Hatchet vs Blood Spatter

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Oct 19, 2021 11:27 pm

I agree PossumPie that morphine is going to, shall we say, affect one's inhibitions? And yes more likely to say too much...

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Wed Oct 20, 2021 8:43 am

I think you both are on the right track. If I had to vote, I'd say she didn't take the morphine prescription, but if she did, that would possibly explain her bumbling the upstairs/downstairs questions. Could also help account for her scattered approach to describing what she and Abby talked about.

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Wed Oct 20, 2021 8:56 am

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Wed Oct 20, 2021 9:56 am

The page number that I referenced to was from:
The Lizzie Borden Trial Transcripts Vol.1: Official 1893 Stenographic Report Kindle Edition
by Frank H. Burt (Author), Mike Stewart (Editor)

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Oct 20, 2021 9:01 pm

I understand now it was a Kindle Edition, and sorry for any confusion.

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Wed Oct 20, 2021 10:23 pm

I purchased 3 volumes of the Trial and the Inquest and prelim hearing from Amazon -Kindle

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Oct 21, 2021 2:43 am

Well, I got to re-read all of Dr Bowen thru those same judicial processes, and found that he was the first one to move a part of both bodies.
He says he went to Abbie's body to check for pulse by entering the area next to the bed, on her right, and that he thinks he slightly moved the bed to get to her, but there seemed to be equal room on both sides of her between the bed and the bureau. Her arms were at right angles, both hands under her and below the bosom area, not near her head, and she was lying flat on her face, with her feet showing at least a foot and a half from the end of the bed. After he checked for pulse by bringing out her right wrist "slightly" from under her, he did not put it back.

Dr Dolan may have a different opinion as to his first view of Abbie's body. It would be interesting to compare.

Dr Bowen also says he took Andrew's pulse as well. And he says Andrew was higher up on the sofa and he can't account for the settling of his body. He doesn't say how he moved Andrew's wrist or if he put it back the way he found it. It also sounds as if he thinks the sofa isn't exactly in the same position in the photo as he first saw it, by using the dining room door frame as reference. But it also sounds like he is describing that there might be a different perspective in the camera vantage point.
(this is prelim and trial, no inquest questions about this to him.)
Some may call the photos "staged" but to me that implies cover-up. My impression has been that the officials wanted accurate pictures but did the best they could to reproduce the original scenes after all the chaos.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Oct 21, 2021 3:06 am

BTW the guest room bed was on casters as well as the sofa.

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Thu Oct 21, 2021 5:29 am

Kat wrote: ↑Thu Oct 21, 2021 2:43 am
Some may call the photos "staged" but to me that implies cover-up. My impression has been that the officials wanted accurate pictures but did the best they could to reproduce the original scenes after all the chaos.

Good point. I didn't want the implication of cover up so I changed my wording in the earlier post to "repositioned". I just wanted to make the point that examination of the pictures shouldn't be used as proof for/against something based solely on the exact position of the bodies.
BTW, her hands being under her below her breasts may be a significant finding as it implies that the first blow probably rendered her unconscious b/c anyone who falls forward instinctively puts their hands above their shoulders to brace the fall/protect their face. If alive after she fell, her hands wouldn't be underneath her and she would probably be in the fetal position. If she had seen the first blow coming, she would have had defensive wounds on her hands/forearms. It appears that she never turned around and her arms remained in front and below her breasts as she fell.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Oct 21, 2021 4:56 pm

I was trying to envision that, too.
Were you able to check Dolan? He is the origin of the "standing, facing" stance by counting the facial flap wound as first strike (which makes sense).
I think there might be some controversy between Bowen and Dolan but we'd also need a timeline and who else was there (who might corroborate either).
But I will say that I was rather surprised that I did not recollect that Bowen slightly "moved" the bodies.

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Fri Oct 22, 2021 5:27 am

Kat wrote: ↑Thu Oct 21, 2021 4:56 pm I was trying to envision that, too.
Were you able to check Dolan? He is the origin of the "standing, facing" stance by counting the facial flap wound as first strike (which makes sense).
I think there might be some controversy between Bowen and Dolan but we'd also need a timeline and who else was there (who might corroborate either).
But I will say that I was rather surprised that I did not recollect that Bowen slightly "moved" the bodies.

