Something to think about

[snokkums]

It's curious to say the least, that the front door was triple locked on the morning of August 4. Bridget testified that, as far as she knew, Andrew Borden had never been locked out of the house befor. District Attorney Knowlton, in his losing argument, suggested that Lizzie locked the door to ensure privacy while she chopped up her stepmother. Governor Robinson, on the other hand, thought it was the the "mysterious intruder" who triple locked the front door after he entered the house. To put it mildly, that doesn't make a great deal of sense.

All this is interesting but beasically irrelievant, since the kitchen door was open most of the time after 9:30. In principle at least, an intruder could have entered through that door, committed the murders, and left the same way.

Notice that the intruder could have entered the house during either of two time periods. Assuming at the time between the murders, he would have had to come in between 9:30 and 10:30 A.M. while Bridget was washing windows outside and Lizzie was engaged in vaious activities within the house. To do that undetected would have been difficult. If, on the other hand, you agree with Melvin Adams that there was no time lapse, the intruder's task would have been much simpler. He could enter shortly before 11 am wile Lizzie was in the barn loft and Briget was napping in her room. After committin both murder in rapid succession, he coiuld then leave though the same door he entered.
From the book Lizzie didn't do it

Any thougts on this scenrio: the intruder entering while lizzzie and bridget were busy. Maybe abby wasn't killed two hours before andrew.

[sguthmann]

Sorry, but the physical evidence doesn't lie - Abby died a while before Andrew. The blood evidence and details of the autopsy make this clear.

But the locked front door (and all its implications)...now there's a detail that isn't so cut-and-dried (no pun intended), and it's something that I've been thinking on for some time now. Still not sure what to make of it?

[sguthmann]

Sorry, but the physical evidence doesn't lie - Abby died a while before Andrew. The blood evidence and details of the autopsy make this clear.

But the locked front door (and all its implications)...now there's a detail that isn't so cut-and-dried (no pun intended), and it's something that I've been thinking on for some time now. Still not sure what to make of it?

[john]

The front door could just as easily have locked someone in as locked someone out. Connect the dots that aren't dots.

[Kat]

snokkums, is this always you posting?
Sometimes you sound like you and sometimes you don't and I can't figure it out?

[john]

It's not me posting as snookums if that's what you think kat.

[snokkums]

I did the orginal post kat Why do you ask? did I do something wrong?

[Haulover]

i think snokkum's theory is a good description of what lizzie initially hoped everyone would think.

but the difference in the two bodies is too well-documented. maybe snokkums is referring to the author who nevertheless found a way around the problem.

[snokkums]

i was quoting from the book. The first 3 paragraphs are the authors. The last paragraph is mine, maybe that's where people were getting confused as to what was mine and what wasnt.

Next time I'll put the author in quotes or something. That way noone will get confused.

[DWilly]

It's very hard for me to imagine someone just casually entering the house and going around killing two people not knowing for sure where everyone was and what they were doing.

There are two main things I look at. First, the number of times Abby was hit. To me she's the real clue to the killer. I do think she was killed first. Another poster said something about seeing a much better picture of Abby on the floor and said how thick the blood was. As I recall they posted it looked like a "sculpture." Hope I got that right. Abby was just an old woman who hadn't done anything to anyone and yet, she was hit so many times. To me there is just too much passion or hate in the murder of Abby to be just a stranger or someone out to get Andrew. I think Abby may have been the main target.


The second thing I look at is Bridget and Dr. Bowen. I don't think they were directly involved but their behavior is rather odd after the murders. I think both of them may have had an idea as to whom the killer was and it seems to me like it was someone they both wanted to protect.

[Bob Gutowski]

Yes, I think it was fairly obvious to family and close friends (and especially after Lizzie burned that dress) what had gone down, and there was a great New England, stoic, "gathering in" to protect one's own.

Until Alice (bless her) blabbed!

