Cover-up

[Yooper]

What is the likelihood that Lizzie's family and friends would have "covered her tracks" or tried to minimize her involvement in the murders? This could take the form of anything from hedging statements to actually manipulating evidence.

Alice Russell for instance, while she admitted that she saw Lizzie burn the dress, her first instinct was the statement, "I wouldn't let anyone see me doing that if I were you", rather than, "I wouldn't do that if I were you".

While Lizzie's first thought was to send for a doctor, was she also looking for someone to "take charge" of the situation or to protect her? Dr. Bowen may have even been confused about which role to assume as a result of his being summoned, as doctor, friend, neighbor, or a combination. He seemed to be a bit slow to get a handle on things. He may have been the most readily accessible "authority figure", and one whom Lizzie could trust. Her father was dead, how many men did Lizzie know who could take over that role?

Bridget mentioned that she empathized with Lizzie in family disputes, she may have felt some allegience even if it wasn't reciprocal.

I think Emma certainly would have been the most likely to "help the cause". I just can't see Emma doing anything to incriminate Lizzie, quite the opposite. Emma probably took charge upon her return, and Emma would have been more apt to let John Morse help in that role than Lizzie would. Emma seemed to be fairly close to Uncle John while Lizzie almost pointedly avoided him the day before the murders. Lizzie's testimony concerning Uncle John seemed to portray distance, even coldness, at times.

Lizzie was surrounded by people whose first instinct might be to protect her, or to protect the Borden family name. The hierarchy had changed, it had become Emma and Lizzie's household and family, and some may have come to terms with that earlier than others. There may have been some confusion in the interim. Minimizing "embarrassing details" may even have been the neighborly thing to do at that time.

[augusta]

Interesting thoughts, Yooper.

I had not heard that Bridget sided in with Lizzie on some stuff. Do you remember where you read that at? Nellie McHenry's interview with Bridget - if it was not fabricated - said Bridget was very fond of Abby and wanted to quit several times but stayed because Abby asked her to.

Yes, Lizzie seemed to be so distant from Uncle John. To me, it sounds as if it's a bit much. I feel that Lizzie and he really stayed out of each other's way August 3 and the a.m. of the 4th, so it would not look as if Morse & Lizzie were connected in any conspiracy. I think it was a three-way thing: Lizzie, Morse, and Emma. I can't brush aside the fact that Emma testified she disliked Abby more than Lizzie. I think it's most telling.

Didn't Morse, Lizzie and Emma meet in New Bedford prior to the murders?
(My office has been recently moved upstairs, and I don't have my books up here yet.)

I agree with you about Alice Russell, and her reaction when Lizzie burned the dress. Maybe she was afraid to tell the authorities later because she was afraid she would be an accessory. I guess her first reaction, while Lizzie was burning the dress, was as a friend.

I don't think others in town helped to do any cover-up, with the possible exception of Dr. Bowen. Another thing I can't brush aside is Morse getting a phone call at his niece's just before he left. And Dr. Bowen coming to the niece's house about the time Morse was leaving. Supposedly they did not run into each other. And supposedly Bowen was coming to see a sick little girl there. Now this was, as I understand it, right after he got the news that Andrew was dead. He left to telegraph Emma, and I think it's Mrs. Emery, who lived at the house on Wybosset that Morse was visiting, that testified that Bowen came when he did. It's too coincidental.

The town of Fall River collectively wanted to ignore the Lizzie Borden story for years. When I first started going out there, you couldn't find out anything hardly - you had the FRHS, and you could drive by Maplecroft, 92 Second Street, and see the Borden graves at Oak Grove. That was it. It felt like it was hushed up because they didn't want to be tarnished by it.

[RayS]

Alice Russell's statements were made months after the deaths. You should assume that she consulted a lawyer, who made sure her statements would not connect her as an accessory.
"Yes, I saw the dress burnt, but I never thought it meant anything at the time." IMO

[Kat]

We haven't verified that the Emerys had a phone. We haven't verified what relationship the Emerys were to Morse either.
It may be a mistake in the newspaper about the phone and about Dr. Bowen coming there. The main reason I question Dr. Bowen going there was that in a timeline, there was not time- especially when he went to send the telegram. We've sort of proved that somewhat by finding out where the place was in relation to the Borden house. It's not impossible tho.

