Another look at Bridget

[Kat]

Well when the whole of it is read, it sounds consistently like Lizzie, if you know what I mean.
"There" meant around the house. "There" means where she was looking or what room she was in.
Lizzie says she didn't see Bridget. But she does seem to say Bridget went upstairs, as far as context is concerned, before Andrew came back..
Lizzie is agreeing that "a large portion of the time" she thought she was alone in the house. That implies that the rest of the time she was not alone in the house, I think. No one asks about *all the time.*

[RayS]

Ray seems to prefer talking about himself, rather than this topic.

Has anyone an opinion on what a potentially truthful Lizzie said about Bridget going upstairs before Andrew came home?
I thought it fit with Allen's surmise that Bridget was ill and uncomfortable- and not necessarily that Bridget was up the front stairs killing Abbie...

As far as I/we know, Bridget went outside around 9:15 and didn't return inside until about 10:30 (when she opened the front door for Andy).

I would like to know in what book in my library does it say that?

[Yooper]

This is in response to Allen:
Lizzie said she thought Bridget had gone upstairs, before Andrew came home. I've always wondered about that.

Inquest
Lizzie
60(17)
Q. What was Maggie doing when your father came home?
A. I don't know whether she was there or whether she had gone up stairs; I can't remember.
....
68(25)
A. My father did not go away I think until somewhere about 10, as near as I can remember; he was with me down stairs.
Q. A large portion of the time after your father went away, and before he came back, so far as you know, you were alone in the house?
A. Maggie had come in and gone up stairs.
Q. After he went out, and before he came back; a large portion of the time after your father went out, and before he came back, so far as you know, you were the only person in the house?
A. So far as I know, I was.

The first part of the quote is qualified by "I can't remember", and Bridget was clearly "there", meaning where Lizzie could see her, because Bridget let Andrew in the front door. This may also imply that Lizzie was downstairs, because the opposite of "there" seems to be "upstairs".

In the second part of the quote, the body language is missing, Lizzie could be distracted by trying to recall events and it almost sounds like she didn't hear the question. Again, Bridget was inside when Andrew arrived so Lizzie wasn't alone in the house all the time Andrew was away. She could be confused by the phrase "a large portion of the time", it is a bit vague. If Lizzie wasn't aware of when Bridget had come inside, she really wouldn't know how long she had been alone in the house. There is a difference between "Maggie had come in and gone upstairs" without a pause and "Maggie had come in (pause) and gone upstairs".

[Kat]

I'm not choosing one person's version over another's here (Bridget or Lizzie). I'm just reporting what Lizzie said. I don't know how she said it.
Knowlton sounds like he just glances over her reply and re-states his same question. It sounds as if he was not prepared to go there with Lizzie's answer about Bridget. Now we'll never know.
The "so far as you know" is when Lizzie could have said that the screen was unhooked and someone might have entered, but she didn't say that either.
It also implies Abbie was not there- to her knowledge.

[Yooper]

Another possibility exists with Knowlton's question about Lizzie being aware of being alone in the house. If she thought she was alone, it implies knowledge of Abby having left the house, or of Abby being dead. He may be giving her just enough rope with the question. If he could establish that Abby could not have left the house, then she was aware of Abby's death. The phrase "so far as you know" makes it a loaded question!

This also makes Lizzie unaware of any intruder, and it appears that she was unaware of an opportunity for an intruder to enter. The best answer Lizzie might have given would have been to say she couldn't possibly have been alone in the house, given Abby's murder. She had to know she wasn't alone, whether or not she was aware of it at the time. She didn't do this.

[shakiboo]

I can see why Lizzie was confused, and possibly a little scared also. She woud had had to know she was a suspect by then, so how was she to answer the question, >>>1. By what she thought to be true that morning. or 2. By what she found out later was true. If during the morning she believed Abby to be away from the house, then she would have thought herself alone in the house, most of the morning. But after finding Abby's body, then she would have known she wasn't alone, not only was Abby still there, but if she didn't kill Abby then some one else had to be there also. So, what was Knowlton trying to find out, what she thought to be true or what he thought to be true?

