Another Dead Cat

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:39 am

The July, 1996 LBQ mentions this in Neilson Caplain's "Lizbits":

"In one or more of the mighty tomes written about the Borden case there is reference to Lizzie Borden and an unfortunate cat. It seems that the former beheaded the latter, cold-bloodedly, lending credence to her ability to similarly end the lives of Pa and Step-Ma. Now comes to my notice one Margaret Coggeswell (her maiden name) who likes to be called by her nickname Pegge. Her mother was Mabel Clancy Coggeswell, her grandmother was Nellie Neville, and her great-grandmother whose name Pegge does not remember, came from County Cork, Ireland, to live here in our fair city. The latter lady told Nellie, who told Mabel, who told Pegge, who told me, that she, the great grandmother, played with Lizzie as a child, and that Lizzie threw a kitten down a well, there to drown and die."

I don't remember reading this one before. I wonder if these cat stories are true, or fabricated. I must say, I do doubt "Little Abby"'s cat story. It sounds far-fetched to me. The clerk in the drugstore who said Lizzie bought chloroform to "kill a cat" sounds like it could be true. This one above, I dunno. It sounds like it could be true. Has anyone else read this from another source?

lydiapinkham · Post by **lydiapinkham** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 11:00 am

I think the decapitated kitty got crossed with the old nursery rhyme here, Augusta ("Ding dong dell, pussy's in the well/ Who put her in?. . . .").

I was recently thumbing through Pearson, and even he thought the dead cat was bogus!

--Lyddie

Tina-Kate · Post by **Tina-Kate** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 11:46 am

Considering Lizzie's love for animals, these stories don't ring true to me at all. Part of Lizzie's penance was the fact she was fair game for the community & people felt free to slander her with impunity.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 7:35 pm

Yes, I can never quite see Lizzie harming an animal intentionally. There is the story of Lizzie chloroforming a cat, see "Lizzie In Public" thread for the full story, but, I'm guessing that it would have been used for an ailing animal that needed to be put down. Can't you just hear the discourse between Andrew and Lizzie when she tells him of a cat that is ailing and needs medical attention, "Well, my money shan't pay for it!"

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 1:50 am

I hope those names were spelled correctly because I went looking for any Coggeswell in the Fall River City Directory of 1889-91 and there was none listed.
But I also looked for these ladies in census as well. Found no one.

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 10:13 am

Maybe it was "Coggeshall", Kat. There were a lot of them around Fall River. (Spelling may not be right.)

If Lizzie did that to a cat when she was a kid, that can be indicitave of being pretty twisted in later life.

Tina-Kate's right, of course. Lizzie was fair game. And she never broke her silence to deny anything like that.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 3:03 pm

Well, at least you spelled the names right!
I checked the LBQ because I was at an impasse.
Hunting for a variation tho, won't do me any good.
I would think Mr. Caplain would give the proper spelling?

Anyway, I did find something in that "Lizbits" tho that I had been searching for and that is a reference to a VISE in the bahn.
I thought it was from Lincoln (when I gave my interview) and it seems it was Colin Wilson- who is British- and he is great on Brit. crime cases but terrible on American ones!
Whew! I'm glad to know that reference!
It's Mammoth Book of True Crime-2.
..........

Now I've gone looking at my shelves.
I have Mammoth Book of True Crime- Colin Wilson (no I or II listed on the book) and I can't find Lizzie in there.

The Mammoth Book of Killer Women- Richard Glyn Jones- Lizzie is in there, but no vise.

The Mammoth Book of Murder- Richard Glyn Jones- no Lizzie that I can find.

Does anyone have this one cited by Caplain? II ? Or Colin Wilson on Lizzie?
I seem to have a Colin Wilson on Jack the Ripper, but no Colin Wilson on Lizzie Borden- in any of my other anthologies!

Sorry to be OT here but I've been wondering about this since March!

