Lizzie Borden Society Forum

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.

Knowlton did ask Lizzie at the inquest about what she repeatedly said about thinking she heard Abby come in, and it is no wonder the defense fought so hard to make sure the jury didn't hear this testimony.

Q: Did you tell Maggie that you thought your mother had come in?
A: No sir.
Q. That you thought you heard her come in?
A. No sir.
Q. Did you say to anybody that you thought she was killed upstairs?
A. No, sir.
Q. To anybody?
A. No sir.

We know several people heard her say she thought she heard Abby come in. It would appear she was lying. Then again, she denied doing or saying at least half a dozen things other people, multiple people, heard her say or do. Most of the things she denied would have made no difference to her guilt or innocence. Like talking to Bridget in the dining room while Bridget was washing windows, she denied she saw Bridget in that room at all. And even when Knowlton pushed and pushed her on it, she still kept saying in this sort of desperate way that she didn't see her. It was almost like her memory of the morning was wiped clean. And maybe it effectively was. I have read a lot about how the rush of chemicals that come with traumatic shock can make it hard to form memories. Well, depends on the memory -- some things get burned into the mind by those chemicals, sensory things, smells, etc. but other things just disappear like they never happened. Reading the testimony of other witnesses at the inquest, just about all of them said they couldn't remember much, admitted to having no idea what they said or did. The first time I read Lizzie's inquest, she sounded to me like a guilty liar who couldn't keep her story straight, but it makes no sense for a guilty person to lie THAT much. Now I think it's at least possible she honestly could not remember.

I also think it's possible, despite her denials, that she did think she heard Abby come in. (If she was innocent -- big "if."). I think it most likely she would have heard it before she went out to the barn. Maybe it helped spur her to go out to the barn, thinking Abby was returning from whatever sick call, and not wanting to see or talk to Abby, who she didn't like, so she headed out. But if so, what she really probably heard was the intruder coming out of his hiding place to kill Andrew. The door of the guest room opening maybe, so she heads to the barn (and perhaps saves her own life in the process), dawdles out there as long as she can, then goes back in... and discovers the shock of her life. At least that's how I'd write it if I was writing a movie about Lizzie being innocent, but then who would want to see that?

That is an interesting window of when Lizzie could have heard it.

If she were in the sitting room with her father at the time of hearing the door she was about 7 to 8 paces from the front door. That door opening would let in the sounds of the street and a lot of extra sunlight. Remember how small this house is. It is 15 steps for me to walk from the front door, straight past Andrew to the back of the kitchen. If she were in the kitchen, perhaps in the little hallway to the screen door, that would be a way for her to not see the sunlight of the front door opening, but it would be timing down to 3 seconds or so for her to walk from the kitchen out the north side screen door.

Then the killer would have to leave via that screen door after Lizzie gathered the pears, but before she was looking out the window from the loft or when she was at the bench or walking down to the yard. That should be a good 10 to 15 minute window, so that is most likely. The only issue is:

1. Why did the killer not immediately attack Andrew and leave?
2. If the killer did immediately attack Andrew, why did they wait 10 minutes with the body before leaving?
3. Why was Lizzie still telling people Abby was out after Andrew was found and Dr. Bowen, Mrs. Churchill, and Alice were all there, along with Lizzie and Bridget?

I failed to address your main point TeenaBee. Would Lizzie leave the house to go to the barn to avoid interacting with Abby? I forgot whose testimony it was, I assume Lizzie herself, but it had been 3 months since Lizzie went to the barn before that morning. I think Lizzie would simply go up to her room to avoid Abby, rather than the barn. However, we should always go to testimony where we can.

Lizzie said she thought that she could find lead for sinkers and if she could, she wouldn't need to buy them when she bought her lines, reel, pole, and hooks. She specifically said she planned to go out at noon and buy the other equipment rather than travel to the Swansea farm (West) before going East to Marion. That, of course, is simply absurd when you read the entire run of testimony.

Sinkers were bought by the box full, for a few cents, and they were a special shape and weight. Making custom sinkers when you are buying all the much more expensive items for a fishing kit does not make sense. Plus, she also talked about looking for tin or iron to fix a screen. The whole sequence has to be taken into account for context.

I posted what sinkers looked like back then and to get the shape, size, and weight just right would be a huge amount of work for a woman with $75,000 (today's purchasing power) in her bank account.

