Excluding Lizzie, who would be your prime suspect?

[snokkums]

Excluding Lizzie, who would you pick for the prime suspect? I would go Emma. I think she would hire someone to do the deed. There's alot of people who weren't to thrilled with Andrew, so I think she would have had some good pickings for someone to help her. What about everybody else think.

[Yooper]

I can't come up with a viable alternative for the prime suspect. With means, motive, and opportunity necessary, Emma may have had motive, but she lacked opportunity. John Morse seemed to lack both motive and opportunity. Abby's murder strongly suggests rage; who hated Abby to that extent?

[LizbethTurner]

I can't come up with a viable alternative for the prime suspect. With means, motive, and opportunity necessary, Emma may have had motive, but she lacked opportunity. John Morse seemed to lack both motive and opportunity. Abby's murder strongly suggests rage; who hated Abby to that extent?

Agreed. We REALLY need to know more about the family dynamics. In so many ways this is an exercise in frustration.

[snokkums]

I can't come up with a viable alternative for the prime suspect. With means, motive, and opportunity necessary, Emma may have had motive, but she lacked opportunity. John Morse seemed to lack both motive and opportunity. Abby's murder strongly suggests rage; who hated Abby to that extent?

Agreed. We REALLY need to know more about the family dynamics. In so many ways this is an exercise in frustration.

Yeah, it is an exercise in frustration, but it can be fun. I think Emma removed herself from the "line of fire" so to speak. I think she kind of knew that Lizzie would do something silly.

[mbhenty]

Yes:

For those who suspect Emma did the deed, you should read Frank Spiering's book LIZZIE. Of course, Spiering takes his liberties. He was a pushy investigator/writer who knew just how to twist the pen and strangle a word or two to weave the truth and invention into his own somewhat believable broth of reality.

As LizbethTurner mentioned: "We REALLY need to know more about the family dynamics. In so many ways this is an exercise in frustration."

How much do we really know about the family dynamics?

The only person outside the Borden family which we could constructively consider is the Borden maid. Otherwise, to claim they "Know," as many writers declare they have discovered, writers such as Spiering, Lincoln, De mille, has its bases in conceited arrogance, an ingredient used many times in best sellers. Take the truth and tweak it just a little and they will come, come to buy your book. (thus, the Natalie Wood book recently in the news, though this may be a bad example, since what is coming out may indeed be the truth) None-the-less, new revelations will sell books, whether truth or lie, or in Lizzie Borden's case, just plain twisted observation.

And yes, it is just that "exercise in frustration" which attracts us to the Borden case. The need to know. And its the dead ends and untidy scenarios which begs us to come back for more, to attain that final element we call Closure.

[LizbethTurner]

How much do we really know about the family dynamics?

Not much. But we can, like good detectives, proceed from what we do know, and arrive at a picture of an unhappy household. Let me know if you disagree or if I have been swayed by unprofessional authors in the following:

1. Both Emma and Lizzie seemed to spend a lot of time visiting other people's houses, without the possibility of reciprocating. In other words, they seemed to frequently want to be somewhere other than home.

2. Lizzie stopped calling Abby "mother" at some point. There must have been a precipitating factor. Since this would have been noticed by everyone in the community, it seems like an act of significant rebellion.

3. I have read that Lizzie and Emma did not take meals with Andrew and Abby. If this is true, it would be one more piece of evidence about the state of affairs in the household.

4. I have read that the elder Bordens used the back stairs exclusively to enter and leave their rooms, and Emma and Lizzie used the front stairs. Another instance of attempting to lead separate lives while under the same roof.

5. Public statements by Lizzie and Emma to the effect that they did not care for their stepmother.

The only person outside the Borden family which we could constructively consider is the Borden maid.

Gosh, yes. Is it really likely she never told anyone what went on in that household?

