Why did Morse pronounce a “what” to Mrs. Churchill?

[Franz]

In a number of my precedent threads and replies I pointed out many times the strangeness of Morse's “what” pronounced to Mrs. Churchill who told him the assassinations of Abby and Andrew, this “what” is really very strange --- at least I think so --- because Morse had been told twice the same news before, by Bridget and Mr. Sawyer.

But to point out its strangeness is not enough, I must find an explanation for it. I will try my best in this new thread. I am inclined to think that Morse was most probably the real guilty (as director of the two killings), and my speculation about Morse’s “what” will be in coherence with my “general” theory about the case.

Yes, in my theory Morse orchestrated the double murder and he carefully not only premeditated the murder itself --- with the help of his accomplice(s) ---, but also prepared his own performance in the criminal event. He unnecessarily brought back Andrews’ letter, he did so intentionally, because he knew that after the murder occurred the police would interrogate him and this letter could justify his visit to the Borden family. That morning he carefully observed what he saw, he heard, he met in the town, in order to give a solid alibi afterwards--- he brilliantly succeeded.

But all this was not enough. Morse, while he was preparing the murder, he should have prepared carefully as well his performance as an innocent when he would return to the Borden house. Since every action need a given space to take place, Morse, when he prepared his performance on the future murder place, he must have imagined a background, a stage, for his post-murder presence in the Borden estate. Since he planned to kill Abby and Andrew IN the house, it seems to me a very natural thing that in his imagination Morse had been seeing himself always behavior innocently IN the house as well. The interior of the house, in his mind, was always his background, his stage for his pseudo-innocent performance.

As an actor before the spectacle, Morse prepared himself pretty well, he made the repetitions many times in his mind, with his imaginative stage in his mind as well… Finally, that fatal day arrived.

But when Morse returned to the Borden house that morning… Oh my God, there were people in the yard! since Morse had been always obsessed by the murder place --- the interior of the house --- he didn’t consider the possibility that he would meet people out of the house, and therefore, was informed about the death of the Bordens (by Bridget and Sawyer) in the yard, instead of on the criminal place (in the house). Poor uncle John, he suddenly found himself in a horrible situation. He went toward the pear tree and took some fruit to eat, right? What a strange thing! In my opinion, by doing so, he was trying to calm his nerves. But hélas! Morse was not good enough for an improvisation. For his reactions outside of the house, I invite my forum fellows to re-read the testimony of Bridget and Mr. Sawyer. Here I repeat only that of Mrs. Churchill: after she told him for the third time the tragic news, Morse pronounced a “what”; outside he didn’t “rush” --- Sawyer used the word "went" to describe his entering the house ---, but only inside the house he began to “rush”; outside no one testified he thought about Lizzie, only inside the house he began to “holler” Lizzie’s name. If we consider Morse’s reactions after his meeting with Mrs. Churchill, don’t you think that these first reactions of him after he entered the house seemed more likely the normal and logical first reactions in such a circumstance? I think so, and I think that these more logical reactions “post-Churchill” were just those that Morse had prepared many times in his mind before the murder, because his imaginative stage --- I repeat --- was just the interior of the house, because the interior of the house was the very murder place in his plan, where he thought that he must act as an innocent. Since he was too impressed by his preparation, and somehow terrified by a situation that he hadn’t thought about before --- meeting people outside the house, in the yard --- Morse failed --- at least to some extent, failed --- to think of anticipating his performance from the inside of the house to the outside of it. In front of Bridget and Mr. Sawyer, Morse did just what he could at that moment --- a very poor performance, IMO.

Before entering the house, as Mr. Sawyer testified, Morse remained there for “a few minutes”. “A few minutes”, in such a circumstance, were a very very long time, an eternity... Some deep respiration, be calm...After those few minutes, our actor number one, Mr. Morse, dear uncle John, would go on his stage. The play would begin.

Mrs. Churchill: “Mr. Morse, something terrible has happened, someone has killed both Mr. and Mrs. Borden.”
“What(!)”… to holler… to rush…

What a brilliant start! What an innocent performance! Respectable spectators, please applaud!

[patsy]

It's all so strange, and it has always boggled my mind that he went to the back and ate pears instead of going straight into the house so you may be onto something. He got off the horsecar at Pleasant and Second Street and as he got to the house he said nothing attracted his attention at first, according to his testimony. And as you pointed out in another thread it would seem he had seen a number of persons outside the house.

