Lizzie Borden Society Forum

This is not a new revelation, but it struck me when rereading testimony, how very brief the timeframe was between Lizzie thinking Abby was out of the house calling on her sick friend to Lizzie being positive she heard Abby return to the house and instructing the ladies to look upstairs for Abby.

Dr. Bowen Inquest testimony:
Q. What was said about the mother, if anything?
A. There was an inquiry made, I don't know whether I made it, somebody said, where is Mrs. Borden, where is Mrs. Borden? Lizzie said, I think, I think she said, "she had a note this morning to go and see a sick friend". That is all, such a serious affair as that, I did not stop, and could not do anything, I was satisfied of that, In that time I said I must go and get some of the officers right off, perhaps I said I would get the officers. Lizzie said that Emma was in Fairhaven and wanted me to telegraph her. Before I went out, she said if you telegraph her, perhaps she will come on this noon train. I went directly across to my house, and told my wife, and told her about telegraphing. I was satisfied she could not come on the noon train direct, so my boy drove me down to the telegraph office, and I telegraphed to Miss Emma Borden.

Dr. Bowen left the Borden house, went across the street, consulted the train schedule, took his carriage to the telegraph office two blocks away, sent a telegram to Emma, took his carriage across the street to Baker's Pharmacy and talked briefly to the occupants and then returned to the Borden house in his carriage.

The conversation Bridget describes below, occurred about the time Bowen was at Baker's Pharmacy. It was approximately 5-7 minutes time between when Lizzie asked Bowen to send the telegram and when Bridget suggested going to Mrs. Whitehead's house.

Bridget Sullivan Preliminary Hearing testimony:
Q. Was anything more said then that you remember of?
A. No Sir.
Q. What did you do then?
A. We were talking, I said I would like to know where Mrs. Borden was. I said I would go over to Mrs. Whitehead's. She said she would like us to search for Mrs. Borden: she told us to go and search for her. I said I would go over there, if I knew where the house was. She said she was positive she heard her coming in and would not we go upstairs and see.
Q. Who said that?
A. Miss Lizzie Borden. I said I would not go upstairs, and Mrs. Churchill said she was willing to go with me; so, me and Mrs. Churchill went up the front stairs. There we found Mrs. Borden.

During this span of 5-7 minutes, Lizzie's knowledge of Abby Borden evolved from, ""she (Abby) had a note this morning to go and see a sick friend" to "She (Lizzie) said she was positive she heard her coming in and would not we go upstairs and see."

One potential reason Lizzie 'remembered' that she heard Abby come home and sent folks to find her is that Dr. Bowen had just mentioned that he should inform the police. For reasons we can speculate upon, might Lizzie have wanted both victims found before the police arrived?

Each can draw their own conclusions.

That’s interesting, and to your point of things evolving during the small time gap after Bowen went to send the telegram , there’s also my remembrance of how things started along this subject.
In the WS p-11, Mrs Churchill’s third question to Lizzie was ,
“Where is your mother?” So this tells me that Lizzie had the note story ready . Of coarse during the trial, p- 238 Bridget says she overheard Lizzie tell Andrew that Abby had a note to go out, then a short time later as Lizzie entered the dining room to iron Bridget is told directly from Lizzie that Abby had a note, and had left.
Had Bridget wondered where Abby might have been for the past 1-1/2 hours? I’d like to know if she did, was relieved to hear about the note, then later started putting the puzzle together, and became terrified.

I think she wanted both victims found asap, yes, and I don’t think Lizzie ever thought the time difference between the crimes would become an issue.

Very interesting point about the timeframe. It’s also interesting to me that Lizzie said she thought she heard her stepmother come in, yet she does not call out to her under the circumstances. Also, after Lizzie says this, I wonder why no one thought it odd that Abby would not come in to question what was going on. With all the commotion, did Lizzie try to imply that Abby just casually went upstairs unfazed? I wish someone would have asked Lizzie, “when did you hear that?” To me, this is one of the biggest flaws in Lizzie’s story.

Hi Investigator Gal! I've been unable to access the forum until Stef made all the recent updates.

