I recently read Fritz's essay in the premiere issue of "The Hatchet", and I loved it. Several things that I had looked at one way for many years, he gave another way to view them.
I had never considered Lizzie buying prussic acid for the purpose of suicide. That opened my eyes a bit. I can't say that I agree with it at this point. But it does fit more logically into his sensible theory.
When he wrote that Lizzie and Uncle John pretended to dislike each other - now that one I do agree with. I just knew she acted weird - how she didn't bother to say hello to him; how she didn't seem to acknowledge his presence when he visited on August 3/4. I never thought of it before, but I think he's got it.
I didn't realize that Emma's trip to Fairhaven was her only trip in years. I assumed or had read that she had gone off on little trips here and there all the time. Is there something that backs this up - that she did not travel during those years? She seemed to enjoy her trip to Scotland later.
I am also interested to learn where Fritz found that Lizzie did really buy a dress pattern in New Bedford, and that it was 'cheap gingham'. I remember reading she said she bought a pattern, and I have been looking for something more on this for a while - like a policeman saying he found the pattern during their search.
I find myself agreeing with the 'hired butcher' as the murderer. It fits. And I liked how Fritz reckoned it could have happened, the butcher's approach to Abby in the guest room.
I don't understand, tho, what Uncle John got out of the murders. He was a friend of Andrew. Of course that wouldn't stop some people. But would he have Andrew & Abby butchered as a way of sticking up for the soon-to-be disinherited sisters? (I do believe they were to be disinherited. Or, probably that Abby was to get the lion's share.)
I think Morse could have felt some alienation toward Abby, because his sister was the first wife and he may have resented her. And there were no blood ties between him and Andrew. I can see where Andrew could have confided in Morse that he was going to make a will and what would be in it. And I can see Morse telling the 'girls'. But what would be his motive for being so involved? Did he expect his dead sister's share and if most were going to Abby there was to be no share for Sarah's kin? Andrew was so wealthy, Morse might have expected to be named in the will. Was he just doing the girls a favor? Did the sisters promise him money for helping? Money is so often the motive behind things.
Thank you, Fritz, for a such a well written - and, I think - most interesting piece. I thought it was exciting. I could hardly put it down.
Fritz's Essay
Moderator: Adminlizzieborden
-
augusta
- Posts: 2235
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 11:27 am
- Gender: Female
- Real Name: Augusta
- Location: USA
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
A good point raised here is what did Morse expect out of all this?
Yes, I think, being penurious, he would have expected or been promised a share in the wealth.
If we look at his will we find he leaves out any girl named "Borden."
Then we also hear from his half-sister, Arabella, that she is like John, in that once crossed- she doesn't forget.
We don't hear of any intimacy between Uncle John and the Borden heiresses after the trial. When he used to come back east a couple of times a year, and he still did I suppose, but we don't hear he ever visited those girls!
So if he was a close uncle of theirs before this all happened, we notice he isn't anymore, after.
A case of theives falling out?
If the girls refused him his share what could he possibly do about it?
Yes, I think, being penurious, he would have expected or been promised a share in the wealth.
If we look at his will we find he leaves out any girl named "Borden."
Then we also hear from his half-sister, Arabella, that she is like John, in that once crossed- she doesn't forget.
We don't hear of any intimacy between Uncle John and the Borden heiresses after the trial. When he used to come back east a couple of times a year, and he still did I suppose, but we don't hear he ever visited those girls!
So if he was a close uncle of theirs before this all happened, we notice he isn't anymore, after.
A case of theives falling out?
If the girls refused him his share what could he possibly do about it?
-
diana
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:21 pm
- Real Name:
Fritz's article is provocative and provides much food for thought. Motive is the big problem in his scenario for me too, though. It appears there was a strong friendship between John and the Davis men -- and John even refers to one of the Davis women in his preliminary testimony. But is there anything to indicate there was a quarrel of sufficient magnitude between Andrew and the Davis family that would cause William to hate Andrew enough to go along with a plan to brutally murder him and Abby after the fact and in cold blood? And wouldn't there have been some kind of paper trail if Fred Howe got enough money to risk murder charges? Surely he wouldn’t have exposed himself to that risk for a paltry sum.
