About uncle John’s behaviours (part 1)

[Franz]

This is from Mr. Sawyer’s Inquest testimony (pp. 138-139)

Q: Were you there when Morse returned?
A: I was there when Morse returned, I suppose the time he returned; whether he had been there before, I don’t know.
Q: Where did you first see him?
A: He came towards me from the gate. I stood on the steps at the time, standing outside the door and holding the door outside. He came along to the steps, and he says “for Gods sake what has happened here”? I looked at him, I had not seen him, he was a stranger to me, I told him Mr. and Mrs. Borden have been murdered, been killed, something to that effect. “My god”, he says, “and I left Mr. Borden right at this door, and he told me to come back to dinner.”
…
Q: What did he do when you told him?
A: “My God”, he says, “What kind of a God have we got that will permit a deed like this to be done?” Something like that.
Q: What did he do then?
A: He stood there a few minutes, and finally went inside the door.

The testimony of Sawyer, in my opinion, implies clearly that he was the first person who told Morse the horrible news (He came along to the steps, and he says “for Gods sake what has happened here”?). But Morse himself gave a different version in his Inquest testimony (p. 104):

Q: What was the first you heard that Mr. Borden was killed?
A: When I went into the door. I went around, before I went into the house, to a pear tree to get a couple of pears. When I came back, the servant girl met me at the door, and asked if I heard the news. I said no. She said Mr. and Mrs. Borden were both murdered. A man named Sawyer stood there at the time.

According to Morse’s testimony, it seems that the first person who told him the news was Bridget (the servant girl).

Now let’s see Mrs. Churchill’s Inquest testimony (p. 130)

Q: Did you see Mr. Morse before you went home?
A: Yes Sire, he came before I went home.
Q: About what time in the order of events did he come?
A: Both Mr. and Mrs. Borden had been found when he came. I think I was the first one that let him in. I says, “Mr. Morse, something terrible has happened, someone has killed both Mr. and Mrs. Borden.” He says, “what”, and hollered “Lizzie”, as loud as he could holler, and rushed into the dining room….

I haven’t read the preliminary testimony, I don’t know if there are any different statements. For the moment I have these questions:

1. Who was the person that told Morse the horrible news for the first time, Mr. Sawyer or Bridget?

2. Mrs. Churchill said “I think I was the first one that let him in.” It implies clearly that Mrs. Churchill was in the house. In this case, why Morse said “what”? It seems that he heard the news for the first time.

3. After hearing what Mrs. Churchill told him, Morse “rushed into the dining room.” How did Morse know that Lizzie was there, instead of, for example, in the sitting room? Someone had told him so?

4. No matter who told him the news for the first time, according to Sawyer’s and Morse’s testimony, neither Sawyer nor Bridget told him that Lizzie was Ok. They told him only that Mr. and Mrs. Borden were both murdered. Certainly, this could imply that Lizzie was not murdered. But, hearing such a horrible news, why didn’t Morse ask immediately: “What about Lizzie? Is she Ok?” In my opinion, such a question should be a very natural reaction for whoever in the place of Morse. But neither Sawyer nor Morse himself testified afterwards that he had asked such a question. It seemed that Morse didn't think of his niece at all before entering in the house.

5. According to Sawyer’s testimony, after having been told the horrible news, Morse, instead of rushing immediately into the house to find Lizzie and to confirm to himself with his own eyes that his niece was OK, he “stood there a few minutes, and finally went inside the door.” If my understanding of English is correct, “few minutes” usually means at least about three minutes. For me three minutes were a long time in that circumstance. What was he thinking about in those “few minutes”?

6. According to the testimony of Morse himself, when Bridget asked him if he heard the news, he said no. Why didn't he say "what news?", or "no, what news?", but only a simple "no"?

In my opinion, Morse’s behaviours were suspicious. What do you think?

[Allen]

Continued testimony of Mrs. Adelaide Churchill page 130:

Q: Did you see Mr. Morse before you went home?
A: Yes Sir, he came before I went home.
Q: About what time in the order of events did he come?
A: Both Mr. and Mrs. Borden had been found when he came. I think I was the first one that let him in. I says, “Mr. Morse, something terrible has happened, someone has killed both Mr. and Mrs. Borden.” He says, “what”, and hollered “Lizzie”, as loud as he could holler, and rushed into the dining room. Alice Russell heard him, and I think let him in, and he went into the sitting room and the door was closed between the sitting room and the kitchen.


Franz, once again the logic involved in your thinking confuses me. We already clearly know that Mrs. Churchill was in the house. Mrs. Churchill also went on to say Alice Russell let him in also. I don't think that meant John Morse ran back out the door so that Alice Russell could let him back in the house. I think it meant they met him at the door to the room. You could have answered your own question about why he rushed into the dining room if you had read just one sentence further. The door was closed between the sitting room and kitchen, and there were obviously people in the dining room. In your opinion, asking if Lizzie was OK should have been a natural reaction on the part of John Morse. Then, using your logic, finding out if Abby was OK should also have been a natural reaction on the part of Lizzie since she heard her come in. What was he thinking about? Maybe that he had just found out his brother in law and his wife were both dead? And I doubt he literally stood there a couple of minutes. The have you heard the news thing is really reaching. It's not proof of anything other than he had not yet heard the news. Also using your logic, conflicting statements are not proof of suspicious behavior. Because you stated many times that Lizzie's contradictions should not be used as proof of guilt . That she could not be expected to remember everything just as it happened so there was nothing suspicious about it. So I cancel out any conflicting statements as not being suspicious using your logic also.

My points that show John Morse didn't exhibit suspicious behavior. There are three. 1.) Nobody ever said John Morse acted suspiciously. Not the police. Not the papers. None of the witnesses. 2.) He showed up with a letter in his pocket from Andrew that validated his reason for being there. 3.) He showed up prepared to spend the night at most bringing only the clothes on his back. After the murders he stuck around for two or three months. He made no home in Fall River. He could have easily left town simply using the excuse he was going home. But he stayed.