Agree this is a big story flaw.....for me it goes along with the fact that Lizzie discovered her slaughtered father with the knowledge that the attack must have literally just happened and her reaction is to go the back steps, call up to Bridget to come down and then wait until Bridget came down. Then she sent Bridget off to fetch Bowen....all the while standing inside the house...mere feet from her destroyed father.

Again, she had no reason not to believe that a violent, homicidal killer was out of the house. I find this totally unnatural and is not excused by the commonly used comment....."everyone reacts differently to crisis"....this wasn't a just a crisis, this one self-preservation and I think everyone has that survival instinct.

Hi Camgarsky4, I agree completely. It’s hard to imagine someone not being too afraid to stay alone in a house where a crime had just taking place and not knowing if the suspect was still inside. Very telling.

You guys gave me a thought…
How was Lizzie to know that Abby herself wasn’t the killer?
Even if she thought Abby had left, surely upon discovering her father, Lizzie would have suspected Abby as a possible culprit.
All the more reason to leave the house.

The cry for Bridget to come quickly was correct, only if it were to get her out of the house, and save her.
IMO, they both would have ran out of the house together.

Inspector, I have never read or thought of that perspective before!

If Abby hadn't been killed, she would have obviously been a 'person of interest' to the police from the start. Just as Lizzie was because she was alive.

You guys helped me try and put myself in Lizzie’s shoes so to speak.
It seems to show that Lizzie had knowledge of Abby’s demise,
To Investigatorgals point, it appears that Lizzie must have heard Abby come home after Abraham’s death, otherwise Lizzie, and perhaps Bridget would have been fearful that Abby was possibly ready to strike them.

Why did no one else hear Abby’s return?
It seems a contrived way to ease the stress, and get things moving.
Similar to her looking forward to the undertaker.
I would like to go back in time to see how Bridget acted upon hearing the call from Lizzie to come quick.
I believe it would tell a lot about her knowledge or lack there of about the crimes.

If guilty, Lizzie seemed to have a bit of the need to be a 'stage director' with situations she had created. Think back to the 1891 home burglary. Lizzie made sure the police knew about the open cellar door and the nail in her parents bedroom door. She applied the same approach on August 4. She called down Bridget so she was present when the murders were discovered and she made sure that Abby was discovered.

Seems a bit odd, but for some reason, I think in her mind it was important that the discoveries occur in a certain flow and timeline. She would also be present to help explain or provide her insights....like someone trying to poison them or seeing strange men around the house.

Talking to Alice the night before fits the same MO, making sure others knew what she wanted to them to know, when she wanted them to know.

That’s a great analysis of how Lizzie acted as director of things.
It appears she did need things to flow at her discretion.
Bridget wanted to go find Abby, so Lizzie it seems, directed her in a different direction, towards the body, but only after Bridget brings the “find Abby” subject up.
Similarly, it looks to me as though Lizzie has to have a Dr. quickly so she can give her excuse for the pail of bloody rags.
It simply has to be explained immediately, and is part of the heavy weight on her mind.
It had to be one of the first things she told Bowen, because he obviously didn’t go searching in the cellar yet he was aware of them when questioned.

Not to change subjects, but I watched a new documentary that was fairly thorough, but held nothing new.
He concluded that Morse was the killer, but his reasoning was that horse traders are not trustworthy, Lol.
According to him, Morse rigged the front door, and left the cellar unlocked for one of his partners to come into the house.
Of course, this intruder would have to be invisible to pull it off, unless Lizzie was directing things.

Morse is easily the most popular alternative suspect. I think because blaming Lizzie is far and away the most logical solution to the crime and people like to feel special and unique (all of us), then picking someone besides Lizzie is appealing. I am a finance person, so take this psychological analysis of humankind with a huge dose cynicism.

I do feel that she might have had an accomplice (not Bridget or Morse). I give it 99% odds that Lizzie was a participant and she had help at around 50% odds.

Interesting, I just commented on her having help before I read your post above.
It’s too bad the police officer couldn’t see what she did on the 2nd visit to the cellar that night.
What could she have done by the sink, or what was she retrieving, or leaving?
Little things like how she just pulled the dress out of the pantry like it was always there.
Nowadays they video the scene, but back then you’d think they’d document the items in each room, or closets better. .