Morse’s relationship with the sisters hardly seems close enough before the murders to make him the leading figure in a conspiracy to do away with Andrew -- and after the crime -- there is little indication that he kept in touch with them. So it's hard for me to believe that he would be motivated so strongly by family loyalty. And if he was only in this for monetary gain there must have been some kind of banking transaction involved that should have raised red flags here, too. Did the murderer and the abettors wait until Lizzie’s trial was over to collect – or did Emma pay them?
BTW -- Regarding the ginham dress pattern -- Lizzie says in her Inquest testimony that she bought it in New Beford:
"Q. Did you buy a dress pattern in New Bedford?
A. A dress pattern?
Q. Yes, a dress pattern.
A. I think I did.
Q. Where is it?
A. It is at home.
.......
...... Q. Not made up?
A. O. no, sir.
Q. Where did you buy it?
A. I don't know the name of the store.
Q. On the principal street there?
A. I think it was on the street that Hutchinson's book store is on. I am not positive.
Q-80 Q. What kind of a one was it, please?
A. It was a pink stripe and a white stripe, and a blue stripe corded gingham." (She doesn't call it "cheap" though.)
Morse’s relationship with the sisters hardly seems close enough before the murders to make him the leading figure in a conspiracy to do away with Andrew -- and after the crime -- there is little indication that he kept in touch with them. So it's hard for me to believe that he would be motivated so strongly by family loyalty. And if he was only in this for monetary gain there must have been some kind of banking transaction involved that should have raised red flags here, too. Did the murderer and the abettors wait until Lizzie’s trial was over to collect – or did Emma pay them?
BTW -- Regarding the ginham dress pattern -- Lizzie says in her Inquest testimony that she bought it in New Beford:
"Q. Did you buy a dress pattern in New Bedford?
A. A dress pattern?
Q. Yes, a dress pattern.
A. I think I did.
Q. Where is it?
A. It is at home.
.......
...... Q. Not made up?
A. O. no, sir.
Q. Where did you buy it?
A. I don't know the name of the store.
Q. On the principal street there?
A. I think it was on the street that Hutchinson's book store is on. I am not positive.
Q-80 Q. What kind of a one was it, please?
A. It was a pink stripe and a white stripe, and a blue stripe corded gingham." (She doesn't call it "cheap" though.)
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
Here is some more from the preliminary hearing on the dress pattern:
CROSS-EXAMINATION.
[Hilliard]
Q. (Mr. Knowlton) Mr. Hilliard, did you look in the trunks in the attic?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. All of them?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did you examine their contents?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did you see anything up there of an unmade dress pattern in the attic?
Page 451 (428)
A. Well, there was some of the trunks that I looked into, but I did not look into all of them. I did not, to my recollection, see any dress pattern in any of the trunks that I saw.
Q. What other officer looked in the trunks in the attic besides you?
A. I think Mr. Seaver, I am not sure but what Mr. Fleet did. I think Mr. Desmond.
Q. Have you been to inquire for a dress pattern there since?
A. I have not, but under my orders other officers have.
Q. Who did go?
A. Mr. Fleet.
Q. Have you been able to get the dress pattern, or any dress pattern?
A. No Sir.
Q. When was it you sent for it?
A. I think the first officer that went there was Mr. Medley. After that, I think, I am pretty positive I sent the Assistant Marshal. Week before last I think was the first time the officer went there. I think Mr. Fleet was there a week ago last Saturday night. I think he was there some day the first part of the week, of last week.
Q. And you have not got it?
A. No Sir.
(Mr. Knowlton) I now call for it, Brother Jennings, and ask you to bring it, not now, but this afternoon.
Seaver:
Q. In your search of Saturday did you look in the attic?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. You went in the attic?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did you look in the trunks in the attic?
