Lizzie Borden Society Forum

Harry's thread on making a poll lead me to try a poll question of my own. In regard to statements made by the witnesses, who did you feel was the most credible? I'd also be interested to know why you feel that way.

I voted for Mrs. Churchill. I believe she was the most consistent.

She was the only one not close to either the girls or the murdered parents. She had no axe to grind (ouch!) against anyone and no reason to lie on their behalf.

Congrats on creating the poll!

Good poll, Allen. I also voted for Mrs. Churchill due to her objective position.

So far it appears that Mrs. Churchill is considered the most credible witness among those of you who have voted up to now. I also voted for Mrs. Churchill. Interesting.

I voted Alice without hesitation...because I always vote Alice...but I really should have considered the question a bit more. Alice came thru in the end, but not fully at the start, so I guess that puts a damper on her credibility.

I am glad to see (thus far) neither Lizzie, Morse or Bowen got a vote. Bowen was way too emotionally involved, IMO. Morse lied by omission, IMO. Lizzie is a no-brainer.

I was surprised to see Emma had some votes!

I voted for Mrs. Churchill as the most credible witness. As Harry posted, I don't think that she had any axe to grind with the Bordens, so, I don't feel her testimony was compromised in any way. What she says seems to be the simple, unvarnished truth. I love her overly truthful statement at the beginning when she was questioned by the police, "Must I, am I obliged to tell you all? Well, if I must, I can't be blamed. O, I wish I had not to do this. I do not like to tell anything of my neighbor; but this is as it is....."

Mrs. Churchill. I feel that Emma could have lied to protect Lizzie and Bridget could have twisted the truth out of loyalty while Alice was a friend who could have fudged the facts a bit. John Morse was too close to the family and his appearance at the time of the killings is just a little too fishy for me. Dr. Bowen was behaving a bit odd on the day of the killings. Lizzie's statements were all over the place so I can't put much faith in her.

I think Mrs. Churchill was disconnected from the Bordens enough to have been less likely to lie to protect Lizzie's bacon.

-1bigsteve (o:

Personally, I love how what we now transcribe as "Oh" was taken down as the more poetic "O" in those days!

Living in a house full of butchers, I always thought the police should have checked the axes and hatchets in the Churchill/Buffington house. If it's not the family, it's usually the neighbors committing crimes.

I think Alice Churchill was the most credible, too. I mean, why would she lie? She doesn't have a reason too.

I voted for Mrs. Churchill, as well. She had nothing to gain or lose, and her testimony was the most consistent. IMO

Has everyone read the *testimonies?*

I prefer the Prelim and that is not something everyone has.

Are people voting as they are because they have read at least the trial testimonies of the characters named in the poll?

If you voted but gave no reason, it's OK not to answer this.

(Snokkums- do you mean Alice Russell or Adelaide Churchill? You've made her into one person- Alice Churchill )

It's a timeless poll question, Missy and a good one!

I agree that Mrs. Churchill's testimony was definitely the most consistent of the choices offered. (Good poll question, Melissa!)

So, because Mrs. C. does appear consistent in her testimony -- and hoping that consistency indicates a measure of veracity -- I went back to revisit the information she'd provided.

She tells us a few interesting things such as: Abby went out "a good many times"; Bridget usually washed the windows on Thursdays; and Lizzie was pale and frightened looking and seemingly in "great distress" at the Borden's screen door that August morning.

We also learn that, although she thought relations between the "girls" and the elder Bordens were "not as cordial as they might be", "they always spoke in the pleasantest terms of each other when [she] saw them" and she "never passed pleasanter calls than in that house, by every member".

She tells the court Lizzie said a note came for Abby about someone being sick but doesn't go into any detail as to where or when Lizzie found out about the note.

However she reiterates over and over again (using almost identical wording at the inquest, prelim., and trial) that Bridget told her: "Mrs. Borden had a note to go to see some one that was sick. She was dusting in the sitting room. She hurried off. She didn't tell me where she was going, she generally does."

Jennings presses her on this point:
"Q. Bridget said that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That was not what Lizzie said?
A. No, sir.
Q. Now, you have got that right, haven't you? No doubt about that?"
And Mrs. Churchill answers:
"That Bridget said that, "Mrs. Borden had a note to go to see some one that was sick. She was dusting in the sitting-room. She hurried off. She didn't tell me where she was going, she generally does." (Trial, 368)

This particularly consistent wording of Addie Churchill's at all three sessions has always intrigued me. Because if she is quoting Bridget correctly -- "she hurried off" implies Bridget had to have seen Abby 'hurrying off' at about 9 a.m. -- the last time Bridget claimed to have seen Abby wielding her duster.

