The conversation between Lizzie and Alice

[Franz]

We all know that in the evening before the murder day, Lizzie had a conversation with Alice, in which she expressed her worry about the safety of the family, and especially for the safety of her father Andrew. Those who believe Lizzie was guilty generally consider this conversation as a circumstantial evidence and the murder was premeditated: Lizzie was setting a stage, as Debbie said.

I ask myself: if I am premeditating to kill two people tomorrow, would I, this evening, go to find someone and tell him/her something like: I have a feeling that the life of A and B (my victims of tomorrow) seems in danger? No, I would never do such a thing.

No, I would never do such a thing; but maybe Lizzie (or someone else) would. Who knows?

[Curryong]

I would, Franz, if I loathed my stepmother, had dark unconfirmed suspicions that maybe my Uncle John was in Fall River to witness a will or to turn over of the Swansea farm to someone other than myself and my sister, and decided that it could not go on.

I would, having been disturbed by conversation between the two men overheard in my room, toddle off to an unsuspecting friend and waffle on darkly about 'father's enemies' and 'people wishing the family harm' and burning the house down.

I would do this certain in my own mind that, though it would of course be risky to commit murder, the police would, if I played my cards right, not look for the solution at a nicely brought up maiden daughter, but would search instead for a male, a possibly unhinged enemy of my father's.

Lizzie wasn't the first murderer, nor the last by a long way, who thought the police could be fooled by outward appearance.

[Franz]

Curryong, the conversation between two men (uncle John and Andrew), if really overheard by Lizzie (I don't buy this theory), occured after the conversation between Lizzie and Alice.

If I wished to draw the attention of the police to some man, as Lizzie allegedly did, I would probably not "set the stage" just in the evening before the murdrr day.

(P.S.: If Lizzie, in the evening of the 3rd August, had already thought to set a stage as a preparation of her murder plan, I can't see why she gave a so disastred alibi testimony for Andrew's death (in fact she didn't give a solid alibi for Abby's death, either). Even if she decided to kill her father only when she saw him return home, she could have given herself enough time to invent a good alibi before calling Bridget. But she didn't?! No, all this is not convincing for me. Not at all.)

[Curryong]

No, no, Franz. John arrived on the Wednesday afternoon. Lizzie said in her witness statement that the noise of their voices had disturbed her as she was not well and was staying in her room.

(Lizzie's Inquest testimony)
"I heard him down there about suppertime. No, it was earlier than that. I heard him down there somewhere about three o'clock, I think. I was in my room Wednesday, not feeling well all day."

Later she is asked Q. You heard him in the afternoon?
A Yes sir.

She presumably had been trying to snooze and couldn't. She hadn't eaten but at 6pm decided to go to Alice's. She may or may not have heard the late night conversation between the two men (or the other earlier conversation for that matter) but John was trusted by Andrew and any idea Andrew had of selling any of his property or making a will would almost certainly have been discussed between the brothers in law first.

[Franz]

Sorry Curryong, I misunderstood you. In the forum, when members talk about the conversation ovverheard (hypothesis) by Lizzie, they usually, it seems to me, indicate (a part of) the conversation between Andrew and Morse after Lizzie's return from Alice's that evening.

[Curryong]

I know, Franz, these conversations between people in the Borden saga get very mixed up.
As far as Lizzie's talk with Alice goes, however, would talk about secret enemies and poison not secretly appeal to someone who was as keen a theatre goer as Lizzie? A touch of the dramatic, perhaps, that her good friend Alice would vividly remember!

[irina]

I think the talk with Alice could indicate several things INCLUDING Lizzie setting the stage for murder. It could also indicate depression, PMS, or real or imagined fears.

Abby was so sick with a stomach bug she thought she had been poisoned and sought a doctor's knowledge. She blames milk, baker's bread or baker's (cream) cake. Did she just have such a bad illness that she thought she was poisoned? (Haven't we all experienced this?) Or were there some outside threats against the family, probably Andrew over business activities? Was there a mentally ill relative outside of 92 Second, who was causing trouble?

