Crowe Barn hatchet

[PossumPie]

I agree, to the extent that it cannot be dispositive in our attempts to understand if she was actually guilty of one or both of the murders, since fingerprint evidence is not available. Also, it is not impossible to think of ways she could have disposed of it, hidden it, or broken it and left it in plain sight (the handle-less hatchet).

But, as to whether she should have been found guilty or not guilty by the jury, it played a hugely determinative role, I’m convinced, for this reason: a missing weapon is like the missing blood from Lizzie’s person. It psychologically removed Lizzie from any means to have committed the crime. No way to convincingly tie in any of the on-site hatchets left her hands as weapon-free as they were blood-free: why, the real murderer must have carried the weapon away with him.

Remember Emma’s 1913 interview where she said she believed Lizzie innocent because there was no place she could have hidden the hatchet? Emma was presenting Lizzie’s best defense to the world (and to herself?).

You are 100% correct. A trial is not really about determining innocence. It is about swaying a jury to believe the accused is either guilty or not guilty. Not guilty often means "we just don't have enough evidence." The O.J. Simpson glove was a genius ploy to that end. OF COURSE, if you try to put a leather glove over a latex glove in a courtroom it won't fit...BUT the picture of O.J. shaking his head trying (half-heartedly) to put the glove on stuck in every juror's mind. No hatchet, no dress, no blood...those words went through the jury's minds like a mantra.

[Reasonwhy]

Kat posted: “ Can my memory be refreshed, please? In opening or closing statements by prosecution or defense at trial state that no weapon taken from the premises can be proven (or not proven) to be the implement of death, and therefore Lizzie must be found "Not Guilty?" Thanks!
I'm just tired...but curious, and interested!
If no one is available, I can look tomorrow.”

I’ve got it, Kat. Will type up in next post.

[Reasonwhy]

So, in Robinson’s closing, from pp. 1710-17 of the trial transcript, he deals in detail with the handleless hatchet. But earlier, on page 1641, he distanced her from any weapon. Think this is the passage you may be referring to, Kat:

“No weapon whatever, and no knowledge of the use of one, as to her, has been shown. You know if you had found her with some weapon of that kind in her control, or in her room, or with her belongings, that would be direct evidence. But there is nothing of that kind. It is not claimed. It is not shown that she ever used an implement of the character that must have produced these murders. It is not shown that she ever touched one or knew of one or bought one or had one. In fact, the evidence is that she didn’t know where the ordinary things in the house of that kind were….”

[camgarsky4]

If the Crowe roof hatchet had been found pre-trial, and introduced at the trial, I suppose his closing argument would have been edited?

Fictional restatement:
“No weapon whatever, and no knowledge of the use of one, as to her, has been shown. You know if you had found her with some weapon of that kind in her control, or in her room, or with her belongings, that would be direct evidence. But there is nothing of that kind. The only mysterious hatchet that has been found was not even on the Borden property, it was found on a random barn roof where any crazed killing intruder could have tossed it as they ran away. It is not claimed. It is not shown that she ever used an implement of the character that must have produced these murders or that she visited the southeast corner of the Borden property on August 4th. It is not shown that she ever touched one or knew of one or bought one or had one. In fact, the evidence is that she didn’t know where the ordinary things in the house of that kind were….heck, she was so busy looking for penny sinkers in the hot, dirty barn loft in her 'going out' dress that she had no opportunity to toss the murder weapon out of sight and off the property. Throwing a hatchet any distance has been determined to make one's hands dirty and we know they were lily white! She has plausible deniability!!"

[Reasonwhy]

I love it. How that Robinson could talk. And talk. And manipulate facts until they begged to be let go. Just reading him is a smothering exercise—I badly wanted some ethical fresh air.

[camgarsky4]

Possum -- do you know by whom and when the visual 3-D display of the borden neighborhood was created?

[Reasonwhy]

This is a 3-D cardboard construction of 3rd and 2nd streets at the Salem Lizzie attraction. It was really helpful to see these- it helps with the sightlines. The Churchill (Buffinton) house was really huge. This is a scale model, with the Borden house being the one painted (of course). You can just see the Bowen-Miller house across the street.

Camgarsky, hope you don’t mind, though you asked Possum. More posts about the model are in the thread, “Dr. Chagnon’s House,” which I added, too.

