Lizzies Dress That Morning

[SallyG]

For some reason, I was always under the impression that no one noticed what Lizzie wore right after the murders. However, in reading the inquest testimony, I came across a passage where Mrs. Churchill describes in detail what Lizzie was wearing right after the murders.

She described it as a blue and white calico, with a deeper navy blue diamond in it. It was a calico or gingham; a cotton fabric. She commented that she thought she would recognize the dress if she saw it again. It was a loose blouse waist dress, of the same fabric, top and bottom.

Obviously, this was not the same dress that Lizzie gave the police when they asked for the dress she wore that day. However, this would not be the same dress that was burned in the stove, would it?

[FairhavenGuy]

It could be.

Dress testimony is quite confusing. Bridget gives a good deal of description about the dress Lizzie wore on Wednesday morning, then if I recall correctly, she says she doesn't know what Lizzie wore Thursday.

Apparently Bridget was wearing a blue dress with a calico print on Thursday morning, then she changed into plain blue.

At least one of the other women, Mrs. Churchill or Alice Russell, was also wearing blue with a pattern.

I might be wrong, but I've got it in my mind that Mrs. Bowen was the only woman who was not wearing something blue.

I'm not sure if any of the witnesses described Lizzie as wearing the dress that was in the courtroom during the trial.

[Kat]

Yes no one described the Bengaline silk.
And yes the dress testimony is crazy and hard to understand.
But I think it's also right that Mrs. Churchill had the best description? Someone here knows this dress stuff better than I- Eugene?

I have graduated to calling these dresses "outfits" because they are 2 pieces. Once I figured that out, I no longer was real concerned about what Lizzie was seen wearing because it's possible she mixed and matched. Besides, since she burned at least a skirt, it's a good bet that if she did the killings, what she wore to kill, as opposed to what she was seen wearing, were probably different clothes.

[Shelley]

I did a powerpoint presentation on this topic to the Costume Society of America last year- textiles being a great interest. Cotton calico is a easily-identifiable simple plain- weave. In the US, "calico" refers to a printed cotton fabric with a small, all-over pattern, often floral It is the right stuff for a summer house ensemble and could also be worn on the street downtown in summer.

Just as we all have, there were old, maybe stained, or second-best items we schlep around the house in but would not wear out in public. Bridget testifies that at times, Lizzie would wear the Bedford cord just around the house.

Bedford cord is distinctive in the weave. Both Bedford, England and New Bedford, Mass. claim the name. Very pronounced rib. Very firm construction. Takes much hard wear and has various qualities and weights. The weave can be done in wool, cotton, silk or rayon. From a distance, it is possible the weave would not be noticed, therefore a bedford cord could look like a cotton calico far away. Women were pretty knowledgeable though, about these things in those days.
Silk/cotton bengaline is unmistakable . It also has a rib, like Bedford cord. Bengaline is a grosgrain fabric, with low narrow ribs running across it's width. Lizzie's was cotton/silk and would have had some luster.

Cotton Calico



Bengaline (three types including moire)

[1bigsteve]

Perhaps Lizzie was wearing a skirt and blouse over a skirt and blouse and after the murders she quickly removed the top skirt and top blouse, much like a painter wearing coveralls over his clothes. This would allow Lizzie to change with out having to strip naked then put fresh clothes on. It would greatly speed up the time it took her to change.

She would still have to keep blood out of her hair. A hat? Perhaps Lizzie kept that stove going not to warm her Irons that morning but to provide a fast means of getting rid of some bloody clothes?

If Lizzie was not the killer why didn't she call out to Bridget in a more hysterical manner? Why so cool and "matter of fact?"


-1bigsteve (o:

[1bigsteve]

Thanks for posting those samples, Shelley. I've been wondering what those fabric terms mean. Now I understand better what we are talking about.


-1bigsteve (o:

[Kat]

Since we don't have Bridget's inquest testimony it's a bit hard to judge what Bridget might have thought at the time was Lizzie's reaction to things.
For example here is Bridget at the trial, and the inference is that her statement has changed somewhat from earlier.
Also notice her phrasing of "such a voice." I don't think it's clear what she means by that- unless we knew Lizzie's usual voice:

Q. Do you remember the exact words that she used?
A. She says, "Maggie, come down," and she hollered with such a voice that I says, "What is the matter?" She says, "Come down quick. Father is dead. Somebody came in and killed him."

