Bridget's Beau?

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 7:11 pm

In the course of talking to someone I know we decided to brainstorm about the case a little. I believe Lizzie did it, but my friend believes she is innocent. We discussed several of the well known theories, and tried to come up with a few which may not have been suggested. I'm not sure after all this time that is possible.

One theory that we tossed around is Bridget had a boyfriend and it was this man who committed the deed. Bridget may have possibly been voluntarily/involuntarily intimate with someone in the household and after he became aware of the situation the boyfriend became enraged. I'm sure this theory has been proposed before but any thoughts on it?

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 8:52 am

That's an interesting speculation, Missy. Adams, in his cross-examination of Bridget at the Preliminary hearing, raised the question of her having a boyfriend. He's questioning her about her return home Wednesday night. Beginning on page 51+:

"Q. Did anybody come home with you that night?
A. No Sir.
Q. Did anybody come to the gate with you?
A. No Sir.
Q. Did you meet anybody in particular in the street?
A. No Sir.
Q. Did you have any visitors?
A. Sometimes.
Q. Did you have any men call on you?
A. No Sir.
Q. Ever since you have been at this house?
A. Not in Fall River.
Q. While you have been in this house?
A. Not anybody from Fall River.
Q. I did not ask you where they were from. When did you have anybody call on you, not from Fall River?
A. About two or three months before that I guess.
Q. That is the last time any man has called on you at the house?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Has any man walked home with you?
A. No Sir.
Q. Has any man seen you in the back yard?
A. No Sir.
Q. Have you met anybody in the back yard for the last two or three months?
A. No Sir.
Q. Did you ever meet anybody in the back yard?
A. No Sir.
Q. Or sit down with anybody on the back step, or in the back yard?
A. No Sir.
Q. Never in your life?
A. I have sat down with girls on the back stairs and in the kitchen.
Q. Have you ever sat out on the back side of the house, or in the yard with girls?
A. No Sir.
Q. Or with anybody?
A. No Sir.
Q. Wednesday night you came in about what time?
A. About five minutes past ten.
Q. Everybody had gone to bed?
A. Yes Sir."

diana · Post by **diana** » Wed Jun 06, 2007 10:39 pm

The tenor of Adams' questioning leads me to believe he'd been told a man had been seeing Bridget while she was in service at the Borden's.

But first she says no one called on her. Then she says nobody from Fall River called on her. Finally she agrees that someone did call on her at the house. Why are her responses so contradictory? Is she trying to hide something? Or protect someone? Or just preserve her privacy? Hard to say...

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:33 am

That was my thought too, Diana. I recall reading that good lawyer does not ask questions that he/she does not already know the answers to. So with that in mind, he must have known that Bridget had a boyfriend of some sort that had visited her in the past. I can't think of a direct example off the top of my head, but, Bridget does this sort of odd answering in other parts of her testimony too.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:44 am

diana @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 9:39 pm wrote:The tenor of Adams' questioning leads me to believe he'd been told a man had been seeing Bridget while she was in service at the Borden's.

But first she says no one called on her. Then she says nobody from Fall River called on her. Finally she agrees that someone did call on her at the house. Why are her responses so contradictory? Is she trying to hide something? Or protect someone? Or just preserve her privacy? Hard to say...

This is the feeling I get also. Asking if she had met anyone in the back yard, or sat on the steps with anyone are pretty specific questions. They all seem pretty specific. Which does tend to make you think that she had been seen in the company of a man on the Borden property. She said the last time a man, not from Fall River, came to see her was two or three months before the killings. Why didn't they ask her who the man was and his reason for being there? Makes one wonder where they got this information about Bridget if they did already know the answers.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Jun 07, 2007 11:25 am

A newspaper claimed Bridget had a finace who died recently- but I can't seem to find the reference. He was out of Newport, where she used to work.
I hope the reference is not from an author.

diana · Post by **diana** » Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:54 pm

Kat @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:25 am wrote:A newspaper claimed Bridget had a finace who died recently- but I can't seem to find the reference. He was out of Newport, where she used to work.
I hope the reference is not from an author.