I've heard that local people might very well coalese around Lizzie, even if they ignored her later on.

[Yooper]

I'm thinking the lawyer would have advised Alice Russell to say "I wouldn't do that if I were you", rather than "I wouldn't let anyone see me doing that if I were you".

[Kat]

I think Alice Russell would quit protecting Lizzie as soon as she herself became suspicious. That might be as soon as Monday. She told private eye Hanscomb what she saw about the dress burning and left it in that man's hands. After that, we really don't hear much about her- except in her testimonies.
I think Emma would be loyal to Lizzie until she herself became suspicious, too. That might have been years later, say around 1905?

Morse went back to where he came from- so he was out of the picture. That might have been a break there- we hear not much more of him visiting the girls at Maplecroft, do we? Or them visiting his property in Iowa or them visiting their Morse relatives out west either.
Apparently Morse still visited East over the years, but we don't see the Morse and Borden girls getting together. I wonder if they ever did?
That's odd if they didn't.

[augusta]

I thought Alice Russell told her attorney first. But, if Kat says it was the detective then it probably was.

'The girls' didn't go west to see any Morses before the murders that we know of. I don't see it as odd if they didn't afterwards. But then, so little is known about all of them pre- and post- whackings.

Yes, the timeline is a big issue with me regarding Bowen going to Wybosset Street, too. I wonder how many different primary sources mention that and the phone call to that house. I think I saw it in a newspaper article. Mrs. Emery never testified, did she?

Ah, did they even have a phone? That's interesting, Kat. I hope someone finds that little tidbit out some day.

Today it seems different in FR where Lizzie is concerned. I'm sure, as some friends tell me, that there are still those who keep their lips sewed tightly and may have - some are known to have - some Lizzie gems we'd like to see tucked away. But Lizzie isn't seemingly just brushed over anymore. Heck, today she is on the town's visitor brochure. I think the changing of the times, the need for tourism, the opening of the B & B and all the press Lizzie gets were catalysts for her being more visible in Fall River today. I think there's going to be more things Lizzie in Fall River in the future. I'm just saying how different it feels there to me, a visitor over the years.

[Yooper]

The reason I'm questioning the likelihood of complicity in the crime is an attempt to frame the timeline, the probability of Lizzie having committed the crime. If she had help in disposing of the hatchet or hatchet head (the handle could have easily been burned in the cookstove), then there is much less time required to commit the murder of Andrew. It wasn't necessary to dispose of the hatchet before calling Bridget, only to manipulate it in a way to keep it beyond immediate discovery.

If Bridget assisted Lizzie before the fact it is possible to increase the effort in committing the crime perhaps four-fold. If Andrew came home and laid down on the sofa soon after arriving, the time can nearly be doubled and there are twice as many people to act and assist in the crime and clean-up.

[Bob Gutowski]

I've come to suspect (and whether he was involved in the crimes or not) that Uncle John, along with Emma and, to a lesser extent, Maggie, drew close and hung tough.

It's been reported at the FRHS that Alice Russell, in later years, would speak of the dress-burning as the turning point for her. It was such an odd moment that she supposedly formed a definite negative opinion about Lizzie she would rather not have had right after it. Of course, she behaved as the rest did, and didn't even mention it for months. I honor her pluck and then her bravery, leading her to break ranks and be accused as a Benedict Arnold.

[RayS]

I've come to suspect (and whether he was involved in the crimes or not) that Uncle John, along with Emma and, to a lesser extent, Maggie, drew close and hung tough.

It's been reported at the FRHS that Alice Russell, in later years, would speak of the dress-burning as the turning point for her. It was such an odd moment that she supposedly formed a definite negative opinion about Lizzie she would rather not have had right after it. Of course, she behaved as the rest did, and didn't even mention it for months. I honor her pluck and then her bravery, leading her to break ranks and be accused as a Benedict Arnold.

