trial transcripts

[leitskev]

Hey M Pea, nice to meet you.

Borden was not a miser, contrary to the impression. The house was filled with fine furniture and most of the latest modern comforts. And Andrew had actually been involved, as a younger man, with the original building of the place. They said on the tour, I think, that he designed the radiators. The house is a fortress. There are no secret compartments. And I've lived in similar houses in Massachusetts, and never seen a secret compartment or loose floor board.

I would love to get a closer look inside that cupboard for the heck of it!

Google for the transcripts. I think if you will read them you will come away with an impression of just how closely they searched. On Sat, the one place they could search well was in the chimney, so they brought a mason with them Monday to open it up.

[Missus Pea-Eye]

Hey M Pea, nice to meet you.

Borden was not a miser, contrary to the impression. The house was filled with fine furniture and most of the latest modern comforts. And Andrew had actually been involved, as a younger man, with the original building of the place. They said on the tour, I think, that he designed the radiators. The house is a fortress. There are no secret compartments. And I've lived in similar houses in Massachusetts, and never seen a secret compartment or loose floor board.

I would love to get a closer look inside that cupboard for the heck of it!

Google for the transcripts. I think if you will read them you will come away with an impression of just how closely they searched. On Sat, the one place they could search well was in the chimney, so they brought a mason with them Monday to open it up.

BBM

My apologies. My meaning behind saying Mr. Borden may have cut corners and used a miser's budget, is mainly because it seems that was his way of thinking in some areas of his life. As in the women and the chores, and such things.
I am having to take my time reading the transcripts, but I swore there was transcript saying that the police did not pull out that many dresses when searching the closets. The cabinet/cupboard in the closet would have been an intriguing piece to find since it was in Lizzie's closet. And this cupboard revealed the crudely filled chimney of the 2nd kitchen. And by crudely, I mean, some bricks removed, but the cement was not even. It was a mound of cement. It would have been something that they noticed in searching the home. Especially since it was in Lizzie's room. Was Lizzie's room not the 2nd kitchen before the remodel?

[PossumPie]

Hey M Pea, nice to meet you.

Borden was not a miser, contrary to the impression. The house was filled with fine furniture and most of the latest modern comforts. And Andrew had actually been involved, as a younger man, with the original building of the place. They said on the tour, I think, that he designed the radiators. The house is a fortress. There are no secret compartments. And I've lived in similar houses in Massachusetts, and never seen a secret compartment or loose floor board.

I would love to get a closer look inside that cupboard for the heck of it!

Google for the transcripts. I think if you will read them you will come away with an impression of just how closely they searched. On Sat, the one place they could search well was in the chimney, so they brought a mason with them Monday to open it up.

BBM

My apologies. My meaning behind saying Mr. Borden may have cut corners and used a miser's budget, is mainly because it seems that was his way of thinking in some areas of his life. As in the women and the chores, and such things.
I am having to take my time reading the transcripts, but I swore there was transcript saying that the police did not pull out that many dresses when searching the closets. The cabinet/cupboard in the closet would have been an intriguing piece to find since it was in Lizzie's closet. And this cupboard revealed the crudely filled chimney of the 2nd kitchen. And by crudely, I mean, some bricks removed, but the cement was not even. It was a mound of cement. It would have been something that they noticed in searching the home. Especially since it was in Lizzie's room. Was Lizzie's room not the 2nd kitchen before the remodel?

Mrs. Pea-Eye, It is all a matter of interpretation. Leitskev has slightly misrepresented Mr. Borden's 'progressiveness' They did NOT have all the modern conveniences. They had no phone, they had no electric, they had no indoor bathroom. It was an ongoing grumble that he had money yet they had to pee in pots. "Miser" is relative. I am somewhat of a miser, I look for the best deals, I DON'T buy designer name brand clothes, even though we can most assuredly afford it. We live comfortably within our means, but my mother-in-law, whom I dearly love, does irritate me by making regular comments about my stinginess. Her interpretation is that b/c I clip coupons or look for the best deal, instead of impulse buying, that I am stingy, depending on who's doing the looking, Miser to one person is 'careful with money' to another.

