More about locked rooms, & Lizzie's statements

[Catbooks]

i was just reading the witness statements, and came across john fleet's, taken the day of the murders.

he said:

Saw Lizzie two hours later, wanted to search her room. Dr. Bowen was in. She did now want to be
bothered, would make her sick. Told her that I must search on account of the murders; otherwise should
not be doing my duty. She then allowed the search to go on. Could not find anything in the room which
would show blood, and found no instruments that had been used for murder. She said that it was
impossible for anyone to get in or throw anything in her room, because she always kept it locked.

lizzie always kept the door to her room locked? news to me! do we have any other evidence of this? i don't know of any.

she obviously wanted to keep him out of there. first she tried saying it'd make her sick if her room were searched, then that there wasn't any way for anyone to get in or throw anything in there.

[debbiediablo]

The place people most want to protect or keep secrete is almost always the place to first search, even to the point of the standing guard in front of the exact spot where something is hidden. This makes me think about the hatchet and whether Dr. Bowen did remove it in his medical bag...it's not like he didn't act suspiciously by burning unidentified papers in the stove.

[Catbooks]

yep, sure looks like there was something important in her room at that point, and she didn't want it discovered.

do you think dr. bowen would go as far as becoming an accessory to double murder for lizzie? what motive? he'd have to have a very compelling one to risk that.

still reading through the witness statements. there is a lot of interesting stuff there. read our eagle-eyed friend harrington's account of bowen burning the papers. sounds fairly innocuous. … unless it isn't ;)

just read this, which relates to your suspicion of dr. bowen:

Mrs. Jane Grey, No. 215 Second street. “Dr. Bowen’s character is al least suspicious. Four years
ago, while the Borden family were summering over the river on the farm, Lizzie remained at home. One
Sunday evening during this time, she and Dr. Bowen came to church together, and sat in the Borden
seat. I myself saw them this evening. At the time, and since, there was much comment on this act. Some
remarked how courageous she was to remain in the house alone; but others replied in a knowing way,
perhaps she has very acceptable company.

mrs. grey didn't like lizzie. sorry, mrs. grey, a neighbor who lives directly across the street *one time, four years ago* accompanying their neighbor to church? and then sitting in said neighbor's church pew with the neighbor, this is suspicious? what was he supposed to do, excuse himself and go sit somewhere else?

anyway, it's interesting.

[debbiediablo]

I doubt sharing the same pew in church indicated a flaming love affair kept hidden from the world. But it may demonstrate that Lizzie looked up to Dr. Bowen and may have been more like a close friend or a member of the family. Who knows? Maybe Abby running across the street had less to do with Bowen being a doctor and more to do with him being someone she could rely on. Did the Borden women seek his protection?

[Catbooks]

here's the bit about dr. bowen burning the paper. this is our extremely detail-oriented friend phil harrington talking:

After leaving her, I went down in the kitchen where was Dr. Bowen, Asst. Fleet, Dr. Dolan, Bridget and several others. Dr. Bowen had scraps of paper in his hand, on which there was some writing. He and I spoke about them, and he tried to put some of them together. He said “it is nothing, it is something about, I think, my daughter going through somewhere.” If I recollect correctly, it was addressed to Emma; but about that I am not sure. The Doctor then said “it does not amount to anything”, and taking tHe lid off the kitchen stove, he dropped the pieces in. There was very little fire in the stove, and the ashes which were on top looked as though paper had been burned there.

the reason i say it doesn't seem to be anything is because officer harrington was right there, asking bowen about the scraps of paper and watching as bowen tried to put some of them together.

where is everyone today/night, anyway??

[Curryong]

I think that the Borden women, if not Andrew, regarded Dr Bowen as a gentleman. I'm sure Phoebe Bowen was more attractive than Lizzie and doctors then had to be so very careful of their reputations. It's not as if there was a scarcity of doctors in Fall River. I can't imagine a flaming affair whatever Mrs Grey said.

And what about Lizzie telling Dr Bowen that she had spent some time that morning looking for the mysterious note that had arrived for Abby. According to Victoria Lincoln he asked her if she had looked in Abby's pocket for it, and Lizzie said she had. Lincoln said Dr Bowen meant pocket in the old-fashioned sense of knitted or long cotton purse, but there must have been something in Lizzie's response that made Bowen become silent, and again according to Lincoln, suggest she lie down in her room. Some hint of a hidden, suppressed excitement perhaps?