To be clear, Dolan testified at the prelim. that:

Q. She was lying with both hands under?
A. No Sir, more extended over the head, as it were, not over it, but
around the head.
Q. This fashion, putting my hands in front of my face?
A. Yes but not resting on the arms; the head in a circle.
Q. In that fashion, with my hands being above the line of my face,
and the hands being together?
A. I would not say they were together exactly.
Q. Approaching?
A. Yes Sir.

This position implies that she was NOT fully incapacitated after the first blow. It may have been only a second of consciousness, but if her arms were above her head she had enough time after the blow to bring them up to protect herself during the fall. But remember what I posted a few days ago, we can't take every small detail of their position as truth because people did move the bodies before the photos were taken.
Remember that Dr. Albert Dedrick who was just passing by when Bowen was entering also checked the bodies for signs of life. How much they were moved is unknown but Bowen testified that he felt her wrist for a pulse so did he pull her arm out from under her to do this? Neither of the photos of Abbey's body shows her hands above her head. Her head appears to be on the floor with her hands under her neck.
If the first wound was the glancing scalp wound it wouldn't have killed or even rendered her unconscious.
Dolan Autopsy:
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.

This could have been made from behind. A right handed person swinging too far to the left of Abbey's head would have hit her over the left ear and the blade glanced off of the skull cutting the skin downwards. There is nothing in his autopsy that suggests that she was facing the attacker. Her skull and Dolan's autopsy report are the most accurate depiction of the wounds. They are all on the right side of Abbey's skull (parietal and temporal bones) and the back of her skull (occiput). These are consistent with a right handed individual striking from behind. The odd one as I said is the glancing scalp wound on the left temporal bone above the ear. It would have had to been delivered when Abbey's head was at least partially turned left, perhaps glancing in the mirror on the dresser or putting something away.
The severity of the wounds, the fact that no scream was heard, and that she was facing the wall (away from her attacker) suggests that she was unconscious within seconds of being hit. The fact that there was no place in that room to hide and she was facing away from the only exit from that small space between the dresser and the bed suggests that either she never saw the attacker come up the stairs, enter the room, and get behind her (unlikely with the smallness of the room) or she knew the attacker and didn't feel threatened by their presence in her house.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Fri Oct 22, 2021 5:25 pm

I just finished re-reading Dolan at Prelim again, last night and today. Whew! That Adams really was snide at times. He seemed to be disparaging toward the witness, and trying to confuse him and putting words in his mouth. Even tho he was a Doctor, at one point Adams actually called him "Mr Witness!" And you know how Dr's are about that!
So I got way-laid looking up Adams (you know how that is), to find what may have made him so arrogant.
Anyway, thanks for the lookup, and I am going to follow thru reading Dolan at trial, next, before I comment more fully.

BTW I knelt in the area of Abbie's body, and could not see anyone approaching thru the door into the room in the mirror -the angle didn't allow for that, and I was with the curator of the house, Bill Pavao, so we tried different things, just FYI for anyone...

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:58 am

I must have read 200 pages of Dolan in the Prelim & Trial! Whew! And this isn't the first time proving first blow.
Anyway, testimony accepted as first blow to Abbie is the scalp wound/flap wound, standing and facing her assailant.
First here is Prelim:
Dolan
Prelim

Q. What of these wounds on the head, in your opinion, if any of them, were given while the person were standing up?
A. I would say the glancing scalp wound, which I spoke of, on the left side, that did not mark the skull; that flap drew right back.
Q. Now you tell us of a glancing scalp wound on the left side of the head over the left ear?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. You think that wound might have been given under what circumstances?
A. While standing up, and facing.
Q. That was not necessarily fatal?
A. No Sir.
Q. What were the dimensions of that wound?
A. I think one and a half by two inches.
Q. An inch and a half wide, and two inches running from front to back?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did it cut the flesh entirely off?
A. No Sir.
Q. If there was any supporting hinge, where was that?
A. At the rear.
Q. Exactly in the back, or toward the bottom?
A. More towards the bottom; I think it was about medium. I would not say positively whether it was towards the bottom or above; I think about the middle.
Q. Was this hinge practically the entire width of the wound?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. So the flesh would fly back, like that?
A. Yes Sir, a flapping wound.
Page 145
Q. Now you are describing, in answer to my question, the wounds that she might have received when standing up; is there any other wound that you think of?
A. I do not think so, sir.
Q. In your opinion were all the other wounds given when the person was lying down, prone on the floor? Could they be?
A. Yes Sir, they could be.
---------------------
Next, here is what Dolan did, in the order he did it, kind of a timeline, so I wrote it down. (Caveat: hand and wrist arthritis- if not clear I will take different photo Saturday)
Trial
plzclickonpic