The claim that Alice Russell was a 'Benedict Arnold' is quite wrong. Russell was a friend, not a relation, or a member of the cover-up.
I do wonder why she didn't speak up that week.

[RayS]

As I remember it, John Morse was 10 years younger than Andrew, his brother-in-law. I think that a teen-age boy would probably look up to his older brother-in-law, and have good memories even after he moved to Iowa. Similar personalities flock together.
But the younger girls would no longer have an interest in Uncle John after he moved back to Iowa. Does anyone know about letters?

[Yooper]

That's an interesting point, Bob, about the dress burning being a turning point for Alice Russell. She apparently found herself in the position of having to knowingly lie for Lizzie in order to protect her. Kat mentioned this with respect to the private detective, Hanscomb. She may have told Hanscomb the truth as she knew it at the time she was questioned about Lizzie's dresses, so her statement could have been defended based upon timing. The dress burning must have resolved any question Alice had about Lizzie's guilt, which implies that she had doubts about Lizzie's innocence all along.

Emma was in the solid position of having been away at the time and, to my mind, it makes more sense for a stranger to have wandered in off the street to commit the murders than for Emma to have gone back and forth in broad daylight to commit them. She had the best alibi of the group, so she could afford to defend Lizzie to the death without implicating herself. While she may possibly have had motive, she certainly did not have opportunity.

I also have to wonder how soon this group (John Morse, Bridget, Alice Russell, Emma, Dr. Bowen, and Mrs. Churchill) began to question Lizzie's involvement. Assuming no direct involvement, I expect Bridget became suspicious upon finding Abby had also been murdered. Alice found resolution with the dress burning. I have a lingering hunch that Emma had a handle on the truth right away. The rest are more difficult to guess at, but I'm sure Lizzie's possible guilt must have crossed their minds at some time.

[Yooper]

The way I look at the relationship between John Morse and Andrew is, from Andrew's perspective, one of male comanionship which seemed to be lacking in Andrew's family life. He was surrounded by women! John might have been Andrew's "kid brother". From John's perspective the relationship was perhaps less focused solely on Andrew and more generally on Andrew and his daughters. He had no wife and children, and brothers, sisters, neices, and nephews may have served as surrogates.

[mbhenty]

Yes Augusta: Upon your early vists here to Fall Rvier the feeling you walked away with that no one cared to talk about the Borden crime was very real. Fall River never did or wanted to ID itself with the Borden Murders. From the time of the murder right up to about the late 60s and early 70's, (about the time a parade of books were starting to be published on the case.) the Borden murders were a shameful curiosity here in Fall River. That was it. No way did the city want to identify itself to such a person as Lizzie or such a beastly crime. Alas, times have changed............tourism, money, etc.

It's just short of a miracle that 92 survived all these years and was not torn down for just those reasons. The shame of the crime and the reminders that building coughed up gave little reason for it to survive.

When interest did begin to pick up visitors and citizens alike appeared to show much more interest in wanting to see Maplecorft as oppose to 92. Even in the early 70s I remember many times tourists to the city stopping to ask me where they could find Maplecorft. When I would give them directions to 92 they would write it down as if an afterthought and when I would inquire, for some strange reason, most wanted to see Maplecroft first.

Is seemed like most people wanted to see where and how Lizzie lived more so than where the murders were committed.

Maplecroft was always a mystery and very few knew where it was. Even friends who lived here in the city could not find it. Unless you had a photo or knew about the inscription in the step, "Maplecorft" was not easy to locate. Many would miss it the first time by. Everyone expects to see this dark colored Victorian with a creaky iron fence and shattered shutters, but the real Maplecorft is no where that interesting. No Adams family or Norman Bates here.

Where 92's heart has been torn out and it's soul scrutinized in books and ravished in the press over many years, Maplecroft has always displayed it's virgin appeal. But as time goes by, sadly, even that appeal is being diminished.

[RayS]

The way I look at the relationship between John Morse and Andrew is, from Andrew's perspective, one of male comanionship which seemed to be lacking in Andrew's family life. He was surrounded by women! John might have been Andrew's "kid brother". From John's perspective the relationship was perhaps less focused solely on Andrew and more generally on Andrew and his daughters. He had no wife and children, and brothers, sisters, neices, and nephews may have served as surrogates.