[Curryong]

Wasn't there a bundled blanket on the floor of the passageway closet. The police kicked it in order to close the doors after they had searched the closet but they never shook out the blanket or even touched it. Apparently, according to Victoria Lincoln, (and yes I know she's inclined to let her imagination run wild,) Alice noticed that Lizzie went out into the lobby twice to check on that closet. A pair of blood-splashed stockings rolled up inside perhaps, or the Bedford cord?

[Catbooks]

do you mean in emma's closet? i know there was something in her closet that wasn't investigated.

[Curryong]

I think it was the closet where all the dresses were hanging. The police didn't pull out the winter dresses at the back that had covers on them, either. Lizzie had the keys to it and had to unlock it for them.

[twinsrwe]

…

Mrs. Jane Grey, No. 215 Second street. “Dr. Bowen’s character is al least suspicious. Four years
ago, while the Borden family were summering over the river on the farm, Lizzie remained at home. One
Sunday evening during this time, she and Dr. Bowen came to church together, and sat in the Borden
seat. I myself saw them this evening. At the time, and since, there was much comment on this act. Some
remarked how courageous she was to remain in the house alone; but others replied in a knowing way,
perhaps she has very acceptable company.

mrs. grey didn't like lizzie. sorry, mrs. grey, a neighbor who lives directly across the street *one time, four years ago* accompanying their neighbor to church? and then sitting in said neighbor's church pew with the neighbor, this is suspicious? what was he supposed to do, excuse himself and go sit somewhere else?

anyway, it's interesting.

Actually, I’d be very surprised if people DIDN’T talk. Dr. Bowen was a 48 year old, MARRIED, man, attending an EVENING church function, with his 28 year old, UNMARRIED, neighbor, whose entire family was away on the farm in Swansea. That scenario would set some peoples tongues to spreading malicious gossip, even in today’s society.

Not only was Dr. Bowen old enough to be Lizzie’s father, he was a member of the First Baptist Church in Fall River. So, what was he doing accompanying Lizzie to her Central Congregational Church? Why did he choose to accompany Lizzie to her church, over being with his wife and daughter that evening?

I know Mrs. Grey didn’t like Lizzie, but if in fact Dr. Bowen did accompany Lizzie to church, then I have to agree with her; it is suspicious! If they were in a clandestine relationship, and stupid enough to attend a social event together, then they should have known that people would ‘talk’. I’m not saying that they were having an affair, but their relationship appears to have been more than doctor and patient, or even friendly neighbors for that matter. Even if they were an unmarried couple, their age difference alone would have been considered enough to cause some gossip, especially in the Victorian Era.

I doing some research regarding a totally different subject, when I came across this video – it’s pretty hilarious!

http://sendables.jibjab.com/view/4q52RPa6YS7Uwu82

[debbiediablo]

…

Mrs. Jane Grey, No. 215 Second street. “Dr. Bowen’s character is al least suspicious. Four years
ago, while the Borden family were summering over the river on the farm, Lizzie remained at home. One
Sunday evening during this time, she and Dr. Bowen came to church together, and sat in the Borden
seat. I myself saw them this evening. At the time, and since, there was much comment on this act. Some
remarked how courageous she was to remain in the house alone; but others replied in a knowing way,
perhaps she has very acceptable company.

mrs. grey didn't like lizzie. sorry, mrs. grey, a neighbor who lives directly across the street *one time, four years ago* accompanying their neighbor to church? and then sitting in said neighbor's church pew with the neighbor, this is suspicious? what was he supposed to do, excuse himself and go sit somewhere else?

anyway, it's interesting.

Actually, I’d be very surprised if people DIDN’T talk. Dr. Bowen was a 48 year old, MARRIED, man, attending an EVENING church function, with his 28 year old, UNMARRIED, neighbor, whose entire family was away on the farm in Swansea. That scenario would set some peoples tongues to spreading malicious gossip, even in today’s society.

Not only was Dr. Bowen old enough to be Lizzie’s father, he was a member of the First Baptist Church in Fall River. So, what was he doing accompanying Lizzie to her Central Congregational Church? Why did he choose to accompany Lizzie to her church, over being with his wife and daughter that evening?

I know Mrs. Grey didn’t like Lizzie, but if in fact Dr. Bowen did accompany Lizzie to church, then I have to agree with her; it is suspicious! If they were in a clandestine relationship, and stupid enough to attend a social event together, then they should have known that people would ‘talk’. I’m not saying that they were having an affair, but their relationship appears to have been more than doctor and patient, or even friendly neighbors for that matter. Even if they were an unmarried couple, their age difference alone would have been considered enough to cause some gossip, especially in the Victorian Era.

