Was Bridget involved poll?

This the place to have frank, but cordial, discussions of the Lizzie Borden case

Moderator: Adminlizzieborden

Post Reply

Bridget's involvment?

Was involved in the killings
4
11%
Only as an accessory after the fact
15
41%
Not involved at all
18
49%
 
Total votes: 37

User avatar
Harry
Posts: 4061
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:28 pm
Real Name: harry
Location: South Carolina

Was Bridget involved poll?

Post by Harry »

Assuming Lizzie was the killer, was Bridget involved in either the killings themselves or as an accessory after the fact?
I know I ask perfection of a quite imperfect world
And fool enough to think that's what I'll find
User avatar
Yooper
Posts: 3302
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 11:12 am
Real Name: Jeff
Location: U.P. Michigan

Post by Yooper »

That's a good question!

I find it difficult to imagine Bridget was involved in the killings themselves unless she had a motive. I just can't imagine what that might be. She didn't seem to gain anything as a result, in fact, she lost her job.

Involvement as an accessory after the fact might be a possibility. It would call for an unusual amount of trust between Lizzie and Bridget, some sort of bond. For Lizzie to promise Bridget some financial gain for her efforts doesn't quite work because Bridget had no guarantee Lizzie would be in a position to fulfill such a promise if she was convicted. Bridget had her future employment to consider, she would have suffered some degree of notoriety the way it was, and to come forward with information resulting in the conviction of a former employer would have further limited her prospects. If her knee-jerk reaction was to keep Lizzie out of trouble and she acted accordingly, it could be a possibility. It seems to me that an effort was made to spare Bridget in all of this, it wouldn't be too far fetched to kill her along with the elder Bordens and avoid the possibility that Bridget saw or heard something incriminating during the day. There was no guarantee what Bridget might or might not testify to, she might have been able to blow the lid off the case with the right information.

The simplest answer is Bridget not being involved at all, I'd guess that was probably true. Given the prospects for future employment, she probably wanted to keep her mouth on a tight leash anyway.
To do is to be. ~Socrates
To be is to do. ~Kant
Do be do be do. ~Sinatra
User avatar
Allen
Posts: 3409
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:38 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Me

Post by Allen »

I voted no. I've never really believed Bridget was involved. She was the one who stood to gain nothing at all with the Borden's being dead. I could never think of a single plausible motive for her wanting to kill them.
"He who cannot put his thoughts on ice should not enter into the head of dispute." - Friedrich Nietzsche
augusta
Posts: 2235
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 11:27 am
Gender: Female
Real Name: Augusta
Location: USA

Post by augusta »

What an interesting post, Yooper. It has been said by some scholars that Bridget did go to Ireland after the murders, and that Andrew Jennings told her not to come back to the U.S. I have not seen proof of it, but those that believe it must have some reason for it. Is there a Jennings letter somewhere that only few have seen? Maybe it's something like that.

That is very true - that Lizzie, or the killer, may not have known what Bridget did and didn't see. But if Lizzie was the lookout and knew where Bridget was when each murder occurred, Lizzie would have known pretty much that Bridget didn't see anything.

I don't think Lizzie would have killed Bridget - or had her killed - to shut her up. Outside of possibly killing the Bordens, I don't think Lizzie was a dangerous person who would kill just anybody. Her Christianity speaks for itself loudly, I think, and goes hand in hand with her many kindnesses she had done during her life and bequeathed in her will.

Do we know where Bridget was after the acquittal?

Her having a "knee jerk reaction" to help Lizzie, maybe after Andrew was killed, sounds very probable.

