Lizzie is Innocent

dosmith · Post by **dosmith** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:44 pm

I'm new here, so go easy on me at first!
Most people think Lizzie did it, but I for one have almost always thought otherwise. I'm not an expert, but I have read almost every book on this case. I've also read quite alot of the posts here. Lizzie's behavior is one of innocence. Telling varied and confused stories about what she was doing is not a guilty person. (They have a story and stick to it) And when she finds her father, I get the feeling she was genuinely shocked and didn't quite know what to do. And lastly, I believe the reason she stayed in Fall River after the trial was because she was Innocent. I think she felt that if she left, it would look to everyone like she was REALLY guilty. Any comments?

connecticuthills · Post by **connecticuthills** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 3:31 pm

Hi do
Im new here too and also not an expert on Lizzie.
But any good detective will tell you, those that are lie have a hard time keeping their story straight.
The ones that tell the truth keep their story consistant

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Fri Jul 16, 2004 11:23 pm

Hello to both of you!

I have a question:
Since Lizzie was found Not Guilty- you are essentially correct. But do you think she knew what was going to happen or found out what happened afterwards? She said it wasn't Bridget- she said who didn't do it- which sounds like she may know who did.

diana · Post by **diana** » Sat Jul 17, 2004 11:17 am

If, for the purpose of this particular dialogue, we assume Lizzie is innocent -- can her defense of Bridget can be taken to mean she knew who was involved? Isn't it possible that because the murders were so horrific she instinctively felt that no one she knew personally (e.g. Bridget or the man who worked on the farm) could have been involved? Much in the way that Laci Peterson's parents initially defended Scott Peterson and Jeffrey MacDonald's in-laws defended him.

Although the Peterson's and Colette MacDonald's parents said they knew who didn't do it --it didn't follow that they did it -- or that they knew who did.

augusta · Post by **augusta** » Mon Jul 19, 2004 10:09 am

Welcome, Do and C.Hills! I think Lizzie showed a lot of signs of innocence. And I also think she showed a lot of signs of guilt. Yes - her saying this one and that one didn't do it sounds like she knew who did. I also agree with Diana's post. One of the maddening - and fascinating - parts of the case: did she or didn't she.

Just think, tho, if she really were totally innocent of everything. The shame that was brought down upon her must have been almost unbearable. The ordeal of the trial exhausting and horrifying. Losing many of her friends and the life-long rep of being an axe murderess.

She stayed in Fall River. Well, according to one interview I believe given by a friend after her death, she had told her friend she stayed because the real murderer would be found out sooner or later.

But don't you think that during her existance in the house on 2nd Street, she was dreaming of a better life with modern conveniences. And where would that fantasy take her? The Hill is my guess. Yes, she did take the Grand Tour. And she did return to Europe on vacation(s). But every day there was something to remind her of life on the Hill, where the family could afford to be, and 'should be', in her mind. Whether she ran into someone who lived on the Hill, or her having to walk to get around, or the dinner menu served up in the dining room. I think it was her dream to move to the Hill. I can picture her jabbing her father every now and then: "Why can't we move to the Hill?" "I want an indoor toilet on the Hill," etc., etc., etc.

Considering she moved there - wasn't it not that long after the murders - never lived anywhere else, I can imagine her feeling quite fulfilled staying in Fall River. "I hope you can see this, Father."

She may have lost some of her old friends - who may have been more acquaintances she dealt with to promote herself socially thru church and other charity work - but she did have friends after the murders. She was not this lonely, old lady who lived in a sad looking old house. She travelled and she did as she pleased. I suspect she was more on the happy side - at least as far as her personality would betray the emotion.

But looking at the whole picture, it looks pretty far-fetched to me to think she was innocent of it all. There's simply too much there all the way around.

Fargo · Post by **Fargo** » Mon Feb 23, 2015 8:50 am

Welcome newcomers. I believe Lizzie to be Innocent too. I figure Lizzie's alibi was so ludicrous, that it must be true. Anyone could of come up with a better story than that.

BillyBorden · Post by **BillyBorden** » Wed Feb 25, 2015 10:03 am

Why wouldn't the killer have killed Lizzie too and JUST focused on the parents? Why the overkill?

The Menendez brothers did it. OJ did it. And Lizzie did it.

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Wed Feb 25, 2015 12:30 pm

As much as many would not blame Lizzie, and still others become discombobulated with those who do, it is difficult to keep her out of the equation.

It is also difficult not to see this crime as a "hate crime." Not measured by the same "Hate" our government measures matters today, you understand.

Some one hated those people, at least Abby. I can see 10 whacks to kill Borden. You want to make certain he is dead. But 19 for the Mrs. After 10 any fool would know she was dead, and if not so, will be in the matter of minutes.

Someone hated that woman.

Whether Lizzie or not, hate is a factor hard to ignore.

Though I don't believe Lizzie swung the axe. If, If, and If, Bridget told the truth about being upstairs and of the morning's activities.

Curryong · Post by **Curryong** » Wed Feb 25, 2015 5:35 pm

If intruders are put aside, and not everybody does so, of course, there is a very small pool of, I won't say suspects but people who could have murdered the Bordens, aren't there?

Emma was at Fairhaven, Uncle John was visiting relatives in the town and Bridget, who was on good terms with Abby, had no known motive. Of the people known to be at No 92 on that Thursday morning there is only one who disliked Abby enough to slaughter her in the way that she was.

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:01 pm

I’m 62, I’m not anyone who has read any of the books, despite living in Massachusetts I never was interested in touring her home. Like many others, as a teenager I watched the made for TV movie in the mid seventies that starred Elizabeth Montgomery and for a month or so was fascinated by the case, and discussed it with friends. One of which had a great grandmother who had been a child in Fall River during the killings and spoke of the 40 whacks song, she also told us many fantastical stories attributed to Lizzie Borden. It must have been quite a hot house of speculation at the time. I haven’t thought much about the case over the years, and admit that after the movie just assumed she was guilty. Since the pandemic started I have had more time spent at home, and looked for more tv programming to watch and started watching YouTube programs on my smart tv, and some weeks back one program ended and one I hadn’t chosen automatically started, it was one on the subject of Lizzie Borden and for lack of anything else I decided to watch it. I had never heard anything about William Borden, or Ellen Egan, who witnessed him leaving the house at approximately the time Andrew would have been killed. I knew nothing about his believing himself to be Andrew’s illegitimate son or suggestions he was seeking money, his record of being confined to a mental institution on several occasions, and him being released 3 days prior to the killings.I have watched several of the less sensational programs on the subject on YouTube, including one of a presentation with a Miss Koorey, and I have come to believe that Lizzie Borden quite possibly was innocent.

swinell · Post by **swinell** » Wed Aug 25, 2021 8:54 am

https://lizzieandrewborden.com/wp-conte ... nquest.pdf

Just posting a link to the Inquest Testimony.

