Lizzie Borden Society Forum

Poe's "LeCoq" stores were written, Arthur Conan Doyle was popular.
Fingerprints had been written about by Henry Fealds? in 1880 for identifying criminals, but not much used until circa 1894?.

What could the FR police done better given what they knew at the time?
State Detective Seaver was the best around?

Too bad that fingerprinting wasn't discovered earlier, that in itself could have changed the outcome. But actually, there was so much traffic through both crimes scenes, before they even got there, possibly kept all unofficial people in one room. Questioned those directly involved (Lizzie and Bridget) alot sooner then they did. I wonder if they'd used a magnifying glass and on hands and knees scoured the carpeting if they'd have found any blood trails.....

The practice of fingerprinting has actually been around for a very long time. It's just that law enforcement in the US was a bit late in boarding the train as it were. The site below provides a bit of its history.

http://onin.com/fp/fphistory.html

"Fingerprints" by Colin Beavan is a short history of this area.
The Illinois Supreme Court sanctioned fingerprints in 1911, and it had been in use earlier.
Your library may have this book.
PS
It is faster and more correct to use fingerprints than the older Bertillon system of measuring bone lengths. Mug shots are still used, they show the person's ears (which don't change much over the years).
But if all there is are bones/skeleton, the Bertillon system is used (if not in name) by measuring bones. See the book "Bones" on forensic anthropology. Both interesting reading, if not related to the Borden Case.

I have the book Bones and could not get thru it. It was the most boring book on such a subject as I think I ever owned.

I just picked it up and opened it immediately to page 270 and there were the words Fall River.
On page 269 they are talking about the "Roadside Murders" of 1988-90 in New Bedford.

By Dr. Douglas Ubelaker & Henry Scammell.
Usually a book written by two people is pretty good because of the collaboration effect.

Kat @ Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:46 am wrote:I have the book Bones and could not get thru it. It was the most boring book on such a subject as I think I ever owned.

I just picked it up and opened it immediately to page 270 and there were the words Fall River.
On page 269 they are talking about the "Roadside Murders" of 1988-90 in New Bedford.

By Dr. Douglas Ubelaker & Henry Scammell.
Usually a book written by two people is pretty good because of the collaboration effect.

Truth and Beauty are in the mind of the observer?
I thought this used library book was just great. I gave it to someone who might have like it because of his interest in CSI program.
Ubelaker is a forensic antropologist at the Smithsonian, and explains his work. Did you know that you can distinguish a skull as to Caucasian, African, or Oriental? Eye-sockets. Differences for some bone lengths.
Everybody is different, even if they look about the same.

I suggest that this book is for serious students. You should browse a book before they buy it. I did this. If ordering on-line, check the reviews in Amazon. You know you can trust some of them!

Hurumph.

And those with a space between their upper front teeth have different skull structure than others. It's unaccountable...

Personally, I don't read the reviews on Amazon.

I just recently read a book on the subject of fingerprinting that was (get me a Bible and I'll swear to this) the worst of the half-dozen or so books I've ever read on the subject. The sad thing is, the feller who wrote it had at least 20 years experience as a fingerprint examiner in California and was crackerjack at it.

I haven't had the heart yet to give him my opinion of the book - he's my uncle. (I wish I were kidding.)

I sure don't envy you! You gotta be honest with him, and that's probably why you feel like packing your bags and running. Evidently it must have some merit, it got published, right?

Well, he hasn’t asked – just strongly hinted by sending the book! As for its publication, the truth is that for a few bucks (or a few more bucks as the case may be) you can get almost anything published nowadays - be it good, bad, or "So sorry, this needs a face lift" ugly.

The only comment I did hear – thru the family grapevine – was that the book did not sell well at all.

As for me? It's much easier to hold my nose, go bury the book in the back yard and read something else! No conflict there at all!!

Well we certainly know you are a great writer! Has he read any of your "Compositor's Bench" ramblings in The Hatchet?
So creative, with layers upon layers of storyline.

Now quit that! I’ll blush all over the keyboard! If I am a good writer, it's because I'm a good reader - there's not much else to it.

The book actually strikes me as something John Douglas might have written – while on some serious medication! Ever see one of those FBI file pages that have about a quarter of the information blacked out? That’s how this book reads. About two paragraphs or so into each chapter there’s a notation to the effect that names have been changed…
Remember “Dragnet”? Dry prose is the stuff they deal in, of course. It just doesn’t translate well en masse, you might say. “I can read FBI files for free – why would I buy this?” would be a likely thought. (I know it was one of my thoughts!)

I mean, what’s the objective in writing? In almost any genre the writer must succeed in grabbing the reader by the throat – or at least the shirt collar – “There’s more on the next page, oh you’ve just gotta read this next paragraph!”

You wanna grab the reader and make him or her want more – not want to be sick!

No, he’s never seen anything I’ve written that I know of. He’s just not the light fiction or poetry type. It's probably better that way. He'd be embarrassed.