Why Did Lizzie Change Into a "Pink Wrapper?"

[Robert Harry]

Something has bugged me since I've been into this case---Lizzie's changing into a pink wrapper. There is a philosophical principle that holds that "the simplest explanation is usually the correct one," and I think criminologists also use this when piecing together stories of suspects. So, that is why I personally think that Lizzie is guilty--she had the motive, and no other explanations are needed, (there is no need to suppose that someone else came into the house) plus for me the dead giveaway are the number of blows to Abby--that definitely implies deep feeling, not just a mercenary killing someone. Anyway, I have also heard that guilty suspects usually want to change clothes after the crime (I have seen that a number of times on "Forensic Files"). So, why did Lizzie have to change at all? That would be the farthest thing from my mind if I was innocent, had just discovered my parents murdered, and was socked with all kinds of emotions--grief, fear, anger, shock. Especially since, by all accounts, Lizzie's clothing did not appear in the least spotted or stained or otherwise out of order (NB this doesn't mean there weren't spots--it just means they weren't detected--I also saw on Forensic Files a pair of jeans a guy used to murder his wife that showed no blood except by microscopic examination later). And, of all things, a pink wrapper--why such a dramatic change? Seems girlish and flirty when you would think Lizzie should put on mourning clothes. The fact of this change further confirms Lizzie's guilt for me, though I respect others' opinions.

[Yooper]

Lizzie may have thought she needed to change her dress due to the possibility of blood spots on it. She wasn't aware of what others had or had not noticed at that point. It may be the reason for directing the search for Abby upstairs instead of allowing Bridget to look for Abby at the Whitehead's house. If Lizzie thought she had to change the dress, and if she didn't want to answer questions about not noticing Abby lying in the guest room, she needed Abby found right away. Abby's body was more or less between Lizzie and a dress change.

[Robert Harry]

Yes, it does sound like it's part of a plan rather than the "normal" flow of events. I recall reading that (I believe in her inquest testimony) Lizzie says, "Someone thought that I should change...." or something to that effect. That also sounds fishy to me. I can't imagine family, or police, or medical personnel on the scene suggesting that Lizzie change in the midst of trying to cope with this shocking and mysterious double murder.

[goddessoftheclassroom]

I honestly thought Lizzie wanted to change into something that didn't require a corset.

[diana]

Yes, my sense of that has always been that, as Lizzie was considered by those attending her (Mrs. Churchill and Alice Russell) to be in a state of upset, she was encouraged to go to her room and rest. So it seems reasonable that she would change into a comfortable garment such as a wrapper once she was in her own private quarters.

[SallyG]

I think back in the corset days, loosening of the corset would make you more comfortable....and changing and perhaps loosening the corset strings would be something that, I would think, the other women would encourage her to do. She obviously was not going anywhere, the doctor would probably give her a sedative...yes, changing into a wrapper, or house dress, and loosening or removing her corset would be the way to go!! I find that perfectly reasonable.

If anyone has ever worn a corset...I mean a real old-fashioned corset...you know what I mean. You can get used to them only up to a point. There is nothing comfortable about them!

Just like back in the day when women wore girdles...as soon as you got home, off they would come. Heck, I don't even wear a bra when I'm at home (sorry guys!). Now that's not to say that if my parents were murdered, the first thing I'd do is snatch off my bra..but you get my drift. The other women were trying to console and tend to her, and changing into something more comfortable would be the logical thing to do.

[Yooper]

Has it been established that Lizzie was wearing a corset the morning of the murders?

[Robert Harry]

But I am still wondering, why a PINK wrapper? It seems like something one might wear to a carnival or summer party, and rather unbecoming for a woman in shock who is (supposedly) grieving the deaths of her father and stepmother.

[diana]

But I am still wondering, why a PINK wrapper? It seems like something one might wear to a carnival or summer party, and rather unbecoming for a woman in shock who is (supposedly) grieving the deaths of her father and stepmother.

I'm thinking of a wrapper as being like a dressing gown -- and perhaps these didn't come in appropriate 'mourning' colors?