When people go thru a crisis together, sometimes it makes a bond between them that is very strong. It would be interesting to know if Bridget had any contact at all with Lizzie or Emma post 1893.
User avatar
Yooper
Posts: 3302
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 11:12 am
Real Name: Jeff
Location: U.P. Michigan

Post by Yooper »

If Lizzie killed her parents and allowed Bridget to live, Lizzie must have been fairly confident in Bridget not being able to testify to anything else incriminating. Family arguments, squabbles, angry comments about Abby and/or Andrew might have gone against Lizzie in the legal sense. Bridget may have made an effort to spin certain answers to favor Lizzie. Nobody wanted to be the one to put a noose around Lizzie's neck.
To do is to be. ~Socrates
To be is to do. ~Kant
Do be do be do. ~Sinatra
Constantine
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 8:54 pm
Real Name: Constantine Coutroulos
Location: New York, New York

Post by Constantine »

I did vote for her as an accessory, but I'm not sure. I simply can't believe she was in on it from the beginning. She had no motive. The possibility of receiving a payoff that would free her from life as a domestic might conceivably have been irresistible, however.
A man ... wants to give his wife ... the interest in a little homestead where her sister lives. How wicked to have found fault with it. How petty to have found fault with it. (Hosea Knowlton in his closing argument.)
User avatar
Allen
Posts: 3409
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:38 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Me

Post by Allen »

I think she might have suspected Lizzie did it, just like many others suspected her, but without proof she couldn't come forward with anything conclusive. She probably didn't know anything more incriminating than Lizzie didn't get along with Abby. But many people knew that and testified to that. She may have suspected in her heart Lizzie did it, but had no proof. By her own admission Bridget was fond of Mrs. Borden, and Abby seemed to have been fond of Bridget. According to Bridget, Abby told her she hoped she didn't return to Ireland when Bridget was thinking about it at one point. Because Abby hoped she'd stay on and work with them.

I'm not sure if she did know she'd have kept quiet because she was afraid helping to convict Lizzie would limit her chances for employment. I don't know it would've hurt her employment opportunities unless her future employers had murder on their minds. Some potential employers might have wanted to hire her because of that fact. "Guess who I have working for me?" But the notoriety aspect of it I agree with. People may have thought they could pump her for information about the goings on in the Borden house to satisify their own curiosity. Maybe this is why she kept so closed mouth about it for the rest of her life. She just wanted to be left alone. As Yooper said, she didn't want the notoriety of it all to follow her.

But incredibly she really didn't gain all that much notoriety, in my opinion. She managed to pretty much to disappear from public view. Any information about her after the murders becomes pretty sketchy and hard to track down.

I've thought about the supposed pay off. If Bridget was to stick her neck out to keep quiet the rest of her life, that would've taken a pretty substantial sum I think. If we look at what we know about Bridget's later life, which in my opinion is sketchy considering census records are polluted with Bridget Sullivan's from Ireland, it doesn't appear that she had gotten much of a pay off. She was still working as a domestic if we go by the available accounts.

But if she kept quiet for other reasons, which had nothing to do with money, I find that more credible.
"He who cannot put his thoughts on ice should not enter into the head of dispute." - Friedrich Nietzsche
User avatar
Yooper
Posts: 3302
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 11:12 am
Real Name: Jeff
Location: U.P. Michigan

Post by Yooper »

I think I recall something being published about Lizzie's "traitor" friend, referring to Alice Russell and specifically Alice's testimony about the dress burning. I don't know if the majority of people thought that way, but perhaps enough of the general public did that an article of this type could be published without recrimination. This is where I get the idea that Bridget might have suffered some further detriment if she had come forward with anything incriminating, at least from some segment of potential employers.

Bridget may indeed have known nothing more than what she testified to, but I also think she suspected Lizzie and probably early on. I wouldn't be surprised if Bridget intentionally dropped out of sight for a time, Fall River and the Bordens had cost her enough time and trouble by the time the trial was over. She might have even used an assumed name for a while.

I think the only person in a position to guarantee Bridget a financial gain for keeping quiet would have been Emma. However, if there was nothing for Bridget to keep quiet about, there was no need.
To do is to be. ~Socrates
To be is to do. ~Kant
Do be do be do. ~Sinatra
augusta
Posts: 2235
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 11:27 am
Gender: Female
Real Name: Augusta
Location: USA

Post by augusta »

I agree with Constantine in that I don't believe Bridget was in on it from the start - for the reason Allen said. Bridget liked Abby Borden.