I think Cara Robertson put it very succinctly: "Lizzie's testimony was very odd, she didn't have a clear story. She answered Knowlton's questions in the exact language they were asked, didn't elaborate even in instances where it would be exculpatory for her, and details would frequently change rather drastically when even lightly challenged." Not exactly the kind of nervous bumbling and confusion that one might expect of someone in shock as has been purported here.

Something to note about the Inquest Testimony - she was on a double dose of morphine at the time. The confusion isn't all that fishy with that taken into consideration. That said, morphine was sold in OTC medications, even as children's aspirin, so the general tolerance level of the population would've been considerably higher than today.

I'm still working my way through reading the trial transcript, but so far only Phoebe Bowen confirmed that Lizzie was in the Bengaline silk dress, everyone else (as of page 271 of vol. 1 of the trial transcript) is pretty certain that the dress being presented in court is not the dress Lizzie was wearing that morning - and two out of three confirm it was a light-blue calico, the one that Alice Russel saw Lizzie burning with "paint" on it.

I'm not sure we'll ever know who murdered Abby and Andrew, or why they did it. But I do think it is safe to say that, at the very least, Lizzie, Emma, John Morse, & Bridget Sullivan knew what was going to happen in advance, knew who was responsible, and thought that Abby and Andrew deserved it (or at least, they didn't think their lives were worth saving).

With the Billy Borden thing, as far as I'm aware, the closest thing we have is a William S. Borden, son of Deacon Charles Borden and Phebe Borden, whose family had a history of mental illness. This William Borden was put into a state asylum from 1893-1897, and hanged himself outside his house in 1901. Ellan Egan is a new figure to me, I'll have to do more digging - if anyone has a place to start for that please post! But what confuses me is that whenever Billy Borden is mentioned, it's in the context of him being Andrew Borden's illegitimate son...but his parentage is well-documented. Curious.

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Wed Aug 25, 2021 9:34 am

Billy and Ellen are both key figures in Browns book. Basically a fiction novel in my opinion. You can find Ellen briefly mentioned in the witness statement, but brown amplifies her role 1000 fold.

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Wed Aug 25, 2021 9:58 am

Swinell -- I've tended to interpret Mrs. Bowens testimony to suggest the dress Lizzie wore that morning was not the bengaline silk. Since I know zero about dresses and material, I spent a little time googling Bengaline silk and the info is pretty consistent that this material was used primarily for evening gowns, wedding dresses, and such. It was basically a silk gown that wasn't 100% silk. In Bowens testimony she notes that the dress was "nothing more than an ordinary morning dress". I've taken that to mean cotton and intended to be comfortable for housework and such.

As I was reading up on the Bengaline silk, it hit me that why in the world would Lizzie go into a barn, much up a ladder into a loft) in a silk-like dress? I presume there was no urgency to find the lead sinker at that moment, so she could have easily done that task when she was more appropriately dressed.

Phoebe Bowen testimony
Q. What dress did she have on?
A. A blouse waist of blue material, with a white spray, I should say, running through it.
Q. A white spray?
A. I thought it was.
Page 480
Q. What was the body of the dress?
A. I did not notice particularly.
Q. The ground of the blouse, you say it had a white spray?
A. O, it was blue.
Q. Light or dark blue?
A. I should say quite a dark shade; I cannot tell; I was not looking for fashions then.
Q. Do you know what skirt she had on?
A. I do not. It was nothing more than an ordinary morning dress; I think I had seen her wear it before. I
only noticed the dress skirt.
Q. Something you had seen her wear frequently before?
A. Yes Sir.

swinell · Post by **swinell** » Wed Aug 25, 2021 12:08 pm

camgarsky4 - Thank you for posting! I'll have to keep reading through the trial transcripts. I seem to recall Mrs. Churchill, Alice Russell, and Dr. Bowen mentioning that she was in a light-blue skirt with an off-white calico but I could be mistaken...was it the calico that Alice Russell saw Lizzie burn? What I'm getting at is that none, save maybe one, of the witnesses hint at confirming that the dress presented in court was the dress worn.

On the topic of the Bengaline silk - I also found that odd that she'd a) wear such a heavy fabric on this hot day (oddly enough, records show the day was about 74 degrees, but add that to Victorian-era layering, the poor ventilation, and the humidity - I imagine it'd be quite uncomfortable), that said I'm not a fashion expert so it may very well be lighter than it looks in photographs and b) that she'd go out to the very dusty barn. I think either Knowlton says in the Inquest or Moody says in the opening statement at the trial that an officer went up to the second floor of the barn and found the place covered in dust, such that when he walked he could see his footprints clearly. I'll have to go back and post it here but he says he didn't see any footprints or anything like that in the barn when he got up there, and nobody mentions seeing any dust on Lizzie's skirt. Certainly odd

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Wed Aug 25, 2021 3:00 pm

I have only recently started reading about the Borden case last weekend, so am not up on all the theories. After watching some programming on YouTube, I am not saying she was innocent, but that she quite possibly was innocent. I also have come to believe that different people with, pun not intended, axes to grind have approached the subject to promote an agenda, or used Lizzie as a puppet to do so. I’ve ordered a few books to get started reading. On the subject of the burned dress, in the Elizabeth Montgomery movie and in some of what I have read since the weekend it’s referenced that the dress burned was called a Bedford cord dress, searching for information on the fabric it was a fabric similar to corduroy that originated in New Bedford. I don’t believe a woman would wear a dress made from a heavy material like that in the summer. I also have a hard time believing she would wear silk in the morning in summer when she would be occupied with household activities.

swinell · Post by **swinell** » Wed Aug 25, 2021 3:49 pm

MaryM - If you want some book recommendations for books that analyze the ones available in the Primary Source Documents page of this site (all of which have had a huge impact on the study of the case for better or for worse and, as such, are worth a read) and then some my favorites have been:

