Lizzie Borden Society Forum

john @ Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:25 pm wrote:the point is you're all widely missing the point.
I think I'm too young for this room.

My suggestion that you may belong elsewhere was simply a response to your own comment.

According to a map of Fall River in REBELLO, showing Andrew's last walk, Clegg's Store is 92 South Main Street, and that is just around the block from 92 Second Street--it seems as though the numbers on these two parallel streets almost coincide exactly at this spot. Based on the numbers shown on this map, it seems as though Dolan's house (Thanks for the address, Harry) would only about two and a half blocks further south. Since Second Street was probably a somewhat less busy road at lunch time, I don't think it would be unusual for Dolan to be passing from the center of Fall River past the Borden House on his way to or from home. He probably went by it several times every day.

It seems the Borden house was almost exactly halfway between Dolan's house and the Police Station.

Posting Len Rebello's map would violate his copyright, but I think other Fall River maps of the period are available to look at, John.

Mrs. Kelly said she was detained by a nurse at her home. That could be verified, I think. She wouldn't invent a person like that, who could be checked. She sounded perturbed about it.
If you have read her testimony you'll find something much more suspicious- at inquest her clock is fine. At trial it's become an old broken down clock!

Anyway, as a doctor's wife the dentist probably made allowances. It's also possible they had a trade-off agreement for services. Very thrifty thing, bartering for services.

I think Dolan says where he was prior to his showing up at #92.

We've done the *where was Lizzie* thing before- in the kitchen- why not answer Andrew at the screen door?
Please see archives or something still open on this section of the Forum another page, perhaps?

""Why would there be impacts of two persons (about the same size) in the barn hay?"

"Again, why would Andrew lock the barn at night, but pin it during the day?"--john


We are down to 2- anyone?

john @ Thu Apr 21, 2005 4:12 am wrote:...I just don't like to see "coincidences" in crime stories...

john i completely agree. there is no such thing as coincidence when it comes to crime. at least that's the rule of thumb i subscribe to. it will invariably lead you to SOMETHING that is not coincidence, not random.

I don't claim to be any sort of expert on the case, and i enjoy the observations and points that are raised...even if not 100% factually sound. i learn from those as well. in my opinion, that's what an open forum such as this ought to be for...anyhow, I digress.

A simple, yet haunting "coincidence" for me is the fact that Uncle Morse came to town at exactly the time this horrible crime went down. From what I understand, he was not in the habit of visiting the Borden's in person very often. Hadn't it been quite some time since he had come to visit? Then all of a sudden he shows up and *BAM!*...the Borden household is changed forever. Coincidence? I have a hard time believing it could be so.

tx fairhavenguy, kat and sguthmann. i'm just trying to bring out questionable things here, and have little resources to rely on anymore. sorry if i was bristled fairhavenguy - will be better.
for example, i know there are maps of fall river in the archives, and i had a few myself, but mine are gone, and i spend too much time on this puter anyway, without digging through archives.
now kat will say that i should at least know what i'm talking about which is not necessarily true. if new members here are expected to read a few hundred, maybe thousands pages of archive materials, how many new members would there be?

my comment about a passerby knowing that there was a murder at the Borden house while the police said they believed there was a "row," came from you kat. you said that you believed someone, most likely a policeman to think about it, or possibly someone on their way to the police station, said to a salesman staying at the mellon house, that there was a murder.
now if it was the initial policeman who told that salesman, it gives very much more credence to my, "why send an inexperienced officer?"
i remember the map which showed where the mellon house was.
the term "row" certainly isn't coloquial today, but may have been in 1892, but further, "row" would not mean "murder," as the salesman repeated to someone at the boiler company or whoever he was calling on.
if the inexperienced patrolman knew of a murder while the experienced sergeant claims a "row," it reinforces my question about who was sent to the house.
the question is, did the sergeant know there was really a murder, and send a "newbie" to investigate it?

Well, Allen, who was sent, was 54 and I don't know his level of experience.

The guy who knew about the rukus at the Borden's before the Second Street inhabitants came from out of town. Didn't he show up at the stables? It didn't really come from me- I wouldn't call it that- but I admit I did ask how the out-of-towner knew more than those standing there. Or at least knew something.

The first word around there was there had been a stabbing, or a row, take your pick. The word wasn't murder right away.

Who is the sergeant? I keep tripping over that one?

I think you write really well and you should do so professionally.

According to the Knowlton papers (Glossary A) Allen was appointed to the police force in 1889. However, Allen testified at the Trial that he was on the force about 5 years, which would make the year 1887.

In the Witness statements Allen says Hilliard told him:

“Mr. Allen, I want you to go up on Second street, the house next to Mrs. Buffington’s above Borden street, and see what the matter is.”