The whole search thing is open to interpretation also. Leitskev believes it was intensive, and that the odds were that they would have found a hatchet. I read parts where the police repeatedly say, "I didn't move each dress" "I didn't give it a good search" "I quickly glanced under the bed" I believe the murder-day-search was quick and sloppy, and not until later did they do a complete search.

[leitskev]

Possum is correct. There were modern conveniences available which Andrew did not invest in, and there seems to have been some grumbling from the girls about. However, Andrew was not a miser. He bought a house for his wife's sister when asked to do so and gave the girls a healthy allowance. I think it's best to picture Andrew as an old timer who didn't see the need for fancy new technologies or luxuries like the phone.

Another example is the food poisoning they may have had from eating old meat. This suggests a miser stretching things. But it also turns out that the family bought only the highest quality meats and foods. A contradiction? Well, old timers are set in their ways. Andrew was once poor, and had built his fortune on his own. No doubt he acquired frugal habits in the process and didn't believe in wasting anything. When I was in high school, I worked for a guy like this. It was a multi-million dollar business, and going through an expensive renovation. The old man instructed me to pick up any discarded nails and stuff by the renovators. I was shown a jar to put them in...under his antique mahogany desk!

The search that Thursday was not intensive at all. It seems the searching on Friday was mostly limited to the cellar. Saturday was the first intensive search, and then again on Monday.

With the search on Saturday, there is what appears on the surface to be contradictory evidence. On the one hand, you will see in the testimony the leader of the police crew describing (over several pages)in great detail how specific and thorough the room by room search was. On the other hand, you will find one of the officers present describing what seems like less than adequate search methods.

This can be explained, but the only way is for you to read the testimony and decide yourself. Let me give my version of an explanation. Let's say you assign Tom, Dick and Harry to perform a top to bottom search of a house. In the meantime, while they are searching, other officers are prowling around the house. For example, Detective Columbo, whose search methods are more instinctive. Now, when it comes to trial, and you ask Columbo about his search methods, he might say, "I searched a few dresses in the closet, then I smoked a cigar on the porch, then I called my wife, then I looked under the mattress, then I visited the servant's room, then I bumped into Lizzie and had this amazing conversation...". In the meantime, the rest of the team was carefully going room by room. But if you cherry pick Columbo's testimony, it sounds like a very random and less than thorough search.

What I believe you will conclude if you read the whole transcript is this:

1) the cops believed the weapon was in the house. They believed Lizzie was the killer, and knew she didn't leave the premises.
2) the cops did not believe they had found the weapon. They lined up all the axes and hatchets in the cellar with the slit in Abby's handkerchief. None of them matched. Then they dug out a broken hatchet from a box. Over time, and really probably over the months leading up to the trial, they convinced themselves, or at least they tried to convince us, that the broken hatchet was the weapon. The theory developed that Lizzie broke off the handle and burned it in the stove, then washed the hatchet head and dipped it in ash. But we now know this was a sham. One of the cops testified seeing the handle next to the hatchet. What then happened to it? There were rust spots on the hatchet, which contradicts the forensic evidence showing the murder weapon to have been new(paint chips in Abby's skull). And the rust had magically disappeared from the hatchet head by the time of the trial...likely because the prosecution new the problem this rust caused. Each of the officers testified that the hatchet looked freshly broken, but under testimony none of them could really describe what that even meant, which shows the broken hatchet theory for what it was...a conspiracy by the prosecution.
3) the cops had all the time they wanted to search the house, as many times as they wanted. The only reason for them to stop their searches was either because they found the weapon, or because they believed the house had been so thoroughly searched that the weapon could not be there.

So for me, what it comes down to is this: did they believe the broken hatchet was the weapon? Or did they believe they had thoroughly searched the house? And my reading of the transcripts tells me they had little confidence they had the weapon. The broken hatchet theory was a problem and they knew it. So that tells me that after Monday, they felt the house had been thoroughly enough searched...that it was no longer there.

