Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

This the place to have frank, but cordial, discussions of the Lizzie Borden case

Moderator: Adminlizzieborden

Post Reply
User avatar
studentlearn
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 9:30 pm
Real Name: Jon

Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by studentlearn » Thu Mar 22, 2018 10:50 pm

Hello everyone. I am enrolled in HS, and I have been assigned as the pr*secutor of the mock trial of Lizzie Borden. I find this case very interesting, but it is very hard to find everything that would be useful to say in the m*ck court. If anyone could, please send any threads that could be very helpful to pr*secute Lizzie Borden as guilty. I have some questions myself that would make my life easier if anyone answered:

1.) What are your thoughts on the dress that Lizzie burned? How could I use this in c*urt against her, if the dress that Churchill saw her wear during the murder was blue but without any blood stains?

2.) The only hatchets found were in the basement that did not appear to be used in the crime. So, how did Lizzie kill her parents? And how did she dispose/hide the hatchets?

3.) In this m*ck trial, it appears that Lizzie Borden will be put on stand. What are some valuable questions that I could ask her?

4.) The d*fense is putting Uriah Kirby on stand that witnessed the day before the murders a strange man on the street at around 11. How could I refute this evidence? What questions could I ask Uriah?

5.) Emma will obviously show Lizzie as a sweet girl who had an amazing relationship with her parents. What questions could I ask her? How could Emma be valuable to the pr*secutor team?

6.) How can I prove that Lizzie Borden did not have a good relationship with her parents? Is there any valuable information that shows this?

7.) John Morse is also being put on stand. I have not done enough research on him, is there anything useful that I could use against Lizzie Borden? What type of questions could I ask him?

8.) If i'm not mistaken, the police found a bucket filled with 'm*nstruation' rags. I will be arguing that Lizzie could have possibly cleaned the blood from herself with those rags, and made it seem like it was m*nstruation blood since she was on her period. Is this a good direction? Could anyone give me more information on the m*nstruation rags? Were they found the day of the murders? (I could not find a lot of information about this.)

9.) What was the timeline on the day of the murders? How could the 90 minute difference of the death of Lizzie's parents show that Lizzie killed them?

10.) Other than the prussic acid, Lizzie's Alibi, no possible break-in, or anything that was stated above, is there any other evidence that could be presented in c*urt that could make lizzie seem guilty?

I know these are a lot of questions. Any help, small or big, will be greatly appreciated! Most of you are very informed about the case, so I am hoping some of you respond. Thank you!
-The * in some words are so the team defending Lizzie don't see this post by searching keywords.. let's hope they dont!

mbhenty
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by mbhenty » Sat Mar 24, 2018 10:47 pm

Yes, StudentLearn, you are up against a daunting task in trying to prosecute Lizzie. She is one of the luckiest killers or innocent targets of a homicide ever to live. I believe that Lizzie was probably guilty of knowing who did the crime or even assisting or planning it.... but not committing the actual deed.

She is squeaky clean. All evidence which may implicate her is circumstantial at best. You can run with the prussic acid thing, which may speak to her intentions, or the burning of the dress, if in fact it was the one worn during the crime, and for which the cops should have found on the day of the killings. Or the rumors that she did not get along with her stepmother.

In the end there is very little solid incriminating evidence. No blood. No weapon.

I also believe that Lizzie did infact walk into or towards the barn when her father was killed. I suspect that she may have gone outside as not to witness or hear her father cry out as he was being bludgeoned, or to make certain the coast was clear for the killer to make his escape. We don't know, but could argue such a case. But it would be a weak one.

Yep, you have a tuff order here, my man. Defending Lizzie is a piece of cake. But trying to prove her guilty just as sour as bacon ice cream.

Good luck. You seem to have a healthy insight and acquaintance with the crime. And some of your plans for attack appear to have legs. Perhaps those here on the forum who feel strongly about Lizzie's culpability will sound off and lend some advice.

