The Ice Cream Man is Coming

[Allen]

Is it possible that the woman that Hymon Lubinsky saw coming toward the house on the day of the murders was not Lizzie? In my opinion it's possible that the woman had never been in the barn at all. From what I gather from Lubinsky's testimony he saw a woman coming from the direction of the barn. He didn't actually see her come out of the barn, and she was very close to the house when he saw her, but he did not see her go inside.

The only fact his testimony really can be said to establish is that there was a woman in the yard of the Borden house at a little after eleven on the day of the murders. She seemed to be going inside the house from the direction of the barn. I also wonder why Officer Mullaly's notes are not included in the Witness Statements. Were they lost? According to Mr. Lubinsky he made his initial report to Officer Mullaly. I think it would be interesting to read this statement. It's interesting that there are pieces of this puzzle that seem to be missing, and no has really questioned where they are.

I have some doubts as to whether or not he was remembering a woman in the Borden yard as opposed to another yard on that street. But he claims to have sold ice cream to Bridget at the house so maybe he did. He knows Bridget to be the servant and stated that when he sold the ice cream at that residence two or three weeks prior to the murders he saw both Bridget and 'the woman'. But he doesn't state who 'the woman' is for the record. I guess this is supposed to be implied. He never actually identifies Lizzie as the woman he saw in the yard either, in my opinion.


Trial Testimony of Hymon Lubinsky page 1408+:

Q. (By Mr. Jennings) What is your name?
A. Hymon Lubinsky.

Q.What do you do?
A. Peddle ice cream --- ice cream peddler.

Q. Do you work for yourself or somebody else?
A. I work for Mr. Wilkinson.

Q. Does he keep a store?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where?
A. 42 North Main Street.

Q. Does he keep a team?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you peddle by the team?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you remember the time of the Borden murder?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you know where the house is?
A. I didn't know at the time where the house is.

Q. Do you know now?
A. I know now.

Q. Did you find out the day of the murder?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where do you keep your team?
A. Second Street.

Q. In whose stable?
A. Charley Gardner's stable.

Q. Is that near Morgan Street?
A. Near the corner of Morgan and Rodman street ---near Morgan street too.

Q. Between Rodman and Morgan?
A. Between Rodman and Morgan.

Q. Is it on the same side of the street that the Borden house is, or the other side?
A. Up a little.

Q. Opposite? Did you go the Borden house that morning in your team?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where did you get your team?
A. From the stable.

Q. Can you tell about what time it was when you left the stable?
A. It was after eleven.

-----------------------------------------------
Q. When you went by the Borden house did you see anybody on the premises.
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Whom did you see?
A. I saw a lady come out the way from the barn right to the stairs from the back of the house.

Q. Can you tell how she was dressed?
A. She had on a dark colored dress.

Q. Can you give the color of it?
A. I can't tell what kind of color it was.

Q. Did she have anything on her head?
A. No, sir.

Q. What was she doing?
A. She was walking.

Q. In which direction?
A. She was walking very slow.

Q. Toward the steps?
A. Toward the steps.
-----------------------------------
Q. Had you ever seen the servant who worked in that house?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Had you ever delivered any ice cream to her?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. How long before this?
A. Oh, two or three weeks before the murder.

Q. Was the woman you saw the servant?
A. I saw the servant and the woman too.

Q. Was the woman you saw the day of the murder the same woman as the servant?
A. No, sir.

Q. Are you sure about that?
A. I am sure about it.
------------------------------

Q. What part of the street was your team on when you saw the woman?
A. Between the Borden house and Dr. Bowen's house.

Q. In front of the Borden house?
A. Little in front of the Borden house.( Illustrating) This is the Borden house and this is my team.

-----------------------------------------------

Q. Then where she came from, you don't know.
A. No, --- away from the barn.

Q. What makes you say that, away from the barn?
A. The barn is not far from the house.

Q. How do you know she came from the barn?
A. Already I told you she came from the barn.

Q. You have said that several times.
A. No sir, --- I said away from the barn.

Q. Then you did not see her come from the barn? Whether she came from the barn, you don’t know?
A. I don't know.

Q. Or away from the barn?
A. I know she came from the barn.

Q. Her back was toward the barn, that is all you know?
A. That is what I know, sir.

[DWilly]

He says he left the stable "after eleven." My question would be how long after eleven and when did he get to the Borden house? By the time you get to that after eleven business every minute counts because soon Mrs. Churchill sees Lizzie out on the steps and of course Dr. Bowen arrives. Lizzie could have sent Bridget to get the Doctor, gone back into the house, grabbed the hatchet, then put it behind the barn and buried it, or she could have helped someone climb over that fence, then walked toward the steps to sit down.