At the Trial Allen said Hilliard told him:

"Q. Where were you between eleven and quarter past eleven?
A. Quarter past eleven the marshal came to me and said there was a row up on Second street.
Q. Without stating what he said to you, did you receive a direction from Marshal Hilliard to go to the Borden house?
A. I did."

Hilliard had no idea what the problem was until Allen returned. It should also be noted that Allen arrived with Charles Sawyer who he placed as a guard at the side door.

Then Deputy Sheriff Wixon and Officer Doherty went to the house. This is Wixon at the Preliminary hearing:

"Q. How soon did you go up there?
A. I think within five or ten minutes. At that time somebody came and gave the information, Mr. Allen. I was there when Mr. Allen came. That I should say was half past eleven, or somewhere in that neighborhood; it might have been a little before, if anything.
Q. What did you find when you got to the house?
A. I did not go there direct. I started out, came around the corner, and went into the office of Swift & Grime, just long enough to make the remark that there had been a fearful tragedy; had they heard of it? I do not suppose I was there more than half a minute. Then I proceeded to Mr. Borden’s house, and walked quite fast.
Q. How many people were there when you got there?
A. I did not see anybody but Dr. Bowen when I first got in. Officer Doherty overtook me before I got there; Mr. Doherty went in first, and I followed; we went in together.
Q. How long after the telephone came, was that?
A. Ten or fifteen minutes; I should not think much longer.
Q. Then it would be in your estimation about half past eleven?
A. I think it was 25 minutes of 12 certainly, when I got to the house. "

officer allen was more experience than i thought him to be.
it was logical to send him to the borden house.
"granted, "granted," but hey - i'm being nice about it.
i guess though, that if anyone knew that something badly was going to happen on that day, it would have most likely been lizzie, bridget, emma, mr. morse, or perhaps even mrs. borden.
now what did they all do irrespective of the neighbors, police, and the doctors?
lizzie bailed outside - pears or searching for lead; bridget was outside washing some windows, then bailed, perhaps as usual, to her room; emma definately bailed as explained on muchly earlier; uncle john bailed by irrefutable testimony and questionable actions.
now if either of them knew something was going to happen, did they leave a clue by their actions or statements that they knew something ahead of time?
take mrs. borden firstly. are there anything illogical about her actions? by testimony she has a note to go uut on a sick call, yet she cleans up the guest room first?.) i don't believe there was a note to go out, but she did do up the guest room. supposedly she said there were guests coming on monday - another (with the note) unverifiable item, but say that there were guests coming on monday. did she do the sheets? if she was cleaning up the guest room for uncle john to stay another night she probably wouldn't have, and i think i read uncle john planned another night, but so far that's unsubstantiated. so if she were doing up the guest room for monday night guests, the simple question is did she do the sheets because the last one to sleep on them would have been uncle john. so coincidentally for one reason or another, mrs. borden is in the guest room. now did she mean to be there or not mean to be there? if she was doing it up for uncle john again would she "close it up," if he were expected in a few hours and probably took a nap after dinner as andrew did? if it were monday guests she would close it up, also something totally beyond all knowledge of the crimes would have placed her there. there is not any evidence, despite wide publicity, that there were guests expected at the borden home on monday. so coincidentially mrs. borden is upstairs, and i think the real reason that she is is that mr. borden has taken their room key, and she doesn't want to admit that she doesn't have it so is busying herself. i believe that the key was missing from the mantle by mr. borden's actions, but i believe if it wouldn't have been missing it would have been taken and replaced by the inside front door key, keeping mrs. borden from her room, and from getting outside.
coincidentally, of course emma was long gone.
coincidentally bridget was outside and in her room supposedly (?) out of earshot. as it turns out, coincidentially lizzie was just gone outside, and out maybe out of earshot but perhaps not out of eyeshot by what is maybe a goof-up in her testimony.
coincidentially uncle john was (and i guess we are supposed to believe) in his own world.
it looks to me, as a casual observer, that lizzie made three mistakes, and one was saying that she was on the stairs and recanted, and two that she was in the barn and looking out the window most of the time which she recanted, and her third mistake was that the keys were mixed up and she had the borden's room key in her pocket when she told dr. bowen to get it, or whoever did tell him, or however, and i also think that she was stressed and took the front door key (backside) out and placed it on the mantle, or perhaps that was in her pocket too.
the more i look at this the more i believe that bridget was just a stable young woman trying to keep her feet dry who knew something was going on, but perhaps refused to admit it.
i know that i've said a lot of jokes on here, on a subject that really isn't funny, especially to abby and andrew, and that some will say that the above is red-herringism, but there are just too many oddities with lizzie, and i guess that's what makes it wonderfull as long as you're not the hatchetee.