Who can say for sure? Police make mistakes. There is a human tendency to cover ones a$$. Maybe they missed it. You'll find reading the transcripts rewarding. If you do, let us know what you think afterward! We'd love to hear.

[FactFinder]

This thread is titled trial transcripts so I hope that I am posting this in the right place. Lizzie stated several times that a man had come to the house to ask her father about letting a store. In her statement, she said the man and her father exchanged angry words concerning the reason for letting the store. Andrew refused to rent it to him for the purpose he intended. Although I think Lizzie may have exaggerated an argument between her father and some strange man (strange angry men might have a motive for murder), a man did come to the Borden house in the days before the murders to talk to Andrew about a store he had already rented from him. Jonathan Clegg had been to the house twice to make arrangements with Andrew for a store he had already hired from Andrew. He was in the process of moving his store from one building to the next, and it was Clegg's new store that Andrew was seen in that morning of the murders as he made his way home. There were some changes being made to the windows of the building. Clegg stated in his testimony that he had been to the Borden house on Tuesday and Wednesday of that week to be exact. When he rang the bell Bridget let him in once, and Andrew let him in once. So someone had been to the house about making arrangements for a store. But it seems likely there was no strange man who argued with Andrew.

[FactFinder]

I set about trying to find out just how busy a thoroughfare Second Street may have been. There were many places of business clustered on and around Second street near the Borden house. Just going by what can be found in testimony Gorman's Paint Shop was at the corner of Borden and Second which was the next corner below the Borden house, Gray's Paint Shop was close by, Halls Stable sat diagonally on the opposite side of the street, Dr. Kelly, Dr. Bowen, Varney Wade's store was the next building past Dr. Kelly's, and behind the Borden's on Third Street we have Dr. Chagnon, and The Fall River Ice Company. That most likely generated a lot of traffic. Many people testified to chatting outside at V. Wade's and Hall's Stable alone. V. Wade's was on the other side of Dr. Kelly's house, and Hall's Stable diagonally across the street.

According to the Fall River directory of 1882, which I do understand is 10 years before the murders, on second street was William Wolfendale's Plumbing at 76 Second, Herbert E. McLane General Jobbing at 63 Second, Nicolas & Bryant Building and Contracting at 147 Second, W.A. Borden's Lumber Company at 135-139 Second, St. Catherine's Academy at 185 Second, Daniel Lee's Grocery at 122 Second, William R. Smith Carpenter and Builder at 48 Second, Joseph Wild Brush Manufacturer at 32 Second, William H. Ashley Clothing Company at 51 Second, J.A. Gowdy & Sons (manufactured Harnesses and sold mill supplies) at 32 Second, Cook and Grew Plumbers at 44 Second (Sold furnaces, ranges and stoves). If even half of these businesses were still around at the time of the murders, or if other businesses had set up shop, that's a lot of traffic on that street.

[Mara]

The prosecutor's opening statement at the trial made reference to a busy street. And yet, we have Morse's odd statement that he saw no one when he arrived at the house and ambled into the back yard to cadge some pears. Other statements about who saw what suggest that there wasn't so much activity going on that the sight, for example, of Bridget scrambling across the street didn't warrant notice.

[FactFinder]

Mrs. Churchill and a few others did see Bridget hurrying across the street. I am more apt to believe that Morse didn't see anything out of the ordinary that caught his attention. Which if I remember correctly was the gist of his statement. The sheer number of witnesses on that street at around that time, together with the number of businesses known to be there, the witnesses's who agreed that it was normally a busy street, are what lead me to believe it probably was pretty busy. I can walk down a busy street and not notice anything to catch my attention. People walking at a normal pace and chatting as usual wouldn't draw my attention. Someone running by would probably catch my attention. Adults don't normally go anywhere on the run unless something is wrong.

