Using Andrew's coat?

[snokkums]

I can see wearing Andrew's coat while trying to kill him, but Abby was killed at 9:30. Assuming that Andrew had the coat on while he was out, and he was out at 9:30, what was she wearing at the time of Abby's murder? It couldn't have been Andrew's coat unless he didn't wear it at the time he was out. Just his suit coat.

[Harry]

Message moved to another thread.

[matt kevin jones]

If Lizzie wore Andrews Coat when and If She killed Him,
If She wore it frontwards or backwards, & then folded & tucked it under His head, I can see that blood would have soaked through, But what about the splatters of blood, especially if She wore it backwards, You would think the Doctors & the Forensic people would realize that there would be blood splatters on the wrong side of the Coat ( according to how She folded or rolled it up, which direction )
So if She thought that it would appear that the blood on the coat came from his head lying against it, what about some splatters that would be say on the inside fold of the coat, not coming from the soaking through ?
I wonder if they even thought about this or if they even checked it out?
Does that make any sense to anyone ??

[RayS]

If Lizzie wore Andrews Coat when and If She killed Him,
If She wore it frontwards or backwards, & then folded & tucked it under His head, I can see that blood would have soaked through, But what about the splatters of blood, especially if She wore it backwards, You would think the Doctors & the Forensic people would realize that there would be blood splatters on the wrong side of the Coat ( according to how She folded or rolled it up, which direction )
So if She thought that it would appear that the blood on the coat came from his head lying against it, what about some splatters that would be say on the inside fold of the coat, not coming from the soaking through ?
I wonder if they even thought about this or if they even checked it out?
Does that make any sense to anyone ??

After nearly 114 years no one will be able to answer this question.
The safe assumption is that nobody noticed anything funny about the coat at the time. Speculation about this comes from the 1974? book by Robert Sullivan. I assume this was never brought up in 1892, even by the Fall River newspaper that claimed "Lizzie done it".

[Harry]

Lizzie's possible use of the coat was suggested in an anonymous letter to Knowlton dated June 16, 1893 (The Knowlton Papers, page 250, HK235) signed "Concord, N.H. for Justice - ". The portion of the letter reads:

"... Lizzie also told you her father had taken off his coat, which of course he did. Now what do you think he done with that coat when he took it off. his "frock coat", the one Dr. Dolan testified to as being under his head after he was dead. Don't you think it likely he would have hung it up somewhere in the place or near it, from where he took his "house coat'? I think that coat was what Lizzie Borden covered herself with."

Later in the same letter:

"... Mr. Borden was killed quickly, no doubt about that and almost as soon as Bridget disappeared upstairs, Lizzie had not the time to prepare for him. that she had did for her step mother, and had to think of what to do right then and there. I believe she went and got her fathers coat, and put. t on - nothing could have protected her better - a frock coat would come down rather long, and completely shield her person from head down - covered her hands well - it could be lapped over in front well, whether buttoned or not - any woman can tell how it was, that has ever put on a mans coat - No doubt she took off her shoes, to make no noise in stepping - as he might not have been long asleep, ..."

No mention of it being worn backwards but the writer doesn't seem to think that was necessary.

HK235 is a remarkable letter, some three and one half pages in length and well worth reading

[Richard]

If Lizzie killed Abby, the murder was done in a room right next to her bedroom door and she could have easily slipped into her own bedroom in order to "freshen up" before coming downstairs to read newspapers, iron handkerchiefs, light stove fires, and eat fruit in the barn without obvious blood stains on her dress.

How certain can we be that the killer folded up Andrew's jacket and laid it under his head? Is this something Andrew could have done himself before trying to nap?

[RayS]

Lizzie's possible use of the coat was suggested in an anonymous letter to Knowlton dated June 16, 1893 (The Knowlton Papers, page 250, HK235) signed "Concord, N.H. for Justice - ". The portion of the letter reads:
... (deleted) ...
No mention of it being worn backwards but the writer doesn't seem to think that was necessary.

HK235 is a remarkable letter, some three and one half pages in length and well worth reading

Can we put much trust in an anonymous letter? Even Arnold Brown did better than that in noting his sources.
IF Brown based his book on an anonymous letter (!) what would you say about him?
BTW was Concord NH near to the area that Emma moved to for the last decades of her life?