That sounds very true. An unmarried aunt or uncle will tend to spend time with his brothers or sisters families. There is no where else to go for family life.

[RayS]

Yes Augusta: Upon your early vists here to Fall Rvier the feeling you walked away with that no one cared to talk about the Borden crime was very real. Fall River never did or wanted to ID itself with the Borden Murders. From the time of the murder right up to about the late 60s and early 70's, (about the time a parade of books were starting to be published on the case.) the Borden murders were a shameful curiosity here in Fall River. That was it. No way did the city want to identify itself to such a person as Lizzie or such a beastly crime. Alas, times have changed............tourism, money, etc.

It's just short of a miracle that 92 survived all these years and was not torn down for just those reasons. The shame of the crime and the reminders that building coughed up gave little reason for it tosurvive.

When interest did begin to pick up visitors and citizens alike appeared to show much more interest in wanting to see Maplecorft as oppose to 92. Even in the early 70s I remember many times tourists to the city stopping to ask me where they could find Maplecorft. When I would give them directions to 92 they would write it down as if an afterthought and when I would inquire, for some strange reason, most wanted to see Maplecroft first.

Is seemed like most people wanted to see where and how Lizzie lived more so than where the murders were committed.

Maplecroft was always a mystery and very few knew where it was. Even friends who lived here in the city could not find it. Unless you had a photo or knew about the inscription in the step, "Maplecorft" was not easy to locate. Many would miss it the first time by. Everyone expects to see this dark colored Victorian with a creaky iron fence and shattered shutters, but the real Maplecorft is no where that interesting. No Adams family or Norman Bates here.

Where 92's heart has been torn out and it's soul scrutinized in books and ravished in the press over many years, Maplecroft has always displayed it's virgin appeal. But as time goes by, sadly, even that apeal is being diminished.

I understand that the great mansions ("cottages") of Newport RI are a tourist attraction. I wonder if tourists are surprised to find Maplecroft not the biggest and best of the houses.
Arnold Brown says Lizzie knew her place in society.

[Kat]

Trial
Alice
(About the burning of the *dress*)

Q. Did you come into the room again?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. What did you see then?
A. Miss Lizzie stood up towards the cupboard door,---the cupboard door was open, and she appeared to be either ripping something down or tearing part of this garment.

Q. What part?
A. I don't know for sure; it was a small part.

Q. A smaller part? Go on and state.
A. I said to her, "I wouldn't let anybody see me do that, Lizzie." She didn't make any answer. I left the room.

Q. Did she do anything when you said that?
A. She stepped just one step farther back up towards the cupboard door.

Q. Did you notice where the waist of the dress was when she held the skirt in her hands as you first came in?
A. I didn't

Page 392 / i414

know that it was the waist, but I saw a portion of this dress up on the cupboard shelf.

Q. Inside the cupboard?
A. Yes. The door was wide open.

Q. When you came back the second time and she was tearing the smaller part, did you see the skirt?
A. Well, I am not positive; I think I did.

Q. Did you have any more talk with her that day, or did she say anything to you about it?
A. No, sir.

Q. At that time were there any police officers in the house?
A. No, sir.

Q. Were there any officers about the premises?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you know whether there was anyone else in the house except yourself and Miss Emma and Miss Lizzie Borden?
A. I don't think that there was.

Q. When had Bridget left? Do you know whether she had left before the Sunday morning or not?
A. Yes, she had left.

Q. Before that?
A. Before that.

Q. Do you know Mr. Hanscom?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you see him at the Borden house on Monday morning, the following day?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. I do not ask you what he said to you or you to him, but did you have some conversation with him?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. In what room?
A. The parlor.

Q. In consequence of that conversation, what did you do? What did you do after the conversation with Mr. Hanscom?
(No Answer)

Q. Did you see anyone after that conversation?
A. I saw Miss Lizzie and Miss Emma.

Page 393 / i415

Q. Where did you see them?
A. In the dining room.

Q. What talk passed between you in the dining room?
A. I said to them---I said, "I am afraid, Lizzie, the worst thing you could have done was to burn that dress. I have been asked about your dresses."

