Lizzie Borden Society Forum

In this thread I focus on only one coincidence: in the very murder day: August 4th, the majority of the police officers were out of the city for an event.

Let's think a little: if those officers had been present in the city, many of them would have been going around the city for their duty, right?

So, IMO, this coincidence should have been much more profitable for an intruder than an inside killer.

Any thoughts?

It depends on whether any such intruder was a local, surely. Although people in the local area knew about the annual Fall River Police Picnic it doesn't follow that a person from say Providence or Boston or New York would be aware.

I have wondered sometimes, as I am a Lizzieite, as to whether she chose a day when the police presence would be restricted, so to speak. However, the sheer anger and hatred shown in the attack on Abby speaks to me of a person who wouldn't care in those moments if a thousand police were in the vicinity.

And of course, everything is relative, isn't it? Several police arrived at the house in the hours after the murders, including Marshall Fleet himself. I don't believe that the police investigation of Abby and Andrew's death was compromised for instance by a lack of numbers. However the investigation did fall short in other ways!

Curryong wrote: ...I don't believe that the police investigation of Abby and Andrew's death was compromised for instance by a lack of numbers...

You are right. But I think a lack of numbers of policemen could have made bigger the possibility of success of an intruder's entering into the house from outside. An inside killer didn't need to penerate from outside, so she benefited much less of the lack of the policemen than an intruder.

There might not have been policemen around, but 2nd Street was an extremely busy and bustling street and the Bordens had nosey neighbours.

Curryong wrote:There might not have been policemen around, but 2nd Street was an extremely busy and bustling street and the Bordens had nosey neighbours.

The 2nd Street's being "extremely busy" could be only a legend just as the barn's being extremely hot that morning.

Regardless of the number of people on 2nd street that day, there were enough people watching the Borden home out of their windows, from the walks, and from their carts to document and witness every single coming and going that appeared in every witness statement. Every one was seen by someone. Chances that a stranger would sneak in and sneak away unseen while Morse, Mr. Borden, Bridget, and Lizzie's every move was witnessed is possible but unlikely.

PossumPie, you said: "that a stranger would sneak in and sneak away unseen... is possible..."

That's enough.

Franz wrote:

Curryong wrote: ...I don't believe that the police investigation of Abby and Andrew's death was compromised for instance by a lack of numbers...

You are right. But I think a lack of numbers of policemen could have made bigger the possibility of success of an intruder's entering into the house from outside. An inside killer didn't need to penerate from outside, so she benefited much less of the lack of the policemen than an intruder.

Have you ever been in a haymow in August after a hot July. It's so hot that there seems to be no oxygen. I doubt this barn was any better ventilated.

Franz wrote:PossumPie, you said: "that a stranger would sneak in and sneak away unseen... is possible..."

That's enough.

Your answer to everything is "It is possible" I have conceded multiple times to you that every aspect of your elaborate theory is POSSIBLE...

Franz, it is possible that the moon could explode tomorrow and kill us all. It is possible that the Pope ordered them killed.
Just because something is POSSIBLE does not make it STATISTICALLY PROBABLE.

Hypothesis: A stranger or strangers were the killers of the Bordens. They slipped in and out of the Borden home unseen.
Observation: Morse was seen leaving, Mr. Borden was seen leaving. Bridget was seen in the yard. Lizzie was seen outside. Mr. Borden was seen returning. Bridget was seen running across the street to fetch a doctor. Bridget was seen returning.
Conclusion: Based on the number of witnesses in the household, on the street, and at their windows that day, the PROBABILITY of people sneaking in and out of the Borden home unseen is low.

PossumPie wrote: ...
Observation: Morse was seen leaving, Mr. Borden was seen leaving. Bridget was seen in the yard. Lizzie was seen outside. Mr. Borden was seen returning. Bridget was seen running across the street to fetch a doctor. Bridget was seen returning.
Conclusion: Based on the number of witnesses in the household, on the street, and at their windows that day, the PROBABILITY of people sneaking in and out of the Borden home unseen is low.

I am curious: why didn't you mention that woman seen by Lubinsky?

(P.S.: Please refrech my memory: did anyone testify that Bridget and Mary chatted at the fence? who saw Morse leave? Mrs. Churchill testify to have seen Andrew in the yard, did she say as well that she saw Andrew leave? Forgive me but I don't recall.)

Oh come on Franz, don't split hairs! It's true that Mrs Churchill only saw Andrew outside by the side stairs not confidently striding down the street. However, as several witnesses later saw him downtown, and testified to that, it's a moot point, surely!