What say you forum people? :smile: :?:

Bev
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2015 5:50 pm
Real Name: Beverle Myers

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by Bev » Mon Mar 26, 2018 7:17 am

Hi StudentLearn--I'm a lurker here. I love to study this case that can be argued both ways. I believe Lizzie is guilty. If I had her on the stand I would work off many of her inquest statements. She couldn't decide where she was when her father came home, she said she didn't know of the drug store where Eli Bence claims she asked for the acid even though it was not far from the house she'd lived in for years, and then there is the note business. I find it very suspicious that no potential writer came forward and no note was ever found. Also, Lizzie said she thought she'd heard Abby come in, thus sending Mrs. Churchill and Bridget to look for her. If Lizzie was where she said she was during the morning, she either couldn't have heard her (from the barn) or would have seen her come in the side door while she was on the first floor of the house. One last thing, I believe the friend from church that was part of the Marion group knew that Lizzie had come by a hatchet (probably purchased or shoplifted on her trip before the murders) because Lizzie had written her a letter about chopping wood at the house and the dull hatchet they'd had to use on the last trip. The friend was named Lizzie, too--can't recall the last name right off. She never testified, but rumors abounded and she dropped Lizzie like a hot potato when they'd been friends for years. Maybe that could be worked in somehow. Good luck!

jimmysnan
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 11:30 am
Real Name: Jo-Anne Nasser

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by jimmysnan » Mon Mar 26, 2018 11:55 am

I do not think that Lizzie did this. I think that there was a visitor, the man that Lizzie claims came to the home and was yelling at Andrew. I also believe that he was the illegitimate son of Andrew Borden. I read a book Lizzie Didnt Do It and before I read that book I still was not convinced it was Lizzie. Anyway in the book it states that there was a man that visited Andrew before the murders, Lizzie felt guilty because she let the man in. I think the man was known to the family and I think he was trying to blackmail Andrew into giving him money. I think Andrew said No and the man was angry. He was seen by Lizzie so he could not murder Andrew then so he waited until later. The book I mentioned stated that there was another axe murder near this mans home and it was to a young girl and an axe was also used. This man was a butcher so it would not be unusual for him to be walking around Fall River with bloody apron on and bloody clothes.
Also I am related to Lizzie by cousin many times removed. I was born and raised in Fall River, my grandfather helped to embalm and bury Lizzie as he worked at the time for Wentworths Funeral Home. As a child I asked about the case, was told "We do not talk bad about the elite of Fall River." That was his answer.
She is related through my grandmothers side through Richard Borden who married Innocent CORNELL (some say Wordell I have seen no proof of this except for Abbie Borden Welds book) I have researched this family a lot in my genealogy.

mbhenty
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by mbhenty » Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:57 pm

:smile:

Yes, we can make our case for the prosecution. But one must be careful. Now Eli Bence never testified about the prussic acid. Why? We don't know. It sure sounded like a sure thing. Even if you could not prove his testimony, having him testify would inflict some conjectural damage. But there was something very seriously flawed with Bence's testimony or with Bence himself. What ever it was was dire enough that Knowlton did not use him. (Please see my amendment in my next post below in accordance with KGDevil's correction.)

As for the note. In a murder case if you don't have a body it is very difficult to prove murder. If you don't have a note it is very difficult to prove that one did or did not exist. Circumstantial!

Now, I always assumed that Lizzie was buried by Winward Undertakers, the same people who buried Abby and Andrew. But don't quote me on that. So Jimmysnan, you must mean Winward. There was no Wentworth in fall river in 1927. (Well there actually was one. But he was a bricklayer.)

As for Lizzie's friend named Lizzie, you must mean Elizabeth, Bev. Lizzie had a schoolmate chum named Elizabeth Johnston. Elizabeth visited Lizzie quite a few times when Lizzie was in the Taunton Jail. As far as dropping Lizzie as a friend... we don't really know that. If we use folklore as a slide rule we are bound to get our math wrong.

We must also be careful about Andrew Borden's illegitimate son. You know, the one that never existed. Billy Borden was figment of author Arnold Brown's imagination, or an excellent ploy for a book, which he wrote. There exists almost no proof that Andrew had a son. Once again, folklore. In any event such a person could not be used in a mock trial.