[Franz]

My point was not that he noticed (or not) people when he returned to the Borden house (at least this is not the point of this thread); my point was that he probably didn't foresee the possibility to be told the news in the yard, before he entered into the house --- the very murder place, the stage where he had prepared his performance in his mind.

[mbhenty]

What was the motive, Franz?

I believe if it was in fact Morse that committed the murders, there would be no way the Borden girls would allow him to get away with it.

They would have implicated Uncle Morse.

Unless, unless, unless... they all planned it together.

[Franz]

What was the motive, Franz?

I believe if it was in fact Morse that committed the murders, there would be no way the Borden girls would allow him to get away with it.

They would have implicated Uncle Morse.

Unless, unless, unless... they all planned it together.

1. I can only speculate the motive of Morse. (P.S.: The motive is not the subject of this thread, BTW.)

2. If Morse was guilty, even the police failed to catch him, why would it be a must for the Borden girls?

3. The Borden girls did send a private detective to inverstigate Morse. If they all planned it together, the girls would not have done such a thing, IMO.

[debbiediablo]

This is where I fail in ability to convict the brilliant criminal whether it be Lizzie or Uncle John. (Now, if it's Bridget or Emma then the killer was totally brilliant!) Hindsight can be 20/20 in ways that see what really wasn't there. Uncle John is so brilliant that he brings along a letter as proof for his visit (never mind he was a common visitor on multiple previous occasions) and he memorizes everything and everyone along the way on the morning of the murders. Then he brilliantly arrives after Andrew's body is discovered just as he supposedly planned. He sees a crowd; he knows he has succeeded. So then he completely drops out of character and moseys on over to chow down some pears!???!

Ditto for Lizzie who has presence of mind to kill Abby first, then casually hang around the house for a few hours after which she wipes out Andrew while Bridget is upstairs with a headache (did Lizzie's superpowers also give Bridget the headache?) all without blood evidence or weapon or overt motive. It's not like Andrew was really Connor McLeod, destined to live forever, and Abby was his Highlander wife. They would've died and the girls would've been fixed for life even if Abby's family had taken a chunk. So Lizzie bedazzles us with her criminal brilliance, manages to hide the dress she wore right under everyones' noses, and then nonchalantly takes it out and burns it in front of the next-door neighbor? When waiting an hour or two would've safely sent Alice to bed first?

I still haven't made up my mind who is Suspect #1, but if it's Uncle John or Lizzie, then I attribute their success more to exceptional luck than exceptional connivance.

[Franz]

... Uncle John is so brilliant that he brings along a letter as proof for his visit (never mind he was a common visitor on multiple previous occasions) and he memorizes everything and everyone along the way on the morning of the murders. Then he brilliantly arrives after Andrew's body is discovered just as he supposedly planned. He sees a crowd; he knows he has succeeded. So then he completely drops out of character and moseys on over to chow down some pears!???! ...

This doesn't trouble me, debbiediablo. An excellent filmmaker might not be an excellent actore. IMO, it is totally possibile that Morse was a brillant director when he was behind the curtain, in the coulisses --- it was his accomplice(s) to accomplish the murder. On the contrary, when he went on the scene, when he must physically appear in the criminal place to interprete an innocent role, he somehow collapsed.

No one could be brillant in everything, so was uncle John as well. And I forgive him.

[twinsrwe]

... 1. I can only speculate the motive of Morse. ...

Franz, I think we would all like to know what you believe John Morse's motive was, even if it is just speculation on your part. Inquiring minds want to know.

[Franz]

twinsrwe, as I just added a P.S. in my reply to Mbhenty, the motive is not the subject of this thread. I prefer to discuss this in a separate thread. Here I would like to exchange with other members what I thought about Morse's "what" pronounced to Mrs. Churchill. We could discuss other explanations, the innocent ones included.

(P.S.: If you only ask me about Morse's motive, does it mean that you had nothing to say against what I expressed in this thread? )

[twinsrwe]

In a number of my precedent threads and replies I pointed out many times the strangeness of Morse's “what” pronounced to Mrs. Churchill who told him the assassinations of Abby and Andrew, this “what” is really very strange --- at least I think so --- because Morse had been told twice the same news before, by Bridget and Mr. Sawyer.

But to point out its strangeness is not enough, I must find an explanation for it. I will try my best in this new thread. I am inclined to think that Morse was most probably the real guilty (as director of the two killings), and my speculation about Morse’s “what” will be in coherence with my “general” theory about the case. ...

