Bring back my Emma to me....

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 11:30 am

John Douglas (The cases that haunt us) speculated that Emma took the 4th train home (p 133) because she had a vague idea as to what happened.

How could she??

Depending on how good old Seabury worded that telegram she was only told that Andrew was ill.... (Someone refresh my memory-- did they know about Abby when Dr B. left to send the telegram?)

Emma was the mild, timid one-- yet she didn't hop the first available train to rush to her father's bedside? (if she did get a "your father is sick'-gram do notice that she wasn't all worried that Lil-Sis was exhausting herself by keeping a bedside vigil and rush right home to relieve her either)

Emma tied to the restrictions of her era?

This seems to indicate no such thing...

(PS-- I will set up a college trust fund for anyone in this forum who has a (newborn) son and legally names him Seabury. Proof required*)

*- monies paid upon HS graduation if aforementioned child is still named Seabury

john · Post by **john** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 12:14 pm

Interesting topic. I havn't read about this case in quite some time, but it seems to me that I recall Emma's first extended trip away from home in all her years miraculously coincided with the double homicides at her house.

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 2:38 pm

As far as I recall, Audrey, Abby was found after Dr. B. had returned from sending the telegram.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 2:44 pm

that is what I thought-- so Emma only knew there was an "emergency" with her father. Still she takes her time about hopping a train....

Thinking of this makes me more sure than ever that Emma was NOT the docile, shy and easily manipulated person some think she was.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:57 pm

I don't think Douglas has any proof that Emma waited to take the 4h train.
He was using some authors I believe and all his facts are skewed. Maybe you can find his source for where he got the info? That might help you to determine if you believe it or not.

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 7:30 pm

We've been through some of this train business before, but here it is again:

The train schedule in the August 5, 1892, New Bedford Evening Standard lists departure times as 8:45 a.m., 3:40., 6:15 and 9:40 p.m.

On Aug. 3, there had also been a train at about 12:30, which Uncle John says he took.

It is stated in testimony that Emma took the the 3:40 train. She took the train that ran north. She did not switch to a Fall River train at Myrics in Freetown, but continued all the way to Weir Junction in Taunton. She then came back south from Taunton to Fall River. This is about THE LEAST DIRECT ROUTE from New Bedford to Fall River that one could take.

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 7:53 pm

It is really sounding like maybe Emma DID have AT LEAST an idea of what the "emergency" was about, and wasn't in any rush to get back to 92 2nd Street.

Tracy...

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 8:04 pm

Chris... So she took the "next" train?

Was there a quicker route???

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:21 pm

It's confusing and we really need to consult with a local train history expert on this, but I think that there was a direct New Bedford to Fall River line in 1892. There were also regular roads, of course.

New Bedford to Fall River is roughly 15 miles. I would make a guesstimate that New Bedford to Taunton to Fall River is 30 miles or more.

I think there might be some indications of travel times to New Bedford by police officers in the witness statements. On day two of the trial, the jury went to Fall River to view the scene catching a train after having lunch. There's no indication there when they arrived in Fall River, but a newspaper report might have it.

I'm pretty sure that someone getting news of the murder in Fairhaven around noon could almost trot on foot to Fall River faster than Emma got there. How long does it take to run a half-marathon?

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:09 pm

Something just occured to me. If the object was to expedite Emma's return from Fairhaven, wouldn't it have been simpler (and faster) to have Marshal Hilliard telephone the Fairhaven police, explain the situation, and have them get hold of Emma rather than depending on Bowen and the telegraph?

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:20 pm

FairhavenGuy @ Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:21 pm wrote: On day two of the trial, the jury went to Fall River to view the scene catching a train after having lunch. There's no indication there when they arrived in Fall River, but a newspaper report might have it.

The New Bedford Evening Standard for June 6th, page 4, has the following:

"Fall River, June 6. --- The train with the Borden jury left the Old Colony station in New Bedford at 12:45 and arrived here at 1:15."

Another paper said they arrived at 1:20.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:24 pm

a short trip by train even with the added 5 minutes!

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 11:12 pm

Right, but Emma didn't get home 'til somewhere around 5:00 p.m.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 12:07 am

Inquest
Emma
107
Q. What time did you get back?
A. I came on the train that left New Bedford 3.40.
Q. You came right to the house. You went up to Weir Junction and came down. Who sent for Mr. Jennings?
A. I think I did. I know I did.
......
Trial
Emma
1550
Q. And you received a telegram fro Dr. Bowen?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. And came, of course, as soon as you could?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where were you when you got the telegram?
A. At Mrs. Brownell's.