PS Since this was after the trial started, the writer of that letter may have just imagined this "fact".

[RayS]

If Lizzie killed Abby, the murder was done in a room right next to her bedroom door and she could have easily slipped into her own bedroom in order to "freshen up" before coming downstairs to read newspapers, iron handkerchiefs, light stove fires, and eat fruit in the barn without obvious blood stains on her dress.

How certain can we be that the killer folded up Andrew's jacket and laid it under his head? Is this something Andrew could have done himself before trying to nap?

Logically, this would explain why only one dress was burned, and another was not needed (assuming LAB did both murders).
Again, the police who investigated this crime did not imagine this scenario. Didn't they do the best they could?
Note how in 1996 Colorado the police handled the Ramsey murder with care. Are we any closer to a solution to this modern day mystery?

[RayS]

Lizzie was acquitted of the murder of Andy. Anyone who says different should come up with some facts to question the Trial verdict.
This could be an interesting article, and could become a book (like Pearson, Sullivan, Lincoln or Spiering). But are these books w/o error?
Birdget was never a suspect. Emma had an alibi; so did Uncle John?
So who is left? An Unknown Subject!

[Harry]

Can we put much trust in an anonymous letter? Even Arnold Brown did better than that in noting his sources.
IF Brown based his book on an anonymous letter (!) what would you say about him?
BTW was Concord NH near to the area that Emma moved to for the last decades of her life?

PS Since this was after the trial started, the writer of that letter may have just imagined this "fact".

It was YOU Ray who said the idea was first put forward by Sullivan in 1974 not me. It was NOT the first time.

NO one is saying that it is fact. It is the IDEA of the coat being worn NOT whether it was fact or not.

Also it was NOT the day after the trial started. It was written 11 days after it started and what has that to do with anything? Whether it was anonymous or written by Lizzie herself, it is the IDEA that was known in 1893.

Again the IDEA was not new with Sullivan. THAT is the point.

[Yooper]

I wonder if we're over-rating blood spatter. It should be directly proportional to displacement and the shape of the striking implement should have something to do with it. There seemed to be a linearity to the spatter patterns with none extending toward the windows in the sitting room. The wall spatter sounds like a linear arc pattern and it causes me to wonder if the hatchet was inclined toward the wall while it was swung. It would be interesting to get some forensic input at this point

[Kat]

We also do not have a witness who said Andrew wore the Prince Albert coat that day. That coat lying there in the summer, could be the biggest clue we have, regardless as to how or if it was used.

There was also a letter from Philip Gordon Reed, who I call Gorden Borden, in The Knowlton Papers that claims he is the illegtimate son of Andrew, so I think it very likely that Brown based his book on an anonymous letter!
You might try to prove otherwise?

[RayS]

Can we put much trust in an anonymous letter? Even Arnold Brown did better than that in noting his sources.
IF Brown based his book on an anonymous letter (!) what would you say about him?
BTW was Concord NH near to the area that Emma moved to for the last decades of her life?

PS Since this was after the trial started, the writer of that letter may have just imagined this "fact".

It was YOU Ray who said the idea was first put forward by Sullivan in 1974 not me. It was NOT the first time.

NO one is saying that it is fact. It is the IDEA of the coat being worn NOT whether it was fact or not.

Also it was NOT the day after the trial started. It was written 11 days after it started and what has that to do with anything? Whether it was anonymous or written by Lizzie herself, it is the IDEA that was known in 1893.

Again the IDEA was not new with Sullivan. THAT is the point.

OK, I admit I haven't read any book in the last two years. I don't remember Sullivan quoting from this note, but as a retired judge he may have had access to court sources unavailable to other writers.
The fact is that the trial transcript (?) never had the Prosecutor making this charge.
The bottom line is that the police who investigated the murder never reported any blood found where it shouldn't be found, like on the outside or inside of Andy's folded jacket. It is only speculation, something that can't be proven (the burden of proof is on those who invent their stories).

E. H. Porter's book has been reissued in a pricy version. Did this book mention the use of Andy's coat? I understand most of it came from the newspaper reports at the time.

[RayS]

We also do not have a witness who said Andrew wore the Prince Albert coat that day. That coat lying there in the summer, could be the biggest clue we have, regardless as to how or if it was used.