[Reasonwhy]

I notice the model shows the tallest, or main, part of the barn with a slanted roof. The newspaper stories Kat posted say Arthur Potter, 14, found the hatchet on the “main barn,” the one with the 18 foot tall roof, and also say that its roof was flat:

“The barn is a flat roof structure about 18 feet high. In the rear is an ell, the full width of the main building, but not more than 12 feet high. Still extending to the west and toward the Borden estate is a narrow flat roofed ell, about nine feet high. A six-foot fence runs diagonally and southeasterly from the north line of the first ell to the second ell, so that it is very easy to scale the roof.
During the game of the boys, the ball was knocked, or thrown, upon the roof of the main barn….”

[camgarsky4]

Would you mind editing your post and add the entire article? Thanks!!

And how do you find things so well and quickly on this forum? I'm amazed.

[Reasonwhy]

This was included in Kat’s post of Nov. 5, in this very thread:



June 16, 1893 Page 8, col. 6.

"THE NEW SENSATION.

'I Have Found Lizzie Borden's
Hatchet'

Cried a Boy in John Crowe's Barn
in Fall River.

Discovery Made in Rear of the
Borden Estate.

Fall River, June 15. --- The Daily News Bulletin this afternoon has the following:
About 7 o'clock last evening a number of boys were engaged in playing ball on Third street, in front of John Crowe's barn, which is nearly in the rear of the Borden estate, the north side of the barn serving as a fence between Dr. Chagnon's orchard, which is directly in the rear of the Borden house, and the Kelly lot, on which the barn stands.
The barn is a flat roof structure about 18 feet high. In the rear is an ell, the full width of the main building, but not more than 12 feet high. Still extending to the west and toward the Borden estate is a narrow flat roofed ell, about nine feet high. A six-foot fence runs diagonally and southeasterly from the north line of the first ell to the second ell, so that it is very easy to scale the roof.
During the game of the boys, the ball was knocked, or thrown, upon the roof of the main barn, and Master Arthur Potter, 14 years old, son of Caleb C. Potter, of the water works office, scaled the building in quest of it.
Near the northwest corner of the main building---about six feet from the west and four feet from the north line of the structure---on the northeast corner of the roof, he found a hatchet of ordinary size, lying with the head toward the southeast, the handle towards the northwest corner.
He forgot the ball and he rushed for the hatchet, and then rang out his salute to the boys below:

I've Found Lizzie Borden's Hatchet.

The hatchet is an ordinary shingle hatchet with a blade 3-3/4 inches in length. It was covered in rust and part of this was scraped off by the boy when found. It has the appearance of having been comparatively new and but little used.
The handle, which is 13-1/2 inches long, looked weather-worn as if it had been long exposed to air, sun and storm. The under side of the handle had a few slight stains, but nothing that resembled spots. Near the head of the hatchet, these stains were more pronounced.
The boys were much excited over the find, and it was given to Mr. Potter, the father of the finder, who now has it in his possession. He at once notified the police and tried to find Mr. Jennings, but in this was unsuccessful.
If the murderer of Andrew J. Borden and his wife escaped from the Borden premises by the rear, and it was a very easy way for him to so escape, he could easily have thrown the hatchet to the place where it was found.
So far as is known no man has been on the roof within two years. Mr. Crowe knows of none; all telegraph, telephone, electric light wiremen, roofers and several photographers agree on this. The police did not visit it in their thorough search.
The police have been carefully examining the hatchet this morning. They thought they could tell whether there had been blood on it or not. They confess that they are baffled.
But one of them, who has been an important witness in the Borden case, admits that with the new find and the exclusion of the Bence story everything has gone up for the government so far as a possible conviction of Lizzie Borden is concerned.
The defense has opened its case. Now look for important and vital contradictions of government testimony."


[Reasonwhy]

Please also see, from that same post of Kat’s, the article from the Fall River Evening News, 6/15/1893. Here’s an excerpt:
“The barn is a flat roof structure… During the game of the boys, the ball was knocked, or thrown, upon the roof of the main barn…Near the northwest corner of the main building.—…on the northeast corner of the roof, he found a hatchet….”

And there’s this, also in Kat’s post—an excerpt from the FallRiver Daily Herald, 6/15/1893:
“The ball lodged on the flat roof of Crowe’s barn…”

So, young Potter finds the hatchet on the 18 foot flat roof of the main barn, several news sources agree (and none of the other news stories say he found it on either the 12-foot or 9-foot structure).

My surmises:
1. If Potter had planted the hatchet, it would have been much easier to plant it on one of the lower two roofs. That’s strong indication he did not plant it.
2. Again, the news sources cited agree that roof was flat (and no other news source says it was slanted). Thus, the hatchet would not have slid nor rolled off, once there. Therefore, if Lizzie or a fleeing culprit did throw it there, it would have stayed put.

