newbie here! hello all!

libby · Post by **libby** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:31 pm

so excited to be here! i stumbled across y'all one evening, read the inquest testimony, and am completely hooked!
i guess what fascinated me at first was that while the trial and forensics were somewhat modern, the attitude about lizzie as a potential murderess was so damned victorian! it just floors me that a bucket of bloody towels in the celler would hardly be discussed in the case because it was too impolite to mention menstruation---even in the face of such a bloody, horrible crime!
i believe it was in the witness statements, lizzie claimed her menstrual towels had been in celler about 3 or 4 days, but bridget told police that wasn't possible because she would have washed them on laundry day. and yet this discrepancy wasn't pursued by the prosecution!

correct me if i'm wrong--i'm only halfway through the trial transcript.

imagine what one drop of that slopwater could tell us with modern DNA analysis. gross, yes, but interesting.

snokkums · Post by **snokkums** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:40 pm

Welcome to the forum! There's a whole bunch of reading material here in the archives. Make you download the Adobe reader so you can read everything!

You are right about it being so victorian. I think the men thought a lady couldn't possilbly commint the crime was crazy.

A book you mightto read is "The Trail of Lizzie Borden" by Edmund Pearson. I am reading now; it's great.
Again welcome to the forum
Snokkums

libby · Post by **libby** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:50 pm

wow! snokkums wrote me back!
my local library had "40 whacks" by kent and "lizzie didn't do it" by masterson---both crap in my opinion. i have been calling around trying to find rebello, but i think i'm gonna have to break down and order it after all.

(i've been reading the forum for a few weeks now---even i just scroll right past rayS. learned to do that within hours!)

shakiboo · Post by **shakiboo** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:38 pm

Hi Libby and welcome!! Yep, sounds like your hooked alright! lol It just keeps on getting more and more interesting!! Glad to have ya on board!

snokkums · Post by **snokkums** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 3:54 pm

Yeah, you are right, Libby, both those books are crap. I have read them too. The book I mentioned before is good reading, as is The Lizzie Borden Sourcebook is another good one to read.

terrie · Post by **terrie** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 4:01 pm

Welcome aboard!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 2:04 am

Hello!

I think in the investigation there are probably statements that were lost or never added to the Fleet collection and that some of this stuff was probably gone over pretty thoroughly- behind the scenes- even if we don't see the written word on the subject. But it was more discussed than some think. We had a topic "Lizzie's Fleas" and showed all the references to the pail, cloths and her period- it's even in the trial closing statement I believe?
What I'm getting at is Victorian times or no, there's more than we think there is on the subject, from what I gather.

Do we think the doctors of that time, 1890's, would be a bit more casual on the subject- at least in comparison to earlier days? We do have a Lot of doctors in this case!

BaAz5 · Post by **BaAz5** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 9:13 am

Hi and welcome

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 12:35 pm

I would be interested in knowing why a few of you feel like the books by Kent and Masterson are "crap". Is it the content ? The presentation ?

Tracy...

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 12:25 am

That's a good question. I was sort of wondering that too- mainly because we usually like to discuss the merits and drawbacks!

We do like to talk about the books!

Cheryl · Post by **Cheryl** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:33 am

Welcome Libby! I just joined myself not too long ago. It's great to have you with us!

Liz Crouthers · Post by **Liz Crouthers** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 2:04 pm

Hi Libby Welcome to the party, hope you have an interesting theory and an open mind.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:17 pm

Hi Libby, welcome to the Forum!

I found a thread in the past from the archives where we were discussing the pail of bloody towels or napkins that you might find interesting:

http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Archi ... fprivy.htm

And where we discussed the blood spot on the back of Lizzie's petticoat:
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Archi ... ective.htm

Sorry, can't seem to locate the "Lizzie's Fleas" thread for some reason?

libby · Post by **libby** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:38 pm

masterson proposes that abby really got a note, probably from the whiteheads, and being a frequent visitor, probably had a key. and being an overweight person, she probably had a piece of pie (maybe two!) and fell asleep til about 10:45.
masterson ignores the fact that no note was ever found, the whiteheads never came forward as authoring a note, and if they HAD sent for abby, why would they then leave the house?
masterson then claims abby probably came in the front door right as lizzie was headed to the barn, ignoring the fact that abby had had her front door key taken several days earlier. masterson then claims that abby probably answered the front door when a man came for a business call for andrew. he calls this man "nemesis." being a good wife, abby "probably" would have known to leave her husband alone to discuss his affairs in private, and that she probably went to the guestroom to busy herself.
masterson then claims that "nemesis" probably gazed upon the face of a sleeping andrew, and then probably spied a shiny new hatchet partially concealed behind the borden sofa, then decided to do the deed.
according to masterson, abby hears nothing, even as this "nemesis" climbs the stairs to kill her, as she could identify him.
finally "nemesis" probably then disposes of the hatchet on crowe's barn roof.

masterson completely ignores the fact that abby was found to have been considerably colder, her blood coagulated, and rigor mortis had started. he claims the extra food she had was probably her mid-morning snack.

as for the hatchet, masterson cites newspaper accounts that bridget testified at the inquest about seeing a hatchet in the sitting room that morning. (and we all know how accurate and level-headed the papers were regarding the case) ---and, darn it all, bridget's inquest testimony is lost, so masterson just assumes that the rumored hatchet existed.

