Lizzie Borden Society Forum

What if Emma didn't have an alibi? What if she was in the house overnight in her room and Lizzie snuck her food? Could she be the one who killed Abby with a hatchet then took off? We know she hated her guts. Then Lizzie kills Andrew later with a meat cleaver. Sure took Emma long enough to get home didn't it? 2 different killers. 2 different weapons. Sure would explain a lot.

And I think Emma was the mastermind and Morse knew it was going down. Brigit lied her ass off on the stand. Dr Bowens behavior is fishy at best. Perhaps the estrangement of Lizzie and Emma was because Lizzie was ostracized the rest of her life. 2 different motives. Emma- hatred and revenge. Lizzie-$$$$$

I think that Emma did put the idea into Lizzies head, but I think Lizzie acted alone. I mean, Lizzie wasn't but about two years old when her mother died, so Emma was the only one who could tell her about their mother (other than their father, and who wants to talk about their dead wife while married to another woman?) And as for Bridget lying, the other maid had to be lying too.. She's the one that backed up Bridget's story of them two talking over the fence.

mmm. I have written extensively on this subject on this forum.

The problem with the Emma theory, is there is a whole lot of theory and no facts.However, assuming Emma wasn't aware of anything would be giving her too much of a benefit of doubt. In terms of Lizzie being the culprit, I still have issues with the time line. In my mind there are a few scenarios:

1. Base case, believing most accepted scenario:

a. 10:45am: Andrew enters the house and goes upstairs
b. 10:50am: Lizzie having a conversation with her dad as well as Bridget.
c. 10:55am: Bridget heading to her room
d. 11:05am: Lizzie screams out father is dead
e. 11:14am: Police shows up at the house.

If one had to believe bridget's statement of going upstairs at 10:55am, 10 minutes is too short of a time for Lizzie, to kill, clean stay sober and ask for Bridget to come downstairs. Therefore, in the base scenario, the possibility of Lizzie herself committing the murder is low. She might have an accomplice.

2. Bridget is dishonest: If thats the case, then Lizzie still has 20mins. too short for a woman of that era. why would she not take an additional 30 mins, to make sure everything is cleared out of view and there is no blood splatter on herself.

As much as people like to convict Lizzie, i personally believe she is not a murderer. But she knows who killed her step-mother and father.

I wonder if Abby was killed later than the police thought. The heat on the second floor would have dried her blood faster, giving the impression of her death occurring earlier. The time span between the two murders could be closer than what we have come to accept.

Curiousmind2014 wrote: Sun Feb 23, 2020 2:27 pm mmm. I have written extensively on this subject on this forum.

The problem with the Emma theory, is there is a whole lot of theory and no facts.However, assuming Emma wasn't aware of anything would be giving her too much of a benefit of doubt. In terms of Lizzie being the culprit, I still have issues with the time line. In my mind there are a few scenarios:

1. Base case, believing most accepted scenario:

a. 10:45am: Andrew enters the house and goes upstairs
b. 10:50am: Lizzie having a conversation with her dad as well as Bridget.
c. 10:55am: Bridget heading to her room
d. 11:05am: Lizzie screams out father is dead
e. 11:14am: Police shows up at the house.

If one had to believe bridget's statement of going upstairs at 10:55am, 10 minutes is too short of a time for Lizzie, to kill, clean stay sober and ask for Bridget to come downstairs. Therefore, in the base scenario, the possibility of Lizzie herself committing the murder is low. She might have an accomplice.

2. Bridget is dishonest: If thats the case, then Lizzie still has 20mins. too short for a woman of that era. why would she not take an additional 30 mins, to make sure everything is cleared out of view and there is no blood splatter on herself.

As much as people like to convict Lizzie, i personally believe she is not a murderer. But she knows who killed her step-mother and father.

Hello Curiousmind2014, welcome back.

You are not alone in believing that Lizzie is not the perpetrator of Andrew’s murder, because of the timeline. Like you, they claim there was too little time to clean herself up, and hide the weapon. Yet an intruder had the exact same amount of time. Furthermore, not only would an intruder have had to clean themselves up and hide the weapon, they would have also had to enter the house unnoticed and escape the crime scene house unseen by anyone in the house or barn (that is, if you actually believe Lizzie went to the barn), and also be unnoticed by anyone who may have been on Second Street that day.

Bridget stated her timeline by how much time she thought she was in her room. The only time she could actually verify was when the city clock struck eleven o’clock. Check out the information below.

The following testimony is from, The Preliminary Hearing in the Lizzie Borden Case, New Edition, by Stefani Koorey, Ph.D., Harry Widdows, and Kat Koorey. Bridget Sullivan is being questioned by Mr. Knowlton, page 211(Underlining is mine):

Q. When you went up stairs, what time was it?
A. It might be four or five minutes to eleven.
Q. How do you know that?
A. By the length of time I was up stairs when it struck eleven o’clock.
Q. How soon after you got up stairs did you hear it strike eleven?
A. About three or four minutes.
Q. After you got up stairs?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Did you take any notice of the fact that it struck eleven?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. What notice did you take of it?
A. My clock was on the bureau.
Q. Where were you at the time?
A. I was lying on the bed.
Q. You were lying down?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. You did not take your clothes off?
A. No Sir.
Q. How long did you say it was after you got up stairs before the clock struck?
A. I should say it was three minutes.
Q. Very soon then?
A. Yes Sir.

On Page 212, Bridget is still being questioned by Mr. Knowlton (Underlining is mine):

Q. After you let Mr. Borden in, did you shut the front door up again?
A. He shut it up.
Q. When did you next see anything, or hear anything?
A. Not until Miss Lizzie called me.
Q. What time was that, as near as you can fix it?
A. I might be up stairs ten or fifteen minutes, as near as I can think, after I went up stairs.
Q. Have you anyway of fixing that, or is it your estimation?
A. That is what I think, I did not look at the clock when I came down. That is the length of time I thought I was there.

My point is: Bridget could have been in her room a lot longer than she thought she was.

You mentioned that Lizzie may have had an accomplice. That one sentence contradicts your theory of Lizzie being innocent. An accomplice is someone who becomes equally guilty in the crime of another by knowingly and voluntarily aiding the other to commit the offense. An accomplice is either an accessory or an abettor. The accessory aids a criminal prior to the crime, whereas the abettor aids the offender during the crime itself. Source: https://tinyurl.com/td28cth

I believe that the Brownells were questioned about Emma's visit and they confirmed that Emma had been in their house the whole time.

Your theory about Emma being involved doesn't wash. I don't think that Emma could have snuck in without being noticed by someone in the house and receiving food from Lizzie. What about her having to use the toilet? (which was in the cellar). Besides, Emma was much more self-effacing than Lizzie and was dominated by her, despite her being that much older.

One thing that does strike me as odd is how long it took Emma to return to Fall River. Dr Bowen telegraphed her @ 11.30 a.m. yet she didn't arrive home until early evening. Fairhaven is only about 15 miles from Fall River. I can't believe that even in 1892 the journey would take that long. Obviously we don't know the train timetables, but still.....