Dr. Bowen vs. Dr. Dolan

[Kat]

Harry saved out this picture from the Boston Globe and I believe it was an illustration for Bowen's testimony at the Preliminary Hearing, by the date ascribed to it.

The court can't seem to illuminate the actual placement of Abby's arms when she first was found by an official (Bowen).
Dolan seems to contradict Bowen and they don't reconcile the position of the arms between the two testimonies.

Note the caption says Mr. Borden, but I checked for body position descriptions and I'm pretty sure it is Mrs. Borden they are illustrating.

I thought it was interesting that there is actually a drawing of testimony, when we would usually be frustrated by the statement made where the witness says something as an example and all we read is *The arms were like this.*




------
Dr. Bowen
Preliminary Hearing
Page 404

Q. Now I would like to have you describe the position of the hands and the body at that time, when you first saw it.
A. Mrs. Borden was lying on her face, squarely on her face, perfectly straight, so far as her legs were concerned, perfectly straight and square on her face, as near as I can remember. Her arms were folded or----
Q. Give an illustration with yours.
(Witness shows with his arms.)
Q. Pointing how, abreast, or below the line of the arm pits?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. One across the other?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Were they up like this, over the head?
A. No Sir.
Q. Are you positive about that?
A. I am positive of that.
Q. What did you do to the body at that time? Did you do anything at the first sight of it?
A. I placed my hand on the head, on the wounds of the head, and satisfied myself that she was dead.
Q. Did you disturb any of the limbs, or anything, did you move them at all?
A. No Sir, I do not think I did.
Q. Do you know how they got to be in this position where they to be subsequently?
A. No, I do not know.
Q. Have you any idea about it?
A. She must have been moved.
Q. You do not know who did it?
A. No Sir.
….
411
Q. What did you say the position of the arms was, I wanted to get that, Mrs. Borden's?
A. Very near that way, crossed this way. (showing.)
…
412
(Court) Doctor, let me understand. When you saw the body of Mrs. Borden, as I understand you, lying flat on the face, were her arms folded across the face?
A. They were.
(Court) Under her?

Page 413

A. Yes Sir, they were.
(Court) She was laying on her arms?
A. Yes Sir.
RE-CROSS..
Q. (Mr. Knowlton) How long a look did you take at the body at that time?
A. The first time up there, I do not suppose it was more than a minute or two.
Q. Were you taking particular notice of the position of things at that time?
A. No Sir I was not, except herself, except the body.
Q. You were not looking at it as a physician would look at an ordinary case?
A. No Sir. I was satisfying myself she was dead.
Q. You were then, if you will pardon me for saying so, quite excited?
A. I was.
Q. You were very excited?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. You looked at that thing, however, so to satisfy yourself she was dead?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. The position was only incidental?
A. It was incidental, for I saw it several times after that, and took several parties up.
Q. Who was up there, and saw it in the same position that you saw it?
A. I cannot tell.
Q. Tell me anybody that saw it as you have described it.
A. I dont know.
Q. You have seen the witnesses that testified on the stand who saw it; can you tell me any of them who saw it, so I could see whether their memory coincided with you.
A. I am not positive.
Q. When was the last time you saw the body in that position, with the arms under it?
A. After Dr. Dolan came we turned the body over on the back---
Q. When was the last time you saw her with her arms under her, instead of over her head?
A. Before she was moved by the direction of Medical Examiner Dolan.
Q. When Dr. Dolan first came, her arms were in the same position as when you first saw her?
A. So far as I know.
Q. So far as you remember?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. So when Dr. Dolan first came, the position he found her in was the position you first found her in?

Page 414
A. So far as I remember.
Q. So far as you remember now?
A. So far as I remember. I did not intend to have her disturbed until the medical Examiner was there. I intended to notify him as soon as I could.
Q. So far as you can remember the position in which Dr. Dolan found her, was the same position in which you found her?
A. So far as I know.
_______

[NOTE: Dolan testified Before Bowen- see page numbers- so Bowen was on *the hot seat*.]

[Saw bodies approx. 11:45 AM]
Dolan
Prelim
101
Q. As you saw it, without turning it over, what was the appearance of it?
A. You could not see any part of the face. The arms were thrown, as it were, prone around the face. All that was exposed was the right half of the back of the head.
Q. As the body lay there could you see any wounds?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. What wound could you see as the body lay there?
A. As the body lay there you could see, getting down closely, you could see there were a number of wounds, by close examination. Introducing your finger you found those wounds, at least seven or eight of them, went through the bone into the skull, that is into the brain.
Q. I wont trouble you any more with that part of the inquiry. What did you do then, did you turn the body over?