Q. What did she reply?
A. She said, "Oh, what made you let me do it? Why didn't you tell me?"

Q. Miss Russell, you testified before the inquest, did you?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. You testified at the preliminary hearing?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you testified once and then again before the Grand Jury?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. At either of the three previous times---at the inquest, at the preliminary, or at the first testimony before the Grand Jury, did you say anything about the burning of this dress?
A. No, sir.

MR. ROBINSON. Wait a moment. I do not see how that is at all material. The Government is not trying to fortify this witness, I hope.

MR. MOODY. Well, I do not press it. If you don't want it, I don't care to put it in.

MR. ROBINSON. Oh, it is not what I want. You are trying the Government's case; I am objecting.

MR. MOODY. I waive the question.

MR. ROBINSON. I think it should be stricken out.

MR. MOODY. I agree that it may be stricken out.
~~~~~~~~~~~

Trial
Emma

Q. Now, what happened next, Miss Emma, that you recall in reference to this dress, ---anything being said about it?

MR. KNOWLTON. Do you mean after the burning?

MR. JENNINGS. After the burning.

Page 1545 / i567

MR. KNOWLTON. I think you ought to limit your question, and ask by whom. I think I ought to know what talk you have reference to.

MR. JENNINGS. I refer more particularly to Miss Russell.

MR. KNOWLTON. To that I don't object. Call attention to that fact.

Q. Was anything said by Miss Russell in the presence of Miss Lizzie, in regard to this dress?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Was anything said Sunday?
A. Not that I know of.

Q. Now what was said Monday.
A. Miss Russell came to us in the dining room and said Mr. Hanscomb asked her if all the dresses were there that were there the day of the tragedy, and she told him "Yes," "and of course," she said, "it is a falsehood." No, I am ahead of my story. She came and said she told Mr. Hanscomb a falsehood, and I asked her what there was to tell a falsehood about, and then she said that Mr. Hanscomb had asked her if all the dresses were there that were there the day of the tragedy and she told him "Yes." There was other conversation, but I don't know what it was. That frightened me so thoroughly, I cannot recall it. I know the carriage was waiting for her to go on some errand, and when she came back we had some conversation and it was decided to have
her go and tell Mr. Hanscomb that she had told a falsehood, and to tell him that we told her to do so. She went into the parlor and told him, and in a few minutes she returned from the parlor and said she had told him.

Q. Is that all as far as Miss Russell is concerned?
A. All that I

Page 1546 / i568

recall.

Q. Now at the time when Miss Russell said "It was the worst thing that could be done ---"
A. Oh, yes, sir, she said that Monday morning. When she came into the dining room and said she had told Mr. Hanscomb that she had told him a falsehood, we asked what she told it for, and said "The burning of the dress was the worst thing Lizzie could have done," and my sister said to her "Why didn't you tell me? Why did you let me do it?"

--Alice left Monday. She had been staying with the girls since being called over on the day of the murders. It sounds like she had already done some errand, on whose behalf I don't know- but then she left. So she left after this (sounds like) second visit with Hanscomb?
One would think she would leave that day finally, if she planned on leaving, at the time she did the errand- unless the errand was for the girls.
It is curious that something about this conversation or this subject frightened Emma so much.

[Kat]

'The girls' didn't go west to see any Morses before the murders that we know of. I don't see it as odd if they didn't afterwards. But then, so little is known about all of them pre- and post- whackings.

--Augusta

I wrote an item for The Hatchet, Dec/Jan 2005, Vol. 2, Issue 6, called "The Visit."
In it, I enlarge upon the theory that the Borden family did go west around 1868, based on a news interview attributed to Mrs. Charles Holmes (Rebello, 10) where it is stated: "When a young girl, she [Lizzie] accompanied her parents to Chicago and was there a member of the Sunday school class and punctual in attendance."
I told the story of their trip, elaborating upon my research which also found that that was the year that Andrew had only one land transaction locally, very early in the year (which gave him time to take such a trip), and also that Morse had testified that Andrew had been out west in the past. My footnotes explain.

