In response to Kat´s message # 3
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 4:18 pm
Hello Kat:
It has been a while but I had to wait for a chance to rendez-vous with a computer. Now the opportunity is here and I´d better take it!
What Bridget said about Andrew taking in the clothes line has always puzzled me. Why should he do such a thing? Well, the most probable thing is that he didn´t. Men at the time usually did not participate in household affairs. So why should Andrew, of all men, do it? If you look at Bridget´s testimony immediately preceding this information (pretrial, page 16) you´ll find that she told Mr. Knowlton that she had bolted the cellar door after bringing the dried clothes in and that she did not know that the door had been used again during that week. Only in answer to a direct question: ”Do you know whether Mr. Borden had anything to do about that the back door was shut up?” (a strange question to ask) did she say: ”Yes, Sir. He always see a Monday, or whatever day the clothes would be taken in, that it was locked; for he always took in the clothes line himself.” He might have helped Bridget do it on some occasion and now she remembered that and took the opportunity to help Lizzie by saying, in different words, of course, that maybe the cellar door had been open but, if so, it was not her fault.
Now about the motive. I think the evidence against Morse that I have pointed out in my essay together with his performance at the pretrial when testifying that he had seen the cellar door open when he returned fron the Emery´s is suffiicient to say with certainty that he was involved in the murders. So I am not using motive as a way to prove guilt. It is the other way around: He was guilty enough and now it remains to speculate about his motive- I do not think that money was involved, Morse saw his nieces as his dear family while Andrew and Abby were not family. Morse was outraged that Andrew intended to more or less disinherit his daughters and he was set on counteracting those intentions even at the price of murder. (The sequence of and time difference between the two murders do point to disinheritance of the daughters in favour of the wife as the precipitating motive, don´t you think?). About William Davis´s motive, if he was the perpetrator, one can only speculate, which I have done. We may find motives weak but what we think is of no consequence. What is important is what the culprits thought..
The poll result are puzzling as far as the 35% believing that Morse knew the killer before the murders are concerned. Of those 35% 30%-units must be included in the 30% in agreement with my theory. That leaves only 5%-units to the 50% partially in agreement. I would have thought that the majority of these 50% believed in the conspiracy but apparently it is not so. Can you shed some light on this, please?
Fritz
It has been a while but I had to wait for a chance to rendez-vous with a computer. Now the opportunity is here and I´d better take it!
What Bridget said about Andrew taking in the clothes line has always puzzled me. Why should he do such a thing? Well, the most probable thing is that he didn´t. Men at the time usually did not participate in household affairs. So why should Andrew, of all men, do it? If you look at Bridget´s testimony immediately preceding this information (pretrial, page 16) you´ll find that she told Mr. Knowlton that she had bolted the cellar door after bringing the dried clothes in and that she did not know that the door had been used again during that week. Only in answer to a direct question: ”Do you know whether Mr. Borden had anything to do about that the back door was shut up?” (a strange question to ask) did she say: ”Yes, Sir. He always see a Monday, or whatever day the clothes would be taken in, that it was locked; for he always took in the clothes line himself.” He might have helped Bridget do it on some occasion and now she remembered that and took the opportunity to help Lizzie by saying, in different words, of course, that maybe the cellar door had been open but, if so, it was not her fault.
Now about the motive. I think the evidence against Morse that I have pointed out in my essay together with his performance at the pretrial when testifying that he had seen the cellar door open when he returned fron the Emery´s is suffiicient to say with certainty that he was involved in the murders. So I am not using motive as a way to prove guilt. It is the other way around: He was guilty enough and now it remains to speculate about his motive- I do not think that money was involved, Morse saw his nieces as his dear family while Andrew and Abby were not family. Morse was outraged that Andrew intended to more or less disinherit his daughters and he was set on counteracting those intentions even at the price of murder. (The sequence of and time difference between the two murders do point to disinheritance of the daughters in favour of the wife as the precipitating motive, don´t you think?). About William Davis´s motive, if he was the perpetrator, one can only speculate, which I have done. We may find motives weak but what we think is of no consequence. What is important is what the culprits thought..
The poll result are puzzling as far as the 35% believing that Morse knew the killer before the murders are concerned. Of those 35% 30%-units must be included in the 30% in agreement with my theory. That leaves only 5%-units to the 50% partially in agreement. I would have thought that the majority of these 50% believed in the conspiracy but apparently it is not so. Can you shed some light on this, please?
Fritz