Lizzie Borden Society Forum

There's no guarantee that Lizzie was taking morphine at any time. It was prescribed at first as about 8 milligrams, later increased to about 16 milligrams. I don't remember any testimony as to whether she was actually taking it or not.

I can go into the kitchen and forget what I went in there for.... I can look up a phone number on the Internet and have to look again before dialing! I could witness an accident or even a murder-- but it all went so fast that I really am confused and cannot remember-- but if I was to be in my house and heard shouting or gunfire and looked out my window-- I would not not later say 'I was listening to the radio' one time and 'I was watching TV the next'. While we may not always remember clearly the things we see-- we usually do remember the things we have just done.

Maybe not the mundane-- I make my bed before leaving my bedroom each and every day-- and sometimes I have to look to make sure I took my vitamin, etc-- but seriously? Not remembering why she went to the barn? Why say she was looking for implements to repair a screen-- and then change her story? Perhaps she realized no screen needed mending and had to change her story?

'I think I heard her come in' ?? Really Lizzie? And Abby was just meandering around the house not hearing the chaos that ensued after Andrew was found?

Morphine? one grain of morphine equals 60 milligrams. Lizzie had an 8th of a grain. 7.5 milligrams. That isn't much.

The Bromo-Caffeine she had earlier in the day is far more interesting-- and I can't find much information about the side effects of it online...

Yooper wrote:There's no guarantee that Lizzie was taking morphine at any time. It was prescribed at first as about 8 milligrams, later increased to about 16 milligrams. I don't remember any testimony as to whether she was actually taking it or not.

This is true. There is no documentation of Lizzie actually taking it. Only that it was prescribed.

Franz wrote:

Yooper wrote:

Franz wrote:Yooper, for me premise and presumption are different. I use "presumption" here in its sense of law. Any accused (suspected) person is presumed innocent before the definitive verdict made, right?

We are not in court and are not bound by the presumption of anything. We are free to use scientific method to examine the evidence without the need to presume innocence.

Yes, I totally agree with you: we are not in the court. But I can begin from the presumption that Lizzie was innocent, it's my choice. (That I am more convinced for Lizzie's innocence is only a coincidence.)

Since we are not in the court, I think any possible theory can be proposed under discussion, even without proof. Without new archeological (in ample sense of the word) discoveries, no one could offer new proof. Does it mean that, without proof, it is forbidden to propose new theory? One could be conservative and doesn't propose nothing new without new proof, but this is only a personal choice, others could face the question in a different way.

If you agree that we're not in court, then why do you make the previous statement? You changed your position the instant it was challenged. Do you stand for anything?

Yooper, if you have read my precedent threads (of all the topics), you would have found that I had said more than one time that we are in a forum to discuss the case, we are not in the court to judge anyone, but this doesn't in contradiction with the idea of begining a discussion from the presumption that Lizzie was innocent.

I have read the preceding threads and that's why I ask.

Allen wrote: Lizzie not only start saying I don't know that day, she gave conflicting statements. Which is also something the witnesses did not do. None of the other witnesses gave conflicting statements. All of their statements remained consistent except for the things they forgot almost a year later. ...

1. Allen, it is not true that "None of the other witnesses gave conflicting statements". Other members of the forum, especially Kat, have discussed a lot the contradictions that Morse’s testimony contained. In another thread, I demonstrated that there is confliction between Mrs. Churchill’s testimony and that of Dr. Bowen about the time of asking the sheet to cover up Andrew’s body, and Mrs. Churchill contradicted herself about the events' order in the witness statement and her inquest testmony. It wasn't after about one year. Here is another example:

At the trial, Mrs. Churchill testified:

Q. What did Bridget tell you about Mrs. Borden having a note?
A. She said Mrs. Borden had a note to go to see someone that was sick, and she was dusting the sitting room, and she hurried off, and says, "She didn't tell me where she was going; she generally does."

It implied that Bridget saw Abby the last time when the latter hurried off of the house to pay the visit in response to the note. But Bridget herself testified differently at the trial:

I finished my dishes and took them in the dining room. Mrs. Borden was there; she was dusting the door between the sitting room and dining room... She said she wanted the windows washed, inside and outside both; she said they are awful dirty. After that I didn't see Mrs. Borden any more until I found her dead upstairs.

It’s obvious that they two didn’t say the same thing, at least one of them was mistaken.

2. Lizzie "gave conflicting statements". Well. Do you mean those "conflicting statements" in her alibi testimony? My answer is this: Lizzie didn’t kill neither Abby nor Andrew, so she didn’t prepare an alibi. But at the moment her father was being killed, she was doing something that she couldn’t make public at any price, that’s why she lied.

Franz wrote:

Allen wrote: Lizzie not only start saying I don't know that day, she gave conflicting statements. Which is also something the witnesses did not do. None of the other witnesses gave conflicting statements. All of their statements remained consistent except for the things they forgot almost a year later. ...

1. Allen, it is not true that "None of the other witnesses gave conflicting statements". Other members of the forum, especially Kat, have discussed a lot the contradictions that Morse’s testimony contained. In another thread, I demonstrated that there is confliction between Mrs. Churchill’s testimony and that of Dr. Bowen about the time of asking the sheet to cover up Andrew’s body, and Mrs. Churchill contradicted herself about the events' order in the witness statement and her inquest testmony. It wasn't after about one year. Here is another example:

At the trial, Mrs. Churchill testified:

Q. What did Bridget tell you about Mrs. Borden having a note?
A. She said Mrs. Borden had a note to go to see someone that was sick, and she was dusting the sitting room, and she hurried off, and says, "She didn't tell me where she was going; she generally does."

It implied that Bridget saw Abby the last time when the latter hurried off of the house to pay the visit in response to the note. But Bridget herself testified differently at the trial:

I finished my dishes and took them in the dining room. Mrs. Borden was there; she was dusting the door between the sitting room and dining room... She said she wanted the windows washed, inside and outside both; she said they are awful dirty. After that I didn't see Mrs. Borden any more until I found her dead upstairs.

It’s obvious that they two didn’t say the same thing, at least one of them was mistaken.

2. Lizzie "gave conflicting statements". Well. Do you mean those "conflicting statements" in her alibi testimony? My answer is this: Lizzie didn’t kill neither Abby nor Andrew, so she didn’t prepare an alibi. But at the moment her father was being killed, she was doing something that she couldn’t make public at any price, that’s why she lied.

Lizzie conflicted her own statements. Bridget and Mrs. Churchill did not conflict their own statements.

From the first quotation, Bridget didn't say that Abby told her that she had a note, she only said that Abby had a note without specifying how she (Bridget) knew that. The rest of the statement is not entirely clear, the use of "she" could mean either Bridget or Abby, depending on the context. For instance; "she (Bridget or Abby?) was dusting....", and "she (Bridget or Abby?) hurried off...". The last statement about "she didn't tell me..." certainly implies Abby didn't tell Bridget.... The other problem is that this is second hand information, it is what Mrs. Churchill said about what Bridget said.