[Allen]

I'm thinking that she may have changed because she wanted to shed the clothing she'd worn that morning for some reason. I agree she may have been trying to hide something. Secondly, in my opinion, I think they would have to go with whatever clothing they had on hand to wear. It might have just been the most comfortable thing handy, regardless of color. This was not an age when you could just run to the nearest shop and grab something off the rack. The Borden's had their clothing handmade. Maybe the Borden girls didn't own any "mourning" clothes. I'm not sure how long it might have been since they had anyone to mourn. Out of the eighteen or nineteen dresses Emma said she and Lizzie owned at the time, ten of them were blue or blue was a marked color. Eight of those belonged to Lizzie. Then the pink wrapper that we know of. So I'm also curious about the mourning clothing they did eventually wear. When and how did they come about it?

[SallyG]

A wrapper was more or less like a housedress...not something you'd wear out on the street, but around the house..a bit informal. It was not a robe or dressing gown.

I would bet that Lizzie was wearing her corset that morning. No proper lady went without her corset! Some women even slept in them! It puts me in mind of an amusing story I read..not sure if it's true. Prostitutes generally did not wear corsets, so their bodies felt quite loose..not firm like a corseted woman. Therefore, a "loose", or uncorseted, woman was generally a prostitute.

[Harry]

de Mille offers another possible reason why Lizzie changed into her wrapper. Page 43:

"...At her friends' solicitation, she went to her room to rest, and she had to pass the two sheeted corpses to get there. She took off her dress and hung it out of sight, then put on a pink and white striped wrapper. This was natural enough; Dr. Bowen was going to examine her and give her a sedative. But the fact remains that she did remove from scrutiny the dress she had been wearing. ..."

I don't see why she would need to do that since the sedative was taken orally.

Although there is no absolute proof I too believe she would have been wearing a corset. If she was telling the truth that she was going out that afternoon to purchase fishing gear a corset would have been part of her "street" outfit.

I dug down deep into my archives and found an article in the now defunct Lizzie Borden Quarterly. written by the late Borden case expert, Neilson Caplain. From the April 2001 issue:

"LIZZIE, A WELL-CORSETED LADY

In a collection of advertising covers (envelopes) I came across several issued by corset companies. I thought it might be interesting to relate them to Lizzie Borden. I came up with the following items.

In a personal memoir in the Fall River Herald News the author wrote, "An entourage of M. Sweeney Company employees ushered Lizzie Borden into the store. She arrived in her Paris fashions a trifle anomalous in her squat, well-corseted figure."

In Burning Your Boats, a work of fiction, Angela Carter wrote, "Under her frock Lizzie wore starched petticoats, long drawers, a chemise and a whalebone corset that squeezed her belly as in a vise."

From Lizzie Borden, a novel by Elizabeth Engstrom, "It was blazing hot, so hot that nobody was out in the street. Women wore their house dresses in public. They would hardly survive in corsets and stays. The air upstairs was even denser ... Lizzie loosened her corset."

Mrs. Belloc Lowndes narrated in Lizzie Borden, A Study in Conjecture, "Mrs. Churchill and Miss Russell made Lizzie lie down, unlaced her corset and fanned her."

From the Internet I learned that in Lizzie's day tightly-laced corsets were considered a virtue, made breathing a problem, and caused women to be helpless. Women wore corsets despite health concerns, ranging from shortness of breath to hysteria.

Could Lizzie have been bound up in a tightly-fitted corset that warm summer day in 1892 and could that have contributed to the hysteria that found release in the violent acts of murder?"

Granted it does not mean she had one on on the 4th of August but ....

[Yooper]

Would Lizzie have been wearing a corset with the paint stained dress, the Bedford cord? I can understand her wearing one if she had been planning to go out and was wearing something better, but would a corset be a part of a house dress outfit?

[Yooper]

Come to think of it, if Lizzie had been prompted to change her outfit by the women present, it may imply she was wearing something restrictive like a corset. That might not have been specifically mentioned in the testimony, that is, the reason for suggesting a change of clothing. On the other hand, if Lizzie changed clothing on her own, without suggestion, all bets are off!

[robbchadwick]

Come to think of it, if Lizzie had been prompted to change her outfit by the women present, it may imply she was wearing something restrictive like a corset. That might not have been specifically mentioned in the testimony, that is, the reason for suggesting a change of clothing. On the other hand, if Lizzie changed clothing on her own, without suggestion, all bets are off!