The key to who did the murder is hanging by the time line. Lizzie did not have the time to kill her father, rid herself of the axe, and clean herself up....... not unless the maid lied. Now there's a boulevard we can travel :!: :?: :smile:


:study:
Last edited by mbhenty on Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:53 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
KGDevil
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by KGDevil » Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:59 am

mbhenty wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:57 pm
:smile:

Yes, we can make our case for the prosecution. But one must be careful. Now Eli Bence never testified about the prussic acid. Why? We don't know. It sure sounded like a sure thing. Even if you could not prove his testimony, having him testify would inflict some conjectural damage. But there was something very seriously flawed with Bence's testimony or with Bence himself. What ever it was was dire enough that Knowlton did not use him.



:study:

Actually, Knowlton argued to have Bence's testimony admitted into trial. So, he evidently thought the testimony was credible. It was Lizzie's lawyer, Robinson, who fought to have the testimony excluded. His argument was that since there was no sale of prussic acid made, and that no poison was used in the commission of the crime, an attempted purchase of poison had no bearing on the crime at hand. It's all right there in the trial transcript. The arguments made by both the defense and the prosecution about the admission of Bence's testimony. The man actually got on the stand, but was not allowed to testify about the sale because of Robinson's objections. The only thing seriously flawed was the decision not to admit it into evidence.

Starting arguments in trial testimony page 1240:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
KGDevil
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by KGDevil » Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:01 am

:arrow:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
KGDevil
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by KGDevil » Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:02 am

:arrow:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
KGDevil
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by KGDevil » Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:02 am

:arrow:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
KGDevil
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by KGDevil » Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:03 am

:arrow:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
KGDevil
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by KGDevil » Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:03 am

:arrow:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
KGDevil
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by KGDevil » Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:05 am

:arrow:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
KGDevil
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by KGDevil » Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:06 am

:arrow:

And you can find the rest of the arguments and ruling on admission in the trial testimony.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

mbhenty
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by mbhenty » Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:50 am

:shock:

Right you are KGDevil. My apology for being so wrong. I should have known better since I wrote about it and placed Eli Bence on the stand in the play I published, namely, By the Naked Pear Tree. Bence did indeed testify at the inquest and the preliminary hearing. But he was denied his account in court by Robinson.

Yes, yes. I remember now. How embarrassing. I was wrong despite the fact that the correct Bence information was well embedded in the back of my brain, not to mention my book. My account above was one I argued many, many years back, before I did the proper research. (I amended my post above, but did not remove anything, as not to circulate incorrect information.)

When explaining the human brain with young people I always describe it like a closet. Some people have small closets, while others have walk-in closets. People like Einstein, Stephen Hawking, da Vinci, and Shakespeare had huge closets for brains. Unfortunately I was not so blessed. My closet is full. And when I try sticking things in there other things fall out. Thus memory is like a closet. Some have limited space while others....... well. But young people are funny and view my little correlation like I have three heads. :sad: :oops: :cry: Hey, at least I can say I worked inside Eli Bence's house. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Thanks for correcting me, my man!

mbhenty
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by mbhenty » Tue Mar 27, 2018 10:44 am

Yep:

Here's some eye candy. A redirection to my blunder above :roll: :oops:

This is the house where Bence was living back in 1893 before he moved to New Bedford. (Which begs the question whether he had to move due to his involvement in the Borden case.) It was a 3 to 4 four block walk to his place of employment on the corner of Columbia and South Main Street, which in turn was a little over a block from 92 Second.

It's on Whipple Street in Fall River. The house on the right is where Bence lived. (You don't have to quote me. I've been wrong before. :lol: :lol: :roll: :oops: ) Both these buildings were owned by the Catholic diocese back in the 1970s, along with two others in the backyard, one which is on Second Street. These two building were a home for wayward girls and nuns. It was a scary place to work, especially when one is in fear of nuns. I ran into Sister Angela here. She was one of my teachers back in grade school. We called her Flo. Not sure why. She didn't look any older than the last time I saw her 20+ years previously. Like I said, scary. I was in and out of these two buildings and have wired many of the rooms.