Sarah Miller - The Borden Murders: Lizzie Borden and the Trial of the Century
Leonard Rebello - Lizzie Borden: Past & Present (out of print and $$$$$$$ but very good if you can get your hands on a copy)
Cara Robertson - The Trial of LIzzie Borden
Michael Martins & Dennis Binette - Parallel Lives: A Social History of Lizzie A. Borden and her Fall River (it is THICK. 3.5 inches THICK. it's pricey on amazon, but the FRHS has them available for at least $100 less than on amazon. Easily the most comprehensive biography of Lizzie Borden to date)

but of course nothing can beat primary sources - handily available on this site here (they also include some of the more influential books on the subject, for better or worse, as stated earlier): https://lizzieandrewborden.com/primary- ... n-case.htm

add to the list of compilations of, if not primary, contemporaneous sources:
David Kent - The Lizzie Borden Source Book
Martins & Binette - The Knowlton Papers (letters written to the prosecutor by virtually every busy-body in the country with access to a newspaper and a post office)
Martins, Binette, & Koorey - The Knowlton-Pearson Correspondence (letters between prosecutor's son and Edmund Pearson, whose book is available on the site. Very useful for figuring out what Pearson chose to include and discard)

and ... coming down the pipeline - The Jennings Journals from Martins, Binette, & Koorey... anxiously awaiting this one. The FRHS has had the Hip-Bath collection for some time now but to my knowledge this is the first time the journals of the defense will be published. What makes that even more exciting is that, oddly enough, the law firm of George Robinson, former governor of MA and Lizzie's lead attorney, is still active and still has Robinson's notes on the case sealed in a vault and won't release them because of an ongoing duty to protect attorney-client privilege. That said, it's likely that what's in the Jennings Journals is the same as what's in that firm's vault.

Handily, most if not all of the books mentioned here are in library circulation. Happy sleuthing!

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Wed Aug 25, 2021 4:50 pm

My Lizzie bible is the book “Case against Lizzie Borden’ by William spencer. It is thorough, well researched and balanced. It is written in chronological order, so helps the reader better understand how all the pieces fit together. Mary- the Elizabeth Montgomery is entertaining, but it takes great liberty on a number of topics and completely leaves Morse out of the story. Similar to Victoria Lincoln’s book, the movie has put a lot of false ‘truths’ in the Borden legend.

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Wed Aug 25, 2021 5:10 pm

Thank you for the references, Swinell and camgarsky4 I have started reading the source materials here after being directed to them last night. As to the Elizabeth Montgomery movie, I have realized with my reading and watching programs this week that it took great liberties with the story, but as a young teen in the 70s I took it as fact. What I have also learned is that more than a few writers and programs about the killings took liberties as well, so the recommendations for reading are much appreciated

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Aug 25, 2021 5:28 pm

Pertaining to the dress, our "Haulover" wrote an essay for The Hatchet that looks at the descriptions:

Victoria Lincoln, Undressed: Exposing a Fiction
by Eugene Hosey
First published in October/November, 2004, Volume 1, Issue 5, The Hatchet: Journal of Lizzie Borden Studies.
Here is a link:
https://lizzieandrewborden.com/HatchetO ... ction.html

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Sun Sep 05, 2021 6:36 pm

Again, not sure if she’s guilty or innocent but...

The police didn’t hesitate to arrest Lizzie Borden merely on suspicion, despite having no evidence to do so. She was declared guilty and needing to prove her innocence long before the trial, and for the rest of her life saddled with perceived guilt. I have watched quite a few Borden authors on YouTube throw around what I have learned here was only speculation, as fact, yet not one of the ones I’ve seen speaking about all the facets of the case mention the fact that inquest witness Eli Bence who claimed Lizzie Borden attempted to buy prussic acid from him, his brother Peter Bence was a political appointee to the Fall River Police Department https://lizziebordenwarpsandwefts.com/c ... lice-dept/

Was Eli’s claim a lie requested by his brother to gin up “evidence” to convict an easy target of murder when they had no evidence she committed it? The Fall River police didn’t conduct a thorough investigation, nothing they did made sense, which makes me wonder. Start it off with the misleading excuse claiming all the Fall River police save a few were across the bay at Rocky Point in Warwick, RI at some workplace thing, they weren’t, only half of them were, I know I read that last week in one of The Hatchet articles, but didn’t save the link or title. There was no excuse to put a civilian as watch on the Borden side door. Another officer was named Harrington, I wonder if he was related to the husband of Andrew Borden’s sister, Hiram Harrington whose statements to the police or court amounted to sour grapes about Andrew’s money.

Short of finding unimpeachable evidence the murderer will never be known, but for all the, Lizzie was acquitted because none of the male jurors wanted to believe a woman like their daughters capable, etc.. palaver, women were routinely victimized and blamed for one thing after another in those days. Women, wives, daughters who behaved in ways their fathers or husbands didn’t care for were known to be conveniently locked up in asylums courtesy of misguided or less than ethical doctors: Lunacy in the 19th Century: Women’s Admission to Asylums in United States of America https://minds.wisconsin.edu/bitstream/h ... sequence=1

Also, the claim that Lizzie going into the basement at night, and couldn’t be seen once she left the stairs as suspicious when that was where the toilet was is ridiculous. If the police suspected one of the house’s inhabitants might disturb evidence in the night they could have placed one or two officers in the house

Not to let the female of the species off the hook, I have seen interviews with a female Borden author who views Lizzie as having to be guilty because she was privileged, while at the same time suggesting fact she didn’t live with more modern conveniences, was deprived of the social whirl, and was under her father’s thumb made her have to be guilty. She, as well as a retired professor in another video who wrote a book also mentioned how all the immigrant workers in the town, who both she and he painted as saintly, were enraged she wasn’t convicted, but didn’t reference how in that same period in Fall River, the angry immigrants included French Canadians, a group of whom hatefully resented an Irish priest being sent to serve at Notre Dame de Lourdes Catholic church in Fall River and made his life a living hell. They locked him out of the church, evicted him from the rectory, seized the parish finances, insulted him on the street and disrupted Mass. The ensuing turmoil went all the way to the Vatican https://www.newenglandhistoricalsociety ... all-river/ . There are lots of similar cases involving Irish, Portuguese and other immigrant groups in the city. Months after the murder a Portuguese immigrant butchered a woman in the city, and through simple searching online I read reports of immigrant peddlers across New England in that era, who would break into people’s basements to sleep, some of whom robbed the homes, and a few of whom assaulted or killed the homeowner when caught. There are as many biases brought to bear in the 20th and 21st century literature shoring up her guilt as there possibly was then. As a teen I took what little was presented and assumed she was disturbed and committed the murders. What I see and read now indicates it wasn’t so cut and dry.

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Sun Sep 05, 2021 8:15 pm

Mary - I am lucky that I never watched any you-tube shows or read the 'novels' about Lizzie until after I had immersed myself into the primary documents and gotten the basic facts down. Since then, I have watched some videos, but like most videos, the information is too quick and superficial to be anything more than frustrating. So I pretty much never watch them anymore, because they are useless.

