Lizzie Borden Society Forum

According to the photograph and testimonies of the witnesses, I think it is most probable that Abby, when she received the first blow, she was not only kneeling on the floor, but also, she was putting her hands on the floor as well, within the width of her body (that’s why her hands were under her body when Abby was found dead.)

The household chore had been done. In that position what else could Abby be doing, if not searching something?

The room in question was the guest room, the spare room, and someone slept in that room the last night. In that position and in that place (between the bed and the bureau), what else could Abby be searching, if not something left or forgotten by that guest?

Who could have asked Abby to search something left or forgotten by that guest, if not the guest himself … John Morse?

Why did Lizzie, if guilty, invent the note story and meanwhile told everyone that note story, knowing perfectly that the note didn’t exist, the writer of the note didn’t exist, the messenger didn’t exist, nothing existed? Why?

So, I tend to believe that the note story of Lizzie was true. The messenger did exist and it was him who, besides that false note, told Abby the false request of Morse to search something (in my theory Morse’s watch), and the poor Abby was cruelly killed in that guest room, in that narrow space between the bureau and the bed, and in that position of (most probably) searching something.

Dr. Dolan, Trial, pp. 922-923:
Q. Have you told us about the injury upon the left temple of Mrs. Borden?
A. The scalp wound?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. There was a flap cut here? (Indicating on forehead)
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Cut so it came forward like that (I am pointing to the right, because that is before the
Jury, but really on the left side of the head)?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And it was cut from the front towards the rear?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. With the hinge on the back part of the cut so that it would lift up in this way, as on a
hinge?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When that blow was given, where in your opinion, did the assailant stand?
A. In front, facing the assaulted.
Q. That is, the assailant and assaulted faced each other?
A. Yes, sir.

As we have said MANY times before, Lizzie invented the note story to prevent Andrew from searching for Abby.

Prove there was a note Franz or shut up!

Yooper wrote:Dr. Dolan, Trial, pp. 922-923:
Q. Have you told us about the injury upon the left temple of Mrs. Borden?
A. The scalp wound?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. There was a flap cut here? (Indicating on forehead)
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Cut so it came forward like that (I am pointing to the right, because that is before the
Jury, but really on the left side of the head)?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And it was cut from the front towards the rear?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. With the hinge on the back part of the cut so that it would lift up in this way, as on a
hinge?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When that blow was given, where in your opinion, did the assailant stand?
A. In front, facing the assaulted.
Q. That is, the assailant and assaulted faced each other?
A. Yes, sir.

As we have said MANY times before, Lizzie invented the note story to prevent Andrew from searching for Abby.

That "Lizzie invented the note story to prevent Andrew from searching for Abby" is not a fact, but only a speculation. You can say it still many times but it will remains always a speculation.

1. No note was ever found
2. No person ever came forth admitting to writing a note.
3. No one except Lizzie admits to seeing a note.
4. Mrs. Borden never left the house to see a sick friend (the time line shows that)
5. By Lizzie saying Mrs. Borden went out, that stopped Mr. Borden from going to look for his (already dead) wife

Mrs. Bordon's position is consistent with someone kneeling down. BUT it is also consistent with a defensive position due to a whack on the head. The science behind the wounds points more to her turning to face an attacker, being hit one glancing blow, turning back around and falling/crouching to protect herself, and receiving the remaining blows while crouching. Even if every blow was from the back, she could have been making the bed, straightening the sheets, fixing her shoe, any number of things besides "looking for a lost item from Morse" The simplest answer is usually correct.

Franz wrote:

Yooper wrote:Dr. Dolan, Trial, pp. 922-923:
Q. Have you told us about the injury upon the left temple of Mrs. Borden?
A. The scalp wound?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. There was a flap cut here? (Indicating on forehead)
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Cut so it came forward like that (I am pointing to the right, because that is before the
Jury, but really on the left side of the head)?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And it was cut from the front towards the rear?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. With the hinge on the back part of the cut so that it would lift up in this way, as on a
hinge?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When that blow was given, where in your opinion, did the assailant stand?
A. In front, facing the assaulted.
Q. That is, the assailant and assaulted faced each other?
A. Yes, sir.

As we have said MANY times before, Lizzie invented the note story to prevent Andrew from searching for Abby.

That "Lizzie invented the note story to prevent Andrew from searching for Abby" is not a fact, but only a speculation. You can say it still many times but it will remains always a speculation.

The simple fact is that the note story DID prevent Andrew from searching for Abby. You can ignore it many times, but it will always be correct.

After being told by Lizzie that Abby had gone out in response to that note, Andrew didn't search his wife. I admit only this as the fact.

