Abby's Body

[matt kevin jones]

Was Abby's Body repositioned, before the photo's were taken ?
I think I remember reading somewhere that She was turned over.
After looking closley at the photos, to me it seems her position looks funny.
Her feet seem to be to erect for a dead person.
I tried an experiment by having a few people lay on the floor in Her position, and told them to relax as much as they could, and their feet seemed to be in a more relaxed position.
( their feet were more in a V shape than Abby's) with their heels further apart & some had one foot all the way on the floor ( on the side )
Was it because She was so Heavy ?
Try this at home with somebody.
This may be a clue somehow???
Or it may just be my crazy thinking
Matt

[augusta]

I think the photos were taken at about 3:30 by James Walsh. Yes, her body was moved, tho she was in the same general area. The bed was moved.

From the Preliminary Hearing (Koorey, Koorey & Widdows, Pear Tree Press, 2006, page 58) Dr. Dolan, the medical examiner, is asked about his actions on August 4th. In summing up lengthy testimony, the questioning attorney says: "Half past three that afternoon you made this autopsy and had the photographing done ..." (The 'autopsy' here is the 'first autopsy', where Dolan removed the stomachs and had them sent to Professor Wood in Boston for the testing of poison.)

So from the time the alarm was given - 11:something till then, over three hours, there was opportunity for persons to see, touch, walk through the rooms, tho I would hope that after the first shocking hour or so was over people were prohibited from entering.

So many people went in that house that day, it is hard to keep track. I think I counted about 7 doctors alone. Even people who were not physicians. I don't think we'll ever know precisely what Andrew or Abby's authentic original positions were.

We can glean some clues from testimony. But I don't think even all the testimony we can quote would cover it all. Last year, I read a piece in one of the FRHS's newsletters, I think, that told about an old man who remembered - was it his father? - going to the Borden house with a clergyman and entering and seeing the bodies. It was the first I ever heard of this - geez, how many people went in there?

Dr. Bowen says in his Preliminary Hearing testimony (same edition as above, page 352): "I don't think I went between the dressing case and the body, but I went between the bed and the body. There was very little room, and I presume I moved the bed in going there." This was well before Walsh and his camera's visit.

Bowen is asked how Abby's arms got to be in the position they were in at the time he examined her up there, and he replies, "She must have been moved." Q: You do not know who did it? A: "No Sir." (same book, same page)

This from the same book, page 358: (regarding his first going up to see Abby's body) Q: Who had been up there before you had, you do not know? A: "I know two had been up, but I do not know how many before me. I know that two had been up, I do not know how many more had been up." (I am thinking "the two" he refers to are Bridget and Mrs. Churchill.)

It seems like the guest room bed was moved so Walsh could take his photos better. Did they dismantle part of it for the photos? There is testimony about how Andrew's body differed from how it looked when first seen compared to when the photo was taken, too. He was more slouched down, I think. But he was being touch and probed, too, before the photos.

[RayS]

The body would have to be removed for the autopsy. Dead at 9:30 would mean that rigor mortis would be setting in by the afternoon. That could explain any difference between a recreation and the real body.

Does that person resemble the height and weight of Abby?

IF the body was turned over to hide the wounds, what does that mean for anyone who drew conclusions from that picture?

[augusta]

Of course her body was removed for the 'first autopsy'.

I don't understand your last sentence at all, Rays.

[1bigsteve]

I have always held the opinion that Abby may have been moved somewhat to give her a bit of dignity in death, like maybe straightening her dress. I doubt they moved her very much.

-1bigsteve (o;

[Audrey]

Does that person resemble the height and weight of Abby?

I think it is really Mrs Dr. Bowen.... Abby-- fed up with Billy coming around all the time with that stench of his ruining her appetite-- faked her own death and murdered Andrew so that she could sneak off and live in poverty with Bridget in Butte.

[theebmonique]

Mystery solved ! Th-Th-Th-That's all folks !!! THE END.



Tracy...

[augusta]

Big Steve - Your post rings a bell. It seems like I read that Abby's dress was up higher when she was first found - in the photos it's down nice and proper. I remember when I read that, and back then did not realize the body had been moved some, it confused me because the photos showed her dress down. Has anyone else read that and know the source?

[theebmonique]

I am wondering why there is not any mention (that I know of yet anyway) of asking for a sheet to cover Abby's body. I know we have discussed in another thread about the sheets being requested to cover Andrew. I think the idea of Abby's dignity being preserved is a good one, and wonder if that would include covering her body with a sheet as well ?


Tracy...

[augusta]

That's a great post, Tracey. I don't recall reading anywhere of anyone asking for a sheet to cover Abby.