Q. Now, when you gave it before to-day, did you give it just
Page 287
like that?
A. I think so.

Q. Did you say "Father is killed"?
A. "Father is killed" or "dead." I can't tell which of the two,---just the same any way.

Q. It means the same, but I am trying to see if you could remember the words. You don't quite, do you?
A. I think she said, "Father is killed; somebody came in."

Q. Other times you have said, haven't you, a little something different? It may mean the same.
A. I don't know. I think it is the words she said, either dead or killed. I can't tell which of them.

Since there are instances where Lizzie's demeanor at this period of time is desribed: we should find them, if the picture of Lizzie is set in someone's mind as "cool" or "matter of fact."

[1bigsteve]

The testimony of Lizzie's reaction to finding her father's body always gave me the impression of someone still in control of her emotions, not exactly "coming unglued." Lizzie may have been in "shock" when finding her father's body resulting in her perceived somewhat "coolish" demeanor. I've always felt that Lizzie's reaction was a bit too calm. But of course everyone reacts differently to a situation like that so maybe Lizzie's reaction was normal for her. But, I don't know...

-1bigsteve (o:

[shakiboo]

Yes, thanks Shelley, I too have been a bit confused by the different materials.....tis true, a picture IS worth a thousand words! I'm gonna have to go check the testimony, but some where in them I read that Lizzies friends weren't surprised by Lizzies cpntrol, that she was as they would expect her to be. Now had she totally lost it and gave way to hysterics that would have, apparently, been out of charactor for her and they would have known it. Wouldn't that have made her look even more quilty?

[1bigsteve]

Good point, Pam. If Lizzie was guilty and went into hysterics and was not a good actress it would have come off phony. So if Lizzie was guilty and maintained some sort of "pained but in control" she could have made her grief look real.

It's kind of a six of one and half-dozen of another type of thing. It could go either way.

What is that phrase, "Excess within control?"

-1bigsteve (o:

[Shelley]

Excess Within Control! That's the line Jane Seymour as Elise McKenna gives to Christopher Plummer in Somewhere in Time. The roles are based on real life actress Maude Adams and her manager Charles Frohman.
I like to embroider sentiments on pillows for people and I did that phrase on a pillow for Somewhere In Time screenwriter, Richard Matheson. Seems a great way to approach living every day.

[1bigsteve]

I just knew that was going to get your attention Shelley. I just knew it! The devil made me do it!

I love that scene in "Somewhere..." Heck, I love the whole movie! It is so beautiful.

-1bigsteve (o:

[Kat]

Should be start collecting the witnesses impressions of Lizzie's demeanor at the time each saw her?

[Shelley]

IN our last INSITE (International Network of Somewhere in Time Enthusiasts) we learned that the society may soon be folding! The cost of publishing the newletter and finding help with the organization (which now has about 4,000 members all over the world) is taxing. The October SIT weekends still go on and one is planned for 2008. I helped get it started in 1990 along with Bill Shepherd out in California and it is now run by an extra who was in the film, Jo Addie and her husband. The film is based on a novel Bid Time Return by sci-fi great, Richard Matheson whose Stir of Echoes and I am Legend have recently seen the big screen. I had talked to Richard back in 1992 about producing a script about the Borden case and he had a lot of interest in. I have been thinking about bringing it up again as he would be a perfect screenwriter for the project -and sadly, at age 82, he is not getting any younger (as are we all!).

[twinsrwe]

... I'm gonna have to go check the testimony, but some where in them I read that Lizzies friends weren't surprised by Lizzies cpntrol, that she was as they would expect her to be. ...

I have read that too, Pam. I have always wondered how Lizzie's friends could have possibly known what to expect emotionally from Lizzie, after all, it's not as if finding her father's brutally murdered body was a normal occurrence within the Borden household.

... Now had she totally lost it and gave way to hysterics that would have, apparently, been out of charactor for her and they would have known it. Wouldn't that have made her look even more quilty?

I agree that if Lizzie had totally lost it and went into hysterics, then it would have been out of character for her. However, the emotions, or lack of emotions, that Lizzie did display made her look more guilty than innocence.

[diana]

Should be start collecting the witnesses impressions of Lizzie's demeanor at the time each saw her?