[mbhenty]

Yes: Allen,

With all respect, the points you made about why Morse did not exhibit suspicious behavior is sort of suspicious.

I think you may receive some quarrel on that point.

John Morse was one suspicious dude. With all the people and police swarming around the property, this guy goes out back and treats himself to some pears. If it were the average person, they would have run into the house right away. No, he hangs around a while.

John Morse stayed at the house. He knew the inner workings of that family. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

When he first reached 92 Second Street and entered that yard, he already knew something had gone down. I believe John Morse knew who killed the Bordens, or had an idea, or if you like, planned it or supplied the killer.

The fact that he stayed around meant very little when identifying him with guilt. The reason the police, the papers, the witnesses did not find him suspicious was because they were focused on Lizzie. If Lizzie hired him to kill her parents, that could very well explain why he stuck around. Waiting to get paid.

Now understand. I am not saying that Morse did the murders... or that he was even involved. But he knew something. He knew a lot. And his behavior when he arrived at the house on that bloody day was very much out of the ordinary....unnatural, strange, and well....suspicious.

At least to this chimpanzee.

[mbhenty]

The finger of guilt points to Morse by some. (Not me, but)

The reason is one of convenience. Put simply, Morse was trained as a butcher and worked at a slaughter house on the Davis farm in South Dartmouth as a young man. With this knowledge it is easy for some to make a connection with Morse, an axe, and murder. But just because he was a butcher does not mean he goes around killing people, though some can make that argument—good with an axe.

Actually very little is known about the inner workings of these people, the Bordens, the Morses', the Durfees, what went on in their minds, along with what they wanted those around them to know. What we do know comes from testimony and newspapers. (Newspaper accounts being less reliable than you think) In some cases from third parties or hearsay. The fun part is putting all the little pieces together and coming up with what "we" think the truth may be.

So, guess away. Your guess is as good as mine. Or even better.

[Allen]

I don't really see evidence of any suspicious behavior at all. Except maybe that he munched on some pears at a bad time.

[Yooper]

Yes: Allen,

With all respect, the points you made about why Morse did not exhibit suspicious behavior is sort of suspicious.

I think you may receive some quarrel on that point.

John Morse was one suspicious dude. With all the people and police swarming around the property, this guy goes out back and treats himself to some pears. If it were the average person, they would have run into the house right away. No, he hangs around a while.

John Morse stayed at the house. He knew the inner workings of that family. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

When he first reached 92 Second Street and entered that yard, he already knew something had gone down. I believe John Morse knew who killed the Bordens, or had an idea, or if you like, planned it or supplied the killer.

The fact that he stayed around meant very little when identifying him with guilt. The reason the police, the papers, the witnesses did not find him suspicious was because they were focused on Lizzie. If Lizzie hired him to kill her parents, that could very well explain why he stuck around. Waiting to get paid.

Now understand. I am not saying that Morse did the murders... or that he was even involved. But he knew something. He knew a lot. And his behavior when he arrived at the house on that bloody day was very much out of the ordinary....unnatural, strange, and well....suspicious.

At least to this chimpanzee.

It could be that the reason the police, the papers, and the witnesses focused on Lizzie was that they did not find Morse suspicious. He was the first one suspected of the murders, I'm sure the police exhausted all of the possibilities before giving up on him. He testified at the preliminary hearing that he didn't remember ever receiving a letter from Lizzie in his life. I think John Morse would be an odd choice if Lizzie was going to hire someone, that would involve a great deal of trust from both parties.

[Yooper]

Morse, inquest, p.11:
Q. How many people were in the house, do you think, when you got there?
A. I don't know, I think six or seven or eight. There was quite a number there.
Q. Were there any people out on the street?
A. I did not see them when I went in.
Q. You did not see any excitement in the yard or or the street?
A. Nothing to attract my attention at all.

Morse, preliminary, p.244:
Q. Did you see any crowds upon the street when you came up?
A. Nothing that attracted my attention.
Q. What did you notice first when you got along?
A. I did not notice anything about the place.

Morse, trial, p.139:
Q. How did you go to the Borden house then?
A. Walked.
Q. Immediately?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When you got to the Borden house did anything attract your attention at first?
A. No, sir.

It doesn't sound like Morse saw people swarming around the outside of the house when he arrived. If he wanted some pears with his lunch, why wouldn't he get them at that point?

[Franz]

Continued testimony of Mrs. Adelaide Churchill page 130:

Q: Did you see Mr. Morse before you went home?
A: Yes Sir, he came before I went home.
Q: About what time in the order of events did he come?
A: Both Mr. and Mrs. Borden had been found when he came. I think I was the first one that let him in. I says, “Mr. Morse, something terrible has happened, someone has killed both Mr. and Mrs. Borden.” He says, “what”, and hollered “Lizzie”, as loud as he could holler, and rushed into the dining room. Alice Russell heard him, and I think let him in, and he went into the sitting room and the door was closed between the sitting room and the kitchen.


Franz, once again the logic involved in your thinking confuses me. We already clearly know that Mrs. Churchill was in the house. Mrs. Churchill also went on to say Alice Russell let him in also. I don't think that meant John Morse ran back out the door so that Alice Russell could let him back in the house. I think it meant they met him at the door to the room. You could have answered your own question about why he rushed into the dining room if you had read just one sentence further. The door was closed between the sitting room and kitchen, and there were obviously people in the dining room. In your opinion, asking if Lizzie was OK should have been a natural reaction on the part of John Morse. Then, using your logic, finding out if Abby was OK should also have been a natural reaction on the part of Lizzie since she heard her come in. What was he thinking about? Maybe that he had just found out his brother in law and his wife were both dead? And I doubt he literally stood there a couple of minutes. The have you heard the news thing is really reaching. It's not proof of anything other than he had not yet heard the news. Also using your logic, conflicting statements are not proof of suspicious behavior. Because you stated many times that Lizzie's contradictions should not be used as proof of guilt . That she could not be expected to remember everything just as it happened so there was nothing suspicious about it. So I cancel out any conflicting statements as not being suspicious using your logic also.