I do think Bridget covered up the fighting and ill wills that went on in the house. She had to have heard some real whoppers. I wonder if she was afraid of a reprisal from Lizzie if she told.

Yes, there were a lot of Bridget Sullivans in that time period as Allen says. I have always really wondered how anyone could have tracked "our" Bridget to Anaconda, Montana and married to someone with the same last name.

It would be great to see more proof that she was "our" Bridget.

I thought that I had read years ago that Bridget married one of the policemen that worked the Borden case.
User avatar
snokkums
Posts: 2545
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 10:09 am
Gender: Female
Real Name: Robin
Location: fayetteville nc,but from milwaukee
Contact:

Post by snokkums »

I voted after the fact. I think Lizzie asked her to help clean up, and being the hired help, Bridget wasn't going to say no.
Suicide is painless It brings on many changes and I will take my leave when I please.
User avatar
Fargo
Posts: 972
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:43 pm
Real Name:

Post by Fargo »

The words "assumming Lizzie was the killer" changes everything. I voted not involved at all.

Considering Brisget's testimony that the door was latched did not help Lizzie.

If Bridget was involved during or after the killings I would think she would want to cover Lizzie as well as herself because if Lizzie went down then so would she, even if on a lesser charge.
What is a Picture, but the capture of a moment in time.
robbchadwick
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 1:13 pm
Real Name:
Location: Nashville TN

Post by robbchadwick »

I voted NO as well. I don't think Bridget was involved. (I do think Uncle John was though.)
Robb Chadwick
Nashville TN
User avatar
nbcatlover
Posts: 1222
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 4:10 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: nbcatlover
Location: New Bedford, MA

Post by nbcatlover »

I recently re-read Muriel Arnold's Lizzie Borden-The Hands of Time. It's got me thinking again about the possibility that Bridget could really have been the murderer. When I took the poll, I voted for Bridget as an accessory (after the fact), but if not for Alice Russell, I think the police would have arrested Bridget...and as the maid, probably would have convicted her.
Arnold makes points about not feeling well and Bridget still having to wash the windows, Bridget as door-keeper to front & side doors, Bridget having access to water in the barn to wash off any blood...

I still think there were more people in and around the house who've never been exposed. I think Lizzie and Uncle John knew of the pending meeting as possibly Abby did (her reason for Bridget's window washing to keep her from overhearing). While we have a possible candidate for Abby's pending overnight guest, I've always felt more was going on.
User avatar
violette
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 8:35 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Amber

Re: Was Bridget involved poll?

Post by violette »

Just found this poll while browsing the site. I voted no, because Bridget had no motive and I don't see her an accessory after the fact because she would have been a liability.
"Don't panic." - Douglas Adams 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy'
Tina
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 12:08 am
Gender: Female
Real Name: Tina

Re: Was Bridget involved poll?

Post by Tina »

My current thoughts is that she was an accessory to the prosecution, not the murders. She could have just been scared or even bullied into it, but something about her testimony is off - IMO. She seems to know an awful lot without knowing anything about the murders themselves.
User avatar
Mara
Posts: 227
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 2:55 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Mara Seaforest
Location: Rural Virginia
Contact:

Re: Was Bridget involved poll?

Post by Mara »

I wish there were a fourth selection! My feeling is that Bridget was used by the prosecution tp build their case against Lizzie and that she may not have wanted to do this. But in her day, she'd have had little social currency to object, if she were so inclined. I'm 100% certain that (a) she had no affection at all for any of the family — that her profession of regard for Abby was pro forma for the servant class if they wanted to be hired again — and, (b) she knew or surmised a great deal more about the murders than she ever articulated for any record we've received.
Post Reply