I wonder if the corset issue would even be mentioned in the testimony or in an other public way. It may have been considered inappropriate to discuss undergarments in that day; in fact, I'm pretty sure it would have been. It does seem likely though that one lady might whisper to another that it might be more comfortable for someone thought to be caught up in an emotional state to remove the corset to improve the ability to breathe to avoid fainting.

[Constantine]

During the last Mutton Eaters' gathering, we went to a house, the name of which escapes me at the moment (I'm sure some of the others will fill you in) surviving from Revolutionary times.

During the guided tour we learned that girls were fitted with corsets practically from day 1, so that their back muscles were incapable of supporting them without them! This was well before Lizzie's day, of course, but I wonder if this was still the case or not.

[patsy]

After all that shock and commotion it would seem reasonable to me to change into something more comfortable such as a wrapper, and especially if she did wear her corset that morning. But if she was guilty, then it would seem that she changed in order to get her dress our of sight.

Alice Russell testified that she did not suggest changing the dress, and she said she did not hear anyone suggest anything like that. I can't recall whether we know that someone did come forward and say that they made such a suggestion. Does anyone remember whether anyone said they suggested changing to Lizzie?

Audrey found some interesting information about wrappers in this thread. viewtopic.php?t=2135

[Bobbypoz]

Since corsets were so confining and painful-I was just wondering - if Lizzie actually did do the deed- would she have been physically able to do so with such savagery (to Abby) while wearing one?

[stargazer]

When did the police ask for the dress she had on, and stockings, etc ? Was it days later ? I think I could easily kill someone with a corset on, especially if I had to adapt to the thing and function on a day to day basis. I doubt that Lizzie had a wasp waist. Her corsets may have been "not so extreme." Some of them were front laced. I wonder if Bridget helped lace her up in the back ? Emma was out of town. Maybe Lizzie didn't have one on what with the mutton and all, making her a mite tad queasy. I can't fathom wearing a long dress, and corset in the heat, and humidity. (unless it's for a short time like a photo op)

[goddessoftheclassroom]

Dresses and skirts with "waists" (blouses) were fitted to a woman wearing the undergarments she would wear with the outfit; they wouldn't fit without the corset.

Corsets do restrict a woman's ability to breathe deeply, so changing out of it would be one of the first suggestions anyone trying to help Lizzie would make.

[Harry]

A fake photo I did many years ago. Her hair is a bit too much red.

[Constantine]

It goes nicely with the wrapper, though.

[stargazer]

That's cool, Harry.

[kssunflower]

That looks very similar to the dress I wore to volunteer at my 1860's historic site. Mine was a drab shade of brown though.

[robbchadwick]

... Maybe Lizzie didn't have one on what with the mutton and all, making her a mite tad queasy. I can't fathom wearing a long dress, and corset in the heat, and humidity. (unless it's for a short time like a photo op)

I guess I was under the impression that Lizzie wasn't really eating the mutton. I know she didn't usually eat with her parents; and I'm pretty sure I remember that she did not eat it that morning at breakfast.

[stargazer]

I read that they had been eating it for days in a row, and that "most everyone" got sick one way or another. I shudder to think that they were going to have it again when Andy and John got home.

[DJ]

Since the Bedford-cord cotton was a cheap-material dress, it was undoubtedly considered a "house dress" of its day-- not something with which someone would wear a corset, since it was more utilitarian than fashionable. For "Ethel Mertz-ing" around No. 92, if you will. (But, still all right to go to market and "informal calling" among friends and relatives who were also similarly attired.)

On the other hand, Lizzie surely would have been wearing a corset if she had indeed changed from the Bedford-cord (and paint-stained) dress that she later burned into the Bengalene silk, which she handed over to the coppers, in a partial lie at least (yes, she had worn it that a.m., but also the Bedford cord, which she hid until the following Sunday).

I doubt Lizzie went downstairs in a corset, first thing that a.m. Surely, she was shlepping about in a house dress (the paint-stained Bedford cord), sans corset.

