:00 PM.)


64. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Susan on Jan-15th-03 at 10:20 PM
In response to Message #60.

Wow!  Thank you, Harry.  It would be helpful too to know how high off the ground someone seated on this wagon of Lubinsky's would be, too high and the leaves would totally obscure the view.  This is really good stuff, its helpful when I've never been sure with Lubinsky's testimony one way or the other. 


65. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by rays on Jan-16th-03 at 1:48 PM
In response to Message #60.

traveling at 5 MPH would be 7 ft a second, plenty of time to notice a young woman walking from the barn. Lubinsky didn't know who she was. If he was paid to testify, he would have identified her as Lizzie, IMO. This lack of precision of detail convinces me he saw someone as he passed by. Was he looking for Bridget or a sale?


66. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Carol on Jan-16th-03 at 4:13 PM
In response to Message #59.

The picture on page 45 in Rebello has the entrance to the privy on the outside of the barn. So, unless you have more knowledge the privy as a potty was inside the barn building but accessible only from the outside.(?)

Kat, I'll repeat, since you are having difficulty with my post. The barn was in family use, (that is a fact, established by Bridget using it to get water to wash windows, Andrew using it the morning of the 4th, etc.)"if not daily" is a speculation, i.e. "IF" means such.  That is clear I believe.  If a fact is there there is no reason not to state it.  If you would like to re-compose my posts for me, inserting the speculative phrases where you think necessary, or a hundred and one in my opinions then feel free. I thought we were engaging in polite yet frank conversations, not giving advice on how people should word their thoughts.  I prefer to let others use their own noodles to understand me and it's not that difficult to understand me.

I do not give Lizzie the benefit of the doubt.  I read the testimony and tried to interpret it and came to the conclusion that at this point in my investigation of the case, she was not lying about this issue.  That is why I tried to interpret why Lizzie might have said the container she saw upstairs in the barn was a "sort of" box. So I evaluated the police testimony, found out it was a basket made of willow and came up with a possible reason why Lizzie might have said what she did. I never said it was her actual meaning. You seem to have difficulty with this, and say, "The difference is in trying to examine Lizzie's actual words and not what we think she means." What? Isn't all conversation and reading an interpretation on the part of the receiver of what is delivered or said by the other party?  How can we not do so. Sometimes it requires additional questions before we determine what the "actual words" or communication meant. 

"I'm not here to state my unmovable position and I hope that is not how I am perceived." You came pretty close when you said, "We all, along with William's research, pretty much discredited Lubinsky as a witness to anything." Who is us?

I would also, like you, hope that others start participating in the forum. 


67. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-16th-03 at 6:29 PM
In response to Message #66.

There is a large body of work, research, opinion and concensus that has been going on here for a long time.
There are archives and threads all over, that, if there is a question as to a concensus or a determination that we had reached, can be accessed by someone who is interested.

Some aspects of this case, be they running down rumors, or gossip and designating them as such, or finding witnesses not credible, have already been put to rest to the satisfaction of the majority at the time.  If a person missed that then they can go look it up, as Ray would say.

These discussions comprised as many people as were available to post at the time, so it could be said that some facets of the case have been settled, for those contributing.  That is all that means. Eventually, odds are, with the talent at hand at the time, some aspects will be cleared up and have seemed to be.  Which means when a *Lubinsky* type question comes up Now, some of us feel that has been settled.

Of course new talent and new blood, or one person popping in with one question about an issue that had been successfully put away does bring it out again, and not everyone involved at the time may care to re-hash it.  Sorry, that's just what happens sometimes.
SO if it seems like I personally am making that statement it is only as spokeperson with the understanding that that was an issue already covered.  Please check archives, past post topics, and the archives at the Museum/Library.

Semantics here but I don't think  Bridget is considered *the family*.
That leaves Andrew using the barn
That's why that statement tends to confuse.  And I do suggest that some things can confuse a reader here and that's why what is known is given footnotes and what is not known, yet speculated, is not, and should be posted as such.  That is reasonable, i think.   


68. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by haulover on Jan-16th-03 at 11:45 PM
In response to Message #59.

i don't really have anything to offer at this point.  i just wanted to chime in on how frustrating her inquest testimony is.  i've been over and over it, and i'm as frustrated as knowlton.  in fact, i think she pretty much defeated him --  i mean she gave him the runaround quite successfully.  by the end, he doesn't even bother to try to make her clarify whether she ate those pears when first in the loft or later after looking for a sinker.  he doesn't ask her to explain this "chip" she picked up.  he passes up so many opportunities for pinning her down.  he had pinned her down about abby's whereabouts that morning, which finally produced the note story.  there is a point where he seems to give up on getting anything out of her.  i think he is incredulous.

whether lizzie is guilty or innocent, i don't think that any objective examination of her testimony can find her "truthful." 

given the fact that we're trying to work through a set of "facts" that is obviously incomplete, we do have to think through the likelihood or the unlikelihood of this or that.  if it's the truth we want to uncover, what choice do we have but to put ourselves in her place and ask ourselves if what she says is believable?  and if it isn't, we then have to ask ourselves why she says it.

to take just one of so many............. both bridget and mrs. churchill understand clearly that lizzie has told them that father is dead or killed -- not "hurt."  (unless someone wants to challenge their veracity, which i don't.)  at the inquest, lizzie tells knowlton that she told bridget she thinks father is hurt. which, as knowlton indicates, is ridiculous.  but why would lizzie make this change in the story?  the only reason i can think of is to make herself seem more innocent.

the central problem in solving the crime is that whereas no one has ever looked more guilty than lizzie, we are compelled to find some other explanation because of the lack of physical evidence connecting her. 

and i can't help but think that the brown theory is a clever fiction that has come about for the psychological reason of giving us an out for this problem.  his theory explains her contradictions and evasions, while giving us another murderer.  this solves our problem, but does it solve the case?  i'm confused as to whether the facts behind that theory can be verified.


69. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-17th-03 at 1:36 AM
In response to Message #68.

That, again, was very well put.
Thanks.
Are you familiar with Brown at the moment?
Does his story SAG if Lubinsky is mistaken?


70. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Susan on Jan-17th-03 at 3:32 AM
In response to Message #69.

I can't answer for Haulover, but, it certainly makes Lizzie's story about her trip to the barn SAG if there is no truth to his testimony.  If she was spotted, it adds some validity to her Inquest testimony. 


71. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by haulover on Jan-17th-03 at 11:43 PM
In response to Message #69.

i'm not up on brown.  just know the general theory.  i did not read it with a great deal of pleasure.  and it's been a few years.  obviously, i'm going to have to read it again, but i'd rather work with lizzie's inquest testimony.

i believe that there is much to learn from her testimony.  it is hard, but i believe that the truth is buried there somehow.  in her contradictions and evasions, there must be something worthwhile.  from it we may not be able to determine who the murderer is, but from it we may be able to determine whether lizzie herself is the murderer.

without being able to explain it, i sense that this is the most valuable piece of evidence that we have.

any other thoughts on this?  this is the only place where lizzie herself speaks.  the truth must be hidden there.............somewhere in particular, somehow.

otherwise, we are lost to the speculation of third parties.


72. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-18th-03 at 12:35 PM
In response to Message #71.

No, please don't read Brown again.
Someone who is recently familiar with Brown can be found to answer my question.
I could even look it up myself .

I agree that Lizzie's own words are most important..
But we are bound to the parameters of the questions asked of her.  (And yes, even the Witness Statements are second- hand and not under oath).
Sometimes I get the impression that there were many more deeply probing questions that were Planned on being asked her (at a later date) and they blew THIS opportunity, thinking ahead to THAT.  Of course, there never WAS another chance to get Lizzie to speak, so I feel this was an error on Knowlton's part.
He should have known, based on how quickly Lizzie had an attorney, that she would never testify again.
Maybe he was distracted at the outset, by everything happening so quickly, within a week.  Or maybe my impression is wrong--but it was the only way I could reconcile why bigger, more important questions were not asked--I mean, they never asked her *If She Did It* even!
Good luck.


73. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by diana on Jan-18th-03 at 3:10 PM
In response to Message #72.

Brown suggests that the woman Lubinsky saw was Ellen Eagan, not Lizzie. (pp.67-68)


74. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Kat on Jan-18th-03 at 3:32 PM
In response to Message #73.

But if some here are convinced now that Lubinsky saw no one that day there in that place, then Lubinsky is eliminated and so is Ellen? 

I'm sorry but Ellen is a story I have never given much credence to.
Thanks for the reference.
Is it intertwined enough in Brown's theory that Lubinsky saw someone, that if he really didn't Brown's theory collapses, I guess is my question.
It's just an added Bonus to find Brown discredited if we rule out Lubinsky, our 18 year old *witness*.


75. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Carol on Jan-18th-03 at 3:34 PM
In response to Message #67.


"Semantics here but I don't think  Bridget is considered *the family*."