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 3:53 pm

If the alleged incident with the cat occurred when this Coggeswell was playing with Lizzie as a child we may want to check the late 1860's, early 1870's records for her name.

Caplain makes note that Coggeswell was her maiden name and by the 1890's she was probably married with a different last name. She also may have moved away from Fall River.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 7:24 pm

I tried the census of Fall River over a period of years with these ladies names. Actually I started with the last name in any census in F.R. Mass. and came up empty.
I'm wondering if Mr. Caplain slightly misrepresented the name (spelling) to preserve the person's annonimity?

I've heard so often that when people agree to interviews, afterwards they might ask to have their name removed or disguised.
I recall someone saying to me recently that oh that person has since died- they can now use the interview. That sort of thing.

Constantine · Post by **Constantine** » Fri Aug 06, 2004 7:59 pm

The cat story is also reported by Sullivan as having been told to him (on tape!) by Abby's niece and namesake, Abby Whitehead Potter, who said she heard it from Abby herself. This would seem to make it reliable. It is, of course, conceivable that Mrs. Potter's memory was playing a trick on her and that, without realizing it, she was actually "remembering" a piece of hearsay (or readsay) (not unlike Victoria Lincoln's "memory" of living next door to Lizzie). Actually, I do not think this at all unlikely. (The story seems to have the earmarks of a legend, and seems out of keeping with Lizzie's love of animals. Still, people are not consistent.)

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Aug 07, 2004 12:55 am

That Abby Potter story is awful!
That's the one where it's claimed that an annoying cat of Abby's was removed from a room of visitors and taken to the cellar and beheaded by Lizzie.

I remember Edisto saying wryly,*how did they ever train that cat to open the latch over and over? And the Borden's didn't have latches they had doorknobs...*
Or something to that effect.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:09 am

augusta @ Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:39 am wrote:The July, 1996 LBQ mentions this in Neilson Caplain's "Lizbits":

I wonder if these cat stories are true, or fabricated. I must say, I do doubt "Little Abby"'s cat story. It sounds far-fetched to me. The clerk in the drugstore who said Lizzie bought chloroform to "kill a cat" sounds like it could be true. This one above, I dunno. It sounds like it could be true. Has anyone else read this from another source?

Trial
Nathaniel Hathaway
1294
Q. And the use of arsenic, then, is quite general in innocent ways, isn't it?
A. No, sir; I think not.

Q. What do they kill cats with? If you want to kill a cat, and don't shoot her or knock her on the head or tie a stone around her and leave her in a bag down by the river? What would you kill cats with if you wanted to do it quietly?
A. I am unable to state, sir.

Q. You have no experience in that way?
A. No, sir.

Q. Well, suppose you put one in a box and put some strong chloroform in with her, what about it?
A. I think if the box was tight the cat would die, if you put in enough

Page 1295

chloroform.

Q. Is it the same about ether?
A. I am a little doubtful about ether, with a cat.

Q. You don't know I suppose?
A. No, sir.

Nancie · Post by **Nancie** » Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:13 pm

I have four kittens in my backyard, wild, they
were born in my shed this winter, you cant approach them, they are truly wild animals. I don't feed them. My Dad said call the SPCA to pick them
up, I called and got such a run around. It is no wonder you have to poison them or do something.

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:57 pm

Hi All

I reread the Sullivan cat story a while back and I was appalled. I can particularly recall that after Abby's cat went missing for a few days she was becoming concerned. At this point Lizzie said coldly that if Abby wanted to know where her cat was, she could look in the basement.

I don't know if the story is true or if Lizzie threw a cat down a well as a child. Neither do I know for certain that Lizzie contacted her neighbor at Maplecroft to complain about the neighbours cats. The stories seem a little on the vindictive side. However, I do know that serial killer profilers and those who study a murderers behavior as a child look for certain warning signs. One of the most commonly found behaviors is cruelty to animals.

I know Lizzie was an animal lover. However, it seems her main objects of affection were dogs, birds and squirrels. Cats eat birds and squirrels so perhaps there is a grain of truth in the stories.