PossumPie wrote: ...
Conclusion: Based on the number of witnesses in the household, on the street, and at their windows that day, the PROBABILITY of people sneaking in and out of the Borden home unseen is low.

I agree with you PossumPie.

But I keep always in mind that I am here to discuss one of the most mysterious murder case of the human history, and I believe that, whoever was the murder, something of low probability, something unbelievable, took place in that fatal morning.

Curryong wrote:Oh come on Franz, don't split hairs! It's true that Mrs Churchill only saw Andrew outside by the side stairs not confidently striding down the street. However, as several witnesses later saw him downtown, and testified to that, it's a moot point, surely!

No, I think it's important: Mrs. Churchill didn't see Mr. Borden leave, so this proved that she was not there staring in continuation all mouvements in the Borden house.

And then, who saw Mr. Morse leave? Who saw Bridget chat with Mary? Their conversation was a continuous action!!!

What possible reason would Mary have for saying she had talked with Bridget when she hadn't? Does every conversation each member of the Borden house have to be backed by an independent observer? This is getting quite amusing.

Curryong wrote:What possible reason would Mary have for saying she had talked with Bridget when she hadn't? Does every conversation each member of the Borden house have to be backed by an independent observer? This is getting quite amusing.

Curryong, my point was not here. I mean: among those that occured and were known to us, some movements were not observed by any eyewiteness. So there could be room for some other mouvements that occurded but were not observed by any eyewiteness either, therefore unknown to us.

Wow...I'm out of ideas.

PossumPie wrote:Wow...I'm out of ideas.

Why? If you admit "that a stranger would sneak in and sneak away unseen... is possible...", this means that a stranger could have entered unseen by any eyewiteness, and therefore, unknown to us.

(Andrew's leaving the house was unseen by any eyewiteness, but since he was seen afterwards in down town, so the logic tells us that he must have left the house, so his leaving the house is a known fact for us. Bridget and Mary's chat, if I am correct, was not seen by any eyewiteness, but they themselves testified that they chatted, and assuming that they told the truth, their chat is a fact known to us. If the killer was an intruder, he must have entered from outside, but unseen by any eyewiteness, therefore, the case remains still unsolved. If the killer had been caught and had confessed, we would have known his entering into the house as a fact by his confession. Why are you out of ideas, then?)

Franz wrote:

PossumPie wrote:Wow...I'm out of ideas.

Why? If you admit "that a stranger would sneak in and sneak away unseen... is possible...", this means that a stranger could have entered unseen by any eyewiteness, and therefore, unknown to us.

(Andrew's leaving the house was unseen by any eyewiteness, but since he was seen afterwards in down town, so the logic tells us that he must have left the house, so his leaving the house is a known fact for us. Bridget and Mary's chat, if I am correct, was not seen by any eyewiteness, but they themselves testified that they chatted, and assuming that they told the truth, their chat is a fact known to us. If the killer was an intruder, he must have entered from outside, but unseen by any eyewiteness, therefore, the case remains still unsolved. If the killer had been caught and had confessed, we would have known his entering into the house as a fact by his confession. Why are you out of ideas, then?)

NO, you are wrong. If Bridget and Lizzie are innocent as you say, they are credible witnesses. Bridget saw Morse and Mr. Borden leave. It isn't just that no one outside of the house saw a stranger, no one INSIDE the house saw one either...that is more significant. A killer wandered around their house with both of them there for an hour and a half and left with no one seeing them.

Why must / should the killer -- if an intruder -- wander around the house for an hour and a half, please?

In anyway, if you, as you youself admit, are not 100% certain for Lizzie's guilt, then it means that you agree that the killer could have been an intruder, so, the probability being low or high, he must somehow have entered in the house without being seen. Therefore, the question who deserves a discussion (certainly, within the intruder hypothesis) should be: when, how and from where did he enter the house? And it was exactly to this question that I tried to give a possbile answer in my Morse's guilty theory.

Well, go on Franz, the intruder got in the house, according to your hypothesis. Where did he (I presume it was a he) conceal himself for about an hour and a half, between Abby's murder and Andrew's? And if you say the guest room I'm going to scream!!

Curryong wrote:Well, go on Franz, the intruder got in the house, according to your hypothesis. Where did he (I presume it was a he) conceal himself for about an hour and a half, between Abby's murder and Andrew's? And if you say the guest room I'm going to scream!!

You have certainly screamed, I imagine.

If the killer was an intruder then I think he came in with Lizzie the night before and spent the night in Emma's room which means he was in cahoots with Lizzie. He then went back to Emma's room to wait for Andrew. I have no clear opinion on who did it.