OK, Franz, you are correct, you have brought up the subject of John Morse saying, "what", and hollering "Lizzie", as loud as he could holler, many times in previous threads. I don’t find his saying, “what’, at all suspicious, nor do I find his yelling “Lizzie”, anything to split hairs over. His reaction tells me that he was concerned for his niece.

Yes, in my theory Morse orchestrated the double murder and he carefully not only premeditated the murder itself --- with the help of his accomplice(s) ---, but also prepared his own performance in the criminal event. ...

You continually point your finger at John Morse, believing that he premeditated and orchestrated the murders of Andrew and Abby, which was carried out with the help of his accomplice(s); granted, it is your right to believe anything you wish. However, since you brought up your theory again in this thread, then it is a reasonable question to ask you for John’s motive, regardless of the fact that his motive is not the subject of this thread. Perhaps, it is because you mentioned your theory in this thread that two members have asked you the same question. This is a question that you have never answered, although it has been asked of you several times.

[patsy]

Although it does seem strange to some, it may be that he had to say "what" for lack of not knowing how to react in such a situation. We could probably go on and on about weird reactions to so many events, and sadly people get convicted for saying things not considered to be the norm. So I wonder how Morse seemed to interact with people in various situations or how others thought about his "ways." Could he have been one to use language loosely or someone who was known to say the wrong things at the wrong time and so on. The idea that he had figured out how to role play his reaction but then couldn't improvise is very interesting too, especially if he was guilty and had been trying so very hard to keep above suspicion. If that was the case the tension would've seemed to be unbearable.

[twinsrwe]

None of us know how we are going to react in any given situation. Lizzie's actions were highly suspicious. A couple of good examples are: She found her father brutally murdered, and called for Bridget. How did she know Bridget was not the killer? Then she sent Bridget out to get Dr. Bowen, while she stayed in the house. How did she know the killer was not still in the house? I think Lizzies' actions were very odd and suspicious, given the situation.

[Franz]

twinsrwe, I agree with you to some extent. I think a "what (?!)" is a natural and logical reaction while hearing such a murder news. But I think Morse's "what" is extremely suspicious since he pronunced it after he had been told the same news for the THIRD time!

(P.S.: this is not for your last reply, but the precedent one.)

[Franz]

... The idea that he had figured out how to role play his reaction but then couldn't improvise is very interesting too, especially if he was guilty and had been trying so very hard to keep above suspicion. If that was the case the tension would've seemed to be unbearable.

Thank you for your encouraging comments, patsy.

You said what I wished to say: I think Morse "had been trying so very hard to keep above suspicion", but even though "he had figured out how to role play his reaction" inside the house (the criminal place), "then couldn't improvise" well in the yard. His going toward the pear tree and eating some pears, his remaining outside a few minutes before entering into the house, in my opinion, could all have been behaviours under an "unbearable" "tension".

[twinsrwe]

twinsrwe, I agree with you to some extent. I think a "what (?!)" is a natural and logical reaction while hearing such a murder news. But I think Morse's "what" is extremely suspicious since he pronunced it after he had been told the same news for the THIRD time!

(P.S.: this is not for your last reply, but the precedent one.)

I'm sorry, Franz, but I just don't see John's "what" as being extremely suspicious, even if he had been told about the murders for the third time. We don't know what John Morse's 'normal' habits of speech were. Maybe, he had a habit of repeating himself when under tremendous stress.

Since it seems as though both John and Lizzie's actions were 'odd' that day, maybe odd behaviors ran in the entire family. As I stated in my previous post, none of us know how we are going to react to any given situation.

[debbiediablo]

I say "What?" all the time...ALL THE TIME...because I have a hearing loss that is not totally correctable. The other day someone said, "We have located a BHIS provider for Alexander and Cara," and I thought they said, "We have located a penis provider who is experienced in a car." (BHIS is Behavior Health Intervention Service)...so I most certainly said, "WHAT?"

Maybe Uncle John was partially deaf or simply couldn't believe what he heard....

[twinsrwe]

Excellent point, Debbie!

Now that you have mentioned you have a hearing loss, it dawned on me that I also say 'what' a lot when I am at work. I tend concentration so deeply on what I am doing when passing medications, that when someone says something to me, I don't catch what they say, so I say "what?", and then I have to refocus in order to hear what they are saying to me. Sometimes they will repeat what they said, and I still do not comprehend their words to me, so I again say 'what?'.