Best Regards
Gary

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Aug 21, 2004 5:40 pm

It almost seems like we can have have a Lizzie who was cruel to cats, was a misfit at school, was hell to live with, caused dissention in the home, shoplifted and maybe thought about starting fires? Arson is also a trait known to serial killers. And bed-wetting. And thus she was a killer, because she exhibted such traits.

Or we can have a Lizzie who did not steal, (tho later there were stories told about that which were misunderstandings), who took care of her dogs and squirrels and left $ to charity, who loved her father and gave him a ring, who joined in in charitable endeavors and had close friends who believed in her until she died, and after. And no killer- or maybe just killed on Thursday, August 4th, but never again?

Either way, she was not a serial killer, but maybe a Borderline Personality?
So the common traits we think of that would describe a Ted Bundy might not fit our woman.

Were there any great Fall River fires in Lizzie's lifetime?...hmmm

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Sun Aug 22, 2004 11:35 am

Hi Kat

My quess would be that the truth about Lizzie Lies somewhere in between the two profiles you mention. She may have been someone who could be pleasant and agreeable most of the time; but if she was crossed or didn't get her way, she could turn instantly cold and cruel. This dosen't necessarily mean she was a muderer. But then again I wouldn't want to be in her way when she was angry....

Best Regards
Gary

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Aug 22, 2004 10:39 pm

When were all the fires?
Anyone know?
I'm surprised Lizzie wasn't blamed for one.

I think you are right that Lizzie fell somewhere in between these extremes, yet could be extreme herself under provocation.

lydiapinkham · Post by **lydiapinkham** » Tue Aug 31, 2004 12:13 am

I just thought of a possible origin for the hatcheted cat story! The axe that was first thought to contain traces of human blood and hair had short grey and white hairs. When it was found to me non-human, perhaps it was speculated that the hairs belonged to the family cat. And it sounds so much like practice that the rumor mongers would seize on it in an instant. (I still think she chloroformed the cat, myself.)

--Lyddie

Tina-Kate · Post by **Tina-Kate** » Sat Sep 18, 2004 12:57 am

Pigeon Murders -- Fact or Fiction? Does anyone know the source of the "Andrew decapitating Lizzie's pigeons" story? Is this a Lincolnism? I don't remember ever hearing a source, but it seems to be common knowledge. Or is this just like the dead cat stories?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Sep 18, 2004 2:33 am

Lizzie saw them come in the house dead, some with their heads off.
It really happened.
I talked about this to someone and they truly believed Andrew killed those pigeons to somehow hurt Lizzie (like in the movie)- but we had a discussion going here previoulsy where it seemed reasonable that Andrew killed them because he was getting the house painted and didn't want the ongoing mess they made.

In fact, I can even see Andrew making a deal with Lizzie: If you want the house up-graded- if you want it painted- those pigeons have to go- AND you can pick the color paint!

Inquest
Lizzie
82
Q. Can you tell of any killing of an animal? or any other operation that would lead to their being cast there, with blood on them?
A. No sir, he killed some pigeons in the barn last May or June.
Q. What with?
A. I don't know, but I thought he wrung their necks.
Q. What made you think so?
A. I think he said so.
Q. Did anything else make you think so?
A. All but three or four had their heads on, that is what made me think so.
Q. Did all of them come into the house?
A. I think so.
Q. Those that came into the house were all headless?
A. Two or three had them on.
Q. Were any with their heads off?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Cut off or twisted off?
A. I don't know which.
Q. How did they look?
A. I don't know, their heads were gone, that is all.
Q. Did you tell anybody they looked as though they were twisted off?
A. I don't remember whether I did or not. The skin I think was very tender, I said why are these heads off? I think I remember of telling somebody that he said they twisted off.
Q. Did they look as if they were cut off?
A. I don't know, I did not look at that particularly.