Whoever believes that Lizzie was guilty, must prove that Lizzie had intention to prevent his father from searching Abby.

Franz wrote:After being told by Lizzie that Abby had gone out in response to that note, Andrew didn't search his wife. I admit only this as the fact.

Whoever believes that Lizzie was guilty, must prove that Lizzie had intention to prevent his father from searching Abby.

They need to prove no such thing. People who struggle with logic and reason are in no position to dictate the rules.

PossumPie wrote:1. No note was ever found
2. No person ever came forth admitting to writing a note.
3. No one except Lizzie admits to seeing a note.
4. Mrs. Borden never left the house to see a sick friend (the time line shows that)
5. By Lizzie saying Mrs. Borden went out, that stopped Mr. Borden from going to look for his (already dead) wife

Mrs. Bordon's position is consistent with someone kneeling down. BUT it is also consistent with a defensive position due to a whack on the head. The science behind the wounds points more to her turning to face an attacker, being hit one glancing blow, turning back around and falling/crouching to protect herself, and receiving the remaining blows while crouching. Even if every blow was from the back, she could have been making the bed, straightening the sheets, fixing her shoe, any number of things besides "looking for a lost item from Morse" The simplest answer is usually correct.

PossumPie, the question is certainly open. But in my opinion, that Abby was searching something is most probable.

Even if we assume that Lizzie killed Abby, it’s worth as well asking the same question. Some people speculate that Lizzie killed Abby under a sudden rage. If so, we should think that Lizzie didn’t have the weapon in her hand when she was irritated by something Abby said. Lizzie must have gone into the cellar to take a hatchet and returned to search for Abby. So, where occurred the provocation scenario? In the guest room, or in another place? When Lizzie returned with her weapon, why was Abby in the guest room? in that place (between the bureau and the bed)? What was she doing in that position?

And if Lizzie premeditated the murder, did she deceive Abby to go into the guest room? In that place? In that position? Under what pretext Lizzie succeeded? Or did Abby go into the guest room by herself and Lizzie found her there by chance? If so, why did Abby go into the guest room, after having done the household chore? Why there, between the bed and the bureau? And finally, why in that position?

I have speculated that Abby was down on her hands and knees picking up small debris from the rug. If I don't want to fully vacuum, I will do this.

Yes, quite possible...I wonder if John Morse took off his boots before coming upstairs. Methinks NOT. Poor Abby. She never had a chance.

I believe that the pictures of the body have deceived us into thinking she was on hands and knees when first attacked. The forensics show beyond doubt that she was hit from the front with a glancing blow. That cannot be done if she were on hands and knees. I think she was cleaning, perhaps putting the pillow cases on the pillows when hit. She partially turned as the first blow hit. she stumbled, fell bracing herself with hands onto her knees. She was hit many time over from that position and died in that crouched position. Speculation of course, but simple and logical.

I've read she was straddled while hacked...do you think this is possible with her knees pulled up like that?

NancyDrew wrote:I've read she was straddled while hacked...do you think this is possible with her knees pulled up like that?

In the position she was found, it would be virtually impossible to straddle and get any kind of arm-swing motion. The first blow (either from front or behind) would have rendered her unconscious. There would be no need to straddle unless she had been struggling, which I presume she would have been screaming also. We can reasonably conclude that the first whack rendered her still, unconscious, and unable to fight back. Perhaps a knee in the back to reach the head...that seems reasonable.

So the killer was on the side of Abby? It doesn't seem as if there is enough room. I'm not trying to be picune, I just cannot feature any way that Abby was killed except by straddling. The space was pretty tight, no?

Evidence wise, the pictures don't mean much since Abby was moved

You are correct, both bodies were moved for the photographs. When I first had an interest in this case, I wondered why the bodies were in posed positions, now I know why.

Aamartin wrote:Evidence wise, the pictures don't mean much since Abby was moved

Kat submitted a topic entitled "How much was Abby's body moved", here is the link:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=388

This is a PERFECT example of conclusions being drawn from things we believe true that are not. Looking at the photos, we draw conclusions about how she was attacked, and she had been moved! From the angle of penetration of the wounds evidence seems to point to her turning around to see behind, and struck with a sharp object while turning. She probably then fell forward, and the attacker hacked from the back, standing or crouching. It bothers me that (all of us) draw out these intricate, precise theories based on flawed "evidence", photos that showed bodies that (we presumed) lay where they fell, but had been moved around. I mean the one thing we thought was 'accurate' and couldn't lie were the photos. This is why I seem argumentative when people build an intricate implausible theory on something we can only guess is accurate (and in the case of the photos) isn't accurate at all. Every time I see Mrs. Borden's photo, I think she looks like a Muslim praying towards Mecca. I could have come up with a wild theory that she converted to Islam, Lizzie being a good Christian was enraged, and seeing her praying, killed her. Wow, sounds great until we hear the position of the body was changed. You can't build a theory on a bunch of what if's or on one piece of evidence alone. There must be collaborating evidence.