Otherwise, to claim they "Know," as many writers declare they have discovered, writers such as Spiering, Lincoln, De mille, has its bases in conceited arrogance, an ingredient used many times in best sellers. Take the truth and tweak it just a little and they will come, come to buy your book. (thus, the Natalie Wood book recently in the news, though this may be a bad example, since what is coming out may indeed be the truth) None-the-less, new revelations will sell books, whether truth or lie, or in Lizzie Borden's case, just plain twisted observation.

Yes, and I find it horrendous. Good detective work, like any good scientific study, proceeds from facts and not from fabrication. At some point we have so many authors flogging their own theories to sell books that the facts are muddied beyond retrieval. I hope we're not there yet.

And yes, it is just that "exercise in frustration" which attracts us to the Borden case. The need to know.

Indeed. We have glimpses of the darkest of underbellies in the clues to the inner workings of this Victorian household. It's almost too tantalizing to bear.

[Yooper]

It would be interesting to hear what the maid previous to Bridget had to say about the dynamics in the Borden household. I don't think she was interviewed to any great extent. There may have been an understanding that maids did not discuss family matters if they expected to continue working as maids. Still, correspondences between maids and their friends and families would make an interesting read.

[mbhenty]

Yes LizbethT:

Please allow me to expound on one of your observations without being to analytical.



"I have read that the elder Bordens used the back stairs exclusively to enter and leave their rooms, and Emma and Lizzie used the front stairs. Another instance of attempting to lead separate lives while under the same roof."




The bedroom chambers in the Borden house was once a separate apartment altogether with similar floor plans. As you may well know, Andrew Borden turned the upstairs of the Borden house into bedrooms. Where there once existed a living room, sitting room, kitchen, and bedrooms, became all bedrooms, with one room becoming a dressing room for Abby, this off the Borden bedroom. But, considering the floor plan, this was unworkable........unless the entire second floor was gutted and reconfigured to include some sort of hallway or common foyer. Andrew Borden's bedroom was once a kitchen. Lizzie's room was once the sitting room. The living room became the guest bedroom, and Emma took one of the existing tiny bedrooms. (more of a walk-in closet by today's standards)

(It is important to note that both the rear staircase and the front staircase were public access ways to the first floor and second floor apartments before Andrew Borden purchased the building. If the public wanted to visit the family on the second level, they would enter the rear door or front door and find themselves in a common somewhat public hallway. There they would find the actual entrance door to the first floor apartment and, if the climbed the stairs, the second floor apartment)

All this being said, it is probably best to see an illustration of the floor plans, both second and first floor, to get a good idea why Lizzie, Emma and the elder Bordens used different stairways.

They had really no choice and the choice to use different stairwells was not an option.

Emma was left with little choice. If she wanted to leave her room she had to go through Lizzie's room. There was no way Andrew Borden could use the front stairway from the second level without walking through Lizzie's room, or Lizzie use the back staircase without walking through her fathers room.

Thus it was more out of practicality and necessity, that daughters and parents used different stairways, and little to do with how they felt about each other.

[LizbethTurner]

Of course there was a choice. The door between Lizzie's room and the elder Bordens' room had a communicating door. If that had not been kept locked, anyone could have gotten to any upper room via either staircase.

[mbhenty]

smile:

Yes, Right you are LizbethT.

"Of course there was a choice. The door between Lizzie's room and the elder Bordens' room, which they kept locked. If that had not been kept locked, egress could have been accomplished via either staircase, and from any room upstairs"

Yes, there was a door between Andrew's room and Lizzie's. And, if Andrew had been more practical, he should have removed the door and placed a wall there instead.

When I said that they had "no choice" I meant in the way of practicality. It made total sense to use the stairways they did. And with the exception of Emma's room, (I always thought the guest room bedroom should have been given to Emma) the choices made were the best.

Yes, there was a choice.

There was a door.

There was a way.

But, in the end, the choice they arrived at probably had very little to do with how they felt about each other. After all, when Borden separated the bedrooms upstairs lizzie was only 11 years old, almost 12 and at an age where she had yet to develop strong feelings of resentment towards Abby or her father. In addition, it is true that it probably separated their worlds, even more. But, if I had lived there and could chose to separated my world form my parents, I'm sure most of us would have. If not for pure privacy alone.