Tina-Kate · Post by **Tina-Kate** » Sat Sep 18, 2004 11:07 am

The Inquest! Thanks, Kat. I had a feeling you would know where to find it if it existed. (Been a LONG time since I read that). In Lincoln, she said Andrew killed them with a hatchet/axe...which was what made me question it anew in the 1st place.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Sep 18, 2004 7:28 pm

lydiapinkham @ Tue Aug 31, 2004 12:13 am wrote:I just thought of a possible origin for the hatcheted cat story! The axe that was first thought to contain traces of human blood and hair had short grey and white hairs. When it was found to me non-human, perhaps it was speculated that the hairs belonged to the family cat. And it sounds so much like practice that the rumor mongers would seize on it in an instant. (I still think she chloroformed the cat, myself.)

--Lyddie

I was looking at the Prof. Wood's testimony today at the preliminary and he said the hatchets found at the house seemed to have stains that looked like blood but were not blood.
On one was found a hair, reddish-brown, which he believed was possibly from a cow.
However, he did find something we never discuss, and that was fibres!
Wood & some cotton fibres- and "There was quite a number of cotton fibres in this patch."
I believe this was the claw-head hatchet, the prosecution's first weapon of choice.

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Sun Sep 19, 2004 4:18 pm

On the subject if cats, there is a short unsigned letter to Knowlton (HK225, p-241, The Knowlton Papers) dated June 14, 1893:

"H. M. Knowlton

Sir-
Why do you not ascertain who the milkman was, who supplied the Bordens with milk for years. He said he knew for a fact that Miss Lizzie decapitated a kitten which belonged to her step-mother. If she would do that for spite, she might do worse."

I don't know how long the Borden's received their milk from their farm nor when the alleged killing occured.

The lack of a signature makes it dubious but it does give some idea of the cat rumors of the time.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:14 am

I thought I'd heard all the cat rumors, but you, Har, and Augusta, get honors for finding those!

What is the basis for cat killing rumors, does anyone know? Is that some kind of folklore that follows an accused parricide?
It might signify something brewing in society at the time- be indicative of something. hmmm?

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 7:43 pm

I think the anonymous letter put it best when it comes to the "killing cats" stories, if she could do that, she could do worse. I think that is what the general sentiment is of those stories, but, from whence they got started?

I found this site that delves into the psychology of people who have murdered other people, most started with killing or torturing animals:

Violent acts toward animals have long been recognized as indicators of a dangerous psychopathy that does not confine itself to animals. 'Anyone who has accustomed himself to regard the life of any living creature as worthless is in danger of arriving also at the idea of worthless human lives'. wrote humanitarian Dr. Albert Schweitzer.
'Murderers...very often start out by killing and torturing animals as kids', according to Robert Ressler, who developed profiles of serial killers for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

'There is a common theme to all of the shootings of recent years', says Dr. Harold S. Koplewicz, director of the Child Study Center at New York University. 'You have a child who has symptoms of aggression toward his peers, an interest in fire, cruelty to animals, social isolation, and many warning signs that the school has ignored'.
Sadly, many of these criminals' childhood violence went unexamined until it was directed toward humans. As anthropologist Margaret Mead noted, 'One of the most dangerous things that can happen to a child is to kill or torture an animal and get away with it'.

Lizzie was supposed to have been acid tongued with her peers in school, I don't know about her interest in fire though? Was she perhaps cruel to animals as a child? Lizzie was social isolated, wasn't she, she was supposed to not have many friends until she got over her shyness and people began to pay attention to her. Hmmmmm?

From this site: http://vivisection-absurd.org.uk/abs02.html

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 11:06 pm

Thanks for an intelligent attempt at a reply! I was hoping for some feed-back!
Albert Schweitzer was working the 20th century.
I wonder if Freud inspired some of these cat-killer=parricide stories?
I guess my question, more literally is, Why Cats?

I also wonder if the shoplifting craze that was reported as happening to housewives was a similar folk-lorish kind of phenomenon.