Good post, PossumPie...I like the way you think (do you mind if I ask: are you male or female? Just curious, not that it matters any.)

I am disturbed by how much Abby's body was moved. Was there no respect for her post mortem? she was moved around like a prop on a stage...I hate that. Poor Abby; all she did was marry the wrong man...

NancyDrew wrote:Good post, PossumPie...I like the way you think (do you mind if I ask: are you male or female? Just curious, not that it matters any.)

I am disturbed by how much Abby's body was moved. Was there no respect for her post mortem? she was moved around like a prop on a stage...I hate that. Poor Abby; all she did was marry the wrong man...

I am a guy, 48 yrs. old. An RN who also has a Master's in Psychology. My specialty in psyc. was forensics, I studied the minds of serial killers such as Bundy, Gacy, Dahmer, among others. I am now a nursing instructor, kinda burned out on the psyc. After awhile the crazy make you crazy!!! I do still keep up on Lizzie Borden and Jack the Ripper b/c they were never solved, they kinda fascinate me.
I love all of the people here who help me see the case in a new light, I just get frustrated when whole theories are built on tenuous semi-facts. I at first also had this picture in my mind of hundreds of weeping people in front of the Borden home, and Uncle Morse strolling past, and standing in the yard eating pears. UNTIL I researched more and found accounts that said there was only Bridget on the front stoop and Uncle came in from the side. My huge suspicion of his behavior deflated like a popped balloon. We can't build a case on a single supposition or account statement. I love Franz's enthusiasm, but my criticism is that he needs to have more facts before he develops theories. It's fun to speculate, but I fear that in the end, the actual truth is very mundane.

Thanks PossumPie. I'll share too...I'm female, age 51, with a degree in Chemistry. I taught high school science for years before getting fed up with the unions and starting my own business. I sell group health insurance now..it's an exciting (read: terrifying) time right now, trying to explain Obamacare to business owners.

I appreciate what you are saying about John Morse. I always thought there were crowds of people too...but I believe what you say. Are you firmly convinced of Lizzie's guilt, or do you think she must have had help?

NancyDrew wrote:Thanks PossumPie. I'll share too...I'm female, age 51, with a degree in Chemistry. I taught high school science for years before getting fed up with the unions and starting my own business. I sell group health insurance now..it's an exciting (read: terrifying) time right now, trying to explain Obamacare to business owners.

I appreciate what you are saying about John Morse. I always thought there were crowds of people too...but I believe what you say. Are you firmly convinced of Lizzie's guilt, or do you think she must have had help?

The simplest solution seems to be Lizzie did it. As for an accomplice, my gut says having a man do the killing, hiding for the hour or so, and leaving all under the direction of Lizzie makes sense. The lost weapon was taken by the accomplice, no blood on Lizzie explained...BUT to have an accomplice who knows your secret for the rest of his life seems unreasonable. She would have had to pay him ALOT of money for his part in killing them. I am nearly certain Lizzie was involved. I am open to the idea of an accomplice. I am fairly certain Emma knew everything after Lizzie's acquittal.

Possum:

So the simplest explanation is the one Lizzie herself gave...it was Dave Anthony, her lover. This is the "Ruby story" that has a thread somewhere on this forum.

What do you think of it? I always wondered why it didn't get more attention on here...Thanks!

NancyDrew wrote:Possum:

So the simplest explanation is the one Lizzie herself gave...it was Dave Anthony, her lover. This is the "Ruby story" that has a thread somewhere on this forum.

What do you think of it? I always wondered why it didn't get more attention on here...Thanks!

Several things trouble me. First, the ONLY reference to David Anthony is from a nurse in Maine. No other reference books mention him or his relation to Lizzie. I did some (admittedly quick) research on David Anthony, Massachusetts. There were a gazillion people named "David Anthony" in Massachusetts. He was allegedly part of the Anthony Newspaper family, so wealthy. He would have had to have been born around 1835-1860, so that narrowed it down. The David Anthonys that I found in that time frame were only about 4 or 5. Of them, several died in infancy, the rest had married before the death of Mr. and Mrs. Borden. This doesn't refute the woman's story, but sure puts cold water on it. Besides, He kills them, then what....disappears forever? he didn't marry Lizzie? What a waste. He was obviously never a suspect, he could now have married her as the only reason he killed them was Mr. Borden refused to give permission for him to marry her. Where was he during the trial? He loved her, but wouldn't be supportive of her? Too many holes. I don't like the whole theory...This doesn't discount that a man did help her, or she paid someone to do it, but not a David Anthony. Besides, she seemed to like the company of women callers more than men after she moved out...