A. Not all of them.
Q. Who looked in those you did not look in?
A. Marshal Hilliard.
Q. You looked in all Marshal Hilliard did not?
Page 458 (436)
A. I think Marshal Hilliard looked in one or two trunks that I did not see in.
Q. In all but one or two, you looked?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did you see anything of a dress pattern not made up, there?
A. No Sir.
Q. Did you see the trunks Mr. Fleet looked into, did you look into the contents of them?
A. I did not.
Q. You did not find any dress pattern at all up there in the garret?
A. Not up there.
Q. How many trunks were there up there?
A. I could not tell you, I think three or four.
Q. In the attic?
A. Yes, that is, trunks and large boxes.
RE-DIRECT
Q. (Mr. Jennings) Do you know who opened that trunk that had the numerous springs on it?
A. Marshal Hilliard.
Q. Sure about that?
A. Do you mean that first opened it?
Q. Yes.
A. He went to that trunk first; I was there and attempted to assist him.
Q. Who finally got it open?
A. Capt. Desmond I think. I think Marshal Hilliard was the first one who went to it. I think your attention was called to it, and mind, and I do not know but two or three others.
Q. Did you look into that trunk to see if there was anything in it?
A. No Sir.
Q. You do not know whether there was any dress pattern there or not?
A. No, Marshal Hilliard was there; I suppose he was taking care of that; and I went into the other room.
.........
I recall they did end up with a dress pattern? Maybe it is in the Trial?
Maybe it's not the original dress pattern, but a *ringer*? There's been quite a lot of time to *replace* one.
CROSS-EXAMINATION.
[Hilliard]
Q. (Mr. Knowlton) Mr. Hilliard, did you look in the trunks in the attic?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. All of them?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did you examine their contents?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did you see anything up there of an unmade dress pattern in the attic?
Page 451 (428)
A. Well, there was some of the trunks that I looked into, but I did not look into all of them. I did not, to my recollection, see any dress pattern in any of the trunks that I saw.
Q. What other officer looked in the trunks in the attic besides you?
A. I think Mr. Seaver, I am not sure but what Mr. Fleet did. I think Mr. Desmond.
Q. Have you been to inquire for a dress pattern there since?
A. I have not, but under my orders other officers have.
Q. Who did go?
A. Mr. Fleet.
Q. Have you been able to get the dress pattern, or any dress pattern?
A. No Sir.
Q. When was it you sent for it?
A. I think the first officer that went there was Mr. Medley. After that, I think, I am pretty positive I sent the Assistant Marshal. Week before last I think was the first time the officer went there. I think Mr. Fleet was there a week ago last Saturday night. I think he was there some day the first part of the week, of last week.
Q. And you have not got it?
A. No Sir.
(Mr. Knowlton) I now call for it, Brother Jennings, and ask you to bring it, not now, but this afternoon.
Seaver:
Q. In your search of Saturday did you look in the attic?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. You went in the attic?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did you look in the trunks in the attic?
A. Not all of them.
Q. Who looked in those you did not look in?
A. Marshal Hilliard.
Q. You looked in all Marshal Hilliard did not?
Page 458 (436)
A. I think Marshal Hilliard looked in one or two trunks that I did not see in.
Q. In all but one or two, you looked?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did you see anything of a dress pattern not made up, there?
A. No Sir.
Q. Did you see the trunks Mr. Fleet looked into, did you look into the contents of them?
A. I did not.
Q. You did not find any dress pattern at all up there in the garret?
A. Not up there.
Q. How many trunks were there up there?
A. I could not tell you, I think three or four.
Q. In the attic?
A. Yes, that is, trunks and large boxes.
RE-DIRECT
Q. (Mr. Jennings) Do you know who opened that trunk that had the numerous springs on it?
A. Marshal Hilliard.
Q. Sure about that?
A. Do you mean that first opened it?
Q. Yes.
A. He went to that trunk first; I was there and attempted to assist him.
Q. Who finally got it open?
A. Capt. Desmond I think. I think Marshal Hilliard was the first one who went to it. I think your attention was called to it, and mind, and I do not know but two or three others.