My points that show John Morse didn't exhibit suspicious behavior. There are three. 1.) Nobody ever said John Morse acted suspiciously. Not the police. Not the papers. None of the witnesses. 2.) He showed up with a letter in his pocket from Andrew that validated his reason for being there. 3.) He showed up prepared to spend the night at most bringing only the clothes on his back. After the murders he stuck around for two or three months. He made no home in Fall River. He could have easily left town simply using the excuse he was going home. But he stayed.

1. Allen, my understanding of Mrs. Churchill’s testimony is a little different (certainly I could be wrong). I think Mrs. Churchill met Morse at the side door of the house, Alice met him at the dining room door, she might have made some sign meaning “come in please” when Morse rushed into the dining room.

2. I am thinking about Lizzie’s curious statement of having heard Abby’s return. I hope I could post something. Even if I accept for the moment that her statement was suspicious, it doesn’t mean that Morse’s was not suspicious (they could have been guilty both, who knows?). For me it is suspicious that Morse didn’t think of his niece’s safety immediately after knowing the terrible news.

3. I think that conflicting statements could be not proof of suspicious behaviour if there is a reasonable (or at least possible) explanation. I don’t want to cancel nothing. What I have been doing is to try to find an explanation. Lizzie certainly gave conflicting statements about her alibi. We can speculate that: 1) she was the killer and she didn’t prepared well her alibi lie; 2) she was not the killer, therefore she didn’t, certainly, prepare an alibi. But unfortunately, she must lie to cover what she was actually doing at the moment of her father’s murder. I am for the second explanation.

4. Andrew’s letter addressed to Morse couldn’t prove neither Morse’s innocence nor his guilt. The letter could have been the reason of Morse’s innocent travel to Fall River, it could offer him as well an opportunity to realise his murder plan.

5. His sticking around for two or three months in Fall River after the murders doesn’t prove neither his innocence nor his guilt. He could be innocent and did his best to collaborate with the police for the investigation, but he could be guilty and remained there to seem more innocent.

6. I think it is possible that Morse planned and organized the double murder (I will post other threads to discuss his behaviours). He could have been a good criminal organizer, but not a good actor. If, after having been told the horrible news, he remained only few seconds before going into the house, it would be possible that Sawyer had no room in his mind to mention it, or he could have forgotten it at all. But few minutes were a notable long time for that circumstance, so I think Sawyer’s testimony is most probably reliable. In my opinion, Morse remained outside the side door few minutes just as an actor who concentrates his mind at the last moment before going on the stage. But he was not a good actor: he was betrayed almost immediately by a little word by himself pronounced to Mrs. Churchill:
“what”.

[PossumPie]

I've said before a few months ago, that people "act suspiciously" all the time, we just don't notice unless something horrible happens. I do things all the time that if a murder occurred, and witnesses were called, people would say, My, that was suspicious. I couldn't find my hammer Saturday, and needed to hammer in some nails out back. I got my hatchet, and used the back of that. If something had happened, and a neighbor said, "He used that hatchet the other day, I saw him carrying it." What could I say? We can't tear apart and examine every behavior under a microscope, people do weird things all the time. I think if we fantasize that hoards of people were clogging the street and sidewalk, and Uncle Morse stood around and ate pears, that is suspicious. Testimony SEEMS to point to at most one or two people talking with each other on the street, Morse probably didn't see anything amiss, and grabbed a pear to eat before going in. MAN, That family sure got their money's worth out of that pear tree!!!

[Allen]

We can't count down to the minute how long it should take someone to process horrible news. For me that argument about how long he stood there is weak. First, I don't think it was a couple of minutes. I say that all the time when asked to give a general time frame and it probably isn't an actual few minutes. I've lost a lot of people and it has never taken me a few seconds to get over hearing the news when they died. He was also specifically, when they asked if he had heard the news, that Andrew and Abby were dead. If Lizzie had been hurt, or murdered, most people would have said this when asked in the first place. And the testimony you posted yourself about him rushing into the dining room and hollering Lizzie sounds like he might have shown some concern. Just because it took him a few seconds to collect his thoughts doesn't mean that he showed no concern for anything. This isn't proof of suspicious behavior.

People do strange things, yes. People can also handle many situations differently than we might ourselves. We might all consider different behaviors suspicious. Because for me being seen carrying a hatchet in your yard isn't particularly suspicious behavior if a murder occurred. I don't think people buy them so they sit on the shelf unused. Because you own one I wouldn't jump to the idea you used it to kill someone. But police officers are trained to observe any suspicious and strange behavior. Whatever it might be. Even given the fact that some people do weird things just because they are weird they are trained to observe it. Nobody found any of his behavior suspicious. There was never even a debate about it then. These behaviors we are talking about were observed and recorded in testimony. The people who actually observed John Morse, and aren't just reading about it all these years later, didn't find any of it suspicious. Sawyer or Bridget were actually standing there and did not find this behavior suspicious enough to have remarked on. Sawyer did not even know John Morse so he had no reason to cover up suspicious behavior. He was not a member of the family or even a family friend. He was also not, as mbhenty said, so focused on Lizzie as being the killer they would not see him standing there acting suspiciously. Nobody that gave testimony was focused on Lizzie being the killer on the day of the murders. There were policemen in the house when Morse arrived. They didn't think anything suspicious about him. But they did think Lizzie acted suspiciously. These very "suspicious" behaviors on the part of John Morse were testified to in court. This is why what we cite is inquest and trial testimony. And with these statements being said under oath in a court of law, where the job of the defense would be to find proof of suspicious behavior on the part of others to create reasonable doubt, nobody found any of this suspicious. The defense was not so focused on finding Lizzie guilty they didn't look at anyone else. There also didn't seem to be very good relations between Lizzie and John Morse. He was one of the first ones to be investigated and he was cleared. Nobody, even while investigating him as possibly being the murderer, found him to be suspicious. Not during the investigation, not at trial, and not in the media who are known to speculate things to sell newspapers.