[Yooper]

Knowlton's phrasing, "so far as you know, you were alone in the house" seems to indicate "know", present tense, "were alone", past tense. It sounds to me like Knowlton was asking what Lizzie presently knew about what had previously occurred. He did not ask what she "knew".

[Kat]

Oooo Shakiboo, I like your question! It doesn't even need an answer- it is fraught with possibilities!


[PS: My spelling stinks tonight! Hence my *edit*]

[Yooper]

Knowlton was asking a question for which the answer should be obvious if Lizzie did not kill Abby. He asked the question twice and Lizzie answered incorrectly. He was trying to get at what Lizzie knew to be true at the time of the Inquest, from the perspective of what he suspected was true. This was a question which would put Lizzie in a bad light no matter how she answered. If the answer was "I know I was alone", then she killed Abby. If the answer was "I know I wasn't alone", then a murder was committed right under her nose while the murderer remained in the house and she was unaware of it. I don't know if Lizzie ever acknowledged that she had been in the house with a murderer under foot all morning. It should have occurred to her when Abby was found.

[Shelley]

"It should have occurred to her when Abby was found."

I have to wonder if Lizzie knew enough about forensics to realize that the police and medical examiner had ways to estimate probable time of death to within about an hour. I think she counted on both murders having been viewed as happening in fairly close succession, and her reputed 20 minutes plus "in the barn" would cover that interim when she was out of the house. I think that idea is also what prompted her desire for a search to be made for Mrs. Borden, hearing her come in, etc. The idea needed to be reinforced, and indeed at first Bowen thought maybe Abby had a heart attack, might have been pursued upstairs by the murderer and collapsed.

Just think, if Abby had been murdered a little later than most think- say, closer to 10 a.m., and we know Andrew was murdered about 11 a.m.- it would have been just on the outside limits of pinning down Abby's death as preceding Andrew's.

[Angel]

It's probably very true that Lizzie would think everyone would assume they had been murdered during the same time frame. I'm sure she had no idea that the experts would be able to pinpoint the time lapse between the two. That's why her story is so fumbled.

[Harry]

That might also explain why Lizzie had no alibi for Abbie's murder. She might have thought if the two murders were committed very near each other the time she spent in the barn would cover both.

[Yooper]

This question took place at the Inquest, the murders were relatively recent. If Lizzie had hoped to put the murders together time-wise, the revelation of a time discrepancy based upon initial findings by the examining doctors would have thrown her for a loop. She may have been trying to avoid explaining how and why she had been unaware of an intruder. I give Knowlton credit for asking the question, it really puts Lizzie on the spot! This is also a good example of why the prosecution was devastated by the exclusion of Lizzie's Inquest testimony.

[Shelley]

Yes, I am quite sure it was a jolt to be left dangling with nothing better to say than she was sitting in the kitchen reading an old magazine while Abby was being carved to bits upstairs. And she could hardly retract her statement and make up a whole new story that she had been out in the garden, watching Bridget wash windows, shopping, etc. Must have been an awful moment if one were guilty. And then the realization that she would have to have been inside all morning with a homicidal maniac hiding out somewhere in close proximity was going to be hard to pass off as her story. For those who have been to the house, you know how all those rooms are right on top of each other. An intruder would have had to have had the luck of the Irish to have avoided Lizzie and Bridget for what may have been as much as one hour and and forty-five minutes.

Harry, did we ever find out whether or not the parlor was locked that morning? I have been looking everywhere.

[Yooper]

Maybe even Lizzie recognized the absurdity of having been alone with a murderer all morning!

[Harry]

I'm looking for it right now. Did find that both doors to the parlor were closed per Bridget's trial testimony, page 281. She's questioned about the time Andrew came home.

"Q. Now, you say that you unlocked the bolts?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You didn't open the parlor door, did you?
A. The parlor door?
Q. Yes.
A. No, sir. I didn't have nothing to do with it.
Q. You don't know anything about it?
A. No, sir, I don't...
Q. Whether there was anybody in there or not?
A. No, sir, I didn't.
Q. The door from the sitting-room into the parlor was closed, wasn't it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. All the time the door from the hall into the parlor was closed?
A. Yes, sir."