[Angel]

As for Bridget acting strangely, I think it was only natural. She knew first hand about the tensions in the house and Lizzie's temperment, so she probably knew right away that Lizzie did it. If I was living with a murderer I would be pretty creeped out by being around Lizzie right after the killings. I would really watch my P's and Q's around her and play dumb while I was forced to stick around for the investigation, but I would high tail it out of there and get away from Lizzie as fast as I was able, which is exactly what Bridget did. She may have even been told by Lizzie in some way that she (Bridget) could easily be implicated, which is why she was probably frantic and scared as hell. If she was protecting anybody, it was herself. She was protecting Lizzie indirectly by not saying anything because she didn't want Lizzie to come after her too.

[Allen]

As for Bridget acting strangely, I think it was only natural. She knew first hand about the tensions in the house and Lizzie's temperment, so she probably knew right away that Lizzie did it. If I was living with a murderer I would be pretty creeped out by being around Lizzie right after the killings. I would really watch my P's and Q's around her and play dumb while I was forced to stick around for the investigation, but I would high tail it out of there and get away from Lizzie as fast as I was able, which is exactly what Bridget did. She may have even been told by Lizzie in some way that she (Bridget) could easily be implicated, which is why she was probably frantic and scared as hell. If she was protecting anybody, it was herself. She was protecting Lizzie indirectly by not saying anything because she didn't want Lizzie to come after her too.

That makes a lot of sense, Angel. I think Bridget may have guessed what happened as well. I don't think it would've been hard to deduce, seeing as Lizzie was all alone with Abby in the house most of the morning, and then Abby turns up dead. Also since Bridget lived there she was well aware of the locks in the house, the lay out of the house, and would've known how hard it was for someone to have gotten in and killed both Borden's without being seen, and then have gotten back out.

She also left Lizzie downstairs with Andrew before she went upstairs to lay down in her room, and then Andrew turns up dead. What do you think Bridget thought of Lizzie's alibi that she was in the barn? She worked in that house for two years. I think she would've become pretty accustomed and knowledgeable as to the habits and such of the household. How likely did she think it was that Lizzie was up in the barn? I agree with you that if she were staying there with Lizzie, who she believed committed the murders, she would've been forced to watch what she did and said to police if she believed Lizzie would either implicate her, or come after her. I think all she could do was hope the police could prove it. It could also explain why she didn't want to stay in the house. She might have been afraid she would meet the same fate as Abby and Andrew. I think this could also have been why Uncle John was acting strangely. HE knew who did it as well. He couldn't prove it, but he knew.

[john]

Just a quick question Allen - did anyone ever check to see if Bridget had actually laid down in her room?

[john]

Another quick question - the first officer on the scene said the doors (including front) were "locked." Now if Mr. Borden couldn't get in, he must not have had that key - yet on the backside that key was supposedly found in Andrew's pocket, and further, the inside key, which Bridget says she used to open the door was found on the mantle(actually I think she just said she got the key), yet did Bridget say she returned to the sitting room, or the key to the mantle? I don't do what if's- but there are a bunch of them here.
Lets say Mr. Borden forgot his keys, and lets say Bridget forgot or didn't return them to the mantle. is there a problem w/Andrew here that could be major? Lets say Andrew says,"I want my keys, and I want to know what's going on," and Bridget hands him his keys!
What happens then?
A servantgirl with his keys and his power, for keys are power.
So he chills, and he's upright, and he's thinkering nothing of it and he's softly thinking of a nap and he wonders of his wife and he smiles, and he listens to the whispers that aren't there anymore, whispers of snowballs and baseball gloves and secret trails, and he lays down and he loves this wi..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................

[augusta]

I loved that - "Knowlton's losing argument," Snokkums. I wonder if you wrote that on purpose or if it was a most fitting typo.

There were three locks on the front door. Usually, Lizzie was responsible for undoing the locks on that door every morning.

There was a spring lock that sometimes got stuck. That isn't something the defense made up - people did experiments with that lock in the days after the murders and found it to be true. Sometimes that lock worked; sometimes it stuck.

I don't know which lock Andrew had a key for. It sounds like Bridget had a hard time with that spring lock that morning when she yelled "Pshaw".

I am inclined to go with the theory that the Bordens were killed by a butcher friend of Morse. A butcher could probably kill a person in that way and not be much bothered by it. And a butcher would also probably know how the blood doesn't gush when the heart stops pumping.

Doctors can't pinpoint the exact time of death, even today. But it's obvious Abby died first because of reasons others wrote of on this thread.

