How hard did the police look for another suspect?

[snokkums]

I have been thinking about this. I was thinking about just how hard did the police look for suspects? Did they just zero in on Lizzie? I mean, if Andrew had all these enemies, there would have been a pool of people would might want him dead. He was known to be well respected, but not well like, a tight wad, and not having a real good personality. So, why didn't look harder for other people. Or did they and everything pointed back to Lizzie.

[RayS]

I have been thinking about this. I was thinking about just how hard did the police look for suspects? Did they just zero in on Lizzie? I mean, if Andrew had all these enemies, there would have been a pool of people would might want him dead. He was known to be well respected, but not well like, a tight wad, and not having a real good personality. So, why didn't look harder for other people. Or did they and everything pointed back to Lizzie.

They did indeed look for other suspects. Joseph Carpenter (Albany NY), and Walter Brayton (FR). They had alibis. Other unnamed suspects as well. When all other leads petered out, then they choose Lizzie.
She did inherently admit she knew more that she said. "It wasn't Bridget or anyone who worked for Father ...".

[shakiboo]

When she said that isn't it possible she was just voicing her opinion that it couldn't possibly be any of the people that she had known and cared for, for most of her life, and not stating a fact that she knew the person who did do it? I can see her defending those people from a possible finger pointing in their direction.

[RayS]

When she said that isn't it possible she was just voicing her opinion that it couldn't possibly be any of the people that she had known and cared for, for most of her life, and not stating a fact that she knew the person who did do it? I can see her defending those people from a possible finger pointing in their direction.

You may be right in your interpretation. I wasn't there with a video camera, but the way that sentence read suggests she knew!
If she said she had no idea who could have done it, that would be different from making a positive statement.

[shakiboo]

If it was said like that, it makes you wonder why they didn't grab on it then, and make her clarify what she was saying, the person asking the question either didn't hear it that way or they really were missing alot of things. and as hard as they were trying to make her look quilty I can't believe they would have missed that.

[RayS]

If it was said like that, it makes you wonder why they didn't grab on it then, and make her clarify what she was saying, the person asking the question either didn't hear it that way or they really were missing alot of things. and as hard as they were trying to make her look quilty I can't believe they would have missed that.

Because of the lack of guilt and bloodstains etc.
She may have said it as a matter of fact, or pleading for them to not investigate Bridget and Andy's workers. The police did this anyway, they checked out everybody's alibi. SOP.

[snokkums]

I think the police just zeroed in on Lizzie because she had motive and she was the only one with motive that was in the house. The maid, Bridget, wouldn't want to kill the cash cow. After all, she'd be out of a job. And Emma was else where.

[doug65oh]

Means, motive, and opportunity. Three strikes and...

[RayS]

Means, motive, and opportunity. Three strikes and...

Once you make up your mind that Lizzie dunnit then you can pick the facts to prove your point. What about the leftover facts that don't fit?

[shakiboo]

she either had the mother lode of luck on her side that day, killed two people and got away with it or she's got the worst luck possible, and someone else did it and she just bumble through the day pointing all signs at herself. Even if she paid someone else to do it, you'd think she'd have been smart enough to go shopping instead of going to the bahn, for heavens sake. I'd want as far away as humanly possible! Then all Bridget could have said was " Lizzie left right after her father got home" along with everyone else who'd have seen her. But then this would probably be the "Bridget Sullivan Forum! lol

[snokkums]

makes you wander why didn't LIzzie say Bridget did it.

[shakiboo]

That;s a good question, if Lizzie had no qualms about taking the lives of her father and stepmother why would she draw the line at the maid (in all respects) losing her life? But then again, there would be Bridget in Lizzies shoes, no blood on her, no bloody clothes found, no murder weapon and not really much of a motive, she'd have probably been aquitted too, if she'd have gone to trail......and I would imagine Lizzie footing the bill for her lawyer, not believing ( knowing) for a second that Bridget did it all's well that ends well and Lizzie could have possibly gotten her chance at the social club.

[shakiboo]

Of course the above is based on Lizzies paying someone else to do it.....had it just been an out of the blue stranger, the only reason I can see for sparing Lizzie and Bridget, is they were younger and would possibly have been more of a fight then an old women and an old man were. And I'm sure screaming bloody murder would have happend. It might not have gone quite so well for him. Has anyone tried to avoid being seen by soneone in the house, just to see if it was possible to be in the house with someone else and not know it? Shelley?