If John Morse was so suspicious a dude he managed to fool a lot of people. That would make him a very good actor. Not a bad one.

[mbhenty]

Yes:

If John Morse arrived at the Borden house after visiting his relatives, and did not see Sawyer at the back door, and no police, and no one was in the yard. Then I can see him going out back to have a pear. I can see that he was not suspicious.

My contention is that there was a yard full of strangers, that there were people all around the property. If not then John Morse's behavior is quite normal.

But if there were people all around the property.....eh, eh.

Perhaps that is where we differ.

What say you Ms. Allen

[mbhenty]

Yes:

That hammer / hatchet story is a funny one PossumPie. How true. How very true.

[Yooper]

Morse testified that there were people in the yard when he went back outdoors after learning of the murders.

[mbhenty]

Yes:

Hey Franz you remind me of that famous fictitious Belgium detective Hercule Poirot.

......."Hercule Franz". Italian detective.

I like that.

Follow his Roman exploits as he uses far eastern philosophy to deal with Victorian misdeeds and homicide and solve the crime unconventionally and precisely in the new world.

[Yooper]

If Morse had something to do with the murders and there were people beginning to congregate noticeably around the street and yard, why would he avoid the side door, pick up some pears, then go in the house? Why would Morse behave "suspiciously" in front of however many witnesses?

[PossumPie]

*****Reality Check*****
What factual information do we have for the number of people in front/beside the Borden house when Morse arrived...You know me, give me the facts.
Can anybody shed some light on this?

[Allen]

The answers can be found in the testimonies that were taken from the witnesses.

[Allen]

It's my impression that Mrs. Churchill stood at one end of the entry hall, in the kitchen, and saw John Morse step up onto the porch through the screen door at the other end. She saw him step up onto the porch. Which she could have seen through the door while standing inside the house. So it's my impression she 'let him in' to the kitchen. Either way the door to the sitting room was closed and there were obviously people in the dining room. Alice Russell tells her in testimony what happened when Morse arrived as well.

Inquest testimony of Mrs. Churchill page 131:

Q. Where did Mr. Morse come from?
A. The back part of the yard, or from the street.

Q. Where did you first see him?
A. He stepped up onto the steps. I think he came from the east, the steps that come from the yard. But I am not sure, I cannot tell you surely.

[Franz]

First, I don't think it was a couple of minutes. ... Just because it took him a few seconds to collect his thoughts doesn't mean that he showed no concern for anything. This isn't proof of suspicious behavior.
...
If John Morse was so suspicious a dude he managed to fool a lot of people. That would make him a very good actor. Not a bad one.

1. Allen, I think that source documents can contain errors, inaccuracies, they are sometimes questionable, we should use them with caution. But I think Sawyer’s testimony is reliable: “He (Morse) stood there a few minutes, and finally went inside the door.” I have three reasons: 1) it’s a huge difference between “a few minutes” and “a few seconds” for that circumstance, in my opinion it’s highly unlikely that Sawyer could have made such a confusion (an exaggeration); 2) Sawyer had been always standing outside of the side door as a guard; 3) in his testimony he used “finally”, “He stood there a few minutes, and finally went inside the door”.

2. Good or bad actor, Morse could have been better, but in my opinion, he wasn't.

[Allen]

This is what Charles Sawyer had to say about the crowd when John Morse got there.


Inquest testimony of Charles Sawyer page 139:

Q. Was there much of a crowd there at the time?
A. At the time there was quite a little crowd there.

Q. In the house, or out in the street?
A. They had been driven out of the yard by an officer there in attendance.

Q. The people were there then?
A. Yes, when he came.

Q. Were the people in the street?
A. Yes sir.

So all of the people were in the street. It was not uncommon for there to be people in the street in the nineteenth century since the main mode of transportation at the time was still walking. Even today it's not uncommon to see people out on the street. Andrew did business out of his home. There were many businesses on that street. Everybody said it was a pretty busy thoroughfare. And when Morse got home all of the officers were inside of the house. So the yard was not swarming with anything. And if the house was swarming with people he wouldn't see them until he went in.

[Allen]

So much emphasis is put into words I take for granted. A few minutes would not always mean a few literal minutes. Finally just means finally. It's what happened next. He didn't say it was really strange. Or that he stood there a long long time. Or make any remarks about it other than he stood there a few minutes and finally went into the door. It's like you pick apart every word and take them too literally I think.

[Franz]

Yes:

Hey Franz you remind me of that famous fictitious Belgium detective Hercule Poirot.

......."Hercule Franz". Italian detective.

I like that.

Follow his Roman exploits as he uses far eastern philosophy to deal with Victorian misdeeds and homicide and solve the crime unconventionally and precisely in the new world.

mbhenty, it's true that I love Italy very much, but I am Chinese. And I am detective only very very very... amateur. I gave myself the name Franz, it's an homage to Schubert, my most beloved composer.

I have not the ambition to solve the case, but I am very happy to discuss it with all of you here.

[Franz]

So much emphasis is put into words I take for granted. A few minutes would not always mean a few literal minutes. Finally just means finally. It's what happened next. He didn't say it was really strange. Or that he stood there a long long time. Or make any remarks about it other than he stood there a few minutes and finally went into the door. It's like you pick apart every word and take them too literally I think.