Regarding Eli Bence. As with most of the Lizzie stuff, context and timing is key to interpretation. What I find compelling about the Bence testimony is that he and his cohorts identified Lizzie trying to purchase prussic acid Thursday evening! That is before word of Abby visiting the Bowens with her poisoning concerns surfaced. Also, do we really believe that a massive police conspiracy against Lizzie was already underway by Thursday evening, day of the murders? It wasn't just Eli, is was also two of his co-workers which identified Lizzie.

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Wed Sep 08, 2021 7:43 am

No witnesses / no evidence / no murder weapon / no motive ( oh that's right, she stopped calling her mother 5 years ago) . Hmmmm seems right - Mounting mob outside demanding a killer be brought to justice, Mayor scared. City Marshall looking incompetent. OK lets charge Lizzie for the double murder.

Marchesk · Post by **Marchesk** » Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:29 pm

Steve88778 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 7:43 am No witnesses / no evidence / no murder weapon / no motive ( oh that's right, she stopped calling her mother 5 years ago) . Hmmmm seems right - Mounting mob outside demanding a killer be brought to justice, Mayor scared. City Marshall looking incompetent. OK lets charge Lizzie for the double murder.

Lizzie had plenty of motive, both financial and personal. And she was the last one known to be around both parents before they were brutally murdered. A house that was kept locked up, in the middle of town during the mid to late morning with people about on the street, only two people known to be on the property, and one was outside washing the windows while Lizzie was inside and her stepmom was upstairs in the guest bedroom getting murdered. It's very hard to see how Lizzie could be innocent. At best, she was an accomplice.

There's plenty of additional reasons to suspect Lizzie, btw. Burning the blue dress, attempting to buy prussic acid, telling her neighbor friend Alice that something bad was going to happen right before the murders, the story about her stepmom being delivered a note to visit a sick friend instead of being upstairs, the inquest where she gave deceptive answers, etc.

Marchesk · Post by **Marchesk** » Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:39 pm

swinell wrote: ↑Wed Aug 25, 2021 8:54 am https://lizzieandrewborden.com/wp-conte ... nquest.pdf

Just posting a link to the Inquest Testimony.

I think Cara Robertson put it very succinctly: "Lizzie's testimony was very odd, she didn't have a clear story. She answered Knowlton's questions in the exact language they were asked, didn't elaborate even in instances where it would be exculpatory for her, and details would frequently change rather drastically when even lightly challenged." Not exactly the kind of nervous bumbling and confusion that one might expect of someone in shock as has been purported here.

Agreed that Lizzie did not sound confused or bumbling. She sounded evasive and clever. There is a four part Lizzie Borden Audio podcast that reenacts the inquest: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cH ... IAhAF&ep=6

I think it's pretty clear she's lying at several points.

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Wed Sep 08, 2021 5:06 pm

That's just it - why would Lizzie actually tell her troubles on how she was feeling and being emotional to Alice Russell ? And why would Lizzie make up a NOTE story , when she could have easily said that Abby went out to visit a friend ?

Telling a friend her troubles does not mean that she is definitely going to kill both her parents. It's just a feeling, who knows maybe Lizzie was a very emotional lady with anxiety.

Buying poison does not make her guilty of using a hatchet on her step mother and father. And it absolutely proves no intent to do harm to anybody.

As for opportunity - who said that the maid was outside all the time ? - The Maid ??? - sure you had a few that saw her washing windows but it takes but a moment to go in the house. I would try my best to stretch my mind and believing she did it. But I can't not with the poor police work and poor searches.

Why did Lizzie burn the dress on Sunday morning in front of her friend her sister and the police that were about the yard ? - she had Thursday / Friday / Saturday when the police did a search of the house, to burn the dress. Did they not see the dress ? Who commits a crime of this magnitude and gets blood all over a dress from 2 murders - then hangs the dress up in the closet after ? How come the police did not look at this dress and check it for blood. Alice Russell even states she did not see any blood stains on the dress. But aparently Emma wanted to hang up something and Lizzie's dress was taking up the space. So that dress was in front and the police should have seen it. They looked at just about all the other.

After taking a double dose of Morphine and something else forgetting the time you were in the barn 5 to 8 days later and making conflicting statements on what you were doing would be easy to do even without the Morphine drug.

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Wed Sep 08, 2021 5:18 pm

Those audio's are really neat.....I am able to focus so much clearer on the dialogue listening vs. reading. Looking forward to listening to all four of the episodes.

To your earlier points on incriminating evidence, if Bridget is telling the truth, there is no way to explain Lizzie's actions. Was Bridget telling the truth.....well, In every instance of a witness to Bridget's story....her story holds true. Morse, Churchill, Kelly maid, Mrs. Kelly and Mr. Pettee, all corroborated parts of Bridget's story. Zero contradictions which indicate Bridget lied. The only witness to Bridget's activities whose story differs is Lizzie.

That doesn't even touch on the fact that Bridget had absolutely no reason to murder the Borden's.

Thanks!!

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Wed Sep 08, 2021 8:16 pm

camgarsky4 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 05, 2021 8:15 pm Mary - I am lucky that I never watched any you-tube shows or read the 'novels' about Lizzie until after I had immersed myself into the primary documents and gotten the basic facts down. Since then, I have watched some videos, but like most videos, the information is too quick and superficial to be anything more than frustrating. So I pretty much never watch them anymore, because they are useless.

Regarding Eli Bence. As with most of the Lizzie stuff, context and timing is key to interpretation. What I find compelling about the Bence testimony is that he and his cohorts identified Lizzie trying to purchase prussic acid Thursday evening! That is before word of Abby visiting the Bowens with her poisoning concerns surfaced. Also, do we really believe that a massive police conspiracy against Lizzie was already underway by Thursday evening, day of the murders? It wasn't just Eli, is was also two of his co-workers which identified Lizzie.

I watched a discussion, lecture with Stephani, one with a retired history professor who gave a talk in Maine or NH, 2 talks by Cara (forgetting her surname) and a few with a professor whose surname might begin with V, one of which had the Lincoln woman on it. One with a man who might have been Mr Rebello. There were a few others that were all over the place, but that’s it. I that’s when I found this forum, my interest is roughly a bit over two weeks old. I haven’t read any of the novels, I saw some of them online when I was trying to look for some of the books, I believe Kat and others had recommended (and have ordered, requested through ILL.) I don’t get the mindset that would indulge in that sort of fiction, I’m not a Mary Sue type, they are frankly repulsive. I ran across the sort when I naively signed up for a, don’t laugh.. discussion mailing list for fans of the ‘60s series, Man from U.N.C.L.E. after buying the boxed set and got a little nostalgic for what was my favorite tv show when I was a little kid.