So, I wholeheartedly agree with you. Maybe Uncle John was partially deaf or simply couldn't believe what he heard....

[patsy]

Heard you, Franz, and it is so interesting how any of us may react in these types of situations, so it's good to stay open to all possibilities unless they seem to be improbable due to other circumstances. So can't rule it out in my mind that he may have been working hard on not being suspicious. But also just being impulsive and blurting out what may seem to be an inappropriate statement could also be possible. And now the idea that Debbie brought up that he may have been hard of hearing could be something to think about too.

Since I lean toward someone else other than Lizzie having done the murders I'm looking for another suspect. And after all this time no one seems to fit as I would like, but for sure some of Uncle John's reactions are very interesting.

[Franz]

Debbie and twinsrwe, I am sorry but I can't agree with you. There is no evidence that Morse might be deaf, even partially. And he didn't say "what" every time.

With his "what" Morse certainly wanted to express that he "couldn't believe what he heard", his surprise, amazement, his being astonished. But this natural reaction --- I repeat --- could be manifested only the very first time he heard the news. That's why I consider his behavior suspicious and that Morse, after entering into the house, was just playing his prepared pseudo-innocent role on his stage.

[twinsrwe]

Debbie and twinsrwe, I am sorry but I can't agree with you. There is no evidence that Morse might be deaf, even partially. And he didn't say "what" every time.

With his "what" Morse certainly wanted to express that he "couldn't believe what he heard", his surprise, amazement, his being astonished. But this natural reaction --- I repeat --- could be manifested only the very first time he heard the news. That's why I consider his behavior suspicious and that Morse, after entering into the house, was just playing his prepared pseudo-innocent role on his stage.

Well, Franz, we all have the right to believe in any theory we wish, point our fingers at anyone as the actual killer, as well as, be suspicious of anyone we wish.

[Franz]

... Well, Franz, we all have the right to believe in any theory we wish, point our fingers at anyone as the actual killer, as well as, be suspicious of anyone we wish.

Yes, twinsrwe.

Meanwhile, to exchange our ideas here is a great thing!

[MysteryReader]

Hey Franz,

What's your opinion of this article I found?

http://lizzieandrewborden.com/resources ... -1892c.htm

[Franz]

Thank you for the link, MysteryReader.

A good killer doesn't seem as a potential killer before (or even after) he / she committed the murder. If someone told me one day that a person I know well might be the author of a terrible murder, my first words could be very well "Oh, it's impossible, you must have made a mistake."

Indeed the reactions of the interviewed could explain very well why Lizzie didn't suspect Bridget immediately after the discovery of Andrew's body.

[debbiediablo]

If someone told me my brother-in-law had been murdered in his home, I can 100% guarantee that my incredulous response would be, "What?" The idea would be so far beyond my belief that I'd need a repeat simply to make sure I hadn't misunderstood.

If someone told me ten minutes later that the cause of his death was being bludgeoned in the face with a hatchet, I can 100% guarantee that my response would be another, "WHAT?" Because I wouldn't want to believe something so horrendous had happened to someone so close to me.

[twinsrwe]

... Well, Franz, we all have the right to believe in any theory we wish, point our fingers at anyone as the actual killer, as well as, be suspicious of anyone we wish.

Yes, twinsrwe.

Meanwhile, to exchange our ideas here is a great thing!

I totally agree, Franz. That is one of the reason why I enjoy this forum so much.

[Inspector]

I remember the first time I saw John’s picture, and I immediately thought…he did it. I suppose his looks are a bit scary under the circumstances.
The fact he arrived the previous day just hit me hard before I knew much about the case.
Not trying to judge the man by his looks, but his alibi seems staged, and if you are correct, he wasn’t ready for the stage except that he got away with it.
Different authors put varying numbers on how many people were in the yard when Morse came back, but going to eat pears only makes sense if there were less people hanging around.
And why does he arrive back at that time?
For supper? We can only trust Lizzie, and Bridget on that.

[camgarsky4]

When Dr. Bowen returned from sending the telegram to Emma (around 11:30), he testified he didn't notice anyone around outside. Carefully re-assembling Morse's timeline that morning, it is very possible he arrived back at the Borden house just moments after Bowen.