I understand the relationship between tourturing animals and sociopathic tendencies- but some kill birds, some dogs- why a whole culture believes these cat-killing stories and reproduces them? Fall River too close to Salem, maybe?

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 3:24 am

You're welcome, Kat, the fixation with cat stories has been lodged in my brain and I've been trying to decipher its meaning. I've thought on it for awhile and the only thing that comes to mind about the cats is related to the sexes and their places in society at the time. Most cats are refered to as she, most dogs are he, regardless of their sex. Cats are associated with inside the home and beside the hearth which was woman's place in society at the time, so, it was more of a woman's animal in a woman's sphere. Cats like to play with yarn, are soft and docile, more womanly things. Dogs are usually associated with the outdoors or the backyard, sheparding flocks, hunting, etc. a man's animal in man's domain. Dogs like to play with a ball, they are aggressive and loud, more manly things.

I think the Victorians saw the cat as part of a woman's world, one of her creatures and companions. And for a woman to kill one of these animals from her domain, why, she was downright dangerous and capable of all sorts of things. It was like ridding herself of that which made her a woman, does that make any sense? Thats about as far as I can get with it, does anyone else have a take on it?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 1:35 am

OOO! That's very good Dr. Susan Freud!
I'm impressed.

I was thinking about Egypitian culture as well and the emphasis they placed upon cats, but that's not exactly Victorian, tho an Egyptian craze did sweep thru upper society at that time.

Do you think (does anyone) that the Salem witches associated with their cats as "familiars" went along those lines you write of, as well?

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 3:09 am

Thanks, Kat. I came across this:

"The cat was sacred to the Druids, the priests of ancient Britain; for that reason it was held in high regard by the early people; so much so that a man who killed a cat was sometimes put to death. The Teutons had a number of gods and goddesses whom they held in reverence, one of the leading goddesses being Freya, the goddess of beauty and love. Cats, bats and owls were sacred to her and were supposed to assist her in her supernatural undertakings. Since they thus became associated with mystic powers it was natural to associate the cats, bats and owls with the spells and charms of Hallowe’en."

From this site: http://www.victorianhalloween.com/oct/l ... owls.shtml

Cats have been viewed as being mystical and magical throughout time and especially during the Salem witch craze. Since cats were part of woman's domain, women could easily become guilty by association to all those bad attributes of cats. Cats were considered to be sneaky, secretive, sly, cunning, crafty, murderous, etc., just the sort of thing you might expect of a witch. So, its easy to see how they made the leap from mere pets to familiars, doing the witch's bidding and dirty work. It made me think of the lines spoken at the end of the Trial:

"You are neither murderers nor women. You have neither the craft of the assassin nor the cunning and deftness of the sex."

I also found this site that has excerpts from Victorian texts about domestic animals:

http://www.messybeast.com/1800-tales.htm

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 3:24 am

I found this doing a Lizzie image search, just had to add it to this thread!!!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 11:22 pm

Thanks Susan! That is cool! A cat takes up the (bloody) Hatchet!

The "cats, bats and owls" all are predators of mice, rodents, pesky bugs and vermin: All which have the ability to transmit disease if the populations are not kept in control. They are extremely useful to society! They should be honored! I have all of them in my neighborhood, too.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:19 pm

Yes, they should be honored, unfortunately they seemed to have picked up that bum rap during the Salem witch craze. I personally think that bats are really neat little animals, kinda' cute even.

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Wed Sep 29, 2004 7:31 pm

One of the possible roots of the "Lizzie killed a cat" story may be found in Knowlton, page 297, HK289. Contained in a letter to Knowlton from a Mrs. George O. Walker:

"... She told me of a family in Swansea, whom Lizzie visited in younger days, and who tell, with bated breath, of her one day having taken a nest of robins, and "chopped off their heads," because she "wanted to have a funeral." From an entirely remote, but equally authentic source, I am told of a lady, who called at the Borden house one day, and was much annoyed by a kitten, who kept jumping into her lap. It became so troublesome that Lizzie finally took it from the room, and on her return said, 'That kitten won't trouble you any more. I've chopped off her head."