Good observations LizbethT.

[mbhenty]

I'm sure I have mentioned this before.

I had been in the Borden house well before it was opened to the public.

In and around the early 70s I did some work in the printshop which was connected to the Borden house. At the time I was given an exclusive tour of the first floor of the Borden house, which was an empty apartment. There was a door between the Borden house and the industrial printshop building.

It was dark, dusty and old. There was an old kitchen in place, probably 20s or 30s. The lady at the print shop was eager to show me the first floor and a obliged, to be friendly. At the time I felt like she was wasting my time, and growing up in fall river (small f, small r) I had little interest in the Borden case. Most fall rive rites had. It was then that I had first discovered the Borden house, even though I drove by it hundreds of times. I had no idea which one it was or did I care to discover it.

What an opportunity.

And I threw it alway by taking little to no interest.

[LizbethTurner]

What an opportunity.

And I threw it alway by taking little to no interest.

If you could travel back in time, knowing what you know now, what would you do differently?

[mbhenty]

Yes:

I would have listened to my tour guide. It was a time closer to the crime. The place was less touched by the masses. I could have made comparisons by my visit then and what I seen and my more recent visits, and perhaps discovered something, something, though, I have no idea what.

Thanks for asking.

[snokkums]

How much do we really know about the family dynamics?

Not much. But we can, like good detectives, proceed from what we do know, and arrive at a picture of an unhappy household. Let me know if you disagree or if I have been swayed by unprofessional authors in the following:

1. Both Emma and Lizzie seemed to spend a lot of time visiting other people's houses, without the possibility of reciprocating. In other words, they seemed to frequently want to be somewhere other than home.

2. Lizzie stopped calling Abby "mother" at some point. There must have been a precipitating factor. Since this would have been noticed by everyone in the community, it seems like an act of significant rebellion.

3. I have read that Lizzie and Emma did not take meals with Andrew and Abby. If this is true, it would be one more piece of evidence about the state of affairs in the household.

4. I have read that the elder Bordens used the back stairs exclusively to enter and leave their rooms, and Emma and Lizzie used the front stairs. Another instance of attempting to lead separate lives while under the same roof.

5. Public statements by Lizzie and Emma to the effect that they did not care for their stepmother.

The only person outside the Borden family which we could constructively consider is the Borden maid.

Gosh, yes. Is it really likely she never told anyone what went on in that household?

Otherwise, to claim they "Know," as many writers declare they have discovered, writers such as Spiering, Lincoln, De mille, has its bases in conceited arrogance, an ingredient used many times in best sellers. Take the truth and tweak it just a little and they will come, come to buy your book. (thus, the Natalie Wood book recently in the news, though this may be a bad example, since what is coming out may indeed be the truth) None-the-less, new revelations will sell books, whether truth or lie, or in Lizzie Borden's case, just plain twisted observation.

Yes, and I find it horrendous. Good detective work, like any good scientific study, proceeds from facts and not from fabrication. At some point we have so many authors flogging their own theories to sell books that the facts are muddied beyond retrieval. I hope we're not there yet.

And yes, it is just that "exercise in frustration" which attracts us to the Borden case. The need to know.

Indeed. We have glimpses of the darkest of underbellies in the clues to the inner workings of this Victorian household. It's almost too tantalizing to bear.

I think you are right on all of those points. I think for me anyway those are the very exact reasons why it's hard for me to pick anyone other than Lizzie. Unless there is some other reason we can look at the maid, but there was nothing there. And Emma was out of town. Unless the crimes were committed at another time and day, that leaves Emma out.

[mbhenty]

Yes snokkums:

If we study the time line and follow it from the time the maid went upstairs to the time Lizzie called her back down, there was just not enough time for Lizzie to clean herself up. Also no time to rid herself of the axe.

