workmen

[Angel]

Was there ever any investigation into the several workmen that were busy next door? One of them may have been seeing the activity around the house and knowing when it would be a good time to sneak in and rob the Bordens.

[Curryong]

In Crowe's Yard? The workmen labouring there that Thursday were all tracked down by the police as far as is known, and asked if they had noted any unusual activity going on at the Borden property. None of them had noticed anything, but as to investigating any of them, I don't know. One of them was supposedly seen near the fence where Andrew's pear tree was, sampling the ripe fruit!

The problem with the murderer being one of those workmen and killing, say Andrew, out of panic in the process of a botched burglary, is the 90 minutes between the murders. Crowe's Yard wasnt a huge block of land, and while of course the men were performing different tasks, they would have been working within sight of each other. 90 minutes, plus time to get into the house over the barbed wire fence, and afterwards clean up and return, is an awfully long time to be away from fellow workers and would surely have been noticed.

[debbiediablo]

I always wondered about Charles Sawyer as an accomplice...for no reason other than he got immediately involved with the police and because he had a relationship established with both of the women due to having painted for them. Plus he could've been splattered in red which would've mixed right in with a rainbow of other colors. Plus he was in a great position for a lookout although I haven't quite decided what he might be looking out for!!

[Curryong]

Charles was wearing a red shirt that day! I didn't know that he had painted at the Borden house!

Lizzie, interestingly, not Abby, was in charge of the arrangements for the painting of the house. The firm of painters (I think their name started with an L) had called at No 92 with a sample tin of paint, at the request of the family. The colour had apparently been discussed, but Lizzie called at their offices and told them it was the wrong colour, so they had to remix. The colour chosen was apparently a kakhi drab brown. Lizzie was wearing her new house dress (the Bedford cord) on the first day they painted and it got smeared with brown paint.

[debbiediablo]

There was a time when I didn't even need a calendar or sticky notes to remember, and trivia details were stuck in my brain exactly like Wacky Wall Walkers from cereal boxes stuck on the walls. Now I think I remember but am prone to mistake, so maybe it wasn't Charles Sawyer who painted for them. Perhaps I made the assumption because he indicated the stains on Lizzie's dress were paint, and being the painter seemed the logical way for him to know this. I did not know he was wearing a red shirt that day! No better way to monitor the progress on a murder one has just committed than by guarding the door to the house!! Of course, if he wasn't their painter then just how did he know all about her dress??

[Curryong]

OMG, Lizzie did have a secret admirer. Charlie wasn't really coming round for the pickles at all, but to see Lizzie after he was in the house painting that day, and she just brushed against him and his wet paint brush!

I'm being silly! I don't know whether Charles S. was a subcontractor and maybe worked for this firm called L something at No 92 or not. I know I've read something about Lizzie taking charge and telling them it was the wrong colour etc in the last couple of days. Very stupidly I didn't take notes. It might have been on an old thread and it's been niggling at me ever since!

[Curryong]

Mrs Raymond was the dressmaker of the spoiled garment and the pink wrapper. According to Victoria Lincoln all blouses and skirts (which were regarded as casual wear,) were called wrappers as well! Mrs Raymond stayed at No 92 for two weeks in the Spring while she made several garments.

During her visit Uncle John dropped in, and Detective Shaw of the Fall River Bureau called at the house and talked to Lizzie, according to Mrs Raymond's testimony (she was a witness for the defence) for quite a long time. What about, one might ask? The horse-car tickets, a spot of five-finger retail therapy at local stores, a donation to the police ball?

I'm still trying to find what I read before about the painters.

[debbiediablo]

I can't find my source either which makes me wonder about my own veracity!

[BOBO]

I always wondered about Charles Sawyer as an accomplice...for no reason other than he got immediately involved with the police and because he had a relationship established with both of the women due to having painted for them. Plus he could've been splattered in red which would've mixed right in with a rainbow of other colors. Plus he was in a great position for a lookout although I haven't quite decided what he might be looking out for!!