This is your opinion and your understanding of the text, Allen.

Allen, in your opinion, how to explain the "what" pronounced by Morse to Mrs. Churchill after he entered in the house?

[Yooper]

First, I don't think it was a couple of minutes. ... Just because it took him a few seconds to collect his thoughts doesn't mean that he showed no concern for anything. This isn't proof of suspicious behavior.
...
If John Morse was so suspicious a dude he managed to fool a lot of people. That would make him a very good actor. Not a bad one.

1. Allen, I think that source documents can contain errors, inaccuracies, they are sometimes questionable, we should use them with caution. But I think Sawyer’s testimony is reliable: “He (Morse) stood there a few minutes, and finally went inside the door.” I have three reasons: 1) it’s a huge difference between “a few minutes” and “a few seconds” for that circumstance, in my opinion it’s highly unlikely that Sawyer could have made such a confusion (an exaggeration); 2) Sawyer had been always standing outside of the side door as a guard; 3) in his testimony he used “finally”, “He stood there a few minutes, and finally went inside the door”.

2. Good or bad actor, Morse could have been better, but in my opinion, he wasn't.

If the primary sources are inaccurate at times and are questionable, then what makes Sawyer's testimony especially accurate?

[Smudgeman]

Franz likes to argue for the sake of arguing it seems. He takes certain words or phrases and twists them into his own little world of make believe. Trying to reason with him is moot. Some other members find it enlightening to read his posts based on fiction, I don't. If you have a legitimate argument then by all means, argue away, but you don't! It is great that he has an interest in the case as we all do, but he does not listen and seems to find enjoyment in irritating anyone who disagrees with him. I am sure I will get a smart ass reply from him but I don't care, give it a rest Franz or get another hobby. There, I said it plain and simple.

[Aamartin]

*edit, double post of below*

[Aamartin]

First, I don't think it was a couple of minutes. ... Just because it took him a few seconds to collect his thoughts doesn't mean that he showed no concern for anything. This isn't proof of suspicious behavior.
...
If John Morse was so suspicious a dude he managed to fool a lot of people. That would make him a very good actor. Not a bad one.

1. Allen, I think that source documents can contain errors, inaccuracies, they are sometimes questionable, we should use them with caution. But I think Sawyer’s testimony is reliable: “He (Morse) stood there a few minutes, and finally went inside the door.” I have three reasons: 1) it’s a huge difference between “a few minutes” and “a few seconds” for that circumstance, in my opinion it’s highly unlikely that Sawyer could have made such a confusion (an exaggeration); 2) Sawyer had been always standing outside of the side door as a guard; 3) in his testimony he used “finally”, “He stood there a few minutes, and finally went inside the door”.

2. Good or bad actor, Morse could have been better, but in my opinion, he wasn't.

So-- if the source documents are possibly erroneous-- we go with Lizzie masturbating in the barn instead?

I am literally flabbergasted. Smudgeman is correct.

[mbhenty]

MY BRAIN, MY BRAIN...

EVERYONE...

MOVE ASIDE, QUICK!

IT'S GOING TO EXPLODE.

[mbhenty]

THERE IT GOES, THERE IT GOES........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CS7j5I6aOc

[Yooper]

First, I don't think it was a couple of minutes. ... Just because it took him a few seconds to collect his thoughts doesn't mean that he showed no concern for anything. This isn't proof of suspicious behavior.
...
If John Morse was so suspicious a dude he managed to fool a lot of people. That would make him a very good actor. Not a bad one.

1. Allen, I think that source documents can contain errors, inaccuracies, they are sometimes questionable, we should use them with caution. But I think Sawyer’s testimony is reliable: “He (Morse) stood there a few minutes, and finally went inside the door.” I have three reasons: 1) it’s a huge difference between “a few minutes” and “a few seconds” for that circumstance, in my opinion it’s highly unlikely that Sawyer could have made such a confusion (an exaggeration); 2) Sawyer had been always standing outside of the side door as a guard; 3) in his testimony he used “finally”, “He stood there a few minutes, and finally went inside the door”.

2. Good or bad actor, Morse could have been better, but in my opinion, he wasn't.

So-- if the source documents are possibly erroneous-- we go with Lizzie masturbating in the barn instead?

I am literally flabbergasted. Smudgeman is correct.

There is nothing in the primary sources about Lizzie masturbating in the barn so they must be inaccurate.

[mbhenty]

Yes:





Some here on the forum will have some far out conclusions. I respect most if not all. The complexion of this crime tames the best of us, whether we realize it or not. At times we must agree to disagree, or disagree to agree and move on. If we take it to serious and do not, the Bordens will make fools of us all.

The explicit truth about this crime will continue to take on, and retain forever, an unsolved and mysterious, enigmatic uncertainty. And it will do so forever.

[Allen]

Mbhenty, as you said yourself fiction is easy to write and not have to stick to the facts. There are limitless possibilities in writing fiction. There are not so many possibilities if you have to stick to the facts because you have to conform to those known facts. They have to be cohesive and make sense against what is known. In this case, not just about the murders, but what is known about the era and the real life people in general. If you are talking about a real murder case with real known facts, even if you may never solve it, inventing things based purely on opinion with nothing to back it up does not offer anything to anyone who has taken the time to study those known facts. It also muddies the waters for anyone who is trying to learn those known facts. If this is supposed to be a forum dedicated to the serious discussion of the Borden murders I expect most people are looking for a serious discussion. Not talk about Lizzie masturbating out in the barn. Anyone can come up with a theory based on opinion also because the possibilities are endless. It's not much different than sitting down to write a book of fiction. There is never much real proof to back it up.