Q. Did you look into that trunk to see if there was anything in it?
A. No Sir.
Q. You do not know whether there was any dress pattern there or not?
A. No, Marshal Hilliard was there; I suppose he was taking care of that; and I went into the other room.
.........
I recall they did end up with a dress pattern? Maybe it is in the Trial?
Maybe it's not the original dress pattern, but a *ringer*? There's been quite a lot of time to *replace* one.
-
diana
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:21 pm
- Real Name:
Here's the dress pattern at trial. Robinson is cross-examining Rufus Hilliard:
"Q. Do you know that a dress pattern was got from the house?
A. I believe that Mr. Jennings and I think it was Mr. Harrington, I won't be sure but I think it was him that had a dress pattern brought from the house.
Q. Where is it now?
A. I don't know, sir.
Q. Was it returned or not?
A. I think it was in Mr. Jennings' custody; I don't know where it is.
Q. You haven't it?
A. No, sir.
Q. Was it examined by you at all?
A. No, sir, it was in the court room; I did not look at it.
MR. ROBINSON. (Addressing Government counsel) Have you that?
MR. KNOWLTON. We attached no significance to that in reference to this matter, and dropped it.
MR. ROBINSON. It had no significance at all." (Trial,1146+)
So it looks as though, by the time trial rolled around, the prosecution had abandoned the notion that the dress pattern was connected with the crime.
"Q. Do you know that a dress pattern was got from the house?
A. I believe that Mr. Jennings and I think it was Mr. Harrington, I won't be sure but I think it was him that had a dress pattern brought from the house.
Q. Where is it now?
A. I don't know, sir.
Q. Was it returned or not?
A. I think it was in Mr. Jennings' custody; I don't know where it is.
Q. You haven't it?
A. No, sir.
Q. Was it examined by you at all?
A. No, sir, it was in the court room; I did not look at it.
MR. ROBINSON. (Addressing Government counsel) Have you that?
MR. KNOWLTON. We attached no significance to that in reference to this matter, and dropped it.
MR. ROBINSON. It had no significance at all." (Trial,1146+)
So it looks as though, by the time trial rolled around, the prosecution had abandoned the notion that the dress pattern was connected with the crime.
-
lydiapinkham
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:01 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: new england
The points about the pattern and fabric are interesting. No unmade patterns, and what of the material? Did anyone ask to see the gingham? Sounds as if the prosecution had settled on the Bedford cord, and didn't want to muddy the waters and confuse the jury. But the phantom dress sounds possible. Where could she have hidden it, do you think?
--Lyddie
--Lyddie
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
Thanks, Diana- that was it!
I'm glad to see that the fact that every one of the men in the case at the time finally discounted the dress pattern- that didn't mean that we should, eh, lydia?
It has been determined that the phrase or word *pattern* can include the material. The dictionaries of the day state this as being possible. (Another usage we cannot know 100% what the Men mean!)
Anyway, it was posited that the material and the pattern was used to make a basted dress- a temporary dress, if you will, which could cover the murderer, and then be taken apart like you'd take out a hem. What was done with the pieces then, is another question...
I'm glad to see that the fact that every one of the men in the case at the time finally discounted the dress pattern- that didn't mean that we should, eh, lydia?
It has been determined that the phrase or word *pattern* can include the material. The dictionaries of the day state this as being possible. (Another usage we cannot know 100% what the Men mean!)
Anyway, it was posited that the material and the pattern was used to make a basted dress- a temporary dress, if you will, which could cover the murderer, and then be taken apart like you'd take out a hem. What was done with the pieces then, is another question...
-
Susan
- Posts: 2361
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:26 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: California
The description of this dress pattern always makes me think of Lizzie's pink and white striped wrapper. There were some other lines on the white stripes that formed small diamond shaped figures, no color given. Then there is this pink and white and blue striped gingham. Was it possible that the pink and white stripe wrapper was supposed to be the dress used the day of the murders and replaced with the gingham? 