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 4:49 am

Kat, this is great, detailed work. Noticed at top of page u note “20 photos”. Curious what photos that count is referencing?

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 6:20 am

I wish there was a photo of the "first wound" the laceration on her right side of her head. He deduces that it must have been made from the front due to the skin being attached near the back of the wound. He assumed the skin was attached at the back of the head b/c the hatchet stopped moving. It seems a glancing blow from the back would also leave the skin attached at the back of the wound if the head of the hatchet were angled away from the body midline by a few degrees. It could be the hatchet swung from the back, cut through the top of the scalp wound, through the front and bottom, but left the back flap of skin attached.
Why does it matter?

No matter who the killer was, if she were facing them for that first swing, and all it did was cut skin, 1. She would have screamed bloody murder and 2. She would have fallen on her back. I don't see how she was struck, pivoted 180 degrees, fell flat on her face with her hands under her. Highly unlikely.
But if she were bending over or squatting facing the way she ultimately laid, the killer swung at her right skull and cut the skin, followed immediately with another blow that fractured her skull, she would have fallen in that strange humped-over position the picture shows.
Furthermore, if she were facing the killer and it were a stranger, she would have called out in alarm. Up in a bedroom, turn around and a stranger is walking toward you? No way you don't call out. The front blow would almost insure the killer was Lizzie or Bridget as their presence in the room wouldn't raise alarm.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 1:24 pm

That's why first blow is so important in this case. "Standing facing" was accepted by the prosecution and the defense, and I assume the rest of the doctors who helped with the autopsies. So I bow to their expertise.
The only other possibility that did not come under speculation, was kneeling, facing...but she would have fallen differently, and most probably the cut would present differently also.

The only other blow that could possibly have been received while standing, barely speculated by the doctor, was the wound to the back of the neck/shoulder area that cut 2"
into flesh, but missed the spine. These 2 wounds were survivable.

Her body was found pretty straight, even to the legs being straight. Maybe the killer did arrange her body, and clothes.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:02 pm

Testing

Reasonwhy · Post by **Reasonwhy** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:04 pm

Kat, this is hard to read. Any way to scan parts of it in more close-up view? Would like to see your work here. Thanks!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:21 pm

The "testing" one is hard to read? Thanks for the feedback. No, I have no more scanner- I can only take pictures on my ipad. Does this current version show sideways when you click on it? When I click on it on my iPad it flips right side up. I need to know these things, thanks!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:37 pm

The 20 photos comment was at trial page 878. I believe they are including the Phillips photos, because Knowlton states to the court that "Somebody under the directions of Mr. Jennings has had a number of photographs taken...may go into the case as exhibits."

The context is under questioning Dolan as to where spots of blood were found, like the mop board in the guest room, and it seemed to be in a photo, exhibit 16, but they also had the piece itself and showed it to the court. The exhibits, I think, are listed at the end of the trial? Maybe someone can find them?

Also, if some of these 20 were by Phillips, then we do know he took quite a few, including one of someone hiding in the little closet next to the front door, and also 3rd street pics...not just body pics by Walsh.

Reasonwhy · Post by **Reasonwhy** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 4:06 pm

Kat, just got a new iphone, and tried the image today. When I zoom out, I can see clearly! So, could have been my old phone that had problems— sorry. Your notes show a great way to get these testimonies into perspective in one’s own head.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 4:29 pm

Oh good! Thanks! I thought zooming might be the answer!

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 5:56 pm

Kat -- are the Phillips photos on-line somewhere?