Bridget says she never went into the parlor to wash the windows from the inside. Could the reason have been the doors were locked? It seems strange one would wash the outside but not the inside especially if that was the room used for entertaining guests.

It doesn't yet answer the question whether it was locked or not but I'll keep digging.

[Shelley]

Yes, it is no end amusing to try and picture X- The Villan, squeezed in amongst the table leaves in the front hall closet, carpet sweeper up his back, eye to the crack, waiting for Lizzie to pass into another room, hoping nobody would turn the lock outside- then a furtive sprint down the hall into the sittingroom closet, squeezing in with the cloaks and hats, hooks in his hair, hoping nobody would see that the closet was cracked open a bit, straining for a breath of air in the fusty-musty dead heat of the dark closet, standing on one foot, then another for over an hour, trying not to sneeze. Then the metallic smell of blood from the wet weapon must have been pungent in close quarters, all the time waiting..waiting.. listening for Andrew's return. The kitchen would have been far to dangerous to try to hide, the women would be in there making lunch soon, and the basement would be so far removed to hear Andrew's return. There was no room at all to hide in the shallow diningroom closet. If the parlor had not been locked- that would have been the perfect spot to wait-and my choice for longterm concealment. It would have been highly unlikely Bridget or Lizzie would have ventured into the parlor on a Thursday morning unless Bridget had decided to wash the parlor windows inside.

It would have taken a cool customer to have attempted both murders in the time span given under the circumstances- and then to have walked out and made a clean get away without being noticed. Or one lucky bugger!

[Shelley]

Our posts crossed Harry, but yes, I have always thought it odd she did not do the very front of the house too- after all the parlor would have been the fancy room where one would want to impress. I am believing it may have been locked, thus eliminating the most desirable hiding place of all.

[Harry]

Re the parlor being locked, I found this in Robinson's closing argument, page 1690:

"But the moment we got at the wall, down it went, doors flew open, and instead of showing a line in the house shut in and hedged in by locks, we find that Mr. Borden's room was doubly and trebly locked, Bridget's room was locked and Mrs. Borden's door was locked, and you find Miss Lizzie's room locked, as well as Emma's, the guest chamber locked, the parlor and the sitting room---I don't know but what everything, and that was all because there had been a burglary in the house and barn, as it came out in the story, and Mr. Borden, old fashioned man that he was, thought they wanted to lock the house pretty securely."

Whether this is just Robinson rambling I don't know.

My suspicion is that it was not locked. The police testimonies mention numerous times of getting the keys to open various doors but I can't recall them mentioning the parlor doors.

It's a very important question as it was a great place to hide as well as a handy place to come from when attacking Andrew. Bridget says when she was washing the parlor windows on the outside that she didn't see anyone in the parlor. But was she really looking very hard?

[Angel]

It would have taken a cool customer to have attempted both murders in the time span given under the circumstances- and then to have walked out and made a clean get away without being noticed. Or one lucky bugger!

Not to mention the fact that, given the conviction of a certain member of this group, the guilty party had to be covered in blood spatters in order to be guilty, the murderer left the house in broad daylight onto a busy street and no one noticed that he was dripping gore. Very lucky indeed!

[Shelley]

Hmm- that bit above indicates to me that Robinson thought the parlor was locked. Standing right beneath the window, one cannot see into the parlor. With lace curtains up in the parlor, it would be even more difficult to discern anything moving in there from the outside street level. Yes, the parlor would have given perfect access to the front door exit to escape, and a comfortable place to perch and listen unobserved, and a good launch point for listening to who went up the stairs.

[Yooper]

It would have taken a cool customer to have attempted both murders in the time span given under the circumstances- and then to have walked out and made a clean get away without being noticed. Or one lucky bugger!

Not to mention the fact that, given the conviction of a certain member of this group, the guilty party had to be covered in blood spatters in order to be guilty, the murderer left the house in broad daylight onto a busy street and no one noticed that he was dripping gore. Very lucky indeed!

Must have been capable of levitation, too, he didn't leave any tracks or drops of blood!

An intruder would have to assume that Bridget, who was washing windows, would not wash the inside parlor windows in order to use the parlor as a hiding place.