I thought the house painters were John Friar painters. No?

[BOBO]

I always wondered about Charles Sawyer as an accomplice...for no reason other than he got immediately involved with the police and because he had a relationship established with both of the women due to having painted for them. Plus he could've been splattered in red which would've mixed right in with a rainbow of other colors. Plus he was in a great position for a lookout although I haven't quite decided what he might be looking out for!!

I thought the house painters were John Friar painters. No?

John W. Grouard testified that he painted the house in May, 1892. Lizzie wasn't happy with the first color and watched as he mixed a second batch. I do not know if he worked for John Friar. Charles Sawyer was a sign painter. I am the worlds worst at keeping up with my notes!!

[Curryong]

Thank you very much BOBO. You're a lifesaver! I don't know where I got the L from!

[augusta]

The guys working in John Crowe's yard on August 4, 1892 said they didn't see a thing. It happened to be that a sheriff's deputy came into the Crowe yard, and the workmen didn't notice him. That went into Lizzie's defense, which showed if the guys didn't notice the deputy, then there was a chance they didn't see any murderer flee from the Bordens' and escape via Crowe's property. The jury was taken to see the yard.

[Source: "Lizzie Borden: Resurrections", Sherry Chapman, 2014, PearTree Press, page 151.

[irina]

Thank you Augusta! I have argued a number of times that someone could have gotten in or out of the Borden yard and been ignored, not seen, not registered in the mind, whatever. Pictures said to have been taken close to August 4, 1892 also show a decorative fence around the front of the Borden home and two shade trees growing on the parkway. A man crouched down, bent over or even walking normally with the visual path is interrupted by fence, trees, whatever, could easily not be seen.

[Curryong]

That was undoubtedly a big point for the defence at the time in the jurors' minds! 'Smile'. However, just because someone could have momentarily escaped notice in Crowe's Yard doesn't mean they did (or would have been able to on that particular day) . Nor does it explain how they weren't seen to go into the Borden property from the street, (the decorative fence wasn't that high) nor how nothing was seen or heard by the neighbours on the Churchill side on that morning, nor by onlookers on the street!

[debbiediablo]

People who are working on a roof should be paying attention to what they're doing, not gazing around the neighborhood. That's how thumbs get smashed and bodies fall off. So I can perhaps understand carpenters not noticing an odd person in the yard. I'm thinking it's not so much that no one reported anything odd as that the people who would be in the best position to notice and who had the greatest credibility were the ones who noticed no one. But there were reports of a strange man jumping over the fence, a pale man pacing out front, Dr. Handy looking around with an air of oddness, an unknown buggy.... Unfortunately no two people made similar reports; the only agreement was among those who saw nothing. Like John and Patsy Ramsey, the police were convinced Lizzie was the killer, and I doubt they investigated anyone else beyond a cursory look. For that matter, they weren't particularly thorough in searching for evidence against their main suspect.

[Curryong]

The police in the early days after the murders were rushing about the countryside questioning and in a few cases arresting various vagrants and travellers with little or no proof.

I thought in January 1893 the Fall River Daily Herald tracked Dr Handy's 'pallid-faced man' (the man the Doctor had seen walking in a strange manner on Second St at about 10:30am on that Thursday.) He was apparently a man known as 'Mike the soldier,' who was tubercular and reasonably well known.

Dr Handy seemed to be one of those sort of people who loathe being involved in anything controversial and was remarkably reluctant to go and identify a man the police thought was 'the man' a few days after the murders.

[debbiediablo]

Handy is interesting in that respect, especially given that half of the doctors in Fall River (excuse my hyperbole) seemed to throw themselves into the investigation.

[Curryong]

Yes, and yet he seems to have been regarded as maybe being a bit pushy by Andrew. According to Lizzie in conversation with Alice Russell, Abbie told Andrew off when she was annoyed with him on the Wednesday morning for being rude to Dr Bowen when he called to see how everyone was, and he replied 'Well, I don't want him coming over here Dr Handy style'.
'Mrs B said he did not come over here Dr Handy style. I told him you were sick and he came over to see you and I think it is a shame you can't treat him decent.'

