Murder For Revenge

[Kat]

F. Tennyson Jesse, great-niece of Alfred, Lord Tennyson, was a contemporary of Edmund Pearson's and wrote true-crime stories. Her book, Murder and Its Motives, first published in 1924, was dedicated to him, and was a learned look at her theories of murder, and she catagorized them as:
Murder for gain, Murder from revenge, Murder for elimination, Murder from jealousy, Murder from lust for killing, Murder from conviction.
She also illustrated these theories with true cases.

The case of Constance Kent fits her definition of "murder from revenge", and her reasoning is interesting and reminds me of the Borden murders.

Contance Kent was 16 when her 1/2 brother was killed, and he was 4 years old. He was found in the privy vault wrapped up and his throat was cut and he was stabbed once. This happened in 1860 and it's possible that the crime and the culprit were very much influenced by the Victorian age.
Because the father had taken the nanny as his second wife after the death of Constance's mother, Constance felt the lady was beaneath her. A quote from the chapter is that "Children, like servants and dogs, are instinctive snobs..." (105)

In analyzing Constance, she was described as being "...sullen calm...It is brooding sullenness, her way of thinking herself ill-used, and her deadly habit of nursing an injury were allowed to accumulate within her like a poison so long as she perserved outward decorum." (106)

The way murder from revenge is described is that Constance shored up every intentional or unintentional unkind thing the nanny/now mother ever said to her, the worst insult being anything negative the stepmother may ever had said against Constance's own mother. Now, her own mother died insane and from too many childbirths. This reminds me of the terrible postpartum depressions which we now recognize. This woman had a child every year until she weakened and died. The father then married and kept having a child a year, basically. This is the Victorian way, and he also, as a Victorian Patriarch, had no conception of how badly his family was managing, and believed in Providence when things went awry. It doesn't seem like he paid too much attention to what was going on in this blended family and he wasn't expected to, until too late.

The revenge was to be acted upon the stepmother by killing her favorite child. Constance said she killed for revenge, but also said she had no ill feelings against the little boy- but I don't believe that. I think she was fooling herself later, when she admitted to the murder.

There are aspects of the Borden case possible here in the theory of murder for revenge. Authors have concentrated on murder for gain because of Andrew's wealth, but what if that was just a sidelight- an added benefit?

If Lizzie killed Abby as her first real victim, then maybe her revenge was upon Andrew. Andrew who may have slowly withdrawn his shows of affection to Lizzie over time, because she was groing sullen and hard to live with. A man may ignore the child in his home which causes discomfort. If Lizzie saw him turning away from her, she might think it was Abby's doing, and not her own behavior which made him become aloof.
We have to admit that the homelife was in disruption, and the culprits were Emma, Lizzie and maybe even Abby. We don't know if Abby threw Sarah's uneven temperment in Lizzie's face sometimes, while trying to hurt her feelings or get through to her. In Constance Kent's reality, it was not that her stepmother said to her that her mother died insane and therefore she, Constance may be acting insane- she didn't take that as a thrust- what she took as the insult was any word about her mother, period.

I can see this maybe developing in the Borden household, and like Mr. Kent, Andrew would be oblivious.

If Lizzie killed Abby from revenge against Andrew, what's to stop her next killing Andrew for making her do it?

[Kat]

She also burned a dress; albiet a nightdress.

Wm. Roughead, Classic Crimes,rprnt. 2000, chapter on Constance Kent:

A schoolmate of Miss Kent asked Constance,"Won't it be nice to go home for the holiday's so soon?"
Constance's reply: "It may be, to your home, but mine's different." Constance went on to explain how contrary her stepmother was.
This reminds me of Anna Borden's statements that Lizzie told her she did not wish to return to her home while they were on shipboard.

Constance put her week-worn nightdress into the laundry, then invented an excuse to send the laundry maid away, and retrieved her nightgown.
This reminds me of Lizzie sending Alice down stairs to tell Dr. Bowen which undertaker she wanted and when Alice returned she found Lizzie coming out of Emma's room tying on her wrapper. Constance had sent the maid out of the lumber room to get her a glass of water. After that, the nightdress went missing.

The nanny whom Mr. Kent married was from Tiverton, England. (This from the Jesse book).

This is staring to sound like a blueprint for murder from events in 1860- down to the events in 1892!

[Smudgeman]

It is very reasonable to assume maybe Abby did talk about Sarah, and infuriate them over trivial things. I know from my experience, my parents are divorced, and my father is on his 3rd wife, me and my younger sister do not like her. Now dont get me wrong, I dont want to kill her, but I challenge her to say anything negative about MY mother! My younger sister recently got married, and it was quite uncomfortable going to the dress rehearsal with my mother and my "step mother". Funny thing is, I have NEVER called her my step mother, she is my father's wife........

[Nancie]

That is interesting Kat, I'd love to read that book.
I wonder if Lizzie read about those murders, sure
sounds like the blueprint!

[Allen]

My mother was married twice. I was the only child from the first marriage, and she three children in the second marriage.I was closer to my step father than I was to my real father, so I can't really relate to that resentment of the "step parent". Even though my mother and he split up and divorced also, I remained very close to him for the rest of his life.He died about 2 years ago of a heart attack, and I was devastated.I still miss him every day.

[lydiapinkham]

One thing that fascinates me about Constance and Lizzie is that they both have good reason to resent their dads, but lay all the blame on the stepmoms. Constance spoke ill only of stepmother to her classmates, and her confession revolved around that single resentment. Even the expanded version given out years later mentions only the lady's slights against William.* Yet we know that Papa was equally at fault there, making preferential comments about young Francis, as superior to William. And, of course, the loss of Francis would equally shatter the father.