Its not red-herringness, it's thoughtful, after all.
But what is the reason that it is importatnt that Mrs. Borden maybe not had the key to her own room?
If she were really called to go out, she would need to go to her room to change, yes - but if she wasn't?

And she didn't change!

Because she didn't have the key.

i think she was called out and didn't have the key to their room, but there are other possibilities.
she either was or wasn't called out by a sick note.
if she was called out why mess with the guest room?
if she wasn't called out by a sick note why mess with the guest room?
she either cleaned up the guest room for uncle john or she didn't.
if she did clean it up for uncle john why do the sheets if she did them?
if she didn't clean it up for uncle john then why did she clean it up if she had to go out?
if she cleaned it up for monday guests then that would make the most sense, but who were the guests and where did she and we hear about them?so lets say there were to be guests on monday. did she change the sheets? if not i think she was just busying herself with no sick note and a plan that would have had her killed wherever she was - guest room having only incidentially to do with it.
but you have to read back to the keys, etc.

if you want to figure this out without knowing the all-inclusive clue, there are three things:
first, did Mrs. borden change the sheets in the guest room?
second, what was bridget's exact testimony about why mr. borden couldn't get into the front door?
thirdly, why would lizzie change her testimony to be in a variety of locations during the murders?

i think she most likely was to have been killed in their room, and andrew too, but andrew took the key. just firstly the layout of the guest room is inconducive to a sneak attack. so why wasn't andrew killed when her went up there on his arrival home? because bridget was still up. i know how she was killed in the guest room and said so to kat - ask kat.

I read all of your answers but it's confusing. I still don't know why the key to Andrew & Abby's room was so important to Abby or where she was killed?

Maybe Andrew could have been killed in his own room while Bridget was still around- the door could have been closed afterwards. Bridget was not in her room until a few minutes to 11, above Andrew's bedroom.
(He wouldn't have been killed there if Bridget was lying on her bed right above there- granted that.)

If poison or chloroform was used (Gosh, I can't believe I'm bringing this back up ...) Andrew could be killed in his room while Bridget was still downstairs.
I think it would be more imaginative if Andrew was killed in his room and the door was locked! - speaking of keys.

Do people here think she had a note?

And the dress Abby had on? How do we know it wasn't worth going out in? Because Lizzie says? Abby seemed to be doing minor housework and she did already have company- Uncle John. An apron could have protected her clothing if she was going out- which apparently she did anyway, almost every day.

Here is something too. Would a large-sized woman try to keep her stair-climbing to a minimum? So maybe she was dressed already for her grocery errands (Also because Morse was there ie: Company) and just fiddled around with an apron on around the house until she meant to go out. If Mrs. Borden went out usually, why invent a note? Unless she never went out until 10:30 a.m. or sometime like that? (speculation).

I do not believe there ever was a note. One reason being the only person who ever said anything about a note was Lizzie. Another reason being no one ever stepped forward to say they had sent Abby a note, even though a tidy little reward was offered. Not even a crank stepped forward, that I find odd considering there were even cranks who confessed to killing the Bordens. The note, if it did come, came from somebody in Fall River that thought enough of Abby to send for her when they were sick. Somebody who wanted Abby by their bedside because they were ill. Somebody who wanted her there because they liked her, trusted her, and wanted her around. Because lets face it, Abby was no nurse.You mean this person who thought so much of Abby would not step forward, even if they did not have an interest in the reward? I think what John is trying to say is Abby was killed in the guest room because she was unable to get to her own room. Andrew took the key. So she was upstairs basically just killing (pardon the pun) a little time until either Andrew came home, or it was time for her to go out. Am I right? Or am I confused as well?

Lets say there was a note.
What if by delivering the note, that was the way the killer gained admittance to the house?
Someone gives a note to Lizzie, and sneaks up to the guestroom or clothes closet, and Lizzie gives the note to Mrs. Borden. Then Mrs. Borden has to go to her bedroom to change to go out, but there is no bedroom key because Andrew has taken it to keep Uncle John out of his room, and Abby just blows time tidying up. More realistically, the phony note probably said that someone was visiting on Monday, and as she couldn't get into her own room (the climbing stairs is good!) she cleaned up the guest room which she would have to be doing sooner or later anyway.
Whether she did the sheets or not is still very important, and I have no idea as to that.
Leads me to believe that Lizzie had collusion, but didn't necessarily know what the note said, and perhaps by her acts of letting the perpetrator in, she just didn't read the note, and she guessed, but it wouldn't have made any difference because nobody claimed a sick note and nobody said they were going to visit the Bordens on Monday. So Mrs. Borden is directed either to her room or the guest room. Now if Mrs. Borden is the target (only target) why wait around for Mr. Borden to come home and how would the perpetrator know there would be another opportune time? Andrew most certainly has to be a target too, and iroically, as soon as Bridget goes to bed, Andrew is dead within about ten minutes. How did the killer get away, and why would Lizzie testify to being in several locations about the house that morning including the second floor where a dead woman was?
I also think that Mrs. Borden was irritated when she realized her room key was missing and edged Bridget by asking her to wash the windows - kinda like kicking the cat when you come home from a bad day at work.