[debbiediablo]

Hmmm. Interesting and new information to me, thank you...:-) Abbie sounds a lot less introverted and meek than often portrayed. She appears to have grown a spine when it came to Andrew's discourtesy or maybe she had one all along and that's what put off the daughters.

[BOBO]

Maybe there was a reason Andrew didn't want ANY doctors around the home. Especially around the lady folks.

[debbiediablo]

That's where my sentiments lie, BOBO. This leaks over into another thread but what could be so compelling that a 'friend' would simply dismiss innocence or guilt in a double hatchet parricide and want to get on with business.

[PossumPie]

Thank you Augusta! I have argued a number of times that someone could have gotten in or out of the Borden yard and been ignored, not seen, not registered in the mind, whatever. Pictures said to have been taken close to August 4, 1892 also show a decorative fence around the front of the Borden home and two shade trees growing on the parkway. A man crouched down, bent over or even walking normally with the visual path is interrupted by fence, trees, whatever, could easily not be seen.

I've never had much of an issue with someone being able to sneak out of the house as much as someone sneaking into the locked house, avoiding Abby, Lizzie, and Bridget, killing, avoiding Lizzie and Bridget for an hour and a half, avoiding Lizzie, Bridget, AND Andrew, then killing again while avoiding Lizzie and Bridget, then sneaking out while avoiding detection. Sure, someone may leave my home undetected by the neighbors, but I'll be darned if someone could hide for 90 min. inside with my wife and I walking around!

[debbiediablo]

Thank you Augusta! I have argued a number of times that someone could have gotten in or out of the Borden yard and been ignored, not seen, not registered in the mind, whatever. Pictures said to have been taken close to August 4, 1892 also show a decorative fence around the front of the Borden home and two shade trees growing on the parkway. A man crouched down, bent over or even walking normally with the visual path is interrupted by fence, trees, whatever, could easily not be seen.

I've never had much of an issue with someone being able to sneak out of the house as much as someone sneaking into the locked house, avoiding Abby, Lizzie, and Bridget, killing, avoiding Lizzie and Bridget for an hour and a half, avoiding Lizzie, Bridget, AND Andrew, then killing again while avoiding Lizzie and Bridget, then sneaking out while avoiding detection. Sure, someone may leave my home undetected by the neighbors, but I'll be darned if someone could hide for 90 min. inside with my wife and I walking around!

This is exactly why (regardless of who the killer is) I think there must be someone else complicit to the murders...perhaps not an premeditated accomplice but someone or more than one who KNEW. My first inclination is Bridget but NoStoneUnturned's theory that Uncle John's fury when he realized Lizzie was responsible (whether or not he helped or she hired) was the reason he and and Lizzie had no contact, not ever, after the trial. I agree with Possum regarding the sneaking out...and the sneaking in. To get in, if the murderer wasn't already in, someone had to open a door. Nor can I imagine someone crawling into a window while Bridget was washing them!

[augusta]

Debbie, I think someone else did see the suspect that Dr. Handy saw. There was a woman and her daughter (was it a "Mrs. Deliah Manley?") in a buggy, and the woman turned around in her seat to look at that strange guy. I'm going by memory, as I have almost no Lizzie books with me now.

Actually the police did follow up on any tips people offered.

I agree in that some of the cops wanted to see Lizzie judged "Guilty" and would not doubt if they slanted their findings against her, or maybe even lied. But only Lizzie was tried. Knowlton wrote to Pillsbury that there was no sense in trying anyone else (i.e. Bridget) because the prosecution had no solid evidence; only circumstantial, and reasoned that trying someone else, the verdict would only turn out to be another acquittal.