It was extremely convenient that Abby died first, which allowed the 'girls' to Andrew's fortune. If Abby had died second, they would have had to share with Abby's relatives. That seems to be the motive.

Great post, Angel! When Bridget asks, "Miss Lizzie, where was you?" she is questioning Lizzie's innocence I think.

Dr. Bowen lost it that day of the murders. These were his long-time neighbors and friends. I think it was a total surprise to him.

I do think it was possible for an intruder to enter the house somehow and remain hidden while Lizzie and Bridget were there. All he had to do was listen to hear where they were and hide himself. But why wasn't there any blood anywhere in the house while a possible intruder were hanging around for Andrew? There would have been blood in a closet he hid in. Or something. He could have stayed in the guest room the whole time. Nobody went in there. The lack of blood in an intruder's possible hiding place after whacking Abby bothers me, tho.

[snokkums]

That's what I am getting at DWilly. How's someone going to be in the house killing two people and not know where everyone is at or if there is anyone in the house other than the two victims.

[sguthmann]

to me that smacks of one or both of "the other two" being in on it. no one in their right mind would murder someone in a house where two other people are present and freely wandering around.

does anyone else think it is strange that Morse "just happened" to be living with a DRUGGIST's family in Iowa and a BUTCHER'S family when he was in S. Dartsmouth?? considering the last two big events in Andrew and Abby's lives, it seems an awfully big coincidence.

[Allen]

does anyone else think it is strange that Morse "just happened" to be living with a DRUGGIST's family in Iowa and a BUTCHER'S family when he was in S. Dartsmouth?? considering the last two big events in Andrew and Abby's lives, it seems an awfully big coincidence.

Yes, I had considered that fact that Morse lived with a druggist rather coincidental. I had remarked about this in a thread sometime back. I am not sure now which one. If Lizzie did in fact try to buy poison she would at least have to have some knowledge of drugs and poisons, especially because she was trying to buy the most lethal and fast acting poison known. She went right for the heavy weight, so to speak.

There is also a precedent for Lizzie buying another poison, according to a newspaper article in which a druggist claims she bought chloroform in his shop for the stated purpose of poisoning a cat. he claims she spoke to him rather "saucily" and he answered her back just as "saucily". So from this we can establish that Lizzie did have some knowledge of poison. But if she did get her knowledge of poison from Morse, was it done innocently on his part, or was it intentional. Was it just brought up in conversation? Or was it a plotting session? I myself don't believe Morse had anything to do with the murders.

[Kat]

Augusta- snokkums says that Masterton wrote that about Knowlton. She says she left the quotes off.

As for Morse, do you guys know that Morse lived with a "druggist" before 1900? Can you tell me where we know this from? Thanks.

[Allen]

Augusta- snokkums says that Masterton wrote that about Knowlton. She says she left the quotes off.

As for Morse, do you guys know that Morse lived with a "druggist" before 1900? Can you tell me where we know this from? Thanks.

You're right Kat. I couldn't find anything prior to 1900.

But the rest of my post still stands. I think if Lizzie tried to buy poison, she had some knowledge of poisons and how they worked, otherwise why would she be trying to by the most lethel and fast acting poison known There is also still the precedent for her buying the chloroform if the newspaper article is to be believed. So we have Lizzie buying poison a few years before the murders. Was she testing out different ones? Had she tried to buy prussic acid before?

[john]

Excellent post Augusta. I like the way you write.
Just a little tidbit - did you ever think that the lack of blood around the Borden home could point strongly to a professional killer?

[sguthmann]

kat, i too could not locate morse residing with druggists prior to 1900, but i know i have also read somewhere that he admitted to some knowledge or training in the trade prior to that...in his early days if i remember correctly. i'm still trying to find that though.

[john]

In the 1890's and possibly up until 1940 "druggists" were bootleggers - not found in MERCK.

[Kat]

kat, i too could not locate morse residing with druggists prior to 1900, but i know i have also read somewhere that he admitted to some knowledge or training in the trade prior to that...in his early days if i remember correctly. i'm still trying to find that though.

Well, I haven't come across that info and I looked at every source Joe used to write a sort of family *bio* on the Morses for The Hatchet, with JVM as star.
The file he sent me is copies of original documents and news items and it's about 6" thick, including my little contributions.
Good luck.