This is not to say that Lizzie or Emma did not hire someone to do the deed, or that they did not know who did it.

Was Lizzie guilty?

Well, for me she was probably complicit.

I believe that she and Emma knew who did it.

I even think that Bridget knew who did it................and was scared out of her wits carrying that information around with her. That is to say, she probably had no proof, but if you asked the maid what and how it happened, more than anyone in the Borden saga, Bridget would probably come the closest to the truth.

[snokkums]

You know, on the point of Lizzie and Emma knowing who did, always gets me to wondering if they did orhestrate the whole thing all the way down to hiring the person who did it. I don't know why I always come up with when people suggest that they knew who did it. That would lead to another whole can of worms being opened and the question of "If the girls hired the killer, why didn't the person come forword?" Two reason: he'd be implcating himself and the girls, he was afraid and he was getting paid pretty well. Opps, 3 reasons.But I do think that Emma, Lizzie and Bridget knew more than they were telling.

[Yooper]

I'm not convinced that there was not enough time for Lizzie to have committed the crime. First of all, I don't know for certain how much time was involved, all I've read is estimates of "a few minutes" one way or another, whatever that might mean. Secondly, I don't know how much cleaning up there was to be done. There was very little blood spatter in Abby's murder, and almost none found on the bedspread when it was recently examined which surprised many people. The blood spatter found in the sitting room sounds like cast-off from swinging the hatchet, which would have been directed away from the murderer. The handleless hatchet may have been the murder weapon, I don't know what effect immersion in water and subsequent rolling in ashes would have on a chemical analysis. Even if another hatchet was the murder weapon, it might have been hidden somewhere in the house or the handle removed and the hatchet head pushed or pounded blade first into the dirt in the yard. It is probably still wherever it was hidden; just because it hasn't been found doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[LizbethTurner]

Yes. In regatd to the hatchet, I was thinking the same thing recently. A secretive person, one whonhad been plotting for some time, might have noticed - or created - any number of hiding places for future use. Loose floor boards, etc.

[snokkums]

It would be interesting to hear what the maid previous to Bridget had to say about the dynamics in the Borden household. I don't think she was interviewed to any great extent. There may have been an understanding that maids did not discuss family matters if they expected to continue working as maids. Still, correspondences between maids and their friends and families would make an interesting read.

Yes, that would have been a great read. Can you imagine what she wrote to her relative about the Borden family? But, I don't think I've ever heard tell that she ever wrote to her relatives, either. Maybe she didn't have any living or just didn't have a close relationship with them. Who knows.

[LizbethTurner]

The handleless hatchet may have been the murder weapon, I don't know what effect immersion in water and subsequent rolling in ashes would have on a chemical analysis. Even if another hatchet was the murder weapon, it might have been hidden somewhere in the house or the handle removed and the hatchet head pushed or pounded blade first into the dirt in the yard. It is probably still wherever it was hidden; just because it hasn't been found doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Yes, that hatchet or another one may have been the murder weapon. I read one theory to the effect that Lizzie hid the hatchet in a container in the basement where women's sanitary cloths were left to soak before washing. The idea was that no one would have searched such a container.

I've been thinking a lot about this, and your comment "It is probably still wherever it was hidden" sparked a new line of thought for me. It's all speculation, of course.

Let's say Lizzie had plotted and schemed to get rid of Andrew and Abby for a good long while. She had plenty of time to nose around the house, find (or create) loose floorboards, or pry boards up in the backs of closets, in the attic or the barn. She might have had no idea what she would later use those spaces for, but if she felt powerless at home simply knowing about those secret places would have given her a feeling of control. (Didn't some of Abby's jewelry go missing a while before the murders? Was it ever found?) On the other hand, maybe Lizzie had a place or places like that since moving into the house, and she kept them filled with little trinkets and secret things, initially innocent but later not so much.