[PossumPie]

Mrs. Churchill and a few others did see Bridget hurrying across the street. I am more apt to believe that Morse didn't see anything out of the ordinary that caught his attention. Which if I remember correctly was the gist of his statement. The sheer number of witnesses on that street at around that time, together with the number of businesses known to be there, the witnesses's who agreed that it was normally a busy street, are what lead me to believe it probably was pretty busy. I can walk down a busy street and not notice anything to catch my attention. People walking at a normal pace and chatting as usual wouldn't draw my attention. Someone running by would probably catch my attention. Adults don't normally go anywhere on the run unless something is wrong.

I always took Morse's "didn't see anything" to mean out of the ordinary. There were people constantly coming and going. The street certainly had it's share of nosey neighbors, Half the street saw people come and go that morning from the Borden home, and they could even nail down times.
BTW...It just doesn't make much sense to me that some "guy" comes and wants to rent a store from Mr. Borden, who says no- so the guy waits a week, then hacks Mrs and Mr Borden up with an ax??? Over a rental? seriously? Rage killings are almost always immediate with no attempt to cover up, not waiting days to do it.

[Mara]

FactFinder, just wanted to be sure you knew I meant that Mrs. Churchill did, indeed, see Bridget crossing the street, which she might not have noticed if the street had been really busy. I worded myself in a kind of convoluted way.

[FactFinder]

FactFinder, just wanted to be sure you knew I meant that Mrs. Churchill did, indeed, see Bridget crossing the street, which she might not have noticed if the street had been really busy. I worded myself in a kind of convoluted way.

Thanks Mara. I'm also sorry if maybe I misunderstood your meaning. My thoughts don't always come out the same way I intend them to sound so don't worry misunderstandings happen

[FactFinder]

Mrs. Churchill and a few others did see Bridget hurrying across the street. I am more apt to believe that Morse didn't see anything out of the ordinary that caught his attention. Which if I remember correctly was the gist of his statement. The sheer number of witnesses on that street at around that time, together with the number of businesses known to be there, the witnesses's who agreed that it was normally a busy street, are what lead me to believe it probably was pretty busy. I can walk down a busy street and not notice anything to catch my attention. People walking at a normal pace and chatting as usual wouldn't draw my attention. Someone running by would probably catch my attention. Adults don't normally go anywhere on the run unless something is wrong.

I always took Morse's "didn't see anything" to mean out of the ordinary. There were people constantly coming and going. The street certainly had it's share of nosey neighbors, Half the street saw people come and go that morning from the Borden home, and they could even nail down times.
BTW...It just doesn't make much sense to me that some "guy" comes and wants to rent a store from Mr. Borden, who says no- so the guy waits a week, then hacks Mrs and Mr Borden up with an ax??? Over a rental? seriously? Rage killings are almost always immediate with no attempt to cover up, not waiting days to do it.

I don't believe there was a man who argued with Andrew over a store. I think this was another one of Lizzie's fabrications. Jonathan Clegg came On Tuesday and Wedneday to make arrangements for a store he had already hired out from Andrew. There was no argument about renting the store he already had it. He came to make arrangements for the move from one store to the next would be my assumption. I just wonder if Lizzie didn't use a man showing up about a store to help her concoct one of her stories.

[PossumPie]

We discussed some months ago the inconsistencies in Morse's account and other witnesses. I read through the testimony and it seems Morse came from the street north of the Borden home, cut through the yard, picked up a pear and ate it. There was no crowd around the house, but Bridget and a cop were at the side door. After finishing the pear, Morse approached them and was told that happened. He then entered through the kitchen. The urban legend of hundreds of people flocking around while Morse calmly ate a pear are incorrect. He says he saw nothing out of the ordinary. Every person who left the house or entered it was observed by some neighbor or other. It seems implausible that a stealthy stranger could sneak into the house and back out and not be noticed.

[FactFinder]

PossumPie there was no back entrance into the yard behind the house. The only way the officers reached the yard behind the house was to climb over the fence, and one officer was cut by the barbed wire in doing so.

[PossumPie]

PossumPie there was no back entrance into the yard behind the house. The only way the officers reached the yard behind the house was to climb over the fence, and one officer was cut by the barbed wire in doing so.