I tend to think (and always will) that Abby was tidying the room after JVM occupied it. Here is a man who wore the same shirt until it was so soiled even he couldn't stand it anymore that he threw it away and bought a new one.... I can imagine he disrobed for bed and re-dressed in the morning between the bed and dresser. Maybe Abby was down on her knees picking up lint, food, Lord knows what had fallen from his clothing (and him) when he stripped for bed...

I would think she would have changed the linens IF she expected JVM to NOT stay again that night... Certainly Abby didn't know how the day was going to end... Do we know what John's (stated) plans were for that day? If he was planning to remain another night-- She would not have changed the linens. Why bother?

If Andrew wanted to keep JVM out of his room-- why not give Abby the key to keep on her person? IF he did take the key-- he must have expected Abby to leave as well-- otherwise she could have guarded the room and ensured no one entered it-- key or not. Once Abby was dead-- why not kick the door down and rifle away? There was already a murder in the house-- what better way to cast suspicion elsewhere by also staging another robbery? (or snooping and destroying whatever documents you wanted rid of)

So the note was real but brought by a cohort of Lizzie, who let him in and she let him hide upstairs? The note said someone was coming Monday to visit and so Abby went to the guest room to clean up for company coming Monday, tho this was still early Thursday morning? And we don't know if Morse was going to stay another night? Or whether Abby knew if Morse was going to stay another night.

Why does Abby need specifically to be in the guest room to be killed? Because that's what it sounds like.

And I still don't understand why Abby maybe not-being-able-to-get-into-her-own-room means anything?

The Hay

"Why would there be impacts of two persons (about the same size) in the barn hay?"--john

It sounds like one person, untrained, saw a small round indentation in the hay before the police saw the area in the barn upstairs. When Clarkson, the police, saw the area 3 men, civilians, had already been traipsing around up there.
By then, the indentation appeared to have more of the form of a man lying there. There is no suggestion of 2 forms, which has been stated here as fact, that I could find in the inquest or preliminary hearing. Maybe the trial? Someone can still check "Charlie Cook" ...

Prelim
Donnelly
437
Q. Where was the hay?
A. I call it on the north side of the barn.
Q. What did you see in the hay, anything about the hay that indicated anything, except the usual condition of hay piled up there?
A. It looked so to me as though there had been somebody laying on it; I do not know whether there had or not.
Q. Where was that?
A. On the pile this way.
Q. When you say "this way", what do you mean by that, north or south?
A. I should call it north west.
Q. Near the north west part?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Towards the window?
A. Yes Sir.

CROSS-EXAMINATION.

Q. (Mr. Knowlton) What was it that looked as though somebody had been lying there?
A. This hay.
Q. What was it about it?
A. It looked as though there was a form of a body on there, that had been sleeping on there, or something.
Q. Do you mean as though somebody had been pressing, or making the impression of their form on the hay?

Page 460 (438)

A. Yes Sir.
Q. How long was the form?
A. I could not tell you; I did not measure it.
Q. How wide was the form?
A. I should think about so wide.
Q. Was it the form of a dog or a man?
A. That I could not say.
Q. How deep was the impression?
A. About five or six inches, I should say.
Q. That is the whole width of the space was an impression of five or six inches. Rounding or square?
A. Kind of rounding.
Q. Give the width in inches, if you can.
A. I could not.
Q. You gave the depth of it in inches; cant you give the width of it?
A. About a foot perhaps.
Q. Straight?
A. No Sir. It looked kind of rounding.
Q. Length ways straight?
A. It looked like kind of a round hole right in the hay.
Q. How long was the hole?
A. I cannot give any idea.
Q. Give the best idea you have.
A. Five or six inches I should say.
Q. Five or six inches long?
A. A foot long, I said.
Q. About a foot wide?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. And six inches deep?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. That was the impression that you saw?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. That made you think a man had been lying there?
A. I could not say what it was.