I should also have mentioned in Curryong's new thread about premeditation that Lizzie complained to Alice of her father's rudeness to people. She was embarrassed by the way he had treated Dr. Bowen. To Alice she said this behaviour led to Andrew making enemies. On the premeditation post I considered that embarrassment with the family habits could have induced murder from rage. If so Andrew's treatment of Dr. Bowen could be an additive factor. It could be especially so if Lizzie had tender feelings for Dr. Bowen, as it seems she might. On the other hand maybe Lizzie is telling the truth as she sees it to Alice, that her father is rude and makes enemies.

Franz, you and I are mostly on the same side but since nobody can absolutely PROVE guilt or innocence, it is important to look at all sides. I believe strongly in being the devil's advocate and seeing where the facts go.

[phineas]

I think that's a great point about Lizzie's love of theater. I'd never stopped to think about what that might mean for her personality....was she a drama queen? And attention-needer? I wonder if she played to the house with Alice and couldn't resist going for the dramatic even if it later makes her look guilty. If it was a ruse to create suspicion of persons unknown I wonder if it was colored with just the tiniest desire to look prescient and all knowing when later events came to pass. It's like the putting on airs with "I'm gone so often myself."

[Curryong]

I believe Abby was also mortified by Andrew's behaviour. He could be, I have no doubt, extremely crabby and difficult and discourteous and embarrassing.

The police investigated any threats against Andrew. Although he was tight to the point of miserliness and was certainly a tough businessman, they could find no-one who bore enmity towards him. Emma seems to have kept in contact with relatives (including Harrington, married to Andrew's sister who had quarrelled with Andrew years before). I'm sure if there was an aggressive and mentally ill relative in the picture Emma would have told the police.

I believe there was some longing to make a splash in life hidden away there in Lizzie's persona, Phineas. I think she would have been an entirely different person with parents who were prepared to socialise with others. Don't forget too, that besides her love of the theatre, Lizzie was a voracious reader. She wouldn't have just concentrated on the serious stuff in my opinion, but would have read novels of the time with their overwrought language and melodramatic plots.

[debbiediablo]

I think that's a great point about Lizzie's love of theater. I'd never stopped to think about what that might mean for her personality....was she a drama queen? And attention-needer? I wonder if she played to the house with Alice and couldn't resist going for the dramatic even if it later makes her look guilty. If it was a ruse to create suspicion of persons unknown I wonder if it was colored with just the tiniest desire to look prescient and all knowing when later events came to pass. It's like the putting on airs with "I'm gone so often myself."

Well said and coming from a new and different angle. Thank you, Phineas!

[Aamartin]

personally, I think Lizzie was dense enough to think this would show her in a more favorable light once the murders occurred. Setting up an alternative solution to the deaths.

[debbiediablo]

I don't know 'why' Lizzie said what said, although both Phineas and Anthony make sense, but I believe her words foreshadowed her plans to kill Andrew and Abby. I won't cite it again, but this kind of talk is common prior to a domestic homicide. Who knows? Maybe it's a disguised plea to be stopped. I do think if everything and everybody fallen into place (Bridget off to the fabric sale and Uncle John staying where he belonged) then Lizzie would've done EXACTLY what she foreshadowed which is to burn down the house to hide the evidence of her murdering her parents by 1st choice (poison) or final choice (hatchet). Nor would we still be rehashing it; the police would've written it off to accidental fire due to a balky wood stove and Lizzie would've lived out her life as the fortunate object of Fall River pity. "We're so sorry, dear, about your parents. You are so lucky not to been there, too."

[Franz]

I am not sure, Debbie.

I can assume for a moment that Lizzie did do it. However:

1. Could the burning down the house cover the fact that Mrs. and Mr. Borden had been killed by a sharp weapon before the fire destroyed the house? In the daylight would the people let the house being burnt down completely without doing anything?

2. Many think Lizzie killed for money. For money she even killed her father! If so, did Bridget's presence matter so much for Lizzie?