The letter is dated June 22, 1893, just after the trial. No information was able to be found on this Mrs. Walker.

I, personally, do not put much faith in the stories with Lizzie as an animal killer. Sounds like somebody trying to talk big in front of others.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Wed Sep 29, 2004 9:58 pm

Thanks for that, Harry. I've never heard the story about the robins before! I think you're right, it sounds like its all tall tales about Lizzie. Wasn't the one about Lizzie killing the kitten disproved because of timing? I think it was supposed to have happened while Lizzie was in or still traveling to or from Europe?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 3:00 am

Yes I think we figured out that lil' Abby Potter had her story wrong- that is archived somewhere.
Is that story in Sullivan?

Thanks for the birds, Har! Interesting.

lydiapinkham · Post by **lydiapinkham** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 8:37 am

Yes, Kat, the story is in Sullivan--just stumbled across it the other day. He interviewed li'l Abby and he reported her story. I don't really think he believed it either. I think it was a piece of Whitehead lore, perhaps to show that they should have seen it coming. I know killers frequently start out as sadists with animals, but I don't think Lizzie was of that stamp--if she had been, I think she'd have been compelled to kill again. If she did it, I think it was for sheer hatred nursed over many years.

--Lyddie

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 5:35 pm

Harry would know- but didn't lil' Abby recall that day the Bordens were killed because her fingers got caught in the window at her aunt's? She claimed Fleet or someone lived next door and brought the news but I don't think he did live next door after all.

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 6:37 pm

As Lyddie says Sullivan is the source.

On page 22+ he includes the story of the cat as told to him by Abby Whitehead in 1972.

On page 34+ he relates the story of Abby staying with Lucy Cahoon, her aunt, on Aug. 4th.

"On the morning of 4 August, the day of the murders, my mother [Mrs. Sarah Whitehead] planning to attend the policemen's annual picnic at Rocky Point, was making arrangements for the care of my younger brother and myself. George was to go to [another aunt's house], and I was to spend the day with Aunt Abby at 92 Second Street. At the last moment there was a change in plans, and I was sent with my brother to [my other aunt's] house, which was next door to the home of Marshal Hilliard in another section of Fall River.

"In the late afternoon while I was helping Aunt Lucy wash windows, Marshal Hilliard returned home, and, standing in the yard, informed Aunt Lucy of Aunt Abby's murder. The shock of the news was so great that Aunt Lucy dropped the window on my hand."

Rebello, in the Jan. 2002 issue of the LBQ, page 21, says that a policeman was dispatched to tell Lucy the news of the murders.

Kat also found a different home address for Hilliard than as a neighbor to Lucy Cahoon, so it would appear little Abby (some 80 years after the crime) has a few of her facts wrong.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:03 pm

Thanks for that, Harry. I've never understood that part of L'il Abby's story about her brother being farmed out to one aunt and she was to go to the Borden house that day. Why would a woman who was trying to go to a social function try to find two babysitters in the first place, why not just one? I could see if the story was something more like "We were both supposed to go to #92 on August 4th, but, Aunt Abby had to say no as Uncle Andrew didn't like having children around the house and underfoot."

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:44 pm

oops, Hilliard. Thanks Harry for the transcription!

Harry has 28 Whipple St for Ms. Cahoon and I found that by 1891 Hilliard lived at 19 Durfee St.

These cat stories are beginning to seem obvious that they are a symptom of the area's burgeoning belief in Lizzie's guilt. The populace can't come right out publically and say Lizzie done it- because she was acquitted- but they can trot out these tails (er, tales) of her cruelty to cats- and that is their ultimate pronouncement of her guilt of something.

Jeesh! I wonder what Lizbeth thought about that?

