Did Lizzie have some one to help her?

[Franz]

Many people believe Lizzie did it.

I noticed that, among the members of the forum, some people think Lizzie was guilty, but meanwhile, some facts trouble them so much that they don't think Lizzie did it with her hands. So it seems that they are obliged to find a "middle" solution: there must have been some one to help her to kill.

This is certainly a respectable theory: it could explain many things. But a very important point troubles me a lot: Lizzie's alibi.

If Lizzie did have some one to help her, the murder would have been undoubtedly premeditated. In this case, I hardly believe that Lizzie could have prepared her alibi in such a suicide manner. In my opinion, she could, certainly, have let enter the killer, remained in the house to guide him, to help to hide him after he had killed Abby, and she could told her father that Abby had gone to the store. When Bridget went to her room to have a rest and Andrew was lying on the sofa to have a nap, Lizzie could have met her conspirator, and said: "Listen, Bridget is now in her room, he is sleeping on the sofa in the sitting room. Now I am going to the store and pretend to look for Abby, You kill him in five minutes after I leave the house, In five minutes I will be in the store." And then, Lizzie could have made a tour of stores to pretend to search Abby, before returning home at about, for example, 11:30. At that moment, or Bridget had found Andrew's body, or, if not, Lizzie could have had very solid testimonies about her alibi when her father was killed. Since it would not be difficult to conclude that most probably Abby was killed by the same killer, so Lizzie would not be suspected for Abby's death as well (Indeed she didn't kill none of them with her own hands).

What I imagine here isn't it a very easy and safe solution for Lizzie's alibi? But what really happened that morning makes me think that most probably Lizzie didn't prepare nothing about her alibi. Who didn't have to prepare an alibi? The author of a premeditated murder, or an innocent?

What do you think?

[PossumPie]

Many people believe Lizzie did it.

I noticed that, among the members of the forum, some people think Lizzie was guilty, but meanwhile, some facts trouble them so much that they don't think Lizzie did it with her hands. So it seems that they are obliged to find a "middle" solution: there must have been some one to help her to kill.

This is certainly a respectable theory: it could explain many things. But a very important point troubles me a lot: Lizzie's alibi.

If Lizzie did have some one to help her, the murder would have been undoubtedly premeditated. In this case, I hardly believe that Lizzie could have prepared her alibi in such a suicide manner. In my opinion, she could, certainly, have let enter the killer, remained in the house to guide him, to help to hide him after he had killed Abby, and she could told her father that Abby had gone to the store. When Bridget went to her room to have a rest and Andrew was lying on the sofa to have a nap, Lizzie could have met her conspirator, and said: "Listen, Bridget is now in her room, he is sleeping on the sofa in the sitting room. Now I am going to the store and pretend to look for Abby, You kill him in five minutes after I leave the house, In five minutes I will be in the store." And then, Lizzie could have made a tour of stores to pretend to search Abby, before returning home at about, for example, 11:30. At that moment, or Bridget had found Andrew's body, or, if not, Lizzie could have had very solid testimonies about her alibi when her father was killed. Since it would not be difficult to conclude that most probably Abby was killed by the same killer, so Lizzie would not be suspected for Abby's death as well (Indeed she didn't kill none of them with her own hands).

What I imagine here isn't it a very easy and safe solution for Lizzie's alibi? But what really happened that morning makes me think that most probably Lizzie didn't prepare nothing about her alibi. Who didn't have to prepare an alibi? The author of a premeditated murder, or an innocent?

What do you think?

I agree with you 100% Franz. Lizzie had no accomplice unless she was incredibly naive to think no one would suspect her while she was there all of the time. Most of us who believe Lizzie killed her parents have thought about someone helping, but it is not necessary to believe that given the evidence. The biggest problems people have are that they ASSUMED that the killer would be covered in blood, and that the weapon was never found. I have shown pictures in another thread of someone who bludgeoned a head with a hammer and had almost no blood anywhere except their hand, and lower legs, two areas not covered by clothes which could be washed quickly. As for the weapon, you know your own house intimately, and could easily hide a hatchet. REMEMBER, the exhaustive search was not done until several days afterwards. they just did a quick check the day of the murders and it could have been hidden under a floorboard during that time.

[leitskev]

I am curious about the nature of the searches of the house. Possum says a thorough search was not done for several says. Is this substantiated? I'm not doubting, just asking the source. It was my understanding that thorough searches were done that day. Uncle John unlocked the chests for police, is my memory.

And they stationed police around the house 24 hours a day right from the beginning. And they were thorough enough to drain the septic pit in the yard and search that.

It's not as easy to hide something in your house as people think. I'm actually surprised people think it would be. Police are used to searching houses, and they were back then too. Fall River was a high crime area. These cops no doubt made mistakes, but they knew how to search for a weapon. Loose floorboards would not have fooled them, and I've been in that house, I doubt there were any loose floorboards. In fact, I've lived in many apartments and houses in my life, and I have never once seen a loose floor board.

Also, Lizzie's lack of consistent explanation and her lack of attempt to stage an intruder presence do not paint a picture of someone very adept at planning her crime. I mean you'd think she'd at least think to unlock the front door. That should have been her first thought after cleaning up and hiding the weapon.

It seems to me she had to have had an accomplice, even if it was just after the fact. Though slipping out that hatchet for Lizzie with all the investigators around was taking a hell of a risk.

As far as the blood splatter, that's a tough call. There probably was not as much as people imagined. But there was still significant splatter on the walls, so it seems there should have been some on her clothing, hands and face.

The lack of a murder weapon is huge, though. It's the kind of hard evidence that can be applied much more readily than the witness testimony. She never left the yard, and the hatchet was never found. To me it demands that either she had an accomplice or was innocent.

[Aamartin]

I think is she had any help, it was after the fact. Someone may have aided her in disposing of the hatchet (I don't think the one they found was the actual murder weapon), they may not have testified to something they knew or saw-- and certainly kept any speculation to themselves.

[Franz]

I think is she had any help, it was after the fact. Someone may have aided her in disposing of the hatchet (I don't think the one they found was the actual murder weapon), they may not have testified to something they knew or saw-- and certainly kept any speculation to themselves.

