Lizzie Borden Society Forum

I was thinking that if I walked into a room in my house and found my father viciously hacked to pieces, with blood everywhere, I would freak out, scream, and run like hell out the door for safety. I would immediately feel like I might be in danger too and some maniac could be in the house somewhere lurking and waiting to pounce on me. I wouldn't be able to get out of there fast enough and I would run to the closest place for help. I certainly would not walk through the house through several rooms to the back and call up the stairs to someone to come down (and alert a killer who might still be there that I've discovered the murder). I would not stand quietly at a screen door and wait for someone else to get help. That's just too weird to believe. That's why I just cannot believe that Lizzie didn't do it or know something enough about it to know she wasn't in danger. It seems that no matter how calm and in control of one's feelings one might be, that would shake up the most collected person.

OK, but how would you react? I (probely) shold have seen to that iam not alone, so I dont find it strange that she called on Bridget.

But what I NOT have done was to send Bridget away at once. That part is a little strange to me.

Hi Angel,

I couldn't agree with you more, I would've also run screaming from the house, her reactions (or lack of them) were extremely suspicious to say the least, and it does seem to point towards her having known some prior knowledge about the crimes, if she didn't do it and had no idea who did I think she would have reacted differently, especially when she first discovered her Father, I always thought it odd that she never had blood on her clothes (however small) considering she called the maid to leave the house for the doctor, she obviously wasn't that scared to stay alone, but she doesn't go back into the room where Andrews lays bleeding, he could've still been semi-concious for all she knew. there is definate guilt there, how much we will never know (unless a time machne gets invented! ) but I guess it's just another puzzling amd fasciinating fact about the case.

I also think that if I had been raised in Victorian times, with the women so protected and shielded and cloistered, having "the vapors" over the slightest shock or impropriety, I would have had a nervous breakdown if I would have had to stay a night in that house after the murders. There's no way in hell! That's just too bizarre.

That's an interesting post, Angel.

Lizzie's reaction, or non-reaction, is strange indeed. True, we can all react differently to stressful situations but Lizzie pushes it to the extreme.

Lizzie never left the house, not even going so far as to stay out on the little back porch. She took no precautions while standing at the door inside. Even the strong Charles Sawyer, who was later guarding the side door, had the presence of mind to lock the cellar door protecting his rear.

She sends Bridget to get Dr. Bowen. During this wait she sought no other help. The doctor is not there so she sends Bridget for Alice Russell. Again she seeks no other help while waiting.

Ironically she says to Bridget when she sends her for Alice (per Bridget's trial testimony, p245) "Go and get her. I can't be alone in the house." Alice would not be my first choice for protection.

Hi Harry
Exactly. Not only that, but she IS alone in the house when she sends somebody else out. I would at least have gone with that person so I would be with someone. I'd be clinging to whoever was there for dear life.

Also, come to think of it, there is no way I would go upstairs, even with another female (why did the men allow them to go up there by themselves, anyway?) to get sheets when they didn't know what or who they might find, and then, all of a sudden, Bridget finds the guts to walk right into the guest bedroom by herself later?

But the whole "say in the house" is logic if Lizzie KNEW that the murder had already left.

Jimmy S. Windeskog @ Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:43 am wrote: if Lizzie KNEW that the murder had already left.

OR she herself was the murderer. Then she would know there was no one else.

Alice lived at 33 Borden Street. Her Uncle Hiram Harrington's blacksmith shop was at 30 Borden Street, just diagonally from Alice Russell. Granted there was some friction between Lizzie and Hiram but at a time like that I should think that would be put aside.

I always thought Lizzie saying "I can't be alone" was a slip of the tongue. I think it had something to do with her alibi.

She would not let Bridget go into the sitting room. That was odd, too. I would be in so much shock I wouldn't have the presence of mind to stop her. And I wouldn't want to stop her. I think I'd want to make sure I really saw what I thought I saw - it was so horrific.