We have the entire set of transcripts and testimony to review and scrutinize Lizzie's words and actions, so we have an advantage over her, a woman under the spotlight with an adversary as formidable as Hosea Knowlton questioning her. She was answering, apparently, to solve one problem at a time, as her story evolved. For instance, to justify why she didn't know when Uncle John arrived, she said she was out of the house. This was exactly what she did other times when she was asked about Uncle John, saying she was away so much she wouldn't know how many times he visited, then saying well, she had not been away since her European trip in 1890, then saying she was away a lot during the day but not so much overnight. This caught her out in a lie when she was trying to counteract two employees and a customer who testified to seeing her trying to buy Prussic Acid. She said she was home sick all day before going out to get some fresh air and seeing Alice Russell Wednesday evening. This directly contradicts her story that she was out shortly after the midday meal when Uncle John arrived.

This evolution and solving immediate problems is the same style she used for the barn - I went out to get sinkers, I ate pears, 3 pears (probably forgetting she already testified to eating a pear in the kitchen when Andrew came home) so that left her with the utterly absurd 4 pears in 20 minutes when she was feeling too ill for breakfast or lunch.

I want Lizzie to have not done this horrible thing, and she did do good deeds before and after August 4th, but it's her own words that keep boxing me into the corner of thinking she must have done it. Each little individual piece Lizzie gives can be looked at independently and it doesn't look so bad, but when you put all of it together and try to walk through exactly what she is saying and simulate it in your mind, the sights, sounds, locations, timespans, etc. that's when it really begins to look like a person reacting to each new challenging question and trying to come up with a fix while not being able to pre-calculate all the downstream implications and upstream prerequisites for that story to be completely true.

Camgarsky has taken the house tour and I took the house tour and stayed overnight in Lizzie and Emma's rooms. Have you been there yet? I highly recommend it, if you are able to do it. It really makes investigating the case more vivid.

Lorcan, how cool that you have been in the house! And that you have even counted out the steps it takes to move from one room to the other. Yes, I have been there, sometime around 2008 or 2009, and stayed in the same room you did. I wish I had been so careful of my observations when I stayed there, but I was with my teenaged daughter at the time. I do plan to go back this year, tho --

You ask excellent questions, especially about how the killer, if an intruder, and if he escaped over the back fence into the Changnon orchard, could have timed his exit so as not to run into Lizzie standing beneath the pear tree, or to be seen by her when she said she was standing at the window eating pears. That is a wrinkle, although if I am going to speculate, I would guess the same way he timed his entry, being very alert and looking for his chance. But he would not have had to wait very long, Lizzie said she was under the tree no more than "four or five minutes," and her sense of time passing seems to have been not very accurate, first saying she was out of the house and in the barn 30 minutes when we know it could have been no more than 15, at least if Bridget's sense of time was accurate. So for me anyway, the timing potentially works out -- IF it was an intruder. If it was Lizzie who did the killing, then I am just spinning my wheels.

All your observations about how see the evolution of Lizzie's alibi at her inquest testimony is also very reasonable -- IF she was guilty. If she wasn't, then you are just spinning your wheels, too. For me all that speculation about what she was thinking and how and why she was changing her story is putting the cart before the horse. You could be right but only if she was guilty, and there is no definitive proof of her guilt, just strong suspicion. I sometimes think that because I can imagine how something could have happened (like an intruder escaping over the back fence), and it makes so much sense to me personally, then that was probably the way it happened. But I have no earthly idea. I have read Lizzie's inquest testimony so many times, and I see different things in it at different times. Still,I couldn't tell you if she was purposely making stuff up as she went along to cover up her guilt and was just terrible at inventing things, or she had gentuined failed to notice stuff and when pressed, her nerves were making her spill nonsensical things off the top of her head, or if tramatic shock had zapped her memory and she couldn't figure out how to be coherent. I do know that Knowlton absolutely refused to let her say she didn't know the answer to something, he would press her, insist she give her best guess, and when she would make an effort, he would mock her. I think we have no idea what factored into her dismal performance at the inquest, I have a few theories of my own, her overliteral answers and the way she seems to always be missing the point strongly remind me of my own autistic adult child, and so I see autism written all over her, the way she speaks, her famously flat demeanor... but of course, I don't know.