[Shelley]

This is an old photo but shows clearly just how high the parlor windows are set into the house. The house has a very tall granite foundation. Even standing beneath the window, Bridget could not have seen into the parlor, diningroom or sittingroom. This I have confirmed, even though I think she was a couple inches taller than I am.

[Shelley]

At night, with a light on, a figure might be seen passing the window. I think the interior shutters were closed though, on the morning of the murder. Most certainly the windows were.

[SteveS.]

Harry wrote "That might also explain why Lizzie had no alibi for Abbie's murder. She might have thought if the two murders were committed very near each other the time she spent in the barn would cover both."

That's kind of where I'm leaning towards Harry. I'm thinking Lizzie probably wasn't up on the latest forensics for the times but I'm sure she knew the difference between fresh wounds/blood and older wounds/blood congealing. She probably thought the 20 minutes in the barn was enough of a time frame to cover both murders and that the difference between the fresher wounds on Mr. Borden and the older wounds on Mrs. Borden could be explained by the time difference in discovery of the bodies. Which could also explain Lizzie's insistance about Mrs. Borden's return and wishing someone would go look for her. One does not want those wounds looking too old now does one?

[Shelley]

We're all on the same page, Steve And I feel quite sure there were plenty others back in 1892 who would be on that page with us.

[Harry]

That's a great point, Shelley, about the height of the windows. When I was there I was amazed how high all the windows were from the ground.

Lizzie in her testimony said she asked Bridget to close the parlor blinds when she was done because of the heat. Page 59 of the Inquest:

"Q. You do not remember of talking about washing the windows?
A. I don't remember whether I did or not; I don't remember it. Yes, I remember; yes, I asked her to shut the parlor blinds when she got through, because the sun was so hot."

One thing about the door from the parlor to the sitting room. If the killer attacked from the parlor would they bother closing the door behind them when they attacked? There was lots of blood on the parlor door which would say it was at least closed, if not locked. And Bridget also said it was closed.

[Shelley]

Good point Harry- I had a vision of the other parlor door being used for the approach to the attack. The one just inside the front door. One could open that door, look stealthily down the hall, then tiptoe to the threshold of the sitting room, get the lay of the land, -back up into the hall if things did not look ripe for the kill, or if Andrew stirred- and then have a wonderful swing radius at one's disposal. To have come through the door to that parlor just above Andrew's head on the sofa would have been a risk- he could have awakened at the proximity of the noise.

It is exactly ten steps from that front parlor door in the hall to the head of the sofa where Andrew's head lay.

[SteveS.]

Again makes me think that it had to be someone that belonged in the house because I don't think there was enough time for Andrew to have fallen asleep. I feel as though the minute the old mans head hit the pillow and his eyes closed, WHACK WHACK WHACK! so even if he did hear some noise from behind it didn't disturb him enough to open his eyes or at least open them in time to take a defensive posture. With Bridget upstairs when he came home that would leave just Lizzie and the sound of someone walking from behind wouldn't alarm him because he would assume it was Lizzie passing through. I have also wondered about the lack of a blood trail anywhere from both murder scenes. Seems to me someone was a little careful to avoid leaving one where as an intruder wouldn't even give it another thought.

[Angel]

Plus- how the hell would have an intruder left through the front door if, after he left, there were a gazillion inside locks latched, bolted, turned and secured? Houdini lived in New York then.

[Shelley]

Well one thing seems certain- no professional hitman in his right mind would have touched this one with a ten foot pole.

Any real enemy of Andrew in the business world would have gotten even with him in the way it hurt him most- in the pocketbook. Revenge in business is no fun when the object of your wrath is too dead to enjoy your handiwork.

[Angel]

A professional hitman would have known when Andrew was home. He wouldn't have botched the job up by arriving too early and having to kill someone else in the meantime. He wouldn't have been stupid enough to have to hide for an hour or more to wait for his victim. If he was Billy Borden he wouldn't have come at a time when Andrew wasn't home (to discuss a loan or anything else) because his business would have been only with Andrew and no one else. If he did come early Abby certainly would not have let him in and then gone nonchalantly upstairs to dust. If anyone else let him in, which would have been highly unlikely, they would not have known he was there to do anyone harm (indeed- he probably didn't either, if he was there just to talk) and there would have been no need for him to hide anywhere. If he DID hide somewhere for over an hour, the stench (according to Brown) would have been enough to kill everyone without the use of an axe.