I also think that everyone forgets that these were real people. We're not talking about characters that move about on a stage to be given lines and told what to do. I think it does their memory a great disservice to fantasize wildly on their behalf. We have Andrew as a child molester, Lizzie pleasuring herself in the hay in the barn, and also having an affair with Bridget while she's at it. Would they want to be remembered that way if there was no basis for it? Would you? If you are ever the victim of an unsolved murder, it would then be alright to make up wild stories without any proof about you and your family? Just because it makes a good story? I did not start out convinced Lizzie was guilty. I didn't start out convinced of anything other than two murders had occurred in Fall River. Without knowing the facts that's the only way one can start out in this case. Then you acquaint yourself with the known facts. You acquaint yourself with the era that murder took place in. You learn about the real that were people involved. You learn of events, people, and culture that really existed. I've spent a lot of time immersing myself in that era to learn about it. Learning the facts. Why would I then want to entertain a theory that is based purely on opinion? What does that offer me? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of research and serious discussion? I said before it can be fun to say what if and anything is possible. I also wrote a story about Dr. Bowen taking the hatchet away in his doctor bag. Did I believe that at the time? Not really. It made a good story.Did I believe an intruder. Not really. It made a good poem. I've since given up any idea of writing fictional accounts of true life stories. Which is why my further story submissions were not works of fiction. I'll leave my fictional characters as being purely fiction. I'm not sure why you chopped my poem up and left out so much that's not how it goes. Maybe it's a habit of writing fiction?

[NancyDrew]

Okay, I'll throw my 2 cents in here. I think Morse was a suspicious dude too. First impressions mean a lot to me. I remember vividly the very first time I read through all the original source documents. Morse's behavior jumped out at me right away...specifically, why he would be eating pears when there were obviously people swarming around the house. Maybe they HAD been 'shooed away' by an officer or deputy...but there still would have been onlookers in the street, and I'm sure they were not speaking in hushed tones. I have a hard time believing that Morse didn't know anything at all was amiss when he arrived back at the Borden house.

I also find his shouting Lizzie's name a bit weird too. I though they weren't close, never wrote, rarely talked? Why would he yell out her name like that? He was THAT concerned about a niece he had NO relationship with?

At the risk of raising the ire of the board, I'll go further. I find his entire visit suspicious. He arrived to find them all sick as dogs; both elder Bordens had been up all night, violently throwing up. Maybe it's a difference in the times, but I know that if I had spend the night vomiting, the last person in the world I'd want to see is an uninvited house guest. He must either have been a completely inconsiderate person, or had a compelling reason for staying. Weren't Victorian's big on manners? Wouldn't you think that, upon arriving at the house and finding everyone looking green and sickly, he might have excused himself or at least, NOT stayed for the night...which meant Abby had to do more work on account of a guest being there?

I am also bothered by his visit to his relatives on Weybosset STreet, but to be honest, I don't have time to look at the source documents to state for certain why...I just remember that something about the visit didn't seem "right" to me.

It could be that he was just an odd person, clumsy and unaware of others feelings. It could be.

[Franz]

So-- if the source documents are possibly erroneous-- we go with Lizzie masturbating in the barn instead?

1. Aamartin, errare humanum est. The authors of source documents were all human being. They could (I am not saying "must") have committed errors as all other persons.

2. I expressed this idea in my reply addressed to Allen, who wrote: "I don't think it was a couple of minutes. ... Just because it took him a few seconds to collect his thoughts ..." But Sawyer testified that "He (Morse) stood there a few minutes, and finally went inside the door." (The bold text is mine.) Sawyer's "a few minutes" became "a few seconds" under Allen's pen. It implied - Allen, please correct me if I am wrong - that Allen thought that Sawyer might have committed an error (an emphasis). That's why I said that "source documents can contain errors, inaccuracies, they are sometimes questionable", but meanwhile, I said that, in my opinion, Sawyer's testimony was most probably reliable, and I gave my reasons.

3. That Lizzie masturbated in the barn is only my theory, a conjecture, nothing else. In my opinion this is possible (certainly, I could be wrong). I haven't never forced anyone to accept it. It's only one of my ideas about the case and I posted it in the forum under discussion, That's all.

[Franz]

Hey NancyDrew, have you completely recovered? Happy to read you again.

You said that you "find his (Morse's) shouting Lizzie's name a bit weird too". To be honest I don't agree. I suspect Morse but for other reasons. It's true that it seemed that the relationship between uncle John and Lizzie was not close, but in my opinion, when Morse knew that Mr. and Mrs. Borden were killed, if he was innocent, he should have thought of Lizzie immediately - in any way she was his niece. It would have been more natural for me if Morse, when informed the horrible news, had shouted immediately Lizzie's name: "Lizzie, are you OK?", and rushing meanwhile into the house. But he thought of Lizzie only after having entered in the house, only after having spent "a few minutes" (Sawyer's testimony) outside of the house. This is suspicious, in my opinion.

[Allen]

Not having a good relationship with someone doesn't necessarily mean you want them harmed or dead. I have enemies I would never wish any harm to come to. That was a busy street in Fall River. Many business were on that street, lots of horses and buggies going up and down, lots of people walking to get where they were going. There were people working in the yard behind the Borden house that morning. There was a lot of noise on that street and not everybody talked in hushed tones as they were out on the street. We also don't know how many people were actually even there. By the time John Morse came home I doubt word had carried around to draw much of a crowd besides whoever was on the street to see and hear what was going on. No phones. No cellphones. No cars. It traveled by word of mouth. John Morse spent a lot of time visiting people around town every time he was in Fall River. He had even hired a horse and buggy to drive to Fall River to take Emma and another niece of his out for the day. Morse was always staying with someone else also. He never lived alone in his life. He always had other people living with him, or he lived with other people. I don't think that was a financial arrangement on his part of any kind he didn't need the money. I think he enjoyed the company. He seemed to have enjoyed visiting and sharing his home with people a great deal. And he never lacked for company. So I don't see why everyone thinks he was so strange.