[Reasonwhy]

Also, please note the description contained in the news articles that the handle was weather-worn. Some posters have noted the blade could have rusted very quickly—but would the handle have acquired weather-worn characteristics as quickly? I doubt it, from my common experience of wood left outside; it takes awhile. 10 months or so would do it

[camgarsky4]

Extract from article Daily Bulletin:
"During the game of the boys, the ball was knocked, or thrown, upon the roof of the main barn, and Master Arthur Potter, 14 years old, son of Caleb C. Potter, of the water works office, scaled the building in quest of it.
Near the northwest corner of the main building---about six feet from the west and four feet from the north line of the structure---on the northeast corner of the roof, he found a hatchet of ordinary size...."

Reason, I've reread this paragraph a dozen times and drawn it out on paper. I'm thinking what is being described is that the ball landed on the 18 ft barn roof. But the hatchet was found on the 12 ft section of the barn.

The hatchet was on the middle roof section, 6 feet from the west edge of the main barn and 4 ft from the north side. The northeast corner of the middle roof would butt up against the northwest corner of the main barn.

This would be a feasible location, since he would run into the hatchet before reaching the ball and would be a shorter toss by the culprit if they happened to be standing in the southeast corner of the Borden property.

[Reasonwhy]

“But the hatchet was found on the 12 ft section of the barn.”
—partial post by Camgarsky

Camgarsky, what is your source for this, please? Every news article I have seen, that talks about where the hatchet was found, including this one you now cite, says the hatchet was found on the flat roof of the 18-foot tall main barn building roof (please see my posts above, higher in this thread). Thanks.

[Reasonwhy]

I get that it would be a shorter toss if flung onto that middle roof, although the culprit would have a boost for either roof if she/he stood on top of the wood pile. Yet, the papers say the hatchet was found on the main building, which was 18 feet high.

I don’t know how difficult it might be to achieve a toss of that height. Might not be difficult, as such a hatchet is small and not terribly heavy. But someone did toss it there. Or a worker, who was up there unbeknownst to the owner, left it. Or it was planted.

Again, though, are you somehow surmising the hatchet was on the 12 foot ell? Or do you have a source for this?

[camgarsky4]

Reason -- I tried to explain my 'math' above, so I've copied and re-pasted my post. What helped me plot this out was grabbing a piece of paper, drawing 3 connected squares in a row, putting N,S,E,W around the row of squares. I might just be feeble minded, but it helped me work thru the 6', 4' , NE corner, NW corner, etc that the article uses to describe the hatchet location.

I read the article to tell us that the ball hit the 18ft section, but the hatchet was found on the 12 ft section. I've put the key portion of the article in blue and my interpretation of the portion in green. I could very well be wrong in my interpretation, but I've read and thought it thru a number of times.

Extract from article:
"During the game of the boys, the ball was knocked, or thrown, upon the roof of the main barn, and Master Arthur Potter, 14 years old, son of Caleb C. Potter, of the water works office, scaled the building in quest of it.
Near the northwest corner of the main building---about six feet from the west and four feet from the north line of the structure---on the northeast corner of the roof, he found a hatchet of ordinary size...."

I'm think what is being described is that the ball landed on the 18 ft barn roof. But the hatchet was found on the 12 ft section of the barn.

The hatchet was on the middle roof section, 6 feet from the west edge of the main barn and 4 ft from the north side. The northeast corner of the middle roof would butt up against the northwest corner of the main barn.

This would be a feasible location, since he would run into the hatchet before reaching the ball and would be a shorter toss by the culprit if they happened to be standing in the southeast corner of the Borden property. I found no other article which specifically tells us the hatchet was found on the main/18ft portion of the barn. Please let me know if I overlooked one.

[Kat]

Yes, Reasonwhy, there is some confusion as to which roof the hatchet was found. Earlier today I read an archive thread about members trying to understand which roof. Apparently Robert Flynn wrote about this too, in his short treatise "The Mysterious Ax." I thought maybe our website had a download of it, but no. We knew who claimed the lost hatchet, but he had been subcontracted to work for Dr Chagnon, so the question became how did he lose it on Crowe's roof 2 lots away? Harry wrote to Bob Flynn and the answer was what I had surmised- he wondered the same thing and we thought it had to have been stolen. When I find the link in archive I will put it here. It's the old black & white format of the Archives. So yes, more questions as to which roof.

However, I also was re- researching that dratted GILT. And so Harry had questions, and those pretty much gave me a direction to figure out what may have happened...I will offer the speculation with documentation next...only because it is fresh in my mind. Maybe it will be an acceptable answer, and we can at least quit wracking our brains over it!