Whatever was wrong with Lizzie and Uncle John's relationship started before the murders. I think the Coroner's Inquest tells us that. Only Emma corresponded with him; not Lizzie. She didn't greet him on Wednesday, August 3 and stayed in her room until around 6 pm when she went to see Alice Russell. She ignored him and A&A as she left the house and when she came back, like 9:30?, they heard her come in and go upstairs, again not making any attempt to even say hello as John and Andrew were still up talking. Morse may have been gone, still at Swansea getting Andrew's eggs, etc., at 6. But he arrived at the Bordens' some time after 1 pm and Lizzie never came out of her room.

As an interesting aside, that evening Phoebe Bowen stopped in to visit Abby since only the day before Abby had run screaming across the street to Dr. Bowen that they've been poisoned. Mrs. Bowen wanted to know how she was. Abby said she was feeling better but that Andrew was still a bit peaked. Interestingly, Abby told Phoebe that Lizzie went to visit Alice Russell. Did Lizzie herself tell Abby that? Was Lizzie on okay terms with Abby to tell her where she was going? Or did Abby hear it from Bridget? I did not know Phoebe was visiting that night until not all that long ago. If writers knew it, they didn't mention it, and I want to know every bit of what went on on August 3.

I used to think that this "Lizzie vs. John" behavior was just a put on so it would look like Lizzie and Morse would NEVER join forces, but it had been going on for some time.

I don't know if any men at Crowe's place were working on the roof on August 4th. I remember reading of workmen working in the yard.

I think a person could hide in the Borden house for 90 minutes. Since all the interior doors were closed, someone could maybe hear the others in the house as to where they were. One thing Jennings was thinking of was someone possibly hid in a shallow closet by the stairs. Arthur Phillips took a picture when Jennings was inside the closet, which is in Phillips' book that contains a section on the case.

Second street was a busy street. It was noisy and there were people coming from and going into the downtown district on foot and in carriages, the crew working noisily at Crowe's place, probably some town noises since the Borden house was so close to the downtown district. I would not think anyone on the street would have heard anything from Lizzie's house. I don't think the victims had time to scream. Well, it looks like Andrew had no time. But Abby's murderer was probably facing her when the first blow was struck. It sounds as if Abby tried to get away from the person and I don't know if she would have thought to scream or not.

I wonder if the killer got in thru the cellar door. Because why would John Morse try to lie by saying the cellar door was open when he came back from his visiting? I think the cellar door played a role in the answer to the murders. Morse wanted people to think that the murderer left that way. I am thinking that maybe the killer did, and probably forgot to leave the cellar door open as maybe Morse had told him? And maybe the killer got in thru the cellar door, maybe Morse unlocking it before he went to catch the horse car. If Lizzie was innocent, she may not have let someone in and helped him navigate himself around in the house. Morse must have known the floorplan of the house. He could have given someone a crash course in where rooms and closets and doors were.

His exit could have been first down the cellar stairs till Lizzie came in and discovered "Father", then out the cellar door.

Curryong, your source on part of Lizzie's conversation to Alice Russell re Abby chewing Andrew out comes from "The Knowlton Papers". I wrote it up into a small article for the "Lizzie Borden Quarterly" and called it "Dear? Abby". Since there have been few things found about Abby, I think it's important to show all we can collect on her - and Andrew. I am happy to see someone remembering it and using it. If you read it from a different source, I was not aware that it was discovered prior to that article.

[debbiediablo]

The safest place I can think of to hide for 90 minutes (or from coming in the door with Lizzie the night before) is Emma's bedroom. I'm the oddball who thinks the killer may have come in with Lizzie when she was done at Alice Russell's. Uncle John's presence would have made this more challenging but not impossible. Although I have no theory that truly resonates with me enough to stick with it (thus I suggest and discuss from all sides depending on the day... ) I cannot fathom the motive for John Morse. On the other hand, everything that happened in that house on August 4 fits perfectly into the forensic description of a domestic homicide, right down to the Lizzie's prescient remarks the night before, overkill, depersonalization and coat under his head which I see as an act of undoing. If it were truly meant to be coverage for blood splatter and then disguised by catching blood loss from after-death oozing, I'd think a murderer that smart would place it directly under his head, not as part of layers.