We’ll never know, but if you think about it, if would make sense if Peter Bence had put his brother up to coming forward to testify at the inquest to pin a shaky charge of murder on a suspect when there was not a shred of evidence to pin the murders on her, claiming she tried to buy the poison, suggesting she did so the night before the murder when it was established she was in town seems like a safe bet.. but why didn’t the people Eli claimed were in the store who identified the woman he claimed was in his store as Andrew Borden’s daughter, come forward to testify?

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Wed Sep 08, 2021 8:29 pm

Marchesk wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:29 pm
Lizzie had plenty of motive, both financial and personal. And she was the last one known to be around both parents before they were brutally murdered. A house that was kept locked up, in the middle of town during the mid to late morning with people about on the street, only two people known to be on the property, and one was outside washing the windows while Lizzie was inside and her stepmom was upstairs in the guest bedroom getting murdered. It's very hard to see how Lizzie could be innocent. At best, she was an accomplice.

There's plenty of additional reasons to suspect Lizzie, btw. Burning the blue dress, attempting to buy prussic acid, telling her neighbor friend Alice that something bad was going to happen right before the murders, the story about her stepmom being delivered a note to visit a sick friend instead of being upstairs, the inquest where she gave deceptive answers, etc.

Any number of people had motive, Andrew Borden had embittered many in the town against him, and quite possibly many one might not have suspected. I can’t help but wonder about any powerful people in the town he might have crossed, and speculate that being the reason the police were so uninterested in securing the crime scene, their seeming unwillingness to even go through the motions of investigating others witnesses had reported to them. There is William Borden, the rumored illegitimate son of Andrew who it’s said was there that morning and argued with Andrew or someone else. Uncle John, Bridget was there, and far from Fionola Flanagan’s Bridget, the actual woman apparently was built like a brick chicken house, we don’t know what axe she might have to grind against her employers. Things just don’t add up.

As to the Bedford cord dress, that material
was heavy, it was along the same lines as corduroy, not something a woman of that period would wear in the summer. I know in the 1975 movie the dressmaker testified about her rushing out to show someone the dress when she had tried it on and that she had brushed against wet paint, and the dress was ruined, don’t know if that happened IRL. From what I have read of the period, in summer women of her class wore light cotton dresses in the morning when they had chores, or other activities in the home to do. If they had errands or were to go visiting they would change to a better cotton dress or for something more fancy a silk dress, but even the latter would be uncomfortably warm on a hot day

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Wed Sep 08, 2021 9:13 pm

Marchesk wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:39 pm
Agreed that Lizzie did not sound confused or bumbling. She sounded evasive and clever. There is a four part Lizzie Borden Audio podcast that reenacts the inquest: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cH ... IAhAF&ep=6

I think it's pretty clear she's lying at several points.

Actors performing a “re-enactment” are known to put their own or a director's spin on a role. From what I have read, while the prosecution and others like reporters and others claimed her testimony was inconsistent, confused, etc.. none of them, as far as I know, accused her of being evasive or clever. True the prosecution tried to allege her inconsistencies and confusion was a sign she had lied and couldn’t keep her story straight but the fact she’s been having a double dose of morphine from the day after the murders clearly clouded her mind. Her trial was 10 months after the murders, and if innocent what she saw when she discovered her father murdered would have been traumatic. I make no bones about it, I think the writer Cara has her own biases, that stem more from ideology rather than high mindedness. Her making snide remarks and reducing various of the women to caricatures drove that point home. She did a good job copying details from the trial transcript, but she didn’t bother doing the work of researching the events of the day of the murder or afterwards. She got Andrew Borden’s time of death wrong. She got Bridget’s actions wrong as well. She claimed Bridget had gone upstairs to nap after washing the outside windows, when in fact she was washing the inside windows, and that was when Andrew returned home. After making derisory comments about the Borden’s having a (Protestant?) doctor, and finding something odd about Lizzie sending Bridget across the street to Bowen’s house for help, instead of sending her to hop the back fence to the Catholic doctor on the other street, she claims Mrs Churchill was the first to ask Lizzie where she was when it happened, when it was actually Dr Bowen. She also put words in Churchill’s, Alice Russell’s mouths, as well as attributing others statements to them as well as to Lizzie. I get the feeling that exploiting the tragedy was an opportunity for her to trash talk those the PC crowds in NYC and DC love to hate was her motivation for the book.

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Wed Sep 08, 2021 9:26 pm

camgarsky4 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 5:18 pm Those audio's are really neat.....I am able to focus so much clearer on the dialogue listening vs. reading. Looking forward to listening to all four of the episodes.

To your earlier points on incriminating evidence, if Bridget is telling the truth, there is no way to explain Lizzie's actions. Was Bridget telling the truth.....well, In every instance of a witness to Bridget's story....her story holds true. Morse, Churchill, Kelly maid, Mrs. Kelly and Mr. Pettee, all corroborated parts of Bridget's story. Zero contradictions which indicate Bridget lied. The only witness to Bridget's activities whose story differs is Lizzie.

That doesn't even touch on the fact that Bridget had absolutely no reason to murder the Borden's.

Thanks!!

Corroborated parts, but only those when she was out of the house, not her actions when she was inside. Yes she had a chin wag with the Kelly maid, who was a friend of hers, and had convinced her to leave her job in Newport to work next door to her in Fall River. Later Mrs Churchill saw her running across the street to Dr Bowen’s. The prosecution tried to discredit Lizzie’s story about the barn, but the ice cream peddler saw her leave the barn. He didn’t know her, but he knew Bridget and knew the woman he saw wasn’t Bridget. Local boys said either to the police or in court they had seen her entering or exiting the barn. Ellan Egan was another of Bridget’s Irish friends who convinced her to quit her job and move to Fall River, but she wasn’t called to testify at the inquest or trial to what she reported about William Borden to the police. The witness who reported a former tenant of Borden who had been seen walking away from the house on Second St with a rusty looking hatchet or axe under his arm wasn’t called to testify at the inquest or trial. Nor do we know what might have gone on with Bridget and Andrew and Abby. In later years her own niece referred to her as mean. Again, merely being in the house isn’t evidence against Lizzie if it isn’t evidence against Bridget

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Wed Sep 08, 2021 9:41 pm

Yes - Andrew Borden was a miser for sure and just because he treats Lizzie on a European getaway doesn't mean he was loose with his money. You hear how cheap he was and the first thing people bring up was the fact that he sent Lizzie away for a while. I think he did it more for him and the family, than for her.