I'll give you a couple clues that will give you a good idea what I think the answer to your question is.

Reread Officer Hyde's testimony and see if he gives any clues as to why Lizzie visited the washroom a second time that night.
Also read up on what activity occurred at the Borden house Friday morning.

Hmm. Mr Hyde did mention the club under the bed, and that Alice thought Lizzie came back down cellar while she was bathing, so that is sneaky. Hyde also heard Lizzie dump water on the first trip to the cellar.
I assume you are referring to the autopsies on Friday, and I believe that’s also the day Lizzie questioned Bridget about the security of the cellar door,

You’ve got me stumped.

I'll restate my 'clues' questions.

What was being kept in the washroom the night of August 4 and only that night?
What happened to that item the following morning?
Anything about that details of the item 'raise an eyebrow'?

I don’t think it was the bloody rags, because that was addressed earlier on Aug 4.

I suspect you’re thinking it was the murder weapon, those hatchets were taken away on Friday if I remember.
Site won’t let me scroll to Hyde’s trial testimony. Error occurs.

Hyde's testimony (and others) tells us that a wash tub containing the clothing which Andrew and Abby wore when killed was kept in the cellar washroom.

Friday morning, these items were buried in the Borden backyard.

I was actually about to respond regarding the items buried, and the clothes, aprons, etc.. from the autopsy.
One area I need to memorize better is the cellar layout, but you may be on to something I’ve never thought of,or possibly given me a thought or two.
It never occurred to me that Lizzie could have brought something down on her second visit, but perhaps she brought it down on the first visit inside the pot, then came back a second time to finalize its location.
The vegetable room cellar area where Fleet found the claw hatchet was close to the NE corner of the cellar, and would mean Lizzie passed it four times on the two visits, but she’d only have the second visit to leave it there.
I wonder if the vegetable room by the stairs was visible through the NE window where Hyde was, though he made no mention of them going in there. There were no bars on that window from what I have found.
Morse was certainly ready to bury the items, and see the hatchets gone.

Looking back at the cellar layout, the sink area is the same spot the pail of bloody rags was found. This puts Lizzie right on top of the evidence already explained away as menstrual.
Of course Bridget denied knowing about it.

I have a question for you.Do you think Morse would protect Lizzie if he suspected her, and isn’t it strange that Bowen and Morse would cross paths just before the murders, then be so involved in the entire case afterwards, yet have nothing to do with the crimes?
It’s as if the answer is right there, and there is a Calvary ready to protect it from being found out.
An interesting comment that you’ve heard before is that the case was closed after the trial, as far as the police was concerned.
This created more suspicion upon Lizzie by her Fall River neighbors. and abroad.

First I must apologize, I am not at home and won't be for a few more days, so don't have access to most of my sources. So my responses have been from memory and what I've saved on my laptop.

I presume you are referencing the early newspaper article that quotes Lydia Emery that Dr. Bowen showed up at their house just as Morse was leaving around 11:20am.

I have chosen to disregard that tidbit because it seems indisputably impossible for Bowen to have been at the Emery house anywhere near that time. He was arriving at the Borden house at roughly the same time as he was reportedly showing up at the Emery's. We know how he occupied his time from 11:20ish for the next hour.

Do you have the Jennings Journals book? Bowen's chauffeur/driver (?? James Leonard) tells Jennings/Phillips that he and Bowen were coming from the south side of town (Williams St.) when they arrived at Second St. The Emery house is east (Weybosset St.) of the Borden's. In the witness statements there is a gentlemen (don't recall his name) who reported seeing Bowen's carriage driving swiftly from roughly the same area that Leonard stated they came from when they arrived at Second

I've toyed with the idea that Lydia mixed up the episode with when Morse arrived at the Emery house...that would be more plausible and I think 'recollections could be flipped or misunderstood by the reporter that way.

If this topic intrigues you still, when I get home Friday I can send more detailed info from Jennings Journals on the statements I reference above.

When you read the buried clothing inventory....did anything specific catch your eye?

