1. "Pruic Acid? Why?"
Posted by RedFern on Nov-29th-02 at 4:09 PM

Why do that, when Arsonic was sold freely at that time, without the need for a presciption? That part I do find odd. I mean wasn't it basically used for mice and rats back then anyways? Mixed with food you would hardly know from what Iread, if it's food with a strong taste. So if that's the case why would nothing else do but Pruic Acid?
     RedFern

Well, this is my supposition here, but, Arsenic is an accumulative poison, it would take a quantity of it over time to do the job.  Prussic Acid is very quick acting, almost instantaneous death and it has the smell of bitter almonds.  I would imagine you could add it to cake that has almonds in it and the victim wouldn't know the difference until it was too late! 

I was watching one of those forensic shows on Court TV the other night and an "expert" said that only 1 in 3 people could detect the smell of almond in prussic acid.

They also showed the Prussian blue test they use to detect its presence.

You are so right Susan.  Prussic acid is an extremely quick and deadly poison.  It has the second advantage of dissipating rather quickly which makes it hard to detect.

So the killings would be quick...why does it need to be quick?
Poisoners like to take their time.
They like the power hold...give a little arsenic, watch the suffering, wait a while...give more 2 days later...and on and on until the body can withstand no more and shuts down.
Long-drawn-out-cruel-death and hard to prove or prosecute.
So that form of killing takes time, and the killer is enjoying it.

As stated, Prussic Acid is quick.  But it is just as lethal if mishandled, to the author of the crime, as it is to the victims.
That method means, "I can't wait!  It has to be done NOW!"

So, in a way, it has an affinity with a hatchet, or a knife or a gun:
*Immediate weapons*?

The "immediate weapon" comparison is very good Kat.  Something happened, probably in the preceeding week that caused the murders to have them happen ASAP.  Thus the attempt to buy the prussic acid.

It's interesting to note that she must already have had the hatchet (assuming it was new and just bought) before the attempt to buy the prussic acid.  If so, did she shudder at the thought of using the hatchet and it became the tool of last resort when she was unable to secure the poison?

So we can remove the IDEA of Prussic Acid FROM the Poison list...which is slow..
And put it on an immediate weapon list, which shows desperartion?
This helps me to figure out why 2 such different methods.
It no longer is 2 M.O's, it's only one.

Maybe hatchet, blade or Prussic Acid are in the different catagory, or M.O., from the other...the slow, torturous poison.
This would be easier for me to understand. 

Now this *thing* that happened that facillitated a pretty quick decision to act, would Probably have happened After July 26, when Lizzie returned home from her visiting, else wouldn't she have been better off shopping for prussic Acid out-of-town?

BUT, there is some question and a vauge possibility, that Lizzie went away again that Saturday, the 30th of July.  Bridget is asked this at the Preliminary and it sounds as if the lawyer expected her to confirm that Lizzie WAS gone Saturday for the day, but she didn't.  So if we know Lizzie returned on Tuesday, yet probably went away again Saturday (for whatever reason--to consult? Conspire? To get a weapon?), then the thing which inspired the crime would be narrowed down to Tuesday thru Saturday, July 26th to the 30th, 1892.

Right right! Plus if she had been fiddling about with poison before August 3, as Abby probably thought when she went to Bowen in fear for her life, why go to D.R. Smith's at all? If she was the culprit who made the elder Bordens and Bridget sick prior to August 3, then she must have procurred some poison from somewhere else. Why not use it again in a higher dose (if it were say, over the counter rat poison) instead of risking everything by asking for the volatile prussic acid at a different store (mabe I just answered my own question-she didnt want to go back to the original source twice? Thought she'd try another store and another type of poison?)And why would she have dumped it into the common food source and made poor Bridget Sullivan sick that time, if Abby was her intended victim? Could it be that she hadnt really planned to kill anybody with the poison, just to flex some domestic muscle?


(Message last edited Nov-30th-02  7:21 AM.)

Do you also mean that maybe she wasn't intending to kill anyone AT ALL?
Just diddling around with the food as a somewhat malicious joke?  Almost like a pressure valve?
The OUIJA said it was soap.
Soap in the food could give similar results as Bowen saw as symptoms.
I can't see Lizzie shopping for poison in her own home town.  She could get it mail-order by Sears, arsenic, for God/dess'es sake!
She gives the folks soap flakes in that nasty food.  It releases some of the pressure that is building in her.
Emma is gone so Lizzie has no one to talk to.
Goes to Alice's and projects her *doom & gloom* story...maybe that's the kind of thing Lizzie would have dumped on Emma if she had been around...but she wasn't...
Someone ELSE decides it's TIME?  Because of the info of what happened at the house July 26-30th?

