Lizzie Borden Society Forum

I’ve been sitting here the last while reading thru Dr. Frank Draper’s A Text-Book Of Legal Medicine, published in 1905. It still amazes me how “modern” the procedures he outlines in the book are. (I did though find it a bit odd that he preferred daylight to lamplight during autopsies.)

Dr. Draper mentioned the Borden case and/or trial a number of times in his book, ranging from three fairly detailed instances to two or three mere mentions in passing. The heftier instances follow:

Pg 24-25

The Wide Variety of Questions Relative to a Homicide Affair.-A somewhat recent instance may be mentioned illustrating the wide scope which a medicolegal inquiry may assume: the Borden affair in 1892, in Fall River, Massachusetts, in which a man and his wife were murdered by hatchet-blows on the head. At the preliminary hearing, to determine whether the accused daughter should be held for the grand jury, the medical witnesses 'ere questioned upon more than forty distinct topics, all relevant to the case and having a clear relationship to it. Here are some of the points raised: Besides the testimony as to anatomical appearances, and inquiries as to facts outside the purely medical field, the lawyers questioned the medical witnesses regarding their conclusions from a study of the wounds; the precise number of the wounds; the weapon which probably made them; the force required to produce them; whether the weapon was wielded with one hand or with two hands; if with one hand, was it the right or the left; which was the first blow; was a certain wound observed at the autopsy the result of a miss-blow; what was the position of the victims when they were struck; what was the position of the assailant in striking; the gravity of the wounds as to their effect in causing instant death; the cause of death in wounds of the brain; peculiarities of bony lesions made with sharp or with dull .weapons; the effect of blows on bone on an edged weapon; the thickness of the human skull in different subjects. The absolute and relative time of death of the two parties killed; the value of evidence as to this question derived from the stage of digestion, from the temperature of the two bodies, and from the appearance of the blood around the wounds. Modifications in the process of digestion wrought by excess or lack of gastric juice; by recent gastro-enteric irritation; by the presence of other matters than food in the stomach; by the nutrition of the body, whether stout or lean.

The amount of hemorrhage from incised and contused scalp wounds; the arterial supply in the way of the 'ounds observed; the behavior of arteries when wounded; the character of arterial blood spurts; the character of drops and spatters of arterial blood on walls and other flat surfaces; the determination of the direction and force of arterial blood thrown on walls from wounds; the effect on hemorrhage of a cessation of the heart's action; the ratio between the weight of the body and the weight of its blood; the exact weight of a pint of blood; the cause of the coagulation of human blood; the time of drying of blood on steel surfaces; the identification of suspected stains as human blood; the differentiation of blood and rust on metal surfaces; the appearance of flea-stains and mosquito-stains on clothing; the identification of human and of animal hairs; the correct use of medical notes in court. Correct answers to all these imply a tolerably liberal medical education.

Pg. 331

These axe and hatchet wounds are easy of recognition. Their characteristics are so obvious that it would be difficult to miss their true nature. This was well illustrated in the case of the Bordens, in August, 1892, in Fall River. Mr.Borden's head showed ten wounds in the face and the left temple. Mrs. Borden’s head presented twenty-one behind the right ear and at the back of the head. Most of them were penetrating lesions. Those which went through the bone showed the force and direction of the blows. One of those on Mr. Borden's skull was studied, and it demonstrated also the length of the cutting edge, and at its lower end, where it penetrated to the depth of an inch and a half and cut through the petrous portion of the left temporal bone, severing the carotid canal, one had an excellent indication of the thickness of the blade.

[The number of wounds he recalls on Mrs. Borden is particularly interesting. It's difficult to say at the moment whether this was error of faulty memory, or he may well have seen two "wounds within wounds" not noted in the autopsy report.]

432

At the Borden trial, in 1893, at the Bram trial, in 1895, and in the Manchester (Fall River) case, in 1893, the conditions of the homicides were favorable for much blood-spattering, but, on diligent search, none was found. These negative instances teach us to be conservative; and the answer to the above question should be: "Blood-stains in such cases would be probable, but not necessary, as incidents of the homicide."
The prudent medical inspector, who cares for his comfort on the witness-stand, will always make an accurate record of the situation in which he finds the suspected blood-stains which are submitted to him. And of the stain itself: he will note the size and shape of its outline in each instance. By these data he may throw light on the question of the manner of the killing, whether it was homicide or suicide, and he will clearly demonstrate his own accuracy and credibility...

Thank you so much for collecting and putting all those excerpts together, Doug! A very interesting read!