Lizzie also supposedly attended the Columbia Exhibition in Chicago right after her aquittal- maybe she met with Morse then- and/or Morse relatives?

[Yooper]

While it isn't clear, I now get the idea that Alice Russell had the conversation with Hanscomb after she saw Lizzie burn the dress. This means she lied for Lizzie's sake and had second thoughts afterwards, and possibly as a result of the conversation with Hanscomb.

Good point, Kat, what would Emma have to fear from a detective she and Lizzie had hired? Unless he had been hired for "show" perhaps?

[Yooper]

OK, I've got it now, the dress burning took place on Sunday, and the conversation with Hanscomb took place on Monday. That conversation would be interesting!

[Kat]

Yes, so Alice told the man *in authority* for Lizzie's defense, Monday, and then seemingly did not speak of it again, until finally at the grand jury. It's been said she was directly responsible for the indictment against Lizzie.
(That's the *Benedict Arnold* reference).
She had later been labled a *turncoat* for the information she gave.
As an aside, and to be technically clear, a while ago a member noted that Alice did not ever claim to actually witness Lizzie burning anything. Alice left the room.

[Yooper]

So, a cover-up is implied when terms like "Benedict Arnold" and "turncoat" are used. These terms presume a "cause", one which the truth would somehow harm.

We might also imply, if Alice Russell is solely responsible for the indictment of Lizzie, that she is also responsible for the cessation of serious investigation by the authorities of anyone else as the murderer, if Lizzie is innocent.

[nbcatlover]

From Emma's testimony:

A. Miss Russell came to us in the dining room and said Mr. Hanscomb asked her if all the dresses were there that were there the day of the tragedy, and she told him "Yes," "and of course," she said, "it is a falsehood." No, I am ahead of my story. She came and said she told Mr. Hanscomb a falsehood, and I asked her what there was to tell a falsehood about, and then she said that Mr. Hanscomb had asked her if all the dresses were there that were there the day of the tragedy and she told him "Yes." There was other conversation, but I don't know what it was. That frightened me so thoroughly, I cannot recall it. I know the carriage was waiting for her to go on some errand, and when she came back we had some conversation and it was decided to have
her go and tell Mr. Hanscomb that she had told a falsehood, and to tell him that we told her to do so. She went into the parlor and told him, and in a few minutes she returned from the parlor and said she had told him.

Do you think it is possible that Emma became frightened because she began to realize that Alice Russell was not staying at the house out of friendship, but because she was a spy for the police? Perhaps that is why Alice ended her stay at Second Street?

[Yooper]

There are many possibilities for Emma being "frightened", if, in fact, she was frightened. She might have said that just for effect. The obvious follow-up questions never seem to be asked in the trial, such as "what frightened you?".

Emma could have come to the realization that Alice might be there out of something other than friendship as nbcatlover has suggested. Emma also testified that Lizzie burned the dress at her suggestion which would implicate Emma in any wrongdoing. She says she was frightened by the detective asking the question about the dresses and Alice's response being "yes" if taken in context. She may have been surprised by the detective asking the question, or by Alice's response, or both.

[Bob Gutowski]

I'd have to have the book in front of me, but Lincoln thinks Emma blabbed there; it was something she wasn't supposed to say, and it might reveal her little account as the carefully coached construction it presumably was. In this case, I think Victoria may be right.

Oh, and for the record, Arnold Brown.

[Yooper]

Emma may also have needed an "out" for "not remembering" the rest of what Alice said.

[RayS]

...
We might also imply, if Alice Russell is solely responsible for the indictment of Lizzie, that she is also responsible for the cessation of serious investigation by the authorities of anyone else as the murderer, if Lizzie is innocent.

I didn't say that. The historical record is that Lizzie was indicted after Alice Russell went to testify to the Grand Jury. I would recommend Brown's book as the ultimate explanation. The police looked at many others, but found no one. SOP

That is why earlier I speculated that Bridget may have taken a package to Alice Russell which she hid/disposed of (innocently, of course).
That was the only time when somebody left the house and could have taken away bloody dress(es) and murder weapon. I'm not accusing Lizzie, I follow Arnold Brown's solution. Just want to mention it for historical completeness.