(all italics mine)
this is why "lizzie didn't do it" by masterson, in my opinion, is crap.

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 2:31 am

Libby...thank you for posting your opinion/interpretation of Masterson's work.

I believe a copy of Mr. Rebello's book will be quite hard to find as there are no more copies to 'order' (from the author). However, you may have luck finding one via ebay. I wish you luck in finding a copy.

Many Lizzie books can be downloaded via the resouce section at lizzieandrewborden.com:
http://lizzieandrewborden.com/Resources ... dBooks.htm

Tracy...

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 3:28 am

I guess "Crap" is good a word as any to describe Masterson's account. But, that phrase can be used for many, if not most, of the scenario's written by students and scribes of the Borden murder case. Take Victoria's account: what a load of crap that was or as I see it, what a wonderful splinter of imagination.........and of course crap. But, I loved it.

Every author has their ideas, some have more holes than others and most are just another slice of swiss cheese. The holes are just in different places. It's what makes this case so facinating. Everyone thinks they know who did it and how it was done. One person's conclusion is another's crap. Don't get me wrong, there is much crap out there.............but, even dung beetles find interest in crap.

Once one becomes very knowledgeable about the case the easier it is to forgive those who appear to give wacky chain of events. Thus I found Masterson a fun read. I can forgive his synopsis. Why? Because I know better. As a matter of fact I know the truth. But, then I'm afraid that if I disclose it many would find it, "Crap."

Yes libby, finding a Rebello may prove a little difficult. If you scrub the antiquarian book sites you may find only one or two and those will list for 150 to 200.

The author is planning a paperback edition sometime in the future. Such a book once it is published would probably sell between 30 to 50 dollars.
I would wait until then and if I come across one at a reasonable fee I will let you know. In any event, good luck in finding one. If it's the facts you want it's the "Rebello" you need.

Tina-Kate · Post by **Tina-Kate** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 9:52 am

I find this whole "Nemesis" business really funny. I think there was a poster on here who also used it all the time to describe Brown's male villain.

Nemesis was actually a Goddess (female, NOT male) who more or less punished those who were undeserving. Wouldn't that be a much better pseudonym for Lizzie instead?! Certainly Lizzie thought Abby was undeserving.

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 10:16 am

Michael, you make some good points. I, too, enjoyed reading Masterton and like that he challenged some of the dogma of the case. It's a great read but his "solution" doesn't ring true. But I don't believe providing a solution was the thrust of the book.

Personally, I would not call it crap. There are other Borden books that come close to that but at least the better part of Masterton was on the scholarly side. He did raise interesting questions.

There are two books on the Lincoln assassination written by Otto Eisenschiml which remind me of Masterton's book. Eisenschiml, too, questioned the accepted theories and raised interesting questions. Upon first read they sound very possible but the more you look into that event you come to realize that a lot of what he wrote was just theory and not supported by verifiable facts. Interesting in itself but it has to be taken in context.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 11:21 am

Susan @ Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:17 pm wrote:Hi Libby, welcome to the Forum! I found a thread in the past from the archives where we were discussing the pail of bloody towels or napkins that you might find interesting:

http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Archi ... fprivy.htm

And where we discussed the blood spot on the back of Lizzie's petticoat:
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Archi ... ective.htm

Sorry, can't seem to locate the "Lizzie's Fleas" thread for some reason?

Thank you Susan for the Search!
It might have been at our previous Arborwood Forum, in the Privy there. That may be why one topic was called "Coming out of the Privy" or whatever...
Since the Privy was private, probably not much came out of there when we were switched over here.

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 1:03 pm

Yes Harry: That is exactly how I feel when reading a new author on the Fall River case. Most have much, or at the very least, something to offer. Even if their theory doesn't make much sense they may open new avenues of looking at an old topic.

Living with Lizzie lore all my life, even as a child, and reading Lincoln and Radin in the 60s, I did not take it up as a study till I came to Speiring. By then I had a good grasp of the crime and the characters and could hold a somewhat intellectual conversation about the murders.

But, then there was Brown. After reading Arnold I was positive, that night, that he had solved the crime. How could all the others have missed this. It made so much sense. BUT, of course as time went on I realized that many scenarios can be made to fit. Though much more far fetched than most, it did leave me asking questions and looking at the case from my own angle, which in many cases is just as good as anyone else's.

After Arnold Brown's book, I went from "Lizzie did it----Emma did it----Bridget did it----and Abby did it, to someone else did it, that being an outsider known or unknown to the family. In time I stayed with that belief and adopted the fact that though the killer is not known to us he/she was known, and perhaps hired, by Lizzie.

Like Elsenschiml's book, Brown spins an entertaining if not convincing yarn which stimulates the reader into looking at the case from fresh and innovative angles.