And who is to say whether it was worth her time or not from her perspective to go look for sinkers, how much money she had in the bank might have nothing to do with it, most of the money she had was only recently deposited from the sale of the Ferry Street house back to her father anyway. For that matter, the money Andrew had didn't start flowing until later in his life, he wasn't rich yet when she was a child, on his way, but not there yet. I would doubt she didn't really think of herself as a rich man's daughter until maybe when she started going to the upper crust church five years before the murders.... So I'm thinking Andrew's save-a-penny ways were probably well established long before he had enough money not to have to worry, and perhaps that was the family culture that Lizzie absorbed growing up. But I don't know, I am speculating as much as anyone, but of course that is why I keep getting hooked and re-hooked by this case, speculating is very absorbing, working the puzzle pieces, and trying to fill in the empty spaces. I admire the efforts of others who are trying to work the same puzzle, and I feel I am learning from your observations and questions. So I am glad you are posting here, thank you!

Let's see if we can make the intruder theory work with Lizzie being 100% innocent and Morse is the planner.

Morse wakes up at 3AM and quietly lets someone in. They hide in Morse's room, standing behind the open door in the guest room after Morse goes downstairs. The following is the only viable way I can think of for there to be no scream and no defensive wounds. The killer would wait for Abby to enter the room, put their hand over her mouth and a blade to her neck and say, this is a robbery, stay quiet and you won't be hurt. Make a sound or struggle and you die. Show me what's in the dresser drawers. Then the killer catches her off guard before she can scream or instinctively raise her arms.

Problems:
a. How did Lizzie hear nothing?
b. What is the point of killing Abby from Morse's point of view?
c. How would the killer know when Andrew was coming home, that Lizzie and Bridget would not enter the room, that Lizzie or Andrew wouldn't invite one or more friends or business associates into the house?
d. If simply the death of Abby and Andrew was Morse's true goal, why not plan something actually viable?
e. How would the killer know there wouldn't be Andrew plus to women, at the very least, who could both scream or run if he came down stairs. He's not going to be able to kill 3 people with a hatchet before at least one of them could scream or run.
f. If it's a killer for hire, why are the strikes so weak and poorly aimed? Why 19 of them? A man of ordinary strength who had experience with a hammer or hatchet (that would be quite close to 100% of men and most women in 1892) would have utterly destroyed the entire structure of the skull by the 4th strike (ask your butcher or watch Forged in Fire forensic dummy tests). A killer for hire could much more easily get the job done via a blood choke hold (like Jack the Ripper - very quick loss of consciousness as compared to a breath choke hold which would take a couple of minutes) followed by killing strikes with a knife.

OK, let's assume the hired killer is a first timer with no experience and decided to ineffectually use a hatchet with far less upper body strength than an average man. Abby is now dead. Close the door and stay in the room. Same set of problems. At least 2 young, healthy women who can run or scream. No idea when Andrew will be home or if he will be alone. No idea if Lizzie will invite any friends to visit, since the guest room is where she hosts them. Two 1892 era women in the house and the only sewing machine is in that room. So, try to leave the room. The only other rooms on the front half of the house are locked (Lizzie's room and the Clothes Press closet). So, he has to walk down the staircase and hide in the closet next to the front door.

I was not able to open it, but I think someone testified a person could technically fit inside. ok, now the killer tries not to die of heat stroke while waiting 90 minutes for Andrew to come home alone, for both women not to be on the first floor, and for Andrew to put himself into a position to not see the killer coming and be able to yell.

The killer lucks out and somehow hears Andrew snoring quite quickly after he hears Lizzie bang the screen door shut. He approaches Andrew, kills him ineffectually again. The blows are slightly better aimed but still far below the strength of even an average man. Now, let's sneak around to the various windows and find a time when all 20 to 30 windows overlooking that driveway have no eyes looking out, including Lizzie in the barn loft. Sneak around the rear corner of the house and climb the wood pile and jump 6 feet down, over the barbed wire, so probably at least 7 feet, without anyone at Crowe yard, the woman on the Chagnon porch, and especially THE DOG whose doghouse is a few meters away from where the killer jumps down hear or see anything.