Q. At what time did you arrive at the house?
A. I think about five.

Q. That same afternoon?
A. Yes, sir.

--It's interesting to think that Emma stalled on the way home.
If I were Emma, I think I would have flown home as fast as I could in order to know sooner just what Lizzie had gotten herself into.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 12:43 am

Either she was unconcerned about her father and/or sister. Maybe she was garnering her strength....

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:43 am

One problem we run into here so far as I can see is this: Do we know the exact wording of the telegram old Seabury sent to Fairhaven? Off the top of my head I can only recollect some mention that the language be neutral enough so as not to unduly upset...ah here it is, from pg. 12 of the Witness Statements: "Lizzie requested the Doctor to send a telegram to her sister Emma, but not to tell her the facts, for the lady whom she is staying with, is old and feeble, and may be disturbed."

It's cliche` by now but quite true that we are judged by our words. We see at page 321 of the trial transcript that the apparent timestamp on the telegram was 11:32 am, and yet there is not even the slightest mention of the content. We know only of its general nature as recorded by Harrington & Doherty above.

I suppose my thought is merely this: That until we know (if indeed we can know) how the telegram to Fairhaven was worded, that it is at least somewhat unfair to Emma in the way we read her actions the afternoon of August 4th, or that is to say her late return on that day.

We can suspect and surmise as we wish, but it's a bit early to start collecting feathers and boiling tar as far as Emma is concerned.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:53 am

au contraire.....

If she was told pappy was a' feelin' poorly why not hot foot it home to see what she might be able to do to help???

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:58 am

That's the whole point Auds. As it stands, we cannot even go so far as to say "If she was told..." because beyond the scant information we have we do not have the slightest clue as to what that telegram actually said...

Personally, I think someone fell asleep at the switch in not getting that information read into the trial record.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 3:09 am

Maybe a telegram message is privileged information, needing a court order or something like that?
I don't think anyone collected that telegram.

I have always thought there was a reason for the delay of Emma's return, part of which might have been the cautious wording of the telegram.
We might think of telegrams as always carrying important news, but maybe to those who had no phone, telegrams of the day might be rather a more normal means of communication- meaning, not inspiring instant shock at receiving such a thing.

Miller · Post by **Miller** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 4:42 am

From the Coroner's Inquest, p107 Emma testifying:

"Q. How long had you been away when this tragedy happened?
A. Two weeks.
Q. Visiting in Fairhaven?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Where were you visiting there?
A. 19 Green street.
Q. Who?
A. Miss Helen Brownell and her mother.
Q. What time did you get back?
A. I came on the train that left New Bedford 3.40.
Q. You came right to the house. You went up to Weir Junction and came down. Who sent for Mr. Jennings?"

It's reasonable to assume that when she got the telegram Bowen sent she didn't have time to pack and make the 12:30 train so the next was at 3:40. Doesn't sound suspicious to me at all.

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 5:51 am

FairhavenGuy says:

We've been through some of this train business before, but here it is again:

The train schedule in the August 5, 1892, New Bedford Evening Standard lists departure times as 8:45 a.m., 3:40., 6:15 and 9:40 p.m.

So, it sounds like there was not a 12:30 train on the 4th, but there was one on the 3rd. Is this correct ?

Tracy...

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:46 am

Probably not privileged information, from the looks of it.

At page 330, Bowen sez of the wire that "I went to the telegraph office and got a copy of the telegram that I sent, at the examination in the station house, with State Detective Seaver.
Q. Well, you had then the time which they had at the telegraph office, the time of sending the message?
A. I had a copy of the telegram; yes, sir.
Q. Do you know whether that contained the time of sending the message from the telegraph station, or the time at which they received it from you?
A. The telegram was marked "11.32". I got a copy of it two or three days ago.
---------------
That'd be roughly ten months after the murders.
Pity those records don't exist somewhere yet today - I'd like to know what the bugger said.

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:55 pm

Unfortunately, Tracy, we don't really know whether or not there was a 12:30 train on Thursday, because the first train schedule I've seen reproduced is on Friday the 5th. (This is in the Standard-Times reproduction book, called something like "Did She or Didn't She." I don't have it with me at the moment.) Since that book only starts with the first news report on the 4th, and ONLY contains the pages of the paper that have Lizzie stories on them, the train schedules for other days don't appear.