Cool !!!

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 8:33 pm

You're welcome, Kat. I guess that explains why I can't locate that thread, oh well, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

I agree, I think every book I've read on the Borden case has some sort of merit. Especially if it makes you start thinking outside the box and question some of the "facts" that are part of the legend that are just taken for granted to be true. The biggest issue I've seen is when you start remembering a certain author's "facts" that are part of their theory, but, aren't in any way documented. I had that problem in the past with Lincoln's book, that certainly got lodged in my head!

libby · Post by **libby** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:27 am

sorry if the term "crap" was a little strong for some here.

it seems like a lot of alternate theories, though, cherry-pick the evidence they like, and ignore the evidence that would easily refute their splashy title and their ability to sell books.

i will admit that this "nemesis" thing is exciting to ponder, i just hate the cherry-picking.

and in the years before the wonderous internet and the availability of transcripts to the general public, authors like masterson were salesmen of half-truths and ridiculous speculation---with impunity.

(i just wish we had a better way of "reading" the credibility of each witness--instead of just words on paper!)

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:46 am

This may not matter to anyone who doesn't care about 'political correctness' but we have Dr. Masterson's son here as a member and his father has recently died. I would personally prefer to show more respect due to his status as a Ph.D. Also, I think Dr. Masterton was very sincere in his beliefs and he didn't come across to me as trying to bamboozle me as the reader in any way- not like some other authors. I think his ultimate goal was to get people thinking and that can only be good, surely?

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 2:11 am

I agree Kat. Thank you.

Tracy...

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 3:05 am

Yes Kat: As long as we critique the theory and not the man I think Mr. Masterson would understand the criticism of his father's scenario.

So, when we have an author or account that we can shoot holes through, let us call it rubbish or Blarney or bunk........but keep in mind that truth is stranger than fiction, and the truth may very well relegate everyone's theory as hogwash and the improbable or implausible as actuality.

What we perceive as evidence, proof, eyewitness accounts could be wrong or prefabricated, tampered with etc. The O.J. thing? Thus, there could be more truth to Mr Masterson's account than we know---then again it may be rubbish. No one knows the truth so......... (?) Thus, license is given to all of us, including Mr Masterson, to put forth his case and try and convince us through his little book. It is our job to do a thorough book review before purchasing the book and decide whether it's worth a read.

I don't have a Ph. D or even a Ph. B. but I have my beliefs about this case and if someone thinks it's crap.....well, I can take it, as long as it's not a personal attack on me or my integrity.

That is why I usually give the advice to new readers to read early accounts about the case, Radin, (again) Lincoln, Sullivan, and even Speiring. Reading all these, and not just one, gives you a stable footing in evaluating the truth, or perceived truth, or more importantly, come up with your own truth. After reading a couple of these accounts, and you come across an implausible scenario or "stretched account" you can agree, disagree, or just have a good laugh.

Then stump your belief structure and read Arnold Brown....

libby · Post by **libby** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:31 pm

as new as i am, i obviously couldn't know everyone who is a member here, nor was i trying to hurt the relatives of the recently deceased. and i certainly wasn't dismissing the man's entire life, education, or intelligence.

and masterson was not the only one to whom i was referring about "cherry-picking" and sensationalism. kent did it in "40 whacks", and of course the infamous brown theory. we all know some people who clutch on to alternate unprovable speculation to the point they won't even refer to the trial transcripts, lest their belief fall apart.

alternate theories are super, i applaud them. but when someone with even a cursory knowledge of the case (like me) can so easily pick them apart, well, it annoys me. yeah, i think masterson's book is 'crap,' but then, who the hell am i? i'm sure dr. masterson, in his lifetime, was criticized AND lauded by many folks wiser than me.

and speaking of sensationalism to sell books: try wading through the thousand or so jack-the-ripper books. so many theories, so many tall tales. so many books sold on half-truths and/or blatant fiction. but that's for another forum.

to the young mr. masterson, if you see this: i meant you no dismay.

libby · Post by **libby** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:47 pm

and, by way of explanation...

my mother worked as a proofreader (and sometimes fact-checker) for a respected publishing house in the late70's-early 80's, so i tend to be VERY cynical about authors just trying to sell books. her anecdotes have me well-hardened about the business.

i hope my attitudes make a little more sense now...

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Fri Jun 22, 2007 2:04 am

For those not familiar with Dr. Masterton's work, here is a link to some sample pages! There are illustrations too!

http://books.google.com/books?id=mRaK8q ... +Durfee%22

On page 15 there's a crowd!

NESpinster · Post by **NESpinster** » Fri Jun 22, 2007 8:50 am

Hi, Libby, welcome to the Forum!

Sounds like you will make a spirited debater (and yes, that is a compliment!!

).

Did you bring your hatchet with you lol?

Good to have you here!!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:02 pm

Did that link work for anyone? I was wondering.

twinsrwe · Post by **twinsrwe** » Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:48 pm

Yes, Kat, the link worked very well. Thank-you.