And traveling was not so easy then as it was today. He had told the man he lived with he would probably spend the night. He couldn't go back out and rent a car to hop into to go home. He either had to rent a horse and buggy to drive himself home or wait on a train. I'm not sure how late trains ran in the day, or what the schedule had even been for a train that could have taken him home. South Dartmouth is roughly 15 miles from Fall River. Fairhaven is about the same distance from Fall River. How long did it take Emma to get home traveling the same distance.

Andrew apparently didn't let being sick let him put off doing much business. He was sick when he went out that morning to walk all over town taking care of his business. Victorian's did have a certain etiquette for things. And that etiquette was taking care of visitors and showing them hospitality for as long as they chose to stay. And it was not at all out of the ordinary during those times for visitors to show up unannounced and spend the night or even longer. For a variety of reasons. Travel distance involved during a time when the way most people traveled was by horse and buggy or followed train schedules being one of them. Lack of telephones to let anyone know you were planning to visit was another. If you took an idea to visit someone there was usually no other way to do it but just show up. It was not out of the ordinary for friends and family to just show up and stay with you. And etiquette of a hostess was showing hospitality. Which Abby did. She sat him right down to eat. They invited him to come back and take dinner with them. They sat up until 10 o'clock Wednesday night chatting with him before anyone decided to retire. That doesn't sound like they found having him there a hardship because they were that sick. Quite the opposite. If they were indeed that sick I'm sure they would have retired long before 10 o'clock. I'm not sure how much extra work he made for Abby. They had a maid that did most of the cooking and cleaning. They took care of their own slop pails. She might have had to make his bed at most.

[Allen]

I lean more towards the idea that he would have had to have gone home by train. I believe the use of rentals were for while you were in town, or for round trips. These was not the days when you could pick up a car at one rental place and return it to another. Most of these nineteenth century businesses were personally owned and operated. I would assume that to rent any sort of rig he would have had to return it to where he rented it. The owners of the buggies would more than likely have wanted them returned without going to South Dartmouth to get it.

[Yooper]

We can read whatever we want into Morse's behavior, but he didn't kill the Bordens. His reason for the visit was a letter from Andrew:

Morse, Inquest, pp. 98-99:
Q. You do not think you had written announcing your visit at this time?
A. I dont think I did. Let me see, let me tell it as I can think of it. Mr. Borden, when I was over here sometime
in July, that I speak of, wanted to know if I knew of a man he could get on his farm, to take charge of it, I told
him I did not know, I would see. When I got back I wrote him I knew of a man I thought would suit him, I
would send him over. He wrote back to me he had rather I would wait until I saw him. I have his letter in my
pocket, if you want to see it.
Q. What was the date of that letter? You may refresh your memory. If you have no objections, I will see it.
(Witness produces the letter dated July 25, 1892.)
Q. Have you any objection to me keeping this?
A. No Sir, I would not like it lost, because it was the last one I ever had from him.
Q. That, then, was the last correspondence before you came over?
A. That is the last.
Q. You did not write him you were coming?
A. No Sir.
Q. You came partially in pursuance of that request?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Was that about ten days before you came?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. So they were not expecting you that particular day, but were looking for you at any time?
A. Yes Sir.

The investigators at the time did not think his behavior warranted consideration of Morse as the murderer.

I get the impression that Andrew may have wanted Morse to run the farm for him rather than someone else.

[Allen]

That's possible. Morse did own a farm of his own out west. This may have been why Andrew asked him to help him find someone to run his. Maybe he did have Morse in mind to run it. And the note in Morse's pocket did give him a reason for being there.

[Yooper]

I think maybe Andrew was asking Morse if he was interested first, asking him if he knew anyone who was interested, which would certainly include himself. Then when Morse came up with someone, Andrew wanted to see Morse before talking to the man Morse suggested, possibly to ask him directly. It may be that Morse's visit was requested so that Andrew could ask him to run the farm.

[Franz]

I said that the authors of source documents were all human being, therefore, they could have committed errors. I give an example here.

Mrs. Churchill testified in the witness statements (p. 12) that, 1) “Then Dr. Bowen came in…The Doctor then went out (for where?) …When the Doctor returned (from where?), he asked for a sheet” to cover up Andrew’s body; 2) then he went out to send a telegram to Emma; 3) When Dr. Bowen was absent, Abby’s body was discovered; 4) When Dr. Bowen returned, he was informed Abby’s death.

But the same Mrs. Churchill gave a different version of events’ order in her Inquest testimony (p. 129): 1) Dr. Bowen, asked by Lizzie, went to send the telegram; 2) He asked a sheet to cover up Andrew’s body (Mrs. Churchill didn’t explain when Dr. Bowen returned to the house); 3) Abby’s body was discovered.

In his Inquest testimony, however, Dr. Bowen said (pp. 118-119) that, after having examined Andrew’s body, “perhaps I said I would get the officers, Lizzie said that Emma was in Fairhaven, and wanted me to telegraph her…so my boy drove me down to the telegraph office … I got in my carriage again … and stopped at Mr. Borden’s door and went in…I think Mrs. Churchill, said, “They have found Mrs. Borden” … I went right around the foot of the bed and satisfied myself in an instant that she was not living…I told them she was dead…I told Bridget to get a sheet, and covered up Mr. Borden…” According to this testimony, 1) Dr. Bowen went to send the telegram first, 2) then he returned to the Borden house, was told Abby’s death, and then, 3) he asked a sheet to cover up Andrew’s body.

So, if I understand well the documents' text, Dr. Bowen contradicted Mrs. Churchill, and Mrs. Churchill contradicted herself.

[mbhenty]

Yes

Sorry.