-----------

--He got to the barn area about 11:45 and was up in the barn where the hay was at about noon. (That time was suggested to him). The pitching over of the hay was at about 3:30, done by Doherty, according to Wixon (Prelim 228)
_______

441
Q. Who was the first officer you did see?
A. Officer Doherty.
Q. When did you see him?
A. When we were going through to go to the barn, me and this Charlie Cook.
Q. Who is Charlie Cook?
A. A fellow that works for the Telephone Company.
Q. Did he go into the barn with you?
(442)
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did he see this round hole in the hay?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did you see anythingelse in the hay besides this round hole?
A. No Sir.
Q. That is all that led you to think there had been a form there?
A. Yes Sir. We looked all around to see if we could see any weapon or anything.
Q. Did you report this round hole to any officer?
A. I do not recollect as I did, sir.
Page 464
(442)

Q. When was the first time you mentioned this round hole, or this impression perhaps I ought not to characterize it; when was it you first mentioned this impression that you saw in the hay?
A. I mentioned it that day.
Q. Who to?
A. Some outsiders.
Q. To any officer?
A. No Sir.
Q. Ever to any officer?
A. No Sir. As I did not disturb the hay at all, I thought let them see it themselves.
_________________

Prelim
Clarkson
468
Q. Most of the hay was on the north side of the barn?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did you notice anything about the hay, except that; whether it appeared to have been disturbed at all, or not?
A. In two or three places it looked as though it had been stepped in. In one place west of the window, it looked as though a man had laid there.
Q. In what direction from the window?
A. North of the west window.
Q. Did you disturb anything there?
A. No Sir.
Q. Was anybodyelse up there at the time that you recollect?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Who?
A. There were three gentlemen that I did not know.
Q. Any of them officers?
A. No Sir.
Q. Do you know officer Medley?
A. I think I do.
Q. Did you see him up there in the barn?
A. No Sir.
Q. Did you see him up there around the premises when you first got there?
Page 490 (469)

A. No Sir.
Q. Did you see him afterwards?
A. In the afternoon.
Q. You did not see him until afternoon?
A. No Sir.
Q. Had you been home, and come back then?
A. I went home about five minutes past one.

CROSS-EXAMINATION.

Q. (Mr. Knowlton) Did these three men go up before, or after you?
A. Before me.
Q. You found them up there walking around the barn?
A. Yes Sir.
_________________
_______________

"Again, why would Andrew lock the barn at night, but pin it during the day?"--john

You've never shown us the "pin" reference, tho you've brought it up a couple of times.

All I can say about this until you do show this, is that Bridget did have access to the barn all that time Thursday to get her water to wash windows. I don't know if Andrew left it unlocked all day every day, or just window-washing days. Bridget might tell us...check her testimony...

I have answered my own 6 (?) questions and the change-of-dress question was dealt with immediately by others and now my finger is really sore!

Yes, but.
Don't you hate people who say yes, but? It's like saying, "it won't cost you anything, except..........."
Anyway, there's a big voice inside of me that says that "Lizzie" has been studied for a hundred years, and it will never be figured out, a perfect crime.
Yetly there is a little voice inside of me that says that somebody made some mistakes and that you, John, have this mission to find what they are. And so I rock on.
So Lizzie must have had problems, like everyone else; the ones without problems are in cemetaries; and Emma had problems, and Andrew and Abby and Mrs. Churchill, and Miss Russell, et al.
Did someone solve their problems by doing this crime? That's what the little voice tells me somebody did.

OK but do you accept the answers I've given to to my claim as to your small *errors*? It took a long time and someone had to do it...

And the dress Abby had on? How do we know it wasn't worth going out in? Because Lizzie says? Abby seemed to be doing minor housework and she did already have company- Uncle John. An apron could have protected her clothing if she was going out- which apparently she did anyway, almost every day.

I could only find one other mention of what Abby wore that morning of the murders from Dr. Dolan. He doesn't say much about it, but, it does sound as though it was a morning dress or house dress for early work about the house. Preliminary Volume 2 Dr. Dolan on the stand:

Q. How was she dressed?
A. She was dressed, as you would expect to find a housewife at that hour in the morning, in some calico dress.
Q. Anything on her head?
A. No Sir. There was a silk handkerchief; whether it had been around her head or not, I cannot say. It was not around the head when I saw it, but near the head.


Q. What dress did she have on?
A. A calico dress.
Q. What color?
A. A light one.
Q. Any figure?
A. I think not.
Q. Light blue, pink or brown?
A. I do not know; it was a light color.
Q. Give me some hint what the color of that gown was?
A. I do not see anything here that looks just like it.
Q. It did not have a red tone, or blue, or pink tone?
A. No Sir.
Q. You cannot tell whether it had any figure or not?
A. No Sir.
Q. Was it light all through; was the waist the same as the skirt, the same material?
A. I think it was, sir.

I accept all of your answers.