If Lizzie had such a place or places, that's where she would have put the axe. Maybe, as you say, the axe is still there. On the other hand, maybe a subsequent owner of the house found the axe and decided to not stir up all the old controversy because they didn't care about it or they just wanted a quiet life. Maybe Lizzie later retrieved the axe and took it to the Borden farm or anywhere else that seemed a better hiding place. In that case the axe could be anywhere.

Do we have any testimony in regard to how many axes the Borden family owned?

[redneckrose]

Hi everybody. I am new to the Borden Mystery, however, Emma is my pick. From what I have been able to figure out about her, she is just too quiet. In my experience it is the quiet ones you need to worry about. They tend to sit back and watch, gaining information and pondering, and wait for the right opportunity to use it. They are the thinkers and planners. In my opinion, the murders were committed by a hired individual. Emma made sure she wasn't around and she did seem to take her sweet time getting back to Fall River after receiving the telegram from Dr. Bowen. Just a beginner's thoughts.

[augusta]

Hello, Rednecknose! And welcome!

I agree with you, that you gotta watch out for the quiet ones. I wish we knew much more about Emma the Person. I can't help but think she was involved after reading her admit at the Coroner's Inquest that she disliked Abby more than Lizzie. And her alibi was oh-so-tight.

Uncle John Morse's alibi was ridiculously tight, plus he tried to lie about the cellar door as being "unlocked" when he came back to the house at noon. (And who could sleep in that guest room after Abby was found so bludgeoned in it?)

Lizzie was home. And Bridget was home. One or both had to know something. I'm more inclined to vote "Lizzie".

I think that Lizzie, Emma and Uncle John planned it. And I think Uncle John arranged for a butcher friend of his to do it. I don't know if Andrew's death was part of the actual plan or not. (Well, I don't KNOW any of this. Maybe some day we will, if more clews show themselves.)

The amount of rage shown in Abby's murder makes me think Lizzie. But maybe the killer had orders to do an extensive hatchet job on her to make sure she was really dead.

[redneckrose]

Hello, Rednecknose! And welcome!

I agree with you, that you gotta watch out for the quiet ones. I wish we knew much more about Emma the Person. I can't help but think she was involved after reading her admit at the Coroner's Inquest that she disliked Abby more than Lizzie. And her alibi was oh-so-tight.

Uncle John Morse's alibi was ridiculously tight, plus he tried to lie about the cellar door as being "unlocked" when he came back to the house at noon. (And who could sleep in that guest room after Abby was found so bludgeoned in it?)

Lizzie was home. And Bridget was home. One or both had to know something. I'm more inclined to vote "Lizzie".

I think that Lizzie, Emma and Uncle John planned it. And I think Uncle John arranged for a butcher friend of his to do it. I don't know if Andrew's death was part of the actual plan or not. (Well, I don't KNOW any of this. Maybe some day we will, if more clews show themselves.)

The amount of rage shown in Abby's murder makes me think Lizzie. But maybe the killer had orders to do an extensive hatchet job on her to make sure she was really dead.

Thank you for the welcome! I agree with you completely. I am hoping that Parallel Lives will shed some more light on Emma. I am anxiously awaiting my copy.

It might sound silly but I think they all worked together to cover it up. In my opinion if Lizzie is guilty because she had the opportunity, then Bridget is just as guilty. Neither one of them implicated the other which leads me to believe they both knew the other didn't do it and who did.

[LizbethTurner]

Hello, Red. Welcome.

In a way, the title of this thread makes it difficult to keep attempting to solve the crime. I don't see how we can exclude Lizzie for a minute.

One thing I'm nearly sure of is that these murders were not planned. Oh sure, I believe Lizzie (and maybe Emma) wanted Abby and Andrew dead, but several things tell me that the murders occurring on this day, in this way, were not in any way planned.

First, there were just too many variables in play for the murder to have been planned in advance. What if Bridget had been too unwell to wash the windows, and had stayed in? What if a neighbor had called? What if Abby had actually gone out for one reason or another? What if Andrew had not come home early? What if, coming home, he had not laid down to rest in the front room? What if Uncle John had not gone out, or, having gone out, had returned early?

