"I Thought The Blood..."

[Kat]

In Pearson's book, Murders That Baffled The Experts ( collected 1967), there is a story on Constance Kent. I recall we talked about this at one point when an article came out in The Hatchet, which gave insights into the Kent case.
I'm reading the Pearson treatment now and 2 things are a part of his retelling which are interesting, when comparing that crime to the Borden murders. He writes:
"The motive for this crime was declared to be too slight for belief. That is not a good argument. We all know that murders have been committed for the most trivial reasons. Moreover, in later years, when Mr. and Mrs. Kent were probably dead, Dr. Bucknill made public some further knowledge that he possessed as to the rage and hatred which animated the young girl. The second Mrs. Kent made unkind remarks about the first wife and had stirred up so much fury in Constance that at one time she thought of poisoning her stepmother."

--The murder was of the stepmother's favorite young son, and he was "stabbed" in the chest and his throat was cut, so that his head was barely attached. Does it seem unusual that a teenaged girl would torture her stepmother by killing her favorite child, rather than killing the stepmother herself? And switching, at least in thought, from poison to razor?
(Basically, she switched from imagining poisoning her stepmother whom she hated, to slicing the throat of her 1/2 brother whom she did not dislike and seemed to have at least a slight affection for). Somehow there seems a sexual undertone to this, but I'm not sure why. It was done in a privy by candlelight, in their nightclothes- maybe that's why it seems that way.

Since there were some who never believed Constance's confession, Pearson's idea of proof ends with:
"Of the statements of Constance in her confession, one in particular sounds like a genuine experience: 'I thought the blood would never come.' "

--This made me think of the many wounds of Abby. In the shaved head photo the cuts look shallow and crude and not really deadly, except for the sheer number of sharp blows (other than the area where the skull was caved in). Maybe these many extra blows were because the assailant (an amature) did not see enough blood- did not know when to stop- did not know when Abby was dead. Maybe the blood seeped out later- maybe the person kept hitting simply because "the blood would never come." Not so much because one of the blows was not fatal, but because of the position Abby fell in hid the blood the killer was expecting to see as a result of their assault.
We certainly have been told there was not much blood splashed about the room after such a savage wounding. Does this seem possible?
It also brings up the question of two possible methods of killing imagined in the Kent case, which I've always struggled with in the Borden case.

[Allen]

--This made me think of the many wounds of Abby. In the shaved head photo the cuts look shallow and crude and not really deadly, except for the sheer number of sharp blows (other than the area where the skull was caved in). Maybe these many extra blows were because the assailant (an amature) did not see enough blood- did not know when to stop- did not know when Abby was dead. Maybe the blood seeped out later- maybe the person kept hitting simply because "the blood would never come." Not so much because one of the blows was not fatal, but because of the position Abby fell in hid the blood the killer was expecting to see as a result of their assault.

I have definitely considered this possibility many times myself. I think overkill happens in many cases because the murderer has never taken a life before, and they are unsure how many blows it takes, or how much poison, or how long to hold the pillow etc. They are afraid the person isn't really dead and may survive. I'd call it extreme panic. What else could there be when you commit an act as taboo and unfathomable as murder?
This is an act that once began there is no going back. So the murderer has to be sure, but if you're a first time killer, how can you be? Overkill.

When thinking about the switching of weapons, or the change from the idea of poison to that of the axe, I do not find it all that hard to believe. It happens all the time. Murderers sometimes change weapons even in the middle of the act. Or use multiple weapons. I don't think there is any sort of method to murder except for serial killers, the murderer tends to follow a ritualistic pattern. Which even he will change as he evolves from one murder to the next, or sometimes just to throw off authorities. But in most killiings I'd say the ultimate goal is death to the victim, and they will use any means necessary to achieve it.