-
augusta
- Posts: 2235
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 11:27 am
- Gender: Female
- Real Name: Augusta
- Location: USA
I think that a butcher in the era was used to killing living things, and perhaps applying his trade to a human may not bother him very much. Who among us could look at a cow, a pig - any animal and directly butcher it? I think that takes a pretty cold heart to do - or at least a person who is able to psyche themselves up to where they reason that it's a job. Maybe they took on the same attitude with killing the Bordens. Today it's usually done differently. But then, there was a lot of one on one combat with the animals.
Morse left a bit in his estate, didn't he ... was it like $100,000? Maybe the girls paid him off in installments, so no one would suspect.
I hear it over and over again, from people who are far from novices in the Borden case, that Bridget was paid to go to Ireland after the trial. I think I've heard it too many times for it to be looked over. I think she knew more than she told, and they sent her away so she wouldn't break down.
The dress pattern I think either didn't exist or it was the one used in the murders. I vote more for the first choice.
Right, if a pattern came to light later on, anyone could have gotten it and said 'Here it is - now what, Knowlton?'
The pattern was important because it was Lizzie's excuse for going in the store alone that day. If she didn't buy a pattern, what did she buy? IF she did buy the hatchet in that store, why couldn't she just say she didn't buy anything? Was there a receipt in the storekeeper's log as to what she bought - maybe not the item but the monetary amount? Did anyone check that out back then?
I think I'd be surprised, tho, if Lizzie bought the hatchet. I'd think the butcher had plenty of his own. But maybe they wanted one that couldn't be traced to him.
Sure, once Knowlton was shown a pattern, what could he say? Nothin'. It suddenly became not important when he was shown one. Very strange it wasn't found in the house with all that searching earlier.
Thanks for the testimony, Kat and Diana. I hadn't read the part where they did say they found a pattern.
Morse left a bit in his estate, didn't he ... was it like $100,000? Maybe the girls paid him off in installments, so no one would suspect.
I hear it over and over again, from people who are far from novices in the Borden case, that Bridget was paid to go to Ireland after the trial. I think I've heard it too many times for it to be looked over. I think she knew more than she told, and they sent her away so she wouldn't break down.
The dress pattern I think either didn't exist or it was the one used in the murders. I vote more for the first choice.
Right, if a pattern came to light later on, anyone could have gotten it and said 'Here it is - now what, Knowlton?'
The pattern was important because it was Lizzie's excuse for going in the store alone that day. If she didn't buy a pattern, what did she buy? IF she did buy the hatchet in that store, why couldn't she just say she didn't buy anything? Was there a receipt in the storekeeper's log as to what she bought - maybe not the item but the monetary amount? Did anyone check that out back then?
I think I'd be surprised, tho, if Lizzie bought the hatchet. I'd think the butcher had plenty of his own. But maybe they wanted one that couldn't be traced to him.
Sure, once Knowlton was shown a pattern, what could he say? Nothin'. It suddenly became not important when he was shown one. Very strange it wasn't found in the house with all that searching earlier.
Thanks for the testimony, Kat and Diana. I hadn't read the part where they did say they found a pattern.
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
Well, I hadn't thought of that- that maybe Lizzie didn't buy a pattern that day.
Maybe there is something confirming that she did?
But if she didn't, she may not have gone to that store at all.
Yes, I'd think someone would at least check that.
But we may have been assuming that was the truth?
If she didn't even go to the store, she could have been meeting someone to plan something.
That has always bothered me that Bridget was asked if Lizzie went away on the Saturday after her return, like 2 or 3 times and Bridget said she didn't know each time.
That sounds like Lizzie went away, to me.
We don't know where she went tho.
She could be meeting Morse?
Maybe there is something confirming that she did?
But if she didn't, she may not have gone to that store at all.
Yes, I'd think someone would at least check that.
But we may have been assuming that was the truth?
If she didn't even go to the store, she could have been meeting someone to plan something.
That has always bothered me that Bridget was asked if Lizzie went away on the Saturday after her return, like 2 or 3 times and Bridget said she didn't know each time.
That sounds like Lizzie went away, to me.
We don't know where she went tho.
She could be meeting Morse?