So glad you enjoyed them, diana. The entire book is pretty interesting even if it is a tad morbid.

I found the post quite interesting. Is this book still available or is this one that you searched out in the rare book section in a used book store?

Errr... just a second, let me find you the link. It's a monster, but you can download it from http://books.google.com/books?id=rsZZUB ... =1#PPA1,M1

if you like.

Thanks doughoh! I downloaded the pdf and I look forward to reading the entire book. Very informative.

I downloaded the book & it is really informative. I was reading some of it & it's quite fascinating the more you get into it. thanks for the link.

Bravo, Doug. Morbid, shmorbid! Great stuff many of us haven't seen before, from someone who was there.

the appearance of flea-stains and mosquito-stains on clothing;

-- partial from above- Dr. Draper's book transcribed by Doug-Oh.

This is the first time that the famous flea bite has been lumped together with another type of insect bite by an official case participant. I think this implies to us that when Lizzie was asked how she thought a bit of blood might have gotten on her clothing and her surmise was a flea bite- she did mean an insect, and not a euphemism for her menstrual period.

Q. Have you said it came from flea bites?
A. On the petticoats I said there was a flea bite. I said it might have been. You siad [sic] you meant the dress skirt.
Q. I did. Have you offered any explanation how that came there?
A. I told those men that were at the house that I had had fleas; that is all.
Q. Did you offer that as an explanation?
A. I said that was the only explanation that I knew of.

Neat, because, as you may remember, I brought up years ago that I didn't believe that Lizzie was necessarily menstruating that week, no matter how much Victoria Lincoln needs it in order for her theory to work.

I think women in those days and, frankly, these days, too, know how little men want to deal with their monthlies, and so Lizzie was able to explain away a pail full of bloody cloths. I wonder if the two other women in that tight little world might've known that it wasn't time for Lizzie's "friend" to "visit."

I suppose in the end it would all depend on the size of the spots as observed - if indeed they were. The insect theory on its face does make perfect sense given the season. I dunno... I keep thinking that if there was too much blood, the mosquitoes or fleas would have to be big enough to saddle break...yaknow??

Oh wasn't it 1/16 of an inch or something- they compared it to a pin head.

Here is Prof. Dr. Wood at trial

A. The same line, I think. I had a pin under that, but that has gotten lost out, the dress has been handled so much. The white skirt, this one, contains a small blood spot on a line---it is 16 inches to the left of this line from the placket hole to the bottom of the skirt, and six inches from the bottom of the skirt. It is this stain here, a portion of which I have cut out, but I have left there about one-quarter or one-third of the complete stain, and it can only be seen by careful inspection. I had to make a larger hole in the cloth in order to avoid removing the whole of the blood spot, it was so small. This blood spot was about one-sixteenth of an inch in diameter, about the size of the diameter of the head of a small pin, not a large pin nor a medium size pin, but a small pin, and it appeared to me to be a little bit more extensive and plainer on the outside of the skirt than on the inside. I don't

Page 1005

know as that could be detected now because it has been rubbed so much, but at that time it was perceptible when the stain was whole. That I examined and found it to be a blood stain, and the blood corpuscles when examined with a high power of the microscope averaged in measurement 1-3243 of an inch. That is the average measurement within the limits of human blood, and it is therefore consistent with its being a human blood stain.

Q. With the blood of what other animal would it be consistent?
A. There are some other animals, mostly of the---not domestic animals, which have the same diameter within the human limits, like seal and opossum, and one variety of guinea pig. The rabbit comes pretty near and the dog comes pretty near.

Q. What inference do you draw, if any, from the fact that the blood was, as you stated, I think, thicker upon the outside of the skirt than upon the inside?
A. A little larger in diameter, a little more upon the outside. It shows that it probably came on to the skirt from the outside of the skirt and not from the inside.

--In the trial it is agreed that Lizzie's "monthly" had ended Wednesday night. I'm pretty sure that Knowlton could check that since he had Lizzie in custody for her next "monthly."

Fleet
Page 550

Q. You spoke of finding a pail near the foot of the stairs---I think you did, as you went down,---didn't you?
A. I did not. There was one there; I did not testify to that, I think.

Q. There was one there?
A. There was in the wash cellar.

Q. There was one there?
A. In the wash cellar.

Q. There were clothes in it?
A. There were.

MR. ROBINSON. It is agreed that that pail contained the napkins which had been worn within a day or two by the defendant,---the ordinary monthly sickness---and as to that fact that is all we propose to put in. We do not care to go into the details. It is also agreed that the sickness ended Wednesday night.

That is all, Mr. Fleet.