Maybe it's some casual knowledge he gained by running a farm?
He did supposedly speculate in the papers that if he were to have done the deed he would have used chloroform.

[Harry]

See Rebello, page 70:

"John Morse boarded with Mr. & Mrs. George C. Chapin and their three children in 1900. Mr. Chapin was a druggist and owned a business in Hastings. Ten years later, Mr. Morse boarded with Mr. & Mrs. VanAusdale. Mr. VanAusdale was engaged in the retail drug business in Hastings. He had purchased the business shortly after the death of Mr. George C. Chapin in 1900. Mr. VanAusdale moved to Hastings in 1900."

Other than this I could find no other information on Morse with druggists.

Being a farmer, Morse would probably have had knowledge of pesticides. Arsenic was used as early as 1867 according to this web site:

"1867 - The beginning of modern pesticide use. Colorado beetle invade US potato crops and arsenic is applied."

http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/webprojects20 ... story.html

[nbcatlover]

In addition to Morse living with druggists, I've always thought it was curious that prussic acid is naturally occuring in some livestock grazing grasses (sorghum) which were introduced in the U.S. by Ben Franklin in the early 1800s. I would think that Morse, with his transactions in horses, would have had some knowledge about it. It was also used as a fumigant in closed spaces against lice, fleas, etc.

Sudangrass, forage sorghum, and sorghum-sudangrass hybrids are often used for summer pasture, green chop, hay, or silage. Under certain conditions, livestock consuming these feedstuffs may be poisoned by prussic acid (HCN).

Exposure to excessive prussic acid--also called hydrocyanic acid, hydrogen cyanide, or cyanide--can be fatal. However, producers can manage and feed their livestock to avoid problems with prussic acid.

What is Prussic Acid Poisoning?
Prussic acid does not occur freely in normal, healthy plants. Instead, certain sugar compounds called cyanogenic glycosides contain the cyanide ion (CN-) and only form prussic acid when degraded by certain enzymes.

Living plant tissues can contain both cyanogenic glycoside (called dhurrin in Sorghum species) and enzymes (beta-glycosidase or emulsin) in separate cells. When plant tissues are damaged, such as by freezing, chopping, or chewing, enzymes can come in contact with the cyanogenic glycoside and produce prussic acid. Bacterial action in the rumen of cattle and sheep can also release prussic acid from glycosides.

Prussic acid production is apparently more likely to occur in ruminants because both chewing and rumen bacteria release cyanide. Hydrochloric acid in the stomachs of horses and swine destroys plant enzymes that release the toxin. Sheep are slightly more resistant to cyanide than are cattle, and Hereford cattle have been reported to be less susceptible than other breeds.

Once cyanide is absorbed, it is readily transported throughout the body, and is very toxic to all animals. In cells, cyanide reacts with cytochrome oxidase (an enzyme involved in the electron transport system that enables cells to use oxygen) to form a stable, inactive complex. As a result, the cyanide ion inhibits the release of oxygen from the hemoglobin of blood to individual cells. Without oxygen, cellular respiration ceases and cells die rapidly due to hypoxia.

What are Signs of Prussic Acid Poisoning?
Signs of prussic acid poisoning can occur within 15 or 20 minutes to a few hours after animals consume potentially toxic forage. Excitement, rapid pulse rate, and generalized muscle tremors occur initially, followed by rapid and labored breathing, staggering, and collapse. Foaming at the mouth, excessive tearing, and voiding of urine and feces may occur. Animals often lie prostrate and have muscle spasms and convulsions. Mucous membranes are usually bright and pink, and blood will be a characteristic bright cherry red. Treatment must be administered quickly because death can occur within minutes during severe convulsions.

Horses grazing Sorghum species have developed a condition known as "equine sorghum cystitis/ataxia syndrome," which may be related to chronic exposure to cyanide or other compounds from sorghum. Incoordination of the rear legs, lack of urinary control, and paralysis and inflammation of the bladder can occur. The unidentified toxic principle causes spinal cord lesions. Pregnant mares may abort, and surviving foals may have musculoskeletal deformities. Thus, Sorghum species pastures are not recommended for horses.

from
http://ianrpubs.unl.edu/range/g775.htm

[nbcatlover]

More to think about...was Charles F. Borden a relative of Lizzie? She may have had a significant amount of knowledge available about "drugs."