Also, Lizzie didn't have her story straight afterward. Any murders that were planned would have included a story to explain things in a way that didn't make Lizzie sound demented. Since a scapegoat was going to be needed, a coherent theory about who the "real" murderer was would have been developed. Instead, we have many stories, all of them rambling and disjointed. Not hallmarks of a plan.

Both of these things also mitigate against a hired person being the killer. Too many variables and no good alibis. Also, the crimes speak of an extremely personal reason for wanting both people dead. No hired killer would indulge in such overkill. Come to that, no hired killer would commit the acts with a hatchet that would be hard to conceal,coming and going from the house, instead of a knife or other smaller object.

The last person I see being involved in any of this is Emma. We cannot know who she really was, and so we can't know if she had motive. We know she didn't have opportunity because she was away at the time. Therefore she didn't have means. With at least two major players right in the house at the time of the murders, I don't think we need to go that far afield.

It's entirely possible that both Emma and Uncle John had such good alibis because they actually were innocent. I do admit Uncle John's alibi is so airtight as to be nearly unbelievable, but maybe he was obsessive-compulsive. That doesn't mean he knew anything or was the murderer.

I'm from the "approach this as if it were an open murder case" school of research, because it is an open murder case.

We so desperately need fresh, accurate information.

[Allen]

A lot of these variables are probably only unknown to us. We didn't live in that home for 30+ years. All of these variables would have been much easier for someone living in the home to count on an outcome. People are creatures of habit. And Abby was ill. How likely was it she was going to go out when having bouts of vomiting? Andrew went out, but that was his nature. Nothing stopped him from his work. I think women back then would've been a little less inclined to go calling when there was a chance they might lose their cookies. There seems to be a very small list of people who visited that home. Many people, including Abby's family, didn't feel welcome. And there really is no evidence Andrew came home any earlier that day than normal. I'm not quite sure why that keeps popping up, but there really is no evidence or testimony by anyone to support it. I've only seen that appear in books, where it's quite possible the author is feeding on myths or has their own agenda. I'm not sure why Andrew had to lay down on the couch to be attacked. I think that just made it more convenient. Abby had not been lying down when she was attacked and she was dispatched rather nicely. Andrew was a man, and maybe taller than LIzzie, but anyone can be caught unaware. Many an axe murder has taken place where the victim was not sleeping at the time. Bridget was upstairs in her room, but that was on the third floor. All she had to do was keep Andrew from having time to cry out. It all boils down to any murder is risky. No murder can be so perfectly planned that there are no variables. Unless you drive the victim out into the middle of nowhere. And even then there are hunters, and hikers.

I really don't have any other suspects. I can't think of one single other person who had the opportunity that day. Someone who snuck into the house past Bridget outside, Lizzie inside, Mrs. Churchill with her kitchen windows facing the Borden home, and Mrs. Bowen sitting at her window watching for her daughter. And in broad daylight.

[LizbethTurner]

If you're saying you don't have any viable suspects other than Lizzie, I agree.

However, in regard to the likelihood of Abby going out, that was what Lizzie said early in the investigation and it seemed she was believed - until the body was found. I wonder what the purpose of that lie was.

It still seems to me that, while this was simmering for a long time, it happened on the spur of the moment, most likely as a result of Lizzie finding out something that pushed her over the edge. We never know who is on the edge until they go over, even today.

[Yooper]

The story about the note was likely invented in order to prevent Andrew from searching for Abby when he returned home. I expect Andrew may have asked Lizzie where Abby was after he arrived. If Lizzie had said she didn't know where Abby was, he likely would have looked for her. The information about the note should have been brought up earlier in the questioning at the inquest than it was, it almost had to be pried out of Lizzie. Knowlton asked several questions which could have been answered directly with information about a note, and they would have been if the story was true. Read Lizzie's inquest testimony carefully and consider how an innocent person believing that Abby received a note would or should have answered. I posted this exchange from the inquest on another thread not too long ago, about the questioning sequence at the inquest. Lizzie was pointedly asked twice in a row if she had any knowledge of Abby being out of the house. The first time she said "no", the second time she finally mentioned the note! She had six or eight prompts before that to mention it and she failed to do so.

