This topic came up in the Pink Wrapper thread, but I thought it need its own space.
Concerning the theft of Abby's jewelry, does the official record indicate when the theft was discovered?
Here's my theory: Abby took her own things to cast doubt on Emma and Lizzie, at least in Andrew's mind.
The Daylight Robbery
Moderator: Adminlizzieborden
-
goddessoftheclassroom
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 10:58 am
- Real Name:
-
Allen
- Posts: 3408
- Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:38 pm
- Gender: Female
- Real Name: Me
It appears from testimony and other accounts that the elder Borden's were at the Swansea farm at the time the robbery was discovered. That Lizzie, Emma, and Bridget were the only ones at home when it allegedly occured.
I had expressed in the other thread my theory that the daylight robbery was a dry run for Lizzie. She wanted to test the risk factor, and see if she could make everyone believe someone had broken into the house in broad daylight, and with people at home. Sounds a little too eerily similar to the circumstances of the day of the murders. She may have wanted to test out several things. If she could get away with it. If she couldn't get away with a simple robbery, how then would she get away with murder. Would everyone believe someone had broken in. What kinds of questions would be asked after such an event? She may have wanted to know what kinds of answers she needed to have ready after the big event. If she got caught, the most risk she faced was the wrath of Andrew. I think she doubted very seriously her father would have any charges pressed against her. If she got away with it, that was another matter. She had planted in the minds of everyone that someone could break in unseen on their property. As Yooper put it, a precedent was set.
My basis for this argument also comes from reading over testimony and realizing that if Lizzie was responsible for the thefts, the daylight robbery was used as evidence by the defence. It was fought to get it into the record by the defence, and opposed by the state. This doesn't sound like the phantom perpetrator idea hurt Lizzie's defence. Not only that but she may have tried this out more than once, since more than one robbery occurred at the property. And according to Lizzie the barn was broken into TWICE. Then there are her mysterious men seen lurking around the house, and the mysterious man who argued with Andrew about letting a store. She is the only one who claims the barn was broken into twice. The rest of the records show one night time robbery. The bolding is mine.
Trial testimony of Bridget Sullivan page 338:
Q. While you were at the house, during the two years and nine months you live there, was there some burglary there or robbery?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When was that?
MR. KNOWLTON. Wait a a minute, I pray your honors judgement as to that question.
MASON, C.J. If it is preliminary it may be proper.
Q, When was it?
A. Twelve months before that time, I guess.
Q. Twelve months?
A. Yes, sir; I think it was; I am not sure.
Q. Did it occur in the daytime or night?
A. In the daytime.
MR. KNOWLTON. I pray your honor's judgment.
MASON, C.J. What was the question?
MR. ROBINSON. The question was, did it occur in the daytime or night.
MASON, C.J. The court is of the opinion it is too long before to be material. If it has occurred within a few days it would be a different matter.
MR. ROBINSON. In one phase of the question it seems to me it is material -- if the court will allow me to state it. The house was robbed right in the middle of the day, when this woman and all the rest were in the house, three of them, three of the inmates of the family; and it was right in the middle of the day this transpired.
MASON, C.J. The court thinks it is not competent.
MR. ROBINSON. I want to save my rights on that point,
page 339
if your Honors please; and I now ask her in regard to any burglary at the barn, later than that.
Q. Any breaking and entering of the barn, do you know about that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long was that after the other occurence?
A. I think it was in the fall after the burglary was in the house. I don't know what time, I can't say what time of year. I don't know what time of the year it was about the barn.
Q. And how long was it before Mr. and Mrs. Borden were killed?
A. I can't remember. It may have been a few months, or five or six months; I don't know anything about it. I can't describe about any of the times.
Q. You cannot fix it?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did it occur in the daytime or night time?
A. Night time.
MR. KNOWLTON. I pray your Honors judgement as to that inquiry.
MASON, C. J. It is too long befofre the transaction.
MR. ROBINSON. I would like to save it, then. I believe I have stated fully enough the purpose of the inquiry. It sufficiently appears in the testimony (in order to make it clear) that this witness was in the house at the time. That is shown.