It might be helpful if people cited the testimony they're using to form their opinions as to Lizzie's demeanor. I guess I've always felt there was sufficient input from Mrs. Churchill, Alice Russell, Bridget, and Charles Sawyer to offset the police position that she was more moved than stoic.

Mrs. Churchill described her as "distressed", Alice Russell found her "dazed" , Bridget said Lizzie was crying. and Charles Sawyer told the court she was " grief-stricken" and said that "when they came down and reported that her mother had been killed, she apparently went off in some kind of swoon or hysterical fit..." (All the above comes from Inquest testimony -- with Bridget's being read out at trial).

For some reason these particular impressions of Lizzie's behavior stuck with me. But it's obvious that conflicting testimony has made a stronger impression on others. So you're right, Kat, it would be a good idea to see all this in one place.

[Yooper]

Officer Harrington interviewed Lizzie the day of the murders. She was in her room with Alice Russell and the description of the difference between the two women and their mannerisms is striking.

Officer Harrington, Witness Statements, Pages 5-6:

During this conversation with Lizzie, I cautioned her about what she might say at the present time. I said owing to the atrociousness of the crime, perhaps you are not in a mental condition to give as clear a statement of the facts as you will be tomorrow; and also by that time you may be able to tell more about the man who wished to hire the store. You may recollect of having heard his name, or of seeing him, and thereby be enabled to give a description of him, or may recollect of something said about him by your father; so I say it may be better for you not to submit to an interview until tomorrow, when you may be better able to recite what you know of the circumstances.” To this she replied “no, I think I can tell you all I know now, just as well as at any other time.” This conversation took place in Lizzie’s
room, on the second floor, in the presence of Miss Alice Russell, who sat in a chair by the door which
leads to the front hall, by which I entered Lizzie’s room. Miss Russell was very pale, and much agitated, which she showed by short sharp breathing and wringing her hands. She spoke not a word.
Lizzie stood by the foot of the bed, and talked in the most calm and collected manner; her whole
bearing was most remarkable under the circumstances. There was not the least indication of agitation, no sign of sorrow or grief, no lamentation of the heart, no comment on the horror of the crime, and no expression of a wish that the criminal be caught. All this, and something that, to me, is indescribable, gave birth to a thought that was most revolting. I thought, at least, she knew more than she wished to tell.

If Lizzie was distressed at one point, she seemed to have gotten over it by the time of the interview with Harrington. Another consideration is that any number of things might have made Lizzie appear distressed, such as grief, or coming down from an adrenaline rush. In any case, she seemed to have gotten over the cause of her distress by the time of the interview. Alice had not.

[Shelley]

Yes, how I love officer Harrington-he was such an observant man and very sensitive to every nuance. His description of the wrapper alone puts him on a pedestal! What a shame he died so soon after, and after his honeymoon in Newport too! I bet he would have made Chief of Police.

[doug65oh]

One thing in that that always sticks out like a sore thumb for me - notice how Harrington approached and treated Lizzie during that interview? As if to say "Now of course I do need to ask you these things but it doesn't have to be today. Get yourself settled and such, do your best to recall what you're able to, then we can talk tomorrow." Of course she plowed right on.

[bob_m_ryan]

(All the above comes from Inquest testimony -- with Bridget's being read out at trial).


Diane -- Was Bridget's Inquest testimony really read out during the trial? I thought her Inquest testimony was lost?

[FairhavenGuy]

A small part of it relating to whether or not Lizzie was crying was read back to Bridget.

So at that point there was a copy that could be read back from.

[nbcatlover]

Haven't any of you known someone who was cool and calm in the face of disaster, then falls apart privately afterwards? Lizzie seems to be that kind of person to me. Call it denial as a coping mechanism.

[Angel]

Haven't any of you known someone who was cool and calm in the face of disaster, then falls apart privately afterwards? Lizzie seems to be that kind of person to me. Call it denial as a coping mechanism.

I'm like that. I don't react to something bad that happens until hours later. It's weird.

[Yooper]

Shortly after the murders Lizzie first falls apart, then calms down according to those who saw her.

[Ad]

(All the above comes from Inquest testimony -- with Bridget's being read out at trial).


Diane -- Was Bridget's Inquest testimony really read out during the trial? I thought her Inquest testimony was lost?