[Reasonwhy]

Camgarsky, you are right, and I’ve been mistaken. Here’s why:

“Near the northwest corner of the main building---about six feet from the west and four feet from the north line of the structure---on the northeast corner of the roof, he found a hatchet of ordinary size...."

We’ve been tossing this quote back and forth, each re-reading it, trying to see the other’s point of view. Although each of the news accounts I cited did indeed say the ball was on the 18 foot, flat roof of the main barn, the wording of the above quote says differently about the hatchet.

The “northeast corner of the roof” must mean the middle roof of the 12-foot high ell because only it could abut the “northwest corner of the main building.” I just did not visualize it correctly until now.

I do apologize! My lack of a good sense of direction is at fault. (I do think the articles could have been more clearly written, though). Thanks for sticking with me, with patience!

[Reasonwhy]

Kat, looking forward to your post. I must have been typing when you sent the above. Camgarsky was right!

[Kat]

However, I also was re- researching that dratted GILT. And so Harry had questions, and those pretty much gave me a direction to figure out what may have happened...I will offer the speculation with documentation next...only because it is fresh in my mind. Maybe it will be an acceptable answer, and we can at least quit wracking our brains over it!--partial quote Kat



Notice the dates: (most of the underlining is mine)

Commonwealth of Massachusetts
vs.
Lizzie A. Borden

The Knowlton Papers, 1892-1893

"Letter, typewritten.


COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT.

New Bedford, Mass., May 5, 1893.

Hon. A. E. Pillsbury:
Dear Sir:-
Jennings wants to have his experts see the
skulls, and I told him I supposed there would be no objection, and have
so written to Dolan.
They also want Bridget Sullivan's testimony at the inquest. We
declined to give it to them before the indictment, but I see no objection
to giving it to them now. It is almost identical with her story as told before
Judge Blaisdell, and will do us no harm. What do you think?
Yours truly
H. M. Knowlton
______________________________

HK203
Letter, handwritten in ink.

May 28,1893
Partial, pg 208
F.W. Draper
......Two of the medical experts for the defence, by the way, have made
their appearance. They are Dr. Thomas Dwight and Dr. Maurice H.
Richardson. Both are Boston men and both are connected with the
Harvard Medical School, the former as Professor of Anatomy and the lat-
ter as Assistant Professor of Anatomy. Dr. Richardson is also a surgeon of
wide reputation and fully acknowledged ability and skill; he is one of the
surgical staff of the Massachusetts General Hospital and has had much
experience in court as an expert. Dr. Dwight has had less experience in
medico-legal matters; he is a highly accomplished anatomist. Both these
gentlemen studied the skulls and the bony fragments at my office, while I
sat in a room near by within easy call, but not where I could hear conversa-
tion when their door was shut. They did not require any information and
we had no communication during their study of the corpora delecti.
This appearance of the defendant's medical experts opens anew the
question of the desirability of more medical help on the side of the gov-
ernment. Although those two skulls tell their own story most eloquently
and thus greatly narrow the need of much doctors' talk it may seem best
to you and to Mr. Moody to have some other help in the line of experts.
If such be the case, I do not know anyone who would give you better
assistance than Dr. D. W. Cheever, of Boston, or anyone who would better
offset Drs. Dwight and Richardson. Dr. Cheever is the Professor of
Surgery in Harvard Medical School, has been for twenty-five years a visit-
ing surgeon at the Boston City Hospital and was formerly for many years
the Demonstrator of Anatomy in the Medical School. To wide knowledge
and experience, he adds a peculiarly cool and impressive manner, and is
reckoned here a model witness. If he can be secured, I am sure that the
prosecution would be very materially strengthened on its medical side.
------------------------------------

212
HK203
Letter, handwritten in ink.


F. W. DRAPER, M. D.
304 MARLBOROUGH STREET,
BOSTON,
May 31, 1893
My Dear Sir: -
Dr. Cheever and I have had a conference to-day with the Borden pho-
tographs and skulls before us. We are in entire accord and he will testify
1. That the cause and manner of the deaths were the same in both cases,
namely, fracture of the skull and injury to the brain by blows on the head.
2. That the weapon was an edged tool of some weight, like a hatchet.
3. That the length of the edge of the weapon was about 3-1/2 inches.
4. That Mrs. Borden was killed by blows inflicted from behind, the
assailant standing astride the body.
5. That Mr. Borden was killed by blows given by the assailant stand-
ing at the head of the sofa just within the door.
6. That the assailant was right handed and used his right hand, or, if
using both hands, that the left hand was foremost, or in front of the right
hand, on the handle.