Supposing that is true. How could Alice Russell squeal on Lizzie yet keep herself (and innocent Bridget the servant) out of it? The answer is to claim that it was burned (altho nobody witnessed the smoke etc on a hot August day). Lizzie could not then admit "no, it was given to Alice to be disposed of".

That reminds me of a story on TV ('Law and Order' NBC Wed 10pm). Two detectives question a man who seems to resemble the murderer. This guy says "it wasn't me and I can prove it - I was robbing a bank on the other side of town". Very funny?

PS My reading of detective and mystery novels is showing.

[Kat]

What's the difference between actually burning the dress and spiriting it out of the house via a friend or servant? Each action implicates Lizzie, except one involves an extra *player.* Spiriting it out is much more dangerous, because it could come back to haunt. A burned dress that disappears into ash is less likely to haunt- tho it did.
One removed from the premises could become fodder for blackmail.

[Yooper]

If Alice Russell didn't want to go along with the program, why not turn the parcel over to the authorities? Both she and Bridget could explain what happened, and turning over the parcel would remove them from suspicion.

I'm having trouble with the image: "Bridget, my father has just been hacked to death with a hatchet, please deliver this parcel to Alice Russell and ask her to come over."

It seems inconsistent that someone would dispose of a parcel delivered from a crime scene and then agonize over a lie to a hired detective. Lizzie could have blown the whistle on Alice if Lizzie had been convicted, just to get even. Alice would have been far better off letting the lie stand if she was already an accessory.

[serendipity]

Yes Yooper, the passing the parcel scenario does seem a bit far fetched.

I think there was a good probability of indirect complicity at about the hedging level.

If Alice hadn't seen the dress burnt, it probably would have remained a secret. Could there have been other evidence that was destroyed that Alice didn't see (another dress, socks who knows)

Its hard to imagine Emma telling on her sister.

[RayS]

If Alice Russell didn't want to go along with the program, why not turn the parcel over to the authorities? Both she and Bridget could explain what happened, and turning over the parcel would remove them from suspicion.

I'm having trouble with the image: "Bridget, my father has just been hacked to death with a hatchet, please deliver this parcel to Alice Russell and ask her to come over."

It seems inconsistent that someone would dispose of a parcel delivered from a crime scene and then agonize over a lie to a hired detective. Lizzie could have blown the whistle on Alice if Lizzie had been convicted, just to get even. Alice would have been far better off letting the lie stand if she was already an accessory.

The Devil's Advocate asked if anyone had documentary proof that the Pinkerton detective actually was told about this? I believe the Pinkerton's kept their records secret. Any book on the Pinkertons tell this?
If this speculation was true, both Bridget and Alice could be indicted for murder as accessories after the fact.
Being innocent is no bar to being convicted!

[RayS]

Yes Yooper, the passing the parcel scenario does seem a bit far fetched.

I think there was a good probability of indirect complicity at about the hedging level.

If Alice hadn't seen the dress burnt, it probably would have remained a secret. Could there have been other evidence that was destroyed that Alice didn't see (another dress, socks who knows)

Its hard to imagine Emma telling on her sister.

My purpose was to point out this was the only time when something could have been taken away, before the police arrived.

[Kat]

For some reason, I sometimes think Alice was supposed to see the burning of the dress, but not Bridget.
(Bridget was gone by then).
But Alice did not really witness it, only the tearing of the garmet (and I think its removal from the cupboard).

If so, why?

[Susan]

I agree, Kat, I think Alice was supposed to witness the burning of the Bedford cord, the whole things just seems so staged. My thought is that it was to make a guilty act look innocent by having an outside witness to it. I feel that if Lizzie really wanted to get rid of that dress without being seen by Alice she could have had it done before she came back. I kind of feel like Emma must have been in on it, hence the drawing attention to Lizzie with, "What are you going to do?" which sounds almost rehearsed. If Emma was in the sink room washing dishes and heard tearing sounds coming from the kitchen and a stove lid being pulled out, I think she would have said something more like, "Lizzie, what are you doing in there?"