I always kind of thought that Lizzie was poisoning her parents and found that it was taking too long and thats why she went and tried to purchase the Prussic Acid.  But, the doctors at the trial stated that they had tried the stomachs for Prussic Acid as well as other poisons, which ones?  They don't go into detail.  I'm wondering if they checked for every poison that may have been available to a typical 1800s household?  But, they do state that the stomachs were perfectly normal and healthy, I would think after a night of vomiting that they would be red and irritated at the least? 

Prussic acid, aka cyanide, is the ingredient in those L-pills given to agents during WW II. Causes instant death, to avoid capture, torture, and squealing. IF you were caught by the Gestapo or SD, you were already dead.

I think Lizzie, IF she was the one (not proven by anyone here) wanted it as protection against a crazy hatchet wielding madman. "Dear Willy, have a cup of tea to calm you down." Yes, it would definitely calm him down. Wdnesday's night discussion w/ Alice Russell tells that she expects something bad the next day. And so would anyone if they knew that an angry crazy relative was coming to visit.

How do you handle unwanted relatives that you have to meet at the holidays?

I find that when I am just being myself its enough to discourage unwanted visitors. Just being myself.

I just borrow my friend's dog that has really bad gas...He really knows how to clear out a party fast! 

An inspiration from the dog story Susan. Hope its not too 'long winded' (It takes place years before the murders. Lizzie has an overnight guest)

"Lizzie? Are you awake?"
Katarina calling out softly from the guest room, both doors in between having been left ajar.
"Yes"
"Good"
She was apprehensive for a moment, imagining what might be coming next when Katarina let out a terrific fart. It blasted forth trumpetously then tapered off, the tone rising to an almost questioning squeak.
Lizzie was too shocked to reply at first, and then she burst out laughing.
"You swine!" she finally commented between gales of laughter.
"Do you think Bridget heard that upstairs?"
"I think Dr Bowen heard it across the street!"
"Mabe he'll come over to see if somebody's ill"
They laughed like she used to laugh with her schoolmates when she was a girl,until her side hurt. When she looked up, Katarina was standing in her doorway.
"Oh don't come in here now!" Lizzie admonished, "In fact why don't you sleep downstairs?"
Katarina rushed into her room and leapt up onto her bed landing on her knees. The bed groaned and she bounced several times for effect.
"Some guest you are" Lizzie noted and began to laugh again. Katarina crouched on all fours now, bouncing the soft mattress with her hands.
"Some hostess you are, asking me to sleep downstairs. Where? On the floor?"
"Yes, that's where you belong. Or in a barnyard"


When she met Father in the sitting room later that day, she found it impossible not to think of it and she would have to turn away from him with sudden fits of giggles. At one point she stopped in the middle of a sentence, covered her mouth and rushed into the kitchen, leaving him astonished. 

Ooooo, is this actually going to be part of your story, just created with the idea of dog gas?  What a hoot!  I love it! 

Yes, so tell me-what else does this dog do???

Hes an old dog, just generally lies there and looks all sweet and innocent, a Jack Russell terrier.  His name is Skipper, there used to be a Gilligan too, but, no more.                                      Skipper is silent, but, deadly!  People will be in conversation and someone will suddenly start fanning the air, everyone knows to duck and cover!  He can still bounce pretty high in the air for an old dog, perhaps jet propelled?  Oh, and he loves cats, really, likes them as sleeping companions and to play games with. 

Awww-I love Jack Russells! They are the cutest bundles of joy (and gas sometimes) Bet Lizzie would have loved them too...

I hope y'all don't mind if I redirect this discussion back to the prussic acid (I did enjoy the dog stories, though).  My question is this: Has it been established that Lizzie did in fact try to buy the acid?  When this testimony was excluded from the trial, was the implication that Lizzie had in fact tried to buy poison but that this could not be used as evidence for the murders; or that the testimony of Eli Bence was false?  What about all this talk of a "Lizzie look-alike" visiting various pharmacies (or "chemist's shops") to test if pharmacists were too willing to sell over-the-counter poison?

Robert Harry, from reading the Preliminary testimony, there are 3 witnesses that said that Lizzie tried to buy Prussic Acid.  Eli Bence and two other men who were in the store at the time, Frank Kilroy and Frederick Harte.  All three of them said that Lizzie was positively the woman who came in to buy the poison.