It wouldn't be hard to look up some New Bedford Standards at the New Bedford Public Library, but I don't have the time for that, and the guy I know who does have the time gets paid to do research.

Over dinner tonight I was thinking, though, that if Emma had planned to stay all summer in Fairhaven, and since she'd already been here for two weeks, she might have had a few trunks to pack and to have transported with her to the station.

Another thought I had was if Emma did bring a few trunks into the house around 5:00 p.m., they might have made a good place to hide something. "No point looking in there. Emma just brought them from Fairhaven. . ."

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 7:09 pm

Good point...

She may had to wait for some able-bodied man to come and "bring her trunks down" from wherever they were being stored...

I hadn't even considered the fact that she might need a lot of time to pack...

diana · Post by **diana** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 7:43 pm

Yes, I worry that we may have been maligning our Emma just a bit here. We’ve made some assumptions based on the ll:32 a.m. time stamp on Dr. Bowen’s telegram which presumably shows when it was sent from Fall River. But after it came in at the telegraph office in Fairhaven, it would then have to be hand delivered to the Brownell residence and may not have even have arrived there until around noon.

Maybe Emma was not at the house when the telegraph came -- but out taking some air, visiting friends or whatever? Even if she was in, it would have taken her some time to pack up her belongings and arrange have some of them sent on. After all, she’s not just stuffing a few T-shirts in a gym bag – a vacation holiday in those days with those fashions would involve large pieces of luggage. Emma probably would not take all of it with her if she was called home on an emergency – and would hardly have left the packing and details of sending on the extra pieces for her hostess to deal with.

I don’t think she could possibly have been ready to get to the train station and purchase a ticket for the earlier train (if there even was a 12:30 train on the 4th). So, as far as I’m concerned she did take the first available train home. Although it sounds as though there was a more direct route, there may have been valid reasons why she took the connections she did. Perhaps there were no bookings in the type of car where a lady would be comfortable traveling alone. Remember, too, that after she got off the train, she had to make her way from the station to the Borden house. So I guess what I’m saying is that I, for one, am comfortable with Emma’s response time to the news of a problem at home (however it was couched). She packed her bags and took the first train home – and an hour and 20 minutes from point of departure to her front door does not seem excessive.

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 10:03 pm

Excellent points...all of you. I hadn't thought that Emma may have a lot to pack up to take back to Fall River, and therefore providing a place to hide something. I am thinking if the weapon was hidden in one of Emma's trunks...it was not a planned event, but an opportinity seized when noticed.

Tracy...

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 10:10 pm

I think that the weapon was well secreted and taken care of LONG before Emma arrived with her trunks...

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 10:18 pm

I thinik it's possible that the weapon may have had more than one hiding place.

Tracy...

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 11:04 pm

I was thinking more of a hidden dress than a hidden weapon.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:23 am

Yes, now will someone tell that troublemaker, John Douglas that the lady had to pack!

About that telegram- Bowen wrote it so Bowen got it back, right? So we don't know if just anyone could gather that evidence. And we all know how vague Bowen can be about notes in his pockets...

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 11:09 am

I just found a pretty good summary of copyright laws in the US, Kat. Apparently the "all works of authorship" provision (which it appears you had in mind re: the Bowen telegram) did not come into being until 1909.
http://www.arl.org/info/frn/copy/timeline.html

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 11:30 am

"I went to the telegraph office and got a copy of the telegram that I sent, at the examination in the station house, with State Detective Seaver."

Wouldn't Seaver have got a look at it before Bowen found a stove to toss it in?

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 11:37 am

I'd certainly think so. The interesting thing is that as the testimony reads, it looks like Bowen (or someone) got a copy of that telegram about 5 June 1893, three days or so before Seabury testified at New Bedford.

Miller · Post by **Miller** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:16 pm

Maybe its possible Seaver took the telegram from Bowen and turned it over to Hilliard. Maybe Hilliard did or did not show it to Knowlton. Maybe the telegram is part of the "Hilliard Papers" turned over to the Fall River Historical Society a decade and half ago, still awaiting publication.