Interesting information but afraid it is of no help to Studentlearn. :roll:




.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

mbhenty
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by mbhenty » Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:39 pm

Ah, just looked inside my closet and came up with old memory about Sister Angela's real name. Sister Florencia, thus, Sister Flo. But not to her face, you understand. She was one tuff cookie. :!: :smile:

User avatar
studentlearn
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 9:30 pm
Real Name: Jon

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by studentlearn » Wed Mar 28, 2018 8:50 pm

Thank you for the replies! I have been enjoying researching more about the case. I'm actually a bit confused, though. Andrew and his family were very wealthy people. I've seen in many articles that Andrew was very frugal.. did the Borden family live in a small house on the bad side of the neighborhood then? I've read somewhere as well that Lizzie wanted to live at the area with Hills (?) (I may be mistaken.) Is anyone able to clarify this for me?

User avatar
NancyDrew
Posts: 408
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 8:33 am
Gender: Female
Real Name: Robin
Location: New England

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by NancyDrew » Fri Mar 30, 2018 7:09 am

Hello studentlearn:

Yes, Andrew Borden was a wealthy man, but very tight-fisted, and even that had some exceptions (which I'll address in a moment.) The house in which the family lived wasn't what I would consider the "bad side of the neighborhood," after all, Dr. Bowen lived right across the street. It was more the 'business district' and not the fashionable Hill area, where Lizzie moved after her acquittal.

He could have afforded many modern luxuries and chose NOT to: electricity, an indoor flush toilet, a bigger home, etc. He was a man who worked hard all his life and valued his money. He was a shrewd businessman who never squandered a dollar. EXCEPT. He did pay for Lizzie to take a grand tour of Europe, aboard a steamliner. I'm sure this was not in inexpensive trip. And also, neither of his daughters ever had to work; they both received allowances, had plenty of clothes, and imo, enjoyed a comfortable life. This is from a financial view, of course. There have been myriad speculations that the Borden household was an unhappy one emotionally.

Certainly there was resentment and tension between the girls and Abby, their step-mother. Five years prior to the murders, Lizzie stopped calling her "mother" and started calling her "Mrs. Borden."

You have a lot of great questions; a good start would be to read one of the many books written about Lizzie and the case. Each one poses a different perspective. Barring new evidence being uncovered, we will never really know what happened to Abby and Andrew, except that their lives were cut short in a brutal and horrendous manner. The most likely culprit was Lizzie. She and the maid were the only ones home at the time of the crimes, and Lizzie had Means, Motive & Opportunity. That last one, Opportunity, is where a lot of us hiccup, due to timing. Andrew was bludgeoned to death within 20 minutes of returning home, and Lizzie was seen by a number of people very soon after he got killed (blood was still dripping from him onto the carpet.) And yet, as others have mentioned, she had NO blood on her, save for a tiny spot on her petticoats.

It's the timing of the murders that confounds me with this case. I can see Lizzie whacking Abby. She had access, privacy, and time to clean up afterwards (she was seen by the maid and her father AFTER Abby was killed...even though Abby's body hadn't been discovered yet.) But her father's murder is the one that trips me up. A neighbor saw him trying to enter his home. The maid unlocked the front door for him. He went upstairs to his bedroom (again, not knowing his wife lay dead in another part of the house) then came back downstairs and laid down on a couch in the sitting room for a short nap before lunch (after all, he was 70 years old, had been puking his guts out the day before, and had just walked 2 miles in August; I'd want to lay down too. ) And yet-----20 minutes after he walked in the door, Lizzie is yelling for the maid that "someone has killed Father!"

How did she do it? Slice his face open with an ax, and have no blood, brain matter, or other disgusting gooey bits on any part of her?

It boggles the mind, and has been doing so for over a hundred years. My personal opinion is that she killed Abby herself, but got someone else to murder her father. But even THAT opinion changes occasionally.

Thanks for letting us chime in on your school project; good luck! (and stick around if you'd like...it's an interesting forum.)

mbhenty
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by mbhenty » Fri Mar 30, 2018 9:41 am

Yes Studentlearn:

The Borden house was built in 1845 by Charles Trafton when the city was beginning to grow. Second Street, along with other streets close to Main Street was the home for many of Fall River's finest... bankers, lawyers, doctors, etc. Homes were grand and neighborhoods very residential. By the time of the murders anyone who was doing well migrated to more distant communities. Second street had become more commercial with countless business up and down its byways.