Thx!

wall59 · Post by **wall59** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 6:04 pm

Page 1609

List of exhibits

1. Large plan, showing main street and other streets.
2. Plan of Borden premises, and surrounding estates.
3. Plan of Borden premises, including ground floor of house.
4. Plan of Borden premises, including second story.
5. Plan of sitting room.
6. Blue print of Exhibit 3.
7. Blue print of Exhibit 4.
8. Blue print of Borden premises and surrounding estates.
9. Plan of cellar.
10 - 14 (inclusive) Photographs of Borden house.
15 - 19 (inclusive) Photographs of bodies.
20 & 21 Carpets.
22 Tag attached to jar containing Mr. Borden's stomach.
23 Tag attached to jar containing Mrs. Borden's stomach.
24 - 43 (inclusive). Small photographs of Borden premises.
44 Pin produced by Mr. Adams for comparison, in connection with
testimony of Professor Wood.

The "20 photos" are exhibits 10-19 and 24-43?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 7:06 pm

Oh thank you! I was just about to look that up! YAY!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 7:25 pm

camgarsky4 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 23, 2021 5:56 pm Kat -- are the Phillips photos on-line somewhere?

Thx!

There are 3 in his actual newspaper article:

NEW BEDFORD EVENING STANDARD TIMES
MAY 13, 1934: 1
“BORDEN MURDER CASE SECRETS BARED”--(”Arthur Phillips Discloses”)
--
3 PHOTO’S:
--“Dr. Chagnon's House and Yard—taken from near Crowe’s barn”
(directly below Article title—4 columns wide)

--”From Dr. Chagnon’s Yard (Third Street), showing rear of Borden yard and barn” [doghouse photo]--2 columns wide

--”North Side of House of Andrew J. Borden”

And 4 in his "Phillips History, Fascicle III" which I think you can download from The Keeley Library online, but there may be only 1 there you haven't seen- an outside view down the street.
I remember there's a link, in LINKS, in our old Forum archive here that goes to Keeley. Maybe you can find it by just Googling The Keeley Library?

Of course, the FRHS has them, and used to be for sale.

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 8:16 pm

Kat and wall....thanks!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 8:20 pm

I have the directions for anyone who wants it:
sailsinc.org

Then go to "Full text online books and articles"

Then click on "books"