Anyway, if she had changed into the Bengalene silk, she must have been wearing a corset and--

*Small wonder that she changed into a wrapper, pink or otherwise, when she retired to her bedroom. It wasn't as if she would be going to town anytime soon, for which she was probably effecting an impression. via her Bengalene silk dress, for those who suspicioned her. Might as well shuck out of her corset and get comfortable.*

************************************************************
Now, I don't know precisely how this relates to 1892, but, in the film "Meet Me in St. Louis" (set in 1903-1904), there is a memorable scene about corset-donning for a fancy Christmas Eve ball, to be attended by one Lucille Ballard of NYC.

The Smith girls believe that rival Lucille Ballard "doesn't make a move without a corset." However, the Smith girls obviously do not wear corsets as a rule, but feel compelled to, in order to compete with Miss Ballard at the formal-dress ball.

Now, if the matter of corset-wearing had not changed much over the decade from the Borden murders to the setting of "Meet Me in St. Louis," then the implication is clear:

Corsets for "fashionable," not everyday, attire.

[Yooper]

Does it sound reasonable that Lizzie would have worn a fancy dress while rummaging around the barn and eating pears in a dusty hayloft? According to Lizzie, she spent twenty to thirty minutes out there.

[DJ]

Well, that's the rub, isn't it?
It *doesn't* sound reasonable at all, and thus lends even *less* credence to Lizzie's tale of hangin' in da barn.
But, then, she had to place herself, somewhere and somehow, out of the house while Andrew was murdered. Her downstairs alibis for Abby (heating flats for ironing; magazine perusal) would not work for Andrew, and she did not want to place herself back upstairs, in such close proximity to Abby's body.

Moreover, I think Lizzie was trying to create the impression that the murders occurred close in time-- hence, the barn story-- ignorant of the forensics that could place them apart in time.

Still and all, she was the one who turned the Bengalene silk dress over to the constabulary, whether or not the sense of donning it for pear-eating wear in the hot barn loft ever dawned on her.

Again, by wearing that dress, she was attempting to create the scenario of
going out, not staying in (although she contradicted herself with the barn story). She even had her hat at hand, in the dining room.

(I believe she was wearing the B.S. dress later that a.m., that she murdered Abby in the paint-stained Bedford cord, which then became blood-stained, and which was burned. Phoebe Bowen ultimately corroborated Lizzie's wearing of the B.S. dress. Mrs. Churchill's description of Lizzie's dress sounds more like the Bedord cord, but I tend to think Mrs. Churchill was working off a mental picture of having seen Lizzie wearing that dress so often.
What makes me think that is that not even Lizzie would have been so bold as to NOT turn in a dress that so many people, including the police [before she changed into the pink wrapper] had witnessed. She could have been easily caught out in the lie of doing that, and I seriously doubt she would have risked such.)

[Yooper]

Still, if she thought the dress might have been spattered with blood, it would be worth the chance of being caught substituting another dress. Blood on the dress is far more incriminating than the substitution. Besides, the dress in question would had been inadvertently burned and destroyed (oh, shucky darn!).

[Yooper]

I think the reason for Lizzie burning the Bedford cord dress was the chance others could identify it as the dress she was wearing after both murders. Bridget might have been able to tell if Lizzie had changed her dress that morning, assuming she had noticed and assuming she wasn't trying to withhold information. If Lizzie had changed to go out, Bridget might well have noticed.

The only people willing to try to describe Lizzie's dress were Mrs. Churchill who described the Bedford cord dress, and Mrs. Bowen who seemingly described something different. Lizzie didn't know at the time of the dress burning who had seen what, she didn't know that so few had noticed her dress. She might well have burned the Bedford cord as an insurance move. If she had merely ripped it into rags, the rags could still be examined, so she had to destroy it completely. Destroying the Bedford cord makes absolutely no sense otherwise. If it contained nothing incriminating, as I've said before, it makes more sense to keep it under lock and key than to burn it, especially if it could be identified as the dress Lizzie was wearing immediately after the murders. It would then have been one more garment in Lizzie's wardrobe without bloodstains, nothing to lose by keeping it, and everything to gain by doing so. The thought of blood on the dress and the possibility of the dress being noticed by others would lend an immediacy to the need to destroy the dress, it had to be done RIGHT NOW.