Mr. Borden had a practice of raising the rents on his buildings when he knew people were prospering. Who does that ? - but back then people got away with a lot. Nobody knows what skilled killer could have done what was done. It could have been Lizzie - it could have been Uncle John Morse that was a mile away ( or was he ) ? and has an alibi taylor made for the event. And it could have been Bridget - I have seen pictures of her when she was old - we all have - she was a big one and loved her wine. And she died with a secret that she almost told to a friend.

Motive for Bridget to kill ????? Lets put it this way - Cheap Andrew Borden too cheap to install a toilet upstairs or even a sink, finds it necessary to hire a maid that had Thursday afternoon and Sunday off and did minimal work for 4 dollars a week which is equal to 120 dollars a week in 2021 - for washing and cooking with some heavy cleaning once in a while. Plus a free room ? With 3 grown able bodied women in the house ?

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:52 am

Mary -- I debated not responding, but assuming you are being sincere in your posting, decided to let you know that practically every item you note in your post above is fictional or miss-stated.

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Thu Sep 09, 2021 4:48 pm

While I am not heavily invested in the Borden tragedies I was being sincere. Nor do I take offense, but given I replied to two of your posts and to a few other members would you mind pointing outright which post, what items and why?

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Thu Sep 09, 2021 7:59 pm

I wonder if anyone in the crowd that was talking amongst themselves the way people spoke of Ebenezer Scrooge after he died. There must have been - I couldn't imagine that tiny street packed wall to wall with people all mourning for Mr. B. with tears in their eyes. I think they packed the streets to bring attention to the Mayor to find the killer fast. They were scared, plain and simple. And from what I have read he was a not nice man. The only friends he had were printed on green paper. But the Mayor ordered the Marshall to make a mountain out of nothing. ( I would say mole hill ) but that is something. Pathetic incompetent police department.

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Thu Sep 09, 2021 8:36 pm

Mary -- I pasted your post below and added feedback in bold/underlined. A couple of these items are in the Brown book, so that might be where you got some of the information. But almost none of this is anywhere in the primary documents or in subsequent validated documents and sources.
I love debating/discussing this case, but it is frustrating to have so much disinformation posted and makes it difficult to talk thru ideas and findings.

Corroborated parts, but only those when she was out of the house, not her actions when she was inside (Morse corroborated Bridgets location in kitchen when he left that morning)[/b] . Yes she had a chin wag with the Kelly maid, who was a friend of hers, and had convinced her to leave her job in Newport to work next door to her in Fall River (these two maids did not know each other prior to Bridgets hiring by Bordens). Later Mrs Churchill saw her running across the street to Dr Bowen’s. (she also saw Bridget rinsing dining room window and saw Andrew looking in to backyard when Bridget was vomiting). The prosecution tried to discredit Lizzie’s story about the barn, but the ice cream peddler saw her leave the barn (Lubinsky saw Lizzie walking towards the back side door. Did not see her leave the barn). He didn’t know her, but he knew Bridget and knew the woman he saw wasn’t Bridget. Local boys said either to the police or in court they had seen her entering or exiting the barn (no one saw Lizzie leaving the barn that morning). Ellan Egan was another of Bridget’s Irish friends who convinced her to quit her job and move to Fall River, but she wasn’t called to testify at the inquest or trial to what she reported about William Borden to the police (nothing in this sentence is accurate or true). The witness who reported a former tenant of Borden who had been seen walking away from the house on Second St with a rusty looking hatchet or axe under his arm wasn’t called to testify at the inquest or trial (this is not true). Nor do we know what might have gone on with Bridget and Andrew and Abby. In later years her own niece referred to her as mean (have never heard this before or anything negative about Bridget post-murders). Again, merely being in the house isn’t evidence against Lizzie if it isn’t evidence against Bridget. (Being in the house at time of murders is just a component of the case against Lizzie.)

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Thu Sep 09, 2021 11:22 pm

camgarsky4 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 8:36 pm Mary -- I pasted your post below and added feedback in bold/underlined. A couple of these items are in the Brown book, so that might be where you got some of the information. But almost none of this is anywhere in the primary documents or in subsequent validated documents and sources.
I love debating/discussing this case, but it is frustrating to have so much disinformation posted and makes it difficult to talk thru ideas and findings.

Corroborated parts, but only those when she was out of the house, not her actions when she was inside (Morse corroborated Bridgets location in kitchen when he left that morning). Yes she had a chin wag with the Kelly maid, who was a friend of hers, and had convinced her to leave her job in Newport to work next door to her in Fall River (these two maids did not know each other prior to Bridgets hiring by Bordens). Later Mrs Churchill saw her running across the street to Dr Bowen’s. (she also saw Bridget rinsing dining room window and saw Andrew looking in to backyard when Bridget was vomiting). The prosecution tried to discredit Lizzie’s story about the barn, but the ice cream peddler saw her leave the barn (Lubinsky saw Lizzie walking towards the back side door. Did not see her leave the barn). He didn’t know her, but he knew Bridget and knew the woman he saw wasn’t Bridget. Local boys said either to the police or in court they had seen her entering or exiting the barn (no one saw Lizzie leaving the barn that morning). Ellan Egan was another of Bridget’s Irish friends who convinced her to quit her job and move to Fall River, but she wasn’t called to testify at the inquest or trial to what she reported about William Borden to the police (nothing in this sentence is accurate or true). The witness who reported a former tenant of Borden who had been seen walking away from the house on Second St with a rusty looking hatchet or axe under his arm wasn’t called to testify at the inquest or trial (this is not true). Nor do we know what might have gone on with Bridget and Andrew and Abby. In later years her own niece referred to her as mean (have never heard this before or anything negative about Bridget post-murders). Again, merely being in the house isn’t evidence against Lizzie if it isn’t evidence against Bridget. (Being in the house at time of murders is just a component of the case against Lizzie.)