Then scroll down to Phillips History of Fall River
choose by Fascicles III
And the Borden chapter

````````````````````````````````
testing direct link
http://sailsinc.org/durfee/fulltext.htm#books

Then you would look in the Index for the Borden Chapter, or download the complete Fascicle III
This History book is almost the last, in bright blue, almost at the bottom of the page

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 8:33 pm

Reasonwhy · Post by **Reasonwhy** » Sat Oct 23, 2021 9:19 pm

Thanks to Kat and wall59!!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:59 am

I downloaded the 3RD Fascicle as PDF, found the page with 4 Phillips pictures, cut the one out we rarely see and mounted it and now trying to upload here
testing...I think it worked!
Photo credit Arthur Phillips
plzclickonpic

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Sun Oct 24, 2021 6:30 am

Looking at the closeness of Dr. Kelly's house in that picture reminded me of the astounding fact that despite the houses being so close in and that people were out and about in their yards and on the sidewalks, that it was a warm day and windows were open, nobody heard a shout, argument, scream, or 200 lb. thud that day. There have been many threads arguing the point of how much noise murdering a 200 lb woman would make. Folks who have been to the Borden home state that a large adult falling in that room can be heard everywhere except the kitchen. To be impartial, a loud thump may not have been interpreted as significant by Lizzie. The killer certainly counted on the fist blow to render her unconscious/dead because any scream would certainly have been heard throughout the house and outside.

TRIAL TESTIMONY DR. KELLY's WIFE:

You live in the next house to the south of the Borden house?
A. Yes.
Q. And lived there, did you, on August 4th of last year?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you at home on Aug. 4th?
A. Yes.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Oct 26, 2021 2:53 am

I agree about the close houses and windows open, but the view you saw, I believe, was foreshortened. Actually, the Churchill house was closer. But wasn't the Kelley girl also outside, Mary Doolan? At least for a part of the morning.
Here is a view from Len Rebello's book showing Second Street.
Plzcliconpic

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:41 am

Yes, Kat, they are a bit further than the picture implies, but I still contend that houses that close together would hear noises within their neighbor's homes if loud enough. I live in the country now, but when I was in my 20's I lived in town. Had a house about the same distance as the Churchill house next to me and a house about as close as Dr. Kelly's across the street. In the spring and summer with the windows open, we could hear their TV and their 2-year-old throwing a tantrum...and that was with automobile noise. In the 1890s there was no auto noise. My point is that there was no shout, scream, or argument heard coming from the Borden home. Either the killer was known to Abbey or was so skillful as to sneak up on her in a small bedroom without her knowing. Possible but improbable. Andrew's death was less skillful as he probably had his eyes shut trying to nap.

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Tue Oct 26, 2021 7:09 am

That was a city of industry and they lived on a main road where horses, people, carriages traveled all the time, so if anybody is wondering why big soft Abby falling to the floor did not shatter the entire neighborhood - now you know.

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:14 am

Impressive how intricate these neighborhood renderings are. The Boston Daily Globe had to have hired an engineer to do that work. Can't you imagine those fella (s) roaming around the neighborhood with their yard sticks in their hands!

Bottom left corner....looks like the artists name was Robbins.

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:14 pm

Steve88778 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 7:09 am That was a city of industry and they lived on a main road where horses, people, carriages traveled all the time, so if anybody is wondering big soft Abby falling to the floor did not shatter the entire neighborhood - now you know.

Perhaps...I didn't live back then so don't know how noisy it was with horses/carts instead of Harley-Davidsons and Hondas with modified mufflers, but I doubt it was louder then compared to now. As I say, I lived in town for a few years and there were times I heard arguing from across the street. It wasn't back-to-back carriages like New York City. Obviously, nobody DID hear Abbey fall so it is a moot point, but I bet if she turned around and saw a seedy stranger coming at her with a hatchet, the scream would have been heard quite away from the Borden home!

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Tue Oct 26, 2021 7:12 pm

Yes - maybe that is why the asilaint decided to kill in the morning / day time as opposed to supper time or later. Or even on a weekend where people were not that busy. Lizzie's house was in the middle of and about 6 buildings to the south of:

A Remnant store
A Laundry
A Candy store -dont think much noise there being it was summertime when school is out (eyes rolling)
A Paint store
The NY/Boston Dispatch Express & Co.

Now to the North - and about 2 buildings up.
A liquor store
Another paint store
A stable and Machine shop ( those are pretty quiet )

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:15 am

Steve88778 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 7:12 pm Yes - maybe that is why the asilaint decided to kill in the morning / day time as opposed to supper time or later. Or even on a weekend where people were not that busy. Lizzie's house was in the middle of and about 6 buildings to the south of:

A Remnant store
A Laundry
A Candy store -dont think much noise there being it was summertime when school is out (eyes rolling)
A Paint store
The NY/Boston Dispatch Express & Co.

Now to the North - and about 2 buildings up.
A liquor store
Another paint store
A stable and Machine shop ( those are pretty quiet )