You mean, there could have been some one to help her to take away and hide the weapon, but meanwhile this person was not a conspirator of Lizzie? In other words, this person didn't discuss with Lizzie about the murder plan, but just help her, I will say, occasionally?

Did I understand well what you would say?

[PossumPie]

I am curious about the nature of the searches of the house. Possum says a thorough search was not done for several says. Is this substantiated? I'm not doubting, just asking the source. It was my understanding that thorough searches were done that day. Uncle John unlocked the chests for police, is my memory.

And they stationed police around the house 24 hours a day right from the beginning. And they were thorough enough to drain the septic pit in the yard and search that.

It's not as easy to hide something in your house as people think. I'm actually surprised people think it would be. Police are used to searching houses, and they were back then too. Fall River was a high crime area. These cops no doubt made mistakes, but they knew how to search for a weapon. Loose floorboards would not have fooled them, and I've been in that house, I doubt there were any loose floorboards. In fact, I've lived in many apartments and houses in my life, and I have never once seen a loose floor board.

Also, Lizzie's lack of consistent explanation and her lack of attempt to stage an intruder presence do not paint a picture of someone very adept at planning her crime. I mean you'd think she'd at least think to unlock the front door. That should have been her first thought after cleaning up and hiding the weapon.

It seems to me she had to have had an accomplice, even if it was just after the fact. Though slipping out that hatchet for Lizzie with all the investigators around was taking a hell of a risk.

As far as the blood splatter, that's a tough call. There probably was not as much as people imagined. But there was still significant splatter on the walls, so it seems there should have been some on her clothing, hands and face.

The lack of a murder weapon is huge, though. It's the kind of hard evidence that can be applied much more readily than the witness testimony. She never left the yard, and the hatchet was never found. To me it demands that either she had an accomplice or was innocent.

Day of the murders, Officer Harrington: "Made a HURRIED search from attic to cellar, no strange weapon found"

MONDAY August 8, 1892.
About 10 A. M. went to the A. J. Borden house with Charles H. Bryant, Officers Desmond,
Medley, Conners and Quigley. Desmond asked permission to search the premises of Miss Lizzie and
Emma. They gave consent. We searched the cellar, chimneys, sounded walls and floor; after which we
searched the barn, out house, under out house, yard, lumber pile in the yard, and adjoining yards. We
found no weapon, or anything suspicious. The search was complete about 1.30 P. M

4 days later!!! You are forgetting that no one in the household was a suspect at first. Lizzie was a distraught daughter of a wealthy murder victim. The search was in case the killer blatantly left the weapon when fleeing the house, NOT b/c Lizzie was a prime suspect. Heck, even when she was the ONLY suspect on monday, they asked her permission to search.

I totally disagree with not being able to hide something for a short time in your own home. I can reach under my corner cupboard, the space is about 4 in. high. Under there is a board running above about 1 1/2 inches wide, a hatchet could be put on that, and someone could stick a hand or broom handle under there and sweep back and forth and not find it, but it would be there. I tried it back when I first wrote this a few weeks ago. Inside wood stoves like the one in the Borden kitchen, a pipe went out of the back, to a "smoke box" that lead to a chimney to take the smoke out of the house, Reaching up to that is easy, and Lizzie testified herself that there was no fire in the stove at the time of the murders. BUT Dr. Bowen threw a note in hours later and it burned. Perhaps Lizzie put the hatchet up in the smoke box, then banked the fire so no one would reach around in there. I'm sure they poked around the actual firebox to see if a hatchet head was there, but I am equally sure they did NOT reach through the flames up to the smoke box. Old houses have kick-boards or mop-boards running along the floor, these often can be pried back and a small opening seen. REMEMBER, back in these days there was no Govt. guarantee of your money in the banks, MANY people hid their money in their homes, and hid it well enough that if thieves ransacked the house they wouldn't find it. It is naive to think Miserly Andrew Borden didn't have secret hiding places for his gold or other valuables, and equally naive to think that the bumbling keystone cops that handled the Borden case were modern "CSI" investigators who used infrared equipment to penetrate the walls metal detectors on the floors and ground penetrating radar to search the yard...this was freaking 1892!

[Aamartin]

I think is she had any help, it was after the fact. Someone may have aided her in disposing of the hatchet (I don't think the one they found was the actual murder weapon), they may not have testified to something they knew or saw-- and certainly kept any speculation to themselves.

You mean, there could have been some one to help her to take away and hide the weapon, but meanwhile this person was not a conspirator of Lizzie? In other words, this person didn't discuss with Lizzie about the murder plan, but just help her, I will say, occasionally?

Did I understand well what you would say?

I think that IF she had help, it was after the fact. Those who may have helped her did not know what was going to happen-- but 'stepped up' afterwards to help her avoid being convicted. Either by actions or (lack of) word.

[Allen]

I also agree that not finding the weapon is not a big deal. There are so many murder cases where the weapon was never found. And Lizzie had four days to hide the weapon in a home she had lived in for many years and knew intimately. The police searched any known places a weapon could be hidden. Lizzie knew all the places a weapon could hide. I've hidden things around my home in places I know that no one would think to look for it. Blood spatter has never concerned me. I've seen too many real life instances of blood spatter evidence that show the killer didn't have to be covered in too much spatter. And I believe that hatchet was in her slop pail during the initial police search. The one place the police would refrain from searching. No officer was going to be gung-ho about searching a lady's slop pail. Especially if he believed she was on her monthly. I've also thought those handkerchiefs Lizzie was supposedly ironing were not just an innocent excuse for what she was doing at the time Andrew came home. Handkerchiefs had to be sprinkled with water and starch before ironing. Leave off the starch and you have some nice damp handkerchiefs handy right after a murder. And a bucket of bloody rags in the basement. As I've said. I think Lizzie was more intelligent than people give her credit for. She made a trip to the water closet and had her slop pail with her that morning. Slop pail goes upstairs with a hatchet inside?