Maybe they covered Andrew because he was downstairs and visible to most that entered the house. He was still oozing, and it was such a bad sight.

But you're right. What dignity did Abby ever get? Even after she died, all that was said about her was she was fat. There's a lot of stuff of friends talking about how good she was, and how she would never say anything out of the way to others about 'the girls', who openly cut her down at seemingly every opportunity.

Geez, Abby actually SAW her killer and had nowhere to run. I cannot imagine her fright. I feel so sorry for her.

[Audrey]

I agree... Poor Abby.

She was truly an innocent victim.

I have always thought she got the short end of the marriage to Andrew. Every person deserves to be with someone who adores them.

[Kat]

Big Steve - Your post rings a bell. It seems like I read that Abby's dress was up higher when she was first found - in the photos it's down nice and proper. I remember when I read that, and back then did not realize the body had been moved some, it confused me because the photos showed her dress down. Has anyone else read that and know the source?

I don't think it's anywhere *official* that Abby's dress was repositioned to make her more modest.

It does remind me of Bertha Manchester tho where she was described as having one leg bent up and exposed. I think they pulled her skirt down after the description was written. They had thought she had been violated but later stated that had not happened. Her skirt might have rucked up because she put up a fight and crawled a bit before dying (Miss Manchester).

I believe it's very possible Abby's dress was arranged for some modesty. Or it's possible the killer staged her body.
Her arms were definetly moved.

[nbcatlover]

Matt, you're right. Abby's legs and feet never looked quite right to me either.

When I first looked at the pictures of Abby's body, the first impression I had was that she had been forced to kneel down, bludgeoned, and then hacked with the hatchet/ax. I didn't know about the body being moved around for photos when I formed that impression.

I also remember Abby being referred to as an "invalid." I believe it was in Victoria Lincoln's book. As I've gotten older, I've wondered if Abby, in her 60s, had developed osteoarthritis in some of her joints which might account for their unusual positioning.

I have no proof. These are just some of the ruminations I have made on the subject.

[Richard]

I was surprised to read somewhere the Abby was wearing a scarf when she was killed, that there is in the Fall River Historical Society a bloodied scarf with hatchet tears in it. Is this true?

[1bigsteve]

The first impression I had when I saw that photo (feet near the lens) of Abby 32 years ago was that it was a stand-in posing. It didn't look anything like you would see if it were a dead body. I feel that someone straightened up Abby a bit.

-1bigsteve (o:

[Smudgeman]

I have always thought that there was no way a person could have been attacked with a hatchet, and ended up perfectly posed on the ground like that. I believe she was definitely moved and posed for that picture.

[Kat]

Richard asks: "I was surprised to read somewhere the Abby was wearing a scarf when she was killed, that there is in the Fall River Historical Society a bloodied scarf with hatchet tears in it. Is this true?"

Morse was asked if when he saw Abby dusting around downdstairs Thursday morning if she had on a kerchief on her hair. He didn't think so.
Bridget said that Mrs. Borden wore one when she swept and/or beat the rugs I think, but not for common chores.
But yes a large kerchief was found near Abby's body. It starts out up near her head and ends up down by her feet, we think- meaning it's the same kerchief, that *traveled*. People had to have moved that.
The FRHS say they have that item and brought it out for shooting the video "Lizzie Borden Had An Axe." It was clean by then tho.
I think it was shown in court, but I'm not sure of that.

[diana]

I've never got that straight in my mind. Is this 'kerchief' the same item referred to as a 'handkerchief' found by Abby's body? If so, that was shown at trial. But the implication here is that it was used as a duster -- not as a head covering.

GEORGE ALLEN
Q. Did you notice any article about the room anywhere near Mrs. Borden?
A. I noticed a handkerchief covered with blood.
Q. Can you tell us where that was?
A. It was lying from Mrs. Borden's feet toward the window.
Q. Could you identify it, do you think?
A. Yes, sir, the border is out. (A ragged handkerchief was shown the witness.) Yes, that is the handkerchief. (Trial, 439)

BRIDGET SULLIVAN
Q: . . . Have you seen such a handkerchief as that before? (Showing dark, old handkerchief.)
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was it commonly used for and by whom?
A. Mrs. Borden used to use handkerchiefs the same as dusters is.
Q. Did she use it as a pocket handkerchief?
A. Mr. Borden used them as pocket handkerchiefs, and Mrs. Borden, when they got worn out, took them as dust rags. (Trial, 1237+)

And here are references to the 'moving handkerchief'.