I think the ruling was that buying the poison was too remote in time as well as that the murders were committed with a hatchet and not poison, so, it was dropped.

I believe that the story of the woman trying to buy the Prussic Acid was a newspaper story.  I think Kat has posted it before.

I think the bottom line is that it was never established 100% that Lizzie tried to buy poison.  But, if Lizzie did kill her parents, I think that would be her first choice, a woman's choice. 

I got the impression from her lawyers somehow that they may have believed that Lizzie DID try to buy poison at some time or other.
I can't pin-point why I have this idea.  I'd have to look around.
I know there was ANOTHER druggist who was very credible who claimed Lizzie was haughty in his shop asking for chloroform in the past years, to put down a cat.
He had known her a long time...whereas neither Bence nor his co-horts had officially known Lizzie.
So maybe her lawyers just didn't want THAT incident brought up and be confused with the *prussic Acid* incident.  They just didn't want a history of her poison-buying to be introduced, even if the cyanide story was provably bogus.
I also have to wonder if *haughty Lizzie* even TOLD her defense team all the *truth* about ANY of this...I can see her there in jail p.o'd at Emma for *giving her away* to her OWN lawyers!
I have a feeling that not only did she Not explain things to a panting public After her trial, but that she may not have guided her defense team too truthfully, as to what really happened that day.
Does anybody else sense this about her?

Trying to buy poison a day or two before the murders is NOT too remote in time. That's only an excuse or cover story. If that story of another woman testing the druggists is true, then it wasn't Lizzie (undercover investigation).

Note the testimony of the three. One recognized Lizzie by her quavering voice; another recognized Lizzie by her strong voice. After every crime there are always people who claim to have seen something. Some are wrong. But they did offer this testimony the afternoon of the crime, I think.

The most famous example (offhand) is the cattle rancher who testified he saw Tom Mooney at the scene of the crime. This rancher was many miles away at the time. A reward had been offered.

Another is that woman who testified she saw OJ Simpson driving by near the scene of the crime at 10:10PM. Her background wasn't credible, especially since Ron Goldman was still walking home around that time (punched out at 9:58PM to walk home). Sold her story to "Hard Copy" for $5000; she needed the money.

You may be able to think of others.

You can look it up, now or 110 years ago. "Eywitness identification is not reliable." Except in those cases where the person was well known to the witness. A lot of people "look like" others, expecially when people are not trained observers, and only see somebody for a few seconds.

One famous example is in the book about the Cleveland Torso Murderer. One or two guys came to the police about seeing a guy with a knife on a dark night and running away. They gave a good description. The police doubted them, because they had seen too much detail in just a few seconds on a dark night.

F Lee Bailey's "Defense Never Rests" tells about a similar case. Two people were robbed in a lover's lane. They described the assailant (over 6 feet?). Two years later they saw a guy and both identified him as the robber. But he did NOT match the original fresh description (he was 5'8"). Memories do change, etc. Or why stories do not match up. I would imagine the police would be very suspicious of any group of witnesses whose stories matched in every detail. Agree?

Good point. It seems odd to me that a person inclined to kill with a hatchet, a weapon that is meant in part to horrify the victim, causes physical pain, leaves a big mess behind and takes physical strength/time to accomplish would also choose prussic acid which is instantaneous, doesn't hurt or identify the assassin to the victim personally and hardly leaves a trace as an alternative method. The two methods have nothing in common that I can see.

I missed something here.
What is the "good point"? (other than a sharp hatchet?)
Do you consider prussic acid an immediate weapon of desperation like a hatchet, or a poison which had been kept in our minds as a different M.O., altogether?

PS:  I wish you had been around when this was discussed.  Would liked to have had your input then.

(Message last edited Dec-7th-02  2:54 AM.)

A man typically uses violence (club, knife, or gun), a women stealth (poison, or attack when sleeping). Its just the way it is. Not that  the reverse couldn't happen.

[AR Brown's argument is that Wm S Borden was USED to carrying around his hatchet as "stock in trade" as a knacker (if they used that word). Most people (thankfully!!!) are not cold blooded killers. Even on farms its done "in back of the barn".]

(Message last edited Dec-7th-02  12:06 PM.)