Perhaps, but following that logic what person NOT living in the house would chance killing two elderly people in broad daylight, on a busy street, during the busiest time of day, knowing that they"d have to make a "get-away" "covered in (some amount of) blood" past all of that?

If the murders were not premeditated, then none of this matters. A spur-of-the-moment decision without a thought to escape from the house. If there was any planning involved, the killer decided that killing two elderly people in broad daylight, on a busy street, during the busiest time of day, was not going to be an issue. That seems to point directly to either Lizzie or Bridget as they wouldn't have to worry about being seen.

I've often thought "why didn't Lizzie wait until midnight, sneak into their bedroom and kill them in their sleep?" Because the first strike of the hatchet to one would waken the other who would cry out in alarm. Any forethought about it would show the killer that the two Bordens couldn't be in the same room at the same time when killed. Andrew always took a walk in the morning leaving Abbey home. Only someone intimately aware of the house routine would know that- which is why the "stranger hiding somewhere upstairs for an hour-and-a-half" theory is so implausible. How would they know WHEN Andrew would return?

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 7:47 am

Andrew basically kept the same routine each day so you can observe a pattern of leaving and returning home. People can be told when his pattern started and stopped. Of course this day was different in that he did come home early. Was someone in the barn waiting to be let it ?
Nobody has to be running out of the house covered in blood a butcher's smock can cover then be folded neatly tucked under a shirt and no one the wiser. If there was a smock or a cover in the house at the time of the many searches maybe Lizzie would not have gotten off. But sadly there was 1) no evidence of anything that she wore that was blood stained or 2) somebody else did the deed and was well paid. ---Or not. Mr. Borden was not a liked man. Maybe a way of getting back at him was to kill his wife. Maybe plans changed because of the early arrival. But these are all maybe situations.

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 8:24 am

Steve88778 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 7:47 am Andrew basically kept the same routine each day so you can observe a pattern of leaving and returning home. People can be told when his pattern started and stopped. Of course this day was different in that he did come home early. Was someone in the barn waiting to be let it ?
Nobody has to be running out of the house covered in blood a butcher's smock can cover then be folded neatly tucked under a shirt and no one the wiser. If there was a smock or a cover in the house at the time of the many searches maybe Lizzie would not have gotten off. But sadly there was 1) no evidence of anything that she wore that was blood stained or 2) somebody else did the deed and was well paid. ---Or not. Mr. Borden was not a liked man. Maybe a way of getting back at him was to kill his wife. Maybe plans changed because of the early arrival. But these are all maybe situations.

My biggest problem with the "Stranger" scenario is that as you pointed out, it WAS broad daylight, there were many people on the street, in their yards, and sticking their collective noses into the Borden's property. How could a non-household member enter a yard, house, and two rooms with absolutely no knowledge of who would see them and kill two people? They could have been seen entering the yard by Bridget, Abbey, or Lizzie, entering the house by any of those women who went in, out, up, and down constantly. Again I'm not saying it is impossible but highly improbable.

I guess what it boils down to is that you believe it more likely that a stranger managed to avoid detection in coming in, killing both, and leaving the property than you believe that Lizzie could have done it and cleaned up. If the killer could have walked away with a butcher apron under his arm, Lizzie could have done the same. We'll agree to disagree.

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 9:43 am

A couple of things that I don't quite understand or maybe don't want to agree with - the night Lizzie came home from Alice Russell's house did she go upstairs with someone and that someone hide in Emma's room ?
Who knows, there is nothing that says she did or didn't. We all know that she did not love her stepmother but I believe she did love her father.
And if it was all for money and inheritance then OK, possible motive established. But why that day ? - The Whitehead house thing happened 5 years ago.

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 10:22 am

Steve88778 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 9:43 am A couple of things that I don't quite understand or maybe don't want to agree with - the night Lizzie came home from Alice Russell's house did she go upstairs with someone and that someone hide in Emma's room ?
Who knows, there is nothing that says she did or didn't. We all know that she did not love her stepmother but I believe she did love her father.
And if it was all for money and inheritance then OK, possible motive established. But why that day ? - The Whitehead house thing happened 5 years ago.

Good hypothesis, it is possible that at some time before the killings Lizzie let a coconspirator into Emma's room. That would explain how Lizzie had no blood on her. I find that plausible, however, why didn't Lizzie leave the house to establish an alibi? She set herself up to be the only apparent person in the house alone with both victims. Anyway, it just shifts the guilt from Lizzie alone to Lizzie and a coconspirator thus she is still guilty.

I don't think that the day held any special importance. Emma was away, thus fewer people in the house. "Revenge is a dish best served cold" and both daughters continued to harbor grudges against their stepmother. Both had respectful relations with their father, but it was well known that he ruled the roost.