[bobarth]

Would there have been professional hitmen back then?

[Angel]

I'm not talking Tony Soprano. But there are those who think maybe Lizzie or Emma may have tried to get someone to do it. I don't believe that, but there are those that do.

[bobarth]

Oh I think it is a possibility but do not know if that service was available to them back then. I suppose murder for hire has been around for a long long time though.

[Kat]

With Bridget upstairs when he came home that would leave just Lizzie and the sound of someone walking from behind wouldn't alarm him because he would assume it was Lizzie passing through.

--partial, SteveS

Lately I posted the question about Lizzie saying Bridget was upstairs before Andrew came home. It's not been demonstrated as a *truth* yet. Some may not wish to rely on it.

Lizzie did say she told Bridget to go in the parlour, yet Bridget says she didn't go in there.

I have been under the impression that the parlour was kept locked until recently when I started looking around for that. I never found it. I think it's a mistake.

Alice went in the parlour with the police when Lizzie went upstairs on her own to change- at least Alice's timeline says that initially- to her memory.

Here's some context, Alice at the Prelim:
A. I remember being up in Mr. And Mrs. Borden's rooms with some officer, I remember their asking me about the rooms that went out of it. The door into Miss Lizzie's room was hooked. They pulled the screw out, I judged. I remember I asked them to let me look in first; I did not know what the condition of the room was. I pulled the portiere aside, and looked in, and said it is all right, and they went in. I do not recollect whether I went in or not.

Q. Do you know whether they searched it or not?
A. I do not.

Q. Do you know Officer Doherty by sight?
A. I do now.

Q. Was he one of them?
A. I have not the faintest idea.

Q. How many were there of them?
A. It seems to me there were three.

Q. At any rate they were up in Miss Lizzie's room before she went up stairs at all?
A. Yes Sir.

Q. And were up stairs around there?
A. Yes Sir.

Q. Do you know whether they went into other rooms or not?
A. I remember going into the parlor with these officers, with some officers.

Q. Was that before Lizzie went up stairs?
A. I think it was about the same time. I had an idea they were making the first search through the house, looking for whoever might be in it, or whoever they might find.

Q. That was before Lizzie went up stairs?
A. The other part was; but the parlor I am not positive of.

Q. You do not recollect whether it was the same man?
A. I do recollect one of the officers, I think one of them was Mr. Fleet.

Q. Mr. Fleet?
A. I think so.

[Kat]

That's a great point, Shelley, about the height of the windows. When I was there I was amazed how high all the windows were from the ground.

Lizzie in her testimony said she asked Bridget to close the parlor blinds when she was done because of the heat. Page 59 of the Inquest:

"Q. You do not remember of talking about washing the windows?
A. I don't remember whether I did or not; I don't remember it. Yes, I remember; yes, I asked her to shut the parlor blinds when she got through, because the sun was so hot."

One thing about the door from the parlor to the sitting room. If the killer attacked from the parlor would they bother closing the door behind them when they attacked? There was lots of blood on the parlor door which would say it was at least closed, if not locked. And Bridget also said it was closed.

Did Lizzie mean for Bridget to close the outer *blinds* or the inner ones of the parlour, do you know?
I used to think Lizzie pretty much was ordering Bridget to go in that room, according to Lizzie. (See my prior post.) But now I'm wondering if they both knew she meant outside?

Can we get more context on the inquest testimony of Lizzie? Thanks!

[Harry]

Bridget testified at the trial there were no blinds inside the parlor just curtains. Page 230+ of the Trial:

"Q. Had you been into the parlor to do anything that morning?
A. No, sir.
Q. Were the blinds of the parlor open or closed?
A. Closed.
Q. To wash them of course you had to open the blinds?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were the shutters in the parlor opened or closed?
A. There was curtains for the inside of the parlor.
Q. And these curtains, were how?
A. I don't remember how they were."