In both cases we have first family daughters committing crimes over preferred treatment (in words or money), blaming the stepmothers, but punishing the fathers as well. (I can't buy Lincoln's murder for love theory." Could some of the violence and rage be explained by their pent-up hatred of the fathers and the frustration caused by their inability to face up to it? I find this aspect of the cases even more striking than the squirreled-away-then-burned clothing.

* See "Unwomanly Weapons" in February Hatchet for complete transcripts of Constance's confessions.

--Lyddie

[Harry]

Lydds, your article was well written and informative. Thanks for introducing me to a new case worth reading further on. I had heard her name mentioned before but that was about it. Good job!

[Audrey]

I agree... Mary's article was really good and I am happy to see articles in The Hatchet that lead us to other time well spent....

The Lizzie conncections are nice-- and Mary did pull well from Lizzie's case and make it fit the Constance case-- and at the same time the article stood well on it's own even if she had left out the Lizzie connection which made it a grand slam in my opinion!

[Kat]

Good point, Lyddie, about the father's roles in these girl's lives.

Both crimes were quickly deemed an *inside job* by the police and popular opinion.

There was raised the possibility of insanity of Constance because her mother died insane, as there were questions of Sarah Borden's sanity and the sanity of the Morse line which was investigated and how that might apply to Lizzie.

There was an overindulgence with blood-letting and overkill, as the child's head was nearly severed from a slit throat plus an added stab wound, which compares to the blood-letting in the Borden case and overkill.
(BTW: The boy Kent was found with his eyes closed. This reminds me that Andrew's were open and in most deaths are left open- therefore Abby's eyes were probably open as she lay dead in her head's blood and brain, staring lifeless at the carpet.)

A blood-stained chemise was found in the Kent house in the furnace-boiler but acknowledged to be of menstrual origin and not examined or retained as evidence. (How could they know that in 1860, when they still couldn't know that in 1892?)

There was the dog that didn't bark.
The Kent's had a Newfoundland that didn't bark in the night and the Chagnon's also had a Newfoundland who didn't bark during the suspicious banging on the shared fence area Wednesday night.
(Maybe Newfoundland's don't bark?)
.......

Mr. Kent was blamed and socially and professionally ruined. Andrew might have been blamed for Abby's murder and ruined as well.
Kent had suspicions of his daughter, and Andrew probably would have as well. Kent sent his daughter away to a convent. Lizzie might very well have been sent to a convent, if Andrew had any say in the matter.
How would that make a father feel, to be suspicious of his daughter, and feel as if he had to send her away?

[lydiapinkham]

So many questions! I'll answer what I can. I think the Newfoundlands had nothing to bark at--no one strange to the area. I know that one of my sources (Nash?) mentioned that the Kents' ordinarily raised the roof.

According to Constance's confession, Francis was sleeping as she killed him. I have often wondered how she held what everyone referred to as a well nourished 4 year old while raising and climbing through a window etc. without dropping him or waking him. He must have been a deep sleeper, or she rocked him to sleep before killing him--there's a spooky image--just so she wouldn't have to see his eyes.

The sanity question is thorny. Her doctor had no doubt that she was sane--even at the time. But so did Parker and Hulme's, and I think that by most people's definition all 3 displayed signs of diminished responsibility. But they could plan and they could tell right from wrong. They chose murder, although from a thoroughly warped perspective. Lizzie's story isthe same--if she was guilty and planned it as coolly as she appears to have.

As to what would Andrew do? I think he would have calmly handed her over to the authorities, then sent her off to a nice cheap rest home.

That bloody shift? I've wondered about that too. Maybe it had to do with the placement of the blood--below the waist and in back, perhaps. That way, she'd have had to wear the thing upside down to have spilled someone else's blood on it. One thing, I think Scotland Yard's Inspector Whicher was just too good a detective to have overlooked such damning evidence. The local boys did try an abortive sting operation by camping out in the kitchen, where Papa locked them in "by accident." I think Papa knew and didn't want to know. You're right about the affair finishing him--probably as much internally as externally. Most of my sympathy goes to the stepmother, though. She had the heartbreak and was still stuck with him!

--Lyddie

[Kat]

I think it's agreed that the father would have been ruined by the scandal and suspected, to boot! Andrew had a chance to kill Abby before he left and since no one saw him leave, he has no alibi. (Mrs. Churchill saw him in the yard, briefly, around 9 a.m. but didn't see him leave).

Maybe Lizzie realized he would be suspected and another reason to kill him would be to spare him the infamy and shame of his being suspected, and /or his knowledge that she herself killed his wife. If no one was ever arrested because of lack of evidence, I can see Andrew sending Lizzie away to a convent. I wonder what Emma would have done if Lizzie was sent away like that.
I don't quite see Andrew turning Lizzie in, as long as there is no proof against anyone in particular. I think the surviving family would guard her and close ranks, until the scandal blew over. Maybe Lizzie figured this out too- that she'd be shipped off like a consumptive sufferer and become a pariah? If she can never see her father again, he might as well be dead.

It's also interesting to contemplate how a mind that is guilty reasons and rationalizes and forgets in a way, that they ever killed. The odd thing is trying to picture the mind that could live with the deed.

[Nancie]

it sounds like an interesting case, i am going to look
for the book at my library. re: newfoundlands, they aren't barkers, my sister has 3 and rarely will
they bark unless it is one quick Yap over food, they
are couch potatos and couldn't care less about saving you UNLESS you were drowning. They have
an instinct to water, we can't go in my sisters pool
without the dogs going nuts, thinking they have to
rescue us.