[Aamartin]

I also agree that not finding the weapon is not a big deal. There are so many murder cases where the weapon was never found. And Lizzie had four days to hide the weapon in a home she had lived in for many years and knew intimately. The police searched any known places a weapon could be hidden. Lizzie knew all the places a weapon could hide. I've hidden things around my home in places I know that no one would think to look for it. Blood spatter has never concerned me. I've seen too many real life instances of blood spatter evidence that show the killer didn't have to be covered in too much spatter. And I believe that hatchet was in her slop pail during the initial police search. The one place the police would refrain from searching. No officer was going to be gung-ho about searching a lady's slop pail. Especially if he believed she was on her monthly. I've also thought those handkerchiefs Lizzie was supposedly ironing were not just an innocent excuse for what she was doing at the time Andrew came home. Handkerchiefs had to be sprinkled with water and starch before ironing. Leave off the starch and you have some nice damp handkerchiefs handy right after a murder. And a bucket of bloody rags in the basement. As I've said. I think Lizzie was more intelligent than people give her credit for. She made a trip to the water closet and had her slop pail with her that morning. Slop pail goes upstairs with a hatchet inside?

I agree-- there was something afoul with that slop pail....

[Franz]

I think is she had any help, it was after the fact. Someone may have aided her in disposing of the hatchet (I don't think the one they found was the actual murder weapon), they may not have testified to something they knew or saw-- and certainly kept any speculation to themselves.

You mean, there could have been some one to help her to take away and hide the weapon, but meanwhile this person was not a conspirator of Lizzie? In other words, this person didn't discuss with Lizzie about the murder plan, but just help her, I will say, occasionally?

Did I understand well what you would say?

I think that IF she had help, it was after the fact. Those who may have helped her did not know what was going to happen-- but 'stepped up' afterwards to help her avoid being convicted. Either by actions or (lack of) word.

I hope I understand well what you mean.

So, Lizzie, after having killed Abbby and Andrew, called some one to help her? Where? on the street? whom? some one she knew or just a passenger? by saying:"Oh Sir (o Mr. X.), would you like to help me to take away this hatchet and throw it? Do everything you want. I just don't need to keep it with me." And that person did what was requested and threw who knows where the hatchet. And then, when the murder news was spread in the city, that person chose to remain silent?

I certainly respect your words. but to be honest, I think all this scenario is just inimaginable.

(Or maybe you had a name as that of Bowen in your mind?)

[Franz]

...Lizzie had no accomplice unless she was incredibly naive to think no one would suspect her while she was there all of the time. ...

On this point I agree with you. That's why I said that some opinions about Lizzie's guilt seem to me an insultation to Lizzie's intelligence. (I bellieve that the authors of these opinions, I repeat here, have certinly no such an intention, but the effect is this, in my opinion.)

[Franz]

.... To me it demands that either she had an accomplice or was innocent.

Since I don't think that Lizzie could have acted in that way if she had had an accomplice, so my conclusion is: most probably Lizzie was innocent.

This is my conjectures list about the case (the probability from high to low, in my opinion):

1. Lizzie was totally innocent; the real guilty person was Morse, who organized the double murder.

2. Lizzie was guilty and acted alone.

3. Lizzie was guilty but some one helped her to take away the weapon.

4. Lizzie was guilty but some one else killed for her (and took the weapon away after the killing).

[PossumPie]

I've never gotten why you hate Morse so much. The man must have done or said something for you to hate him. You believe him a cold blooded heartless murderer, and I can't find one thing that gives me even a tiny idea as to why. You might as well say the local Pastor of the church, or the 90 year old sweet little neighbor who baked cookies for the kids in the area killed them...Hmmm. He got no revenge, no money, had no hate of them, came and visited them regularly, was uncle to Andrew's kids, got absolutely nothing out of slaughtering them with a hatchet. NOTHING.

[Aamartin]

I hope I understand well what you mean.

So, Lizzie, after having killed Abbby and Andrew, called some one to help her? Where? on the street? whom? some one she knew or just a passenger? by saying:"Oh Sir (o Mr. X.), would you like to help me to take away this hatchet and throw it? Do everything you want. I just don't need to keep it with me." And that person did what was requested and threw who knows where the hatchet. And then, when the murder news was spread in the city, that person chose to remain silent?

I certainly respect your words. but to be honest, I think all this scenario is just inimaginable.

(Or maybe you had a name as that of Bowen in your mind?)

No-- that once they found out what she did-- they either kept their opinions to themselves or may have helped her by aiding in the removal of the hatchet or which I think is the most likely-- shut their mouths about things they may have known.

[PossumPie]

OFTEN (but not always) even when someone 'gets away with' murder, they end up eventually telling someone, who tells someone, and it gets out. When two people are involved, the conspiracy almost never lasts. Now you have two people who may tell people, who may tell...I strongly believe that If Lizzie is guilty, she planned and executed the plan alone. I think Others around her had gut feelings, but didn't know for sure. To think there were others makes some of the sticky points easier to handle, but just makes it too implausible that the truth never came out. Some one person took the truth to their grave...

[Franz]

No-- that once they found out what she did-- they either kept their opinions to themselves or may have helped her by aiding in the removal of the hatchet or which I think is the most likely-- shut their mouths about things they may have known.

How was the removal of the hatchet done? Could you give me a more precise explanation?

[Franz]

I've never gotten why you hate Morse so much. The man must have done or said something for you to hate him. You believe him a cold blooded heartless murderer, and I can't find one thing that gives me even a tiny idea as to why. You might as well say the local Pastor of the church, or the 90 year old sweet little neighbor who baked cookies for the kids in the area killed them...Hmmm. He got no revenge, no money, had no hate of them, came and visited them regularly, was uncle to Andrew's kids, got absolutely nothing out of slaughtering them with a hatchet. NOTHING.

It is not because I hate Morse that I speculate he was guilty; just as it is not because I have a sympathy for Lizzie that I think she was probably innocent. I didn't accuse the local Pastor of the church, nor the 90 year old sweet little neighnor, nor Mrs. Churchill, nor Alice, nor Dr. Bowen or her wife, I never suspected even Bridget or Emma. But I have more than one reason to suspecte Morse. You don't know if there was a motive for Morse, so you concluded that effectivley there was not? There are many events that occured in the past but of which we now know nothing!