Would there be a slight possibility that there's a copy of the her Inquest testimony (and others as well) in the Robinson paperwork locked in that filing cabinet all these years?

[diana]

Sorry, Bob Ryan that I didn't get back to you and thank you, Chris for responding!

Yes, portions of Bridget's inquest testimony were read out at trial to show how, over time, she'd changed her tune. At the inquest, she said Lizzie was crying, but at trial she denied saying this.

The stenographer, Annie White is called and reads out the following from Bridget's inquest testimony:
"A. She [Lizzie] seemed to be excited more than I ever saw her.
Q. Was she crying?
A. Yes, she was crying." (Trial, 1593+)

[FairhavenGuy]

Bob Ryan's question and the one by Ad about the Robinson files makes me wonder: do we know exactly when Bridget's and Lizzie's Inquest transcripts went missing? Has anyone ever pinpointed when it was last seen?

[Ad]

Regarding the stenographer Annie White, has anyone ever done a search of her family tree with the hopes that she may have kept a copy of the inquest testimony?

After all, it was probably the biggest case she ever sat in on. It’s a hard one to top.

Wouldn’t that be grand if there is a copy sitting in a dusty corner of a family member’s attic?

[diana]

Yes, how I love officer Harrington-he was such an observant man and very sensitive to every nuance. His description of the wrapper alone puts him on a pedestal! What a shame he died so soon after, and after his honeymoon in Newport too! I bet he would have made Chief of Police.

Harrington climbed the ladder from patrolman to Captain in the period between the murders and trial.

He was certainly uncannily observant about the wrapper Lizzie changed into: “plain---or in a house wrap, striped in pattern, a pink and light stripe alternating,---pink the most prominent color or shade. On the light stripe was a diamond figure formed by small bars or stripes, some of which ran parallel with the stripe and others biased to it, or diagonally. It was fitted to the form on the sides; stand up collar, plaited on the sides and closely shirred in front. . . . . . . gathered closely; smaller plaits in front. . . . From the waist to the neck it was puffed, quite a number of folds in it. On either side, directly over the hip, was caught a small, narrow, bright red ribbon about three quarters of an inch or an inch in width.” ( Phil Harrington,Trial, 580)

It would seem he had an eye for some details, but not others, however. Oddly, he persisted in his impression that Andrew Borden was wearing laced up high shoes, even as the defence showed him a photograph of the Congress boots on Andrew’s feet. (Trial 580+)

[bob_m_ryan]

It is so hard to believe those testimonies were lost. They must have been mis-filed at some point. I wonder, were the court records back then ever moved around or re-filed at a certain time interval; sort of like being archived?

[diana]

At this point we have four people testifying that Lizzie was distressed, grief-stricken, and crying and only one witness claiming she was unmoved.

There must be a stronger reason people have the distinct impression Lizzie was unduly calm on the day of the murders. Surely one policeman's testimony doesn't cancel out four other witnesses?

Has anyone found other testimony to back up Officer Harrington's claim?

[Kat]

I've been re-reading the Witness Statements and finding good ole Phil Harrington a bit of a bore. His eloquent retelling of Mr. Hiram Harrington's statement about Lizzie is at odds with that man's own grammer and syntax in his own words in testimony (page 11).

He had rather jumped the gun with his "I don't like that girl" comment to the Marshal on Thursday's search of the barn. He has Dr. Chagnon and fam. leaving town Thursday at 5 a.m., but I think Lucy Collet says she saw them go by before she went to sit at Dr. Chagnon's house. (W.S.7).

He has Mrs. Dr. Bowen sitting at her front window "in full view" of the 2 doors to the Bordens' - watching for her daughter but Mrs. Dr. Bowen later explains she had to look out thru the blinds. (W.S.8).

[Prelim-Mrs. Dr. Bowen, pg. 481]:
Q. Whether you paid attention, or not, you did not see anybody go in or out of their yard?
A. No Sir, if I had had the blinds open---- I had my blinds closed so I could not see through them.
Q. So you could not see the yard at that time?
A. Not at that time.
Q. At that time you could not see the yard where you were at all?
A. No.
Q. So where you were standing that morning, watching for your daughter, you could not have seen, without opening some blinds, you could not have seen the yard?
A. No Sir. I misunderstood you.

