Asking all the right questions but all the wrong way.

[snokkums]

I got to thinking about this the other day. I think maybe the police were asking questions all the wrong way. I mean, asking lizzie what she was doing that day. Well, to me that implays the whole day. I can do alot of stuff in the course of one day. Then to come back and ask what she was doing between the two hours her parents were killed. Well,there again, I can do alot of stuff inbetween two hours. I think that is where the police thought that Lizzies alibie wasn't constant. But she might have been taking like I just did.

Maybe the police should have asked: "What were you doing at 9:30 and What were doing at 11:30" .

[Yooper]

I think it is reasonable to expect Lizzie to know whether she had been to the barn or not. It is also perfectly reasonable to ask Lizzie what she had done that day rather than ask her what she had done three weeks ago, or simply not ask her about it at all. The police asking the wrong questions did not make Lizzie look guilty, Lizzie made Lizzie look guilty, in spite of the questions. If the authorities had specified a time for an event in questioning Lizzie, it would have made it all the more difficult to answer because Lizzie didn't check her watch every time she washed her hands any more than you or I do.

[shakiboo]

She'd have been better off if she'd have just stuck with what she said, she was (it seems) trying to say what they wanted her to say. Lizzie- "I went to the barn to look for sinkers, on the way I picked up a few pears, having not found the sinkers, i just wandered around munching on the pears." Police- "How long were you out there?" Lizzie- "i have no idea, I wasn't really concerned with the time" Police- "You don't know how long you were out there?" Lizzie- "nope, was just wandereing around eating pears and wondering what could have become of my sinkers." Police- How long did it take to eat those pears? Lizzie- I don't know, I don't do anything fast. etc lol That wasn't me quoting their conversation, that was me saying what she could have or should have said.

[Yooper]

I guess it works both ways, the police want answers to be as specific as possible while the person answering the questions doesn't want to be misleading. Lizzie was asked about how much time she spent in the barn and outside. If I remember correctly, her answer was 20-30 minutes. The officer then said; "you say 20 minutes?" The reply was; "I said between 20 and 30 minutes." Don't take the quotations as literal, they're just for illustration and the times may be incorrect. There's a couple of possibilities here. Either the cop was really trying to pin her down to an exact time, or he was baiting her to find out if she was in control emotionally. If someone was unstable emotionally, they might be inclined to answer; "yeah, whatever", when being pinned down to just 20 minutes.

[shakiboo]

With all the really stupid things that Lizzie did and said, it's a wonder she didn't cut off her own foot while swinging the axe!! It just looks like from the second the deed was done, she totally lost interest in the whole mess. She didn't figure she'd be asked any questions about where she was, or anything. She just kinda wandered through it totally unprepared.

[Yooper]

It's entirely possible that Lizzie thought she would never be suspected, and to a point, she was correct. Neither the court system nor the public wanted her to be guilty, from the standpoint of having to execute a woman for murder. The only people who stood behind the accusation were the police and Judge Blaisdell, along with the grand jury, but only after Alice Russell's testimony about the dress burning.

[shakiboo]

I wonder what her life was really like after she'd been acquitted. once she finally got her hands (and Emma's) on all that money. Wonder if she still felt it was worth it. It's even stranger to have anyone that knew she did it, not write. or speak one word about it, not even on their death beds. Wouldn't that be a horrible load to carry?

[Yooper]

I suppose it would have been a lot like waiting for the other shoe to drop if anyone else knew she did it, there was no telling when or where they might spill the beans. Not that they would volunteer the information, they might have faced obstruction of justice charges if they had withheld evidence, but deals can be made. There wasn't much they could do to Lizzie anyway by then, except to retry her as an accessory, and if Lizzie was the solitary murderer there was no case to be made against her as an accessory. Still, if the information got out people would know for sure, and the few friends she had would have likely abandoned her.

If I had been in her position and if I was innocent, I would have raised all kinds of hell about pursuing the real murderer, before, during, and after the trial! If they had wasted a year of my life, they would damn well have to answer for it! Lizzie never seemed to pursue that option seriously, if at all.

[snokkums]

I suppose it would have been a lot like waiting for the other shoe to drop if anyone else knew she did it, there was no telling when or where they might spill the beans. Not that they would volunteer the information, they might have faced obstruction of justice charges if they had withheld evidence, but deals can be made. There wasn't much they could do to Lizzie anyway by then, except to retry her as an accessory, and if Lizzie was the solitary murderer there was no case to be made against her as an accessory. Still, if the information got out people would know for sure, and the few friends she had would have likely abandoned her.

If I had been in her position and if I was innocent, I would have raised all kinds of hell about pursuing the real murderer, before, during, and after the trial! If they had wasted a year of my life, they would damn well have to answer for it! Lizzie never seemed to pursue that option seriously, if at all.

I think you are right. If I were innocent I would have been raising all kinds kane too. I would want them to finding the person that did it. In fact, I think I'd of been doing that when they were accusing me of doing the deed.

I think she was glad she was aquitted and wanted to put the incident behind her, so I think that's why she never egged the police on about finding the person who did it. Either that or she did and knew she did it, and she knew she got away with murder, so she didn't want them to pursue other options.

[Yooper]

The difference lies in the perception of the public. An innocent person attempting to pursue the case, to find the murderer of her parents, appears innocent. She is less likely to be ostracized by the public, and she has every right to be angry about it. If she is simply going to not deal with it, that tends to look like something a guilty person would do, to keep quiet about it and hope for the best. I'm sure I would be relieved if I had been acquitted, but at the same time I would be mad about having wasted a year waiting for everyone else to realize I was innocent! My focus would be finding the murderer, rather than buying a house.