I have a feeling that any part or parts that may have been blood spattered had already been ripped off and burned before Alice came back. It sounds like a very risky bit of business to me, but, Lizzie knew Alice and possibly how she would react and whether or not she would question or stop Lizzie's actions at the time. So, it was probably more of a calculated risk on Lizzie's part. But, I feel like it was the only way Lizzie could dispose of that dress, which she may have caught wind that it was being looked for, and have an innocent explanation for why it wasn't around anymore.

[Kat]

Well, I must say, that makes sense to me! Thanks! We'll wait to see if the interpretation stands the test of the members.

[Yooper]

If Lizzie wore an apron while committing the murders, concealed it like an undergarment beneath her dress, and burned it before the Bedford cord dress, it might create a fair amount of smoke. If the police were paying close attention, they might possibly prevent the apron from burning completely. They might at least be suspicious of the smoke. It is possible that the Bedford cord dress was a cover-up for the sake of the police. Alice would have explained that Lizzie was burning a dress which had been examined by the police, rather than an apron, if the police asked about the smoke.

[Airmid]

I don't think Alice has been asked to act as police spy. She impresses me as being a highly nervous creature:
"Miss Russell was very pale, and much agitated, which she showed by short sharp breathing and wringing her hands. She spoke not a word." (Witness, p. 5)
She panics easily (the Stick incident), and I also think she has the tendency to jump to conclusions. Not the type of person I would have picked to give inside information about what was going on in the house!

Airmid.

[Airmid]

I did some more reading in the transcripts about what happened around the time of the dress burning. The evening before, saturday evening, the mayor in presence of the marshall told Lizzie she was a suspect. Emma and Morse were also present, but not Alice.

So Alice might not have known that Lizzie was suspect, and might have thought that if the dress burning was seen by others, it would make Lizzie suspect.

Emma on the other hand did know Lizzie already was a suspect. Yet she approved of Lizzie burning that dress, and that rather puzzles me. If the dress had been spotless, shouldn't she have said something like: "Better keep that dress, Lizzie, so you can show to the police that you had nothing to do with the murders.", whether Lizzie was innocent or not. I can think of only 2 other explanations. One: the dress wasn't spotless. Two: Emma (and Lizzie) had no idea what a criminal investigation was all about. I think we can't expect Emma to have a background on criminology as we have now, thanks to the thousands of detective novels and CSI-like tv-programs. But on the other hand, the police had been searching the house already for some days, so Emma must have had at least some idea of the kind of things they were looking for.

After Alice had her conversation with Hanscomb, she probably knows that Lizzie is a suspect. Because then she said that "burning the dress is the worst thing Lizzie could have done". This may indicate that Alice indeed believes the dress was spotless, and that Lizzie could have used it to prove her innocence, but that after the burning, that no longer was possible.

Airmid.

[Kat]

That's a good assessment, I'd say. I particularly like that you refer back to sources and you also quote from them. Thank you.

[Airmid]

Thanks for your kind words, Kat!

[Kat]

It puts things back into their context, and that is always valuable to share with the rest of us. I admire people who check or double-check things.

[snokkums]

If there was a cover up on Lizzie's behalf, it could have been two scenerios.

The first one could have been that the people who loved her were trying protect her. After all, she had shop lifted before, and Andrew did go and pay for what she lifted. And someone didi steal from Andrew and Abby's room, promting Andrew to lock his bedroom door everday he left the house. What I am saying is, that if Andrew paid the shopkeeper for what was stolen to keep lizzie out of court, maybe there were other situations to keep the shopkeeper to press charges, but with Andrew paying for what she stole, and maybe there were people will to protect her so she wouldn't get the murder rap.

The second scenerio could be that there were other people involved-- a conspiracy. Maybe the people invovled didn't want to open a can of worms. And they didn't want Lizzie to go to prison, or anyone else.