Though there were still some grand old homes and families, the place was tired and overrun by traffic. Still the house was not a small place, and by today's standards, still a comfortable size. Folklore and those with the desire to sell books have spread the myth that 92 Second street was tiny or that you could hear a mouse in the next room. Not so. The building had plenty of room on three levels and was quiet and comfortable.

When the house was built the city had a population hovering around 9 thousand and growing quickly. By the time Borden purchased the place around 25 years later the city had grown to 27 thousand. And around the time of the murders it had almost tripled and bloating to 76 to 78 thousand. So you see, 9 thousand when the home was built and 76 thousand by the time of the murders. You can only imagine the changes the neighborhood shouldered.

Though the neighborhood reshaped itself the house Lizzie lived in remained the same, with very little change. A somewhat austere but relatively stately Greek Revival home. It was built as a 2 family. Writers refer to it as 'railroad flats'. Not so. The home was very common and the layout not very different from many homes in the city. (I have been inside and worked in thousands of houses in Fall River in my 30 years of employment. I should know better. Some of those who write books are only guessing or repeating the inaccuracies of other writers.) When Borden purchased the place he modified it somewhat, turning it into a single family home. Which meant he had to tear out the second floor kitchen. The kitchen became Borden's bedroom.

As you can see in the floor plan below of the first and second floors, 92 Second Street was a comfortable size, even for someone with money. What you see is 2300 square feet of living space. (not counting the third floor which would make it around 3400 square feet. By today's standards 92 is considered on the smaller side. The average house built last year was around 2600 square feet. The average house built in the seventies or eighties was around 1600 square feet. Considering that families are much smaller today you can only assume that people have gone mad.... or perhaps more affluent or foolish. But for a house in its time, or even today, 92 Second Street was a good size.

Also in the plans you can see that the first and second floors are almost mirror images of one another. The dining room behind the couch where Borden was killed use to be two small bedrooms, just like the second floor. Borden removed a wall and turned two rooms into one. Otherwise, you can see how both floors were meant to accommodate two families.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
studentlearn
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 9:30 pm
Real Name: Jon

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by studentlearn » Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:09 pm

I have some great news! We finished the case today and the jury reached a decision: that Lizzie Borden was guilty of the murders of her parents! I would have to say that they most likely reached this verdict because the defense team did not prepare/research the case enough for them to defend Lizzie well. They did state that there was a lot of circumstantial evidence presented from my part, which I would have to agree with. However, some mock witnesses messed up their testimony, especially Alice who said that she saw something 'red' on Lizzie's dress. Of course, this was false, but I didn't want to say anything (thank god the defense team didn't do enough research!) and finished questioning her. I presented the Prussic Acid, the blue dress, the bucket with bloody rags, how everything was usually locked, how Second Street was usually busy, and the hatchet with a broken handle as evidence. I also presented the maid, Churchhill, the crime scene investigators, the police, Hannah Gifford, the dressmaker, and Eli Bence as witnesses for the case. I really didn't understand the direction the defense went with, though. They presented Uriah Kirby on stand (played by someone who obviously didn't want to say the whole truth, allegedly not recalling about anyone with the name Charles N. Gifford :roll: ), followed by the STRANGER who Kirby saw the day before the murders. I guess they attempted to show that the stranger was suspicious, even adding that he was a client at Andrew's bank? It was really strange, but I'm glad I won. It wouldn't have won if it weren't for this forum and its educated members! I'm a newbie compared to you guys who've researched this case for years. It's really interesting, and it's sad to know that we may never know if Lizzie actually did it. Even if she did, how did she clean the blood off of her so fast? Maybe the 'menstruation' buckets played the roll here, but who knows. Thank you guys for informing me about Lizzie Borden and her case, it was really interesting to see all of your perspectives and the evidence that y'all found. I plan to stick around! :grin:

User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 473
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by InterestedReader » Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:59 am

How did you present Bridget Sullivan?

mbhenty
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by mbhenty » Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:04 am

Congratulation Mr. Knowlton.... I mean Mr. Studentlearn.

