Opinion rant - Context is key

[camgarsky4]

Lizzie and Emma inherited the equivalent of several $million dollars.
Lizzie and Bridget are the only undisputed persons on the Borden property from 9 to 11:15 a.m. on August 4.
Only one name is common to both statements.

If we KNEW of a legitimate motive for Bridget, she would be added to the list above. But we don't know of a motive for Bridget which would cause her to act out homicidally.

Possible motives offered up over the decades include John being pissed about a horse trade and/or a real estate deal not being consummated, Bridget mad about washing windows, a tenant upset over not having the opportunity to rent a storefront, a tenant irritated for being evicted, or of course, some lunatic roaming the streets of Fall River, randomly choosing the Borden home to act out their craziness and then go back into dormancy mode. When you consider any of these motives, they are just silly when compared to the crimes committed. Why these 'motives' are silly or based on nothing are discussed on many threads in this forum.

The only reason Lizzie was found 'not guilty' by the jury was due to the lack of blood on her person and the lack of a proven murder weapon on the Borden premises. This created legitimate doubt and her social/gender pedigree allowed for there to be no doubt to justify her being put to death (which would have been required if she was found guilty).

The circumstantial evidence pointing at Lizzie is extensive. One-off explanations can probably be concocted to explain away most any occurrence in the history of mankind. But when the case against Lizzie is evaluated in its entirety, only one conclusion is reasonable to consider. However, that is all cancelled out because there was no blood splatter and no definitive murder weapon.

Therefore, when current day folks study the case and identify how lack of blood evidence and murder weapons can be plausibly explained, it is a 'different animal' and serves a clear purpose even if only casting a shadow on the two reasons Lizzie was not found guilty.

[Lorcan]

I agree with everything Camgarsky said, except I am still very suspicious of that blood droplet on her underdress. I agree there are too many alternative explanations for how it got there to be useful in court, but given its size and location, it still makes me suspicious.

For Bridget, her testimony about the laughing near the top of the stairs and especially her denying knowing anything about the note other than being told by Lizzie, plus the suggestion to go to Mrs. Whitehead's house and her seemingly genuine fear of going up the front staircase all lead me to think Bridget was not a true conspirator. I am very open to the idea that she did not tell all she knew, especially all that she later saw within a new context after the murders.

I'm going to read the What if Lizzie succeeded in buying Prussic Acid thread.