Yes, you are quite right...from a nurse in Maine, who took care of Lizzie in the last week of her life. This nurse didn't say anything about it until she was well into her advanced years, and then she told a local newspaper, if I'm not mistaken.

There definitely was a Dave Anthony who was the right age. He died in a motorcycle accident in the 1920's.

Look at the forum archives, PossumPie, especially for a poster named Grandma...she actually knew a woman who knew Ruby. It's hard not to believe her.

NancyDrew, you get up...so early!!!

Yes, I do...I'm not a good sleeper, anyways (not since becoming a mother 20 -odd years ago.) I don't ever need an alarm clock...my body always wakes up before six a.m. and I have no desire to sleep after that.

Here's a newspaper article on the Anthony theory:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1 ... 629,346636

And a 2004 discussion on the forum:

http://lizzieandrewborden.com/Archive04 ... maruby.htm

Many thanks, Harry. Your threads are always very helpful.

NancyDrew wrote:Yes, you are quite right...from a nurse in Maine, who took care of Lizzie in the last week of her life. This nurse didn't say anything about it until she was well into her advanced years, and then she told a local newspaper, if I'm not mistaken.

There definitely was a Dave Anthony who was the right age. He died in a motorcycle accident in the 1920's.

Look at the forum archives, PossumPie, especially for a poster named Grandma...she actually knew a woman who knew Ruby. It's hard not to believe her.

I had a little more time to research, and there was a man named Dave Anthony who died in 1920, so that fits. That doesn't negate the rest of my skepticism. Why did he kill them then never marry Lizzie? Why did Lizzie prefer the company of women after she moved out of the family home? Should we believe one very old woman in Maine with no collaborative evidence? I find that living people who had relatives who were involved back then tend to be believed, but there were people who were alive during the murders/trial who were mistaken/lying, so just because your mom said her mom worked for Lizzie... doesn't mean everything discussed was gospel truth. There were theories back then too. I'm not trying to discount whole cloth, but even if someone knocked on my door and proved they were related to someone who was there, I wouldn't give a lot more credence to their story than to the books/articles written at the time. Stories passed to kids passed to their grand kids....wow, a lot can get twisted/exaggerated in the re-telling.

[quote="PossumPie"]... I at first also had this picture in my mind of hundreds of weeping people in front of the Borden home, and Uncle Morse strolling past, and standing in the yard eating pears. UNTIL I researched more and found accounts that said there was only Bridget on the front stoop and Uncle came in from the side. My huge suspicion of his behavior deflated like a popped balloon... [quote]

PossumPie, I would like to know what source document(s) made you so sure that "there was only Bridget on the front stoop and Uncle came in from the side".

Your said your "huge suspicion of his behavior deflated like a popped balloon." This means you have found convincing answers for those - in my opinion - suspicious behaviours of Morse. If so, please enlighten me:

1. Is Sawyer's testimony reliable? If yes, why Morse, after being told twice that Andrew and Abby had been murdered, he remained outside "for a few minutes", without asking at all about Lizzie's safety and how the two victims were killed, and then, "finally went into the house"?

2. Is Mrs. Churchill's testimony reliable? If yes, why Morse, after being told the horrible news by Bridget and Sawyer, and when Mrs. Churchill told him the news for the third time (but the first time inside the house), Morse said "what (?)"?

3. Are the testimonies of Mrs. Churchill, Alice and Morse himself reliable? If yes, why Morse hollered as loud as he could Lizzie's name and rushed into the - according to you - tiny dining room where there were only Lizzie and Alice, but he didn't see Lizzie? If he was so worried about Lizzie as his hollering her name makes us believe, why did he meet Lizzie only after having finished his "two bodies tour" through the house?

4. Who informed Morse the location of the two bodies? And where was he given this information? And how? Taking his elbow, as you guessed?

There are still many other questions about Morse, but for this thread, these four are more than enough.

NancyDrew wrote:Yes, quite possible...I wonder if John Morse took off his boots before coming upstairs. Methinks NOT. Poor Abby. She never had a chance.

Yes, poor Abby.

In my opinion, if Morse were really the organizer of the murders, his target should be only Andrew. But to make sure that his two nieces could inherite their father's wealth, he had to kill Abby as well, and he had to kill her first, and Andrew after. The double murder could have been premeditated and prepared by Morse for a more or less long time.