[Angel]

It just occurred to me that it really doesn't make sense in the scheme of things that Lizzie would have hired someone to do the crime. Just a day or so before the murders she was out and about looking for ways to get poison. If she had hired someone she wouldn't be doing that. Or, if she decided she couldn't succeed doing it herself she couldn't have gone out and found someone to hire that quickly. It would have taken some time to covertly find someone and make the arrangements. If she had made the arrangements, then she wouldn't be looking around for poison. Just doesn't compute.

[DWilly]

It just occurred to me that it really doesn't make sense in the scheme of things that Lizzie would have hired someone to do the crime. Just a day or so before the murders she was out and about looking for ways to get poison. If she had hired someone she wouldn't be doing that. Or, if she decided she couldn't succeed doing it herself she couldn't have gone out and found someone to hire that quickly. It would have taken some time to covertly find someone and make the arrangements. If she had made the arrangements, then she wouldn't be looking around for poison. Just doesn't compute.

The biggest problem I have with the theory that Lizzie may have hired someone to murder Andrew and Abby is that I doubt she would have known anyone to ask. Lizzie did not make it a habit to hang out with the low lifes of Fall River. You would have to find just the right person to ask to do a murder for hire. Where would Lizzie have found this person? I cannot see her just walking into a tavern or approaching a bunch of thugs out on the street. Even if she saw some worker type of guy she would have had no way of knowing that he was the type to do a murder for hire. She could not have very well just walked up to someone and said, " If I pay you would you kill my Father?" What if she asked the wrong guy and he told the police?

[Angel]

I totally agree. She wouldn't have known where to even start looking for someone like that.

[Shelley]

Yes, it is possible to be in the house without being seen. The trick is to be very careful about the opening and closing of doors. The floors were carpeted which helps footstep noise a lot. The parlor door was closed as was the kitchen door that goes into the sitting room. It is the entering which is tricky. Coming in that side door by the back stairs, you are in high risk of someone coming downstairs, coming up from the cellar, being in the kitchen, or if you make it to the kitchen, bumping into someone coming from the sitting room or diningroom. Once past all that however, a stealthy treading can get you into the parlor and hidden away where you can keep tabs on the front stairs, wait for your chance and sneak up the front steps. It takes some effort, timing and luck, but can be done.

[RayS]

It just occurred to me that it really doesn't make sense in the scheme of things that Lizzie would have hired someone to do the crime. Just a day or so before the murders she was out and about looking for ways to get poison. If she had hired someone she wouldn't be doing that. Or, if she decided she couldn't succeed doing it herself she couldn't have gone out and found someone to hire that quickly. It would have taken some time to covertly find someone and make the arrangements. If she had made the arrangements, then she wouldn't be looking around for poison. Just doesn't compute.

So very true! It is much better to use the facts (known and unknown) instead of deciding Lizzie dunnit and selecting only the facts that support this a priori conclusion. IMO

[RayS]

I totally agree. She wouldn't have known where to even start looking for someone like that.

Newspaper reports tell of people who go to a bar to hire a killer. The bartender, for obvious reasons?, tells they will put them in contact with somebody. This evil looking guy turns out to be a police detective wearing a wire. Its not just in a TV drama!

Those who have "family connections" know the right people to ask. But there is always a price tag that is more than you reckoned on.

[Kat]

I've been away, so please excuse my bringing this back up and to everyone's attention-- but ray, shame on you (as you would say)! I can't believe you *got away with this!* : : :

"They did indeed look for other suspects. Joseph Carpenter (Albany NY), and Walter Brayton (FR). They had alibis. Other unnamed suspects as well. When all other leads petered out, then they choose Lizzie.
She did inherently admit she knew more that she said. 'It wasn't Bridget or anyone who worked for Father ...'.
.....

You may be right in your interpretation. I wasn't there with a video camera, but the way that sentence read suggests she knew!
If she said she had no idea who could have done it, that would be different from making a positive statement
.......
Once you make up your mind that Lizzie dunnit then you can pick the facts to prove your point. What about the leftover facts that don't fit?
__

You actually invented a sentence and then stated that because of the way it reads, it "suggests she knew." And then you seemed to chide Doug-Oh with the innane opinion that he had already made up his mind.