A question I've been mulling, is, if it was a planned killings, where were they each supposed to be killed? Abby is fairly easy. She went upstairs, discovered the killer, and he/she persued her to the point of no return in the guest room. It was either accidental, or genius to kill her in the guest roo.
But Andrew is so time sensitive. What if Bridget just plopped in the kitchen and tried to chat with Lizzie because Lizzie told her about the sale of yard goods? It doesn't make sense that Lizzie would attempt conversation with someone she wanted out.
What if Andrew decided to paint the barn and went out to find a painter.
I think the sickness the elder Bordens had was designed to keep them in the house, but it didn't really work.
What if Andrew went to his room to lie down, and locked the door behind him?
No one could have known these things ahead of time, he just happened to lay down on his couch, but Lizzie was nicely, and did help him!
So the plan for Andrew could have been that couch.
And Bridget bailed, but not too far, and Lizzie bailed but not too far.
Why would they each want to stick around if they knew what was going down?
In Lizzie's case, she may have had to do or to get something after Andrew was dead, hence the key mixup.
In Bridget's she probably had no where to go, but left soonly afterwords.
There had to be some incentive to send Bridget to her room, though, and I don't see any, other than that she may be tired, and perhaps still sickly, not firm reasonings.
So conclusion is, Bridget had to have been in some way bought off. I don't like this because it draws another potential snitch into the plot, but it's the only thing that makes sense.
So Bridget goes to her room, and out of earshot?, and the thing is done before lunch when it would have been wondered why Mrs. Borden didn't show up.

john @ Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:22 am wrote:
But Andrew is so time sensitive. What if Bridget just plopped in the kitchen and tried to chat with Lizzie because Lizzie told her about the sale of yard goods? It doesn't make sense that Lizzie would attempt conversation with someone she wanted out.
What if Andrew decided to paint the barn and went out to find a painter.
I think the sickness the elder Bordens had was designed to keep them in the house, but it didn't really work.

Maybe it was a customary habit of Bridget's to take a short nap around this time, and Lizzie was well aware of it. She might have snuck off at around the same time every day to take a nap in between preparing the meals. I go back and forth with myself over whether or not Bridget knew anything. But, when I really think about it, I cannot believe she did. She always spoke so fondly of Abby.Not only that but she is the only one who seemed to show genuine fear. The idea that the sickness was intended to keep them in the house makes some sense to me actually.

I'm still mulling this over, so it's still not clear to me, but, maybe someone can help me. If Andrew went out, it would have been a good time for Lizzie to get into his room if she was looking for something like a copy of the will or whatever. Maybe she was freaking that they were about to do something about her part in the will that she didn't want to happen. She could have killed Abby to get Abby's copy of the key to get into her father's room. Maybe she found some bad news and then whacked her father when he got home to prevent what he may have been intending.
Maybe she got a hold of his front door key some time in the previous day so he couldn't get in right away if she was upstairs snooping. I am thinking something regarding the keys figured in some kind of plan.
Maybe she knew they were planning something like sending her away for treatment or something and she needed to get information she felt was locked up in that room.

The thing about Bridget, I think, is very similar to the situation with Lizzie as a suspect, except they couldn't find motive. In court tho, motive was not necessary, tho back then, before modern forensics, they did count upon motive more. But- recall Blaisdell's closing remarks before he found Lizzie *probably guilty*? He said what if you were a man? Wouldn't I think you did it, because you werethere. If either was a man, of course we'd think he'd done it.

Judge Davis wrote on the conduct of the case at trial, which I always remember:

Page 5

"It is a rule of law that the possession of property recently stolen and unaccounted for is sufficient for conviction. This was the role when the prisoner could not testify and when certain larcenies and robberies were capital offences; and many a man has thus been convicted and dragged upon the hurdle to his place of execution. This rule was not exceptional. It was in conformity with common sense, and a severe logic, as all rules of evidence are. It was but the expression of the principles of all criminal evidence applied to certain robberies.

But the same law which then and now convicts of robberies, applies to capital crimes. Here was a person who had in possession the bodies of two victims robbed of the precious jewels of their lives. Does anybody think that if this evidence had been applied to a case of robbery or of mere property the law administered, or the verdict would have been the same?"
--THE
CONDUCT OF THE LAW
THE BORDEN CASE
with
SUGGESTIONS OF CHANGES
n
CRIMINAL LAW AND PRACTICE
By
JUDGE CHARLES C. DAVIS
PLYMOUTH, MASS.
1894