What I posted was all that Lizzie said regarding the shutters. This is the context (page 59+)

"Q. Did she go out after a brush before your father went away?
A. I think so.
Q. Did you say anything to Maggie?
A. I did not.
Q. Did you say anything about washing the windows?
A. No sir.
Q. Did you speak to her?
A. I think I told her I did not want any breakfast.
Q. You do not remember of talking about washing the windows?
A. I don't remember whether I did or not; I don't remember it. Yes, I remember; yes, I asked her to shut the parlor blinds when she got through, because the sun was so hot.
Q. About what time do you think your father went down town?
A. I don't know; it must have been after nine o'clock. I don't know what time it was.
Q. You think at that time you had begun to iron your handkerchiefs?
A. Yes sir."

[RayS]

It would have taken a cool customer to have attempted both murders in the time span given under the circumstances- and then to have walked out and made a clean get away without being noticed. Or one lucky bugger!

Not to mention the fact that, given the conviction of a certain member of this group, the guilty party had to be covered in blood spatters in order to be guilty, the murderer left the house in broad daylight onto a busy street and no one noticed that he was dripping gore. Very lucky indeed!

Arnold Brown quotes Ellan Eagan (who was there at the time) that the stranger she saw was wearing a duster. That would cover any stains on a dark suit. But if you say there was not much blood spatters, then you have removed any reason why someone would notice.

I'm not going to repeat Parts 1 & 2 of the Proof of Brown's Theory. It is just a rational explanation as to what happened, and why neither Lizzie or Bridget done the murders.
The copy of Pearson's Trial of LB printed circa 1963 has Gerald Gross' explanation of the seeming impossibility. Bridget was seen outside around the time of Abby's murder, and Lizzie was seen outside around the time of Andy's murder. You can read it for his explanation (which only works if you next to nothing about the lack of blood spatter and murder weapon).

Surely you all realize that Arnold Brown's explanation does not suffer from imagined solutions (hiding clothes or weapons). The solution of an Intruder is hinted at in Todd Lunday's book too (as I read it).

Agnes De Mille's book about her visit in the 1950s tells us that there was a secret about the murders that no one ever suspected. An Intruder would solve the logical tangles.

[RayS]

Harry wrote "That might also explain why Lizzie had no alibi for Abbie's murder. She might have thought if the two murders were committed very near each other the time she spent in the barn would cover both."

That's kind of where I'm leaning towards Harry. I'm thinking Lizzie probably wasn't up on the latest forensics for the times but I'm sure she knew the difference between fresh wounds/blood and older wounds/blood congealing. She probably thought the 20 minutes in the barn was enough of a time frame to cover both murders and that the difference between the fresher wounds on Mr. Borden and the older wounds on Mrs. Borden could be explained by the time difference in discovery of the bodies. Which could also explain Lizzie's insistance about Mrs. Borden's return and wishing someone would go look for her. One does not want those wounds looking too old now does one?

But the effect of time on blood clotting was certainly known, even by cavemen (and cavewomen). One policeman at the time said he estimated Abby's death as "over an hour". He was a Civil War veteran. But at the trial he deferred to the physicians as to time of death.

[RayS]

[quote="Shelley @ Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:37 pm"]This is an old photo but shows clearly just how high the parlor windows are set into the house. The house has a very tall granite foundation. Even standing beneath the window, Bridget could not have seen into the parlor, diningroom or sittingroom. This I have confirmed, even though I think she was a couple inches taller than I am.
[quote]
I bought the copy of Brown's book from the back copy. He told how iron bars were put on the basement windows. Reminded me of some homes after a burglary. They are all close to the ground.

[Shelley]

The front of the house gets the afternoon sun until about 5:30 or so in the summer, so it makes sense that the blinds would be kept shut-I take that to mean the outside shutters. So, since the sitting room and diningroom were not locked, nor the cellar, the downstairs rooms seem to be open for moving freely about, and might include the parlor being left open. So, if anyone were inclinded to hide and wait, the parlor may be the best answer.

[SteveS.]

RayS. wrote "But the effect of time on blood clotting was certainly known, even by cavemen (and cavewomen). One policeman at the time said he estimated Abby's death as "over an hour". He was a Civil War veteran. But at the trial he deferred to the physicians as to time of death."