I doing some research regarding a totally different subject, when I came across this video – it’s pretty hilarious!

http://sendables.jibjab.com/view/4q52RPa6YS7Uwu82

Tsk.Tsk. Her bloomers are showing!

[Curryong]

Yes, well, the sight of bloomers or ankles in those days would set any male off!

I get the feeling that Phoebe Bowen didn't care for Lizzie too much. She was apparently fond of Abby and upset at her horrible death, but on the day of the murders she didn't spend too much time fussing over Lizzie, before she went off home to, in my opinion, phone people like Marianna Holmes about what had happened!

Maybe she didn't like the thought of her husband, who seems to have been a susceptible old thing, being taken in by Lizzie's act. It doesn't sound as if Lizzie cared about any gossip!

[Curryong]

Some of the times of movements of people in the Borden home that Thursday morning seem quite vague and contradictory. For example John Morse, who left the house earlier than all the other occupants, said that he didn't see Abby, who had been floating around dusting in the sitting room while he and Andrew talked, was last seen by him going into the front hall.

Abby couldn't have been (still) dusting the hall when he went to get his hat at about 8:40am, or he would presumably have said so. Where was she? Had she gone upstairs, or slipped through into the dining room without being seen by he and Andrew? Mrs Borden was in the dining room at one point as she and Bridget had the conversation about washing the windows. Still no Lizzie. Had she gone back up to her room?

At the Prelim (Page 10) Bridget says that when she had come back from vomiting near the pears, Lizzie, whom she had last seen sitting at the kitchen table contemplating breakfast, had left the kitchen. Where had she gone, and was Andrew still in the sitting room (where Lizzie placed him in her evidence at the Inquest) reading the Providence Gazette?

No-one definitely saw Andrew leave the house either, though Mrs Churchill saw him at about nine o' clock standing near the side steps. (He was already suffering from nausea. Was the sight of Bridget heaving in the garden a bit too much, and was he contemplating a return to the house?)

When Fleet questioned Lizzie on the day of the murder, his testimony (Trial Page 470) States "I then asked her when was the last time that she saw her stepmother-- when and where? She said that the last time she saw her stepmother was about nine o'clock and she was then in the room where she was found dead and was making the bed. That is to say she was making the bed in the room where she was found dead, at 9 o'clock."

Lizzie at the Inquest (Page 58)
Q. Where was your father when you came down Thursday morning?
A. Sitting in the sitting room in his large chair, reading the Providence journal.
Q. Where was your mother...?
A.....She was in the dining room with a feather duster dusting.

Now, besides all these confusing times, (of course people don't necessarily keep their eye on the clock all the time) and Lizzie being self-serving at the Inquest by placing herself far away from the guest room as possible that early morning, two questions come to my mind.

Did Lizzie indeed see Abby in the bedroom at about nine and finish her off a few minutes later, earlier than is generally thought? I don't believe she saw her father that morning. I think he was gone before she went downstairs. I think Abby finished dusting in the dining room after the conversation with Bridget and went up to fix the bedroom.

I think Lizzie didn't have any breakfast and went up to her room while Bridget was being sick. In fact I think the murder occurred shortly after 9 o clock, not at nine thirty, and was maybe taking place while Bridget was getting her things together from the barn to wash the windows.

[debbiediablo]

If someone asked me what happened and who was where and when, in and out and around, at our home this morning, I wouldn't have a clue. I'd remember that my husband made coffee and read the paper because that's what he always does, not because I really remember it. Yesterday morning I recall perfectly because his 91year-old father fell and called at 6:10 for my husband to come haul him off the floor from in front of his refrigerator. He uses a cane, not the walker, but keeps the cell phone in his pocket. That I recall; this normal morning is a big blur.

[Curryong]

Yes, same with my home when I was working and the children (now young adults) were at home! Of course we haven't experienced two murders in our immediate vicinity and been charged with them. I suppose the thought of going on trial would sharpen the memory!

I hope your elderly father-in-law is all right, no broken bones, fractured hips?