I haven’t read the Brown book, I had been told not to waste my time, but I did read some articles about what a Mr Peterson whose family knew Lizzie Borden. I had remembered Ellan Eagen (correct spelling) being cited as saying she, Bridget and another friend (referring to them as 3 friends) had emigrated from the same place in Ireland, I assumed from their friendliness the Kelly’s maid was that third. I went looking for the articles tonight and saw a side note that described the third girl as working at Cherry and Webb, so I was wrong about that. As to what Mrs Churchill saw of Bridget, I have never read anything other than her initial sighting of Bridget rushing to the Bowen’s, when Mrs Churchill had been returning home from shopping. Link to scan of article where Peterson tells of Ellan Eagen saying she and Bridget were friends who came over to the US together and told her about the job at the Borden’s

As to Mr Lubinsky, I had read some of the testimonies linked to in a blog article the first weekend I became interested, this is what he said to have testified: “I am an ice-cream peddler working for Mr. Wilkinson of 42 N. Main St. I peddle ice cream by the team [i.e. drive a wagon]. On day of murder, left the stable a few minutes after eleven and drove by the Borden house. Saw a lady come out the way from the barn right to the stairs back of the house, the north side stairs. She had on a dark-colored dress. Nothing on her head. Was walking very slow. I didn't see her go in the house. Have seen the servant at that house: delivered ice cream there two or three weeks earlier. This woman was not the servant. Am sure of it.” Lubinsky said he saw her come out the way from the barn toward the stairs on the north side of the house, but did not see her enter the house. What other woman was in the Borden’s backyard leaving the barn and walking towards the stairs on the north side of the house? Source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f ... imony.html

The two boys who testified at the trial, saying they snuck into the barn loft to watch what was going on, Everett Brown and Thomas Barlow, said the barn loft was cool, but also said they had seen her earlier, I cannot find that link in my bookmarks folder, I apologize for not being able to provide a source but I do remember reading it.

I had started going back and making a few notes the week after I started reading articles, A Dr. Benjamin Handfy testified that he saw an agitated pale, man walking down the sidewalk from 92 Second Street around 10:30 am, he might have been the man I read who spoke of the man with the rusty axe or hatchet under his arm. I also found this note, a plumber and a gas fitter testified at the trial that in the day or two before the murders they had been in the Borden's barn loft, casting doubt on police assertions that Lizzie's alibi was suspect because dust in the loft appeared undisturbed. Again, no source to cite, sorry.

I never said there was anything about Bridget after the murders, I said we don’t know what problems she might have had with Andrew and Abby. Tonight scanning through links, I saw things I had forgotten reading, for example in archived posts on this forum a discussion from years ago about reading the source documents, and one of the posters said Bridget in her testimony she hadn’t told Lizzie she was going up to lie down as she didn’t want to be thought to be lazy. Someone else posted about Bridget being asked about where she worked when she first arrived, which was the Porter Hotel in Newport, when asked where she lived, she lived with friends, when pressed for the name of the friends, she only gave one person’s name, a man whose last name was Sullivan. When she was asked if he was married or single, there was no response listed in the post. There’s a lot we don’t know about Bridget. Would you please cite what components there were in your opinion that were evidence of Lizzie’s guilt, other than the unsubstantiated hearsay generally cited?

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Fri Sep 10, 2021 7:13 am

Mary - I believe the evidence and reliable information available overwhelmingly indicate Lizzie was involved in the killings. I started to respond with why I think she is guilty and quickly realized I would be writing a small book. That said, I have shared many of my theories in posts over the past year.

You are welcome and encouraged to poke on the points I make in those posts and we can have an active dialogue.

We are all free to lean into whichever sources or theories we wish, so I should not have challenged your comments above.

Thanks.

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Fri Sep 10, 2021 8:00 am

Mary - I would not bother to read the Brown book although I have access to it. The best sources of information are from the newspapers / interviews with people that were involved. Lizzie Borden sourcebook is a good start as well.
But you have to be careful with some articles because some early ones are very wrong. I read Edwin Porter's book which is right from the source. Him being a police reporter, of course he had a couple of things that were off as well, but at least it's better than some overpriced book or collection of one sided papers that has surfaced over the years.
Getting back to basics is always the best way to look at this tragedy. I believe Lizzie is as innocent - not just because the police or any investigators were unable to find one shred of evidence other than a grown woman that called her stepmother, Mrs. Borden 5 years prior to the tragedy. And not because they were unable to find a murder weapon, despite looking in a box for hatchets and axes that Lizzie herself told where to find them. The Fall River police were the dumbest group of bumbling boobs ever to pin on a badge. They had no direction no leadership no evidence - they did have a growing mob that wanted the killer apprehended fast so they could sleep at night. And of course they had Lizzie Borden - who's only crime was to go in a barn and get lead or tin.
I would go back to the basics and not worry about these articles that surface whenever someone wants to revive this case to make a fast buck .

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Fri Sep 10, 2021 8:20 am

Well said Steve. Regardless of how you interpret the info (guilty or not), this case is best approached from the primary documents and contemporary interviews.

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Fri Sep 10, 2021 9:39 am

I try not to go in too deep with articles that often conflict. If an article said something happened at 930 and another said it happened at 940 - I usually keep looking at this "thing" that happened. Most of the time there is an agreement to a close time. - This is only an example though.

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Fri Sep 10, 2021 11:11 am

Agree.....all the timings should be viewed as a reasonable range depending on all the other moving parts.

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Sat Sep 11, 2021 12:01 am

Steve88778 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 8:00 am Mary - I would not bother to read the Brown book although I have access to it. The best sources of information are from the newspapers / interviews with people that were involved. Lizzie Borden sourcebook is a good start as well.
But you have to be careful with some articles because some early ones are very wrong. I read Edwin Porter's book which is right from the source. Him being a police reporter, of course he had a couple of things that were off as well, but at least it's better than some overpriced book or collection of one sided papers that has surfaced over the years.
Getting back to basics is always the best way to look at this tragedy. I believe Lizzie is as innocent - not just because the police or any investigators were unable to find one shred of evidence other than a grown woman that called her stepmother, Mrs. Borden 5 years prior to the tragedy. And not because they were unable to find a murder weapon, despite looking in a box for hatchets and axes that Lizzie herself told where to find them. The Fall River police were the dumbest group of bumbling boobs ever to pin on a badge. They had no direction no leadership no evidence - they did have a growing mob that wanted the killer apprehended fast so they could sleep at night. And of course they had Lizzie Borden - who's only crime was to go in a barn and get lead or tin.
I would go back to the basics and not worry about these articles that surface whenever someone wants to revive this case to make a fast buck .