I removed the poem and any reference to you.

I was trying to be nice. (Fruitless)

I am discovering that when talking to, or commenting to, your posts, one is not allowed to be human. You are all business. You share none of yourself. You should really loosen up. Though intellectual, your posts can be very tedious and boring, and you can be very clandestinely rude and unkind. Chill. No need to be so uptight. Your one dimensional approach of this case is cold, lifeless and unforgiving. Like the bodies of Andrew and Abby Borden. Reassess. Life is good. You must be a better person than that? I know you are. Don't go prove me wrong, now.

[Franz]

We can read whatever we want into Morse's behavior, but he didn't kill the Bordens. His reason for the visit was a letter from Andrew...

Me too I think Morse didn't kill the Bordens (with his own hands), but I suspect him to have organized the double murder. The letter of Andrew, in my opinion, didn't prove nothing: it could have been the reason of Morse's innocent travel to Fall River, but it chould have given him an opportunity to realize his murder plan.

[Yooper]

We can read whatever we want into Morse's behavior, but he didn't kill the Bordens. His reason for the visit was a letter from Andrew...

Me too I think Morse didn't kill the Bordens (with his own hands), but I suspect him to have organized the double murder. The letter of Andrew, in my opinion, didn't prove nothing: it could have been the reason of Morse's innocent travel to Fall River, but it chould have given him an opportunity to realize his murder plan.

Andrew wrote Morse a letter requesting that Morse come to Fall River to see him, Morse responded by doing just that, and in your opinion that didn't prove anything? Really?

[Yooper]

Yes

Sorry.

I removed the poem and any reference to you.

I was trying to be nice. (Fruitless)

I am discovering that when talking to, or commenting to, your posts, one is not allowed to be human. You are all business. You share none of yourself. You should really loosen up. Though intellectual, your posts can be very tedious and boring, and you can be very clandestinely rude and unkind. Chill. No need to be so uptight. Your one dimensional approach of this case is cold, lifeless and unforgiving. Like the bodies of Andrew and Abby Borden. Reassess. Life is good. You must be a better person than that? I know you are. Don't go prove me wrong, now.

There's a large difference between being human and being irrational (in some cases). If you want rude and unkind, read my postings, they can be blatantly so. Allen has every right to approach the Borden case in her own way, the same as the rest of us. The fact that she tends to be more rational than many should not be held against her.

[Aamartin]

I think there was a reason John was in FR at that time--- that there was indeed something afoot business wise that caused the murders to have to happen at that time. I don't think he was involved, but may have not have been shocked to hear the news. He may have needed time to collect himself to decide how he was going to act once in the house.

[Smudgeman]

We can read whatever we want into Morse's behavior, but he didn't kill the Bordens. His reason for the visit was a letter from Andrew:

Morse, Inquest, pp. 98-99:
Q. You do not think you had written announcing your visit at this time?
A. I dont think I did. Let me see, let me tell it as I can think of it. Mr. Borden, when I was over here sometime
in July, that I speak of, wanted to know if I knew of a man he could get on his farm, to take charge of it, I told
him I did not know, I would see. When I got back I wrote him I knew of a man I thought would suit him, I
would send him over. He wrote back to me he had rather I would wait until I saw him. I have his letter in my
pocket, if you want to see it.
Q. What was the date of that letter? You may refresh your memory. If you have no objections, I will see it.
(Witness produces the letter dated July 25, 1892.)
Q. Have you any objection to me keeping this?
A. No Sir, I would not like it lost, because it was the last one I ever had from him.
Q. That, then, was the last correspondence before you came over?
A. That is the last.
Q. You did not write him you were coming?
A. No Sir.
Q. You came partially in pursuance of that request?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. Was that about ten days before you came?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. So they were not expecting you that particular day, but were looking for you at any time?
A. Yes Sir.

The investigators at the time did not think his behavior warranted consideration of Morse as the murderer.

I get the impression that Andrew may have wanted Morse to run the farm for him rather than someone else.

It is interesting to note that John did not want the note lost, because it was the last correspondance he received from Andrew. It makes him human and wanting to hold on to it for sentimental reasons perhaps. I don't think he had anything to do with the murders. I do think his arrival maybe pushed Lizzie to act a little quicker with what she was planning to do. Abby may have confided in John that she suspected Lizzie was poisoning them and Lizzie overheard the conversation.

[PossumPie]

Taking a logical view...Morse had no motive that we can determine. The Brother of Andrew's first wife stood to get nothing, held no grudges (that have come to light). Wouldn't have helped Lizzie kill her father b/c he wasn't even particularly close to her either.

[Franz]

After being told by Bridget and by Mr. Sawyer that Mr. and Mrs. Borden were both murdered (killed), Morse remained “a few minutes” before entering in the house. During these “few minutes”, he not only didn’t ask nothing about Lizzie’s safety, but also, he didn’t ask: “How were they murdered? Stabbed? Shot?”, he didn’t ask neither: “And the killer? Was it a group or one person? Was he caught?” No, he remained there for “a few minutes” but didn’t care at all of all this. The only phrase Morse pronounced, according to Mr. Sawyer’s testimony, is that very Shakespearian “My God, what kind of a God have we got that will permit a deed like this to be done?”

I think that, if Morse was guilty, most probably he met his conspirator(s) while he was returning to the Borden house and was informed that all had been OK as they had planned. When he arrived and took some pears to eat, he was probably thinking: "They have accomplished their task. Now it's the moment for me to enter on the stage."

[PossumPie]

Again, To murder someone you know you must have a motive. Suspicious as heck, he didn't have reason to kill them or have them killed. The long time between the two murders also points away from a 'hired killer' b/c the risk of Mrs. Borden's body being found before he/she had a chance to kill Andrew was enormous...would a hired killer stick around several hours????