Why Bridget Went to Ireland

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:03 am

I used to think Bridget being sent to Ireland after the murders was just gossip, but I've been hearing whispers and hints that she went, and she went on Lizzie's money.

If so, why was Bridget given the funds to go? What did she do to 'be rewarded' with the trip?

Or why was she paid to go away?

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Mon Oct 05, 2009 9:53 am

IMHO, Bridget's testimony regarding Lizzie seemed to be a mixed bag, some favorable, some unfavorable.

If she got paid anything it must have been for what she didn't say than what she did. She was a member of that household for almost 3 years so she had the opportunity to hear a lot.

I think these few lines from her trial testimony (p255) say a lot:

"Q. You never saw any conflict in the family?
A. No, sir.
Q. Never saw the least, ---any quarreling or anything of that kind?
A. No, sir, I did not."

That's hard to believe in a family that was supposedly divided between parents and daughters.

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Mon Oct 05, 2009 10:18 am

That's for sure. Just think if Bridget said she did see some quarrels, and she told what they were. It'd make for some great reading!

Would it have made any difference in Lizzie's trial if Bridget did tell of some good fights that went on?

I don't recall anyone testifying about Lizzie's back-stabbing words about Abby - at the trial.

I'm almost sure that Anna Howland Borden was supposed to testify about coming home from the Grand Tour with her and what Lizzie said to her, but I believe she was not allowed to testify at the trial.

I'm thinking only at the trial itself, because that's where the jury was and Lizzie's guilt or innocence finally proclaimed. The other hearings were not supposed to matter to the jury.

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:30 pm

I think there were any number of people who told less than they knew in order to avoid being the one person responsible for a conviction. Alice Russell came the closest to that with the dress burning information. Bridget was in a unique position, in that she had future employment to consider. If she had been the person responsible for Lizzie being sent to the gallows, she might well have found herself out of work just about anywhere. A lower class servant testifying against upper class family matters would not be taken lightly by prospective future employers. Bridget had nothing to gain, and a lot to lose, by supplying any negative information about the Borden family.

Alice Russell testified about "differences of opinion", the dressmaker testified about negative comments about Abby made by Lizzie, but nothing about any face-to-face confrontations among family members. Bridget might have been the more believable because she lived within the household and it was her word against the others.

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:01 pm

That makes sense, Yooper. People might be reluctant to hire a blabber mouth. I have a feeling that Bridget's testimony on any fighting might be thrown out. They threw out all the other good stuff.

Knowlton was a little thick with Bridget, tho. He talked to her. Wouldn't that be something if Knowlton made a deal with her? I guess not, tho, because she didn't really point a finger at Lizzie. I don't think she gave the Prosecution anything.

Do you think she might have been afraid to say? Afraid of getting axed herself?

Has anyone ever read of Bridget's next address after the trial?

I've also read that Andrew Jennings told Bridget not to come back to the States. The only reason I can think of for that, is she had something she could tell. Remember one of the items in the hip bath not being turned over to anyone because Jennings thought Lizzie could be tried on a different charge if it were seen? (I am thinking this charge would be as an 'accessory' to murder.)

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Oct 07, 2009 11:50 pm

Personally, I don't think Bridget could be in a position to not cooperate if she knew much of anything- Meaning, if she knew anything really specific that she'd be able to hold out on that.
She wasn't in a position to make any deals- considering her lack of status, she might be thought 'disposable.' Or, if she was bought and paid for- I doubt she had the acumen to weather all the questions- but, also, if paid, she wouldn't need to worry about her future employment, at least for a while.
Where did she go after employment at the jail?

My thoughts are that Bridget could not, by herself, subvert the trial of Lizzie Borden for a double muder- she wasn't that important a person, as a servant.