With reference to written material not yet made known about this case, Lizzie remarked to one of her interviewers while incarcerated that she had received many letters, specifically citing Mary Livermore (who knew her mother, Sarah). Lizzie mentioned in this interview she spent alot of time writing to people. So there are many letters out there. Maybe the letters Lizzie received were kept by her and passed on to Leighton or Grace Hartley Howe. We know she didn't throw out the silver cup Abby gave her when she was around 8 years old because that had surfaced and is owned now by Leonard Rebello. Howe's son is long dead but her daughter is still alive, I think, so maybe SHE got Lizzie's correspondence. Helen Leighton lined the houe she inherited from Baker with old newspapers of the case. If Helen had possession of any of Lizzie's old correspondence she probably disposed of it. But to the many people whom Lizzie corresponded with, in jail and out of jail, I have to believe there's lots of letters yet to surface.

Another thing that might surface in the Hillliard Papers is any statement Cook may have been to the Marshall. There's reference to this in one of the source documents, forgot which.

The telegram would be a great find.

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 9:04 am

Here's an excerpt from the Fall River Herald, (not dated, but probably Aug. 31 or Sept. 1) from the Kent/Flynn Sourcebook , page 191, under "Lizzie's Friends":

"... Emma when she went away to New Bedford says she had not a care in the world; her mother was an excellent housekeeper, and took the whole care of it on her shoulders, relieving the girls of that, and their father always provided for their every want. When she got the telegram summoning her home she had no thought of a greater calamity than that her father was sick. When she arrived within sight of her house and saw the crowd about the door she wondered what it could mean. So you can understand what she must have felt when she realized what had taken place, ..."

This information was contained in an interview with Mrs. Brigham.

Read any 2 things on the Borden case and you'll get 4 interpretations.

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 1:44 pm

Thanks for that quote, Harry.

Doesn't Mrs. Brighman generally paint a rather rosey picture of things relating to the Bordens? "Not a care in the world" doesn't sound much like Emma to me. I think that according to Mrs. Brigham everything about the Bordens was absolutely perfect, except Andrew and Abby had the misfortune of dying rather suddenly.

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:09 pm

Yes Chris, Mrs. Brigham was definitely a Lizzie loyalist. It was she who performed the experiment with Uncle John in the guest room, where Morse laid down in the spot where Mrs. Borden was found. I have to research whether that little experiment was performed before or after the carpet was removed from that spot. Off hand, anybody know?

That column where that information came from covers an interview with two ladies, a Mrs. William Lindsey and Mrs. Brigham. Re-reading it, it appears I have mis-spoke and it was Mrs. Lindsey who stated that. But who is Mrs. Lindsey? She is described in the article as a close friend. I can't find any other reference to her anywhere. Perhaps the writer meant Mrs. Livermore.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 12:39 am

I recently collected the carpet information and posted it- but meanwhile I am getting used to a new browser (Safari) and have cleaned out my Drafts section of my e-mail where I stored stuff like that- so I can't do a search right now.

Sorry!

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 8:45 am

The Morse/Brigham experiment, with Morse lying on the rug, was performed per Mary Brigham's preliminary testimony on Aug. 31. (page 471-473)

"Q. Did you make an experiment this noon, Mrs. Brigham, to see if you could see a person lying flat upon the floor between the bed and the bureau, while you were standing on the upper entry floor?
A. Yes Sir."

Prof. Wood testified at the Preliminar hearing (page 372):

"A. On the 10th of August I received from Dr. Dolan a trunk."
------------
"... The carpet --- one carpet was a light Brussels carpet, light colored, with red figure, which had two dried pools of blood, that is, two patches made by the drying of a pool of blood, which, of course, was blood stain. That was the carpet which I recognized as being the sitting room carpet. The other carpet was thoroughly saturated with blood, both underneath and on the surface; it was stiff with blood. I recognized it as the carpet from the spare room, and said to have been found under the body of Mrs. Borden."

So at least Uncle Morse had the good sense to lie down after the carpet had been removed.

john · Post by **john** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:42 pm

Were there any other signs of violence to Mrs. Borden, other that the hatchet wounds?

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:44 pm

There was some bruising, but I think they were also caused by the blows of the hatchet. You can find them listed in the autopsy report, which can be found here...

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

And someone, I think Kat, did a nice job of illustrating the bruising somewhere in the forum. But I can't find it right at the moment.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 4:53 am

I mistook this to mean that the carpet was cut out on the 16th when Kieran was there- but now it seems as if Kieran is saying when he was there it was not there?