[Audrey]

Assuming he was correct and it was the Borden yard he saw the woman in, who else might it have been?

And why would be question his competence? Delivery/service men who go door to door are usually the best ones to ask directions from! It is their livelihood to know who lives where and a little bit about the people who live there. ie- are they a soft touch for luxury items like ice cream? I bet you the Schwanz man knows where I live and wouldn't mistake it for another house!

[Kat]

He says he left the stable "after eleven." My question would be how long after eleven and when did he get to the Borden house? By the time you get to that after eleven business every minute counts because soon Mrs. Churchill sees Lizzie out on the steps and of course Dr. Bowen arrives. Lizzie could have sent Bridget to get the Doctor, gone back into the house, grabbed the hatchet, then put it behind the barn and buried it, or she could have helped someone climb over that fence, then walked toward the steps to sit down.

It is pertinent to get the time, as you say.
The testimony says from 5 to 10 minutes after 11- according to Gardner and to Lubinsky. However, Lizzie was not out on the steps when Mrs. Churchill saw her. Lizzie was espied by Churchill thru her own screen door.
So the "gone back into the house" doesn't apply at that time of sighting by Churchill.

It can apply to the time that Lubinsky says he saw a woman who was not Bridget outside. If Lizzie was outside at 5 or 10 minutes after 11 then she:
A. Would have seen the killer
B. Would have heard the noise she first said she heard.
C. Would have been outside and very close to entering the house within a minute or two of Andrew's death.

Audrey, to answer your question of what other woman it might be-- the only other *woman not Bridget,* who has been theorized as to being the person seen by Lubinsky, is Ellen Eagan.
A case has been made by Arnold Brown for the sighting being of her. I suppose another woman in the case might be Emma.

[Allen]

Audrey, to answer your question of what other woman it might be-- the only other *woman not Bridget,* who has been theorized as to being the person seen by Lubinsky, is Ellen Eagan.
A case has been made by Arnold Brown for the sighting being of her. I suppose another woman in the case might be Emma.

I think there are many possible misperceptions in Mr. Lubinsky's testimony. First of all we have no way of knowing if the woman he saw was indeed coming from the barn. She may have been in the back yard. It also may not have been Lizzie at all. It's possible it could've been Ellen Eagen. She did say she ran into a yard on that street to be ill.I guess it is in debate as to whether or not it was the Borden yard. She also said she saw a woman washing windows. I think it was Bridget. So the woman could've been Ellen in my opinion. As for the woman being Emma, I guess that is within the realm of possibility. If you want to believe she could've come back from Fairhaven, dispatched the elder Bordens, and made it all the way back to Fairhaven in time to receive the telegram and without anyone in the Brownell home realizing she was gone.

[Angel]

Maybe the woman in the dark dress that Lubinsky saw going towards the house was Mrs. Churchill as she was coming to Lizzie's aid.

[Kat]

That's an interesting suggestion...but...would Mrs. Churchill pause at the sidesteps on the east side of the Borden porch? Again, tho, it's timing. If Mrs. Churchill was coming over at , say, 10 minutes after 11, maybe. Do we have a description of Churchill's clothing?

Allen, are you saying that Ellan Eagan says she saw a woman washing windows?

[Allen]

Allen, are you saying that Ellan Eagan says she saw a woman washing windows?

I had posted this same information from Rebello in a thread awhile back, this is where I really started wondering about the whole Ellen Eagen angle and also had me wondering why she wasn't listed as a witness in the Inquest, when clearly she was. I think it's possible the houses were mixed up, and that it was Bridget that she saw washing the windows perhaps? Either this or there was another servant girl out washing windows who may have saw something on the day of the murders. Here is the link to the original thread.

viewtopic.php?t=1066&postdays=0&postord ... &start=100

Rebello page 128-129:

" There was a witness at today's inquest, whose name was not given out by the police, when the usual bulletin was issued this afternoon. It was Mrs. Egan [ Eagan], who was seen to enter the Borden yard before the murders, mistaking it for Dr. Kelly's property adjoining." Boston Daily Adviser, August 11, 1892:1


" The last witness of the day, and the most inconsequential one of all, was the mysterious woman whom the little Polish peddler, Lubinsky, declared he saw coming out of Borden's yard on the morning of the tragedy, and at the time, not far from the hour of it.