You may have a career awaiting you in the future.

I appreciate your honesty in admitting that the prosecution did not prepare as they should have. But then again, it could have been that you over/prepared and were ready for any contingency. You appear to be a very learned student of the Borden murders, thus, you should know that it's an uphill battle to win this case. Here in Fall River and bordering towns there have been countless mock trials of the Borden murders over the years and Lizzie is ALWAYS acquitted. So the fact that she was found guilty in your mock trial is a landmark decision.

Good job Counselor :!: :wink:

User avatar
snokkums
Posts: 2502
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 10:09 am
Gender: Female
Real Name: Robin
Location: fayetteville nc,but from milwaukee

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by snokkums » Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:14 am

Hello and welcome to the forum!! If I were to put her on the stand as her defense lawyer I would really grill her on her actions of the day. I say that because I would want to shoot down any avenue the prosecution would use against her. Yes, she burned her dress. The prosecution could say that it was her parents blood, but you could say it was paint (only if they were painting),or it was her time of the month. Shoot down everyone of their arguments. And this is a great site to find all your info!
Suicide is painless It brings on many changes and I will take my leave when I please.

VictorianFan89
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:59 pm
Real Name: John

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by VictorianFan89 » Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:13 pm

(I'm new here as well!)

Do I think she's guilty? Well, yes and no...and that's what makes this case so fascinating! Some say she did it, others say she didn't. It really just depends on what you believe.

Personally, I think there's just so many unanswered questions that we can't really say Lizzie was the one who delivered the killing blow. Did she want them dead? Most likely, but it doesn't necessarily mean she was the one who actually did it.

User avatar
studentlearn
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 9:30 pm
Real Name: Jon

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by studentlearn » Tue Apr 17, 2018 11:07 pm

Thank you for the kind words and various information you provided me with, mbhenty, I greatly appreciate it! As for the comment about how I presented Bridget Sullivan, I would have to say that we attempted to present her as a maid who had no intention of murdering the Borden parents. We discussed how she enjoyed her job, and was happy to be working for them (assumed, of course, since they did give her a room to sleep in.) We also discussed her whereabouts during the murders and her discussion with Lizzie (although the person playing the maid didn't quite research that part.) When Lizzie was placed on trial, I asked her various questions that were direct, so I received a LOT of objections from the defense team.

User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 3976
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: Is Lizzie Borden Guilty?

Post by twinsrwe » Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:12 pm

Congratulations, Studentlearn, and welcome to the forum! I am glad to see that you plan on sticking around the forum; I look forward to your input.

I don’t know if you have read, or heard of, Judge Blaisdell’s statement at the end of the Preliminary Hearing or not, but in case you haven’t, I think you will find it interesting. I think he made a very good point.

Leonard Rebello’s Lizzie Borden Past and Present; page 162 (Underlining and highlighting are mine):

The Court’s Judgment

Judge Josiah C. Blaisdell: "The long examination is now concluded, and there remains but for the magistrate to perform what he believes to be his duty. It would be a pleasure for him, and he would doubtless receive much sympathy if he could say, ‘Lizzie, I judge you probably not guilty. You may go home.' But upon the character of the evidence presented through the witnesses who have been so closely and thoroughly examined, there is but one thing to be done. Suppose for a single moment a man was standing there. He was found close by that guest chamber which, to Mrs. Borden, was a chamber of death. Suppose a man had been found in the vicinity of Mr. Borden, was the first to find the body, and the only account he could give of himself was the unreasonable one that he was out in the barn looking for sinkers, then he was out in the yard, then he was out for something else. Would there be any question in the minds of men what should be done with such a man? So there is only one thing to do, painful as it may be - the judgment of the Court is that you are probably guilty, and you are ordered committed to await the action of the Superior Court." (Porter, Edwin H., The Fall River Tragedy: History of the Borden Murders, 1893:139140).
"You can fool some of the people all the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all the people all of the time."~ Abraham Lincoln :grin:

Post Reply