My mistake...not back gate, but the side gate. Pleasant and 2nd street was north of the Borden house, if you are facing it it was to the left.

Q: Where did you leave the car?
A: At the corner of Pleasant and Second Street

Q: Where did you go first?
A: Went in the back door around the Rear part of the house to the pear tree.

Q:Where did you go then?
A: I went into the house.

Later he says that he walked back the walk, saw no one outside, went to the pear tree, ate a pear, came back the walk then saw Bridget and a cop who informed him of the murders.

[FactFinder]

I've always thought that Andrew walked home in a direction that would take him past Mrs. Churchill's house. But in re-reading the trial testimony to find a reference to a subject totally unrelated something dawned on me. Reading the statements of both Joseph Shortsleeve and Jonathan Clegg (the shop keepers who last saw Andrew on his walk home) I realized that Andrew left their store on South Main Street, traveled up Spring Street and onto Second. After consulting a map of Fall River that route would have taken him down the street past Dr. Kelly's coming from the opposite direction. From South Main he would have turned left to get to Spring Street, and then left again to get onto Second Street. So if Bridget had been washing the sitting room windows which faced that direction at the time he came home, could she have seen him walking past? Could Lizzie have seen him from her bedroom window?

[Curryong]

In Britain and Australia juries aren't allowed to comment afterwards on cases they have deliberated on with regard to how they came to their decision to convict or not. I notice that isn't so in the U.S., especially in high profile cases (like the Casey Anthony case.) I know Lizzie's trial was a long time ago and maybe it wasn't considered proper then either, but has anybody ever come across any such comments made by jury men after her trial?

[FactFinder]

I have not come across any statements made by the jurors about the trial, but it's an intriguing question that deserves some follow up. I am planning to explore this a little further. I do know that all of the jurors got together on at least one occasion after the trial was over.

[Missus Pea-Eye]

I recently found some photos of someone's trip to the Borden home. I do not remember if it was on another forum or someone's personal site.
I found one picture quite interesting. It was a picture of a hidden cupboard inside Lizzie's closet. The closet, I do not know if it is the original piece, but the cupboard would have been hidden. The reason being, when the house was made into a 1 family home, they crudely sealed off the kitchen oven chimney. I doubt it would be visible in a finished room after the 2 family home was changed into a one family home. If I can find them, and they are not on the other forum that I am on, I will link the pictures for all to see.
My thought in this, is if the police were looking "everywhere" in the house, did they know about the home conversion? Would they have found the cupboard odd and worth mentioning in their search? Perhaps, because of the house conversion there were other similar hiding places.

UPDATE on the picture!! When I called yesterday, to schedule my 2 night stay at the B&B, I asked for them to send a picture to me of the hidden cupboard in the Abbey and Andrew Borden suite. (It was NOT in Lizzie's room as I had originally thought:) She described it to to a "T"!!! As soon as I get the picture, I will post! I am so excited to see it!!

[Catbooks]

that's wonderful. can't wait to see it!

[Mara]

That's intriguing. Looking forward to seeing it :)

[twinsrwe]

I am also looking forward to seeing this picture!

[Missus Pea-Eye]

Update, 3 day weekend. I probably won't get the picture until after tomorrow. She said the room was rented out.

[peareater]

i apologize for not being tech savvy. I'd have done better in lizzie's time. Have been reading about the crime and don't know exactly where to put this thought, but, has anyone else considered that she might have flung the hatchet into the kitchen fire after committing the crimes? She'd be left with just the small head, and that could be smuggled out when thrown into the household waste...... If i were a clever murderess, that's what i'd do....... just sayin.'

[twinsrwe]

Hello, peareater, welcome to the Forum! I see you just joined today. I think you will enjoy being a member of this forum; IMO, it is the best place to obtain the facts, ideas and comments on this case.

I don't recall that anyone has considered Lizzie burning the hatchet in the kitchen stove. This is a very interesting and intriguing thought. We know the handleless hatchet is not the murder weapon, so, you may have just come up with the reason the missing hatchet was never found.