Angel - According to Mrs. Borden, they took her "keys." She didn't say who they were, or what the keys were. So she may not have had a key to their room. If Andrew had the only key to the elder Borden's room at the time no one could get in there. My thinking is that Abby "busied herself" dusting, and asked Bridget to wash the windows, and asked Lizzie what she wanted for lunch - both sound uncharacteristic. First, if, as some testimony states, Bridget were to wash the windows Thursdays anyway, why tell her to unless she just wanted to irritate Bridget? Could be a sign that Abby was irritated herself. Why would Uncle John say he heard this when he was long gone?
Second - why would Abby ask Lizzie what she wanted to eat, when Lizzie didn't eat with the elders anyway, and it doesn't sound like she ate much.
It could very well be that Abby was killed in the guest room (where Uncle John could have been expected at any time) because on that particular day, they (or someone) couldn't get her into her own room. Same for Mr. Borden. He comes home, Bridget and Lizzie are wandering and ironing handkerchiefs, and he puts his bedroom key on the mantle after going to their room. Now if Mrs. Borden had been killed there he would see her body of course, leading one to believe that the origional plan might have been to kill only Mrs. Borden. But he comes back down. He places his key on the mantle, and to nap.
He's killed and Lizzie goes to his room and perhaps gets something he just put there. She puts the key in her pocket and goes outside and comes back in to try to establish an alibi. The killer is gone. She calls Bridget, but forgets that the Borden's room key is in her pocket until that room is supposed to be searched.

john @ Wed Apr 27, 2005 1:08 pm wrote: Now if Mrs. Borden had been killed there he would see her body of course, leading one to believe that the origional plan might have been to kill only Mrs. Borden. But he comes back down. He places his key on the mantle, and to nap.
He's killed and Lizzie goes to his room and perhaps gets something he just put there. She puts the key in her pocket and goes outside and comes back in to try to establish an alibi. The killer is gone. She calls Bridget, but forgets that the Borden's room key is in her pocket until that room is supposed to be searched.

I don't understand why Abby being killed in their bedroom instead of the guest room means that Andrew was not an intended target.

Kat @ Sun Apr 24, 2005 2:35 am wrote: "Again, why would Andrew lock the barn at night, but pin it during the day?"--john

You've never shown us the "pin" reference, tho you've brought it up a couple of times.

All I can say about this until you do show this, is that Bridget did have access to the barn all that time Thursday to get her water to wash windows. I don't know if Andrew left it unlocked all day every day, or just window-washing days. Bridget might tell us...check her testimony...

I have answered my own 6 (?) questions and the change-of-dress question was dealt with immediately by others and now my finger is really sore!

This might answer the question of where the reference of the door being pinned during the day came from.

Trial testimony William H. Medley page 690:

Q.Perhaps that won't do, Mr. Medley. When you got to the barn, how did you find the door?
A.The door was fast with a hasp over a staple and an iron pin in it.

Q.I think I know just what you mean, but won't you draw it, and then I shall not lead you: just make a diagram of what you mean by a hasp.

(The witness drew an outline of the hasp)

MR. ROBINSON. Let him state what he means.

Q. Tell what you mean by a hasp.
A.Well, this is the piece of metal that goes over the staple, and it is held in place by a pin.

"j.  Mrs. Dr. Bowen--called and said that on Tuesday of the murder she was walking up the street with Mrs. Borden and (spoke?) and (B saw?) said L wasn't up yet but Mrs. Bowen had seen someone come away so she knew she was and went over there with Mrs. Borden.

Mrs. Borden said she couldn't get in the front way 'for they had taken her key.'  So she and Mrs. Bowen went in by the back door."
--Jennings' notes from "The Hip-bath Collection",by Barbara Ashton in
Proceedings.
It's in the Privy.
There's some good *clews* in there!

viewtopic.php?t=37

I'm still thinking that if we knew who "they" were who took Abby's keys, some things would fall into place. If she was the mistress of the household, why would she give them up willingly? If they were forced from her, then maybe she was being bullied. Why wouldn't Abby complain to Andrew if the girls were doing that? etc,etc,etc

Abby did say someone took her Key," I thought it read "keys."
Sounds like the beginning of a set-up to me, although the only one who could really "take" her key or keys, would probably be Andrew. It doesn't really make sense that Andrew would want Abby dead.
Andrew may not have wanted extra keys laying around if Uncle John was coming?
I think it was keys that were taken from her, and probably would have included the front door key, key to her room, and of course, the front door key would be the same as the backside key to the front door. Surely sealing her in.
The word "took" could also mean stolen, or that she left them on the kitchen table or somewhere, and they disappeared. That's what I think happened.
If Andrew didn't take his room key mistakenly that morning, someone could have taken it from the mantle, and Abby would be pretty much stuck.

the "they" in the statement about the keys seems very significant to me. if the keys were simply misplaced, one wouldn't say "they" took them...if one suspected that some unknown person had picked up the keys, one would most likely say "someone" took them...if the keys were suddenly mysteriously missing, one would expect Abby to say something to that effect, and would most likely make reference to one of the previous choices (the keys were misplaced, or someone appeared to have taken them).