In 1898, Martha Place burned her step-daughter's face with acid, and also forced to her swallow some of it. The cause of death, however, was determined to be smothering. Martha smothered her with a pillow. None of the online information I read mentioned any mutilations , but I think I remember reading in a book that contained information about the case that there were. When her husband arrived home she attacked him with an axe. Fortunately he survived the attack, but she went to the electric chair for the murder of her step-daughter. Martha went from acid, to smothering, to an axe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_M._Place

[Kat]

Wow she sounded really desperate, or deranged!

I was also wondering about the comment of Constance in that I thought a cut throat probably caused a lot of blood. Maybe the *stab* would came first and it wasn't enough blood?
I suppose that could have happened in Abby's case, though her facial area was cut first, and that tends to bleed a lot- by falling on her face, maybe the assailant did not really see it.

I wonder how bad Lizzie's eyesight might have been?

[1bigsteve]

I've alway's felt that this is what happened in the Borden case. Lizzie failed to poison her folks so she turned to the hatchet. Without an exhumation of the bodies we will never know if they were poisoned.

The lack of blood could have been caused by a dull blade pinching the veins closed rather than cleanly cutting through them. Of course a quick death would have stopped the heart and minimized the amount of blood flow. I doubt the hatchet hit any large arteries in Abby. The shallow wounds indicate to me that the killer was most likely a woman.

-1bigsteve (o:

[Allen]

Here are some images that illustrate where the arteries are located in the head and neck region of the body. So amaybe we can argue that further about whether or not any major arteries were struck during the attack.


http://www.fofweb.com/Subscription/Scie ... &iPin=H544

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/murder/gallery/g_11.html

http://www.bartleby.com/107/143.html

http://www.thebodyworker.com/headneckarteries.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There has always been something that bothered me about the wounds inflicted on Abby. The information I gathered from Abby's autopsy report on the LABVML.

http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Crime ... Borden.htm

FIRST an incised wound 2 and 1/2 inches in length, and 2 and 1/2 inches in depth. The lower angle of the wound was over his spine and four inches below the junction of neck with body, and extending thence upward and outward to the left. On the forehead and bridge of nose were three contused wounds. Those on the forehead being oval, lengthwise with body.

SECOND The contusion on bridge of nose was one inch in length by on half inch in width.

THIRD On the forehead one was one inch above left eyebrow, one and 1/4 inches long by 3/8 inch in width, and the other one and 1/4 inches above eyebrow, and one and 1/2 inches long by 1/4 inch wide. On the head there were 18 distinct wounds, incising and crushing, and all but four were on the right side. Counting from left to right with the face downwards, the wounds were as follows:

1. Was a glancing scalp wound two inches in length by one and 1/2 inches in width, situated 3 inches above left ear hole, cut from above downwards and did not penetrate the skull.


That first wound mentioned has always interested me more than any other. How was it inflicted? Where was the killer standing in relation to Abby, and was Abby already on the floor when it was received? If this was the first wound struck Abby would've been able to cry out. If the first wound was the glancing scalp wound she would've been able to cry out. She would've been able to struggle. Neither would not have knocked her unconscious, or rendered her incapacitated. Unless, she was bashed in the face first and knocked unconscious by the blows or by some other method.

The idea that there was no noise due to the fact that the first blow was a fatal one has never cut it with me (pardon the unintended pun). I've studied cases of other axe murders where there has been evidence of a struggle, or the intended victim even survived. See Martha Place above for one instance. I've also read what the sound of the axe may sound like when it's striking a human being. It's no quiet affair just on the hacking end of it. Yet, with Abby and Andrew we are expected to believe they went peacefully and quietly, without even the thud of a body hitting the floor?

And the overkill to me either speaks of a killer who is uncertain, as I stated above, or in a terrible fit of rage. I bet on both factors in this case. There had to be a reason Abby was unable to cry out other than the idea that the first blow was a killing blow, because that doesn't ring true to me.

Second of all, it says that all but four of the wounds were on the right side of her head. If the killer was standing in between the bed and the dressing case, or even in between the bed and the window, which is to the left of Abby after she is already on the floor, it's pretty logical that the blows would fall in this fashion. If you look at the way Abby is laying, this would be the killer’s natural reach. How then do some of the wounds extend to the left? There was no way for the killer to stand between Abby and the bed. How can you stand on the left side of someone, and have the wounds extend to the left? If you strike from the bed, I would think that most of the wounds would've been on the left side of the head, within the killer’s natural reach, as Abby is laying too close to the edge of the bed to make it feasible that he could reach the right side of her head that easily.