MR. KNOWLTON. I should not have objected, it if had appeared, to the question being put. I do not understand it has appeared accept by your statement and your offer to show it.
Trial testimony of Alice Russell pages 377-378 she is being asked about the conversation she had with Lizzie:
Q. Anything about trouble with tenants, or anything of that sort?
A. she says, "I don't know, she says, " I feel afraid sometimes that Father has got an enemy. For," she says, " he has so much trouble with his men that come to see him." And she told me that a man had came to see him. She told me of a man that came to see him, and she heard him say -- she didn't see him, but she heard her father say, " I don't care to let my property for such business." And she said the man answered sneeringly, "I shouldn't think you would care what you let your property for." And she said, "Father was mad and
page 378
ordered him out of the house." She told me of seeing a man run around the house one night when she went home. I have forgetten where she had been. She said, "And you know the barn has been broken into twice." And I said, "Oh well, you know that that was somebody after pigeons; there is nothing in there for them to go after but pigeons. " "Well," she says, " they have broken into the house in broad daylight, with Emma and me and Maggie there." I said, "I never heard of that before." And she said, "Father forbade our telling it." So I asked her about it, and she said it was in Mrs. Borden's room, what she called her dressing room. She said her things were ransacked, and they took a watch and chain and money and car tickets, and something else that I can't remember. And there was a nail left in the keyhole; she didn't know why that was left; whether they got in with it or what. I asked her if her father did anything about it, and she said he gave it to the police, but they didn't find out anything; and she said her father expected they would catch the thief by the tickets. She remarked, "Just as if anybody would use those tickets."
I had expressed in the other thread my theory that the daylight robbery was a dry run for Lizzie. She wanted to test the risk factor, and see if she could make everyone believe someone had broken into the house in broad daylight, and with people at home. Sounds a little too eerily similar to the circumstances of the day of the murders. She may have wanted to test out several things. If she could get away with it. If she couldn't get away with a simple robbery, how then would she get away with murder. Would everyone believe someone had broken in. What kinds of questions would be asked after such an event? She may have wanted to know what kinds of answers she needed to have ready after the big event. If she got caught, the most risk she faced was the wrath of Andrew. I think she doubted very seriously her father would have any charges pressed against her. If she got away with it, that was another matter. She had planted in the minds of everyone that someone could break in unseen on their property. As Yooper put it, a precedent was set.
My basis for this argument also comes from reading over testimony and realizing that if Lizzie was responsible for the thefts, the daylight robbery was used as evidence by the defence. It was fought to get it into the record by the defence, and opposed by the state. This doesn't sound like the phantom perpetrator idea hurt Lizzie's defence. Not only that but she may have tried this out more than once, since more than one robbery occurred at the property. And according to Lizzie the barn was broken into TWICE. Then there are her mysterious men seen lurking around the house, and the mysterious man who argued with Andrew about letting a store. She is the only one who claims the barn was broken into twice. The rest of the records show one night time robbery. The bolding is mine.
Trial testimony of Bridget Sullivan page 338:
Q. While you were at the house, during the two years and nine months you live there, was there some burglary there or robbery?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When was that?
MR. KNOWLTON. Wait a a minute, I pray your honors judgement as to that question.
MASON, C.J. If it is preliminary it may be proper.
Q, When was it?
A. Twelve months before that time, I guess.
Q. Twelve months?
A. Yes, sir; I think it was; I am not sure.
Q. Did it occur in the daytime or night?
A. In the daytime.
MR. KNOWLTON. I pray your honor's judgment.
MASON, C.J. What was the question?
MR. ROBINSON. The question was, did it occur in the daytime or night.
MASON, C.J. The court is of the opinion it is too long before to be material. If it has occurred within a few days it would be a different matter.
MR. ROBINSON. In one phase of the question it seems to me it is material -- if the court will allow me to state it. The house was robbed right in the middle of the day, when this woman and all the rest were in the house, three of them, three of the inmates of the family; and it was right in the middle of the day this transpired.
