Lizzie Borden Society Forum

The disappearance of the murder weapon is one of the many mysteries of this Unsolved Mystery. The hatchet found could not have been the murder weapong. David Kent explain why in "Forty Whacks", the one best book.

As I pointed out years ago, the only time when the hatchet and bloody clothes could have disappeared was right after the murder. Lizzie sent Bridget to call Lizzie's friend (Alice?). If Bridget carried a bundle with a dress and hatchet (wrapped up to hide this evidence) that was the only chance for that to happen. But you are free to suggest another solution.

Alice's later testimony before the Grand Jury is interesting. If she admitted to receiving a bundle and destroying it, she would be an accessory after the fact. But if she merely testified that "Lizzie burned a dress" THAT would leave her out of it. Lizzie could not deny this without revealing too much. (Lizzie is not guilty, but I can keep an open mind.)
I often wondered why Alice waited so many months before testifying. Do you?

I tend to think Lizzie did it, but the disappearance of the murder weapon, as well as her not having even a spot of blood on her clothes, has always bothered me.

It has always bothered me that they never found the hatchet or found any bloody clothes. Which leads me to believe that who ever did the crime desposed of the evidence, and lizzie was the only one that would have been able to do that.

Unlike the O.J. case, where he was the only suspect, the Borden case has a host of possibilities. Very real suspects existed, such as Emma, Morse, the maid, and of course Lizzie, all at the scene that day; and of course an outside party. The best support of the Legend is the fact that the same questions asked then are still valid today. I'm affraid that all interest would fade if suddenly there was undisputed proof to who did the crime. The whole genre behind the Legend would fade and interest in the case would quickly dim. My -od, this whole site could collapse.

After all the reading I have done over the years it solidifies my belief that Lizzie was innocent of the murders but guilty of the crime, the author but with the aid of a ghost writer.

Even if she was lucky enough not to get any blood on herself, the weapon could not have vanished without outside help. If that is what you believe, it opens up a whole new group of suspects like Bowen, Churchill, Russell, embezzlers, farm hands, suspect pedestrians, a Lover, etc. (I'm rooting for the Lover. Makes a better story) Any one of these could have walked off with the weapon.

No, I believe there was an outside party.

Brown' book makes all the pieces fit so neatly together that the possibility of all the proof he uncovered, proof that all past historians have overlooked, brings me to the conclusion that his work is one of fiction; though I believe old Arnold was on the right track. There is a lot the public does not know, including the possibilities of secret lives in any number of closets, weather they be Andrews, Lizzie, a host of dirty laundry that we are not privy to.

But to cut my narration short here, I believe Lizzie knew the entire story, and possibly so did the maid and Emma. Lizzie was guilty, no one could prove it, could believe it, could accept it, and the jury was left with no other verdict but, "not guilty."

mbhenty @ Thu Feb 16, 2006 2:48 pm wrote:Unlike the O.J. case, where he was the only suspect, the Borden case has a host of possibilities. Very real suspects existed, such as Emma, Morse, the maid, and of course Lizzie, all at the scene that day; and of course an outside party. The best support of the Legend is the fact that the same questions asked then are still valid today. I'm affraid that all interest would fade if suddenly there was undisputed proof to who did the crime. The whole genre behind the Legend would fade and interest in the case would quickly dim. My -od, this whole site could collapse.

Yes, a solution would impair those who have a vested interest, whether emotional or proprietary, in the "Lizzie did it" scenario.

ALL your suspects were KNOWN to be presetn at that house. None of them, except Lizzie, were suspects afterwards. But the same lack of evidence against Bridget also applies to Lizzie!!!

If you read Kato's book, you would know that Kato was first treated as a suspect, and, some of his friends thought he was the unidentified dead male found w/ Nicole.

Can you explain why Nicole's boyfriend was never a suspect? Wouldn't he be a prime suspect. WHAT do you really know about this case?
You might want to read "Killing Time" by Freed and Briggs.

Rays: Thanks for the info. I forgot about Kato. But then again, perhaps I spoke out of turn since I am not that fimiliar with the O.J. case, aside from what was on the Nightly News at the time.