No apology needed, I appreciate you taking time to converse with such a novice as me. I was always a bit confused about Bowen’s visit to the Emery’s, and thought it odd that Morse and Bowen would cross paths, or both visit the Emery’s at any time on the day of the murders, or any other location for that matter.
I’m sorry, I don’t have the Jennings papers, but your idea about getting names flipped to a reporter sounds plausible.
I tend to agree it makes more sense .
Was it true that Bowen did visit the Emery’s earlier that day, and Morse came later?
If so, it’s odd but doesn’t necessarily mean they had a rondeau, probably just coincidence of the illness at the Emery’s.

You and I touched on the subject a few months back, and I think it was the apron/aprons that you were concerned about.
I was thinking over it again and wondered if an inventory of the items at the autopsy showed everything accounted for, specifically after being dug back up.
Are you thinking Lizzie may have added an apron to the autopsy table on Thursday night, or some other garment she had been hiding?
If I’m way off please forgive.
I can’t seem to connect the visit to the cellar with the buried autopsy items, but possibly Lizzie added a garment to the bloody clothes by the sink that night. A shielding garment of some kind.
I’m doing everything on my phone so I need to get on a PC when I can to access testimony easier.

We don't know if Lydia's niece was a patient of Bowen or if he did visit that morning. The single newspaper statement is the only reference. It does seem like that would have come out if it did happen, but I also think there is still much of the police investigation that was either not written down or has not surfaced/survived (as of yet).

That’s interesting, and frustrating at the same time when different authors and enthusiasts state the Bowen Weybosset visit as fact, and build their theories off of it.
As you know, this being only one example, but it happens in many ways all the time with this case.
Yourself having so much knowledge, must see it more than anyone. The more you know about the case evidence, the more errors you see in others.

Publishing one off, unsubstantiated 'tidbits' as fact is a far too common behavior of all the authors. Everyone tries to pick on Morse using random comments and isolated quotes.

Setting aside books that are primary sources (trial transcripts, Jennings journal, Knowlton papers) and Leonard Rebello's book, Lizzie Borden, Past & Present, for studying the case, the only book that I would recommend is William Spencer's, The Case Against Lizzie Borden. I have found a few errors, but they are not presented in a way that is misleading....they are just 'innocent' errors and none would lead someone down the wrong path to understanding the case. Amazon is selling the book for $30. Might be able to find a used copy on line for cheaper. Its worth it because besides the source books noted above, you don't need to buy the other case books.

If you want to read a very very informative 'book', Parallel Lives provides a much broader scope of Fall River and the case. However, it may very well be the most massive book I have ever attempted to read. It really has turned into a encyclopedia for me more than a book to read. If I had been the FRHS, I would have broken it down into 2-3 volumes and published yearly over a multi year period. Ah well...no one asked me!!

Man, I just wish we could find something new, but it seems that so much has been sifted, that the only new items are those we speculate upon as “would have” and “should have “ happened.
I still believe there’s DNA evidence in the house, but is probably buried under remodels,footsteps, and paint.
Stefani had the right idea in my opinion.
If the blood had any trails leading to Lizzie’s room, or (my thought) up the back stairs to Bridget’s room, it would say a lot.
Do you mind sharing your thoughts on Lizzie and her cellar visits?

Pretty sure that it is impossible to conclusively solve the crime, but I think it is definitely possible to construct a solution that is built on strong points of fact and can't be refuted by known information. My favorite analogy is the 'connect-a-dot' game. Establish definitive facts that can then be connected by common sense or circumstantial evidence to reveal to us what happened, why and who was involved.

Over the past few years, I have dug up a couple dozen previously unknown (to my knowledge) factoids about the case.....most are minor in nature, but a handful are far more juicy. I'm am quite confident that much more can and will be unearthed about the case...just doubt anything will provide a conclusive solution. But I've sure had a good time digging, probing and solving.

I'll send you a PM about the cellar visits.