There was also a letter from Philip Gordon Reed, who I call Gorden Borden, in The Knowlton Papers that claims he is the illegtimate son of Andrew, so I think it very likely that Brown based his book on an anonymous letter!
You might try to prove otherwise?

WOW!! That is easy!! Wasn't that letter postmarked "Albany NY"? Know anybody who lived there?
The proof is found in Brown's book, where he says he received the Henry Hawthorne handwritten memoirs that explained the solution. Brown also did his own investigation.
Others reportedly now possess this document.
Brown says Hawthorne made this charge in the 1950s, but it was rejected and laughed at. Does anybody have any newspaper reports of that time?
It could be an interesting article for an article in a journal.

[RayS]

We also do not have a witness who said Andrew wore the Prince Albert coat that day. That coat lying there in the summer, could be the biggest clue we have, regardless as to how or if it was used.
...
You might try to prove otherwise?

Yes, the proof that he wore it could (?) be found in the fact that was what Andy wore, even on a hot August day. Would Andy have walked around in his shirtsleeves? Of course no, that is the proof!

[Kat]

*Proving otherwise* was my rhetorical question to you- about Brown using that letter from 1892- even including an insane asylum! Hmmm...

Page 22-23, The Knowlton Papers, FRHS, Martins & Binette, Fall River, MA., 1994.
Letter, handwritten in ink.

HOTEL KENMORE

Albany N.Y. Aug 12 1892

District Atty. Knowlton
Fall River, Mass.

Dear Sir:-
Feeling quite safe from all possible arrest, I write you This information
regarding the Fall River Mystery. The Killing of old man Bordon and his
wife was not perportrated by any immediate member of his family as is
generally supposed. But They were put out of the way By an illgitimate
Son whom Bordon refused to recognize after the Mother of his off-spring
died a number of years ago in a certain Mass. Insane Asylum of a Broken
heart. That son is now twenty five years of age. He was not known to any
member of the family save the old man and woman. When that sons

Page 23

Mother was sent to the asylum through Bordon, the Son was put in a New
York Orphan Asylum. When he was subsequently bound out to a farmer.
When he reached his age he left the farmer and went to Bordon and
demanded recognition and some sort of an understanding. We mutually
agreed to a certain contract part orally & part written. What the contract
was does not matter here more than to say - He was to be educated at his,
Bordons expense. Allowed a certain sum of money a year and when com-
pleted course preparatory to College was to be paid a final sum of $5,000
to commence life with and then they were quits. Through the influence
of his Wife who disliked the said son because he once insulted her when
she made a stinging remark regarding that sons mother in his presence
was persuaded to renounce his obligations & promises after he had partly
filled them. The son repeatedly thereafter tried to induce Bordon to
carry out his agreement as he was abundently able to do so. He wouldn't
listen. So to make a long story short the son Brooded over his and his
mothers past troubles and resolved upon Vengeance, with the result
known to all. One point More Lizzie Bordon my half sister may have
heard of me and it is to shield her fathers infamy and good name that she
is taking the course she has so nobly with stood. The girl is entirely inno-
cent and it is only that justice may be done her that I write this otherwise I
would not have written this for I fairly hate the Bordon name.
The instrument the deed was done with was a Lathers Hatchet and was
droped over board from a Fall River steamer at the Dock. Entrance to the
House was gained by a front window afterwards fastened egress by side
window. The time of Revenge about 11:45 I think.
And the illigitimate who took the revenge is the Writer of this confes-
sion. No use to track me for it will be an utter impossibilty to do so. At the
hour this letter is mailed I shall take a train for hundreds of miles away.
Yours Truly
Phillip Gordon Reed

[Kat]

*Proving otherwise* about the Prince Albert makes no difference to me.
Show me the proof Andrew Borden wore the Prince Albert that day? You said there was proof? Or is it inference?

[Bob Gutowski]

I've believed for a long time that the reclusive playwright Eric Stedman had shown, in his phyiscal experiments with his actors, that Lincoln's "back-to-front" theory was a mess.

As I've posted before, why couldn't the murderer simply have tied the arms of the coat about his/her neck, making the coat into a neck to toe apron, and leaving the arms free?

[Kat]

I think you may have withheld that theory from our more newer members. I think it sounds very plausible, personally.