Moving the sofa

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Tue May 04, 2004 3:29 pm

I was looking at the crime scene photos this afternoon and something struck me about the clearest one I have seen of Andrew.

If you look at the caster on the sofa it is clearly in position as if it has last been moved out/in versus side/side. The wheel is facing front to back on the sofa.

Was the sofa moved during the investigation? Either way, the sofa was last moved (prior to this photo) in and out and not pulled to the side. On carpeting the wheels would not easily spring back to any certain position but remain as they were when the moving ceased.

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Tue May 04, 2004 4:04 pm

Interesting... I had never noticed that before. The photographer, Mr. Walsh, was only asked (during the trial) about things having been moved in the bedroom:

Trial, Pg. 121-22:

Q. Under whose direction were the body, the bed and the bureau
Page 122
adjusted to the position seen in the view?
A. They were that way when I went in the house. I didn't see anyone move them.

He was never asked at all about Andrew's body (or the sofa) having been moved.

From the looks of it, Walsh's only value as a witness was to authenticate the photographs he made.

Robert Harry · Post by **Robert Harry** » Tue May 04, 2004 4:18 pm

There was an extended thread on this topic--moving the sofa--I'm sure you could find it in the archives. As I recall, the original debate started with the idea that the couch is curiously off-center. Someone thought that the sofa should have been centered along the wall with the picture in the middle. Several people, though, thought that the sofa would have to be placed the way it is shown in the photo in order to allow for people to pass easily through the door from the kitchen into the sitting room--although that door was usually not used by the Bordens. During my last visit to the house (on May 1-2), I have become convinced that there is indeed something fishy about both the sofa and Andrew's body. While there, I heard a report that two psychics who visited both separately said that there had been a fight in the kitchen between two men and that Andrew was killed or knocked out in the kitchen and moved to the sofa.

But if he was already dead and then axed, how could there have been blood spurts? Looking again at the murder scene photo, it is clear that there is something odd about Andrew's position on the sofa. It doesn't appear that he had been either napping or sitting, but rather pluncked down there. And, I just noticed that one of his sleeves is pulled up rather high, which doesn't seem consistent with someone who had been sitting or resting and was killed on the spot--he either pulled up his sleeve, or maybe it was hiked up by someone dragging him by pulling him by the arms.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Tue May 04, 2004 4:23 pm

I did read that thread but found no reference to the position of the caster which does seem to indicate which direction it was last moved.

I have yet to form a final opinion as to if the couch was moved at all on the day of the murders......

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Tue May 04, 2004 5:39 pm

Yes, we had discussed in the past the casters on the sofa and the position that they were in which looked as though it had been moved. I guess the tricky part comes when we are trying to find if the sofa had been moved before the photos were taken by someone in authority, if that was just the normal position of the casters say from Abby or Bridget moving the sofa out to clean the carpet underneath it, or, if the sofa had been moved during the murder.

Nancie · Post by **Nancie** » Tue May 04, 2004 7:22 pm

i guess this is one of those things "we'll never know". In one photo with the Inspector standing in
the corner suggests that things were moved.
Audrey why do you want to be a greasy plate of
french fries?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue May 04, 2004 8:28 pm

There is testimony as to the blood pooling on the sofa and onto the floor. It was recounted as "blood evidence".
They would have to move the sofa to examine that and record it, and describe it.
But it's probable that that was done after Andrew's body was taken off the couch?

If someone of Andrew's size was flung or flung himself backwards on the sofa (say to get away from an attack, or tripped or was fighting), and if the sofa's normal position no matter where it stood in relation to the picture was away from the wall, the weight of the man would cause it to roll back against the wall and the casters would be facing that direction?

We had a very large sofa (a 3-seater) on a short wall such as this, and we tried to keep the back a tiny bit away from the wall- because whenever anyone flung themselves down it would drive that sofa into the wall at the highest point in the back. Our wall has a permanent horizontal groove now because of that.

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Tue May 04, 2004 9:23 pm

I don't know if we'll ever know if the sofa was moved backward, forward or even a little side to side between the time of the murder and the taking of the photo, but with regard to the general off-centeredness of it, I think that was normal, not only because there was a door to the kitchen to the right of it (even though it wasn't often used) but also because one can clearly see a small carpet next to the sofa, between it and the kitchen door. To me, that carpet shows that space was left in front of the door on that side.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue May 04, 2004 9:36 pm

Yes there is that throw carpet upon the theshold- but it's still what? Maybe 12 to 16" away from the sofa caster? There's room for the sofa leg to butt up against that rug, and stop there...