Twice he cites (W.S. 8,9) Mrs. John Gomeley as being at/implies living at 90 Second Street at Mrs. Churhill's, but she didn't live there- she lived at 122 Third Street and was Mrs. John Gormley (Knowlton Papers Glossary 436).

Granted, some of these statements are signed "Doherty/Harrington" but his name is on them.

Then there is his (IMO) sarcasm when it came to the "Frank Wade clue." (W.S. 15-16).
I left off at page 28 last night. I do wonder about the Trickey- McHenry stuff in the W.S. that are just incomprehensible- I don't know why Harrington was involved in that- it's just so weird! (W.S. 22-28).

[diana]

Yes -- what on earth was he doing secreted in a closet while McHenry fed Trickey false information designed to implicate Lizzie? That truly is weird!

[Yooper]

At this point we have four people testifying that Lizzie was distressed, grief-stricken, and crying and only one witness claiming she was unmoved.

There must be a stronger reason people have the distinct impression Lizzie was unduly calm on the day of the murders. Surely one policeman's testimony doesn't cancel out four other witnesses?

Has anyone found other testimony to back up Officer Harrington's claim?

Another good question might be; why would a trained observer want to contradict absolutely anyone else who might be questioned about Lizzie's demeanor if she was clearly distressed and remained so throughout the day? Surely officer Harrington would be aware that others would contradict him if he noted or testified that Lizzie seemed calm, including his fellow officers.

It isn't quite as simple as comparing one observation with another because they were made at different times, not simultaneously. They may all be correct, Lizzie's demeanor may have changed at some point. Perhaps the change itself, or it's degree or timing, is why people get the impression she seemed calm rather than agitated. The observations are not mutually exclusive due to a separation in time.

Officer Harrington seemed capable of recognizing someone in an agitated state through body language, he described Alice Russell as such. She was in the same room at the same time as Lizzie, and he made a point of the distinction between the two.

[Shelley]

'they were made at different times, not simultaneously"

Exactly the point! And what a difference even 15 minutes can make.

[Yooper]

Maybe that's why people get the idea that Lizzie's demeanor was unusual. Not so much that she was distressed or calm, but the diametrically opposed observations. If all are correct, then she exhibited an unusual degree of control over her emotions, and at that point, which one do you believe, distress or calmness?

[Kat]

Sorry I couldn't help myself!

Another good question might be; why would a trained observer want to contradict absolutely anyone else who might be questioned...

--Yooper, partial

The point Diana was making:
Trial
Harrington
558
Q. Where did you go after you first entered the house?
A. I asked a question or two, and I was directed to a door on the west side of the kitchen. It was closed. I opened it and went into a room which was called the sitting room.

Q. Yes. And you discovered Mr. Borden's body there?
A. Yes, sir; on a sofa which rested on the north side of the house was the form of a man partially covered with a sheet, going from the head, the west end of the lounge, down a little below the knees. Below that black pants and a pair of laced shoes.
.....
577
Q. You said, speaking of Mr. Borden as he was laid upon the sofa---did he have slippers on?
A. No, sir.

Q. What kind of boots did he have on?
A. He had a laced shoe.

Q. Do you mean a low shoe?
A. No, sir.

Page 578

Q. A laced high shoe?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. You are pretty certain about that?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. It was not a congress boot?
A. No, sir.

Q. You know what I mean?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. You are certain about that. Have you ever seen the photograph of the body as it is presented here?
A. Not the photograph, no, sir.

Q. (Showing photograph to witness). Will you look at those shoes---your eyes are better than mine, but will you kindly tell us whether those are a correct representation?
A. Not as they impressed me, sir.

Q. Then, as you recall it, this is not correct?
A. As I recall it.

Q. Then seeing this, having this to refresh your recollection, do you change your statement?
A. No, sir.

Q. You leave it that he had on laced boots?
A. My impression was laced boots.

(Photograph shown to the jury).

Q. Well, that is merely a matter of recollection, I suppose on your part. You were not excited at that time?
A. Well, no, sir, I don't think I was.

Q. You had full possession of all your faculties?
A. Well, I thought so.

Q. All the time you were there, notwithstanding you had seen these horrible sights?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you ever see worse ones in your life?
A. No, sir.