Looking at Masterton last night and tonight I see, pg. 178 where he alludes to the comment made by Phillips, one of Lizzie's defense team, in his "Defense" booklet (broken out of his History of Fall River):
"She had sought to purchase it [prussic acid] for an innocent purpose."
This view supposedly held by the defense wasn't specifically presented or made known , that we know of, until Phillips' books were published, after his demise.
This actual phrase is missing from the news article authored by Phillips  in May, 1934.
Therefore it MAY have been added to the uncompleted manuscript by Phillips, or by his editor/co-writer brother-in-law Easton who claims he followed notes of Phillips as to his intent, in order to finish the project.
Regardless, Phillips crows that he is just about the only one left (In May, 1934) besides Alice and *my friend Manning*, that had anything important to do with the trial. 
We can suppose that by this time he could say just about anything he wanted.

Also, I found the reference to the *other druggist* I referred to who sounded credible to me (and more believable than Bence...).
Rebello, pg. 81:
"Nailing The Poison Story / Neither Nor Any Relatives Bought Prussic Acid at Brow's," Boston Herald, August 8, 1982: 2.

"It was claimed Lizzie made a second attempt to purchase prussic acid at Walter J. Brow's Drug Store at 62 Second Street. A Boston Herald reporter interviewed Mr. Brow to verify the rumor. Mr. Brow said Lizzie traded at his store and had known Lizzie for the past twenty years. He assured the reporter Lizzie did not purchase any prussic acid.  He recalled that Lizzie stopped trading at his store about four years ago. Her last purchase was chloroform, stating she wanted it for the purpose of killing a cat. Mr. Brow states Miss Borden asked for the stuff in rather a surly manner, and he answered just as saucily. Miss Borden paid for the chloroform and went out. She has never been in the shop since."

--Note the address of this store is #62 Second Street?

Didn't Lizzie eat the mutton that was supposedly poisoned though?
     RedFern

That's me, always out galavanting when something important is going on.

The good points were that both weapons, the hatchet and the poison were weapons that had to be part of a plan, both would have had to have been bought and put in the house prior to the event, which means the murders weren't based on just spontaneous opportunity or epileptic fit, in this scenario.

The irony of the comment that Lizzie (if it was her) had already lighted on a hatchet as the weapon of choice, then changed her mind to poison, then being unable to come up with it, went back to the hatchet. Thus also a good point in the message was that Lizzie might have been in a tizzie about what to use, (if it was her.)

Rays is right in that poison was and I think still is more a woman's weapon and a hatchet a man's tool....hey, maybe Lizzie was confused as to her gender and should have taken the gender test (on another link) and find out what she really was, then tell us. It might have altered history.

I don't think either weapon, poison or a hatchet, were or could have been used as immediate weapons of desperation in this case because unless they were just lying around the house, they had to be brought in, which indicates to me planning.

I think whoever used the hatchet was familiar with the weapon and it was brought into the house by whoever with the intention of use, either in defense or offense. In this respect, Arnold Brown might be on to something in that if it was an illegitimate son with knowledge of hatchets and who carried them around all the time, that this is the person who committed the crimes. Thus making any attempt at buying prussic acid an innocent act, if that really occurred, by Lizzie.

I've always wondered about that claw-head hatchet, which possibily is the same instrument as the *bench hatchet* Alfred Johnson refers to in the Witness Statements (37)
What was considered the likliest weapon at the prelim., has degenerated by the trial into some useless implement that seems to have gaps at the head where the blade meets the handle...according to Prof. Wood.***
I wonder why the people responsible for using these tools and caring for them, were not interviewed to IDentify the implements found on the Borden property and did not testify at the trial.
Eddy  says this was a pretty newish hatchet.  Being partly ground, it might fit the evidence as still having some gilt to deposit into Abby's wound when used on her, yet may after overuse on her, have given up what little gilt it had left so none was deposited in Andrew's wound.
These items, as far as we know were not I.D.'d by Andrew's farm workers.
The point being that it still could have been a hatchet that belonged to the house of Borden, and not bought or brought in specifically to kill which might imply premeditation OR expediency...but rather an item that belonged there was used in desperation...but not necessarily grabbing for ANYTHING at the moment, but still using something that was already to hand, with even a days notice could still be considered desperate.

--***How did the relatively new claw-head hatchet get this way: (?)
Trial
Wood
1000
..." I observed also that the handle of the hatchet did not set firmly or tightly into the hole of the head of the hatchet: that there was quite a large space, which can be seen now---as I have not disturbed the handle of this hatchet at all,---can be seen at this part of the head: quite a cavity between the handle and the iron of the head, both in front and at the back part.".....
-----------
I've been wondering if the request of Bence for Prussic Acid Wednesday may have been (if it happened) a misunderstanding as to what was actually asked for.  He says Lizzie's voice was low and tremulous...can anybody think of something that might SOUND like "10 cents worth of prussic acid" but be something different?