[Robert Harry]

This line of thought is what I had in mind when I posted this topic--I always wondered, not why Lizzie changed into a wrapper, but why she changed into a PINK wrapper. I think that was planned also as a red herring--or a "pink herring," something so radically different that it would contribute to peoples' confusion about which dress she was wearing earlier in order to allow her to get rid of the "stained" Bedford cord. I agree, if she had not done it and had not gotten blood on that dress, there would be no reason to burn it, especially then--I guess she thought it was easier to say "Oh, why did you let me do it?" and risk some mild suspicion than to keep it and offer proof.

[DJ]

If Lizzie did wear the Bedford Cord dress throughout the a.m., and not just early on, then it must have remained relatively unstained of blood (not noticeable), because Lizzie certainly was on view right after the murders, with neighbors and constables piling in the house.

She turned over the Bengalene silk to the police. Of course, there's no way we can prove, at this juncture, that she was wearing it before she changed into the pink wrapper.

However, considering how many witnesses might have taken notice of what she was wearing, she was taking a big risk at that.

Yes, Bridget would have noticed if Lizzie changed. However, it would not have been unusual for Lizzie to have changed out of a "cheap goods" dress, especially one that was paint stained, in order to go shopping for something other than market goods from a butcher or produce vendor.

Maybe Bridget gave Inquest testimony about Lizzie changing clothes-- wish we knew!

Of course, the "dress burning" bomb wasn't dropped until the Grand Jury proceedings. If Alice Russell had come forward at the Inquest, Lizzie would have been in a much bigger bind about what she was wearing that morning. And, we would probably know something more definite.

[DJ]

Sorry to double post, but you slipped in just ahead of me, Robert Harry.
I suppose the answer to your question would lie in the "array" of Lizzie's wrappers. Maybe the pink one was clean and handy. I wouldn't read much into the color choice-- the pink wrapper may have been her ONLY choice (clean and comfortable).

Anyway, I think she just wanted to be as comfortable as possible, within the realm of propriety, when she changed.

Maybe she was finally realizing that she could avoid excessive grilling from the police if she would take to her bed, as she should have done without attempting to answer anything in the first place.

I tend to think she was unprepared for the amount of scrutiny she was under, all of a sudden, and she wished to escape it.

[Yooper]

Lizzie's reply to officer Harrington when he offered to delay his interview of her until later was that she could tell what she knew now as well as any other time. Apparently she was not overwhelmed by the situation, not dazed or confused due to the murders. She may well have wanted to limit the number of interviews by the police by putting a door between herself and them, but nothing more than that.

If Lizzie had changed her dress due to the possibility of blood spatter present, it would have seemed odd if she had gone upstairs and changed, then gone back downstairs. Remaining upstairs would have obscured the focus for changing if blood stains were the reason for the change. Putting on an informal house dress as a matter of comfort and remaining in her room might then have been seen as the objective. The color of the wrapper is probably not too important, especially if there was little choice, and perhaps pink was indeed the only choice. I don't think the police ever came across the Bedford cord dress during their searches of the premises, so maybe retiring to her room was an opportunity to stash the dress somewhere.

Lizzie would indeed have been visible wearing the Bedford cord dress right after the murders, or any other dress. What amazes me is that so few could describe Lizzie's dress. The two people who attempted to describe it each seem to have seen something different. Lizzie was seen as a victim rather than a perpetrator at the time, no one was looking for blood on her dress, no one had need to examine her closely. No one could definitively describe the dress she wore, so why would they notice blood on a dress which they didn't notice?

[Bob Gutowski]

DJ, I agree that a guilty Lizzie would have thought (not being someone who had seen 783 episodes of CSI: Wherever) that most people would think the murders had taken place one after the other.

I think, guilty or innocent, that Lincoln's explanation holds: Lizzie was no longer going out, as she appeared to be when Andrew got home early (and became part of the day's main event). The wrapper was a more casual dress than the bengaline silk. Occam's razor, y'all. And to think that anyone, even in that Victorian society, would feel the need to right then and there jump into mourning clothes I feel is doubtful in the extreme.

[Allen]

And to think that anyone, even in that Victorian society, would feel the need to right then and there jump into mourning clothes I feel is doubtful in the extreme.

I totally agree with you on that Bob. I'm of the opinion that they may not have even had any mourning clothing on hand to jump into at the time of the murders. I don't usually keep clothing on hand today expecting to wear it to a funeral. I'm sure that doing so back then would've been just as unlikely. I'm not even sure of when the last time the Borden's had to wear morning clothes.