That was my point Ray. That if Lizzie felt that if 20 minutes to 1/2 an hr. went by from the time she "discovered" her fathers body to before Abby was found that the clotting of Abby's wounds would be inconsiquential. I'm sure a civil war veteran has seen alot more dead and bleeding bodies then Lizzie had in her lifetime. So all I was saying is that from Lizzie's perspective I don't think she thought there would be a major difference in the clotting of Abby's wounds between an hr. more or less either way. She was just counting on the time difference when Abby's body would be discovered to cover the clotting difference.

[Kat]

Thanks Harry!
She is not saying there were no blinds on the inside though is she? She's just saying there are curtains.
I suppose there could be blinds inside too? And we can see shutters /blinds on the outside right?
What do you think?

Bridget testified at the trial there were no blinds inside the parlor just curtains. Page 230+ of the Trial:

"Q. Had you been into the parlor to do anything that morning?
A. No, sir.
Q. Were the blinds of the parlor open or closed?
A. Closed.
Q. To wash them of course you had to open the blinds?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were the shutters in the parlor opened or closed?
A. There was curtains for the inside of the parlor.
Q. And these curtains, were how?
A. I don't remember how they were."

--Harry

[Kat]

Ray are you referring to Maplecroft with the iron bars *put on the basement windows?* I think previously you said Brown wrote that about the French Street house?

[Susan]

We were having this discussion in the past about the blinds vs. shutters:

viewtopic.php?t=1041&start=25

I was reading on a site about colonial homes, which I can't seem to locate now, that exterior shutters were called blinds with the louvered slats. Interior shutters were called "Indian shutters" and were solid boards to close up and protect the occupants. The author had asserted that we today incorrectly call exterior shutters "shutters" when they should be called blinds. And what we call blinds today would be known as Venetian blinds to the Victorians.

Heres a site with 1890s adds for using different types of Venetian blinds:

http://www.victoriana.com/Wood-Blinds/w ... tyles.html

And a really interesting site I came across while searching for shutters and blinds, it has a color sample of Drab for painting an 1859 house as well as many wonderful articles.

http://www.victorianpassage.com/2006/12/c8b08f_fawn.php

[Harry]

Thanks Harry!
She is not saying there were no blinds on the inside though is she? She's just saying there are curtains.
I suppose there could be blinds inside too? And we can see shutters /blinds on the outside right?
What do you think?

It is very possible there was. My interpretation of that particular statement is that there were curtains. She doesn't mention blinds when she is specifically asked. But Bridget rarely gives a complete answer to anything asked of her.

If there was, they were open as Bridget claims she didn't see anyone. But then again, as Shelley explained, she wouldn't have been able to see much due to the height of the windows.

[Shelley]

And the great thing about lace, one can see out from the inside of the window through lace, but lace obscures the view from the outside looking in during the day, even if there was not already the issue of the windows being to high too peer through.

Am trying to recall where I read that at Maplecroft, Lizzie had lace curtains in that triple window seat window on the second storey front room (which some refer to as her winter bedroom) so she could look down onto French Street through the lace, but not be seen during the day by curious peepers who liked to gawk in front of her house. Wonderful stuff- lace

We know there were interior double hung shutters in the diningroom and sitting room- it might follow there was also the same treatment in the parlor. Seems odd that the parlor, also on the first floor would not have had them also.

[Yooper]

Plus- how the hell would have an intruder left through the front door if, after he left, there were a gazillion inside locks latched, bolted, turned and secured? Houdini lived in New York then.

An intruder would not have been able to manipulate the sliding bolt lock from outside. That lock was found to be in use (locked) by officer Allen when he first arrived. Another question, why would an intruder use the rear door rather than the front door? Why walk through the house if the front door was only a few steps away?

[Shelley]

Yes, my thought was that if the parlor were unlocked , it would be ideal for hiding, keeping track of who was where in the house (footsteps going upstairs and in the guestroom are clearly heard from the parlor) and then it would be handy for walking out the front door. If the assailant were not blood-covered, seeing a man go down the front steps at around 11 would not register any alarm with the neighbors- Andrew did his business at home during this time and the killer would merely look like he had been calling on business. Not for a minute that I believe there was an intruder- but that it could happen that way.