(Message last edited Dec-10th-02  11:09 PM.)

When I think of an act of immediate desperation I think more of "instantaneous" action, which would imply grabbing a fire poker if one was standing next to a fireplace or a candlestick if near a set table, etc. or anything at hand.  And so unless the Borden's had hatchets or bottles of poison laying about in the different rooms, I don't think these weapons are in sync with my conception.

Interesting concept, maybe Bence did have a hearing problem with Lizzie that day, but I think he also testified that she said she wanted it to clean a sealskin cape, so it would have to be a word which would equal something that would also clean the cape.  What else did women buy at drugstores that cleaned capes?

You know, a thought just came to me that may be very farfetched, but, we know that Prussic Acid kills instantly, right?  I was just thinking that what if Lizzie was suicidal?  She couldn't take her life at the Borden home anymore and wanted out, quickly and painlessly.  I don't know if anyone has ever brought this point up ever before? 

I'm sorry, but my estimate was that Lizzie may have been "unhappy" but definitely no suicidal. Assuming she was the attempted buyer.
The story about an undercover agent trying to buy cyanide sounds good to me, in that it explains this as to why the judge kept it out.

As to not needing to clean sealskin fur (?), was faux fur unknown in those days? Passing off something that looks like the more expensive article?

(Message last edited Dec-13th-02  3:43 PM.)

As I said, it may be farfetched, but, Lizzie confided in Alice Russell the night before the murders and we have Alice's trial testimony as to what Lizzie said:

"Well, I don't know; I feel depressed.  I feel as if something was hanging over me that I cannot throw off, and it comes over me at times, no matter where I am."  And she says, "When I was at the table the other day, when I was at Marion, the girls were laughing and talking and having a good time, and this feeling came over me, and one of them spoke and said, "Lizzie, why don't you talk?"

Veiled suicide threat?  I'm depressed, stop me before I do something...    Just a thought, I figured I would just throw it on the table and we could see what we could make of it. 

I think this suicide theory is found in Lincoln but I thought it was also a speculation in the newspaper at the time...
But I can't find it in the papers.
I thought I read where it was postulated that since cyanide is considered a suicide poison, that Lizzie's intent, when (?) she asked for it was to kill herself if the murders went horribly wrong, and if she was arrested.

[eeek-maybe you've been infected by lincoln, susan...maybe they will develope a vaccination for that....]

(Message last edited Dec-14th-02  1:45 AM.)

Actually, I don't recall reading that in Lincoln or any of the authors for that matter.  Is there something in one of them about that? I thought it was just something that popped into my head.  Then theres this thought; what if Lizzie was suicidal and decided to take the rest of the family down with her too?  As I said, I don't know if this was ever discussed before or not, is this already covered ground? 

Maybe she and Emma was told about the Visitor by Uncle John, and she wondered what tricks were going to be played. Wasn't there trouble in May the last time Uncle John showed up?

Given everything that happened, Lizzie seems too strong a person to even think of suicide (self-murder as they called it). Are some people reading their own minds into this? In the worst case, Lizzie and Emma would be faced w/ reduced circumstances. And Lizzie had not yet developed her spending habits.

(Message last edited Dec-14th-02  4:39 PM.)

Lincoln, Victoria. A Private Disgrace: Lizzie Borden by Daylight. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1967. Rpt. NY: International Polygonics, 1986:
pg. 71+.
"...Fall River was once called Troy, we learned in school, but to me the words that Alice Russell would eventually quote in court sound almost like the suicide's veiled call for help. Or, more accurately, they sounded not like Cassandra, but Clytemnestra 
compulsively talking. Murder, like suicide, must be frightening in the prospect; and Lizzie was determined to poison Abby. One feels that she is not only providing herself with an alibi; she is also saying, 'See through me; stop me.'

Lizzie's first words as she burst in on Alice were, 'I am afraid someone will do something. I don't know but what someone will do something.' And then, abruptly, 'I have taken your advice and written to Marion that I will come.'

Miss Russell said that she was glad. She urged Lizzie to have a good time.

'Well, I don't know. I feel depressed. I feel as if something was hanging over me that I can't shake off.'  ......
------------------
I knew you had recently been in the process of minutely studying
Lincoln, so I went looking there first...but also I am not sure what other cite there is for that.
It's not as if any ideas can't be "new" anymore.  They may have been discussed, but they can still be new to the person who has the thought, AND bring a fresh look & a fresh approach to the question.