In my context she would be considered as part of the family constellation as I said the barn was in family use, and Bridget is an employee of the family, she used the barn as part of her job as a Borden family employee. I didn't say she was a blood Borden. Communication is really hard, isn't it?

"And I do suggest that some things can confuse a reader here and that's why what is known is given footnotes and what is not known, yet speculated, is not, and should be posted as such.  That is reasonable, i think."  Sorry, I don't use footnotes here, this I am not writing a paper for school, and what I said was clear and I think that dog has been beaten to death now.     

It is encouraging to others who do participate by reading only if not posting that all aspects of the Borden case be continually in process, in search, discussion and review process and none of the aspects are considered closed.  Because certain members of the board have made some conclusion on another link, archive, etc., on an aspect of a subject, the subject in my opinion should be left open and even RE-OPENED to spill out again with new thoughts, updated thoughts, evidence, etc.  While going over other old links is a good idea, if people think a topic is closed just because certain others closed it in their own minds or state such new members and others with varying viewpoints might be likely to be discouraged from adding their perspectives.


76. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by haulover on Jan-18th-03 at 11:04 PM
In response to Message #75.

carol:

i see you like to defend lizzie.  that's a job someone has to do.

but i've never seen you respond to the many damning points against her.  now i ask this not to argue, but in the hope that you can give a credible response to questions of lizzie's "confusion."

tell me something i don't know about any of the following:

why does lizzie tell knowlton that she thought her father was hurt, when clearly she told everyone present at the time that he was dead or killed?

why does lizzie dance around the issue of where abby might have been that morning before finally telling of a note and that abby had gone out?

why did lizzie try to buy prussic acid and deny it?

why does lizzie insist that father left at 10 when witnesses confirm that he was in town shortly after 9?

why does lizzie insist that she did not see bridget washing windows inside the house when bridget clearly remembers seeing lizzie?

why does lizzie change her story so much between the wake of the murders and when she gives her testimony?

why does lizzie tell mrs. russell of her premonitions of doom on the very night before the murders?

why is lizzie so confused about where she was when her father came home  --  in the kitchen, the dining room, the stairs?  how is it that bridget heard her laugh behind her on the stairs, whereas lizzie finally insists she was in the kitchen?

___________________

i could find twice that many questions.  i hate to put all this on you, but what irritates me in the conversation is that no one has successfully defended lizzie borden in terms of fact.  i'd love to find lizzie borden innocent, but will her defenders please step forward and make the case -- or will they continue to hang in the shadows with a defensive attitude?

 





77. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by Carol on Jan-19th-03 at 1:55 PM
In response to Message #76.

From reading your posts I feel your angst against Lizzie is quite robust, perhaps thinking that Lizzie has personally thwarted you and others like you from solving the case, which I find an unusual position. 

You have listed interesting questions, ones that I have offered an opinion on in the past and it would take a thesis for me to answer now. I believe this is a conversation board and not one made for me to dominate by taking up so much time. Anyway, I think you have listed the questions not really to get an answer but to state your case against Lizzie.

I don't consider myself a Lizzie defender, and am certainly not defensive on the Lizzie Borden Case. There have been other people who have questioned the case from all angles, sometimes siding one way, sometimes another, so it is rather unfair to throw down the gauntlet saying those who feel her innocent are hanging about in the shadows.

The case and people in it are intriguing to me. What is more important in life than human relationships, those that give us joy and those that give us endless frustration and this case has it all.

There is great possibility in my mind that Lizzie could have known something about the crimes although at this point I don't believe she actually was the murderer. I try to find new perspectives and sort out for myself what is fact or fiction. I hope you will calm down soon but on the other hand, it is sort of different to experience posts with such pointed perspectives.


78. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by kimberly on Jan-19th-03 at 8:23 PM
In response to Message #76.

Considering that no one saw what actually took place that
day --- Lizzie is just as innocent as she is guilty. Do
you have any proof she did it? Beyond just your opinion and
your take on what was said during the trial? I have no idea
if she did it or not --- but I can see both sides.........


79. "Re: Morse Visits--Where's Lizzie?"
Posted by haulover on Jan-20th-03 at 11:51 PM
In response to Message #77.

no.  i really want an answer to those questions.

like most people, i move back and forth as to her innocence. 

it's just that she has a lot to explain that doesn't get explained.

as far as having a pointed perspective....i'm looking for something.

i just happen to be at an impass.

let's just see what develops as we keep going. 



 

Navagation

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

 

Page updated 12 October, 2003