Lizzie calling for a doctor first, then Alice Russell was strange. Her father was clearly dead, or at least way beyond anything Dr. Bowen could have fixed him up with in his medicine bag. I would have told Bridget to go for the cops. Or better yet, both of them go for the cops. Alice Russell?? What good would she be, except to come in and hopefully say, "Oh Lizzie! You were so right in what you told me last night!"

Bridget did go up for the sheet with Mrs. Churchill. From testimony, it sounds like Bridget just went in on impulse, or from surprise, and probably not bravery. I think her testimony was kinda wishy-washy, if I'm remembering right. Seems like she wasn't real sure how far into the room she went in - it was like she just kind of darted in. (She might have been leading Mrs. Churchill, and if she was she probably couldn't have backed up and ran downstairs with her behind her on or near the stairs.)

It is strange that Bridget and Adelaide Churchill went upstairs alone, without anyone having checked the upstairs. I guess it was a big shock to everybody, and some people weren't thinking quite right.

Bowen was the first doctor to arrive, even tho he was not home when Bridget first went for him. Officer Allen, the first policeman to go to the house, came right back to the precinct to report what was going on. I don't know if there were any men in the house when Bowen requested the sheet.

I would not have stayed in the house, unless the cops had gone over the whole house. And maybe not even then, with Andrew being in there like he was. And spending the night??? It's hard to believe any of them could. Morse slept in the guest room. That's really weird.

Harry, what is this about Charles Sawyer locking the cellar door? I thought Morse was trying to tell a reporter the cellar door was unlocked, then later recanted it. Was it locked when the bodies were found, and maybe someone unlocked it to go down there? And Sawyer was re-locking it?

Harry @ Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:59 pm wrote:

Jimmy S. Windeskog @ Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:43 am wrote: if Lizzie KNEW that the murder had already left.

OR she herself was the murderer. Then she would know there was no one else.

Alice lived at 33 Borden Street. Her Uncle Hiram Harrington's blacksmith shop was at 30 Borden Street, just diagonally from Alice Russell. Granted there was some friction between Lizzie and Hiram but at a time like that I should think that would be put aside.

Of chourse. But I think that if she really did it someone else must had known to. But thats besides the point.

The point Iam trying to make is that its not that strange that Lizzie called for Bridget. The strange part is that she sends Bridget away and then stays in the house untill Mrs Churshill sees her. Why did she not run with Bridget?

So why did she stay? One anser is that she did the murders, but that dont really explane why she didnt run with Bridget (if she was the murder it may be logic to be away from the house as soon as possible, and why wake Bridget?. The other anser is that she knew the murder was outside.

[/quote]

Augusta asked:

Harry, what is this about Charles Sawyer locking the cellar door? I thought Morse was trying to tell a reporter the cellar door was unlocked, then later recanted it. Was it locked when the bodies were found, and maybe someone unlocked it to go down there? And Sawyer was re-locking it?

No, not the cellar door that leads to the yard. There had to be some door between the cellar and the first floor if for nothing else to shut out the dampness and odors. This is Sawyer's trial testimony, p1477:

Q. Did you at any time shut the cellar door going down cellar,---lock it or anything?
A. I pushed the bolt in that door.
Q. You don't mean the outside door, of course?
A. I mean the one that goes down in the cellar from that back entry.
Q. What did you do that for?
A. Well, I didn't know but what somebody might be concealed round there.
Q. Did you step outside the house at any time?
A. Yes, I stepped outside on the steps.
Q. Were you a little nervous yourself?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. Was that one of the reasons you went out on the steps?
A. No, sir, not entirely.
Q. You were rather afraid of the assassin coming down upon you?
A. I didn't know what might come. I was there alone part of the time.
Q. And didn't feel very easy to be there alone?
A. No, sir, I did not.
Q. And you locked the cellar door up on that account?
A. Yes, sir.

Personally I would have been out of that house as fast as I could go. I can see no advantage to staying.

Edit here: I assume it was this door that Sawyer locked.