I can only think that Abby was moved. The way her feet are turned so they are facing perfectly upward with toes pointed has always indicated this to me as well.

I think this could be the reason Lizzie chose to strike her father while he was sleeping. She had learned with Abby that the first blow wasn't going to necessarily render him unconscious and incapable of fighting back. I can't see her trying to bash him in the face very successfully. Maybe Lizzie even entreated him to lay down and take a nap, using his illness as an excuse. Wouldn't that add a whole new spin on things?

The main thing to remember when studying this case is this:

Lizzie was an inexperienced killer, all the planning in the world was still not going to prepare her for what would happen when she picked up that axe with the intent to kill Abby. She had no idea what would happen, or how it would all go down, you can't preplan for every contingency. All she knew was that at the end of it Abby was going to be dead one way or another, and there was no turning back once she she started.


http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/crime ... abby-c.jpg

[1bigsteve]

When I first saw the Photo of Abby's body, Allen, my first impression was that it was a "Re-enactment" photo with a stand-in. The placement of the body and feet looked phony. When I realized it was really Abby's body I felt that the photo must have been taken after her body had been moved.

Perhaps Dr. Bowen saw Abby laying on the floor with her dress and/or body in disaray and decided to make Abby look more "presentable." I have alway's been leary of that photo.

I'll get into this Autopsy info you have here. Thank you for providing it.

-1bigsteve (o:

[Kat]

Good points, Allen.
That back wound was not even found until August 11th!
That was by the last day of inquest.
How that can be is beyond my comprehension. Some autopsy!
Anyway, Since the body of Abby was probably moved, and we know the bed was moved, then we don't really know how much room there was between Abby's body and the bed when she was attacked and during the continuation of the attack, which thwarts our efforts even more to figure this out.
Was the bed on casters? Could it have been moved during a struggle, where just the weight of 2 individuals falling against it could slide it out of place?
Otherwise, a killer could crouch over the body, astride, or even have placed their right foot on her back as they whacked.
If that caused bruising, they didn't note it because it doesn't seem they looked below head level until the 11th. By then, a bruise from a foot might not even then be noticed.

I think the facial wound had to be first. That would leave Abby screaming or groaning or making some sort of noise I think. Else it rendered her unconscious, as you say, Allen.
Maybe in shock, someone might not protest too loudly? Is it an instinct to yell out first and foremost?

You're right in that the scalp/facial wound was not deadly, nor was the back wound.

How could Andrew fall into a snooze so fast? Does that seem like it's possible?

[Allen]

I think the facial wound had to be first. That would leave Abby screaming or groaning or making some sort of noise I think. Else it rendered her unconscious, as you say, Allen.
Maybe in shock, someone might not protest too loudly? Is it an instinct to yell out first and foremost?

You're right in that the scalp/facial wound was not deadly, nor was the back wound.

How could Andrew fall into a snooze so fast? Does that seem like it's possible?

I have my suspicions that Abby did make some noise, she did struggle, and did at least try to cry out. I think Lizzie did some thinking and decided that Andrew needed to be struck while he was sleeping, or maybe she decided to use the chloroform I was so fond of in another thread. If the first blow had not been a fatal one, he may also have cried out. How Andrew seemed to fall asleep so quickly is something else that seems suspicious.

I read that article awhile back about the man murdered in the street with an axe. It has stuck with me ever since. Especially the descriptions of the sound of it. I found a few more links to this article for those who may not have been here, or had the chance to read it. Maybe you will get a better understanding of why I said it was not a quiet affair just on the hacking end of it. And this victim did scream, and did try and defend himself. What also interested me is that although there are many people who reportedly pleaded with him to stop his attack on the victim, no one physically tried to stop him. Interesting.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1363049/posts

[Allen]

Was the bed on casters? Could it have been moved during a struggle, where just the weight of 2 individuals falling against it could slide it out of place?
Otherwise, a killer could crouch over the body, astride, or even have placed their right foot on her back as they whacked.
If that caused bruising, they didn't note it because it doesn't seem they looked below head level until the 11th. By then, a bruise from a foot might not even then be noticed.