Have you got more from Wood, Har? This is confusing.
Isn't that an odd way of putting it?

Trial
Kieran
93
Q. And on this plan there is a red indication; that means where the carpet is now cut out, does it not?
A. That means where the carpet was cut out on the day I made the measurements.

Q. That is in the guest chamber?
A. Yes, sir.

(Plan marked Ex. 4.)

..........

111
Q. How soon after the tragedy?
A. I went there at Dr. Dolan's request on the 16th of August.
......
Q. In what position did you place the man who was lying between

Page 112

the bureau and the bed on the day you made the experiments, relative to the mop board at the head of the bed? (No answer.)

john · Post by **john** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 5:41 am

Thanks, Allen. Very interesting. Thorough background too - i checked. I always thought that Lizzie hired someone to kill her mother and for some reason they hung around and killed her father. If Mrs. Borden said she was going to "close up the guest room," and Lizzie subsequently went up stairs later and the door was open it would have been suspicious to her - if she was innocent. From the layout of the room and how Mrs. Borden was found you wouldn't think someone could sneak up on her by the bed without her screaming and from the wounds she was facing her killer. Leads one to believe she had to have known who killed her.
Who lied?
Was Mrs. Borden in the wrong place at the wrong time?
If the killer was after Mrs Borden why wouldn't he/she kill her the first time she was in the guest room?
Who could approach Mrs. Borden without frightening her?
Lots of questions.
I always felt two things about the Borden case - one that if Emma would have been indited along with Lizzie (Emma had more motive but less opportunity than Lizzie) there would have been a different outcome, and two, that if the Mexican police would have investigated it that the crime would have been solved about ten minutes after the bodies were found.

john · Post by **john** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:50 am

The time line doesn't work. So you experts explain to me how bridget could have done all she said she had done after Mr. borden came home and be in bed by 11:00? If not she is lying and where was she? Lizzie is obviously lying and where was she? I usually don't look at these type of old unsolved but this one caught my eye. Who slept in the barn? Why did Lizzie say when she returned from the backyard that "the screendoor was unlatched?" Who would have latched it? Why would it be latched? Was bridget awake? - who would have latched it? Why did Lizzie call for a doctor - TWICE - and not the police? She never even checked to see if her father was alive according to her own testimony. Why would she stay alone in the house? Why would she openly burn a dress? Lizzie is too obvious really for comment.

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:27 pm

Kat, I'm taking that quote as meaning on the day he took the measurements there was a hole in the carpet, not that the cutting itself was done on that day.

In other words:

Q. And on this plan there is a red indication; that means where the carpet is now cut out, does it not?
A. That means where [the piece was missing]on the day I made the measurements.

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 4:52 pm

John,

Lizzie is too obvious for what ?

Tracy...

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 7:55 pm

Thanks Christopher.
You'd think that after looking up all the carpet info earlier I'd remember that the piece was in the ground on Friday, Aug. 5th!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 7:59 pm

john · Post by **john** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 8:57 pm

Hi theebmonique. Cute pic.
Lizzie said she dressed the morning of the murders to "go out." Yet she hung around to iron handkerchiefs and look for sinkers in the barn loft. Either she knew her step-mother was dead or she didn't know. If she knew she would have wanted to get away from there. If she didn't know, she was planning to go out so why didn't she? If she was waiting to, and then did kill her father, why discover the body so quickly? Why not go "out," and let Bridget discover it - to say nothing of her taking more time making sure she was cleaned up. I think there was a force she knew of yet couldn't deal with in the house that day. If she did it she would have to have covered her hair and it's one thing to drop a hatchet in a privy yet another thing to drop coverings because they float.
Also whoever killed Mrs. borden left no blood trail. Either they waited until the blood had dried (15 minutes standing next to her body) or done the crime in stocking feet and put on shoes. Probably they would have shut the door - no blood there. It would take more of a criminal mind than Lizzie had to have accomplished the murders.
I think there was good reason Lizzie was ostracized by the community.

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:54 pm

Also whoever killed Mrs. borden left no blood trail. Either they waited until the blood had dried (15 minutes standing next to her body) or done the crime in stocking feet and put on shoes.

...unless, as was discussed several threads back, the possibility that the killer hacked away at Abby from a position on the bed.

Tracy...