GEORGE ALLEN
Q. State, if you can do so, the position of that handkerchief as it lay on the floor in reference to the window and the woman's feet, that is, which was the nearer?
A. It was lying about the same distance, I should think, from the windows as from her feet, about middle way.
Q. That is, about as far from the handkerchief to the window as from the handkerchief to the feet? (Trial, 439+)

DR. WILLIAM DOLAN
Q. Where did you find the handkerchief, near the head?
A. Almost touching it, nearer the wall than the head.
Q. Was it knotted or loose?
A. Loose.
Q. Describe the handkerchief.
A. It seemed to be an old silk handkerchief, in some places shredded from wear.
Q. Did you notice whether the handkerchief was cut or not?
A. I did not see that it was cut.
Q. It was a dark colored handkerchief?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there blood on the handkerchief?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How near her head was the handkerchief? Perhaps I have already asked that.
A. It was quite near. The hands were in there between the head and the handkerchief. (Trial, 858)


The following articles which had been offered in evidence during the progress of the trial were selected from among the exhibits in the case by counsel and sent to the jury:
Plans and photographs marked as exhibits in the case.
Skulls of Mr. and Mrs. A. J. Borden.
Bedspread and pillow shams.
Handkerchief found by Mrs. Borden's body.
Piece of doorframe taken from inside of dining room.
Piece of moulding taken from guest chamber west of dressing case.
(Trial, 1927)

[nbcatlover]

Now I am confused. Were there 2 handkerchiefs?
One by her head (possibly used to cover her hair) and one by her feet (that was used for dusting). Or is this just documentation of the tampering that occurred at the crime scene?

[diana]

Oops ... sorry if I just caused more confusion. As far as I can determine, the trial testimony above is about just one 'handkerchief'. I was using it as documentation to illustrate Kat's point about why we think the kerchief "travelled".

But I'm not sure if this is the "scarf" Richard is referring to simply because Bridget says here that the large handkerchief found by the body was the type Abby used for dusting -- not wearing.

[Kat]

Thank you Diana for looking that up!

Morse saw Abby with a feather duster and so did Lizzie. The kerchief was probably for headwear- at least that seems to be the official's idea- poor Bridget sends us off in the wrong direction once again. (It might be the way she was asked questions).

Prelim
Morse
241
Q. What was she doing, or could you not tell?
A. She was dusting the room when I went in the sitting room, when I was there.

Q. With a cloth or a feather duster?
A. A feather duster.

Q. Did she have anything on her head?
A. I do not think she had.
_______

Prelim
Bridget
11
Q. When Mrs. Borden said that to you about washing windows, do you know where Lizzie was then?
A. No Sir.

Q. That was the last time you saw Mrs. Borden?
A. Yes Sir. She had the feather duster in her hand dusting the dining room. I left her there, and went back into the kitchen.

_________

Inquest
Lizzie
58(15)
Q. Where was your mother? Do you prefer me to call her Mrs. Borden?
A. I had as soon you called her mother. She was in the dining room with a feather duster dusting.
Q. When she dusted did she wear something over her head?
A. Sometimes when she swept, but not when dusting.

[irina]

I carefully copied all the testimony about the "handkerchief" into a notebook so I could post it here, then accidentally found this older discussion which has the same testimony reproduced. So I am reintroducing it while we are discussing various aspects of Abby's demise on 'All About Abby'.

Reading this testimony too much could make a person crazy. Where was it found? What was it? Dust rag? Neck scarf?

I'm sure I saw something on TV with a silk scarf (not handkerchief) which the FRHS has. Point of the show was matching a hatchet blade to supposed cuts in the scarf which looked like a neck scarf and not a handkerchief to me. So was she wearing a neck scarf? If so when did it come off? Was it cut or not? Covered with blood or not? Was Abby dusting perhaps, when attacked? Would this have any implication for her position or not? At least one handkerchief seems to have been buried with the clothing, dug up, possibly re-buried and dug up again. Anyway when I was looking for pictures of the scarf, which I didn't find, I found this forum. Call me lazy but I'm up-cycling it.

If I was smart with computers I would post the picture that comes up in images where Abby's picture is side by side with a picture of actress Kathy Bates. I like to think of Abby looking like Kathy, who is a very nice person and a great actress. It seems to fit with 'All About Abby'.

[Curryong]

Irina, the entire testimony is inclined to drive anyone crazy, isn't it? Thanks for bringing this early post up again, by the way. I'm inclined, for better or for worse to think that it had been a handkerchief (a very large one, of napkin size) and it was the one buried and then dug up again.

The trouble is that Abby appears to have been a bit of an eccentric in her dress so she could have been wearing the shredded article on her head while dusting, however, I'm inclined to think not. For one thing, she surely had kept the guest room well dusted anyway. Such a house proud person would undoubtedly do so, and when John arrived on the day before she would surely have not allowed him to speak in a dusty bedroom.