[debbiediablo]

I am not sure, Debbie.

I can assume for a moment that Lizzie did do it. However:

1. Could the burning down the house cover the fact that Mrs. and Mr. Borden had been killed by a sharp weapon before the fire destroyed the house? In the daylight would the people let the house being burnt down completely without doing anything?

2. Many think Lizzie killed for money. For money she even killed her father! If so, did Bridget's presence matter so much for Lizzie?

Yes, it could cover the murders if the police and fire department weren't looking closely; no matter who the killer really was, it's fair to say the police in Fall River did not look closely when they had an obvious double ax murder to investigate. I doubt they'd take much notice of two deaths in a house fire. Whether it burned completely would depend on how the fire started and how far along it got before it was noticed.

Lizzie didn't kill for money alone; she killed Andrew because he betrayed her and Emma as their father, as their blood kin, as the man who needed to provide for them for the remainder of their lives in preference not just for Abby...but for Abby's sister! He betrayed their loving devotion and failed to recognize and reward everything they endured (no electricity, no phone, primitive plumbing, a house in the business district, the embarrassment of being his daughters) to please him.

[Curryong]

I totally agree with debbie's explanation of Lizzie's motives for killing her father and stepmother.

Could I offer a little story of my own here? Many years ago a cousin that I was close to became friendly with a doctor's widow. She was still quite young, 40ish when my cousin knew her and had been left a widow with one daughter in reasonable financial circumstances, no more.

Her father, a widower, was an immensely wealthy man and when he died from cancer, this woman and her brother inherited a great deal of money, to be shared between them. This woman, I'll call her Anna, was very surprised that she had inherited this money. She often told my cousin "He'll leave it all to Roger, you know, because he's the favourite. I shan't get much at all." (Roger was her brother.)

My cousin was absolutely amazed at her behaviour once the money was in Anna's hands. Although she did tuck half of it away she blew over £500,000 in a matter of months (and that was in the 1970's!.)

It was clear Anna was a mass of resentment. She would sometimes say things to my cousin who accompanied her on shopping trips. "Well, I'm buying the house I want now! He (her father) helped my brother with the down payment on HIS house, but I got hardly anything!" (My cousin knew this was not true.)

"I'm buying this fur coat. I never got any clothing allowance from him when I was single so now I'm dressing the way I want!" "My father never sent me to Bedales" (a famous English school and an expensive one) " when he knew I wanted to go, so my child's going!" and so it went on.

It was almost as if she was shaking her fist at the heavens and saying "Well, you can't stop me from living the way Im entitled to, now!" and it was terrible to see.

If you transpose every few thousand dollars Lizzie inherited with one stroke of the hatchet on Andrew's head you get the picture, and I'm convinced that Lizzie had much the same resentment and sense of entitlement Anna exhibited.

[debbiediablo]

Exactly that, Curryong: a sense of entitlement can be downright ugly.

[Franz]

...
Yes, it could cover the murders if the police and fire department weren't looking closely; no matter who the killer really was, it's fair to say the police in Fall River did not look closely when they had an obvious double ax murder to investigate. I doubt they'd take much notice of two deaths in a house fire...

You are right, Debbie, "it's fair to say the police in Fall River did not look closely when they had an obvious double ax murder to investigate". we all know this. But we all know this only after the murders occured. But before the murders, how could Lizzie --- if she did it --- have been so sure that the police would do a bad work?

The killer, if an intruder, could not foresee either what work the police would do, good or bad; but from his part, he had tried to do his best: to enter the house and to escape without being seen (helped by his good luck; August 4th 1892 was realy his day); to deceive Abby with the note and then to regain it (I would not leave it in the police's hands, who knows what would happen); to take away his weapon so that the police would have no concrete evidence (I know the police of FR are stupid, but who knows what would happen if I left my weapon in their hands).