-
Haulover
- Posts: 721
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:44 pm
- Real Name: Eugene Hosey
- Location: Sycamore, AL
though i admire the detailed work involved in the solution, i also -- like others for reasons they have stated well enough they need not be repeated -- have a problem believing that morse had the heart to coordinate the murder of andrew, or abby, for that matter. but even that is not what i find the most implausible. i can't quite believe that lizzie - even if i could believe that she would invite them in and stand aside for each murder -- i can't quite believe that she would allow herself to be so implicated -- that with aforeknowledge she would so place herself. it's hard to believe that she could foresee that the lack of physical evidence against her would exonerate her. you know, if the premise is that she herself did not do the murders, and if you look at the situation without all the testimony we have in our heads -- it really looks like a clever set-up with lizzie as scapegoat. because the question i keep coming back to is -- what kind of fool would allow this? (of course, this is a story i don't have -- but i'm fairly convinced there is a whole story we don't know.)
-
Nancie
- Posts: 604
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 5:15 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: New Jersey
-
Haulover
- Posts: 721
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:44 pm
- Real Name: Eugene Hosey
- Location: Sycamore, AL
i'm not sure what you're saying, i'm not sure if i agree or disagree with you. i mean to make one specific point -- that if someone else did the deeds with lizzie as supervisor, then lizzie would have to be a fool to calculatingly make herself the obvious primary suspect. meaning i don't think she did. meaning it must have happened very differently.
-
Kat
- Posts: 14785
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 11:59 pm
- Real Name:
- Location: Central Florida
-
augusta
- Posts: 2235
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 11:27 am
- Gender: Female
- Real Name: Augusta
- Location: USA
Yeah, a molasses cookie! 
Wow, haulover. You've got me in a whole 'nother dimension here. A possibility that Lizzie had no clew whatsoever about any of it. ...
Well, that's what was supposed to have happened, according to her jury. There would have had to have been a whole lot of stuff that happened, then, that was pure coincidence. Like Lizzie being in one spot while the murderer was in another spot.
When I was little and I read about the case, I thought Lizzie was innocent. I would shiver under my covers reading about her telling that when she was walking home one night she saw the shadow of a man run from her house.
I always pictured her going thru the house, doing just what she said she was doing, and the murderer watching her and keeping out of her way.
Back then, I thought it was possible. I hadn't re-visited that theory since I was little. I still think it's possible.
Wow, haulover. You've got me in a whole 'nother dimension here. A possibility that Lizzie had no clew whatsoever about any of it. ...
Well, that's what was supposed to have happened, according to her jury. There would have had to have been a whole lot of stuff that happened, then, that was pure coincidence. Like Lizzie being in one spot while the murderer was in another spot.
When I was little and I read about the case, I thought Lizzie was innocent. I would shiver under my covers reading about her telling that when she was walking home one night she saw the shadow of a man run from her house.
I always pictured her going thru the house, doing just what she said she was doing, and the murderer watching her and keeping out of her way.
Back then, I thought it was possible. I hadn't re-visited that theory since I was little. I still think it's possible.
-
Haulover
- Posts: 721
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:44 pm
- Real Name: Eugene Hosey
- Location: Sycamore, AL
augusta:
no, i don't think lizzie is innocent. it's pretty clear she could not have been. but exactly who did what -- that's the mystery. i don't know how much control lizzie had over what went on that morning and/or what lizzie herself was doing while it was happening.
what i mean by scapegoat -- if somebody else she was involved with did it -- then obviously this person left her holding the bag. and obviously she did not believe she could tell about it.
the "coincidences" you refer you i well know -- i would proclaim her guilty in a second if i could explain plausibly the last murder.
no, i don't think lizzie is innocent. it's pretty clear she could not have been. but exactly who did what -- that's the mystery. i don't know how much control lizzie had over what went on that morning and/or what lizzie herself was doing while it was happening.
what i mean by scapegoat -- if somebody else she was involved with did it -- then obviously this person left her holding the bag. and obviously she did not believe she could tell about it.
the "coincidences" you refer you i well know -- i would proclaim her guilty in a second if i could explain plausibly the last murder.