Borden & Remington
Company History


In 1837, the drug and medicine business of Dr. Nathan Durfee, located on Central Street, was purchased by Hale Remington and Company and a line of groceries were added.

About 1850, Robert K. Remington, a son of Hale Remington, took over the business which was carried on in a wooden building near the foot of Anawan Street. Upon the death of R. K. Remington, on November 25, 1886, the business passed into the hands of Edward B. Remington, a son, and Charles F. Borden, a son-in-law. The original company building was on the northeast corner of Anawan and Pond Streets.

Following Mr. Borden’s death in 1905, the control passed to Edward B. Remington, the minority stock being held by Albert A. Harrison and the Borden Family. Subsequently, Mr. Remington sold his interests and, after the death of Mr. Borden’s two sons, Mr. Harrison purchased the controlling shares and became president of the company in 1921. Mr. Harrison originally entered the employ of the company in 1888 as an assistant bookkeeper.

From
http://www.boremco.com/brhist.htm

Note: This company still exists in Fall River today.

[john]

How many cats do you have?

[Angel]

Out of curiousity I typed in a search "kleptomania, Lizzie Borden" and found a site that said LB11, www.curiouschapbooks.com. It was called Lizzie Borden Unlocked. I found Chapter Eleven gave a good Freudian interpretation of what was going on with her. I'm sure you guys have all seen it already, but I don't remember reading anything about it on the forum. Do any of you know what I am talking about? I really enjoyed it. For those of you who have seen it I'd like to know what you think about it.

[Angel]

My prev post is getting buried. Did anyone check out the website?

[DWilly]

My prev post is getting buried. Did anyone check out the website?

Yes, I did. The most interesting to me was the section called The Key. I suppose in a way you can look at different parts of this crime and see them as symbols to mean something else. And of course, there are posters who have pointed out that at the root of this case may be the crime of incest. Was Lizzie thinking of her beloved pidgeons while she hacked a way at Andrew with the hatchet?

[Kat]

It's been around a long time. That's Ed Sams, right?
I haven't read it lately and more recently we've been working on the magazine.
Maybe you can take it apart, or comment?
It's a big job. It's a long article, as I recall.
Sorry not to respond.
Keep asking- I know what you mean about your query getting buried.

[Allen]

My prev post is getting buried. Did anyone check out the website?

I read through there, and I found some statements that were inconsistent with the record,but I think the most curious was the story about the cat. I have yet to find a concrete source for the story of Abby's cat dieing. Another few things I found interesting are these statements that are in Chapter 7 and are both attributed to people who are related to Lizzie in some way. One of them is Hiram Harrington, and the other chose to remain anonymous.

Hiram Harrington:

Lizzie is of a repellent disposition, and after an unsuccessful passage with her father would become sulky and refuse to speak to him for days at a time. She moved in the best society in Fall River, was a member of the Congregational Church, and is a brilliant conversationalist. She thought she ought to entertain as others did, and felt with her father's wealth, she was expected to hold her end up with others of her set. Her father's constant refusal to allow her to entertain lavishly angered her. I have heard many bitter things she has said of her father, and know she was deeply resentful of her father's maintained stand in this matter (Brown, 106-107).


Anonymous letter sent to the newspaper by a member of the Borden family:

By blood! If she did it, the old Borden nerve, grit, and cheek are not degenerated. No woman except a Borden could have done it, and yet it seems impossible that a woman could do it. I have watched her indomitable nerve and bearing with admiration, and I recalled that Aunt Nannie Borden, who ran out when the bullets were flying, and kicked a wounded British redcoat and then tore up her skirts for wadding; and I remember that my poor old grandmother when a constable seized her broadcloth cloak for grandfather's rum bill, when he read his warrant and said: 'I seize this cloak,' she took him by the throat and said: 'God! And I seize you!' And he was glad to drop the cloak and git. So if this girl has done this thing it is the old Borden nerve and grit that carried her through, and I predict that she will not wilt. No, by blood (Brown, 15)!