Page 102
A. Yes Sir, I turned the body up so to get to the light to count the wounds better.
….
116
Q. Then you could look across the bed, and see her lying there?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. She was lying with both hands under?
A. No Sir, more extended over the head, as it were, not over it, but around the head.
Q. This fashion, putting my hands in front of my face?
A. Yes but not resting on the arms; the head in a circle.
Q. In that fashion, with my hands being above the line of my face, and the hands being together?
A. I would not say they were together exactly.
Q. Approaching?
A. Yes Sir.

……
119

Q. This fairly must have been near twelve o'clock when you went up stairs, must it not?
A. Yes, it was.
Q. You know whether before you went there any person had disturbed or changed the position of the body, or any part of it?
A. It had not been changed.
Q. That is to say, you believe so?
A. I was told so by the one who saw it.
Q. Having said so much, although it is not competent, I will ask you who that was.
A. Dr. Bowen
Q. While Dr. Bowen was there with you, did you see him do anything to change the position of the body, or any part of it?
A. No Sir I did not.
Q. Did he, or you, or both of you, put your fingers or hands in these wounds, or any of them?
A. Yes Sir. I raised her up, with his assistance.
Q. Did you, either or both of you, put your hands or fingers into these wounds, or any of them?
A. I put my hands in; I do not know whether he did or not.
…….

139
Q. Then you are not sure but then you went up stairs, and took your view of Mrs. Borden; is that right?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. That was about quarter to one, was it not?
A. If it was as late as that when the search got through, I must have examined Mrs. Borden before we went on the search; I told you I was not positive.
Q. Did you not tell me you went up and just looked at her, and then went down stairs, and all these things occurred?
A. I told you I did not know positively whether I made the view of Mrs. Borden, that is the second, to examine her wounds, before or after the search.
Q. Who went with you when you took the second view of Mrs. Borden, and examined her wounds?
A. Dr. Hardy, and Dr. Tourtelott, and I think Dr. Bowen.
Q. At that time did any one of the physicians disturb the position of the body?
A. I disturbed it.

Page 140

Q. Did anybodyelse?
A. Simply in assisting me, I think.
Q. Not before you touched the body?
A. No Sir.
……
141
Q. I wonder if you could not help me a little by that. (Producing a small doll) I have not attempted to make any travesty; it seems to me this manikin is less shocking---
(Court.) There ought to be none.
Q. If I understand you, in the first place these arms were up so, in a crude way, lying down in that position?
A. Yes Sir.
…..
186
Q. When you lifted Mrs. Borden, did you not change the position of the arms?

Page 187

A. The arms fell down by the side when she was lifted up, yes sir.
Q. In other words, when the photograph was taken, you put her back again as nearly as you could in the position in which you saw her; is that right?
A. Yes Sir.
….
196
Q. No. 5, which is the picture of Mr. Borden, was that as it was when the body was found by you, in every particular?
A. Yes Sir.

[There doesn't seem to be a problem with the arm placement of Andrew].

[DWilly]

I think it's possible that Dr. Bowen may have been a little in shock. Thus, he may not really remember what he saw. When I look at that picture those arms just don't look natural for someone who fell face first to the floor. The arms look the way someone does when they're laying on their back and have either put their arms that way or someone else did. Didn't Bowen first think that Abby had died of a heart attack even though she was clearly covered in blood? How rational was he after he found the bodies?

[RayS]

Compared to today's world, there is NO GUARANTEE that the pictures were taken right after the murders. It is possible that the arms of Mr. Borden were arranged. OR, the unaided memory of a witness is wrong.

Judge Dewey mentioned the unreliability of a sole eye witness when there is no corroborating evidence. Could the effect of rigor mortis have affected the posture of the arms? (I don't know.)

Some have suggested that the body of Abby was arranged also.

In the Marilyn Sheppard murder, the prosecution argued for Dr. Sam's guilt BECAUSE the top pajamas were arranged over the pubic region. Yet it is likely that the rearrangement was done by the photographer.
(Read James Neff's book for the details).

[RayS]

In any case, this question if basically meaningless as to solving the crime. So many had access that any evidence would be questioned today.

It is one reason why these topics will turn away all but the True Believers.
(You are free to disagree.)

[Susan]

Thats a great find, Harry and Kat, to see one of the points of the trial illustrated like that. After reading through the testimony and the illustration, I do believe it is correct that Bowen is illustrating how Andrew's hands were placed when found.



The reason I think so is this bit of testimony about Abby's hands and arms:

411
Q. What did you say the position of the arms was, I wanted to get that, Mrs. Borden's?
A. Very near that way, crossed this way. (showing.)
…
412
(Court) Doctor, let me understand. When you saw the body of Mrs. Borden, as I understand you, lying flat on the face, were her arms folded across the face?
A. They were.
(Court) Under her?