The police could do a good job or a bad one, this is their affair. But in my opinion, no killer would think, before the murder: well, I will kill them and then burn the house down, anyway the police would not investigate carefully; I will tell them a note story, they certainly would believe me, because I am Lizzies; An alibi? I don't need to prepare a good one, because the police are so stupid, I will esaily deceive them...

No, I don't buy all of this. Absolutely not.

[PossumPie]

We all know that in the evening before the murder day, Lizzie had a conversation with Alice, in which she expressed her worry about the safety of the family, and especially for the safety of her father Andrew. Those who believe Lizzie was guilty generally consider this conversation as a circumstantial evidence and the murder was premeditated: Lizzie was setting a stage, as Debbie said.

I ask myself: if I am premeditating to kill two people tomorrow, would I, this evening, go to find someone and tell him/her something like: I have a feeling that the life of A and B (my victims of tomorrow) seems in danger? No, I would never do such a thing.

No, I would never do such a thing; but maybe Lizzie (or someone else) would. Who knows?

That is false logic- "If I am smart enough not to do something, than Lizzie must have been smart enough"
That is NOT necessarily true.

YES Franz, unfortunately people WOULD kill even their father for money. Yes, the newspapers are full of stories every day of murder covered up by setting a house on fire. A few years ago a woman killed two elderly people 6 miles from my house, and clumsily thought that setting the house on fire would cover it.

If someone posted here "I am worried about Franz. His crazy theory upsets people. I am afraid someone is going to hit him in the face with a pie for having such a crazy theory." And then dear Franz, the NEXT DAY you were hit in the face with a pie.......wouldn't you suspect the person who posted that on this forum???

[Franz]

We all know that in the evening before the murder day, Lizzie had a conversation with Alice, in which she expressed her worry about the safety of the family, and especially for the safety of her father Andrew. Those who believe Lizzie was guilty generally consider this conversation as a circumstantial evidence and the murder was premeditated: Lizzie was setting a stage, as Debbie said.

I ask myself: if I am premeditating to kill two people tomorrow, would I, this evening, go to find someone and tell him/her something like: I have a feeling that the life of A and B (my victims of tomorrow) seems in danger? No, I would never do such a thing.

No, I would never do such a thing; but maybe Lizzie (or someone else) would. Who knows?

That is false logic- "If I am smart enough not to do something, than Lizzie must have been smart enough"
That is NOT necessarily true.

PossumPie, I invite you to re-read the last paragraph of my thread.

[Franz]

... If someone posted here "I am worried about Franz. His crazy theory upsets people. I am afraid someone is going to hit him in the face with a pie for having such a crazy theory." And then dear Franz, the NEXT DAY you were hit in the face with a pie.......wouldn't you suspect the person who posted that on this forum???

OMG, I just read this paragraph. PossumPie, you added it after, right?

Three points:

1. The person who posts such words might even hit me in face with a pie. But to hit someone in face with a pie is very very much different from to kill two people, in my opinon.

2. My theory has two parts: 1) Lizzie could be innocent; 2) Morse could be the real guilty. I think non one would say that the first part is crazy. Maybe someone, or many, or even most, of you, could consider crazy the second part. All ok for me.

3. I can consider, me too, some theories crazy, but a crazy theory can't upset me. I come, I read, I consider it crazy, and I go ahead. Someone speculated that Andrew and Morse were a gay couple, and offered a theory about how Abby was killed. For me this is a crazy theory, but it didn't upset me, If it did, the problem would not be of this theory and of its author, but of me.

[PossumPie]

I agree with you that Lizzie could be innocent. If so, I also look towards close friends and family as suspects because the viciousness of both attacks seems to point to the killer hating them, not just angry. I have always said your theory is POSSIBLE meaning "not impossible" but the vast number of unlikely events that had to happen for it to work make me believe that it never occurred that way. Theories don't upset me either...but I must confess poor logic drives me crazy. People believe the stupidest things because of lack of training in logic. A theory that Lizzie was innocent which uses logical assumptions, and entails almost no coincidences or "luck" for it to work would be given a place of honor by me right up there with Lizzie is guilty. Alas, your theory, and the theory of a naked homosexual Morse chasing Abby with an ax fall short in both logic and coincidence...