We have a whole topic where we tried to find your mythical mantra and have yet to do so. So it's not fair to call out people on it! Tsk tsk.
I suggest you forget that line until you can source it in the form you always render it!

[Kat]

Or maybe they all have you on *Ignore* and didn't notice?

[Angel]

Or maybe they all have you on *Ignore* and didn't notice?

So true, so true. The ignore button---a wonderful invention. So peaceful.

[RayS]

I've been away, so please excuse my bringing this back up and to everyone's attention-- but ray, shame on you (as you would say)! I can't believe you *got away with this!* : : :

"They did indeed look for other suspects. Joseph Carpenter (Albany NY), and Walter Brayton (FR). They had alibis. Other unnamed suspects as well. When all other leads petered out, then they choose Lizzie.
She did inherently admit she knew more that she said. 'It wasn't Bridget or anyone who worked for Father ...'.
.....

You may be right in your interpretation. I wasn't there with a video camera, but the way that sentence read suggests she knew!
If she said she had no idea who could have done it, that would be different from making a positive statement
.......
Once you make up your mind that Lizzie dunnit then you can pick the facts to prove your point. What about the leftover facts that don't fit?
__

You actually invented a sentence and then stated that because of the way it reads, it "suggests she knew." And then you seemed to chide Doug-Oh with the innane opinion that he had already made up his mind.

We have a whole topic where we tried to find your mythical mantra and have yet to do so. So it's not fair to call out people on it! Tsk tsk.
I suggest you forget that line until you can source it in the form you always render it!

Any topic here doesn't amount to "a hill of beans" compared to any published book that is in a public library. Any! There is a hurdle in time and money to publish a book, and another test in getting it bought by a public library. As I remember it, these books repeat that quote of Lizzie: "it wasn't Bridget or anyone who worked for Father ..."
Surely you are not going to say I invented it?
I've said how I interpreted it; and so did the police. But they checked out everyone's alibi anyway, as they should.
I'm sure its in Brown's book, and probably David Kent's one best book. Does anyone else question this quote? I think I first read it in Pearson't book published circa 1964.
PS So how would you interpret that?

[RayS]

Or maybe they all have you on *Ignore* and didn't notice?

Does this add anything to the discussion?

[Smudgeman]

Don't you get it? Everyone is ignoring you. I can't imagine why?

[theebmonique]

Ignoring who ? (Goddess bless the ignore button)





Tracy...

[Shelley]

I wish there was one on my television set lately with all the political advertisements! Or if we all had one on our dashboards, there would be no more road rage. Ah, harmony and bliss for millions. As Martha Stewart says, "It's a good thing".

[Kat]

Well, I promised I would *read ray* so no one else would have to.
I'm just doing what I promised.
I am actually appalled at what he gets away with! I shouldn't have been gone so long...sorry.

[Shelley]

Just off the top of my head, I seem to remember the police checking on these suspicious types
:
1. Dr. Handy's Wild-eyed man who turned out to be Mike the Soldier.
2. A Portuguese man who had drawn out his savings from the bank.
3. A man who was overheard muttering in the woods about the murders.
4. A man who tried to hire a carriage to drive him fast to another city, but the wife of the carriage driver had a bad feeling and forbade her husband to take the money.

I am sure there are more-? We could make a longer list maybe.

[Allen]

Yes, it is possible to be in the house without being seen. The trick is to be very careful about the opening and closing of doors. The floors were carpeted which helps footstep noise a lot. The parlor door was closed as was the kitchen door that goes into the sitting room. It is the entering which is tricky. Coming in that side door by the back stairs, you are in high risk of someone coming downstairs, coming up from the cellar, being in the kitchen, or if you make it to the kitchen, bumping into someone coming from the sitting room or diningroom. Once past all that however, a stealthy treading can get you into the parlor and hidden away where you can keep tabs on the front stairs, wait for your chance and sneak up the front steps. It takes some effort, timing and luck, but can be done.

The person would also have to possess a key to the parlor door as it was kept locked like most of the other doors in the house. I at first thought of the parlor as a hide out. But once I realized the door was kept locked that ruled out an intruder for me. Or, if there was an intruder in there, it was someone Lizzie let in with the key.