She may have been using the old cloth to go over a few things on the dressing table that might have had a speck on them and had loosely tucked it into her waist band and it came out during the attack. I do really think, because of the blood splatter evidence, that Abby was attacked very near to where she was found, probably while she was leaning over the bed.

[irina]

I think Abby was attacked just there. The handkerchief bothers me because what I saw on TV seemed more like a neck scarf and I think they said Abby was wearing it. But that's just TV. They matched the hatchet blade to a supposed cut. Silk disintegrates with age so who knows if those are cuts or age. Could maybe tell us something about the crime if it was around her neck and got cut there and ended up halfway between her body and the wall. Odd to think about using a silk handkerchief to dust but suppose it would work. Some silk is kind of rough and feels kind of like the micro-fiber cloths we have today. Funny how so much is made over the handkerchief and that extra apron just comes up willy nilly in questioning Lizzie and Bridget. Important enough to ask about but not important enough to note where it was found. For all their questions they didn't seem to learn much.

The streets would have been very dusty in those days. If you have ever lived close to a dusty unpaved road, you might know how dust can blow in all the time and so it makes sense Abby did a lot of dusting. On the other hand we are under the impression she had finished with the guest room except for the pillow cases/shams. (To me it is very weak or ill defined if Abby was planning to work on any sewing or sewing of pillow cases on that day.) But like you say maybe she had the rag in tucked into the waist of her skirt and she pulled it out as the need arose.

[Curryong]

I read somewhere, years ago, that silks in the 18th and 19th centuries weren't the soft and malleable fabrics they are today. In women's clothing silk was often stiffened, and resembled taffeta. Not that that has anything to do with Abby's bloodstained handkerchief/scarf/dusting cloth, but I just thought I'd share that piece of useless information!

[debbiediablo]

This is my curiosity and lack of knowledge. Do feather dusters really work? To me it looks a lot like stirring the dust but perhaps oil in the feathers attracts the particles??

[Aamartin]

This is my curiosity and lack of knowledge. Do feather dusters really work? To me it looks a lot like stirring the dust but perhaps oil in the feathers attracts the particles??

They just scatter dust....

[Curryong]

Does anyone know about a tape-measure being found on the floor near Abby's body? It seems to me the woman was surrounded by a collection of objects -- handkerchief/scarf, tape measure, apron maybe, that are referred to in an off-hand sort of way once or twice and then never again!

[Catbooks]

irine, the scarf/handkerchief bothers me too. the one they showed in the tv show absolutely looked like a decorative silk scarf, to be worn around the neck, to me as well. yet everyone was calling it a handkerchief in the testimony, and bridget said andrew had formerly used it as a pocket handkerchief, which abby used as a duster after it'd become too worn out in its use as a pocket handkerchief.

they said it was quite worn, with some shredding, and it had blood on it. it appears first it was found midway between abby's feet and the window, and later someone had tossed it around her head area, probably not far from the false braid. later it was buried with the rest of the clothes, then exhumed and entered into evidence, eventually turning up at the historical society.

you're right, silk does shatter, due to age and the chemicals in the dyes they used back then which break down the fibers of the silk. often that happens at the fold marks, but it can happen anywhere in the fabric, and looks like it already had back when abby was using it as a duster.

my mom used to have a few silk dust cloths, so i didn't think much of that.

here's a photo of the scarf and the switch, sort of entwined, from an article by kat in the hatchet. the photo is from when it was first giving to the frhs. in the bottom right part of the photo you can see the same print in it as in the clip from the tv show, so it's definitely the same scarf.

but what a mess it was when it arrived! it looks quite tattered, almost shredded in many places. someone untangled it and pressed, if not cleaned, it. if it did in fact have blood on it to begin with.

curryong, i was going to respond to something you said, but now can't read your post to remember what it was, so will do an edit to include whatever it was after hitting the post button

[Catbooks]

oh, the tape measure! that was it. i just read (somewhere!) about that. i believe it was kat who mentioned it, on a thread currently on page 5, which may be page 6 or 7 by the time you return. it's the first time i'd heard about it.

[InterestedReader]

A yard rule, would it be? This was a long wooden stick used in dressmaking but the suggestion I just read was that Abby might have been using it to smooth out the bed-cover (commonly done at the time).

Even here in the UK this programme about the scarf 'evidence' was screened, I dimly remember it, and its being a bit specious. But they were surely showing something more in the nature of a kerchief, which was a larger piece of fabric than our modern handkerchief. Often of silk, they were favoured equally by men and women - and most usually worn around the neck when still new enough to be thought decorative