[Curryong]

Augusta, my quote came from your book 'Resurrections' (Page 8). Sorry I didn't give the source. In your post above I don't quite understand when you say Phoebe called in and spoke to Abby. Was it the Wednesday evening, when Abby and Andrew were entertaining Uncle John in the twilight in the sitting room? Because it was that morning, not the day before, that Abby had rushed over to Dr Bowen speaking about poison.

I think that Phoebe Bowen was very fond of Abby. It was to Phoebe that Abby made that mysterious remark a few days before that 'they' had taken her front door key.

I never knew that Lizzie told Abby that she was going to visit Alice Russell. In Lizzie's inquest testimony she made it seem like spur of the moment stuff, as she was feeling a lot better by about six. I've got a vague recollection somewhere in the back of my brain of reading that someone (was it Phoebe Bowen?) saw Lizzie heading down the street towards Alice's home that evening. Could she have put two and two together perhaps, and come to the conclusion that Lizzie was visiting Alice? I don't think it could have been Bridget that told Abby as she took the night off and was out herself.

I just get the feeling that Lizzie, who was very 'status conscious' was not particularly proud of Uncle John, who travelled without spare underwear, socks or toothbrush and, for all his business nous, was very home-spun. Why would Uncle John be involved in a plot to murder Andrew? He liked Andrew, and was virtually his sole friend. All the evidence we have points to excellent relations between John and Abby and Andrew.

John Morse wasn't in need of money himself, nor was he so fond of his nieces that he would put his head in the noose for them. Lizzie seems to have regarded him as a hick, and Emma, possibly more kind-hearted, wrote to him a whole four times a year, if that.

I thought that Officer Allen, who was very proud of only taking a few minutes to get to No 92, checked the cellar door lock and it was locked. So did the man who originally called the police at 11:15am and the newspapers, arriving with a couple of reporters only a few minutes later. He and the two reporters were among the earliest to get to No 92.

[irina]

I noted that about Abby telling Phoebe that Lizzie was going to visit Alice. I thought it was also in some testimony by Mrs. Bowen. At any rate I was able to read most or all of 'LBQ' in some archives where page ran after page and I just kept reading. I have been thinking of bringing up what Phoebe said because, like you say Augusta, I had all those feelings. Which makes Lizzie's cordial conversation the next day about "meat for dinner", etc. more believable. You are so right Augusta, to understand every minute of the days before and after the tragedy. (I'm going to get your book pretty soon. )

There are so many modern cases where some real nasty criminals were caught because of a paper trail or pictures or other items from our modern world. I have a very low opinion of police in Lizzie's day "following every clew" when looking at suspects. Alibis seem to have been heavily relied upon. For example a wife fearful of a beating if she didn't cooperate or fearful of what would happen to her children if her husband went to prison, would surely say her husband was home with her all the time when a crime was committed. Beyond alibis there was almost no forensic science. There was virtually no way to tell human blood from other blood. As was said about Jack the Ripper, as horrific as those crimes were, the police practically had to catch him with bloody hands within ten feet of the victim to make a case. Back to the Borden point, NOBODY, including Lizzie, was caught on WalMart security cameras buying or stealing a hatchet. Luminol wasn't invented so not used to see if a minute blood trail led through the Borden house to an escape route. Carriages and wagons didn't have license plates and no meter maid was handing out parking tickets, that could place a suspect in a locale. I think I have made my point. Let's assume the police did the very best they could but everything considered they couldn't do the job and so we have no idea about other suspects except none of them looked excessively guilty.