If you don't know nothing, you think that there was really nothing? Me too I don't know nothing, but I think that there could have been something that I ingore.

Why so many people insisted by saying that Morse "got absolutely nothing out of slaughtering them with a hatchet"? If some one could not get the dollar cash, he would not commit a murder? Andrew's sudden and horrible death could give Morse a great sadisfaction, if Morse, being appparently his friend, hated him a lot forr some unknow reason to us, even if he would not get a dollar.

(Possumpie, I mention here, among many others, only one point: Mrs. Churchill testified that Morse, after being told the murder news by her, pronounced "what(?)". but his suprise is just surprising for me, because Morse had already been told twice the same news outside the house. PossumiPie, would you like to explain to me his "what"? My thread about this point was posted monthes ago, but, if I didn't miss anynothing, no one never give me an answer.)

[Allen]

Shock makes people do and say strange things Franz. You base proof of Morse being guilty of murder on such trivial details. "What?" may have just been an expression of shock that two people he was close to and had known for decades were hacked to pieces with a hatchet while he was visiting in town. It doesn't matter how many times someone already told him they were murdered. It's still going to be pretty shocking when he initially hears it from anyone. I don't expect him to behave like, "Oh, I already heard about the murder outside so no bid deal now." I WOULD find that suspicious.

Just as Morse hollering for Lizzie was probably due to the fact that she was the only living family member left in that house. There was no one else to yell for. If I had just found out that two people in my life had been murdered I'd be yelling for someone who could explain what happened. Lizzie was the only one who could give some explanation because she was home at the time. Bridget was the maid he barely knew. He's not going to holler "Bridget!". None of the neighbors knew what happened. Dr. Bowen didn't know. The police didn't know. Only Lizzie was home at the time and probably knew what had occurred in his absence.

I don't believe Lizzie needed anyone to help her. I think she was quite capable of taking Andrew and Abby out on her own. And I do believe she'd been planning it in her mind for a long time. There would be no problem hiding the weapon from the police, in my opinion.

And I do think that Lizzie's lack of emotion points towards her being guilty. I do know that people respond to terrible situations differently. When my husband was in his accident I was terrified when I arrived at the scene. I rode in the ambulance to the first hospital. They life flighted him to Pittsburgh from there. I was running on panic. I was more scared than I have ever been in my life. But I did not cry that night or the whole time he was in the hospital. Not to say I didn't feel grief. I felt it very deeply. But I was definitely NOT calm. I may not have cried but I was still a mess. Yet I could remember everything that happened that day. I could relate all the details. I could answer all of the questions coherently and correctly. And I definitely remember every second. First seeing his car in the road and him lying there with paramedics all around. His wounds. Months later when my Speech teacher in college gave us an assignment to write a speech about something that affected us deeply in our lives I wrote about his accident. While reading the newspaper account out loud I was totally overcome with emotion when I got to the part about him being life flighted to Pittsburgh. There was no stopping it. I broke down and cried right in front of the class and could not shut it off. I cried so hard I could barely get through my speech. I was seriously embarrassed that I stood there crying like that. I had not planned it and had not expected it. But there it was. When the emotions do overcome you there is no stopping them. Lizzie was too calm. She changed her story too much. Which for me indicates lying. She could not have forgotten where she was when her father came home. Or why she went to the barn. She would not be talking about what mortician was going to prepare her parents for burial. That to me speaks of having all that planned out in her mind.

[PossumPie]

Franz, so you are saying: You believe strongly that Lizzie is innocent.
You have NO EVIDENCE or even any theory why Morse did it nor do you have any idea why he would do it.
That makes Morse just as unlikely a perpetrator as the pastor or old lady down the street.
You say "We don't know what kind of hatred he might have had"

WOW, you would accuses someone of murder because he MAY have had some unknown hatred?
At least Lizzie had motive. Heck- even that mysterious man who Mr. Borden refused to rent the store to had more motive than Morse. Yep, I can't know Morse's possible motive, but for that Matter I don't know if you have motive to murder someone BUT I would never accuse you of murder just b/c I liked someone else better.

[Franz]

...
That makes Morse just as unlikely a perpetrator as the pastor or old lady down the street.
...
WOW, you would accuses someone of murder because he MAY have had some unknown hatred?
...BUT I would never accuse you of murder just b/c I liked someone else better

1. No, not at all as just unlikely as..., because the pastor had nothing to do with the case, but many reations of Morse, in my opinion and in that of many others, were suspicious.

2. I repeat, I don't like Lizzie more than Morse, I don't hate Morse more than Lizzie. I neither like nor hate none of them. And for those who believe Lizzie was guilty, I don't think at all that they hate her. This idea would never pass in my mind. You certainly have all your right to disagree what I said, but please don't judge my opinion in that way.

[Franz]

Shock makes people do and say strange things Franz.
...

You are speaking for Morse, right? But I think your words should be valid for everyone, so, for Lizzie as well. According to your words, I would say: The great shock Lizzie suffered made her do and say a number of (apparently) strange things that morning.

I remember that in another occasion you said: people usually don't suspect the persons they know. If you think so, you would not think that it is something of suspect that Lizzie instinctively didn't suspect Bridget, right? So this point should be excluded from the list of circumstancial evidence against Lizzie. In my list there isn't. (I do have my list of evidence against her.)

"What?" may have just been an expression of shock, you said. Certainly, but Morse had been told the news firstly by Bridget, did he pronounce such a word? If he did, it would be a very natural thing. And then, Mr. Saywer told him the news for the second time, and then, he remained there "a few minutes" (Saywer's words) before entering (not rushing) into the house, Mrs. Churchill told him for the third time, I would not be surprised at all if Morse, to Mrs. Churchill, said: "Oh Mrs. Churchill, they have told me the news. What a horrible thing! Is Lizzie right? Where is she, please?"