I would think that if I had come in from spending a relaxing 20 minutes in a barn eating pears and looking for fishing tackle and found my papa hacked to death that I would not even have the presence of mind to remember the maid was upstairs. (If I remained in the house)

Lizzie called "Maggie" to come down... How did she know Maggie wasn't lurking in the parlor with the instrument of death?

Lizzie didn't even think that maybe Bridget was also injured or killed somewhere....

She didn't call out "Maggie, are you all right?" -- Wouldn't you have if you didn't know what had really happened????

augusta @ Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:21 pm wrote:Bridget did go up for the sheet with Mrs. Churchill. From testimony, it sounds like Bridget just went in on impulse, or from surprise, and probably not bravery. I think her testimony was kinda wishy-washy, if I'm remembering right. Seems like she wasn't real sure how far into the room she went in - it was like she just kind of darted in. (She might have been leading Mrs. Churchill, and if she was she probably couldn't have backed up and ran downstairs with her behind her on or near the stairs.)

This is from The Witness statement of Mrs Churchill, Monday 8th August 1892:

When the doctor returned he asked for a sheet. Bridgett Sullivan, the work girl, was afraid to go upstairs alone, so I went with her. Lizzie said we would find the sheets in the dressing room. Which is off of Mrs Borden’s room, I think we waited for a key to Mrs Borden’s room, and I think Dr Bowen went into the sitting room to get it. If I am not mistaken, he first brought out a bunch, but the one wanted was not among them: so he went in again, and returned with a single key, we then went upstairs, and Bridgett asked me if two would be enough. I said I think so, one will cover a person. But we brought down two, and gave them to Dr Bowen. He covered Mr Borden, and then went out. Lizzie requested the doctor to send a telegram to her sister Emma, but not to tell her the facts, for the lady whom she is staying with, is old and feeble, and may be disturbed.
Lizzie then said I wish somebody would go up stairs and try to find Mrs Borden, so Bridgett and I started, I think she led the way. We went up the front stairs, but I only went far enough to above the second floor. The door to the spare room was on the north side of this hall, and was open. I turned my head to the left, and through this door I could see under the bed of this room. On the north side of the bed, on the floor, I saw what I thought to be a prostrate body. There was not much light in the room, so I could not distinguish clearly, but I knew the object was more than a mat. I felt certain it was Mrs Borden. I then rushed downstairs,

It's kind of an odd remark for Bridgett to make about bringing two sheets, when Abby hadn't been found yet (was this a slip up on her part?) also I wonder if Lizzie tried to bring Abby's name in on the conversation "Oh you can get the sheets from Mrs Borden's room" to make somebody ask her where Abby was, but since nobody asked at that moment she had to go and blurt out that she thought she heard her come in after they did the trip to get the sheets, seems to me like she just wanted the body found, and she also asks this after the Dr had left, very suspect indeed

Thats a good point you are making Audrey.

But then again, if Lizzie did it - would it then be logic to call Bridget in this way? Then she really had a reson to make Bridget belive that she knew what happend inside the house

If Lizzie know that the murder is outside and that Bridget was saft, then the call "Maggie, come down, father is hurt" make sens in a way.

But i do agree, it is hard to think that Lizzie did not do or at least know about the murders when you just look at thes facts.

I have often wondered if maybe Lizzie did not stay so composed and immediately send Bridget away from the house so that she might have a few extra minutes to hide evidence.Maybe she thought she was pushing her luck time wise or became scared that Bridget had heard something and called her down and sent her away.No one wonders why she sent first after the doctor, then Miss Russell, but never the POLICE.

But then why not hide the evidence before she woke Bridget up? Bridget has just gone to bed so that she would wake up as Lizzie hide the evidence was not a great danger.

If you are on the first floor, and someone else is on the third floor, can you be 100% sure what the person on the third floor is doing? Especially someone who had been sick and vomiting through out the day?

One can never be 100 % sure.

Harry, the picture of the doors, do you know if they are the original doors that were there in 1892, or have they been replaced? cheers Aaron

It is strange that Bridget and Adelaide Churchill went upstairs alone, without anyone having checked the upstairs. I guess it was a big shock to everybody, and some people weren't thinking quite right.

Exactly...Lizzie wasn't the only one not thinking clearly. The police didn't think this through couldn't that also show how Lizzie could also not be in the best state of mind to think everything through if she was innocent?

One can scream out and become hysterical or one can become stunned and quiet and try to remain in control while in shock and make the wrong decisions. Calling Alice could have been finding emotional support for herself...

Blood or no blood? Either would be used against her.

I do think it's odd that she didn't think police, and what she was thinking about the killer...is it possible that's why she stood in the doorway-a way out if she needed one?

Her reaction about Bridget not going in the sitting room could have been one of "on no you DON"T want to look at that", fear that Bridget would break down and not be able to get help, or out of a territorial response to her slain father that she was so attached to, perhaps all of the above?

If she did it and it was premeditated it was a poor after plan...if I were to plan a murder I'd be laying on the emotion as well as unlocking the front door etc. If it were spur of the moment she had the presence of mind to clean herself up well enough and dispose of evidence well enough at first (till it could be covered up better that night by the family) that she should have also had the presence of mind to unlock the door so as not to look a likely suspect.

In terms of spending the night in the house as morbid as the crimes were, everyone but Bridget stayed including dear sweet Emma. Maybe they didn't know what to do, we do know it was a very odd thing to happen and the local police were not skilled in investigating such. Why would anyone in the town really know what to do or where to go when it was so out of the ordinary? We do know that death was not looked upon the same then as it is now, it was custom to have dead bodies in your living room back then. Shiver, so I have to wonder how much of it was just they lived much closer to death, animals (cats and dogs being shot or killed over things we would treat with vet care now) as well as raising and slaughtering your own meat, death rates were high among humans, and Andrew was once an undertaker. T

The girls may have been even less fearful of dead bodies due to that fact alone..having bodies, even ones that were mangled couldn't have been all that out of the ordinary for the only undertaker around yes? Yes, these were however relatives...but the girls DID leave the house and not return.

Emma's washing the blood goes both ways as well, was she trying to put her life back together the only way she knew how or was she concealing evidence? Had she not cleaned the blood would we be more horrified that these people stayed in the house that was covered in blood and never cleaned?

Bridget's statement about the sheets again could be as simple as not knowing how many sheets a dr. would want for a body. One to cover sure, but how would she ness. know what he was going to do, perhaps he wanted one for under the body, or more to wrap the body (if I were a maid or had to clean the house I'd think wrap them up and get them off my carpet don't drip any more blood). Again, murder was out of the ordinary so unless Bridget was an avid fan of mystery books is it possible she was a shocked 19th century woman caving to whatever the man thinks is best?

Or, Lizzie did do it...I wouldn't cast my cards against her knowing more than she let on to know...but I don't know if she did it. Smart enough to get rid of the traces of blood on herself but not smart enough to unlock the door or open a window I don't know about that one....but I haven't received my Rebello yet...but it's been shipped!!

I think with the known habit the Borden's had of locking all the doors, (they were always kept locked,even the door between Andrew and Lizzie's room and the front door triple locked) and the fact that Bridget had just relocked it right before the second murder herself when she let Andrew in, would've seemed even more out of the ordinary for her to run about unlocking doors and opening windows. And how could she have opened a window when Bridget just spent half the morning cleaning them? Bridget knew which windows were opened and which ones werent.

I forgot to mention the fact that it would also look suspicious due to the fact that when Andrew got home, he couldnt even get in himself because the door was locked, he had to knock. So how could it be argued someone else could have?

jamfaws @ Tue Dec 07, 2004 5:37 pm wrote:Harry, the picture of the doors, do you know if they are the original doors that were there in 1892, or have they been replaced? cheers Aaron

Aaron, I'm not 100% sure but think that it is the original door. Maybe someone else can verify that.

Allen, in your Dec. 7, 8:25pm post, you state in part : "... and the fact that Bridget had just relocked it right before the second murder herself when she let Andrew in,"

Can you tell me your source that Bridget re-locked the front door after admitting Andrew? I can't find where she was asked that. Thanks and BTW, Welcome!

Well I couldnt quite remember where I thought I had read that, so I went back and did some checking. In the trial Bridget was asked how the door was usually kept, was it usually kept locked using something other than the spring lock? She said she didnt "know nothing about that door." Probably why she had such a hard time working the locks to let him in. Bridget always used the side door. When she was asked by the police if she fastened the door after Andrew came in, she said she couldn't remember she thought she left Andrew to do it. I think what I might have been basing this on was the testimony of other witnesses who stated the door was always kept locked. Like Albert Chase said in a report written on August 17, 1892.

"During the past thirteen days I have been on duty at the Borden house at the front door. During all this time the front door locked everytime it was closed. No one has been ever admitted withouth first ringing the bell.
Several times the people who were inside, have stepped out to speak to me, and the door would close, and lock them out, and they would have to ring to get in. I have tried the door a great many times and always found it locked. Have seen a great many other people try to get in before ringing the bell, but the door was always locked. I have never seen anyone get in without being let in by someone from the inside."

But it seems the front door was not locked by Bridget, but probably was by Andrew who habitually kept doors locked. Even the one to his own bedroom.

Pippi, that was a great meaty post! It certainly gave me a lot to think about, you are gonna have some fun when you get your Rebello! I guess it's sometimes difficult for us 20/21st century folk to realise just what it was like back then, and this case has picked apart every tiny movement that ALL have made (especially Lizzie) I was thinking, if mrs Churchill was a suspect, then her reaction on seeing Abby for the first time, and what she blurted out in her statement could be read in an entirely differant way, as indeed could most of the people involved in the case, but you must admit which ever angle you look at it, something doesn't seem quite right where Lizzie is concerned. How guilty Lizzie, Bridgett, Morse were we will never truely know, so many theories in the past 112 years has bogged this case further and further down in to the darkness of the Twilight Zone Cheers Aaron

It's true that Bridget says she left Andrew to lock the front door.
So we don't know if he did that. But it sounds reasonable that he didn't, because that door was usually kept on the spring-lock (only) during the day (after Lizzie usually unlocked it- which she says she didn't that day).
So the habit would be to have that door on the spring-lock.
But Morse contradicts the previous information (by Chase) that the door always locked by itself. So that is a *draw.*

When Kieran, the engineer, was there on the premises measuring eveything, he was asked about blood spots in the sitting room (Trial, 118+) and he explains a few measurements and what he saw. He was there on the 16th. So not all blood was cleaned up- maybe just some. I only really recall that Emma cleaned up blood off the parlour door area, and that was Friday before the funeral- against Dolan's orders.

The girls lived in the house until Lizzie was arrested, and then Emma and a servant continued to live there until September, 1893- a year later.
Of course, Emma probably was not about to make any financial decisions regarding the house the girls now owned in common, until the whole mess was cleared up.
Technically tho, for our purposes, Emma was the one to stay in that murder house all that time- so if it's weird, she was the one who somehow could stand it.
Also, there was no proof that Andrew was an embalmer or had anything to do with preparing bodies. He was an undertaker, which can also mean he rented out funeral equiptment and the like.

About being on the first floor and someone being on the 3rd floor- I forgot to mention Stefani's experiment at the house. SAhe didn't warn us- she just did it- which was cool.
Sherry/Augusta and I were in the front south room in the attic- the one on the kelly side, on the street. We were jabbering and Stef and party had descended to the first floor. She called up to us- she called my name. I heard her faintly- and answered "What?" or "Yes?" She said something and we moved to the doorway of the room to call down what did she want.
We knew we were behindf the group so we gathered she wanted us collected downstairs with the guide. When we got down there in the kitchen hall, she asked us what we heard.
So at that point we recalled what the experience was. Her voice calling (she said she called loudly) came to us at about the level of a murmured conversation. Meaning, we could hear her distinctly, but at a low level. Remember, this was in the front attic room with the door open.
Stefani's experience was that she couldn't tell if we had heard her, because her voice had to go up thru the floors, rather than up the stairwell, because the stairs are connected with halls, and therefore zig-zag.