Where did Mrs. Churchill come up with this image of Abby hurrying off from her dusting chore if not from Bridget? Is it something Lizzie said and Addie got confused and thought it was Bridget? This seems unlikely because she has "no doubt" it was Bridget who told her.

And as you read the transcripts it becomes obvious that, not only is Mrs. Churchill consistent in her responses, but is also someone who is very careful to indicate when she is unsure in her recollection of events.

But she is adamant on this point.

Is it possible for Bridget's statement to Mrs. Churchill to be a reconstruction of cause and effect by Bridget? Please note that Bridget doesn't say that Abby told her she had a note, she only states the alleged fact that Abby had a note. Perhaps Bridget found it odd that (1) Abby had a note and didn't tell her about it, and (2) Abby was dusting and hurried off in some uncharacteristic manner. Item (2) seemed odd to Bridget and it may have been explained to her satisfaction by item (1).

Yooper @ Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:06 am wrote:Is it possible for Bridget's statement to Mrs. Churchill to be a reconstruction of cause and effect by Bridget? Please note that Bridget doesn't say that Abby told her she had a note, she only states the alleged fact that Abby had a note. Perhaps Bridget found it odd that (1) Abby had a note and didn't tell her about it, and (2) Abby was dusting and hurried off in some uncharacteristic manner. Item (2) seemed odd to Bridget and it may have been explained to her satisfaction by item (1).

You're right of course -- anything is possible.

If Bridget was used to Abby telling her when she was going out, she may simply have made the assumption that Abby was in too much of a 'hurry' to tell her this time.

As an aside, it may be noteworthy (no pun intended) that each time the prosecution tries raising the question as to whether Abby was in the habit of informing Bridget as to her comings and goings, the defense objects and their objections are sustained by the court.

It seems to me that, in general, courts are not much interested in individual habits or customs. I can understand the reasoning where the jury is concerned, they might be misled.

In this particular case, let's assume for a moment that Abby was in the habit of always informing Bridget whenever she had to leave the house. If she didn't inform Bridget on this particular occasion, it might be implied that she hadn't received a note or hadn't planned on leaving, based solely upon inference rather than fact. In reality, it could be that she didn't want Bridget to know about it, or she might have simply forgotten. There may be any number of reasons why Bridget might not be told.

The courts seem more interested in "did" or "didn't" rather than "usually did" or "should have". This would make it seem no less odd to Bridget if it was the one and only time she wasn't informed of Abby's intent to leave, but the oddity really isn't hard evidence.

Yooper @ Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:43 pm wrote:
The courts seem more interested in "did" or "didn't" rather than "usually did" or "should have". This would make it seem no less odd to Bridget if it was the one and only time she wasn't informed of Abby's intent to leave, but the oddity really isn't hard evidence.

When it comes to the court system a person's usual routine does carry some amount of weight, if just to establish how a person might have normally reacted, but it's not a definitive piece of hard evidence. No one can accurately predict how another person will act in a given situation no matter how well they know them. Even if it's an issue they confront on a day to day basis.

But I feel that a person who has servants would be very likely to tell them of their intentions of being away from the house no matter what the circumstances. There are a variety of reasons why I think the employer would find it necessary to do so. Especially if Abby was the one that dictated Bridget's chores, or was the person Bridget "reported" to if she had a question or a problem. If you are in charge you normally don't leave without letting your employees know you are doing so. No matter how well Bridget got along with the Borden's , or how well she knew her day to day routine, this was still an employer/ employee relationship. This is why I agree that Bridget probably found it quite odd that Abby had not told her she was going out. If Abby didn't take the time to let Bridget know she would be away, to my mind Bridget would probably believe the situation to have been an emergency. I think Lizzie knew this as well, and this is why she gave the excuse that the note called Abby away to aid someone who was sick. Mrs. Churchill is quite clear on the fact that it was Bridget who told her of the note, not Lizzie. Maybe Bridget was only implying that Abby "hurried off" because she didn't tell her where she was going. From this she inferred that it must've been an emergency, and so Abby had to "hurry off" without telling her. Maybe Bridget didn't actually see her, it's just the conclusion she came to because Abby didn't tell her where she was going.

That's interesting reasoning, Missy!
Yes, human nature is hard to predict.

I'm still struggling with an answer, actually.
I've not voted- I'm still thinking.

I would wish to read all of Churchill, then all of Alice from Witness Statements thru Trial, to decide who is being consistent throughout, and how much bias there might be.

I wouldn't vote until I had done that.

Kat @ Thu Sep 06, 2007 1:56 pm wrote:That's interesting reasoning, Missy!
Yes, human nature is hard to predict.