But the use of "they" implicates something co-conspiratorial, something insidious is happening here. Of course the big question is "who are 'THEY'?" Think about the possible pairings that might make sense. I agree, including Andrew as being one of the "they" doesn't make much sense. But the others - Lizzie and Emma? Lizzie and Bridget?

And so these co-conspirators, whoever they might be, take Abby's keys, and my guess is that at least one of the "they" did so because it figured in with the murder plan. Both didn't necessarily have to had known what was going on...why, it could have been explained as easily as "the ol' hag, let's take and hide her keys from her." Thus what seemed to be merely an immature prank may have had much darker underlying motives.

good post squthmann

To Allen:
I think the real plan was to have Mrs. Borden killed in the elder Borden's room, have Mr. Borden come in and see her, and have him killed there too. That may not have been the plan of the planner, but I think it was the plan of the killer.
I also think the plan included Bridget to be killed too, but Lizzie came in and interrupted it, and for some reason (you guess) Lizzie wasn't a target.
So Lizzie comes in - her stepmother was only supposed to be killed, now her father is killed, and she is dealing with a looney. The looney doesn't kill Bridget and dashes - Lizzie DOESN'T CALL FOR THE POLICE! She wants Dr. Bowen, Miss Russel, Etc. You tell me how this makes other sense?

Key
That's the quote. I wouldn't wish to confuse anyone as to what Jenning's notes said.
It sounds like a front door key.

If it is just a front door key, it is not too much of an imposition, surely?
"They" implies those girls, I think (I agree), without really tattling.
Abby problably wouldn't refer to Andrew in a collective with *they*, agreed.

Maybe someone wants control of the front door- more than control of Abby?

What about Emma as instigator of the plan, Morse doing the actual deed, and Lizzie knowing about the plan for Abby, but not expecting dad to get it too?

I would believe anything of dear Emma.
How did she end up with a relatively normal life after, tho, if she did incite this thing?
My understanding is that she never lost her cache, as Lizzie did. Emma was still considered acceptable to the town and she never lost her friends. Could she be that diabolical to stay friends with the Misses Buck, even living with them after leaving Lizzie, and leaving Lizzie to self-destruct?

I don't know, Kat, but I've come to see Emma as the more pathetic of the two sisters--and, (my theory) the one who actually acts more guilty. THough Lizzie might have a "label" attached to her, she still circulated about rather freely, enjoying carriage--and later, automobile--rides. She refused to cave in. She maintained a library card, went to the theatre, etc. Emma, on the other hand, has a shadowy existence--taking the smaller room, moving away from Fall River and actually changing her name. Lizzie changed hers, of course, but only to give it more panache. Isn't it reported that Emma had a kind of mental breakdown (or "nervousness") as she got older? I had never seriously thought so before, but now I am coming to agree that Emma had a very critical role to play in the murders.

You know, I was wondering about a breakdown...
You've got a point.
Maybe Emma's association with a minister's daughters was to surround herself with good so her evil would be controlled?
Sure would like to question Annie Conner about Emma's last days...

I'm not sure about nervouseness. I know Lizzie was nervous or anxious later at Maplecroft. She did write Brayton about the noisy bird. I don't think Lizzie slept well at night. Maybe neither of the sisters did?

On keys, Kat, there was something about the second key to the Borden's bedroom being missing - remember? That's why i figured it was with the front door gone key.

Good thinking Angel. Morse could have done it. He knew the streetcar lines and stuff, but nobody remembered him.

It's a thought but not the way I see. ( I don't see motive)

Uncle John could have done it.
The motive wouldn't necessarily be known.
But his alabi also said that Dr. Bowen appeared at their house a few minutes after Uncle John left - crazy?

Liz Crouthers @ Tue May 10, 2005 8:00 pm wrote:It's a thought but not the way I see. ( I don't see motive)

I agree. I don't see a motive for Uncle John committing the murders, or even being an accomplice. He did not gain anything by their being killed.

Dr. Bowen possibly showing up at Mrs. Emery's house was in the newspaper. There's not proof or sworn oath or anything. It's like something someone chooses to believe or not believe. We figured out where that was and went there ourselves last visit and there wasn't time for Bowen to go there to Weybossett after Andrew's murder while he was sending the telegram.

As for a second key to the Borden bedroom, I've not heard of one. We've speculated there was only one key and that might be why Andrew kept it on the mantle for common use, instead of a constant finger-pointing at Lizzie for the robbery...

By the time Morse died those girls were on the outs with him, so that must mean something...