Page 212

7. That Mrs. Borden died first, and that the supposition of an hour's
interval is not inconsistent with the facts relating to the stage of digestion,
the body temperature and the condition of the blood in the two cases.
8. That the deaths were not instantaneous.
9. That a woman would have sufficient physical strength to inflict the
blows, assuming that she was of normal adult vigor. I write especially to
inform you of two important discoveries which I made upon a careful
examination of the two skulls. On Mr. Borden's skull I found that the
blow just in front of the ear left its mark on the base of the skull within
the cavity, that its depth was 1-7/16 inches and that it cut directly
through the internal carotid artery; this wound was necessarily and imme-
diately fatal from hemorrhage. The other discovery is still more impor-
tant; on one of the cuts in Mrs. Borden's skull, near the right ear, there is
a very small but unmistakable deposit of the gilt metal with which hatch-
ets are ornamented when they leave the factory; this deposit (Dr. Cheever
confirmed the observation fully) means that the hatchet used in killing
Mrs. Borden was a new hatchet, not long out of the store. Perhaps this is
not new information either to you or Dr. Dolan; it was new to me and
seemed important enough to justify immediate conveyance to you. The
shining deposit can be seen with the naked eye; it is plainly visible with
the use of a lens, when once its situation is indicated.
I see by the morning papers that killing people with hatchets is a Bristol
County habit. I am sorry that this latest homicide comes just now when you
and Dr. Dolan are so much occupied with other matters.

Very truly Yours
F. W. Draper
Mr. Knowlton."

---Up to the 5th of May, no mention of gilt, but a warning that the defense wanted to examine the skulls.
--On the 28th of May, defense Dr's examine skulls behind closed doors, out of sight.
--On the 31st of May, a seemingly agitated notification to Prosecution there is now found GILT in Abbie's skull.

--The speculative theory here is that the defense tried to fit different size hatchet weapons they brought in new, to test the wound sizes, thus, unwittingly distributing a bit of gilt into Abbie's skull, not on purpose. We had agreed that the skull could not have withstood previous probing, boiling, and casts made, and retain gilt.

[Reasonwhy]

Wow, Kat! I never would have thought of this! Now my theories have had quite a spin. Need to think on this one overnight…

[Kat]

Here is Harry's post, quoted by twinsrwe. He used the Trial and I used Knowlton Papers and recognized continuity, due to dates.

[camgarsky4]

Excellent research and connecting of the dots into a very rational explanation.

You could add to the trail that in a letter from Dr. Cheever to Knowlton on June 2. He basically repeats EVERYTHING Draper listed (per the above) EXCEPT the gilt. Source: Knowlton Papers pg 226-227.

To my way of thinking this does not lessen the likelihood that the Crowe hatchet was the murder weapon, but it does remove a compelling piece of the case for it being so. The skulls coulda/shoulda/woulda had gilt in the wounds, but it was boiled away.

Kat -- I hope you are able to locate the privy discussions about the workman's lost hatchet.

[PossumPie]

This incredible discovery that the gilting wasn't found until after the skulls were boiled and cleaned changed a lot in my mind. I went back to my posts 7 years ago about "that bleadin' hatchet" and found that we spent a lot of energy postulating on the speck of gilt in Abby's skull. I stated then that my theory was that Lizzie shoplifted the hatchet in Fair Haven and it was new with gilting on it. Reading all of this talk of cleaning the skulls first, I now firmly believe that the defense experts tried to fit new hatchets into the wounds and inadvertently put the gilt speck there. When they clean a skull, they generally put it in a pot of water with some soap or other cleanser and slow boil it until all tissue comes off. That gilt would never survive all of that agitation of the boiling. Why in the world wouldn't someone step in and ask under oath if the defence had indeed inadvertently put that speck there? It would at least make things clearer for both sides.

[Kat]

Well, good, thank you all for your support! And I agree that gilt or no gilt will no longer be a determining factor in the finding of the weapon. It seems we are no longer "limited", except by blade size.

I'm still looking for the discussion about the roof and it's weird because I've seen it twice in the last few months! I even word searched one person's name who used to be a member and had less than 250 posts, looking at all of them, recalling they had contributed, and did not find it. So It has to be in the archive, which is not searchable. See ya later!

In the meantime I meant to give you a link to different weapons that are hatchet-like from the website
https://lizzieandrewborden.com/evidence ... eapons.htm

[Reasonwhy]

Kat, if I’m remembering correctly, wasn’t that workman’s name who claimed the Crowe roof hatchet as his own O’Connell? I’m trying to remember where I saw it, but I’m thinking in a newspaper story? I’ll check a couple places…

[Reasonwhy]

It was Carl McDonnell. Found this in Rebello, pp.105-106:

From the Fall River Daily Herald, Saturday, June 17, 1893:8
“It was McDonnell’s Axe/Alibi Established for the Hatchet on Crowe’s Barn—
The owner of the Potter-Borden hatchet has in all probability been found. Carl McDonnell, a carpenter employed by William Smith of Second Street, did some work for Dr. Chagnon about the time of the murder or a little later and lost a hatchet of a description similar to this one.