Page 413

A. Yes Sir, they were.
(Court) She was laying on her arms?
A. Yes Sir.

It sounds to me like Bowen found her arms up towards Abby's head with the forearms folded under her with her hands under her face?

[Allen]

Good research Kat and Susan. I think I agree with Susan so far based on reading the testimony provided by both Susan and Kat. I think the pictures Susan posted to illustrate were a good visual reference. I think I remember Bowen stating that Andrew's body seemed to have 'settled' somewhat before the pictures were taken? Could his hands have slid downward somewhat from their original position by the time the pictures were taken? I'm going to go back and read the testimony to make sure I'm remembering it correctly.

[Kat]

It's a good question and I don't know the answer.
I noticed that Bowen was more quizzed specifically as to Abby's position after hearing from Dolan as a witness. That info from Bowen made the questioner sound almost incredulous, because he had the benefit of Dolan's description first.

As for Andrew, there was the photo to go by (and yes, one of Abby too), and the questions were more geared toward Andrew's settling down into the angle of the arm of the couch- his arm placement was not emphasized. Admittedly, if Bowen took Andrew's pulse, his arms very well might end up this way as in the photo. But I don't think Andrew's arm position was much in question- whereas Abby's certainly were.

More discussion is needed I agree.

It sounds like Bowen is contradicting himself in that 1 little answer, given as an example, whereas in his more descriptive answers he says Abby was on her arms- looks to be just under her bust, which is the position we see in the photo.
Maybe Bowen is recalling the photo- and not what he actually saw?
I didn't check the trial, because the date of the picture (which was removed from its context) seems to indicate the Preliminary Hearing. So if there is more Trial info to support the theory that Bowen is describing Andrew, that would be interesting to find out.

[Kat]

I'm wondering if Dolan had it wrong?
Wouldn't Abby's elbow be soaked in blood to the extent we could see it, if her arms had been up in a ring around her head? And wouldn't she have had possibly *missed blows* to her hands or arms if they had ended up up there?

Still, assuming Bowen is talking about Abby here- what if he was correct, and Dolan was in error?

[sguthmann]

i'm almost more inclined to think abby appeared more to bowen's description, at least in this instance. rigor mortis would not produce muscle shortening to the effect that arms thrown about the head would shorten and become "curled" inward under the bust. also, from the testimony abby's arms fell to her sides when they lifted up the body from the floor. this goes to show that rigor mortis hadn't yet set in. this is to be expected given the estimated time of death (and serves a confirmation of that estimate as well!)

then there's the blood pool. if her arms had originally been laying the pool, you might expect to be able to see some outline of the arms in the way the blood flowed and pooled around them, as the arms wer making contact with the floor, and as the material from abby's sleeves soaked up blood. i don't see this effect in the resulting pool that appears in the picture.

i think the newspaper illustration was correct in that bowen was demonstrating andrew's arm positions. i don't think it was a typo. he was showing the placement of AJB's hands when he found the body.

i also think it is just as probable, if not more so, that abby fell with her arms under her bust/upper chest/shoulder area. if one is pushed (or hit) forcefully from behind, it would be natural to raise the arms out in front to catch oneself - but think of the placement: are you going to raise your arms up to your head, or are you more likely to have them ready to support your fall at the upper chest level? for me, getting an forceful shove from behind would send my hands mid to upper chest level once i made contact with the ground. i think that's how abby landed and likely never made much if any movement after that as blow upon blow fell upon her.

[theebmonique]

Much of what Scott says above rings true with me. I think that if the picture were of a higher quality, we would be able to see more blood detail such as smearing from the arms being moved.

I am not aware that there is an extreme amount of muscle shortening with rigor mortis other than the regulr muscle contraction which is what you mean Scott, correct ? Some of you may already know that the 'stiffening' is only temporary.

http://www.deathonline.net/decompositio ... mortis.htm

http://chemistry.about.com/cs/biochemis ... 61903a.htm

http://folk.uio.no/mostarke/forens_ent/afterdeath.shtml


Tracy...

[Kat]

I'm tending to agree somewhat with you all, but the problem is that the drawing gives a "Quote."
But in the preliminary hearing, Bowen is not asked about Andrew's arm position therefore he would not likely to be drawn giving a quote. That's what I am stumbling over. Does that make sense?
(I have to keep scrolling back to the testimony I posted).

This:
Her arms were folded or----
Q. Give an illustration with yours.
(Witness shows with his arms.)

and/or this:

411
Q. What did you say the position of the arms was, I wanted to get that, Mrs. Borden's?
A. Very near that way, crossed this way. (showing.)