[debbiediablo]

He's probably headed for a nursing facility unless he can get the congestive heart failure under control...lots of bruising from blood thinner and seems to have orthostatic hypotension. But last year he was out bulldozing trees which outstrips most 90 year-olds. If Lizzie committed the crimes she would have paid close attention to everything, but if she didn't then the morning itself might not have been memorable until she found Andrew's body. Innocent or guilty, she probably wanted to place herself as far as possible away from the possibility of her involvement. For all of the cleverness we attribute to her (wearing the coat to prevent blood splatter...throwing the hatchet on the roof...somehow managing to not have identifiable blood on herself) she was a scattered witness at the Inquest which does not point to exceptional cleverness in crime - even giving her credit for the morphine. One thin g for sure: she did not testify. An attorney cannot suborn perjury. She had no attorney representing her at the Inquest; at the trial her attorneys could not allow her to testify if they knew she would lie under oath.

[Curryong]

Your father-in-law may feel better and more active when the warmer weather finally arrives for you. Hope so.

99 per cent of why Lizzie was 'excused' from testifying at her trial was because the idiot mayor of Fall River, Dr Coughlin, warned her after the funeral on the Saturday that she was a suspect. This allowed, eventually, Lizzie's Inquest evidence to be omitted from the trial in 1893. This peculiar decision was much criticised, after the trial and later.

Someone on an early thread observed that Lizzie was extremely lucky and quite careful in keeping herself clean of blood splatter etc. Where she fell down was in keeping her story straight afterwards. In his opinion, and I agree, Lizzie hadn't given enough thought to that at all. Plus, I guess, we might all start to splutter and get confused when in court and faced with intense questioning!

[debbiediablo]

Lizzie was not excused. The right to not self-incriminate is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. What's interesting is her inquest testimony would be excluded in a court today because she was already a suspect and not Mirandized (“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me?” ) The really interesting part of this is that Miranda v. Arizona was heard before the United States Supreme Court in 1966, and even then the decision was split 5-4. Those Massachusetts judges got it Constitutionally correct...73 years early.

[Curryong]

Poor choice of words! Not permitted to give evidence, might be better. However, at the time and a little later several eminent jurists were surprised and criticised the Court for its decision.

This is a bit strange! Officer Harrington questioned Lizzie on the Thursday afternoon about what she made of the murders. (Witness statements Page 5)

Q. 'What motive?'
A. 'I don't know'.
Q. 'Was it robbery?'
A. 'I think not, for everything appears all right, even to the watch in Father's pocket and ring on his finger.'

What a very observant woman. Checking her father's jewellery wasn't missing before calling the maid!

[Aamartin]

Lizzie was not excused. The right to not self-incriminate is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. What's interesting is her inquest testimony would be excluded in a court today because she was already a suspect and not Mirandized (“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me?” ) The really interesting part of this is that Miranda v. Arizona was heard before the United States Supreme Court in 1966, and even then the decision was split 5-4. Those Massachusetts judges got it Constitutionally correct...73 years early.

Massachusetts is scored (today) as having the 11th most liberal courts in the nation. http://judgepedia.org/Massachusetts_Sup ... cial_Court

[Curryong]

By the way Mrs Jane Gray, the old gossip whose statement Catbooks found and posted at the top of the page (with gossip about Dr Bowen's questionable behavior with Lizzie) was stepmother to Abby Borden. No wonder she didn't like Lizzie!

[debbiediablo]

Poor choice of words! Not permitted to give evidence, might be better. However, at the time and a little later several eminent jurists were surprised and criticised the Court for its decision.

This is a bit strange! Officer Harrington questioned Lizzie on the Thursday afternoon about what she made of the murders. (Witness statements Page 5)

Q. 'What motive?'
A. 'I don't know'.
Q. 'Was it robbery?'
A. 'I think not, for everything appears all right, even to the watch in Father's pocket and ring on his finger.'

What a very observant woman. Checking her father's jewellery wasn't missing before calling the maid!

Lizzie's defense team chose that she not testify at the trial. The inquest testimony was ruled inadmissible. An attorney is an officer of the court and can be severely punished for suborning perjury. Maybe she didn't testify because she was such a poor witness or maybe because Jennings, et al., knew she was lying and could not allow that to happen under oath.

[Curryong]

I think Lizzie was both muddled and a liar! I wonder whether Jennings (a family friend almost,) knew about the daylight robbery the year before?

[Inspector]

I wonder what happened to the feather duster.
Seriously. I don’t recall it being discussed.
What about the dark handkerchief at the FRHS, with the honey cone designs on it, was that the one found between her feet, and the window?