I'm still struggling with an answer, actually.
I've not voted- I'm still thinking.

I would wish to read all of Churchill, then all of Alice from Witness Statements thru Trial, to decide who is being consistent throughout, and how much bias there might be.

I wouldn't vote until I had done that.

I glanced through the witness statements. By process of elimination I voted Mrs. Churchill. Russell seems to me to be a neighborhood gossip; therefore not worthy of my vote. Morse? Well, he's Morse...what is he hiding? Bridget? Mmmmm. Churchill seems to be the most credible.
Joe

I'm torn Joe!
I want to say Alice. I'm still working on it.
(Part of my reasoning is that Alice tried not to say what she didn't really know.)

With Mrs. Churchill-- just a question you guys: Do you think she said she saw something that you'd have to tear her tongue out before she would tell it?

The problem with the Witness Statements is that they are someone else taking notes of what the Witness says. These police/people who took these notes probably wrote them later or at least pieced them together later. These are the same police that people criticize for bumbling the entire investigation.

That's why I would prefer to compare for consistencies.

I voted that Mrs. Churchill was the most honest in her replies. She was not a close family friend,really didn't have anything to gain or loose from her statements. She was not enthusiatic,no one wanted to be associated with the police,much less a murder investigation. As for Bridget saying Mrs.B received a note,I think she is parotting back what Lizzie told her. Lizzie is now her employer and maybe Bridget is afraid of Lizzie. Bridget probably knows who committed the crime,and if so,wouldn't you be afraid. Just a thought.

Kat @ Thu Sep 06, 2007 6:13 pm wrote: With Mrs. Churchill-- just a question you guys: Do you think she said she saw something that you'd have to tear her tongue out before she would tell it?

Wasn't that a bit of hearsay---someone said Mrs Churchill said, etc etc? I think it's part of that whole Lizzie-was-working-out-at-a-gym Fall River gossip part of the Witness Statements.

The tear-her-tongue-out thing, yes- was McHenry.
So we pick and choose what we believe in the Witness Statements.
And we don't even have them all.
I'm only trying to promote the reading of the other source documents, as usual.

Barbara @ Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:46 am wrote:I voted that Mrs. Churchill was the most honest in her replies. She was not a close family friend,really didn't have anything to gain or loose from her statements. She was not enthusiatic,no one wanted to be associated with the police,much less a murder investigation. As for Bridget saying Mrs.B received a note,I think she is parotting back what Lizzie told her. Lizzie is now her employer and maybe Bridget is afraid of Lizzie. Bridget probably knows who committed the crime,and if so,wouldn't you be afraid. Just a thought.

I think that last part hit a good point- that Bridget was afraid and probably knew or figured out who had committed the crime.

Would she, so soon, have realized Lizzie was now in charge of the Household, at least until Emma returned? I hadn't thought of that as a realization of Bridget so quickly. It makes sense tho, as a servant.

I hve always thought that Bridget knew more that what she was telling, and I. too, think she was afraid. She was loyal and didn't to lose her job.

Maybe I am confused- but bear with me...If "Maggie" (I am sooooooo Lizzie and Emma sometimes) was scared about loosing her job was this the one with the Borden's or was this the job after the Borden household? The reason that I ask is didn't she quit days after the murders? Since she did quit she really couldn't be afraid of losing that job, right or am I missing something?

Call me confused Bob

Bridget left but she didn't quit right away. She came back during the days to do the work, until after the funeral: but yes you are basically right.
The difference between her statements on the day and after she left, tho, would be cause for comparison of consistency, of course. But we don't have her inquest testimony.

I think "Fleet's Notes" on the Thursday in their original are a good example of how all these statements were taken down. They've changed a bit over time, actually. It's like someone knew what was testified to later and added or took away some key words, just from his notes alone.

Bridget might have left and awaited her normal pay too. I think she was paid weekly?
Would she bother Emma for her pay right away when she left Saturday, or wait a bit for mournings sake, I wonder?

Emma inquest, 113:
Q. What did she [Bridget] tell you about it?
A. She did not tell me anything. I dont remember asking her but one question, two questions.
Q. What was that, please?
A. I asked her if she would stay with us.
Q. If the other one has no more to do with this matter than that, I dont care for it.
A. I asked her if she saw any boy come with a note. I do not remember asking her any other questions.

Well it seems to be official. Mrs. Churchill appears to be the most credible witness for most of you.

I chose Mrs. Churchill, pretty much for all the reason's given by everyone above. She had no reason to do anything but tell the truth.

It's amazing to me that all the family members either got 0% or 6% of people thinking they were crediable. Makes me wonder what was going on in that house. Bridget even got 6%. I think she was holding back.