The killer can't go North to Borden Street because the woman watching the Chagnon house will likely see him in addition to any street traffic seeing him or residents of any surrounding houses. The killer can't go South, that is an active work site with stone masons and carpenters at work. The killer has to go East in full sight, smell and hearing of the dog, then emerge on to Third Street and have no one see him while he blends into the hustle and bustle of Fall River.

Lorcan, you’ve given some examples of why the lone intruder just doesn’t work.
It’s as if the crimes didn’t happen, if it was a single intruder, because there is literally no evidence, as you well know.
No blood trail, footprints, or trustworthy sightings (in my opinion) of a stranger, although I have always been concerned that Morse was involved, but it’s like grasping at the air with him.

Ha ha, yes Inspector that is pretty much the entire premise of the Mystery Unveiled pamphlet that came out in 1893. Impossible for an intruder to have done it and if Lizzie was "not guilty" as the jury decided, then it must have been Nobody! I have a different way of looking at it. I think IF there was an intruder, it almost necessarily would have had been someone who knew Andrew (or else why would he want to kill him) and probably Abby and maybe Lizzie, someone who knew the house, would have a good idea where to hide. I don't think he managed it perfectly, and that's how Abby ended up dead. And if Lizzie or Bridget ran across him, they would have ended up dead too. But he would prefer to not kill them, at least until he got to Andrew, because if they were lying dead around the house then Andrew wouldn't go lie down for his nap and be ripe for the hacking. He kept his focus on his mission. So Intruder hid himself out of the way, parlor maybe (which I gather from interviews with Mrs. Brigham was the Borden sisters theory.) I've read that it is so common for people to be able to secretly live for days or weeks at a time in an inhabited house without being detected that there is an actual term for it -- Phrogging. So if people can successfully do it for weeks, why shouldn't the killer of the Bordens be able to do it for a few hours?

I do recognize its farfetched, but no more farfetched to me than Lizzie the Sunday School teacher suddenly going psycho for no reason supported with evidence and ALSO being able to make the evidence disappear. We accept the weirdness of that premise because we have heard it is true all our lives, as our parents heard it all their lives,and their parents before them. But it is a weird and farfetched thing, a not easy to explain thing. I have no idea what that hypothetical intruder's story might be, what kind of person he was, but I from what I read Lizzie lived a good moral life up until that day, and all the days after (unproven shoplifting rumors notwithstanding), and Parallel Lives revealed much about how beloved she was by her small circle of friends, and her employees and their children, so.... Yeah, I'd prefer not to put the axe in her hand.

But I am unreasonably determined to convince myself she was innocent, still haven't got there, but having to consider your excellent questions helps me get closer haha. But as to your point about a blood trail, I just read an old Hatchet article by Kat Koorey today in which she suggested it was possible that the bloody handkerchief found next to Abby was used by the killer (whether Lizzie or an intruder) to wipe off the blood from the hatchet so it wouldn't drip. And I think I actually clapped in front of my computer because I hadn't thought of that before. Hadn't seen the suggestion before. There are very clever people who pop up on this forum that think of things that would never occur to me. If there was an intruder maybe he was clever and did things that wouldn't occur to us from this far remove. Lizzie, however, does not strike me as all that clever. More an ordinary woman dazed from shock who has no idea how to explain the nightmare that unfolded in her house...

Also, Lorcan, you have mentioned a dog a couple of times now, please tell me what dog you are referring to? Sorry if you have posted on that before and I missed it. That would be another new piece of information for me, a dog is an obstacle not in my imaginary scenarios --

There is a lot of testimony about the Chagnon's dog, but I think the big argument at the trial was whether the noise the Chagnon's heard was an intruder going over the fence at night or one of the dogs, either the Chagnon's dog or another dog, trying to get at the bones or other food waste in the ash barrel.

Here is a map showing where the dog house was. I know every dog my family ever had, no matter how cute and cuddly, would turn into Cujo if a man jumped our fence.

My goodness, away from my laptop for a few hours and we've got a great debate going on. So fun to read!!