[Angel]

[quote="Kat @ Wed Oct 25, 2006 5:43 am"]Well, I promised I would *read ray* so no one else would have to.
I'm just doing what I promised.
/quote]

Why on earth would you promise something like that? And to whom? What's the point? What possible positive thing would that accomplish? No one feels like he is missing anything by hearing the same old record, and no one expects to hear anything new or constructively contributory. I'm sure you have better things to do with your time.

[Shelley]

Oh! I just learned something new- the parlor was kept locked? There are two parlor doors, the one from the sitting room and the one from the front hall. Wow! Okay- now it makes it tougher than ever. I also forgot that someone also could have popped out of the sink room or pantry as the Intruder tried to slip in -as well as the diningroom, kitchen, basement or someone coming down the back stairs. The side door was the one door which was the most vulnerable to anyone trying to sneak in. The ideal door would have been the backyard basement door, but Bridget swears that one was locked. The front door would have been in full view of the street, and also had that triple lock situation.

[shakiboo]

What if she was too scared to tell the truth and she forgot (just that one time) because she had been sick to lock it? The parlor door was kept locked too??? That was one strange family!

[RayS]

Yes, it is possible to be in the house without being seen. The trick is to be very careful about the opening and closing of doors. The floors were carpeted which helps footstep noise a lot. The parlor door was closed as was the kitchen door that goes into the sitting room. It is the entering which is tricky. Coming in that side door by the back stairs, you are in high risk of someone coming downstairs, coming up from the cellar, being in the kitchen, or if you make it to the kitchen, bumping into someone coming from the sitting room or diningroom. Once past all that however, a stealthy treading can get you into the parlor and hidden away where you can keep tabs on the front stairs, wait for your chance and sneak up the front steps. It takes some effort, timing and luck, but can be done.

The person would also have to possess a key to the parlor door as it was kept locked like most of the other doors in the house. I at first thought of the parlor as a hide out. But once I realized the door was kept locked that ruled out an intruder for me. Or, if there was an intruder in there, it was someone Lizzie let in with the key.

These difficulties go away if that person was admitted to the house for personal business, and was familiar with it.
Do we know how familiar Wm S. Borden could have been with this house?
Did they tend to build houses on a local pattern, sort of like tract houses in the 1950s?

[RayS]

Well, I promised I would *read ray* so no one else would have to.
I'm just doing what I promised.

Why on earth would you promise something like that? And to whom? What's the point? What possible positive thing would that accomplish? No one feels like he is missing anything by hearing the same old record, and no one expects to hear anything new or constructively contributory. I'm sure you have better things to do with your time.

"Angel" is right in what she says, but she keeps on posting the same stuff over and over, again and again in objecting to my comments.

My conclusion hasn't changed, because it is based on the Truth that Works.

[Kat]

Just off the top of my head, I seem to remember the police checking on these suspicious types
:
1. Dr. Handy's Wild-eyed man who turned out to be Mike the Soldier.
2. A Portuguese man who had drawn out his savings from the bank.
3. A man who was overheard muttering in the woods about the murders.
4. A man who tried to hire a carriage to drive him fast to another city, but the wife of the carriage driver had a bad feeling and forbade her husband to take the money.

I am sure there are more-? We could make a longer list maybe.

We have a "Suspect List" at the website, with sources:
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Crime ... tsList.htm

[Kat]

"Well, I promised I would *read ray* so no one else would have to.
I'm just doing what I promised."--Kat

--Why on earth would you promise something like that? And to whom? What's the point? What possible positive thing would that accomplish? No one feels like he is missing anything by hearing the same old record, and no one expects to hear anything new or constructively contributory. I'm sure you have better things to do with your time.

--Angel

I read everyone anyway. Every word. So those who have instituted their *Ignore* button, and who want to peek every now and then, don't have to. I've told them so. It might lower their blood pressure. I like to think that promise is keeping members healthy and content!

[Smudgeman]

Well, I for one, have instituted my ignore button. He has blinders on when it comes to this case, and I find him obnoxious, insulting, and boorish. I am happy we have the option of an ignore button, otherwise I probably would not continue to frequent this forum.