Q. That did not shake you a particle?
A. Well, it disturbed me some, but I don't think I lost my reasoning faculties.

Page 579

Q. Or your perceptive faculties?
A. No, sir, I don't think I did.
----------------

and, out of page order:

574/Cross
Q. Well, your talk with her [Lizzie] then was right after 12 o'clock, or between twelve and one?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. A good many people about there at that time?
A. There were.

Q. A good deal of excitement?
A. Well, it wasn't demonstrated.

Page 575

Q. What?
A. I didn't see any demonstration of excitement. Everybody was quiet and peaceable.

Q. You think that everybody was perfectly collected and calm, all the people around the house there outside?
A. Well, they didn't show any indications of being otherwise, more than walking round and talking casually.

Q. Well, I don't mean there was any riot, but whether there was any excitement such as there would be? You don't know about that?
A. No, sir.

[Kat]

Harrington still has some 'splainin' to do about those Witness Statements I posted...

[shakiboo]

I think the problem between Lizzie and Harrington was a personnel dislike......She could have thought he was talking down to her (a lady) and he could have thought that she was treating him like she was royalty. If you get what I mean.....He didn't like her and she didn't like him either, it could have been her personnel dislike of him that colored her answers to him and made her seem cold and indifferent about the murders. If you can see what I'm getting at.

[diana]

Harrington definitely didn't like Lizzie and said so in his statement. I think they went to school together -- he was a year older than her, if I remember rightly. (I wish I could find my source for this information. I don't like posting stuff I can't validate.)

But, as for the "diametrically opposed observations" -- I see where you're going with that, Yooper. However I think it would be a stronger point if the ratio was a little more balanced ; i.e. if three people said Lizzie was calm and four people said she was distressed. Personally, I need more than one versus four.

That's why I'm intrigued by how so many forum members share the opinion that Lizzie was unmoved that morning, when the testimony seems weighted the other way.

[shakiboo]

I think she was upset, and the ones who saw her first are the ones that said she was. I think it was Lizzies upbringing that worked against her. I believe she was raised to be stoic and not to show her emotions. Especially to strangers and in public, it would be precieved as a sign of weakness. I think Andrew had alot to do with that. I don't think Emma fell apart or showed alot of emotion either, but nothing was made of that by any one.

[Yooper]

Did Alice Russell ever dispute officer Harrington's description of Lizzie's demeanor? She was present at the time, and he described her demeanor as well as Lizzie's. It seems to me that she would be in a good position to dispute any discrepancy between officer Harrington's observation and the truth.

I agree, diana, the testimony does seem weighted by volume toward distressed, but the disparity in the time of the observations must be considered. How many of the four people who said Lizzie was distressed observed her at the same time as Harrington? Based upon the time difference, all of the observations could be accurate.

The point I'm trying to make is that perhaps Lizzie's demeanor changed quickly. People might relate to that as being too much in control of her emotions to make the grief seem genuine. It is much easier for a calm person to feign grief than for a deeply and genuinely distressed person to appear calm. A trained observer, such as a police officer, would probably see through an act sooner than a casual observer. Harrington picked up on Alice Russel's distress without her having to utter a word. This may be the reason why so many believe Lizzie was calm the morning of the murders

[Kat]

It was Terence's article in the LBQ: "Duniho, Terence. 'Friends From Boyhood: A Police Officer and an Embezzler.' Lizzie Borden Quarterly VIII.3 (July 2001): 7, 17-20.
Duniho follows the trail of Joseph W. Carpenter, Jr., an employee of Andrew J. Borden who had embezzled $6,700 from Borden & Almy as a possible suspect in the murder of Andrew and Abby Borden."
Cited at:
http://lizzieandrewborden.com/Resources ... Auth.htm#d

[diana]

Thank you for the source, Kat! Yes, and although they were boyhood friends and both had worked at Almy and Borden at the same time, it was Harrington who was sent to verify Carpenter's alibi....

Shakiboo, I tend to agree with you that Lizzie's upbringing may have contributed to Harrington's perception of an unsuitable lack of overtly displayed grief. And that may have been why Bridget, and her close friends and neighbors were privy to her loss of control, while Harrington was not.

[Yooper]

So, now we're saying that Lizzie was capable of changing from her genuine and deeply felt grief to a calm and controlled demeanor as easily as, say, changing her dress? The sincerity of her emotions were the result of her upbringing?