Couple of fact checks:
1) If you reread Lizzie's testimony about being out when Morse arrived at their house, it is just as likely that she was referencing when Morse arrived at the Borden house upon his return from Swansea and Lizzie was at Alice Russell's place. At least that is how I read that statement in the context of the preceding and following questions.
2) The Chagnon's were out of town the morning of August 4. It would seem the entire household left because they asked Lucy to come watch the house. The front door is locked, so Lucy Collett is forced to sit out front the entire time she is manning 'the fort'. Before sitting on the front steps, she went into the yard to see if a hammock was available to sit in. She would have been moving and making noise in the dogs 'realm', but she doesn't mention the dog barking. For me, it seems as likely as not (50/50), that the elderly dog was kept inside the house when the family was away. We don't know definitively where the dog might have been. Frankly, we don't know if the dog was a barker....Mrs. Chagnon testified that the dog was once a great guardian, but had grown lazy with old age. I interpret that to mean the dog was very 'chill'.

TeenaBee , as for evidence of blood, I think there had to be preplanning involved for several reasons, and yes possibly to Cam’s point, things got a bit off track.
I feel there should have been at least some blood in rooms other than the guest room, and sitting room.
There’s where I see one of the most glaring clues pointing to Lizzie, and it’s the pail in the cellar,
Not only did Bridget not see it before Thursday , but the fact that Lizzie insisted on having a doctor immediately after confessing her dad had been killed, is suspicious.
However, when you surmise that Lizzie herself , of all things—-must have told Dr Bowen about the pail soon after his arrival, strikes me as desperation, and a mind which is concerned about something that is out of order.
She had to have the subject addressed before the police found it, which they did shortly after they started looking around on Thursday.

For me, this shows foreknowledge or preplanning, and possibly the clock running too fast for the original plans to be carried out precisely.

Window washing and Emma’s absence could have been in the plans, but Morse’s arrival, and Bridget not leaving for Sargents are possible interruptions that had to be worked around.

I would like to know what Emma thought when she found out.
Did she believe Lizzie or feel sorry for her .

Sorry, off topic, who was Joseph Derosiers?
How well were he and John Denny looked into?
Your map got me curious,
I know John was a stone mason who saw no one, and I think Joseph spoke with the fence climbing police on Thursday.

Camgarsky - thanks for the fact checks - I updated my personal casebook with them.

I don't know what the original source of that map was. I would give credit to the author - I assume it's out of some book.

Here is Joseph Derosier from the Trial:

Q. (By Mr. Moody.) What is your name?
A. Joseph Derosier.
Q. How old are you?
A. Twenty three.
Q. Do you remember the day that Mr. Borden was killed?
A. No, sir.
Q. I do not ask you the date, but do you remember where you were the day that he was killed?
A. I think it was on Wednesday.
Q. I am not asking you the day in the week, but I will ask you if you remember hearing about the killing the same day that he was killed?
A. As far as I know, it was on Wednesday he was killed.
Q. I don't want to ask you what day in the week it was or what day in the month it was, but whatever day it was, where were you at the time?
A. I worked in John Crowe's yard.
Q. What time in the morning did you go to work in John Crowe's yard?
A. Seven o'clock in the morning.
Q. What time did you leave off work?
A. Five o'clock in the evening.
Q. What time did you leave off work at noon time?
A. We had an hour at noon.
Q. What time did your hour begin?
A. At noon.
Q. What were you doing in the Crowe yard?
A. Sawed and split wood.
Q. Did you that morning hear from somebody that there had been a murder in the next house?
A. About ten o'clock a man came to us and told us about it.
Q. Well, some one told you at some time?
A. Yes, sir; we were told that there had been a murder.
Q. Up to the time you were told that there had been a murder committed in the next house, did you see any one go through your yard and get over into Mr. Borden's yard over across Mr. Borden's fence and into his yard, or come over from his yard over the fence and go out of your yard?
A. No, sir.

CROSS-EXAMINATION.
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) (Addressing the interpreter). How much wood did he have to saw?
A. I can't say how much we had, but I sawed about a cord. They were old pieces of wood, boards and old lumber.
Q. (Addressing the witness). Do you speak English?
A. No.
Q. How old are you? (No answer).
Q. How old? (No answer).
Q. What is your name? (No answer).
Q. Can't you talk at all? (No answer).
Q. What did you shake your head for? What did you do that for? (To the interpreter) Ask him what he shook his head for.
(Witness answered in French).