There are so many hatchets of a similar make that it is almost impossible to identify any one in particular unless marked for that purpose. The axe undoubtedly belongs to McDonnell.”

Maybe knowing his name will help us find the thread where he’s discussed?

[Kat]

Thanks, but the archives are not searchable, I don't think...

[Reasonwhy]

Think I may have found it: “A gilty hatchet,” first post by Harry, on May 14, 2003. This is in the Jan.1, 2003-May 31, 2003 Index to Archives. Kat recently posted these archives for us (thanks, Kat!) in the “Links” forum.

There is good discussion there on these issues.

[Reasonwhy]

Pretty new avatar, Kat! I want to guess, but I’m not sure, so I’ll just ask: What kind of flower is it?

[Kat]

Think I may have found it: “A gilty hatchet,” first post by Harry, on May 14, 2003. This is in the Jan.1, 2003-May 31, 2003 Index to Archives. Kat recently posted these archives for us (thanks, Kat!) in the “Links” forum.

There is good discussion there on these issues.

Is there an index to archives? Can you link me to the thread, pretty plz? You know, there's different topic areas, and I don't know which...
(Once you get to the thread, go to the very top of your screen where the address is, and highlight it, then click copy, then come here and open your reply window and "paste" it.)
Thanks
The flower is a pansy- "that's for thoughts"- Lizzie's flower. I took a photo of a grouping in my neighborhood and cut one out. I no longer look like my picture. My hair is very white and very long.

[PossumPie]

Can my memory be refreshed, please? In opening or closing statements by prosecution or defense at trial state that no weapon taken from the premises can be proven (or not proven) to be the implement of death, and therefore Lizzie must be found "Not Guilty?" Thanks!
I'm just tired...but curious, and interested!
If no one is available, I can look tomorrow.

There are many pages in the closing argument by the defense about how no hatchet was proved to be the murder weapon. The defense made a very big point of that, but of course statements by the prosecution or defense are always flowery. Many a murderer was found guilty without producing the weapon if enough other evidence is present.

[Reasonwhy]

Think I may have found it: “A gilty hatchet,” first post by Harry, on May 14, 2003. This is in the Jan.1, 2003-May 31, 2003 Index to Archives. Kat recently posted these archives for us (thanks, Kat!) in the “Links” forum.

There is good discussion there on these issues.

Hope this may be the one you were wanting to find, Kat


https://lizzieandrewborden.com/Archive7 ... atchet.htm

[Reasonwhy]

Here is one post from the thread above related to our discussion:

41. "Re: A gilty hatchet?"
Posted by harry on Mar-9th-03 at 7:17 PM
In response to Message #40.
Yes Kat, Mr. Flynn was kind enough to reply and gracious enough to allow his reply to be posted. This is the heart of his reply:

"If the carpenter was working for Chagnon and lost an axe on Chagnon's property how did it get on Crowe's Barn?
Note the location of the Chagnon house and the pear orchard and then Crowe's barn. It would be quite a coincidence if the carpenter had just bought a new axe and then it disappeared from his tool box and somehow landed on Crowe's barn unless he was the murderer or someone stole it from him and was the murderer."

This is almost exactly what Kat said in posts 36 and 37. Good thinking Kat.

I have another problem with the hatchet being tossed from the Borden yard onto the roof and it involves the trial testimony of Patrick McGowan (pg 1194+). McGowan was the fellow in Crowe's yard who decided to help himself to a pear.

Q. Never mind about what you said. The only thing I want to call your attention to is, did you go anywhere near the Borden yard at that time?
A. Yes, sir; I went over as far as the fence.
Q. What did you do there?
A. I went up on a wood horse that we used to have for staging, for Mr. Crowe, and I got a few pears off one of the trees.
Q. From whose trees was that?
A. Mr. Borden's.

This would have to be the S.E. corner of the Borden yard as Crowe's yard only borders the Borden yard briefly there. This would strongly indicate to me that a pear tree in the Borden yard over hung the fence between the Borden and Crowe yards. That would certainly complicate, or even make it impossible, to toss an object up and onto the roof. Of course that would depend upon the size of the branches and their density. Since it was August they would be in full bloom and at their densest.

I have got to re-read exactly where the hatchet was found and get that straight in my mind. The description is quite convoluted.