Officer Harrington was detailed to work up the case, and he brushed aside the mystery and revealed the unknown in[is] a big, good natured Irish woman named Emen [ Ellen] Eagen who lives on Mulberry Street.

Mrs. Eagan was put on the stand and after the first three questions had been asked her, the authorities were satisified that her evidence had no bearing on the case.

She answered all the queries directed at her with a bluntness, however, which caused a smile to pass around among the officers, the first tinge of levity which has appeared on this terribly serious case so far.

In the first place, she was not sure whether or not it was the Borden's yard from which she emerged on the fatal morning, and a little questioning satisfied the district attorney that, instead of from the Borden's she had come out from the yard of Dr. Kelly, who lives in the house above the Borden homestead.

Her reason for her appearance there was a most natural one. She had been feeling unwell for a day or two preceding the murder, and on Wednesday last had experimented on herself with a few pills.

On Friday [Thursday] morning she had occassion to go down to make some purchases, and was taking the Second Street route when she began to feel the effects of the pill. She hurried into Dr. Kelly's yard and accosted a servant girl who was washing the windows, and who directed her to a place nearby.

When she came out of the yard the little peddler saw her but she passed down the street, performed her errand and then returned home, totally unconcious of the fact that she was to become quite and important personage in the eyes of the clew hunters. After Mrs. Eagan testified, the inquest was adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning..." Boston Herald, August 11, 1892:2.

[Kat]

OK thanks!
So, it's the newspaper which says what it thinks Ellan Eagan testified to at the secret inquest.

[Audrey]

Audrey, to answer your question of what other woman it might be-- the only other *woman not Bridget,* who has been theorized as to being the person seen by Lubinsky, is Ellen Eagan.
A case has been made by Arnold Brown for the sighting being of her. I suppose another woman in the case might be Emma.

I think there are many possible misperceptions in Mr. Lubinsky's testimony. First of all we have no way of knowing if the woman he saw was indeed coming from the barn. She may have been in the back yard. It also may not have been Lizzie at all. It's possible it could've been Ellen Eagen. She did say she ran into a yard on that street to be ill.I guess it is in debate as to whether or not it was the Borden yard. She also said she saw a woman washing windows. I think it was Bridget. So the woman could've been Ellen in my opinion. As for the woman being Emma, I guess that is within the realm of possibility. If you want to believe she could've come back from Fairhaven, dispatched the elder Bordens, and made it all the way back to Fairhaven in time to receive the telegram and without anyone in the Brownell home realizing she was gone.

I guess I do not understand what you are basing the idea that Mr. Lubinsky's testimony may have been wrong-- or that he could be mistaken other than your opinion.

If the testimony regardig Ellen Eagen is to be believed-- The woman had an irritable bowel and based on what we know about the layout of the Borden propert would have had to go as far as the barn to find a place to relieve herself. Logically speaking--what woman is going to rush into someone's outhouse, have a spasm and then meander along about her way to be spotted by Lubinsky?

[Allen]

I guess I do not understand what you are basing the idea that Mr. Lubinsky's testimony may have been wrong-- or that he could be mistaken other than your opinion.

If the testimony regardig Ellen Eagen is to be believed-- The woman had an irritable bowel and based on what we know about the layout of the Borden propert would have had to go as far as the barn to find a place to relieve herself. Logically speaking--what woman is going to rush into someone's outhouse, have a spasm and then meander along about her way to be spotted by Lubinsky?

Logically speaking how could she have felt an on rush of what you call 'irritable bowel', although I don't know what you're basing that on, and NOT try to find a place to relieve it out of the possible detection of passer's by? Can she tell it to wait until she gets home? If nothing else I would for the safety of my own dignity. We don't know what kind of effect the pill had on her because that is not stated in the newspaper article; it's what you're reading into it. So that makes it your opinion she had irritable bowel? It simply says she started feeling the effects of the pill. I've been reminded in the past that when inferring things into testimony that are not directly stated, I should state it as being merely my opinion.