How to explain his "What (?)". In my opinion: he was playing. After entering into the house, he thought he was on the stage. But this little word "what", among others things, betrayed him.

[Franz]

...
And I do think that Lizzie's lack of emotion points towards her being guilty...

So, the testimonies of Mrs. Churchill, Alice, Dr. Bowen and Mr. Sawyer about Lizzie's emotional reactions, you cancel them all by throwing them in the fire?

[Allen]

If Morse's emotional reactions could be staged, which is your opinion, so could Lizzie's. And she did a far less convincing job than you say Morse allegedly did. Because she did raise suspicion with her actions and reactions. Morse did not.

[Franz]

If Morse's emotional reactions could be staged, which is your opinion, so could Lizzie's. And she did a far less convincing job than you say Morse allegedly did. Because she did raise suspicion with her actions and reactions. Morse did not.

How could Lizzie have been playing if she didn't know that she was being observed by some one (Mrs. Churchill)?

Yes, Lizzie did raise suspicion. but the Borden case remained and remains still unsolved, in my opinion, it's most probably because that people wrongly believed that she was guilty. You can put a photo and then you say, look, in this photo the murderer had no blood on him. I can say simply here: how many people did raise suspicion but were indeed innocent?

[Allen]

What exactly did Mrs. Churchill see that has to imply Lizzie was grief stricken? Mrs. Churchill saw her stand at the side door rubbing her head. That could have been anything. Lizzie could have been trying to think what she was going to do next. What did anyone see in Lizzie that day that implies she was grief stricken? There are statements she was pale. That she seemed distressed. I'd be a bit nervous also if I had just committed two murders and my house was getting ready to be descended on by police. Maybe I'd go over and over things in my mind to decide if I'd left any clues behind. If my alibi would hold up. Not to mention she just chopped up a human being and then had to hurry to clean herself up and cover her tracks. Nobody saw tears. She looked pale and distressed. And she lied consistently from that day. She was already planning a funeral. Or had already planned it in her mind. She lied about hearing Abby come in. She lied about where she was and what she was doing.

[Allen]

Let's also factor in that Mrs. Churchill had already seen Bridget hurrying across the street for a doctor. People don't usually hurry for a doctor unless something is wrong. Then she's sees Lizzie standing at the back door 'rubbing her head'. The natural response, especially if you're a nosy neighbor, would be to ask what's wrong.

[Aamartin]

No-- that once they found out what she did-- they either kept their opinions to themselves or may have helped her by aiding in the removal of the hatchet or which I think is the most likely-- shut their mouths about things they may have known.

How was the removal of the hatchet done? Could you give me a more precise explanation?

Not any more than you can give me a precise explanation or accounting that Lizzie was in the barn pleasuring herself.

[Franz]

What exactly did Mrs. Churchill see that has to imply Lizzie was grief stricken? Mrs. Churchill saw her stand at the side door rubbing her head. That could have been anything. Lizzie could have been trying to think what she was going to do next. What did anyone see in Lizzie that day that implies she was grief stricken? There are statements she was pale. That she seemed distressed. I'd be a bit nervous also if I had just committed two murders and my house was getting ready to be descended on by police. Maybe I'd go over and over things in my mind to decide if I'd left any clues behind. If my alibi would hold up. Not to mention she just chopped up a human being and then had to hurry to clean herself up and cover her tracks. Nobody saw tears. She looked pale and distressed. And she lied consistently from that day. She was already planning a funeral. Or had already planned it in her mind. She lied about hearing Abby come in. She lied about where she was and what she was doing.

!. I never use the words "grief stricken". You "think that Lizzie's lack of emotion points towards her being guilty". I just mentioned the testimonies of Mrs. Churchill, Mr. Sawyer, Dr. Bowen, and Alice (so numerous testimonies) about her emational reactions. Their testimonies make me think that it isn't correct to say there was a lack of emotion from the party of Lizzie (as you said more than one time). But up to now I didn't judge what kind of emotions they were.

2. You said that what Mrs. Churchill saw "could have been nothing". This is your interpretation. Others could make their own.

3. You said: "Lizzie could have been trying to think what she was going to do next." Why didn't Lizzie think well before calling Bridget or even more earlier? She would have plenty of time to think well, right? At that moment she was still thinking how to do next by rubbing her head, at the side door, in a place where she could be seen by some one? So, in your opinion, Allen, how did Lizzie premeditate her murder plan? would you yourself premeditate a double murder in this manner?

(P.S.: If Lizzie did killed the two persons, at that moment, as you all speculated, she had already cleaned her up and had hiden her weapon (wtih a great success). For what matter would she have been still so nervous that she rubbed her head at the side door, a open place?)

[Franz]

No-- that once they found out what she did-- they either kept their opinions to themselves or may have helped her by aiding in the removal of the hatchet or which I think is the most likely-- shut their mouths about things they may have known.

How was the removal of the hatchet done? Could you give me a more precise explanation?

Not any more than you can give me a precise explanation or accounting that Lizzie was in the barn pleasuring herself.

Aamartin, my question is not agressive at all. Since it's difficult for me to imagine the transmission (correct word?) of the hatchet from Lizzie to the person who helped her, I would like to know if you had any more precise idea about this point. In my opinion, if Lizzie did do it, I prefer to believe that she acted alone.

For my conjecture about what Lizze could have been doing in the barn, I have explained in my second thread about the issue.

[Allen]

2. You said that what Mrs. Churchill saw "could have been nothing". This is your interpretation. Others could make their own.

3. You said: "Lizzie could have been trying to think what she was going to do next." Why didn't Lizzie think well before calling Bridget or even more earlier? She would have plenty of time to think well, right? At that moment she was still thinking how to do next by rubbing her head, at the side door, in a place where she could be seen by some one? So, in your opinion, Allen, how did Lizzie premeditate her murder plan? would you yourself premeditate a double murder in this manner?

(P.S.: If Lizzie did killed the two persons, at that moment, as you all speculated, she had already cleaned her up and had hiden her weapon (wtih a great success). For what matter would she have been still so nervous that she rubbed her head at the side door, a open place?)