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Tue May 04, 2004 9:42 pm

Sure, but what would the point be of having the carpet there? Given the awfully cockeyed perspective of this photo, it still looks to me as though the outer edge of the sofa's arm aligns with the edge of the little throw carpet. The sofa is centered between the door jamb on the left and the edge of the little carpet on the right.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Tue May 04, 2004 9:50 pm

I get the feeling that the sofa was off center normally. I don't know why-- I just feel it.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue May 04, 2004 9:54 pm

I'm seeing things- don't mind me.

Haulover · Post by **Haulover** » Tue May 04, 2004 10:21 pm

fairhaven:

yes, i noticed that too a while back. so if the sofa was moved at all -- how much could it have mattered as far as the overall crime scene or the basic position of the sofa?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed May 05, 2004 10:13 pm

Doesn't the normal, everyday position of the sofa vs. the way the sofa was found and it's condition, matter to those who don't accept the gospel of Dr. Dolan, and believe for themselves that Andrew was attacked face to face and fell back onto the sofa?
No defense wounds, an odd position of the body, the sofa moving from the fall- these could all be clues to the attack.
If Andrew was not asleep or resting, but active in the room- that might make a difference, wouldn't it, in assessing the culprit or the reconstruction of the attack?

Nancie · Post by **Nancie** » Thu May 06, 2004 7:50 pm

I like your thinking Kat, we don't have to accept the
gospel of Dr. Dolan or anybody on this botched case.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Fri May 07, 2004 11:46 am

Actually, I posted that for those who have a different viewpoint of the attack on Andrew. That includes a lot of people who have studied this question deeply and have made up their minds. They can't be discounted by me- they may have a valid case for their theory.
Personally I believe the experts who were there at the time.
But I also believe nobody who testified knew the actual physical daily position of the sofa...so there is room for interpretation.

Haulover · Post by **Haulover** » Sun May 09, 2004 11:09 pm

Bowen from Trial: (he's looking at one of the photographs)

Q. Is there any change in the position of the sofa from its position as you saw it?

A. It shows here so it is out from the door. It was even with the door. It shows here, the way it was taken probably, in that direction.

____________

i understand him to be saying that when he first saw the body, the sofa was up against the door frame. but i don't understand the last statement in his answer. does anyone get this?

doug65oh · Post by **doug65oh** » Sun May 09, 2004 11:46 pm

Q. Is there any change in the position of the sofa from its position as you saw it?

A. It shows here so it is out from the door. It was even with the door. It shows here, the way it was taken probably, in that direction.

-------

To my way of thinking, that last statement there refers to the relative position, or angle of Walsh's camera when the photo was made. I see what you mean though - that makes for one confusing statement as written, for sure... "Taken" could also be meant as "moved"...

Seabury, what did you mean by that?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Mon May 10, 2004 12:08 am

I agree with Dougoh- that Bowen is referring to the photograph which we are told is much distorted.
Bowen was an occaisional visitor to the house but not as conversant with the placement of the furniture as people might believe based on his testimony- what I mean is I don't see his descriptions as proving the sofa's normal position.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Wed May 12, 2004 9:15 pm

If Andrew laid on the sofa willingly... Could it have been repositioned to move his eyes from the glare of the sun?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed May 12, 2004 10:34 pm

There seems to have been shutters on the inside of the sitting room windows which could probaly be used to prevent the glare of sunlight during a nap:

Inquest
Lizzie
69
Q. When you went out to the barn, where did you leave your father?
A. He had laid down on the sitting room lounge, taken off his shoes, and put on his slippers, and taken off his coat and put on the reefer. I asked him if he wanted the window left that way.
Q. Where did you leave him?
A. On the sofa.
Q. Was he asleep?
A. No sir.
Q. Was he reading?
A. No sir.
Q. What was the last thing you said to him?
A. I asked him if he wanted the window left that way. Then I went into the kitchen, and from there to the barn.

--
Trial
Bridget
Q. Then you say you went in the dining-room and sitting-room and left down the windows?
A. Yes.

Q. And what did you do to them, exactly?
A. Well, the windows was up, and I left down the windows.

Q. Shut them up?
A. Yes sir.

Q. Did you shut the windows in both rooms?
A. Yes sir, there was a window up in both the rooms.

Q. Were the curtains up or down in the rooms?
A. There was no curtains there.

Q. Were the shutters closed or open?
A. They was open at the bottom, I remember.

Q. Did you change their position at the time you shut the windows -- the position of the shutters?
A. No sir, I don't think I did.

Q. Up to the time when you shut the windows on the outside in those two rooms had you in any way closed the shutters of the dining-room and the sitting-room?
A. No sir, I don't think I did.