[shakiboo]

Not exactly Jeff, It's more like a preconditoning, for example, boys are told not to cry, to be strong, to not act like a baby when they're hurt and it's expected of them to do so. If you raise a girl the same way, you'll have a girl who isn't prone to hysteria, who can control her feelings as well as a man, the difference is he's stoic and strong, she's cold and unfeeling. It doesn't mean she didn't commit the crime, it just means that for a little bit there, she did let her composure slip, but once she regained control of it, she then appeared cold and unfeeling. Hope you get what I'm trying to say......

[Yooper]

I understand what you're saying Pam, but the original question was why so many believe that Lizzie appeared calm and in control of herself, when it appears to some that the contention is false.

If Lizzie was calm, she was feigning grief. If Lizzie was distressed, she was feigning calm. In either case, Lizzie was acting. She was doing rather well with it because she managed to either fool four casual observers or one trained observer.

In the midst of all the turmoil and grieving, during which Mrs. Churchill uttered a distressed sound when announcing that Abby was dead, Mrs. Bowen had to return home because she was somehow deemed unfit to remain, and Alice Russell was wringing her hands and appearing distressed, we have Lizzie, the one who should have been the most affected by the events, appearing to be in complete control of herself and the situation. I can't speak for anyone else, but this strikes me as odd.

Maybe this answers the original question as to why so many think Lizzie appeared calm, or that Lizzie's demeanor was somehow inappropriate. All I've seen as dissent is the contention that the sheer volume of observations is somehow a parameter, regardless of the time of observation, and an attempt to discredit officer Harrington and his observations. The first is only viable if all of the observations are made at the same time, which makes them mutually exclusive. The second may indicate that Harrington was capable of making errors, but the number of incorrect observations will correlate with the total number of observations. He probably made more correct observations than anyone else, too. The bottom line is, we all read the same primary sources and we all reach our own conclusions based upon our individual experiences.

[Shelley]

"The bottom line is, we all read the same primary sources and we all reach our own conclusions based upon our individual experiences."

That's pretty much it in a nutshell! What a pity Harrington did not have another officer with him during the questioning. Lizzie may also have behaved more emotionally with lady friends than she would with a male official. The thing which has always given me the impression of detached coolness was her comment about going down to the cemetery, and suggesting Winward for the undertaker, all a curious thing at a time like that. I also thought it odd that as the only family member at home , she made haste to go upstairs at the earliest convenience, change her clothes and remove herself from the events below. I can understand how this may have been so during the operations on the bodies late in the afternoon, but I wonder that she did not want to be with her neighbors and friends in the kitchen, trying to be of use and to keep abreast of the goings on, arrangements, police questioning, etc.. Maybe she thought Uncle John would take over as a man, and only living male at hand from the family.

[Yooper]

That's right Shelley, Lizzie wasn't attempting to remain calm and take charge of the household when she shut herself in her bedroom. Her comments to others at various times indicate something other than emotional turmoil.

Harrington offered to postpone the interview until the next day or some later time, as Doug brought up earlier. I don't think he had the idea that Lizzie was guilty until he began interviewing her, or shortly after. If he had any inclination that Lizzie was guilty before the interview, he would have insisted the interview take place immediately. He offered to postpone it, possibly due to a previous association with Andrew, or perhaps because he and Lizzie were classmates. I definitely don't take the phrase "I don't like that girl" literally, I think that was paraphrased for public consumption. If I was in Harrington's shoes, speaking to a fellow officer, even to a superior, I would have said something more like "I think Lizzie's full of (beans)".

[Kat]

Quoting Yooper here to get at the question of who else said Lizzie had a cool calm demeanor?

...but the original question was why so many believe that Lizzie appeared calm and in control of herself, when it appears to some that the contention is false.

--Yooper, partial

and

This may be the reason why so many believe Lizzie was calm the morning of the murders

--Yooper earlier, partial

and

Maybe this answers the original question as to why so many think Lizzie appeared calm, or that Lizzie's demeanor was somehow inappropriate.

--Yooper, partial

I studied Harrington's discrepancies as a lesson to myself. It did somewhat discredit him. I had started out to find other instances of anyone describing Lizzie's demeanor. Please, are you going to show who these other people are you refer to, other than Philip Harrington?