This last looks like the quote.
Those with the Prelim might find something comparable in the description of Bowen finding Andrew?

[theebmonique]

It does make sense. Could it be just a misprint or typo ?


Tracy...

[sguthmann]

anyone know where i can get a copy of the preliminary hearing? wish i had it.

[theebmonique]

From Stef:

Case documents for free:
http://lizzieandrewborden.com/Resources ... uments.htm

Case documents for a small cost:
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Borde ... cripts.htm


Tracy...

[Kat]

We love love love the preliminary hearing.
It is my favorite document on the whole case.
Some of us have read it 5 times.
The rules of evidence are more relaxed and the *beyond a reasonable doubt* stricture is relaxed- it's a more *intimate* trial, and the first time we hear Bridget.

[sguthmann]

thanks for the resources re: the prelim. yes, i simply must get a copy soon!

[Susan]

I'm tending to agree somewhat with you all, but the problem is that the drawing gives a "Quote."
But in the preliminary hearing, Bowen is not asked about Andrew's arm position therefore he would not likely to be drawn giving a quote. That's what I am stumbling over. Does that make sense?
(I have to keep scrolling back to the testimony I posted).

I looked through the trial testimony just to be sure, there is only a reference to one of Andrew's hands when his pulse was taken. It is indeed an oddity. I would assume the artist was there to sketch out Dr. Bowen before making the illustration, so, he had to have struck the pose at some point. And I assume the crime scene photos weren't accessible by anyone other than the police, lawyers and jurors? So, the artist must have seen this particular pose by Bowen at some point. Perhaps it was something more along the lines when they were asking Dr. Bowen how the crime scene photo of Andrew differed from how he was originally found and Bowen illustrated the pose as he explained?

[Kat]

I'm beginning to think it is a misprint in the paper- not unheard of- and it is Mrs. Borden to whom he refers and that it's possible that Bowen was right and not Dolan, which is a big deal to me because I was prone to believe Dolan always over Bowen, but now I'm not so sure. That's a big deal to me...
The posture of Abby when found was so much more important in the prelim questioning than the placement of Andrew's arms, and I think the importance is on a lot of levels:
Veracity of the witnesses
The possible sequence of attack on Abby
The way she fell can determine how the attack occured

But then again, if she was staged before Bowen saw her, the question is moot.

Somehow I thought maybe the doctors would be privy to the photos? Do you think not?

[Susan]

Oh, yes, Kat, I believe the doctors would be privy to the crime scene photos too having already viewed the real deal. My point was about the newspaper sketch artists that were present, would they have had access to them? I wouldn't think so, so they had to have seen Bowen pull that pose to draw from it. Granted, both doctors have a different idea of exactly how Abby's arms and hands were placed, but, they both place them in or about her head, not her waist. If Abby had been found with her hands under her waist like that, I would believe she was already dead when she hit the floor, no reaction to stop herself from the fall. Or, the killer had dragged or posed the body.

[Kat]

But Bowen didn't place them around her head- the questioner did- Bowen only slipped that weird acceptance in that one question which was highlighted, but not anywhere else in his prelim description.
It wasn't him speaking either, it was a question asked of him to which he merely agreed.

I guess I will get out the article PDF itself and read the whole thing. I didn't think of that until today.*
I will check the Evening Standard as well.

*(I dislike reading news coverage of testimony).

[Kat]

I checked the Did She /Didn't She? book, but the page with Bowen is missing. They did not include it in the edition. It's August 31, 1892, page 7. There's an *abbreviated* illustration of Bowen, though, page 1.

The PDF of the Boston Globe is taking longer. I've had lot's of phone calls tonight so I have not got too far into checking out the Globe.

[Kat]

I guess this is sort of answering my own question. I had to check the Boston Globe dated Aug. 31, 1892.
It's a huge article with testimony which is replicated, and not exact. I looked for Bowen's comments.
Here is All of Dr. Bowen, which I photographed on my desktop and cut out to put here.
I think the bottom line is that Bowen was only *shown* (illustrated) to be questioned about Abby's position in this news account. So I think the picture was mis-labeled.
This excerpt is all of Bowen published that date: 7th page col.'s 3 and 4.

It will be presented in 4 installments.

[Kat]

part 2

[Kat]

page 3

[Kat]

part 4 final

I guess I had to do this in order to answer my question. I never thought to go to the PDF until recently. Sorry. It was hard.

[Kat]

I certainly don't recall an exchange such as this between Knowlton and Adams in the Prelim. How strange. The reporter caught it but not the stenographer? Hmmm...