[snokkums]

Hi everybody. I am new to the Borden Mystery, however, Emma is my pick. From what I have been able to figure out about her, she is just too quiet. In my experience it is the quiet ones you need to worry about. They tend to sit back and watch, gaining information and pondering, and wait for the right opportunity to use it. They are the thinkers and planners. In my opinion, the murders were committed by a hired individual. Emma made sure she wasn't around and she did seem to take her sweet time getting back to Fall River after receiving the telegram from Dr. Bowen. Just a beginner's thoughts.

hi redneckrose,

I think you are right, you do have to watch out for the quiet ones. I think that maybe she did hire someone, but Lizzie beat the person out by doing it first. Or maybe, just maybe, she and LIzzie were in cohoots with each other and before Emma could hire someone Lizzie went ahead and did the deed. But I am like you are, I'm not entirely convinced of Emmas innocence.

[Allen]

I was also thinking about the wounds on both Andrew and Abby. They were all head wounds. With the exception of one on Abby's face, and one after she was already down on the ground in the back/neck area. These were deliberately calculated wounds. There was none of the chopping wildly at the victim you would expect if someone did just fly off the handle and grab a hatchet. These were intended not only to kill, but incapacitate as quickly as possible. And I believe there was also an element of surprise. This person, in my opinion Lizzie, kept their composure until the last second. She caught them unaware. Otherwise, I believe Abby would've cried out, and there would've been a struggle. But Abby had no defense wounds, and there really was not a sign there had been much of a struggle. I believe Andrew laying down made it more convenient for her to catch him unaware. But with Abby she was wide awake, and not screaming. Which means she didn't see it coming.

[Yooper]

It seems as though the culprit was someone Abby did not fear in the physical sense. Hatchet range is just a bit more than arm's length, so the murderer was able to close to this distance without Abby screaming or struggling.

[snokkums]

I think, too, that the murderer was someone Abby knew. But, I have always wondered who was the primary target and who was the one who just got in the way. If Abby was the primary target, then Andrew was the one who got in the way. If it was Andrew, then it was Abby was the one who was in the way. Or a third possabilty would be both of them.

[LizbethTurner]

Not sure why there would be a primary target and a secondary target. Both of them were clearly the targets. As far as I know there were no hesitation wounds on either body. If, as I suspect, Lizzie found out something that morning that pushed her over the edge in regard to a deal of Andrew's that benefited Abby, then the two of them would have seemed like the common enemy to her.

The thing about the murders that bothers me the most is the reported two hours between the murders. How would a person sustain that amount of extreme, almost dissociative, rage for that amount of time? Is there any chance the coroner got the times of the deaths wrong?

[Allen]

It's my opinion that rage may have been a part of it, but I don't think it was the extreme rage of just snapping and flying off the handle. I think it was the rage and resentment of being in the situation she was in. I think this had been simmering for years. She was too calm, and too able to keep her composure until the right moment to catch them both unaware. This is why I think it was planned. She was also able to speak to Bridget, and Andrew, without giving the slightest hint that anything untoward had happened. I think if Andrew had grown suspicious of Lizzie's behavior, he'd have gone looking for Abby regardless of Lizzie's excuse about a note. But she remained calm and conversational. I think the only thing she needed to sustain over that two hour span were her nerves after just committing the first really horrific murder.

[Yooper]

Both murders seemed very deliberate, the only misdirected blows were delivered to Abby who was a mobile target, while Andrew was a stationary target. Lizzie might have been a bit nervous before killing Abby, but it may have been easier than she imagined. If that's true, it would have provided encouragement to kill Andrew. Once Abby was out of the way, I expect there was a big release of tension if Abby was the primary target.