Thank you for allowing me to hear your thoughts on the cellar visits, I’ve familiarized myself with the cellar layout much better.
There’s a great drawing I’m sure you’ve seen that has positions of the hatchets, clothing,etc. and that helped me .
It was tough with just testimony picturing the areas.
I’m still am curious about the sink area by the side exit door, even if there was no running water to it, there’s a curiosity that nags me.

What about the 'sink' room are you curious about?

That’s the problem, Can’t put my finger on it However, looking at the early layout of the house which shows the hall sink, it appears to show a walk through into the kitchen via the NE kitchen pantry/room.
If so, there’s a window “in” the hall sink room (south side by steps), and another window in the kitchen facing the backyard (east corner.)
My suspicion is concerning a lookout vantage point over anyone approaching the side steps, while doing messy cleanup.
Possibly a secret area in the hall sink room to hide the weapon, or clothing.
If Andrew did fall asleep, it would be quickly accessible, and easier than going up and down the stairs, possibly waking him again. Then after the crime, a good place to have fresh water in a basin already waiting, even if there was no working plumbing to the sink there.
Morse would be coming soon, and there’s no better place than that hall sink room to do those things in my opinion.
However, I feel there’s something I’m missing, that’s what’s nagging me.
It seems Emma stepped out of that sink room and into the kitchen when Lizzie was burning the dress, and Alice saw Lizzie pull the material out of the pantry door by the stove.


The front door was locked, and someone (it seems) jimmied the lock/locks so Andrew couldn’t access with his keys.
Did Andrew have trouble getting in the front door on a regular basis?
Hmm, it appears he went to the side steps first, based on Mrs Kelly’s testimony, so why did he not simply call to Bridget through the screen door to let him in?
If I were Andrew, I’d simply call out, Hey!! Bridget, let me in.

The front door has 3 locks. The spring lock, which activated when door closed required a key to open the other 2 locks were Operated from inside.

Andrew had his key to the spring look, but the bolts were were also engaged and that is why he couldn’t get in the house. Bridget had to unlock from inside. Lizzie conceded she had responsibility to disengage the inside 2 locks, but didn’t that day.

I have a ‘mini’ theory that Andrew had gone around back to barn to put the broken lock he had picked up back there. Then he came to front to enter house. He may have tried getting in side door, which would be an indication of Lizzie’s guilt since she testified she was in kitchen when he hit jobs.

Three front door locks mentioned on the previous post. Photo from the Virtual Library.

Upper and lower locks are bolts and are operated from inside. Outside key only used for spring lock.

Wow. I appreciate the clarification, you must have surmised I wasn’t very clear on the locks.
That’s a strong point that Lizzie testified she was in the kitchen , among other places, when Andrew came home.
Bridget would have known if she was downstairs, but instead Bridget knew it had to be Lizzie who made the sound at the top of the stairs.
What is somewhat troubling. is that Bridget complained about opening the door for Andrew. It would seem a simple duty to turn/ slide a couple locks for her employer, especially in 1892.
I’d think she’d not want Andrew to hear her grumbling through the door.
I’m probably reading too much into it, but the clarification of the locks allows one to stand there and imagine how Bridget felt.

Bridget didn't complain, she had a little trouble with the initial lock and in her frustration, she mumbled 'pshaw'. I'm sure she was a bit nervous trying to open door for the boss man. The 'pshaw' is what Bridget assumes Lizzie was laughing about.

Apparently 'pshaw' was thought to be borderline cursing.

Bridget's preliminary hearing testimony. Pages 18 & 19.
Q. What was the occasion of her laugh?
A. I got puzzled on the door, I said something, and she laughed at it; I supposed that must make her laugh, I don’t know.
Q. She laughed when you said something?
A. Yes Sir. I did not expect the door was locked. I went to open it. I was puzzled; I went to unlock it twice.
Q. What was it you said, if it is not too bad to repeat?
A. No. I did not say much.
Page 20
Q. Some exclamation you made when you had trouble with the door?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Was that the time she laughed?
A. Yes Sir.

Yes, I have always looked at it the way you explained, the pictures and explanations of the locks just gave me an alternative way. A way that perhaps showed a bit of impatience , or just maybe a little short temperament.

'Reactivating' a thread on a similar theme.