MASON, C.J. The court thinks it is not competent.
MR. ROBINSON. I want to save my rights on that point,
page 339
if your Honors please; and I now ask her in regard to any burglary at the barn, later than that.
Q. Any breaking and entering of the barn, do you know about that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long was that after the other occurence?
A. I think it was in the fall after the burglary was in the house. I don't know what time, I can't say what time of year. I don't know what time of the year it was about the barn.
Q. And how long was it before Mr. and Mrs. Borden were killed?
A. I can't remember. It may have been a few months, or five or six months; I don't know anything about it. I can't describe about any of the times.
Q. You cannot fix it?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did it occur in the daytime or night time?
A. Night time.
MR. KNOWLTON. I pray your Honors judgement as to that inquiry.
MASON, C. J. It is too long befofre the transaction.
MR. ROBINSON. I would like to save it, then. I believe I have stated fully enough the purpose of the inquiry. It sufficiently appears in the testimony (in order to make it clear) that this witness was in the house at the time. That is shown.
MR. KNOWLTON. I should not have objected, it if had appeared, to the question being put. I do not understand it has appeared accept by your statement and your offer to show it.
Trial testimony of Alice Russell pages 377-378 she is being asked about the conversation she had with Lizzie:
Q. Anything about trouble with tenants, or anything of that sort?
A. she says, "I don't know, she says, " I feel afraid sometimes that Father has got an enemy. For," she says, " he has so much trouble with his men that come to see him." And she told me that a man had came to see him. She told me of a man that came to see him, and she heard him say -- she didn't see him, but she heard her father say, " I don't care to let my property for such business." And she said the man answered sneeringly, "I shouldn't think you would care what you let your property for." And she said, "Father was mad and
page 378
ordered him out of the house." She told me of seeing a man run around the house one night when she went home. I have forgetten where she had been. She said, "And you know the barn has been broken into twice." And I said, "Oh well, you know that that was somebody after pigeons; there is nothing in there for them to go after but pigeons. " "Well," she says, " they have broken into the house in broad daylight, with Emma and me and Maggie there." I said, "I never heard of that before." And she said, "Father forbade our telling it." So I asked her about it, and she said it was in Mrs. Borden's room, what she called her dressing room. She said her things were ransacked, and they took a watch and chain and money and car tickets, and something else that I can't remember. And there was a nail left in the keyhole; she didn't know why that was left; whether they got in with it or what. I asked her if her father did anything about it, and she said he gave it to the police, but they didn't find out anything; and she said her father expected they would catch the thief by the tickets. She remarked, "Just as if anybody would use those tickets."
"He who cannot put his thoughts on ice should not enter into the head of dispute." - Friedrich Nietzsche
-
augusta
- Posts: 2231
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 11:27 am
- Gender: Female
- Real Name: Augusta
- Location: USA
I don't think Abby did the daylight robbery. She wasn't home when it happened. It's an interesting thought, tho. But I think she can be excluded.
There was a little red Russian purse of Abby's that was taken, and one of the items taken was especially sentimental to Abby. I think it was very cruel of "someone" to have taken something that meant so much to her, and she had so little.
I've read that Lizzie gave the horse car tickets to friends, and someone used one. The conductor recognized the ticket as being reported stolen from M/M Borden and asked the person where they got the ticket. He/she said that Lizzie Borden had given it to him/her. (There may have been more than one instance like this.) It sounded pretty true, from wherever I read it.
There was a little red Russian purse of Abby's that was taken, and one of the items taken was especially sentimental to Abby. I think it was very cruel of "someone" to have taken something that meant so much to her, and she had so little.
I've read that Lizzie gave the horse car tickets to friends, and someone used one. The conductor recognized the ticket as being reported stolen from M/M Borden and asked the person where they got the ticket. He/she said that Lizzie Borden had given it to him/her. (There may have been more than one instance like this.) It sounded pretty true, from wherever I read it.