[shakiboo]

I wonder how many people who have lost someone they love through violence, do go looking for the murderer themselves if the authorities haven't been alble to find the one's responsible. If you think of all the unsolved murders, how many had someone go on looking after the police guit? By that I mean hiring a private investigator. And of the one's who did, how much good did it do? Were any murderer;s caught, by other mean's? I wonder if some one might have told Lizzie and Emma, that it was futile, that if the police couldn't find the person, it wasn't very likely that any one else would.

[SallyG]

To be honest, there was not a lot to be gained by hiring someone to try and find the killer (if indeed Lizzie was innocent, which I doubt). IF she had been innocent, it was probably not likely that an investigator would uncover anything the police had missed. And it would cost money. Money that, I'm sure, she was planning to enjoy.

If she was guilty, there was no point in having an investigator poke around and possibly find something incriminating. Better to let sleeping dogs lie.

[twinsrwe]

... If she was guilty, there was no point in having an investigator poke around and possibly find something incriminating. Better to let sleeping dogs lie.

Good point, Sally!

[Yooper]

One thing is certain, if you don't look for the killer, you won't find him. Lizzie might have gone after the authorities to pursue the guilty party. If she made enough noise, the press would have covered it, especially during or right after the trial. There was absolutely nothing to lose by doing that, and she might gain public support. For that matter, I don't know why even just a segment of the general public didn't demand that the police pursue the matter. If Lizzie was innocent, there was still a murderer on the loose.

[shakiboo]

That's true, unless the good people of Fall River already believed the culprit had been caught........

[twinsrwe]

I was going to post the exact same thought, Pam, but you beat me to it!

I have to wonder why Emma didn't pursue hiring someone to try and find the killer. Especially if she truly believed in Lizzie's innocence, as she claimed. After all, she would have been the head to the family after the murders.

[Yooper]

So, based upon what was not done during and after the trial, I get the idea that everyone, Lizzie and Emma included, knew who the murderer was. There was no need to search any further.

[snokkums]

I was going to post the exact same thought, Pam, but you beat me to it!

I have to wonder why Emma didn't pursue hiring someone to try and find the killer. Especially if she truly believed in Lizzie's innocence, as she claimed. After all, she would have been the head to the family after the murders.

I think she knew who did it and didn't want to see Lizzie in prison. I think she knew Lizzie did it or knew and or hired the person to do it. At any rate if she would have pursued finding the killer(s) Lizzie would have gone to prison with them. So she kept her mouth shut.

[shakiboo]

How could she ( Emma) just turn her head knowing that her sister murdered her father? She apparently was very good at hiding her emotion's and feelings too. It just makes me think, even more so, that something was very wrong with that family!! Ask yourself, could you be silent about your brother or sister harming or murdering, your own father?

[twinsrwe]

... Ask yourself, could you be silent about your brother or sister harming or murdering, your own father?

No, I couldn't!

I guess that is why I truly believe that Emma 'planted the seeds' in Lizzie, for her father and step-mother's deaths. I believe the death’s of Abby and Andrew were by Lizzie’s hand, alone, and were condoned by Emma. I think Emma influenced Lizzie more than we will ever know. I also think Andrew’s money meant a lot more to Emma, than it ever did to Lizzie.

[twinsrwe]

So, based upon what was not done during and after the trial, I get the idea that everyone, Lizzie and Emma included, knew who the murderer was. There was no need to search any further.

I think there were several people who knew, without a doubt, who the killer was. No further searching, only confirmed this.

(Sorry, Jeff, I meant to respond to your post before Pam's post. Guess I got ahead of myself!)

[Yooper]

Another question occurs assuming Emma knew Lizzie was guilty, why did Emma trust that Lizzie wouldn't turn on her? One possibility is that the lines had been clearly drawn between the elder Bordens and the daughters, two opposite camps within the household. There may have been a good deal more turmoil within the household than anyone would admit to. Emma might have felt safe knowing she and Lizzie were a team of sorts, and Emma did nothing during the trial to incriminate Lizzie, in fact, Emma seemed to cover for Lizzie. If Lizzie was aware that Emma fabricated parts of her testimony in order to do that, Emma might have counted on Lizzie being grateful. This doesn't necessarily imply that Emma was aware Lizzie planned to murder their parents, but another possibility is that Emma was aware of a plan. A third possibility is that Lizzie was the product of Emma's influence and Emma blamed herself as well as Lizzie for the murders. If Emma had that much influence over Lizzie, then Emma may have trusted Lizzie's dependency upon her to keep her safe.

[Yooper]

Come to think of it, it's possible that Lizzie befriending and entertaining "theater people" may have represented Emma losing influence over Lizzie. There could have been other instances of a break in Lizzie's dependency upon Emma which never saw the light of day. It could possibly be that Emma moved out of Maplecroft because she no longer had any control over Lizzie and Emma no longer felt safe as a result.

[Fargo]

I have to wonder that after the trial, if Lizzie was innocent that if her trying to get the authorities to find the real killer would have been practical.

Even if Lizzie had public support on her side, for the police to pursue the matter further could be interpreted by the public as the police admitting that they were wrong about thinking Lizzie guilty. I could be like saying yes we just put this innocent woman through hell for nothing. That would not make the police look good.

[Yooper]

I guess the bottom line is; if Lizzie was innocent, then the police and other authorities really should look bad. They got it wrong. The general public had a stake in the outcome if there was still a murderer on the loose. There isn't much to recommend a police force refusing to do their job, they would have looked worse if a murderer, who they allowed to escape and refused to pursue, killed others. It wasn't just the local press she could have appealed to, the story was covered nationwide. There was absolutely nothing for Lizzie to lose in the attempt to bring the murderer to justice.