Thanks, I'll see if I can paste my post here and delete the new thread I created. I couldn't delete it, but we can let it drift down. I'll paste my challenge here since it fits the existing topic. If anyone is an admin, they can delete my thread.

Let's consider what may have been Lizzie’s single most self-incriminating testimony and see if there is a plausible way out for Lizzie.

After Andrew’s body was discovered, Lizzie continued telling those on the first floor: Alice, Adelaide, Bridget, and Dr. Bowen, that she believed Abby had received a note, left the house, and had not returned. This is fully consistent with Lizzie’s behavior when Andrew was found. She did not call out for Abby, only for Bridget. Lizzie’s explanation was that she did not call for Abby, nor search for her immediately, because she believed Abby was out of the house after receiving a note that someone was sick and after going to visit them and obtain groceries for the noon meal.

That explanation is self-consistent, and plausible, until Lizzie says she thought she heard Abby return home. That leaves only three possible time intervals at which Lizzie could have believed Abby had returned.

1. After Andrew’s body was discovered.
This is impossible. Once Andrew had been found on the sofa, with several people gathered on the first floor, Abby could not have entered the house by the front door, the side screen door, nor even by the basement route, without immediately becoming aware of the crime scene and being seen by others. It is only 15 steps for me to walk from the front door to the back of the kitchen and there is a clear line of sight directly over Andrew's body on the couch. If Abby entered through the front door she would have seen Andrew's body and likely Dr. Bowen. If she entered through the north side screen door, she would have seen Lizzie, Bridget, Alice, and Adelaide.

2. Before Lizzie went to the barn.
This is not impossible, but it is highly improbable. Andrew asked Lizzie where Abby was and even went to their bedroom. Lizzie said Abby was out. Bridget was moving around the house. Lizzie said she was on the first floor except for a few minutes. If Abby had returned during this period, several highly expected things did not occur: Abby did not speak to Bridget about the groceries nor the noon meal; she did not go into the kitchen, where Lizzie was. She did not greet Andrew, if she was already home when he arrived. All of those things being true are nearly impossible.

3. While Lizzie was outside in the backyard or barn.
Lizzie's defense would have to argue that Abby came home after Lizzie was outside, that Abby didn't discuss meal preparation for the imminent noon meal, nor the progress on the window washing assignment, with Bridget upon returning home. They would have to argue that Abby did not call out to Bridget to see where she was. That Abby did not wake Andrew up upon her arrival, by accident or on purpose. Then Abby would have to go to the second floor or basement and Bridget not hear her on the stairs, for the killer to be able to kill Andrew while he was still sleeping. Do I think Abby would have come home with groceries and not speak to either Bridget nor Andrew?

So, why didn't Hosea ask Lizzie:

1. Which door did you hear Abby come home through?
2. When did you hear her come home?

These questions would have forced Lizzie to answer for one of the 3 possibilities above, all of which are absurd or impossible, as far as I can tell so far.

The defense could argue Lizzie heard the killer and mistook that noise for Abby returning. That still puts the only viable time span for hearing it while Lizzie was outside. How did the killer make a loud enough noise to be heard from the back yard or the barn, but not be heard inside the house by Bridget? It can't be before Lizzie left the house for the reasons discussed above. It can't be after there was a crime scene, for obvious reasons. The only window is when Lizzie was outside the house.

If Lizzie heard Abby come home when she was outside, then shortly after discovers her dad, then either Abby was the killer or in grave danger.
This also puts both murders close together and must mean the killer is close by, therefore anyone in the house is in unsafe territory.
Lizzie would have to deduce that Abby is in either situation, yet no need for the police, just the doctor.
Yet Lizzie stands carefree at the door, sending Bridget away twice to find a doctor.

I speculate that Bridget started putting 2 and 2 together after Lizzie wouldn’t let her go out of the house to fetch Abby, rather she directed the search to the upstairs where Abby was.

In my opinion, Lizzie mentioning hearing Abby come home at Bridget’s request to leave the house, shows foreknowledge of the crimes, and a desire to have Abby discovered quickly.
As I’ve stated before, the time gap hurts Lizzie’s alibi.