Mrs. Churchill saw Lizzie rubbing her head. This is not exactly a lamentation of great magnitude. She stood at the back door rubbing her head. She didn't stand there weeping and wailing and pulling at her hair. She didn't need to worry about not being seen Franz. There were two dead bodies in the house. She was getting ready to be seen by plenty of people. You are looking at things in hind sight Franz. Lizzie was not. Even if you premeditate a murder you cannot be sure you will get away with it. She did not know she had been a great success at getting away with anything. And if you cannot see why a person who had just murdered two people might be nervous about what was going to happen next then I cannot explain it to you.

[Franz]

2. You said that what Mrs. Churchill saw "could have been nothing". This is your interpretation. Others could make their own.

3. You said: "Lizzie could have been trying to think what she was going to do next." Why didn't Lizzie think well before calling Bridget or even more earlier? She would have plenty of time to think well, right? At that moment she was still thinking how to do next by rubbing her head, at the side door, in a place where she could be seen by some one? So, in your opinion, Allen, how did Lizzie premeditate her murder plan? would you yourself premeditate a double murder in this manner?

(P.S.: If Lizzie did killed the two persons, at that moment, as you all speculated, she had already cleaned her up and had hiden her weapon (wtih a great success). For what matter would she have been still so nervous that she rubbed her head at the side door, a open place?)

Mrs. Churchill saw Lizzie rubbing her head. This is not exactly a lamentation of great magnitude. She stood at the back door rubbing her head. She didn't stand there weeping and wailing and pulling at her hair. She didn't need to worry about not being seen Franz. There were two dead bodies in the house. She was getting ready to be seen by plenty of people. You are looking at things in hind sight Franz. Lizzie was not. Even if you premeditate a murder you cannot be sure you will get away with it. She did not know she had been a great success at getting away with anything. And if you cannot see why a person who had just murdered two people might be nervous about what was going to happen next then I cannot explain it to you.

Allen, I think I understand well what you said. But for me, all you said here is only your own interpretation basing on your opinion that Lizzie was guilty. Others, like me, can have a different interpretation as well. It's all OK.

[Aamartin]

No-- that once they found out what she did-- they either kept their opinions to themselves or may have helped her by aiding in the removal of the hatchet or which I think is the most likely-- shut their mouths about things they may have known.[/quote]

How was the removal of the hatchet done? Could you give me a more precise explanation?[/quote]

Not any more than you can give me a precise explanation or accounting that Lizzie was in the barn pleasuring herself.[/quote]

Aamartin, my question is not agressive at all. Since it's difficult for me to imagine the transmission (correct word?) of the hatchet from Lizzie to the person who helped her, I would like to know if you had any more precise idea about this point. In my opinion, if Lizzie did do it, I prefer to believe that she acted alone.

For my conjecture about what Lizze could have been doing in the barn, I have explained in my second thread about the issue.[/quote]

People helping her with the disposal of the hatchet is not hard to imagine... Some have said Dr. Bowen smuggled it out in his medical bag-- I don't think this is the case at all.

I also don't think Alice knew anything about it-- if it went downstairs or came upstairs in that slop pail -- Alice was in no way complicit. She couldn't keep the dress burning quiet-- so she wouldn't have lied by omission or otherwise about the hatchet.

But someone else might have helped her hide it better in the house-- Emma for example. Dear, sweet, Emma. Who scrubbed up the blood and was never, not even once impugned by the media, townsfolk or anyone else. (at the time). Emma, who, even though they disinherited one another-- went to her grave protecting Lizzie....

But is is just a theory-- more of an idea really...

[Aamartin]

Maybe Lizzie was rubbing blood off her head-- or working it through her hair, like an early form of hair gel!

[Curryong]

Ha Ha Ha! Or henna!. Didn't Lizzie have reddish hair? H

[Indecisive]

It should be noted that I haven't made up my mind yet about this case.

If Lizzie and an accomplice did it together, then of course Lizzie could have run off to the store or somewhere where she would be seen by many people, and then she'd have a solid alibi. That much I agree with. I disagree that it's a sign that Lizzie didn't have an accomplice, though.

On the accomplice's end this could pose a few problems. If the accomplice didn't know the house very well, then he or she would be unable to find a decent place to hide and dispose of the murder weapon on the fly. If Lizzie and an accomplice planned it together they may well have gone through possible hiding places, the house's layout, the works. That would give the accomplice a better notion of the house but it doesn't guarantee that in an emergency the accomplice would be able to effectively escape alone and unseen and dispose of the murder weapon.

The accomplice would ask risk being caught by Bridget, Lizzie's uncle if he came back early, even unexpected visitors. If Lizzie was guilty then I can see how she could have persuaded herself to take that risk. However, Lizzie acting alone would mean that if she was discovered in the house before or in-between the murders, she had a reason to be there as she lived there, unlike an outside accomplice.

Unless the accomplice was absolutely sure of the plan or had a reason to be invested in helping Lizzie, the accomplice could well be afraid of being left alone and risk being caught and then convicted while Lizzie (being at the shop) walked free, or even of Lizzie blaming that accomplice to divert attention.

If Lizzie and her accomplice decided to do it because of something unexpected, such as a fight with Abby, then they may not have had the time to come up with a completely solid plan. The idea of sending Lizzie off to the store would require some time and calm to come up with. Even if they'd been planning it, if something caused them to do it right on that day before the plan could be perfected, then maybe they didn't even come up with that idea until it was too late.

An accomplice seems very, very risky, because it could work both ways. Lizzie being caught along with the accomplice would make it seem far, far more premeditated. It could ruin both of their lives. It would make it harder for Lizzie to improvise walking in and being shocked by what she was seeing or cancel the plan if needed. I don't think she had an accomplice. If she did, though, I think it would have to have been someone who was very familiar with the house and close to the Bordens (or at least Lizzie) and who had a reason to help her.

[Franz]

Welcome to the Forum, Indecisive!

I agree with you: IF Lizzie was guilty, I think she did it alone.

[Curryong]

Yes, welcome Indecisive. I am also a newbie! Any ideas about a possible accomplice, known to the Bordens or unknown?