[RayS]

Well, I for one, have instituted my ignore button. He has blinders on when it comes to this case, and I find him obnoxious, insulting, and boorish. I am happy we have the option of an ignore button, otherwise I probably would not continue to frequent this forum.

Truth and Beauty are in the mind of the beholder.
I hope you will be able to contribute to this forum, somehow, someway in the future.

[Smudgeman]

I would rather converse with "Audrey", at least he/she had a personality.

[theebmonique]

Me too, Scott. Me too.





Tracy...

[RayS]

I would rather converse with "Au**ey", at least he/she had a personality.

If "Au**ey" is using another identity, you may be doing it already!

[Curryong]

I thought I would put this early thread up again as it has some salient points/discussions on other suspects, the key to the parlour door, (irina, you might be interested) and other bits and bobs. Please ignore the bit of infighting that was going on at the time about a former member who was obsessed with one suspect and one book he'd read and was obviously a source of tension. However, I think the thread is interesting!

[Franz]

When she said that isn't it possible she was just voicing her opinion that it couldn't possibly be any of the people that she had known and cared for, for most of her life, and not stating a fact that she knew the person who did do it? I can see her defending those people from a possible finger pointing in their direction.

You may be right in your interpretation. I wasn't there with a video camera, but the way that sentence read suggests she knew!
If she said she had no idea who could have done it, that would be different from making a positive statement.

I agree with shakiboo's interpretation, because, if Lizzie herself murdered Abby and Andrew, it would be very difficult for me to imagine that Lizzie might have said, in a very affirmative tone, that Bridget didn't do it, anyone of those who work for father didn't do it. The killer Lizzie would or keep silent, or put finger to someone. But she didn't.

[Franz]

she either had the mother lode of luck on her side that day, killed two people and got away with it or she's got the worst luck possible, and someone else did it and she just bumble through the day pointing all signs at herself. Even if she paid someone else to do it, you'd think she'd have been smart enough to go shopping instead of going to the bahn, for heavens sake. I'd want as far away as humanly possible! Then all Bridget could have said was " Lizzie left right after her father got home" along with everyone else who'd have seen her. But then this would probably be the "Bridget Sullivan Forum! lol

Well said!

[Franz]

The biggest problem I have with the theory that Lizzie may have hired someone to murder Andrew and Abby is that I doubt she would have known anyone to ask. Lizzie did not make it a habit to hang out with the low lifes of Fall River. You would have to find just the right person to ask to do a murder for hire. Where would Lizzie have found this person? I cannot see her just walking into a tavern or approaching a bunch of thugs out on the street. Even if she saw some worker type of guy she would have had no way of knowing that he was the type to do a murder for hire. She could not have very well just walked up to someone and said, " If I pay you would you kill my Father?" What if she asked the wrong guy and he told the police?

As Angel, me too I totally agree.

[Curryong]

If you look at the witness statements the first days after the murders were full of activity for the police on the ground. They were interviewing people left, right and centre as well as searching for clues. Dr Handy was reluctantly dragged down to the police station several times to look at various men who may or may not have been the 'pale-faced' individual he had seen on Second St before the murders. I believe the more senior police did concentrate on Lizzie being the guilty party quite early because of motive, opportunity etc., which you all know.

However, there was a piece in a local newspaper of the time that I posted some time ago that I found interesting. This stated that Emma and Lizzie (in a hired trap from Hall's livery stables I suppose) had been regular visitors before the murders to their uncle John. He was of course staying with the Davis's at their cottage near Dartmouth. I believe, whether deliberately or not, Morse was letting them have pieces of information about what Andrew intended to do with his property.

However, if you look at it in another way, there were probably rough characters (some of them itinerants) who could have worked in the Davis's slaughterhouse. Lizzie, in theory, could have made the acquaintance of one or two of them. Lizzie was a very reserved, ladylike woman, (as was Emma) and I can't see it myself, but it could have occurred. That is if the newspaper article is accurate, of course. And is it, is a big question!

[debbiediablo]

If Lizzie indeed killed Abby and Andrew, there was a hidden side to her that was definitely not reserved and ladylike!

[Curryong]

Hey, Lizzie let her guard down a couple of times! Happens to the best of us! 'Smile'.

[debbiediablo]

Yep.