This is exactly the point I’m trying to raise about Hymon Lubinsky's testimony. I'm not saying his testimony was wrong. Something that has never been said cannot be wrong. Where in all of his testimony does he state definitely that the woman he saw was Lizzie? He was never even asked if it the woman he saw was Lizzie. He simply states that he saw a woman in a dark dress in the Borden yard coming from the direction of the barn, and he did not know the woman.


Trial testimony of Hymon Lubinsky page 1415:

Q. Did you know the woman?
A. No, sir.
-----------------------------
Q. Where was the woman when you saw her?
A. She was coming down the way of the barn.

Q. Had she got as far as the house?
A. Out near the barn, near the house, she was.

Q. Which was she nearest to?
A. Nearest to the house.

Q. How near was she?
A. I could not tell you.

Q. Can you give me an idea?
A. Not that I know of.

Q.What?
A. Might be four or five feet from the house.

Q. Was she walking?
A. Walking.

He did not state with certainty that she was even in the barn because he didn't see her come out. She was coming from that direction. So it is taken for granted that's where she came from. That's not my opinion that is the testimony. It has been taken for granted from his testimony it was Lizzie coming from the barn.

There doesn't seem to be a barn on the property of Mrs. Churchill. The barn like building that was situated on the Kelly property seems to have been situated in their yard in much the same way as the one on the Borden property, but depending on where the gate leading into the yard was situated would've been harder to access from the street.

Also, the newspapers seemed to have some means for obtaining the information about the testimony in the inquest. Whether it was from interviews with witnesses, or police officials, I am not willing to say for sure. But they seemed to have information about what the witnesses testified to that when held up against the actual inquest testimony seems to be pretty accurate.

[Haulover]

while we're on the subject of lubinsky -- this from Rebello, pg 88.

"While in Fall River, Hyman resided on Spring Street (1889-1911), Ferry Street (1912), Washington Street (1913-1916/1920-1923) and 230 Second Street, the Borden house (1917-1919)."

this last residence -- this is what is now 92 2nd? he rented from lizzie and emma? or had they sold it by then? anyone know any more about this?

[Harry]

Rebello, page 35 says:

"They owned the home until they sold it to John W. Dunn on June 15, 1918...."

So Lubinsky would have boarded there at least in part during their ownership.

Think he got a discount on the rent?

[theebmonique]

I'll bet Lizzie CUT him a deal.


Tracy...

[Haulover]

maybe he even cleaned up and stayed for free.

ah, to be a friend of lizzie borden -- what benefits!

i saw ya, lizbeth!

[Allen]

Rebello, page 35 says:

"They owned the home until they sold it to John W. Dunn on June 15, 1918...."

So Lubinsky would have boarded there at least in part during their ownership.

Think he got a discount on the rent?

That is a truly weird situation. I wonder how it came to be that he wanted to live in the house where the murders took place, especially after testifying at the trial. I also wonder what Lizzie thought of that arrangement?

[Gramma]

Do we know when the house was converted into apartments?
Were there others living there as well, providing income? That was something Lizzie and Emma grew up with and knew well.....being a landlord and collecting rent.

Gramma

[Kat]

Wasn't Lubinsky divorced by then, Har, do you recall?

There were quite a few people living at #92/230 Second Street before and after the Bordens. I think it was mainly a 2 family home again tho, with maybe a boarder and a servant as non-family.
I did read that later on a whole soccer team was lodged there!

[nbcatlover]

As an immigrant, I believe Hyman was looked down on (as was Ellan Egan). Some of the confusion in his testimony (from the barn, away from the barn, etc.) may have been caused by English not being his first language.

The most confusing thing is why the police or Knowlton ever try to establish an identification of Lizzie or of Ellan, since both were known to the police.

If you believe in the possibility of alternate theories, Ruby Cameron talked about "Maggie" Cameron and Flora Hood being there that day to help ferret the boyfriend away.

I also have a question. Someone recently posted something about Mrs. Churchill talking to her yard man. She had a yard man? Was he in the yard? What was his name, etc.? I can't put my finger on what bothers me, but I've always felt there was something a little off in Mrs. Churchill's involvement that day.

[Kat]

Thomas Bowles lived at Mrs. Churchill's and worked for her. He was washing a carriage in her yard that morning, but he was on the north side of her house and couldn't see anything past the shared fence and the well-house and I think there was something also like a trellis there.

Unless the theorectical women visitors of Bridget were already there when the killing occured- one of them wouldn't be seen at 11:05 or 11:10 by Lubinsky. Were they already there?