Concerning a stranger in the house I'm still going to say it depends on how aware the occupants are. Possum you mention you and your wife. Before I mentioned having always lived in a small family~2 parents or one husband. Yes, we would know if a stranger was in our homes. Then consider more people in the household, some of whom don't seem to like others, some who stay to themselves as much as possible. In addition there is a maid and father's business associates coming to the house. At least one neighbor comes over for vinegar sometimes. Uncle John showed up yesterday more or less unannounced. Milk and ice are delivered, albeit very early in the morning. There is a busy street outside the front gate. Bridget is thumping away at the windows with a brush. There is a difference between hearing and knowing. It's kind of like the 1960s hippie pop psychology: You are looking but are you SEEING? Apply that to hearing. One hears but does it register? Would Lizzie, hearing something in the guest room, REALLY pay attention? Would she more likely assume in passing that Abby was still in the room doing whatever? She didn't have a wrist watch nor could she base times on TV or even radio programmes. Maybe the whole thing was vaguely in her mind and after the shock of finding her father none of it went together.

Think of other times when we believe we hear things that aren't real because our senses are extra alert or for some reason our minds tell us it might be dangerous. I stayed with a friend recently and "heard" footsteps walk across upstairs and down the steps. It was so real to me that I partially woke up my friend who disregarded what I said. I reasoned that we had two dogs present and they didn't care so I went back to bed. I have heard similar things in that house before so will say reasonably that it's an old house and that's how the house cools down after a 100 degree day. Alert, don't care or distracted, all affect what and HOW we hear. I rather suppose Lizzie was distracted or didn't care about what others did in the house.

It comes up a number of times that Abby "interferes" or has too much influence on Andrew. The main thing I find interesting in the Gordon Bordon letter is that the motive motive for murder is stated to be Abby's interfering and exerting control over her husband. Next time I look at the old papers I am going to try to see if this was even much suggested by the time the letter was written. It would have come up a little when Lizzie described the flurry over Mrs. Whitehead's house and the less than cordial feelings between her and Abby, but would that have been enough for a crank to pick it out in a newspaper report and then fashion a hoax letter around it? I'm not trying to say the Gordon Bordon letter is a wealth of information but I am not willing to completely disregard it, especially since Knowlton seems to have kept it in his files. Anyway I think we have a number of bits of information to say Abby wasn't meek and mild and totally beat down.

[debbiediablo]

Someone could move into the basement and I'd never notice...it's a very nice basement but the kids are grown and gone so neither my husband nor I go down there much. There could be two or more people in every closet in the house right now (excepting the ones at the garage door and in our bedroom) and I wouldn't notice unless they sneezed or coughed when I walked by. My husband, however, would immediately notice their footprints or tire tracks in the yard as not belonging to either of us. On the other hand, I'm much more likely to recall exactly what people say or do once they're a blip on my radar...

[Curryong]

Alice Russell, who after all, knew the house and all its occupants, stated in her old age that Mrs Borden wasn't in charge of the household, mr Borden was. That doesn't mean that Abby wasn't capable of standing up to him occasionally (as his daughters did, too) merely that most of the time what he laid down his household obeyed.

Lizzie didn't say she was in her room ALL the time before her father came home. She placed herself in different locations. This was a very small house. Lizzie was the only person who testified that she had a cordial conversation about meat with Abby that Thursday morning (with someone she hated.) That was for obvious reasons. She would hardly say "I had an argument with her, I'd had enough. I decided to kill her!" There is no evidence of Abby intending to go marketing, or visit a sick friend or even taking a walk. She was found in a house dress and old boots after making up the guest room bed. The note (which in my opinion never existed) was never found.

The police suspected Lizzie, in spite of the lack of modern forensic evidence, because she had means, motive and opportunity. In the first instance, Abby's death, she was the only person known to be inside the house and near the victim. In the second instance, Andrew's death, she was the only person on the ground floor near the victim at the time of death and her barn 'alibi' wasn't believed.

I believe she would be arrested today (and convicted) because she would immediately be made to change her clothing and all the clothing would be preserved. The house would also be regarded as a crime scene and there would be no nonsense about the family remaining. Modern forensics including luminol, would help immensely.

[debbiediablo]

Abby: I'm going to the butcher this morning, Lizzie, to pick up something besides that damn leftover mutton for dinner. What do you think Uncle John would like? Pork liver? Chicken gizzards?