I'm wondering about that dress pattern that was found in the trunk. Did Lizzie sew herself a dress to be worn during the murders? One that wouldn't be missed if it were destroyed? She probably could've worked on it up in her room without fear of anybody finding out. Who had a reason to go into Lizzie's room, except Emma to get to her own? Emma was also away two weeks prior to the murders. Plenty of time to make a dress or similar piece of clothing. If she did, then why decide to destroy the paint stained dress so close to the time of the murders? If Constance kent could have enough presence of mind at sixteen to do a switcheroo with her night dress, why couldn't Lizzie who had more uninhibited freedom and privacy have devised something just as crafty?

[DJ]

Allen, I've thought about the dress patterns, too (which came complete with cut cloth), especially since one was similar to the blue Bedford cord, and the other was pink, as in the pink wrapper.

In a previous thread (pun intended), I believe it was established that the patterns were ultimately located.

However, someone could have supplanted patterns for those that Lizzie purchased in New Bedford, if Lizzie did indeed whip them up at the eleventh hour.

It's an interesting parallel that Lizzie wore blue and pink garments that a.m.

************************************************************

In the last analysis, I still believe Lizzie started the day in the Bedford cord, murdered Abby in it, stashed it in a hiding place in the clothes press (which she could lock), then changed into the Bengalene silk (over which she wore Andrew's coat).

I think Lizzie was bent on creating the impression that she was *going out* in her Bengalene silk, not hanging around in her Bedford cord.

Lizzie's intended message: I'm all dressed up and headed out, la-da la-da, so how could I possibly be involved in these murders?
Besides which, the Bengalene silk would scarcely seem "appropriate" hatchet-wielding attire (which is no doubt why the detectives tuned into the "waterproofs").

However, by removing her shoes, wearing her Father's oversized coat, and ducking behind the door jamb at the head of the couch, Lizzie could have pulled off a fairly "clean" murder of Andrew. Blood no longer spurts when a person's heart stops beating; the post-death splatter would occur from what covered the blade and was slung therefrom. With some care and experience (from Abby's murder), Lizzie could have minimized the extent to which Andrew's blood hit her.

[Allen]

I think Lizzie was bent on creating the impression that she was *going out* in her Bengalene silk, not hanging around in her Bedford cord.

Lizzie's intended message: I'm all dressed up and headed out, la-da la-da, so how could I possibly be involved in these murders?
Besides which, the Bengalene silk would scarcely seem "appropriate" hatchet-wielding attire (which is no doubt why the detectives tuned into the "waterproofs").

However, by removing her shoes, wearing her Father's oversized coat, and ducking behind the door jamb at the head of the couch, Lizzie could have pulled off a fairly "clean" murder of Andrew. Blood no longer spurts when a person's heart stops beating; the post-death splatter would occur from what covered the blade and was slung therefrom. With some care and experience (from Abby's murder), Lizzie could have minimized the extent to which Andrew's blood hit her.

I'm not sure there is anything considered appropriate hatching wielding attire . But the fact that the dress patterns contained blue and pink material is interesting. I agree that she still may have worn something over her clothing, Andrew's coat, or the waterproof. She may have underestimated the amount of blood spatter during Abby's murder. Or she may have over estimated the amount of blood spatter during Andrew's. Either way it's possible she used some sort of covering for her hair and body. I'm torn between her sewing herself a "murder dress", and wearing the bedford cord for Abby's murder. After all, if she became blood spattered killing Abby all she had to do was change clothing, there was no need for a covering. But if she got her clothes blood spattered with Andrew, how would she account for changing her clothing a third time? Bridget had already seen her by this time. She could have worn the dress she had sewn for Abby's murder. Then changed back into the bedford cord. Or vice versa. Nobody remembered the Bengaline silk as the dress they had seen Lizzie wearing. Some of the witnesses claimed it was definitely not the dress she had been wearing that morning. Even though they could not remember the dress she had been wearing. I find that believable in the sense of knowing something when you see it. Like remembering a face when you see it, even though you don't know the persons name when you hear it.

She could just have likely said I was upstairs in my room changing my dress to go out when I heard an awful noise, being half undressed I had to put on my clothing before I could go down, etc. That might have been more believable than the whole being in the barn eating pears story. But a guilty mind would want to place herself as far away from the house as possible. She never stated she was getting ready to go out as any explaination for the silk.