Dr. Michael Baden (p.40), in  Confessions of a Medical Examiner says: "Of all the exotic drugs, cyanide is the one most associated with spies and international intrigue. As a suicide pill it acts rapidly. Hermann Goering avoided hanging by chewing on one..."

There are those who subscribe to the abused/incest victim view of Lizzie, and in an article by Dr. M. Eileen McNamara, in the April 1993 issue of the LBQ, called "Was Lizzie Borden a Victim of Incest?", pg.12, she states: "Incest survivors carry within them a mix of rage, guilt, and love toward their parents, and feelings of self-loathing...."(actually, I am not a proponent of Lizzie as Incest victim), but this climate of mind seems ripe for murder OR SUICIDE. ... where  just AN ATTEMPT, she thinks, might gain her her ends & not  even the full deed.  She could have been intending to enact some private melodrama.  (Remember Emma was away, and maybe Lizzie was ready to *blow*, without Emma's guiding advice...)

--Rays:  What trouble happened in *May the last time Morse visited*?
I can only find the house being painted and the pigeons killed?
Morse doesn't say he was at the Borden house in May, but says he visited the end of June and July 10....

That's an interesting idea Susan.  I know there was a rumor about Lizzie in a Boston paper about her possibly committing suicide by poison but that was after the killings.  There are several lines devoted to it in Rebello (page 118)

The incest theory has been suggested by more than one author and I'm not convinced that it's entirely out of the question.

(Message last edited Dec-14th-02  9:43 PM.)

INQUEST
Emma
Pg. 109

Q.  Do you know where the marketing was done?
A.  No.

Q.  Didnt have any particular place?
A.  We always had the groceries from Mr. Wades. and John M. Deane's. My sister used to order a great many things from John M. Deane's.

Q.  Was that a meat market?
A.  No Sir.

--I think Lizzie HAD spending habits prior to her coming into her inheritence, but she also, reputedly, donated money to her charities if they had cost over-runs.  I think she probably was generous, and liked to spend.  Also, it has been suggested, that if her home at Maplecroft, later, was tastefully decorated, Lizzie wouldn't have learned that overnight, but might have been teaching herself good taste all along, as a way to better herself...but also as an inate inclination.

Thanks for posting that, Kat.  I found it in my notes later, due to the Lizzie was planning on poisoning Abby line, how does she know, did Lizzie tell her? 

Did Lizzie actually make that statement the night before the murders?  Or did she claim she made this statement?  In other words, is there corroboration of her statement?  I think I come to this site with a firm belief that ol' Lizzie did the deed and I am suspicious of any claims she made at any point before or after the murders.  Also, I don't think Ms. Lincoln ever hints or suggests that Lizzie may have been suicidal.  I could be wrong, but I don't recall reading that and when I saw these postings, that theory really surprised me.  If she was suicidal, it is a shame she did not act upon it rather than take it out on others.......just a thought.

From Harry's reference in post #38 on this thread:

Rebello
Pg. 118

"Died a Natural Death / Rumor That Lizzie Borden Had Poisoned Herself Startled the City, Boston Herald, August 7, 1892: 6.

Two days after the murders, newspapers reported a rumor that Dr. Collet and Dr. Bowen were summoned to the Borden house. It was stated that Lizzie had poisoned herself. 'Later wayfarers made a bee line for the home of mystery ...' "

But that wasn't the news article I was thinking of.  But it's an interesting item, anyway.
------------------
Lincoln (paperback)
Pg. 71
"... but to me the words that Alice Russell would eventually quote in court sound almost like the suicide's veiled call for help."
--------------------
"What Lizzie told Alice" is included in the Knowlton Papers, pg. 227, and is in the form of a letter by Alice to Mr. Moody and dated June 2, 1893, only 4 days (inclusive) before the start of the trial.  We can't know when Alice finally did tell the authorities the full content of that "doom & gloom" visit by Lizzie, but of course it could be prior to the writing of it in that form of a statement.

Also, try Alice Russel Trial testimony. pg. 375+
-------------
As to a person who is suicidal eventually committing murder, I think it happens all the time...and I agree with you that it's a shame that person doesn't go through with it before harming others.
There are myriad instances we hear of where a murderer had attempted suicide, was saved and went on to kill.  Anyone think of an example?  Was Charles Whitman one?  Susan Smith?  Andrea Yates?




(Message last edited Jan-4th-03  1:48 AM.)