Lizzie: That's a bit chintzy, Mrs. Borden. I'd prefer beef steak with a side order of lobster.

Abby: My gracious, Lizzie! Do you want your father to kill me?

Lizzie: That would definitely free up my morning....

In 1997 the Stanford Law School retried Lizzie in moot court and once again found her innocent. But they used the same evidence (no prussic acid testimony, etc.) that the original court considered. If she really did kill her parents, I think modern forensics would find enough evidence for conviction. Ditto for Bridget or Uncle John if they did it. It gets more complicated if these were the acts of a hired killer or a deranged stranger. Certainly public video cameras would confirm Morse's alibi. And probably Emma's. With what we now know about domestic homicide, Lizzie would be the first and foremost suspect right from the start. And the huge array of people including every doctor in Fall River except Handy (hyperbole) wouldn't have been tromping through the house moving bodies and performing home delivered autopsies.

[PossumPie]

I've said this before. I come from a family with several MODERN police officers. I LOVE my family members, but most crimes are not solved by the witty Sherlock Holmesian-like logic of our men and women in blue. It is b/c most crooks are far stupider than the cops. The cases I hear them proudly discuss cracking have little to do with police smarts. Smart criminals like Ted Bundy et al. either get lazy, make a dumb mistake, or perhaps-just perhaps- deep down just want it over. Even our illustrious FBI and CIA and NSA, and every other alphabet soup govt. organization where slapped upside the head with a 767 jet on Sept. 11th. These brilliant idiots were petty and refused to share evidence with each other that they had months before Sept 11 that pointed to a building terrorist plot. After the fact, it has been agreed by all involved that if they had played nice and shared intel early in the summer of 2001, that Sept. 11th would have passed as just another cool crisp fall day. Fall River cops were no more stupid than any others, they just happened to be in the spotlight.

The case holds all of the fingerprints of a domestic one. I will concede that Lizzie might not have done the actual killings, but she aided and abetted whoever did. Despite wild plots by secret love-children, homosexual Morse and Andrew romping upstairs, the Pope and his minions, or Uncle Morse gallantly risking his own death so Lizzie could eat lobster the rest of her life, Lizabeth Borden looks like the right suspect.

Wow, I'm going to have to cut back my caffeine intake in the mornings...

[irina]

As with anything else, practice makes perfect. Small town police don't have much practice with murder and they make terrible mistakes. I used to live in a place that Paul Harvey said was the best place in America to commit murder. Something like five murders and no solutions. Small town cops making terrible mistakes. This is the same place where I got my throat cut with a dull instrument. The powers that be have no problem getting rid of people who are problems in my opinion, and have incompetent police to cover up. In my case they hired a cheap, incompetent assassin.

It is possible that if the Borden case had been handled with modern techniques Lizzie would have been found clearly innocent. For example she may have had blood on a dress but perhaps it was on a hem from when she discovered Andrew's body in the sitting room. Possibly she did touch him and then got blood on herself. Maybe there was blood on a door knob and she wiped her hand on her skirt. It may not have been visible to others but in fear she later burned the dress.

It bothers me that the police officer said he didn't like her. That may have been his way of saying he thought she was lying or he didn't like her answers but it also leaves room for the idea he simply detested her and was determined to see her convicted. Since it was so hard to break suspects' alibis, it was very easy to say no other "clews" worked out, therefore Lizzie was the one.

[Curryong]

Harrington, the fashion expert, who had suspicions of Lizzie, was of course, only a junior officer in the police force then. It was Marshall Fleet really that was in charge and he interviewed Lizzie and expressed no opinion as to her personally.

I was just reading an observation by a police officer that I will have to look up again as it might have been Harrington or somebody else. He said Emma answered questions looking people in the eye while Lizzie turned her head while doing the same. Easy for Emma of course. She wasn't under suspicion.

[irina]

Some people don't make eye contact out of habit or custom. If Lizzie was innocent she might have suffered from survivor's guilt before the term was even invented.