[Franz]

I agree with you that Lizzie could be innocent. If so, I also look towards close friends and family as suspects because the viciousness of both attacks seems to point to the killer hating them, not just angry. I have always said your theory is POSSIBLE meaning "not impossible" but the vast number of unlikely events that had to happen for it to work make me believe that it never occurred that way. Theories don't upset me either...but I must confess poor logic drives me crazy. People believe the stupidest things because of lack of training in logic. A theory that Lizzie was innocent which uses logical assumptions, and entails almost no coincidences or "luck" for it to work would be given a place of honor by me right up there with Lizzie is guilty. Alas, your theory, and the theory of a naked homosexual Morse chasing Abby with an ax fall short in both logic and coincidence...

PossumPie, I firmly believe that, no matter who was the real killer, a number of coincidences and luck did have happened that morning so that the Borden case became so mysterious.

And, IMO, coincidence and luck have nothing to do with the logic. Assuming that the intruder went into the house without meeting inside neither Lizzie nor Bridget, this is a coincidence (and luck for the killer), but we counldn't say this assumption is logic or illogic. There is no room for logic here, IMO.

(P.S.: It doesn't upset me if you think my theory improbable. But "I must confess" that I am a little disappointed that you consider --- it seems to me --- my theory equal to that of Morse-Andrew gay couple: Morse and Andrew could even have been lovers and I don't care, but it was IMPOSSIBLE that Morse was in the guest room at that moment to kill Abby.)

[debbiediablo]

It's quite obvious to me that Andrew Borden and John Morse shared a lifelong love affair - with money.

[irina]

The problem with theories is getting proof. I have a pretty good theory of how and why an intruder did it but there isn't much proof. A problem with conspiracy theories is that in considering every player in a conspiracy one has to ask "What's in it for them"? If Morse conspired and used a couple accomplices then the question is, "What's in it for the accomplices"? They would be risking hanging perhaps more than Morse who was pulling the strings in such a scenario. Would money be enough? Were they depraved and did they enjoy killing or participating in a murder? Were they able to believe there was a moral reason to kill, or could they rationalize it? Did they stay in FR or go away soon after, perhaps back to Iowa or a "horse camp"? Would close friends kill for Morse? Could they be relatives~heaven knows everyone in FR seemed to be related to everyone else.

[Franz]

Very good questions, Irina.

[debbiediablo]

The problem with theories is getting proof. I have a pretty good theory of how and why an intruder did it but there isn't much proof. A problem with conspiracy theories is that in considering every player in a conspiracy one has to ask "What's in it for them"? If Morse conspired and used a couple accomplices then the question is, "What's in it for the accomplices"? They would be risking hanging perhaps more than Morse who was pulling the strings in such a scenario. Would money be enough? Were they depraved and did they enjoy killing or participating in a murder? Were they able to believe there was a moral reason to kill, or could they rationalize it? Did they stay in FR or go away soon after, perhaps back to Iowa or a "horse camp"? Would close friends kill for Morse? Could they be relatives~heaven knows everyone in FR seemed to be related to everyone else.

Moreoever, what was in it for Morse?

[Curryong]

As distinct from what was very clearly a motive for Lizzie (and Emma.)

[debbiediablo]

Considering the Final Four, Morse is the only one without any motive I can discern followed closely by Bridget. Or it could be the other way around; however, I think there may have been something shady between Andrew and the series of maids referred to as Maggie. This excludes the "mysterious stranger" as suspect.

[PossumPie]

The parsimonious explanation is that looking ONLY at the known facts...Motive for the crime can ONLY be proven for Lizzie and Emma. They got rich enough to never have to work from the death of their Step-mother and father. Any other person who had a motive is pure speculation. Doesn't mean that someone else didn't do it...just that the only factual benefactors from the deaths were Lizzie and Emma. Guilty or not Lizzie and Emma benefited immensely from the deaths.