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 8:05 pm

Lizzie seemed to enjoy the company of animals so much, but a thought entered my mind, just kicking it around some. Supposing that Lizzie heard all the cat stories and decided instead of telling people she didn't do it, as they probably wouldn't listen to her anyhow, she decided to show them by her kind acts towards animals.

I was thinking how Andrew plunked down his room key on the sitting room mantel, it may have been some sort of sign to the family after his and Abby's room had been robbed. A silent gesture if you will. Could Lizzie's outside displays of feeding the birds and squirells be some sort of gesture like that also? See, I'm nice to creatures, big and small, I wouldn't them or anyone else either.

Weird, it just made me think of the end in the movie Psycho when Norman/Mrs. Bates is sitting in the prison cell and we hear her thoughts. A fly lands on her and she says she won't swat it in case they are watching her. They'll see and they'll say,"Why shes the kind of person who wouldn't hurt a fly." Sorry, paraphrasing, don't recall the exact wording, but, was it possible that Lizzie thought along these lines too?

Nancie · Post by **Nancie** » Sat Oct 02, 2004 12:51 pm

that is really interesting thinking Susan! I suppose it could be true but I personally never gave Lizzie
that much credit for such creative forward thinking,
I believe she was being herself throughout. If she
did have any part in the murders, I think it was pure dumb luck that she got off, not any brilliance on her part. As for feeding the squirrels, that is an
alone-type thing in the backyard nobody sees really, I can't see that she would do that for "show"
in some long range scheme. (BUT ya never know..
that's why we are here!) thanks for interesting views..............

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 2:38 am

Thanks, Nancie, yeah, its just something that popped into my mind and I needed to kick it around a little bit and see what came of it. I recall reading somewhere that Lizzie was seen by her neighbors feeding the birds and squirrels, thats where the idea came to me, it sounds as though people were watching her constantly, not a private moment to herself! I guess thats what my question is, would or could Lizzie think that far outside of herself to come up with that sort of idea or was it just her doing her normal thing?

lydiapinkham · Post by **lydiapinkham** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 9:05 am

I think her interest in animals predated the murders, though, Susan: horseback riding, pigeon keeping, etc. If it came out of nowhere,
I think it would be very like Norman, wrapped up in his blanket and smiling benignly down at the fly on his hand. Maybe Emma left Maplecroft because she couldn't stand the shouting matches between Lizzie and Father.

--Lyddie

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:04 pm

Ooooo, Lyddie, now thats a creepy thought!!! Lizzie having conversations with and as Andrew.

Yes, I realize that Lizzie always had a fondness for animals, but, do you think she was above using that to her advantage when all those cat killing stories started surfacing? Maybe she didn't always feed the birds and squirrels at Maplecroft, maybe it was something she thought to adopt once those stories came to light? We don't have any evidence that she did this while she lived at #92.

Constantine · Post by **Constantine** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:19 pm

Harry @ Thu Sep 30, 2004 7:37 pm wrote:As Lyddie says Sullivan is the source.

Pearson told the story (slightly differently) long before Sullivan. I believe it was in his piece, "Legends of Lizzie." Interestingly, though a firm believer in Lizzie's guilt, he doubted the truth of the story.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Oct 05, 2004 12:22 am

Janet Leigh died today, I hear?
She looked like my next door neighbor!

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Tue Oct 05, 2004 2:40 am

I know, just heard it on the radio today. Janet said that she didn't mind being remembered for her role in the movie Psycho as that was what being an actor was all about, creating these roles.

Constantine · Post by **Constantine** » Tue Oct 05, 2004 4:18 pm

With all due respect to Ms. Leigh, what does this have to do with the topic?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Oct 05, 2004 9:02 pm

There are all these references to Psycho in this topic, like Lizbeth talking with Andrew at Maplecroft...flies..."Norman" (Bates) etc.

Lizzie Borden Society Forum

Another Dead Cat

Another Dead Cat

Re: Another Dead Cat

Another Dead Cat

Another dead Cat