(Message last edited Mar-9th-03 7:37 PM.)

[camgarsky4]

Reason, check out page 195 in William Spencer's book or page 45 in Rebello. Both illustrate that there was a goodly amount of space between the Crowe Barn western edge and the Kelly shed.

Also, as a reminder the Crowe barns also served as the 'fence' between the Chagnon pear orchard and the Crowe work yard. So once in the SE corner, unless large branches hung over the barn roof, there was nothing obstructing a toss.

[Kat]

Think I may have found it: “A gilty hatchet,” first post by Harry, on May 14, 2003. This is in the Jan.1, 2003-May 31, 2003 Index to Archives. Kat recently posted these archives for us (thanks, Kat!) in the “Links” forum.

There is good discussion there on these issues.

Hope this may be the one you were wanting to find, Kat


https://lizzieandrewborden.com/Archive7 ... atchet.htm

Thank you so much, you've been very helpful. I don't know how you find stuff!
Edisto's and Harry's comments about upon which roof the hatchet was found was the controversy. Quite frankly, I have been confused as to which roof, and still am. But it seemed from the discussion that the hatchet could have been deposited on one part of Crowe's roof from the Borden yard, but not on another, so it seems like an important distinction. (I have no idea!)

[Reasonwhy]

Camgarsky, is there any way you could draw this, and scan it and upload to your computer to post here? It would be a great service to all to be able to “see” this…

[Kat]

Here is the Rebello diagram.
When you click on pic it should revert to the right direction. Please tell me if it doesn't?
Sorry it's so big.

[wall59]

Worked perfectly for me. Thanks, Kat.

[Kat]

Can my memory be refreshed, please? In opening or closing statements by prosecution or defense at trial state that no weapon taken from the premises can be proven (or not proven) to be the implement of death, and therefore Lizzie must be found "Not Guilty?" Thanks!
I'm just tired...but curious, and interested!
If no one is available, I can look tomorrow.

There are many pages in the closing argument by the defense about how no hatchet was proved to be the murder weapon. The defense made a very big point of that, but of course statements by the prosecution or defense are always flowery. Many a murderer was found guilty without producing the weapon if enough other evidence is present.

--First, thanks for the quick feed-back on the posting of the Rebello offering, wall59- appreciate it!

--And PossumPie, I'm glad I didn't have to take the time to read trial arguments as to how important producing a viable weapon was in court in the case against Lizzie. Thank you for checking. I wasn't sure if it had needed to be proven.

[camgarsky4]

Reason -- I am strangely incompetent when it comes to cutting, pasting, etc. Kat has tried to 'teach' me and to-date.....failure.

Good news is that Kat posted one of the rebello drawings that shows what I'm trying to describe. If you look at the intersection of the SE corner of Borden property with the Crowe yard and the Chagnon orchard, you will see that the final Ell of the barn ends on the western side of the Borden back fence. So no pear tree would disturb a toss unless a branch is hanging over the barn. You can also see the Borden pear trees as #3. However, the artist packed them together and based on the couple photos I've seen, pretty sure they were more scattered across backyard and I suppose McGowan leaned over the fence in the space between the crowe barn and the Kelly shed.

Its early, so good chance I typing gibberish....so just let me know if my words are still not matching with what you see in the Rebello drawing.

[PossumPie]

There are a lot of inconsistencies regarding the placement of things. Maps and drawings seem to be contradicting each other. Robello p. 45 shows multiple pear trees in the Borden yard, a grape arbor, a barrel, etc. while other drawings show only one small tree. All of the drawings are off-scale when drawing trees as they make the canopy of the tree only about 5 feet in diameter. This is not consistent with a fruit-bearing pear tree which can be 15 feet or more diameter of the canopy. I only bring this up because people are discussing line-of-sight and limbs hanging over the neighbor's barn.I mention this because if we are trying to figure out the probability of someone heaving a hatchet from that wood pile across the neighbors orchard of trees and onto the high eastern part of the barn, it looks easier in some drawings than others.

[camgarsky4]

I've not seen anyone suggest that a hatchet was tossed across an orchard of trees or onto the high eastern part of the barn. Reasonwhy might have wondered about that earlier in the thread, but she has changed her POV to the middle Ell roof.

However, you make a great point on recognizing the true dimensions of a full grown pear tree. Not only do they have a relatively broad canopy, they also grow 18-20 feet tall (per wikipedia). That would far exceed the 12 foot height of the middle Ell roof which is where I interpret the newspaper articles place the hatchet location.