MR. ROBINSON: Tell me what he says now, Mr. Interpreter.
A. (Through the interpreter). I can understand a few words. I could understand you when you asked me if I could speak English. I could understand a little but not much.
Q. (Addressing interpreter). Did he see any man in the Crowe yard beside himself?
A. I saw those that were working with me.
Q. Who were they?
A. A man named Pat.
Q. Ask him if he talked to Pat?
A. No. He is an Irishman, I can't make him understand.
Q. What did Pat do?
A. He was helping Crowe's teamers loading the team.
Q. Ask him if he (Derosier) got any pears off the tree? Did Derosier get any pears off the tree?
A. Yes.
Q. Whose tree?
A. I don't know; I didn't know at the time that I ate them.
Q. The same yard that he was working in?
A. There was a limb hanging in the yard that I was working in.
Q. Did it hang on the tree that was in the yard or in another yard?
A. It was in the other yard.
Q. Did Pat get any pears?
A. Yes.
Q. Did he see any other man but Pat?
A. A stone cutter there.
Q. Did he see a man get over the fence and come up to him?
A. No.
Q. Didn't see any man at all come over the fence and come up to him?
A. No, sir.
Q. Does he know Mr. Wixon, the sheriff?
A. No.
Q. Didn't see any officer get over there and come over into that yard?
A. No.
Q. What was he doing?
A. Sawing wood.
Q. Sawing wood all the time?
A. All the week.
Q. All the week. And was he doing it by the job or by the day?
A. By the day.
Q. And which way did he stand? Which way was his face?
A. South.
Q. South; and his back was to that pear tree, wasn't it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And he did not see any man get over the fence and come right up to him where he was sawing wood?
A. No, sir. There was a man that came, but he came into the front gate; the man that told us that there was a murder committed.
Q. That man came through the front gate?
A. Yes.
Q. Was he a Frenchman?
A. He was an Irishman; told the other Irishmen.
Q. Well, did he see anybody? I have asked him once, now ask him if there was anybody got over the fence and came to him when he was sawing?
A. I didn't see any.
Q. Was there anybody working with him sawing wood?
A. No, I was sawing alone.

Fairly certain the neighborhood drawing was in Spencer's book, The Case Against Lizzie Borden. It looks accurate to me.

Thanks for the testimony Cam, it reminds me of other testimony that talked about the first pears the men/boys ate were bitter, so one of them hopped the fence and got some better pears.
Maybe it was Pat.
Joseph wanted to make sure they knew it was Wednesday..lol

For some reason I always thought the Borden pear trees would block an easy hatchet throw to the Crowe roof.
I haven’t seen a good photo of that area of the yard, but as far as extra hatchets go, it’s one that stands out as curious.
Also a photo of the 6-foot, barbed wire fence by the Crowe barn would be interesting to see, for then we may see what Mr Derosier saw. Was it private or semi-private?

Here is the best I can do keeping to the file size limits. As you can see from the Chagnon orchard, there isn't much cover at ground level and these back yards are small and there are many windows.

The rest.

Thanks for the dog info you guys, it's why I love coming on this forum, the "hey I never thought of that" feeling. And I love those photos! Funny how you look at them and see a yard that leaves an intruder wide open to being spotted, whereas I see short distances to dash across and all kinds of shade for cover and fence that with that lumber practically has steps on it to help an intruder get over it, ha. Escape is in the eye of the beholder I suppose.

But now my REAL reason for this post is to say I have to take back my speculation of a days ago, when you were asking just when Lizzie would have heard Abby come in. I offered my by best guess that maybe it was before she went out to the barn, and I didn't think it a half-bad idea, but totally made up in my imagination. And ironically just today as I was re-reading Robinson's closing to make sure I am properly defending him and not heaping praise on him for no good reason, I ran into a passage that I didn't really register before in which he actually addresses when Lizzie thought she heard Abby come in. Here it is from pages 1675 to 1677, with some pruning and commentary from me --

Lizzie=“recalled that she might have heard her come in before her father came back, before Mr. Borden did, and she said at once, Go up and see if Mrs. Borden isn’t in her room. Mrs. Borden isn’t here.I heard a noise as though she came in, and she must be upstairs in the front room somewhere. Go and see.” (Of course, none of the people with Lizzie heard her say these things; so I'm thinking this is what Lizzie herself had told Robinson, and he wanted the jury to have her story. She thought she heard Abby come in before Andrew returned from his trip downstreet)

“Now,the inference that Mrs. Borden had come in was the most natural thing in the world. Hearing some noise in the house, perhaps the shutting of a door – by and by we will say something about who might have shut it – perhaps the movement of somebody else in that house that she heard – she had no occasion to go to look and see, she was not called to, and her father came in, and as Mrs. Borden had not appeared in the sitting room, you understand.”