Approaching the matter by looking at even challenging things that have become accepted as but are not necessarily facts isn’t unreasonable or being “worried”

. The basics, as I was taught are the facts and principles. I watched a video of Stefani’s talk before a group and was fascinated by what she had to say about the subject that I hadn’t known. As a teen I accepted the movie starring Elizabeth Montgomery as fact, and aside from my friends and I being fascinated for a month or two which was prolonged by one’s mémère telling us about being a child in Fall River at the time and what she remembered, that was the extent of it, I think once she moved on to her tales of wearing hobble skirts when she was older kind of was the end of it. As I mentioned, I have no intention of reading Brown. Nor have I read blog articles by fantasist Mary Sue’s, cranks or paranormal types. Most of what I have read was written by people who have written books about her, or who are involved with the historical society, or those who just have an interest and presented a theory that seemed plausible. I haven’t said Lizzie was innocent, rather I am far from convinced she was guilty. I don’t feel comfortable with her being presumed guilty and needing to prove her innocence. That isn’t how our laws are supposed to work. I don’t know if the Fall River police were stupid, I do feel what we’re told indicates something beyond incompetence.. could it have been calculated? Mr Porter’s book is available to read online on the Wayback Machine’s archive and from what I have read, he had a bias. What I have found helpful in his book is the information I found before learning about the source documents.

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Sat Sep 11, 2021 12:09 am

camgarsky4 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 7:13 am Mary - I believe the evidence and reliable information available overwhelmingly indicate Lizzie was involved in the killings. I started to respond with why I think she is guilty and quickly realized I would be writing a small book. That said, I have shared many of my theories in posts over the past year.

You are welcome and encouraged to poke on the points I make in those posts and we can have an active dialogue.

We are all free to lean into whichever sources or theories we wish, so I should not have challenged your comments above.

Thanks.

Nothing wrong with challenging any of our comments that is what discussion is all about

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Sat Sep 11, 2021 5:21 am

I'm in my final year of a doctoral program in nursing. One of the most important things that I have learned is how to dig for facts. In a world where competing news organizations have stories that contradict each other, we can not simply read a paper, watch a news story, or read a book and accept it as fact. Take the widely accepted fact that it was a "sweltering hot day" when the Bordens were killed. Actual meteorological data shows it was not hot. It was hot during the trial, but only mid 80s on the day of the crime. Before you accept anything as "fact" within the case, verify it.
With the Borden murders, the foundation is trial transcript. Obviously this is just a record of people's recollections under oath, but it is the closest to the "facts" as we have. Next, I look for collaborating stories. If several different people tell of the exact same thing happening, it holds more weight. Remember, everyone in the case had an agenda. The prosecutors wished to put Lizzie away and close the case. The defense wished to make every damning thing that happened look trivial or inconsequential. The jury couldn't convict due to lack of evidence, and I've decided long ago that I could not have convicted either...even though I believe (with slight doubt) that she did indeed kill them.

MaryM · Post by **MaryM** » Sat Sep 11, 2021 2:25 pm

PossumPie wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 5:21 am I'm in my final year of a doctoral program in nursing. One of the most important things that I have learned is how to dig for facts. In a world where competing news organizations have stories that contradict each other, we can not simply read a paper, watch a news story, or read a book and accept it as fact. Take the widely accepted fact that it was a "sweltering hot day" when the Bordens were killed. Actual meteorological data shows it was not hot. It was hot during the trial, but only mid 80s on the day of the crime. Before you accept anything as "fact" within the case, verify it.
With the Borden murders, the foundation is trial transcript. Obviously this is just a record of people's recollections under oath, but it is the closest to the "facts" as we have. Next, I look for collaborating stories. If several different people tell of the exact same thing happening, it holds more weight. Remember, everyone in the case had an agenda. The prosecutors wished to put Lizzie away and close the case. The defense wished to make every damning thing that happened look trivial or inconsequential. The jury couldn't convict due to lack of evidence, and I've decided long ago that I could not have convicted either...even though I believe (with slight doubt) that she did indeed kill them.

What are your thoughts on the theory that Abby’s blood could have coagulated faster in the warmer temps on the second floor? I have read that dismissed as it is surmised as being a few degrees different but if anyone has lived in a tenement without air conditioning knows even a second floor can be ten or more degrees warmer.

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Sat Sep 11, 2021 7:47 pm

MaryM wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 2:25 pm
PossumPie wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 5:21 am I'm in my final year of a doctoral program in nursing. One of the most important things that I have learned is how to dig for facts. In a world where competing news organizations have stories that contradict each other, we can not simply read a paper, watch a news story, or read a book and accept it as fact. Take the widely accepted fact that it was a "sweltering hot day" when the Bordens were killed. Actual meteorological data shows it was not hot. It was hot during the trial, but only mid 80s on the day of the crime. Before you accept anything as "fact" within the case, verify it.
With the Borden murders, the foundation is trial transcript. Obviously this is just a record of people's recollections under oath, but it is the closest to the "facts" as we have. Next, I look for collaborating stories. If several different people tell of the exact same thing happening, it holds more weight. Remember, everyone in the case had an agenda. The prosecutors wished to put Lizzie away and close the case. The defense wished to make every damning thing that happened look trivial or inconsequential. The jury couldn't convict due to lack of evidence, and I've decided long ago that I could not have convicted either...even though I believe (with slight doubt) that she did indeed kill them.
What are your thoughts on the theory that Abby’s blood could have coagulated faster in the warmer temps on the second floor? I have read that dismissed as it is surmised as being a few degrees different but if anyone has lived in a tenement without air conditioning knows even a second floor can be ten or more degrees warmer.

The ambient temperature before noon on that day in Fall River was under 80 degrees, rising to about 85 late in the afternoon. This is based on meteorological data. The downstairs would be about 80, upstairs with the windows down (they were being washed) maybe 85 degrees(remember it was before noon). The temperature would not effect the coagulation of blood. Coagulation (clotting) happens because of fibrin/fibrinogen not heat, it is a CHEMICAL process NOT a heat process. The heat would only effect it if it were extreme (fire or oven) or a long period of time hours/days. Coupled with the lack of digestion of stomach contents, it is clear that there was definitely a "significant" period of time between the deaths. It can logically be debated that someone else did it, but not logically argued that they happened at the same time. Whoever killed them waited for at least an hour between deaths.

camgarsky4 · Post by **camgarsky4** » Sat Sep 11, 2021 7:49 pm

Possum -- is that a typo? Don't believe there was any indication that the upstairs windows were being washed.

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:05 pm

camgarsky4 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 7:49 pm Possum -- is that a typo? Don't believe there was any indication that the upstairs windows were being washed.

"Mrs. Borden instructed her to wash the first floor windows inside and outside. It was the last time Bridget saw Abby alive."(Preliminary Hearing: 8, 10; Trial: 226, 227).
I read somewhere that she used a ladle of water and a bucket to rinse the upper windows but I can't find the reference. Windows up or down, the heat difference between floors wouldn't have mattered for blood clotting.

PossumPie · Post by **PossumPie** » Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:11 pm

double post

Steve88778 · Post by **Steve88778** » Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:33 pm

I dont know what the heat difference was but I did read that it does have an effect on clotting