[Indecisive]

Welcome to the Forum, Indecisive!

I agree with you: IF Lizzie was guilty, I think she did it alone.

Thank you for the welcome!

Yes, welcome Indecisive. I am also a newbie! Any ideas about a possible accomplice, known to the Bordens or unknown?

Welcome :)

I'm not as well-versed in the case as some here are, so feel free to correct me if I get any facts wrong. If (and that's a huge if for me) the murders were committed by Lizzie and an accomplice together, then I believe whoever did it must have had something to gain. I've wondered if the accomplice in this scenario could have been one of the Bordens' enemies, someone whom was known to dislike Lizzie's father and who could have been contacted to help, perhaps with the added incentive of some profit.

I don't know if Bridget would have done it. I've read before that Bridget later acquired enough money to leave for Ireland (if memory serves) and I've seen this pointed out as a reason why, if she knew anything, she may have stayed quiet. I don't know if money alone could have convinced her to kill. The descriptions of the crime scene sound too grizzly to be just an attempt to get more money, unless of course, they were made to look that way by whoever did it.

Could Morse have done it? In this scenario we'd have the reverse of the scenario that was already dismissed. While he may have wanted to protect his sister's children from lacking for money if he believed that was at stake, I don't think he would have been able to go out at such a distance and then back again.

The only other option I can think of is a good friend of one of the sisters, probably Lizzie. As far we know, Lizzie didn't have a secret boyfriend, but could her sister have had one whom her parents would never approve of? There has been speculation that Lizzie was a lesbian and as such, maybe a girlfriend could have been the accomplice. Or even just merely a friend, someone who was very loyal or very desperate for money, maybe someone who stood to lose something, and who was willing to help.

[PossumPie]

Welcome to the Forum, Indecisive!

I agree with you: IF Lizzie was guilty, I think she did it alone.

Thank you for the welcome!

Yes, welcome Indecisive. I am also a newbie! Any ideas about a possible accomplice, known to the Bordens or unknown?

Welcome :)

I'm not as well-versed in the case as some here are, so feel free to correct me if I get any facts wrong. If (and that's a huge if for me) the murders were committed by Lizzie and an accomplice together, then I believe whoever did it must have had something to gain. I've wondered if the accomplice in this scenario could have been one of the Bordens' enemies, someone whom was known to dislike Lizzie's father and who could have been contacted to help, perhaps with the added incentive of some profit.

I don't know if Bridget would have done it. I've read before that Bridget later acquired enough money to leave for Ireland (if memory serves) and I've seen this pointed out as a reason why, if she knew anything, she may have stayed quiet. I don't know if money alone could have convinced her to kill. The descriptions of the crime scene sound too grizzly to be just an attempt to get more money, unless of course, they were made to look that way by whoever did it.

Could Morse have done it? In this scenario we'd have the reverse of the scenario that was already dismissed. While he may have wanted to protect his sister's children from lacking for money if he believed that was at stake, I don't think he would have been able to go out at such a distance and then back again.

The only other option I can think of is a good friend of one of the sisters, probably Lizzie. As far we know, Lizzie didn't have a secret boyfriend, but could her sister have had one whom her parents would never approve of? There has been speculation that Lizzie was a lesbian and as such, maybe a girlfriend could have been the accomplice. Or even just merely a friend, someone who was very loyal or very desperate for money, maybe someone who stood to lose something, and who was willing to help.

Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I my research shows that it was false that Bridget went to Ireland. It is first seen in Lincoln's book Private Disgrace. She seems to have made it up without any evidence to fit her pet theory. Bridget moved to Montana married, and we loose track of her. SOOOOO much taken as 'Gospel truth' in this case is rumor started so long ago and passed from one author to the next so many times, that it is seen as truth when it isn't.

[Indecisive]

Welcome to the Forum, Indecisive!

I agree with you: IF Lizzie was guilty, I think she did it alone.

Thank you for the welcome!

Yes, welcome Indecisive. I am also a newbie! Any ideas about a possible accomplice, known to the Bordens or unknown?

Welcome :)

I'm not as well-versed in the case as some here are, so feel free to correct me if I get any facts wrong. If (and that's a huge if for me) the murders were committed by Lizzie and an accomplice together, then I believe whoever did it must have had something to gain. I've wondered if the accomplice in this scenario could have been one of the Bordens' enemies, someone whom was known to dislike Lizzie's father and who could have been contacted to help, perhaps with the added incentive of some profit.

I don't know if Bridget would have done it. I've read before that Bridget later acquired enough money to leave for Ireland (if memory serves) and I've seen this pointed out as a reason why, if she knew anything, she may have stayed quiet. I don't know if money alone could have convinced her to kill. The descriptions of the crime scene sound too grizzly to be just an attempt to get more money, unless of course, they were made to look that way by whoever did it.

Could Morse have done it? In this scenario we'd have the reverse of the scenario that was already dismissed. While he may have wanted to protect his sister's children from lacking for money if he believed that was at stake, I don't think he would have been able to go out at such a distance and then back again.

The only other option I can think of is a good friend of one of the sisters, probably Lizzie. As far we know, Lizzie didn't have a secret boyfriend, but could her sister have had one whom her parents would never approve of? There has been speculation that Lizzie was a lesbian and as such, maybe a girlfriend could have been the accomplice. Or even just merely a friend, someone who was very loyal or very desperate for money, maybe someone who stood to lose something, and who was willing to help.

Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I my research shows that it was false that Bridget went to Ireland. It is first seen in Lincoln's book Private Disgrace. She seems to have made it up without any evidence to fit her pet theory. Bridget moved to Montana married, and we loose track of her. SOOOOO much taken as 'Gospel truth' in this case is rumor started so long ago and passed from one author to the next so many times, that it is seen as truth when it isn't.

Thanks for clarifying that.

[Curryong]

The trouble is that some authors latch on to famous murder cases and write a book on such a case, knowing that the public is interested in true crime and it will probably sell. They then sometimes change testimony, make up 'facts', and change evidence in order to promote their particular theory. I've seen it time and time again, especially in books on Jack the Ripper, another interest of mine! Early authors on the Ripper made things up which were repeated in countless following books, simply because writers couldn't be bothered to check primary sources.

[PossumPie]

The trouble is that some authors latch on to famous murder cases and write a book on such a case, knowing that the public is interested in true crime and it will probably sell. They then sometimes change testimony, make up 'facts', and change evidence in order to promote their particular theory. I've seen it time and time again, especially in books on Jack the Ripper, another interest of mine! Early authors on the Ripper made things up which were repeated in countless following books, simply because writers couldn't be bothered to check primary sources.

When I was researching my current book on Creationism vs. Evolution, I found many "facts" which pastors, Creationist websites, and everyday people quoted as true. I painstakingly traced them back to their origin, many were false, or extreme twisting of the truth. Yet each book, sermon, quote, or tract quoted one before, not bothering to go back to the original source. Things even I as a skeptic accepted as true because I'd heard them quoted to much, turned out to be false.

For many years now, people all over the USA have saved soda can pull-tabs for dialysis. Cups full of tabs even appear in Professional offices as naive people dutifully tear off the soda can tab and drop it in. I am a Registered Nurse and am telling you There is NO Dialysis center ANYWHERE that accepts pull tabs for payment. NONE. Dialysis costs many thousands of dollars per session, and even a garbage bag of pull tabs would only bring about $20 at recycling centers. But people argue with me that it is a FACT that they do. Things get so engrained as facts that people stop checking sources...

[Curryong]

What a fascinating subject for a book, PossumPie! Don't want to offend anyone, but Charles Darwin is quite a hero of mine, though I realise he is a bit of a contentious figure in some States of the U.S. We are far from the subject of Lizzie, I suppose. I don't know though, she might make a good subject for evolutionary theory!

[PossumPie]

What a fascinating subject for a book, PossumPie! Don't want to offend anyone, but Charles Darwin is quite a hero of mine, though I realise he is a bit of a contentious figure in some States of the U.S. We are far from the subject of Lizzie, I suppose. I don't know though, she might make a good subject for evolutionary theory!

The book is non-offensive, in fact I go out of my way to be gentle with those who believe the earth is only 6,000 years old, as opposed to 4.54 Billion years old. Darwin is indeed a hero of mine as well.

[debbiediablo]

I'm new and just read this forum and have four comments:

• Maybe Morse had a hearing impairment. I do, and I often say "What?" especially when there's background noise and confusion.

• I doubt that a maid becomes co-conspirator with her employer in a double murder, one of which was clearly premeditated, when the employer can't even remember her correct name. Ditto for the supposed lesbian relationship between Bridget and Lizzie. "Ohhhh Maggie...Maggie...oops... I mean Ohhhh Darling...Darling."

• When my kids were young we had long talks about lying by omission. If Lizzie had help (not considering the David Anthony theory which remains minimally open to my consideration) then the help was along the lines of lying by omission. Emma already had a dead mother, a dead father and a dead step-mother. I doubt she wanted to see her little sister go to the gallows whether or not she was guilty. Morse may have viewed his niece as incapable of committing such a crime or he simply kept his opinions to himself for reasons we will never know. The same could be said for Dr. Bowen.

• I have always been bothered by Lizzie's willingness to send Bridget out for the doctor and then for the neighbor while she stayed behind in a house with a possible hatchet murderer still present. There's only one reason why Lizzie didn't go running into the street with (or maybe even without) Bridget in tow, and that's because she knew there was no danger within. Bridget's refusal to go upstairs alone rings far more true than any of Lizzie's behavior in the immediate aftermath of the murders.

[Curryong]

Indeed, yes, Lizzie wasn't bothered about staying alone, at all. I think in most discussions the Members of the Forum have had when it comes to 'did Lizzie have help', (Franz, where are you?) the twin questions of proof of any sort of motive immediately comes up. Emma and Lizzie were the only ones to benefit from Andrew's death, financially anyway, and for me, anyway, lovers, (lesbian and otherwise,) illegitimate sons and hit-men sent by Uncle John, don't really cut the mustard! In a way it would make these murders even more interesting if there were another viable suspect we could discuss.

[Catbooks]

lovers, (lesbian and otherwise,) illegitimate sons and hit-men sent by Uncle John, don't really cut the mustard! In a way it would make these murders even more interesting if there were another viable suspect we could discuss.

for me either, curryong, although i have passingly considered lizzie having a male lover who did the deeds, but have pretty much rejected it. it would be more interesting if there were other viable suspects.

i can't see bridget, emma, or john morse doing it. nor a random madman, nor an enraged tenant or prospective tenant, as lizzie suggested.

the fact that lizzie didn't want to get bridget and get the HELL out of there, after determining her father was dead, has bothered me too.

if i'd gone out of the house for 15-20 minutes, came back in and found my father's face hacked to a pulp on the sofa where i'd left him, first i'd be in a state of shock and disbelief that i was actually seeing what i was seeing. then i'd want to make sure he was beyond any help. and then, i'd get the heck out of there! i'd just call to bridget to get out of the house and explain why once we were both safely out.

[Curryong]

Absolutely! And I think that's what most people without an ulterior motive would have done, Catbooks! Later, of course, Lizzie seemed to be positively urging people to go upstairs and find Abby.

[debbiediablo]

For sure. Which opens up the whole story about Abby going out to visit the sick friend. No note found. No sick friend ever located. Then suddenly Lizzie recalls hearing her coming home. Except Abby was killed 90 minutes prior to Andrew. This almost moves into a time frame that has Abby coming before she was going!?!? I won't repost here what I quoted from a book on criminal classification in the Mental Illness forum except to say that in a staged domestic homicide the body is most often "found" by the murderer. Lizzie needed to find Andrew. Conversely, Abby could have rotted on floor except people were starting to look for her.

[Curryong]

I've always wondered whether she got some kind of a weird perverse thrill from others finding her handiwork as far as Abby was concerned. All that 'I'm sure I heard her come in' business, yes, right, through a locked front door or a side door with a man consigned to guard it! Some things she did and said on that morning are just very strange.