This is just a theory I'm entertaining at the moment. I think she used the bedford cord to kill in because it was paint stained. She had an excuse to destroy that dress at a later date. But she couldn't then wear it in front of Bridget if it got stained. It would raise an alarm before Lizzie was ready for it to be raised. So in came the dress she had sewn herself maybe to try to match one of the other dresses she owned. Maybe it almost came close, which is why nobody remembered exactly what she had been wearing that morning. Which could also explain why she was in a hurry to change to the wrapper before anyone got wise to the differences. She kept it on as short a time as possible. She may have also destroyed that dress in fear of it being examined to closely. This may also explain her repeated trips to the clothes press after the murders.

So she turned over the Bengaline as the dress she had worn that morning. Maybe she was hoping nobody would notice in all the confusion exactly which dress she had worn.

[Allen]

I agree Lizzie directed the search for Abby's body so it would be found. She wanted to get to her room, and to the clothes press, and for her to do so she had to have Abby's body found. I think more than anything she was probably concerned with changing her clothing before Emma arrived home to notice anything amiss with her clothing. I think if anyone would've noticed it would be Emma. Lizzie spent more time with her than anyone else in the household.

[DJ]

I think one thing we have to remember is that, in the Lizzie-as-murderer-scenario, she had to grab her chances where she could.

She couldn't plan on killing Abby-- or Andrew-- at a certain time. She had to jump on her window(s) of opportunity.

I seriously doubt she wore anything over her clothing when murdering Abby-- Abby would have been alerted to such strange attire the moment Lizzie entered the room.

I also maintain that if Abby had been facing Lizzie head-on, not surprise-attacked from behind, then Abby would have stood a fighting chance.

Just if she had been facing Lizzie, and shielding her head with her arms, or attempting to grab Lizzie's hatchet arm.

************************************************************
I still think Lizzie would have been risking all to turn in the wrong dress (the Bengalene silk, into which she changed after the paint-stained Bedford cord was bloodied, I believe).

If Bridget had bit on the temptation to hurry over to Sargent's, I strongly believe Lizzie would have whacked Andrew, put on her hat, and left the house.

Ready to go out in her Bengalene silk.

************************************************************

Why didn't she leave, anyway? Because Bridget would have told that Lizzie was around most of the morning, and Lizzie would thus look (even more) guilty, having skipped off.

("Mr. Borden was alive when I went up to my room. And Miss Lizzie was with him.")

[kssunflower]

DJ, have to agree with you that Lizzie's Sargent's sale comment was mentioned to be rid of Bridget. However, I feel that she planned to leave the house without doing Andrew in and possibly even suggesting Bridget could have been responsible for Abby's death. Since Bridget stuck around, she had no choice but to revise her plan and story.

[Allen]

I'm not sure Lizzie would've been risking all turning in the Bengaline silk if it was not the dress she had worn. I think it would've been risking more turning in the dress she had actually worn during the killings. She couldn't do that, so she substituted the Bengaline.

I don't think she wore a covering for Abby's murder. All she had to do was change. Maybe say she was getting dressed for the day. She may have wanted to minimize the risk of transfer to her under clothing changing back into the paint stained dress. Which is why I think she wore a covering for Andrew's murder, or possibly another dress she could destroy that wouldn't be missed. Such as one she had made herself.

With Emma gone for two weeks, and before Uncle John showed up, Lizzie was alone in the house with Abby and Andrew. Except for Bridget who could probably be counted on to run errands for the Bordens. Lizzie could've suggested errands herself, such as the sale at Sargents. Or Abby could conveniently ask her to do the windows. Either way she knew Andrew's schedule. She knew which errands or chores Bridget did each week. She lived there. It would be much the same as a killer casing his intended victim to learn their schedule and habits, and the layout of the house. But in this case Lizzie already had that information.