What no one ever explains when they say they suspect Morse because of his pear story....is why in the world would he claim to see no one if he did? Why would he fib about grabbing a couple pears? I can't think of any reason, guilty or innocent, as to why he would lie about it.

Concerning his alibi....again, in my opinion, this is a massive myth. There is no record of Morse ever mentioning car or badge #'s. That was something Arthur Phillips put in his book in the 1930's. We have Morse testimonies, witness statements, interviews w/ Jennings, newspaper articles....and never are those details mentioned. So the only additive detail that can be dated to time of the crime was that 6 priests rode in the street car with him. A passing street car conductor (Kennedy) told the newspaper that he also saw those priests.

[Inspector]

Great clarification camgarsky4, I don’t recall if anyone witnessed John leaving the house.
Not that it matters much, just would validate what Lizzie, and Bridget said.
If I were visiting like John, and I saw a few people hanging around, it’s really not my business to who they are as they could be friends of the family.
Why not have a pear, and look around.

[Inspector]

Also, Mr. Sawyer said JVM wasn’t eating a pear, and stood around outside for a few “minutes “ before going inside.
Mrs. Churchill seems to say she told JVM first.
Rey strange.

[camgarsky4]

I've done a little study on the question of who let John into the house....Churchill or Bridget. I'm very confident it was Churchill.

John recalled that he 'thinks' it was Bridget. But Bridget never testifies that happened and Mrs. Churchill does. I think this was a simple case of Morse confusing the ladies.

Morse preliminary hearing testimony:
Q. When did you first learn anything had happened?
A. At the door.
Q. Who told you?
A. I think the servant girl.
Q. Bridget?
A. Yes.

[Inspector]

Mr. Sawyer’s testimony is intriguing. Said John stood outside a few minutes before going in the first time, and Mr. Sawyer states he saw him return , and was the first to inform him of the crime.Said JVM questioned God, and stood around for minutes.
Seems like JVM would have rushed in.
Maybe Sawyer is mistaken.

[camgarsky4]

Anytime I am reading about the minutes immediately after the murders were discovered, I remind myself that these folks were experiencing the most horrific and frenzied moments of their lives.

Many had never met each other before this episode and they didn't learn each others names until afterwards.

In this example, Sawyer had never met John Morse before August 4. Sawyer encountered a couple dozen men that morning while he stood guard....most with facial hair and wearing hats. Either there was a lot of confusion and joggled memories, or a lot of people were making things up for no apparent reason. I vote for confusion and fuzzy memories.

Why would John lie about who told him the Borden's were killed? Morse, Sawyer, Churchill and probably Bridget were all basically standing on the top step of the side door at the same time.

John says he got there roughly 20-30 minutes before noon. Sawyer comments signal that Morse got there roughly 20-30 minutes before noon. Churchills memory backs up the fact that John got there 20-30 minutes before noon.

Remember that Mrs. Churchill also said she was first to tell Morse when she let him in the house. Was she lying? Morse lying? Sawyer lying? Bridget lying? Maybe none of them were intentionally lying. I can't think of a reason that any of them would.

All that to say, when reading about the post-murder discovery activity, remember the Borden house was in a world class state of chaos.

[Inspector]

I agree with your assessment, as I can’t imagine Morse just standing around outside for a “few minutes “ after hearing of the crime from Sawyer.
He should of rushed in right away.
Also, Sawyer said he had no pear, while Morse said he was heading to the door with a pear, so possibly Sawyer was confused about the details or Morse’s arrival.

The only way any of this has a bearing, is if Sawyer is telling the truth. It doesn’t look so good on John if he remains outside, especially if the crowd has gathered, which is anyone’s guess.

[Inspector]

What to make of Knowlton asking JVM if Abby had on a head covering as she was dusting in the sitting room?
This was the last time John would see her alive.

[Inspector]

Interesting factoid, At the trial John Morse tells Robinson he returns at 20 minutes to eleven, but the attorney catches it, says—-you don’t mean eleven do you?
Also, interesting that Robinson doesn’t want to hear what Sawyer said to Morse.

[camgarsky4]

Throughout the trial, the lawyers never wanted to hear conversation between people recounted. I don't know for sure, but I think something to do with hearsay. Its a shame for those of us, 130 years later, who want to know what was said!!

[Inspector]

I think in this particular case, Robinson was probably trying to protect Morse’s credibility, and had remembered Sawyer’s witness statements.
He didn’t want anything to do with that mess.