WITNESS STATEMENT:

(Question) “Mr. Cook, do you know of anything that would lead you to imagine that Lizzie and her
father did not get along well together?”
(Answer) “I do not like to answer that question on account of my position as custodian of property,
as I do not know what my relations may be with the family, when this thing is settled.”

Fall River, August 8, 1892.
Paid a visit to Mrs. Cyrus W. Tripp at her home in Westport on August 7, 1892. In reply to my
questions she made the following statement. “Lizzie told me she thought her stepmother was deceitful,
being one thing to her face, and another to her back. Lizzie told me her stepmother claimed not to have
any influence with her father. But she must have influence with my father, or he never would have given
my stepmother’s half sister such a very large sum of money. She said, I do not know that my sister or I
would get anything in the event of my father’s death. This conversation took place at different times
during former visits; nothing being said during her visit July 26th.

ALICE RUSSELL TESTIMONY
A. Mr. Borden was a plain living man with ridgid ideas, and very set. They were young girls. He had earned his
money, and he did not care for the things that young women in their position naturally would; and he looked
upon those things--- I dont know just how to put it.
Q. He did not appreciate girls?
A. No, I dont think he did.
Q. Their ideas were more modern than his with regard to the way of living, do you mean?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. How did you get this, from the girls talk, or what you observed?
A. From what I observed. Everybody knew what Andrew Borden’s ideas were. He was a very plain living man;
he did not care for anything
152 (59)
different. It always seemed to me as if he did not see why they should care for anything different.
Q. Did they complain about it?
A. Yes, they used to think it ought to be different; there was no reason why it should not be. They used to
think it might be different.

While not being affectionate with one's parents isn't proof of disdain, it seems from the testimony that they simply coexisted in the house together. Testimony from many sources including Lizzie shows that Lizzie actively avoided most contact with both Abbey and Andrew. If one's father caves in and gives property to one's stepmother's family, who would you be angry with? The stepmother for asking? Your father for doing it? Both?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:40 pm

Thank you for your well-considered response and testimony plus witness statement citations!
I have read several places where the senior Bordens were supposed to go to the farm in Swansea sometime each summer, and have been wondering why a planned murder did not use that locale...I would think it would be easier there.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:42 pm

I have a question: why do folks say Andrew arrived home "early?"

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 8:27 pm

Good hypothesis, it is possible that at some time before the killings Lizzie let a coconspirator into Emma's room.

I think an alibi is a double edged sword. Yes it can point to a place and time. But with no witness verification it is missing something.
Take for example - Good ole Uncle John Morse - Leaves early / comes back, picks a pear like nothing ever happened . But just in case, he just happens to have in his holster some bits of information on the trolly car. Three pieces to be exact. 1) witnessed priests - 6 of them and Irish. Then he remembers his car number - ( i can understand that one ) and 3) the strangest of them all the badge number on the conductor's cap.

Lizzie doesn't do anything because she didn't have to. - but let's say she did. When asked if the maid could have done it - she said no. She could easily say I don't know. And that note - why would she open herself to investigation about a note ? She could have easily said - "Mrs Borden left the house to visit a friend" done end of discussion. No note to search for no speculation to weather she received a note or is lying because there was no note to be found. The dumbells at the Fall River PD sure ate that one up - they thought that was suspicious. But then again they thought a lot of things were suspicious. Like Lizzie Borden herself directs the maid to show the officers were the hatches were and in the collection - one that stood by itself -like it just has been washed. It was a tragedy but the mayor handled it all wrong - his police force was not prepared to take on this task - and should have enlisted the Pinkertons to assist. But egos get in the way.

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 8:45 pm

Steve -- thank you for sharing this message again. We have vetted your similarly stated thoughts on multiple occasions, and so really not worth the energy to revisit/retype. If you truly are looking for feedback, best to go back to other threads to read the feedback previously provided in response to your same dissertation.

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 9:53 pm

I just used the John Morse fishy stories as just an example of the alibis that were a little bit too over the top. Like how he stated the coachman's badge on his cap for me was the final nail in the coffin. I did not know about the 6 Irish priests at first but think that's kind of strange but noteworthy.

Not having read tons of material on LB or studied the case for a good part of my life - I am new to the whole "who done it" guess. I know that this forum is big and the things that I point out may have already been posted and debated before. But it's not worth my time to look at past threads, after all there is life after Lizzie.

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 10:52 pm

Because it is stated in the DA Moody's opening statement that Mr. Borden came home contrary to the usual custom of the house. I believe he was sick or not feeling well. Common sense dictates if he was not feeling well it would be early.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Oct 27, 2021 10:56 pm

Thanks, I'll look it up!