From what I remember that case was so mis-handled by the police. Makes you wonder how inefficient the Fall River Police were with the Borden case. For instance, the first officer on the scene, being one George Allen, who placed a civilian, John Sawyer, to gaurd the back door of the Borden house while he returned to the station to make his report........, it would make more sense to send Sawyer to the station for more police and guard the crime scene himself. Who knows what could have gone on while George Allen was away. If it took him 3 to 4 minutes to make it to the Police Station, (3 to 4 blocks away) another couple to explain to the Marshal, and another 3 to 4 minutes to return......., that's a long time in which much could have transpired at the crime scene.

Would it not be bizzare if history proved that the painter George Allen did the crime and the police mistaken the red on his clothing as paint since he was a painter? (Please, no comments needed, this is not a suggestion to a real scenario......Ha, Ha!)

mbhenty @ Fri Feb 17, 2006 8:46 pm wrote:Rays: Thanks for the info. I forgot about Kato. But then again, perhaps I spoke out of turn since I am not that fimiliar with the O.J. case, aside from what was on the Nightly News at the time.

From what I remember that case was so mis-handled by the police. Makes you wonder how inefficient the Fall River Police were with the Borden case. For instance, the first officer on the scene, being one George Allen, who placed a civilian, John Sawyer, to gaurd the back door of the Borden house while he returned to the station to make his report........, it would make more sense to send Sawyer to the station for more police and guard the crime scene himself. Who knows what could have gone on while George Allen was away. If it took him 3 to 4 minutes to make it to the Police Station, (3 to 4 blocks away) another couple to explain to the Marshal, and another 3 to 4 minutes to return......., that's a long time in which much could have transpired at the crime scene.

Would it not be bizzare if history proved that the painter George Allen did the crime and the police mistaken the red on his clothing as paint since he was a painter? (Please, no comments needed, this is not a suggestion to a real scenario......Ha, Ha!)

Ha ha ha!!! WHAT 'red paint' was there on Mr Sawyer? I thought Allen picked him as being 6'2" and 250 lbs? Allen had to be back at the station to 'process' an individual. Also, the memory of the militia was quite fresh in those days. Before the 20th century the 'well-regulated militia' was the police force as they kept and bore arms. you can look it up.

In 1890 the SC Legislature passed a Prohibition Law, and the Governor signed it. But the militia refused to enforce it, and it became a dead letter. THAT is the purpose of a 'militia', to serve as a check and balance against crooked legislatures. Or is it different today?

Joe Bosco was the ONLY REPORTER to have a seat all through the OJ trial. Read his book for his comments. Bosco had experience with DNA evidence from an earlier trial.

The murder weapon could have been up in a tree, or thrown on a roof nearby.
Or buried.
They didn't dig up the yard that I know of.
Maybe the noise at the fence Wednesday night was Lizzie digging a hole, getting ready to bury something Thursday.

They should have used bloodhounds.

But if she dug a hole, wouldn't there be evidence of a hole being dug that recently? I'm assuming the back yard was covered with grass. Wouldn't a dirt spot and evidence of digging have been considered suspicious when they were searching?

I don't know how thoroughly they checked. They never mentioned the marks made by Bridget and her water splashing around.
The Chagnon dog didn't bark Wednesday night.
Maybe it knew Lizzie, if she liked animals, she might have made a friend of it.
Lizzie has missing time Wednesday night.
Just a suggestion.

[BTW: I bury keys outside and after I've done so you'd never know it in a million years.]

If Lizzie did the killing I think she may have had a prearanged hiding place for the hatchet such as a hollow spot in the wall or under or "inside" her matress maybe. Wouldn't that be something if Lizzie had the hatchet hidden inside her bed mattress and that was her real reason for laying on it when the police were there?

-1bigsteve (o:

P.S. Is it just me or are these emoticons now moving? I never saw them move before.

Some smilies move, some don't move.

Lizzie lay on the lounge in her room for a while accepting visitors. She could have been lying on the weapon. Pretty uncomfortable tho.

I think the officials thought of this because eventually they looked at that lounge- I think on Saturday's search.

Today I saw a hatchet head identical to the Borden handleless hatchet in a used tool store. It looks slightly larger and, unfortunately, it is bent. It looks like someone used it as a wedge to pry something up. Too bad. It is an old, old one. I would love to get one in good condition and put a handle in it.

Does anyone know what company made the Borden hatchet? What brand it was?

-1bigsteve (o:

The info might be in Flynn's "Mysterious Axe" as he talks about axes and hatchets in that article, the focus being on the hatchet found the following year after the crime on Crowe's roof in the rear of the Borden property.