It would seem what the jury was supposed to understand was that Lizzie had thought she’d come back earlier, perhaps assumed she’d gone up to her room, but when Abby didn’t come down to greet Andrew as she normally did, Lizzie thought, no she hadn’t come in after all, and so told her father about the note. It was only later, said Robinson, when she was being asked about Abby, that “she recalled, as she thought she did, the fact that she’d heard a noise which indicated to her that Mrs. Borden had come in.” She began saying as much and asking people to look for her.

Back to Robinson’s hint about “who” might have shut a door and been the source of the noise Lizzie thought she heard, he of course meant the intruder who was lurking in the house, the intruder who had already killed Abby. While the prosecution was railing about how impossible it would have been for an intruder to hide in the house without being detected, it was clear to Robinson the intruder had been detected after all. (You know, IF there was an intruder). First, he was detected and almost certainly seen by Abby in the guest room, which is why he cut her down. Then he was later heard by Lizzie as he moved about, only Lizzie didn’t realize what she was hearing. Imagine how chilling it must have been for her to later understand that she had heard the killer and could have fallen to him if she’d gone to investigate the noise she heard instead of assuming Abby had returned.

Anyway, that's it. I couldn't leave my mistaken theory out there when there is the real answer, presumably from Lizzie's mouth into Robinson's ear, sitting in the transcripts. I feel a little sheepish. But I would like to add that I always thought that Lizzie expressed concern and worry for Abby from almost her first words to Mrs. Churchill as to "I don't know but what she's killed too." She kept saying she wished people would look for her. This seems to me desperation to know if Abby is okay, or if she's still out or not (I say this even though I think "the note" is likely BS) So often people she wanted people to hurry and find Abby's dead body. But I have never understood why, if she was guilty, she should want to have Abby's body quickly discovered. Wouldn't it have been better for her if it had been discovered later, when it might not have been so obvious that Abby's condition was not so obviously different from a freshly killed Andrew's condition? If someone who Leans Guilty could explain that to me, I would love to understand.

Lizzie said 5 minutes in the basement and a few minutes at most to baste the piece of tape and that she went immediately upstairs from the basement and back downstairs while her father was still home. Otherwise, she says she is in the kitchen and dining room except for addressing labels for the newspaper in the sitting room. The front door is triple bolted from the night before. Bridget makes at least 5 trips to the barn and 2 trips to the kitchen.

It is literally impossible for the 200lb+ Abby to have left the house, visited a sick friend, and returned with the groceries in the timespan Lizzie was not on the first floor. Lizzie testified that Andrew was with her on the first floor until about 10AM. Bridget testified to not seeing Abby outside the house.

Every single behavior Lizzie exhibited upon discovering Andrew indicates she did not believe Abby was in the house nor that Abby was in danger nor that Abby was the killer.

She needs to get Abby discovered while Andrew's body is still warm and with wet blood for the inheritance to pass only to her and Emma without any question of order of inheritance. For Lizzie I think it was not about dollars for dollars sake, it was about finally having the freedom to live her life.

TeenaBee, please consider going to my Let's Play Lawyer thread and answer the questions as Lizzie.

Well Lorcan, I actually did go to your Let's Play a Lawyer Thread and was almost done answering the questions, having a good time with it, then a bug landed on my touch screen and as I was trying to swipe it off, the page closed and I lost it all. Ahhhhhhhh! Too bad there's no auto save on this board. I'll try again some other time --

Lorcan, thanks for the photos, I haven’t seen the Chagnon yard photo before that was excellent. Also, the photo in Lizzie‘s backyard shows the Crowe barn, which means that it would be a fairly easy toss from there.

TeenaBee, remember Mrs. Churchill asked Lizzie, where her mom was, Lizzie did not offer the information up to start with out of concern. The question was posed to her.
Concerning Lizzie, hearing someone come in, the only reason she said that in my opinion was because she was desperate to have Abby found. This happened precisely when Bridger wanted to leave the house to go look for Abby.

Lorcan. I almost forgot. it appears the fence separating the Crowe/Borden yards would have probably kept Joseph Derosier from seeing much. It seems to be in good repair.