I agree there was a communication gap with Lubinsky. I shudder to think how he was treated. But I do have a hard time with trying to envision what he says he saw in the time he says he saw it, on that day.

[Allen]

I agree there was a communication gap with Lubinsky. I shudder to think how he was treated. But I do have a hard time with trying to envision what he says he saw in the time he says he saw it, on that day.

It's too bad there isn't a way to do a recreation of what he may have seen that day. I think that even the act of trying to recreate it, even if it cannot be done with any degree of certainty, would give a better idea of what may have taken place when he drove past the house that day. What exactly could he see from his place on the street?

I'm also wondering how much attention he actually gave to the woman in the yard. Both Lubinsky and the man who owned the stable testified that he was in a hurry because he was getting the team out later than he normally did. When someone is in a hurry they usually do not pay close attention to things.

Why he was never asked if the woman was Lizzie, or even Ellen, mystifies me as well. I would think that would be the most important question and the most logical question to be asked. But he was never asked. So we're stuck with the discription of a woman he did not know, in a dark dress but wearing nothing on her head, walking slowly toward the house from the direction of the barn. Why didn't they ask him? Lizzie was sitting right there in the courtroom, why wasn't he asked if the prisoner was the woman he saw? Language barriers would not have had anything to do with a clear sight identification. The only thing I can think of is no one was really sure if the woman was Lizzie or not. The prosecution did not ask because they were afraid he would say it was Lizzie, and defense did not ask because they were afraid he would say it wasn't Lizzie.

[DWilly]

I just read The Borden Murder Mystery on-line by Arthur Phillips. I'm not quite sure what the deal is but, he was the junior member on Lizzie's defense team. Now, I guess this is an article from a larger book he did and he didn't actually write this piece but, rather it came from his notes. I hope I got that right. Anyway, on page 12 it talks about Lubinsky and this is what it says Lubinsky saw, " and he saw Miss Borden go into the house from the direction of the Barn." Now, I don't know. Was this something scribbled down in his notes after he talked to Lubinsky and in that case he was being more specific in what he said he saw?

[Allen]

I just read The Borden Murder Mystery on-line by Arthur Phillips. I'm not quite sure what the deal is but, he was the junior member on Lizzie's defense team. Now, I guess this is an article from a larger book he did and he didn't actually write this piece but, rather it came from his notes. I hope I got that right. Anyway, on page 12 it talks about Lubinsky and this is what it says Lubinsky saw, " and he saw Miss Borden go into the house from the direction of the Barn." Now, I don't know. Was this something scribbled down in his notes after he talked to Lubinsky and in that case he was being more specific in what he said he saw?

That's possible. It's also possible that like so many others, he just took for granted that the woman Mr. Lubinsky saw was Lizzie.

[Audrey]

Why can't it have been Lizzie?????????

[Allen]

Why can't it have been Lizzie?????????

It might have been Lizzie, it might not have been Lizzie. We have no positive ID of who the woman was that's just it. Lubinsky said he didn't know the woman. If he sold ice cream there before, maybe he had seen Lizzie before that day. He said he saw Bridget and 'the woman' when he was at the house. Whether it was Lizzie, Abby, or Emma we don't know that either. Why wasn't he just asked if everyone was so positive?? Shouldn't he have had to stipulate for the record that yes the prisoner is the woman he saw in the yard that day, and not just a description of who he saw? If it was Lizzie, he would have said as much. He was looking right at her in court as he testified. So again, why didn't they ask him? Again, I think it's because they couldn't be sure what his answer would be. Without more evidence of what Lubinsky saw from other sources, I'm not inclined to be positive it was.

[Kat]

To answer about the Phillips item: He first wrote about this (extensively) in the newspaper in 1934. The newspaper item is nearly alike to the extract which you read. However, it appeared, with a few additions (of sentences and maybe an opinion or 2) after his death in one of the 3 volumes of the famed History of Fall River. His brother-in-law, Easton, was the editor and had free reign to add from notes Phillips may have left. Since the news item was pretty much all Phillips had to say on the case, I believe Easton added a few comments himself, because he could.
I believe Lubinsky was Phillips witness- meaning his very own first witness to depose and prepare for trial and testimony. I've felt that any defiencies in that testimony were due to Phillips' inexperience.

[Allen]

Well Phillips inexperience may have had something to do with it, but I don't think his inexperience would influence the prosecution.