Andrew's position

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Tue May 12, 2009 9:27 am

If Lizzie did wear the her father's coat to protect herself from splatter, then she would have had to place it under her father's head afterwards, as it is seen on the pictures. It would have been impossible for her to pick his head up and tuck it under him without getting blood on herself. I am wondering if he may have been attacked instead while he was sitting more upright, maybe nodding off with his head back against the wall or the top of the sofa. Wasn't there some blood spatter right under the picture? If that was the case, she could have simply folded the coat, put it on the end, and then pushed him to the side, as he was found. The position in which he was found looks like a very unnatural way to relax and take a nap.

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Tue May 12, 2009 11:13 am

Yes Angel:

You bring forth some good points. The scenarios you lay out all but puts the argument that lizzie wore Andrew Borden's jacket to bed, making it very unlikely.

Further proof is that if she did wear Andrew's jacket, after she folded it and placed it under his head, there would be blood spotting between the folds. Surly, this would be realized by the investigation team.

Another point you bring up is Andrew's position on the couch. I too have always found it unnatural.

This speaks to another scenario, that being, that Borden could have been napping, seen his assailant and began to get up from his reclining position while receiving the blow. With all the talk about Abby seeing her killer the truth could be that Andrew Borden seen his................and if it was his daughter the only conciliation would be that he would have very little time to mull over the reason why or the realization that my own daughter is killing me.

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Tue May 12, 2009 12:30 pm

The fact that his fists were clenched seems to me that he may have had just enough time to tense up before he was struck, so he would have had a second to see something.

I think, however, that the coat was probably pretty soaked, so the folding wouldn't have shown much of a pattern, especially if there was enough blood to soak through the floor and onto the cellar ceiling boards.

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Tue May 12, 2009 3:54 pm

Was the coat under his head- or folded on the arm of the sofa by his head?That would make a difference. The photo we all know of Andrew on the sofa was taken long after the body was initially examined and adjusted. His body was examined to see if burglary had been a motive, so his hands and arms would have been disturbed going through his pockets. Dead arms dangle and these arms in the photo have every look of someone (either a policeman or Dolan or Winward) carefully propping them in the funeral parlor pose we all know so well to keep them from sprawling. I should imagine rigor mortis is also at play here. The photos, I think, were not taken until about 4:30 or thereabouts by Walsh. The sheet would have had to have been removed for the photos.

Yooper · Post by **Yooper** » Tue May 12, 2009 9:17 pm

The coat seems to be partially beneath Andrew's head but mostly above and behind his head. There is an asymmetry to the arms of the sofa, the one on the right from the camera position seems to be undisturbed, but the one Andrew is lying on seems to be a bit bunched beneath the pillow and his coat. Were the sofa arms made as movable pads? Maybe I'm looking at it wrong, but there seems to be a light colored rectangle (doily?) on the left sofa arm or pad which is not seen on the other one. If the sofa arms were movable or loose pads of some design, then if Andrew caused the left sofa arm to slide and bunch up, where would his coat have to start out in order to end up where we now see it?

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Tue May 12, 2009 9:24 pm

No, the sofa arms are not movable. This style of sofa is still very easy to find- in fact I bought an antique one just like it this weekend. There is clearly something on the arm of the sofa-doily, afghan, something-perhaps more than one item. I understand it is clearer in a photo which is close to the first generation. The problem with the photos in books is that they are sometimes third or fourth generation from the original and the detail is not sharp. I sure would love some high res digitals from the masters!

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Thu May 14, 2009 6:08 pm

Trial testimony of Dr. William A. Dolan page 855-856:

Q. What was the head resting on?
A. The head was resting on a small sofa cushion that had a little white tidy on it. The cushion in turn, I think, rested on his coat, which had been doubled up and put under there, and that I think, rested upon and afghan or sofa cover, ---a knitted affair.

Q. The lowest of the three was the doubled up coat?
A. No, sir.

Q. Was the--?
A. Afghan.

Q. Then came the coat?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. And then the sofa cushion?
A. Yes, sir.

--------------

page 927:

Q. The photograph that is marked Ex. 5 and is a representation of Mr. Borden lying on the sofa, I understand you to say, is a correct representation of the way he looked to you when you saw him?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. With the exception that the head is lower down?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. In this photograph there appears to be on the arm of the sofa near the dining room, something folded up which is not clear and distinct. Was that the coat?
A. No, sir, not at the very bottom.

Q. No, I mean, on the upper arm of the sofa?
A. That is the Prince Albert coat.

Q. When you saw him, was his head upon that?
A. No, sir.

Q. Did it touch it at all?
A. No, sir.

Q.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Thu May 14, 2009 6:12 pm

If she pushed up her sleeves even just a bit, all she would have needed to do is a quick tuck of the coat under his head and if she received any blood transfer make a quick trip to the faucet in the sink room at the foot of the stairs, and then step over and call up to Bridget. I remember how clean and white it was said Lizzie's hands were, even after she claimed to be up in the hot dusty barn.

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Thu May 14, 2009 7:21 pm

Here's a blowup of that section of the photo.

I agree with Shelley in that the body had been moved by the time the photo was taken. Didn't Dr. Bowen testify he thought Andrew's head was higher when he first seen the body?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon May 18, 2009 1:33 am

Thanks for the closeup picture Har, and the testimony, Missy!

IMO Lizzie would take a chance getting blood on her clothes trying to shove that coat there.

BTW: It looks so large there in that picture!

As for where Andrew's head was positioned:
Dolan
Prelim
93
Q. What sort of a sofa was it?
A. An old fashioned sofa.
Q. An arm at each end?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Not one of these modern lounges?
A. No Sir.
Q. Was the head up on the arm of the sofa?
A. No Sir, it was in the angle between the top of the head of the lounge and the lounge itself, that is, the middle of an angle, about the middle of a line drawn.
. . . .

Len had told me that his grandfather habitually would come home and lie down on the sofa in just the same way we see Andrew lying.

As to when Andrew's photo was taken:
Dolan at the Prelim:
Page 159

A. No sir.
Q. Where is the photograph?
A. At my house.
Q. Will you produce that?
A. If you wish.
Q. Please do tomorrow. What else did you have photographed?
A. The position of both bodies, the rooms, the heads of the bodies; that was all.
Q. What else did you do that Thursday?
A. That afternoon I opened both bodies, and took the stomachs out.
Q. What else did you do that day? That photograph was in the afternoon?
A. About three o’clock, yes sir, that is what causes the discrepancy in my record of that opening, and the I told you. I did it about half past three; and in the record it is three; that is because the photograph was taken.
Q. What do you mean, you made a mistake setting it down in your records?
A. Yes sir.
Q. It was half past three, and not three, that is the time when you removed the stomachs, and sealed them up, and had them sent to Prof. Wood?
A. Yes sir.
Q. That is the time you made the incision?
A. Yes sir.