Can we tell from looking at the pictures whether or not the bed was on casters? Are there any reports as to how easily the bed was moved by the authorities?

As for the killer crouching, I thought for awhile this may quite possibly have been the stance the killer took during Abby's murder. There is so little blood spatter, that if the killer were crouched over the victim, making short but methodical little chopping motions, this could account for the lack of blood spatter about the room. The only thing that causes me some doubt about this is how close Abby was to the bed, and how narrow that space is. Wasn't there also a chair there? It's still possible, because Lizzie was a woman, and was only about 5'4", and weighed about 130? I have almost the same proportions,just add about 2 pounds . She could've fit into that space, but I don't believe a man would've.

[Kat]

Anybody know if the bed was on casters?
Since the police moved it at the head, initially, I wonder how easy or hard it would have been?

I think Abby made noise, too. But what is thought of a first cry?
When someone is surprised and stunned, do they think to cry out or would it be dependent on the specific circumstances?

[Susan]

Hmm, from what I can see, it doesn't appear that there are casters on the bed.



I did a search of Renaissance Revival bedroom suites, there are beds with casters readily visible and then there are ones without them. But, then I found this example, perhaps there might be casters on the Borden's bed that weren't readily visible?



I couldn't find any mention in the source documents of casters.

[Allen]

Thanks for the research Susan!

It does appear from the picture you posted that the bed may have had casters which wouldn't be readily apparent in the pictures. I did a little looking around and found many examples that are similar to the one you posted. It would be practical for such a heavy piece of furniture to be on casters in order to make it easier to move. What if Abby needed to do a little cleaning that involved moving the bed? Can you see Lizzie or Emma lending a helping hand? Did she ever rearrange the furniture? But as you said there are also examples of really heavy looking beds without casters. So I guess we'll never know?

http://www.rubylane.com/ni/shops/souhan ... 01141#pic1

http://www.rubylane.com/ni/shops/souhan ... 01115#pic1

[Allen]

Which seems to be the most common? With or without?

[Susan]

You're welcome, Melissa. While searching I found equal amounts of beds with and without casters, I guess the question would be which was more prevalent in the 1800s? Just my opinion, but I would think the lady of the house would opt for furniture that would be easier to move. Even with casters I imagine those beds were still difficult for just one person to move, all that solid wood and then a mattress and bedding.

[Harry]

We had a similar discussion of the bed in the past. Here are two photos. the first is a portion of one of the pictures of the bed showing the bed post. Note how there is no indentation in the rug where the post meets the rug. As in the photo Susan posted the caster may have been behind the post and not visible in the photo. I can't believe a bed of that size would not have some sort of caster.

In the second photo (a portion of the bed as seen from the stairs) unless these old eyes are completely gone it does look like some sort of caster beneath the post on the left.

One other thing. The bureau definitely had casters. They are quite visible in one photo and if the furniture was a "set" then it is likely the bed had them as well.

[Kat]

Wow you guys that's excellent. I don't recall that we discussed casters on the bed before but I know you have a good memory, Har!
The pics and the info sound reasonable to me.
I think that's very helpful in designing the crime scene in our minds to know this.
The good chance that the bureau was on casters also might figure in to the furniture placement after the attack. For all we know the killer pushed things back into place if the struggle caused any movement of the furniture.
Ditto for the sofa downstairs. It's possible that was set up close to the dining room door ahead of time- just a chance that was so- and it might mean something.