In the Trickey-McHenry reportage McHenry says:

"I investigated her [Bridget's] career from the time she landed in America to the time of the DEATH of her INTENDED HUSBAND a MONTH before the murder." (Boston Daily Globe, Oct. 10, 1892)

McHenry also claims he initially sent his wife dressed up as a nun to interview Bridget, BTW.

That's the only reference I could remember -- but if it is the only one -- it's even worse than an author!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Jun 07, 2007 11:46 pm

Oops! I knew it would be bad- but not that bad! Forget I mentioned it!

Thanks Diana for finding it!

diana · Post by **diana** » Fri Jun 08, 2007 1:22 am

No problem. I figured you'd be dismayed by the source.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Fri Jun 08, 2007 6:52 pm

diana @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 11:54 am wrote:

In the Trickey-McHenry reportage McHenry says:

"I investigated her [Bridget's] career from the time she landed in America to the time of the DEATH of her INTENDED HUSBAND a MONTH before the murder." (Boston Daily Globe, Oct. 10, 1892)

McHenry also claims he initially sent his wife dressed up as a nun to interview Bridget, BTW.

That's the only reference I could remember -- but if it is the only one -- it's even worse than an author!

I definitely wouldn't take that source very seriously. I do wonder, however, because they say that even a myth has a grain of truth buried somewhere in it. I've also been searching for any other evidence Bridget may have had a boyfriend at around this time. If this were the case it could account for how the killer seemed to know the house well enough to hide even with all of the locked doors, the general routine of the household members, how the killer found his way into the house, it could account for many things. I'm sure if it were someone Bridget had been seeing they may have discussed these kinds of things during general conversation. Bridget may even have confided certain secrets of the household. This is all pure speculation because there doesn't seem to be any proof that exists, but it could definitely explain a lot about how the killer moved about without being seen.

Cheryl · Post by **Cheryl** » Fri Jun 08, 2007 9:07 pm

There was a Chicago Daily Tribune article from December 1899 which
states that there was a NY detective collecting evidence and shedding
new light on the case...convinced the murderer was Bridget's lover who had gone back to Ireland after the murders. Article states that Bridget went back to Ireland as well, but then returned to Taunton, Mass. Article also suggests that Lizzie was using all of her intelligence & means to help this investigation along.

The small article can be found in the Mondo Lizzie Bordon archives June 2006, Bordon Buzz.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 1:22 am

I happen to like the Bridget-Boyfriend scenario.
I don't know the motive but I've thought the idea intriguing.

snokkums · Post by **snokkums** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 3:35 pm

My only problem witht the Bridget boyfriend sceniro is that if Lizzie knew the boyfriend did it, she point the finger a Bridget saying that Bridget set the whole thing up.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Jun 10, 2007 12:35 am

And what's the motive?
But with Bridget's work history- several jobs over a few years- and her station as cook- gives her a sort of suspicion and she could possibly have been dabbling in poison and her beau took a hatchet...
There's poison and a Hatchet- right there.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Jun 10, 2007 12:35 am

Maybe Bridget sent a naive Lizzie out to buy prussic acid for her.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sun Jun 10, 2007 4:46 pm

Kat @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 11:35 pm wrote:Maybe Bridget sent a naive Lizzie out to buy prussic acid for her.

That's a possibility that is pretty intriguing. But I wonder if this was the case what possible reason would she create to tell Lizzie for wanting such a volatile substance?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Jun 10, 2007 7:41 pm

To kill some moths in her cooking pot?

I don't know- what are the other uses for prussic acid?
Do they use it to clean things, like the bottom of pots?
I imagine pots on a cooking stove exposed to a direct flame need some kind odf special cleaning?

sguthmann · Post by **sguthmann** » Mon Jun 11, 2007 12:33 am

i'm sorry, but i cannot make sense of a motive for this scenario - unless it was in a fit of passion/jealousy/rage/revenge for something going on between Bridget and Andrew? even so, would Bridget have gone along with such a plot? and why would she need to? i just don't see her condoning such actions, let alone actually taking an active part in such a plot with a beau.

it would be nice to know more about her past work history, though (i.e, relationships with past employers, if there were ever any "strange events"/crimes which occurred at the places she was employed while she was there, etc).

i know Bridget is a pretty elusive figure, but in your opinions what author/researcher has put together the most comprehensive (and ideally accurate) information on Bridget? i really don't know?