here's another angle for lizzie being guilty

[snokkums]

I was reading this article, "Lizzie Bordon, and American legend", and thought that this was very interesting and something I didn't know.
The articile said "The trial lasted fourteen days. The prosecution called witnesses to testify that Andrew was about to draw up a new will, leaving half his estate to Abby and dividing the rest between his daughters and to testify that Lizzie bought 10 cents worth of prussic acid from theh local drug store, which could have been used to poison her parents had she beenallowed to purchase it".

First, I never knew her father was making a new will. But if Lizzie knew, that could have given her reason to rid herself of both of them. She couldnt just kill her step mother, because then maybe her father could testify against her, so she had to rid herself of both of them before the will was drawn up.

[1bigsteve]

Thank's snokkums. Everything seems to point to Lizzie having a motive for the double killing, even though I hate the idea that Lizzie could be guilty. A lot of people bought cyanide but not for the purpose of killing someone. Perhaps Lizzie was under the impression that Prussic acid was good for killing moths on her seal skin cape. Was ten cents worth enough to kill two grown people? Maybe Lizzie knew what was in that Will and didn't like it.

Heres a link to info on Prussic acid that I came across while doing the google:

http://ianrpubs.unl.edu/range/g775.htm

Read it carefully, there's a quiz at the end.

-1bigsteve (o:

[Kat]

I was reading this article, "Lizzie Bordon, and American legend", and thought that this was very interesting and something I didn't know.
The articile said "The trial lasted fourteen days. The prosecution called witnesses to testify that Andrew was about to draw up a new will, leaving half his estate to Abby and dividing the rest between his daughters and to testify that Lizzie bought 10 cents worth of prussic acid from theh local drug store, which could have been used to poison her parents had she beenallowed to purchase it".

First, I never knew her father was making a new will. But if Lizzie knew, that could have given her reason to rid herself of both of them. She couldnt just kill her step mother, because then maybe her father could testify against her, so she had to rid herself of both of them before the will was drawn up.

Sorry that's a bunch of hooey.
No disrespect snokkums, but trolling for articles on the internet is not any way to learn anything factual about the Borden case.
Please- anyone who does this- first take that time you spend surfing and download the source documents from our website and familiarize yourself with their contents.
There are very few sites out there that have any basic facts correct. They will only lead you farther astray.
You are at the best site here to learn about the case*, and my suggestion is you guys stick around here to get work done and to find out stuff.

*The Morningstar productions who made the Discovery Channel video on Lizzie started at our website.

[Kat]

Once you read the witness statements and the inquest and the preliminary hearing and the trial- then turn around and read them again.
And then again.
I've read the preliminary hearing over 6 times. Susan told me she had as well!
It's great!

What do you think?

Stef has a goal to *fix* all those websites and we've only managed one- Wiki-peodia. (sp.)
Our own member fixed that at Stef's request.
Most websites on Lizzie are not maintained and don't answer.
Once you've committed the facts in the case to your memory and understanding, you can contact these sites with bad info and straighten them out!