[Allen]

There is one piece of evidence, or should I say missing evidence, holding me back from being completely positive Abby's body was moved. Abby's head wounds caused a good deal of blood lose. Once she was in a prone position on the floor this would have caused some 'leakage', for lack of a better term at this moment. The only pool of blood found in the room was the one under her head. It was coagulated. If the body was moved, where is the blood evidence to show us that? Also if there was furniture being moved about, even with the aid of casters, there would be an added noise factor.

[Kat]

I believe the blood also was staining the carpet under Abby's bodice area. Notice the size of the rug swatch which was removed. I'd think that there was blood evidence on that piece which was cut out, which is rather sizeable.
We don't visualize the blood which was found under Abby.
Besides she needn't have been moved a lot- not across the room or anything. Just positioned differently, is all.
I guess the sound of a killing and the moving of furniture on casters might be almost equal in the *I can't believe no one heard anything* category?

[Kat]

Here is Preliminary Hearing Testimony from Dr. Dolan about the back wound. I include it because not everyone has the prelim.
Imagine the blood from that wound.

Page 143
Q. The wounds on the face consist of some contusions on the nose, and some on the right forehead, over the eye?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. All of which, in your opinion, might be adequately caused by a woman of her appearance, her size, and weight, falling forward on to the face?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. I understand you to say at the Oak Grove Autopsy, there was found an injury in the back of Mrs. Borden?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. It was just below the line of the junction of the neck, and it went from below, backwards?
A. I simply chose that point because it was a good starting point.
Q. It went diagonally, cutting into the spine, and going diagonally in which direction?
A. In the direction of the left shoulder.
Q. Wont you be good enough to mark the place.
A. Of course this manikin is not very perfect anatomy, the shoulders are too low down.
Q. I see two marks here.
A. I gave that one as the central line of the spine, that is the wound. That is a soil there, not a mark.
Q. I have made that a little more distinct, is that right?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did that cut through the gown?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Were there any stays or other garments under that, as high up, or only the under wear?
A. The top of the chemise was cut.
Q. How deep was that wound?
A. About two and a half inches deep.
Q. That is, running your fingers in so?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. It would come down to the middle joint of my finger, or more?
A. More than that. Perhaps some of that a week afterwards might have been post mortem swelling; I do not think the wound originally was that deep.
Q. I mean the depth of the wound caused by this instrument.
A. That was the exact measurement, two and a half. I think there was some post mortem inflammation there of the gas.
Q. Did it go into the bone anywhere?
A. No Sir, it did not.
Q. Can you give me your opinion as to what the depth of that wound was at the time it was given?
A. About two inches.
Q. Down to the middle joint of my finger would be a fair illustration of the depth of it?
A. Yes Sir.

Page 144

Q. Where was the wound deepest, towards the shoulder blade, or towards the spine?
A. Towards the shoulder blade.
Q. Towards the left shoulder blade, and running diagonally down the spine, towards the shoulder blade?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Was that wound in the back given, in your opinion, before or after these wounds on the head?
A. I have no idea.
Q. Was the wound in the back necessarily a fatal one?
A. No Sir.
Q. In other words, a person might recover from that?
A. Yes, indeed.
Q. There would be every probability that they would?
A. Yes Sir; it was a flesh wound.

[1bigsteve]

We had a similar discussion of the bed in the past. Here are two photos. the first is a portion of one of the pictures of the bed showing the bed post. Note how there is no indentation in the rug where the post meets the rug. As in the photo Susan posted the caster may have been behind the post and not visible in the photo. I can't believe a bed of that size would not have some sort of caster.

In the second photo (a portion of the bed as seen from the stairs) unless these old eyes are completely gone it does look like some sort of caster beneath the post on the left.

One other thing. The bureau definitely had casters. They are quite visible in one photo and if the furniture was a "set" then it is likely the bed had them as well.

There seem's to be a slight gap between the bottom of the bed post and the surface of the carpet indicating to me that there were castors in operation on that bed.

Furniture in those days were heavy due to the use of so much solid wood. Now days a lot of VC plywood and other composites are used which are lighter in weight. That Borden bed was probably solid wood so castors would have been almost mandatory.

-1bigsteve (o: