Good grief!!!

[Harry]

I don't know of an ice house on Second Street. The one referred to in the trial, The Fall River Ice Co., was on Third Street. Officer Philip Harrington, per the trial, went there as part of his neighborhood search.

The Chagnon's lived at #31 Third.

Mrs. Crapo lived at #39 Third.

Between the Chagnons and Mrs. Crapo's was the pear orchard and Crowe's yard.

After Mrs. Crapo's came the ice house at #41-43 Third.

[Shelley]

Thanks Harry- I just knew you would know! So it was pretty much in the Borden's backyard. Hmm- I wonder if that woman seen in the back yard on the day may have been making a little trip to Third Street?

[stuartwsa]

I remember back in the '80s, the FRHS had Andrew and Abby's hair samples on display. Abby's was very dark, like a gun metal gray. Andrew's surprised me though, as it was yellow, as Haulover mentioned. My mother, who has had white hair since I was a child (yet, she never blamed me for it!) went through a period where her hair was turning yellow. Her hairdresser blamed it on something in her diet being too acidic, and indeed it was a temporary thing.

[Kat]

Yes you guys are right- Andrew's lock of hair at the FRHS is yellow, or blondish.

It is surprising, to say the least!

I have a question.

I've always wondered why is Abbie's picture so weird looking? It looks more like it was snipped out of a group picture than a regular portrait. And there's no background.
And I have always wanted to know its provenance- and how do we *know* when that picture was taken?

[shakiboo]

wow what a difference a hairstyle makes! They don't even look like the same person! She looks stern with her hair pulled back like that! In the picture of her hairpiece you can see a hair pin, wonder why noone checked to see if that's where the gilt could have come from.... but wouldn't gilt be more like paint flecks, rather then metal scraping?

[Shelley]

Gilt originally referred to gold-edged stock certificates or goverment bonds- so gold was implied, "gilt-edged" -meaning a sure thing of value. Later, gilt sort of meant metallic coating of some sort, even base metals. The verb version changes form a bit and becomes gilding. Polished iron, steel and other metals are gilt mechanically by applying metallic leaf to the metallic surface at a temperature just under red-heat, pressing the leaf on with a burnisher and reheating, when additional leaf may be laid on. It's quite a big deal in the gold leaf frame business, but I am sure the tools, such as hatchets, of the day used some other metal for that edging. I cannot seem to recall the word "gold gilt" flecks being used in regards to the wounds of Abby.

Some other possibilities were metallic hair combs which were much-used, and gilded hair pins. These were gilded with base metal of course, like nickel, and the gilded hair pins below are pretty fancy for Abby but you can see the effect. I expect if such an item were cut repeated and with force, some fragments could easily become embedded flecks.

[shakiboo]

I'm still new at this and I'm sure I just hit the wrong thing I meant to hit the "quote" and hit the "report" key instead.......don't have any idea what happens when that happens, but I'm sure I'm gonna find out. So, Shelley please forgive me if it was a major mistake, it was accidental.

[shakiboo]

I don't remember seeing anything about "gold gilt" either, I was talking about the gilt they found in Abby's wounds as possibly coming from a brand new axe or hatchet blade. But there was none found in Andrews, I thought you had a very good idea as to where it could have come from ie. if a sharp weapon hit one of Abby's hair pins, it could have scraped it leaving the metal and was just wondering if they had concidered that. And then wondered too if the gilt found in her wounds would have been more paint like as opposed to metal scraping. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear, like I said earlier I'm still new at this and have alot to learn. Thanks for your patience.....

[DWilly]

Dr. Dolan at the preliminary is asked about Abbie's hair (145).
It's a good question as to how Abbie might have worn her hair and how the hair switch accented her own hair.
It sounds like she had enough hair, just that the switch added some kind of style?

Q. She was 64?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did she have a full head of hair?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. What was its color?
A. It was getting to gray; it was not what you call a head of gray hair; but it was getting to that color.
Q. What was the pigment, or the color of it?
A. I think it was brown, or a blackish; I did not pay much attention to that?
Q. You do not think it was dead black; you think it had a brownish tinge, slowly turning gray?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. How was it worn?
A. It was down when I saw it, the knot was broken.
Q. The knot, or whatever it was, was broken, and it was down?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. How was the front, parted in the middle, and combed down smooth?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did these blows, or any of them, cut the hair?
A. Yes Sir, all of them cut the hair.
Q. Cut it right through?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Was it a clean incised cut of the hair?
A. Some of it was so matted you could not tell. There was one large one on top that was cut as though you cut it with the shears; it was a wound that took out the piece of skull on the left side; it was not glancing, but was neat and clean.
Q. As though done with a razor?
A. Yes Sir.

It's my understanding that the hair piece was found on the center of the bed. I always thought that the hair piece being on the bed that way was a little to neat. I wonder if the killer picked up the hair piece from the floor and then placed it squarely in the center of the bed.

[Smudgeman]

i am not sure we could ever find evidience that was not tainted with lies and gossip...............

[Kat]

There was some hair found on the bed. I don't know if it was the hair switch.

Gilt could come from a hatchet just as easily as from a hairpin I suppose- it's just that the new theory we were discussing was that the gilt came to be there the following year after a certain amount of people had examined it.
We're not at a loss to explain the origin of the gilt right away after the murder- but rather before trial within the skull when it seems to have been first noticed.
A hairpin sounds like an interesting source for it tho, I admit.

I will look for the hair on the bed.

[Kat]

Prelim
Doherty
330
He led the way, and we went up stairs, and we went into a sleeping room on the north side. We went out through the dining room, through the front hall up the stairs to a room on the north side of the house. He pointed to Mrs. Borden. I went to the foot of the bed; I looked at her. She was laying face downwards between the dressing case and the bed. I noticed three or four blood spots on the pillow sham, and a bunch of hair on the bed.
Q. How large a bunch?
A. Well, it was a small bunch.
Q. It was not a switch or false hair?
A. No, I think it was human hair that had been pulled out, or something, been cut out, or something.
Q. Give me some idea how much.
A. About half as big as that, I should think.
Q. On the bed?
A. On the bed. I wanted to examine the woman, but there was not room between the bed and dressing case to walk. I walked back to the foot of the bed, up around the north side of the bed, and I pulled it out about three feet, away from her.
Q. Towards the street?
A. No, pulled it against the north wall, away from her head.

--BTW: The north wall is the Churchill side. I don't think he pulled the bed that direction- so he probably meant pulled toward the south.
Abbie lay near the north wall, with her head pointing east.

[stuartwsa]

Yes you guys are right- Andrew's lock of hair at the FRHS is yellow, or blondish.

It is surprising, to say the least!

I have a question.

I've always wondered why is Abbie's picture so weird looking? It looks more like it was snipped out of a group picture than a regular portrait. And there's no background.
And I have always wanted to know its provenance- and how do we *know* when that picture was taken?

The other photo of Abby that was taken at the same time (and appears in Porter) has a darker, but still plain background. (The pattern on the floor is the same, though) Many times the photographers used "drops" (a curtain or drape with an elegant architectural theme) as backgrounds. It is curious that it is missing in both photos.
I've often thought the close-up photo of Abby was odd. Her body is at a strange, and to me, rather tense and rigid angle and posture.

[Kat]

Yes that's the picture- Shelley said it was taken around age 49 I think, and about 15 years before the murder? Something like that. I wonder where that photo comes from and how do we know when it was taken? Is it from the FRHS and how do we know it is Abbie?

(That earlier one has props at least- a table, a chair...)

[Harry]

Kat and I were noticing almost all of the photos of the Bordens have no backgrounds.

Of the 8 known photos of Lizzie the only one that does is the one of her standing behind the chair in Newport. But that is more of a snapshot than a posed photo. All the rest appear to be studio photos.

There seems to be almost an unwritten rule that unless the whole body is in the photo there is no background. All the Borden family photos that show the person, at the most from the waist up, do not have a background.

The two of Emma, one as a child with Sarah and the other where she appears to be about early teens, do have a background especially the latter one. The photo of her as an adult, from the chest up, does not.

The only one of Bridget does show some drapery behind her. Morse's and Andrew's do not. Abbie's early 2 photos at least show a chair, table and rug on the floor.

[Shelley]

I have noticed that phenomenon too. I expect the bust shots were meant to replicate the very expensive oil portraits, and so do not have backgrounds. Since the opportunity for candid spontaneous photos did not exist due to limited photographic capabilities, people had to be posed and stand still. I love the old cabinet cards of the period taken in a studio- you can recognize the same chair used for many different sitters! I note there were many photo studios in Fall River during the 1890's.

[Shelley]

As far as the hair pin/hair comb theory, it is only that. When I thought about what was different about Abby's head from Andrew's head, naturally the hair and pins were the biggest factor. The only way for women to secure that hair style was with hairpins or combs. It may not have been mentioned because it was not at all remarkable-especially to men who had little to no dealings with ladies' hair pins. How I wish Phil Harrington had been on the spot to give all the descriptions! He would not have missed a trick.

The photo I have seen with Abby's hair down before the shaving shows not very long hair by the era standards- somewhere I believe I read it was 5 to 8 inches long (not long for backhair)- which would have neccesitated pins to make a bun and secure a hairpiece. The shorter curled hair which they called a fringe and what we would call bangs of course might have been shorter in front.

The thinking has always been that the metallic gilt came off a new hatchet because it had sustained at least 19 wounds so none was left by the time it was used on Andrew. I don't know how scientific that approach is of course. We do not know conclusively:
1. What the murder weapon was.
2. Were both killed with the same murder weapon.
3. Did all new hatchets of the period have that gilt
edging and how thick was it and how applied?
4. What was the nature and composition of the
metallic flecks found embedded in Abby's wounds and was that consisitent with the material found on new hatchets.

Reading over the inventory of clothing, given by Mr. Chace I think, there is no mention of Andrew's coat, underclothing, suspenders or belt, hose, trousers or shirt and neck tie. although we get all of Abby's garments. I doubt anyone would give a thought to hairpins or combs. I can picture her on the autopsy board being prepared for the head shaving, her hair loose in back, "knot broken", and those men just removing what remaining hairpins were there and not giving it a second thought.

[RayS]

There was some hair found on the bed. I don't know if it was the hair switch.

Gilt could come from a hatchet just as easily as from a hairpin I suppose- it's just that the new theory we were discussing was that the gilt came to be there the following year after a certain amount of people had examined it.
We're not at a loss to explain the origin of the gilt right away after the murder- but rather before trial within the skull when it seems to have been first noticed.
A hairpin sounds like an interesting source for it tho, I admit.

I will look for the hair on the bed.

There's no way a hairpin could have made those wounds.
"Gilt" here refers to the ornamental trim put on edges in those days. Ever see those old Sears & Roebuck catalogs? Its one way to show the axe was never used before, and keeps the rust off.
I'm sure if you struck a metal painted object some of the paint would adhere to the edge of the blade. Don't try this at home unless you're skilled enough; the metal hatchet will bounce back!

[Shelley]

Ray- nobody said the HAIR PIN made any of those wounds. What I suggested several times, and pretty clearly too, was that metallic hairpins, one struck with a blade could possibly account for metallic flecks in the wounds- embedded flecks at that. A hair pin could make a puncture but nobody in their right mind could conceive they made cutting, slashing wounds. Death By Hair Pin would be a non-starter.

[stuartwsa]

Would the FRHS ever allow the examination of all of the original family photographs? It would be very interesting to see them in their original form and to note the photographers' names. We could also note whether any of the photos might have been taken at the same time, and where the photographers were located.

[Shelley]

I will have a go at some metallic hairpins and combs this weekend with a hatchet and give you a report. When all else fails- try it at home yourself and see what happens. Experimentation and re-creation with camera, tape measure or whatever is not to be despised.

[shakiboo]

Good luck, Shelley, with the experiment, but be very careful!!

[Shelley]

Thanks! I have gotten pretty handy with a hatchet -it is a remarkably balanced and precise tool. I live in the state forest on 10 acres of trees so I get plenty of practice with axes and kindling hatchets for our wood stove which burns October-April.

[Kat]

I am asking where the info is please that Abbie's photo is of her at 49, 15 years before the murders? I'd like to know where that info comes from (Porter, maybe?), and now that it is mentioned, where it is we can find that Abbie's hair was 5-8" long?
Please? Thank you.

[Harry]

Yes, the photo of Abbie and it's source are of interest to me as well. She looks somewhere about the age Shelley mentioned, 49. Do we know when and where it was taken? I think the photo of Andrew must have been pretty recent to his death. Maybe it was a photo taken for his position at the bank. Can't you just see him staring down at you while you made a deposit or heaven forbid, a withdrawal, from his bank.

I found the information on Abbie's hair. The length is mentioned in the Witness statements (p42) by Police Officer Chase:

"Fall River, Mass. August 5, 1892. The following articles and wearing apparel were this afternoon taken from a washtub in the cellar wash room of the Borden House by orders of the City Marshal and Medical Examiner, and were buried under my direction in the yard back of the barn. 1 sofa pillow and tidy, one large piece of Brussels carpet, one roll of cotton batting, one sheet and several pieces of cotton cloth, three towels, one napkin, one chemise, one dress., one pair drawers, one skirt, two aprons, one hair braid and several pieces of hair from Mrs. Borden's head from five to eight inches long, one neck tie, one truss, one piece of black silk braid or watch guard. I also found mixed in with the hair of Mrs. Borden a piece of bone, which from it nature I took to be a piece of Mrs. Borden's skull, it was cut so smooth, that I thought it might be of use in determining what kind of instrument was used, as the bone and hair both had the appearance of being cut with a very sharp instrumetn; ..."

[Shelley]

Thanks Harry- you guys are the bees knees when it comes to finding this stuff. I have forgotten it has been so many years ago that I read it. I will try to hunt up the source for the date of that Abby photo this weekend as I will be in Fall River for 3 days and will ask a few people there.

[Kat]

Thanks!
And thank you Harry!
But that does say the pieces of hair were that long- so it is not necessarily so that Abbie's overall hair length was that- just the cut pieces, right?

As for her autopsy picture, the sheet is pulled so far up I can't tell how long her hair is there.

[Shelley]

But that does say the pieces of hair were that long- so it is not necessarily so that Abbie's overall hair length was that- just the cut pieces, right?

As for her autopsy picture, the sheet is pulled so far up I can't tell how long her hair is there.

I think this hair-splitting is important stuff (pun intended). I wish more detail had gone into describing both crime scene reports. The little hairball on the bed half the size of a man's fist was clearly not the braided switch, -the false hair, I agree. Looking at this false hair now, today, it is iron gray. Of course for many years it was not in the best conservation circumstances , in bright natural light in a case in what is now the gift shop at FRHS. It is also dessicated, as it is a real hair hairpiece. Horse hair coming from the manes and tails was rarely used in human hairpieces.

The bunch of "black hair" of a length of 5-8 " was probably dark-looking as it was damp and matted and displayed upon a white matlasse bedspread. This would give it a darker than normal appearance than it would have had dry and on her head. In order to sever hair from the head though, either the killer had to have pulled the hair up from the head with some good amount of tension on it, then swiped it off in a scalping method, or the weapon used to cut it off had to impact with some harder surface (namely a skull) beneath the hair to cause the cutting separation of the hair from the head. I tend to favor this last scenario. Depending upon where the piece was severed might determine the length of her overall hair. If it came from the crown of her head, or from the nape, there would be a variable of some inches on the 5-8" . In any event, it would indicate to me that Abby did not possess the long waistlength hair or shoulder length hair popular at the time.

One would wear a hairpiece, in my opinion for several reasons: 1. adding fullness to thinning or balding back or side hair 2. to extend the length of existing hair so as to allow current hair styles to be achieved 3. as some sort of disguise 4. to allow the wearer to have shorter hair, but still be able to attach longer hair for achieving popular hairdressing styles

So, we know Abby had "a full head of hair" from testimony. And we know she was not needing a disguise. One very possible scenario is that the elderly, as elderly do today, have short hair for reasons of ease and hygiene. Most geriatric units in nursing homes keep hair on female patients short and easy to care for. In 1892 a woman rarely washed her hair more than once every week to 2 weeks depending on whether or not it was oily. Cornstarch was sprinkled and brushed through the hair vigorously to remove oil, kerchiefs were worn around the house, hats covered hair outside, and hair was pinned up. With the state of plumbing, no showers and bathtubs- washing long hair was a real project. I daresay Abby, for convenience sake may have kept her hair shorter, but used her fake hairpiece attached to make up her backhair chignon.

If this is so, then combs or hairpins would surely come into play in her coiffure. The flecks of metal embedded in the wounds, to my mind are extremely important. We know that Mr. Johnson at the farm testified to sharpening a bench hatchet for Andrew, the handless hatchet was not a new hatchet-so any gilt which ever was on the Borden hatchets would have been gone by prior use and sharpening. How to explain the gilt then, in Abby's wounds? Either it was gilt from a new hatchet, metallic particles from a weapon of another sort, or hairpins or combs worn by the deceased. In any event, it is important in eliminating weapon possibilities. There- -hairaising !

[Kat]

I was looking in the trial to see if the HH was designated as *not a new hatchet* and could not find that info.

Does anyone have more info on this?

I checked Flynn's Mysterious Axe too, and he doesn't say that. He only underlines the *fact* that the 2 doctors thought a nearly new hatchet caused the wounds.

[doug65oh]

It may be in Volume 2, Kat, I can't say for sure from what I'm reading here. Draper was on the stand though. If you're thinking of the "experimental demonstrations" though, those seem to start with Frank Draper near the head of Volume 2.

[Shelley]

Perhaps I should have used the words "previously used" rather than "not new" for the handleless hatchet. If animal hair and animal blood was on that hatchet, it most probably had been used at a prior time- and was not brand new, or unused. I also have never seen mention of any metallic gilt , flecks or coating on that handleless hatchet. It could still have been new, or nearly new though. I wonder if they checked for sharpening marks? Are new hatchets ready for instant use, or do they need sharpenening first? Didn't Mr. Johnson at the farm say Andrew had dropped off a new hatchet he wanted sharpened, and decided not to take it home with him as Mr. Johnson could run it over with the milk later?

[Kat]

The fibre and animal hair was found on the claw-hammer hatchet and that was considered a pretty new hatchet I think and was the expert's *choice* in the preliminary hearing as the weapon.
It had a larger blade tho, and dropped out of the case by the time they went to the grand jury. It actually had cotton fibre on it! I am always confused as to why they dumped that as the weapon.
Anyway, I believe that is the one that came from the farm and the one alluded to, above.

After interviewing various hardware store salesmen, I find that the consensus is that one sharpens a new hatchet even before its first use.

[Kat]

The hair and fibre on the claw-hammer hatchet:

Prof. Wood
"...I was unable to find any hair on it at all, and that hair (pointing to the cow hair) is the only hair which I have had as coming from the hatchet. I would state that on the examination of that stain upon the edge of the hatchet, the cutting edge, a part of which remains there, but a large portion of which has been removed,

Page 1003

I found a good deal of wooden fibre and cotton fibre, that is, in this rough stain right near the back part of the cutting edge, the bevelled edge. It contained quite a number of fibres of cotton. Whether that was upon the other hair or not, I don't know."

and 1009:

..."The small hatchet I should have mentioned in connection with the claw hammer hatchet, that the edge measures four and a half inches. I omitted that in speaking of it. This hatchet has a cutting edge of three and one eighth inches..."

He does say that the handle did not fit well into the claw-hammer hatchet. But that was the implement found struck into the chopping block in the cellar and I think it is the only one any lady in the house admitted to knowing existed in the cellar.

[Shelley]

Cotton fiber is an odd thing to find on a hatchet blade- unless of course, the hatchet had been washed and dried with a cotton towel. . .hmmmm

[DWilly]

All styles from the early 1890's. Hair ornaments and hat trims all featured a very strong vertical line- feather straight up in the air, bows, etc. Lizzie wore a beautiful stylish black chip-shaped hat with cherry ribbons at her trial. Not exactly mourning color!

Looking around on the internet for articles on hairstyles during the Victorian Era I came across this site. I am not sure but did not Lizzie go for that "French Twist" fashion? If you scroll down you will see the Twist as well as a bit about how bangs came into fashion.

http://www.shootingstarhistory.com/hairstyles2.html

[Kat]

Thanks for the link! That was interesting. I don't recall Lizzie as having a French Twist hairdo from any of the newspaper coverages I've read- maybe someone knows?

But that last lady at the bottom left is what Abbie would seem to look like to me- the shorter haircut with the supplemental hair.

[Shelley]

An update from the hayloft- ALL four pins which were in Abby's hair at the time are cheap, non-gilded ones which the historical society still has in possession- no gilt. So there's one theory blown to bits

[DWilly]

Thanks for the link! That was interesting. I don't recall Lizzie as having a French Twist hairdo from any of the newspaper coverages I've read- maybe someone knows?

Took me a bit to find this but on page 34 of Rebello there's an article from the New York Daily Tribune, June 9, 1893 that says this about Lizzie's hair:

"She wears her hair in the old fashion French Twist, which however suggestive of an antiquated fashion-photo, nevertheless, becomes her. It is well-brushed, and greatly aids in the rendering her appearance neat and lady-like."

I also found this drawing of Lizzie in Rebello on page 217. It is of her and Mrs. Livermore. To me it does look a lot like the drawing of a French Twist in the article I read and gave a link to.

[sguthmann]

what became of the claw hammer hatchet and fibers/hair that were found on it, i wonder? does the FRHS have that as well?

[Kat]

Thanks for the hairdo update! Good for you! You found it!

Someone once submitted a bun, but that I could not find anywhere.
~~~~

As for the other implements produced in court- you'd think they also would be in the Jenning's Hip-bath Collection.
They were actually sent in to the jury!
Among the list:
"Two axes.
Claw-hammer hatchet.
Hatchet with plain head.
Handleless hatchet and bit of wood."
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Crime ... ceList.htm

[RayS]

An update from the hayloft- ALL four pins which were in Abby's hair at the time are cheap, non-gilded ones which the historical society still has in possession- no gilt. So there's one theory blown to bits

I don't disagree with you, but can we be sure those items are "real", authenticated pins? You do know the problem with that hatchet and handle, don't you? It was sawed clean through, not broken off.

[Shelley]

The pins are real and documented as having been the pins in Abby's hair. You can see them by appointment at the historical society. That evidence was collected with the fake switch of hair. They are just ordinary cheap metal pins- no gilt on them and not chopped, cut or flaked. It is possible that something else, inserted into the skull of Abby after the hair was shaved and the skin removed, caused the flakes though. Either surgical tools or perhaps hatchets used to test the blade width MIGHT have contributed to the presence pf metallic flecks.

[RayS]

I think the testimony of the Harvard Professors should be taken as fact.
Nobody here has the standing or authority to say otherwise (but some will). They investigated the skulls, and came up with the facts that were kept secret, as it would argue for the defendant (no fairly new hatchet on the property).
Contrary opinions only show the "Lizzie dunnit" mindset. You can look up "begging the question" in a book on classical logic. It means presuming the answer and basing the question on that.
"EG given Lizzie's guilt, then the gilt must be a mistake." Or was it planted evidence? By whom and for what purpose?

[Shelley]

Nobody is contradicting Dr. Wood or Dr. Dolan- something left the gilt. Something embedded it. And nobody is claiming to be an authority that I see here. The sentence was, Ray, "Either surgical tools or perhaps hatchets used to test the blade width MIGHT have contributed to the presence of metallic flecks. " Might and perhaps does not imply fact- only possibility. These were the things associated with the skull, and handling of the skull, so it is a valid observation, and not particularly Lizzie-biased one way or another. One should also consider that personnel handling the skulls might have had residue of some nature on their hands, clothing or person which would account for these results.

[Kat]

There's no authority or evidence that the HH handle was "sawed clean through, not broken off" as claimed here.
Unless you've read about these implements in the source documents, it's not really worth your putting that claim in bold text.

You do know the problem with that hatchet and handle, don't you? It was sawed clean through, not broken off.

--ray

[Shelley]

It also occurs to me that straight razor blades may have an edge coating. It's hard to know the conditions and tools ( most likely a straight razor) of the shaving of Abby's head, the removal of the skull in Oak Grove, where and how the bodies were stored in the holding tomb, interior of the coffin, the transport container for the skulls at various stages, the method used for the removal of the skulls and surgical implements used at that time, and so many factors which might have affected or contributed to the finding of metallic flecks in the scalp. At least now one can be ruled out- hairpins!

[RayS]

It also occurs to me that straight razor blades may have an edge coating. It's hard to know the conditions and tools ( most likely a straight razor) of the shaving of Abby's head, the removal of the skull in Oak Grove, where and how the bodies were stored in the holding tomb, interior of the coffin, the transport container for the skulls at various stages, the method used for the removal of the skulls and surgical implements used at that time, and so many factors which might have affected or contributed to the finding of metallic flecks in the scalp. At least now one can be ruled out- hairpins!

Wasn't there a picture here of Abby's head showing close-cropped hair?
That would be from shears or scissors, still in use today.

[RayS]

There's no authority or evidence that the HH handle was "sawed clean through, not broken off" as claimed here.
Unless you've read about these implements in the source documents, it's not really worth your putting that claim in bold text.

You do know the problem with that hatchet and handle, don't you? It was sawed clean through, not broken off.

--ray

I am the authority (and anyone else with practical experience) for the statement that the handle in the FRHS museum was sawed through. I'm going from the picture in David Kent's "Forty Whacks", which seems to be authentic. No Photoshop then.
I guarantee this scientifically. Anyone who cares to saw through a handle will see similar results. Try it and see!
Were there any contemporary pictures of the evidence from the trial? Or was it not worth the effort?

[Shelley]

You can hardly make pronouncements "scientifically" on somethng you have only seen in a photograph. The most scientific study of this handless hatchet was done in 1992 by Dr. James Starrs of George Washington University- a forensic specialist-odd that he did not pronounce that the hatchet handle was "sawn through". A saw, as you must know, leaves a pretty definitive blade mark.

Incidentally, from personal experience, shaving hair with a razor is the way hair is removed for autopsies, forensic examinations requiring it, and hospital surgeries. The tool is vastly improved, however from 1892. Abby's head appears to have a very close shave in the portions where wounds are measured. I would agree shears were probably used to remove as much as possible first-check out the nape hair.

[Kat]

OK Susan- that is the comparison that the guests and I spoke of the night we all stayed at the House.
The guy put one photo above the other to show they might possibly correspond - being the same view, so to speak. Just one with hair and one without.

Thanks Shelley.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In earlier pictures of the HH, there are ragged splinters, ray- like in Snow's book.
And in the trial testimony they talk about the *little piece* of wood and the "splinters" that had been there which now are not- during June, 1893, that is- in trial. It's called a *new break.* They are not specific as to being cut.

If you read the source documents you would gain so much more knowledge and perspective! I don't know why you don't want to read these and expand your knowledge or grow in your own ideas. There really is no point in your going in circles. Download the trial and read it! You've had about 5 years to do it Then come discuss it.