With Emma gone Lizzie could be pretty much alone in the house with the elder Bordens if the need arose. She had at least a two week window of opportunity where her sister was assured to be miles away. All she had to do was wait for the other member of the household, Bridget, to be sent out. So she could in fact do some planning ahead, then just grab the first opportunity that arose. I think this is why she began failed attempts at poisoning during this time which resulted in the Borden's getting ill. When that didn't work she had to resort to drastic measures before Emma arrived home to make things more difficult. Then Uncle John showed up. She may have been concerned Abby might try to alert him, or maybe someone other than Dr. Bowen, to her suspicions of being poisoned. Uncle John went out, Bridget went out to do the windows, and the rest fell into place.

I don't believe she intended to blame the murders on Bridget. After the murders she adamantly denied anyone else in the house could've done it. She also denied that anyone who worked for her father could've done it. I think that if Lizzie wanted to blame the murders on Bridget it would've been easy enough for her to have done so with Bridget being a maid servant with no relatives around to support her. I think at the time the jury would've believed Bridget had done it before they believed Lizzie had done it.

[Yooper]

My best guess is since Lizzie could not have known she would have an opportunity to kill Andrew after killing Abby, any prior planning would have focused on killing Abby. This might have included wearing a dress recently made, a covering such as an apron, or something else which could be disposed of. Bridget would not have noticed Lizzie wearing a new dress while Bridget was outside washing windows. Lizzie would have had time to dispose of or clean up whatever was worn to kill Abby before Andrew arrived.

Andrew's murder was the more impromptu, there was little or no time to plan it. There would have been more concern about missing a spot of blood on the dress worn for that event and no good opportunity to dispose of the dress if necessary. I think this makes the Bedford cord the dress likely worn during and immediately after Andrew's murder.

[DJ]

No, I don't think Lizzie had any intention of blaming the murders on Bridget.

Nor do I think she had any idea that forensics could place times on the murders.

I think she wanted to get Bridget out to Sargent's, kill Andrew, then leave the house herself, creating-- in her mind, oblivious to forensics--
a scenario where she and Bridget were out and someone came in and committed the murders.

Of course, Bridget didn't leave, and Lizzie wouldn't dare take off like a thief in the night, so Lizzie had to work with the circumstances at hand.

This is why I think she created the "barn story": time to account for both murders, not realizing that Abby's murder could be separated by at least an hour from Andrew's.

Lizzie thought she was placing herself outside of the house for both murders, but forensics showed her up. By her own words, vis a vis the forensics results, she was in the house when Abby was murdered, and just across the landing, in her own bedroom, with Abby lying dead in a blood-splattered room, with the door open.

The smell of the blood, which had pooled over the floor, along with Abby's bodily evacuations, ought to have been formidable.

***********************************************************
Abby's murder was improptu, too.
If Bridget weren't outdoors, if Andrew (feeling as ill as he did) hadn't left, and if Abby hadn't gone upstairs, Lizzie would have not had the oppurtunity she did.
It's a wonder that Abby hadn't already gone up and tended to that room. Breakfast was over before 8 a.m.

[Bob Gutowski]

Some credible talk, folks!

Do allow for the possibility of conversations we have no way of knowing took place, such as:

"Mrs. Borden, will you not come with me to the guest room so I may show you what Uncle John has done to the bed?"

[Bob Gutowski]

Some credible talk, folks!

Do allow for the possibility of conversations we have no way of knowing took place, such as:

"Mrs. Borden, will you not come with me to the guest room so I may show you what Uncle John has done to the bed?"

[DJ]

Okay, what DID Uncle John do to the bed, Bob???!!!

(Besides sleep in it in doubtless ripe-smelling circumstances!)

[Yooper]

Might have been hard to decide whether to change the bed or burn it!

[Allen]

If Andrew had a pretty regular schedule he followed during the day, it would've been easy enough to plan for his murder also. I'm not so sure we know whether or not Andrew came home early that day, or if that is one of those myths that has become accepted as fact. I think in planning any murder the killer can't count on everything going the way it's planned unless they abduct the victim and take them to a secluded spot. Then they still cannot plan for the victims reaction, or a million other variables. I think anyone who had thought about killing their parents for any amount of time, and sat in the house with those parents plotting, watching, and biding their time for possibly years, they could do some planning ahead. Also as Bob said so humorously, there could've been conversations we have no way of knowing took place. Maybe Lizzie invited Mrs. Borden to the guest room where the sewing machine was to help her baste something onto her dress. She claims she went up to baste something onto her dress herself.