[PossumPie]

I've not seen anyone suggest that a hatchet was tossed across an orchard of trees or onto the high eastern part of the barn. Reasonwhy might have wondered about that earlier in the thread, but she has changed her POV to the middle Ell roof.

However, you make a great point on recognizing the true dimensions of a full grown pear tree. Not only do they have a relatively broad canopy, they also grow 18-20 feet tall (per wikipedia). That would far exceed the 12 foot height of the middle Ell roof which is where I interpret the newspaper articles place the hatchet location.

Exactly my point. We must all be careful when speculating on distances, open areas, heights, etc. from drawings. I'm most confused by the Rebello drawing showing a much more "cluttered" Borden yard with all of the trees and grape arbor. Most other drawings show a barn and one tree and a pile of wood in an otherwise empty yard. I was reading over the testimony mentioning the morning of the murders and found that Andrew took his "slop bucket" and dumped it out "near the pear tree" He had to get water from the barn to "rinse it" with, so use your imagination what was in that bucket. How disgusting that they didn't have some kind of hole or something to deposit their chamberpot waste in...

[camgarsky4]

I am not aware of a single drawing, photo, or illustration that doesn't show the Crowe barn as serving the dual role of a barn and a 'fence' between the Borden, Kelly/Crowe and Chagnon properties. I've also not seen any visual that does not show the Crowe barn extending further west than the Borden SE corner. Based on that I feel confident in stating that if one was standing on the wood pile at the SE corner of the Borden lot, that person would have a clear shot to toss an item onto the middle 12' Ell of the Crowe barn.

In case anyone isn't aware, there are a # of useful photos of the Chagnon orchard and the Borden backyard (Spencer pg 231) which show the trees and wood pile. Don't recall where I saw it, but there is also a photo on the south side of house that shows the grape arbor. The Chagnon orchard photo (a Phillips photo) demonstrates how it was truly an orchard with many trees and even with leaves gone (as in the photo), would be impossible to look thru the tree branches and ascertain anything on the other side that wasn't a bright color.

Due to my lack of techno skills, I am unable to paste these photos, but they are in the usual sources.

[PossumPie]

I've seen that photo also somewhere camgarsky4. You are absolutely right about the shared barn side/fence. I just wish there were a better photograph of the Borden backyard to see what the tree canopy was like. It may have been a clear shot to throw a hatchet up there. It got up there somehow...although some speculate that it was stolen from a laborer a few houses down and for some reason thrown up there. If it wasn't on the flat roof piece, do we know for sure which side of the peak of the roof it was on...the north or the south?

[wall59]

Screenshot_2021-11-13-12-28-12.png

Is this the photo you're talking about camgarsky (Spencer)?

[camgarsky4]

Yes Wall, that is one of them. Gives you a pretty good idea how thick the total canopy is. There is another that is taken from the southwest side of house looking east. Show the grape arbor. This later photo isn't in Spencer (just looked).....also skimmed thru Rebello and PL.....no luck.
Kat -- does the photo showing the grape arbor ring a bell to you?

All we have are the newspaper articles and they describe all 3 of the Ells as being flat. Hatchet was found on the middle Ell, 6 ft from the northwest corner of the main roof and 4 ft from the north edge of the roof.

Speaking of Parallel Lives....on page 153 is the photo of the Chagnon orchard. Those trees do seem to be in the 15-20 ft height and looks to me that the 2nd story windows of the Chagnon house would not be able to see what was on the roof of the crowe barn, especially the 2nd and 3rd Ells which were 12 ft or shorter.

[Kat]

Wow! I had no idea that photo of the Chagnon house was in Paralell Lives! I had a picture of the picture in my files. Cool Thanks.
From the LABwebsite galleries
https://lizzieandrewborden.com/borden-c ... leries.htm
Can scroll down to House Pics
Plz clickonpic

[PossumPie]

One other thing to remember, there were other axes and hatchets found over the years-- in the Borden barn, the Borden building, and elsewhere. Hatchets were everywhere in 1892 as most homes still had wood-fired stoves and needed to cut kindling.

My main reason for believing the Crowe-barn hatchet was THE weapon was the gilding found on it which pointed to Mrs. Borden's wound which also had a fleck of gilding. But I now realize that the guiding fleck found in the skull was discovered NOT during autopsy but after the skull had been stripped of flesh, boiled, and allowed to be handled by the defense. They brought a series of hatchets with them to compare to the wound in the skull and undoubtedly left the speck of gilding in the wound while doing so. I see no way it could have been missed during the autopsy and survived the cleaning. This doesn't mean the Crowe-barn hatchet couldn't be the murder weapon, I'm still "undecided," just the main clue tying it to the weapon (gilding) is no longer important.