Yes I had forgotten that Morse said he had the lock fixed soon after the murders because he noticed that the lock did not always catch.But that could maybe also go to whether or not Morse was trying to insinuate it was possible for someone else to have gotten in.

So we don't know if he did that. But it sounds reasonable that he didn't, because that door was usually kept on the spring-lock (only) during the day (after Lizzie usually unlocked it- which she says she didn't that day).

Dear Kat
Were did Lizzie say that she did not unlock the front door?

Where Lizzie "speaks" is usually in the Witness Statements or her inquest testimony. I'm looking...

I'm still looking. I'm pretty sure she outright said it- but I am sick today and full of medicine
Here are the words Implying Lizzie was supposed to unlock it in the morning, but it wasn't:
(Anyone else know the answer?)

Inquest
Emma
114
Q. How about the front door?
A. We locked that with a spring lock.
Q. Did the spring lock work?
A. Once in a while we would find it did not, but very seldom.
Q. The few times it did not work, did it not come from the fact the door was not slammed too enough to catch the spring?
A. I suppose that must have been it.
Q. You had not had it repaired?
A. No Sir.
Q. It is in the same condition now it had been?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. You have lived there since the tragedy; you are still living in the house?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. It works as well now as it did; there is no difference in it?
A. So far as I know, it does.
Q. Was it the habit to keep the front door locked with the spring lock?
A. Yes Sir.
Q. How about the bolt and the big lock?
A. We used those only when we went to bed.
Q. When did they get unlocked in the morning?
A. Usually when my sister or I came down stairs, one or the other unlocked them.

--of course, Emma was away, so that left Lizzie.
................


Inquest
Lizzie

55/12
Q. When you came back at nine o'clock, you did not look in to see if the family were up?
A. No sir.
Q. Why not?
A. I very rarely do when I come in.
Q. You go right to your room?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Did you have a night key?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How did you know it was right to lock the front door?
A. That was always my business.


56 (13)


Q. How many locks did you fasten?
A. The spring locks itself, and there is a key to turn, and you manipulate the bolt.
Q. You manipulated all those?
A. I used them all.
Q. Then you went to bed?
A. Yes, directly.

.............

61/18

A. I think he came to the front door and rang the bell, and I think Maggie let him in, and he said he had forgotten his key; so I think she must have been down stairs.
Q. His key would have done him no good if the locks were left as you left them?
A. But they were always unbolted in the morning.
Q. Who unbolted them that morning?
A. I don't think they had been unbolted; Maggie can tell you.
Q. If he had not forgotten his key it would have been no good?
A. No, he had his key and could not get in. I understood Maggie to say he said he had forgotten his key.
Q. You did not hear him say anything about it?
A. I heard his voice, but I don't know what he said.
Q. I understood you to say he said he had forgotten his key?
A. No, it was Maggie said he said he had forgotten the key.
............
68/25
Q. And during that time, so far as you know, the front door was locked?
A. So far as I know.
Q. And never was unlocked at all?
A. I don't think it was.
Q. Even after your father came home, it was locked up again?
A. I don't know whether she locked it up again after that or not.
Q. It locks itself?
A. The spring lock opens.
Q. It fastens it so it cannot be opened from the outside?
A. Sometimes you can press it open.
Q. Have you any reason to suppose the spring lock was left so it could be pressed open from the outside?
A. I have no reason to suppose so.
Q. Nothing about the lock was changed before the people came?
A. Nothing that I know of.
...........

Help:?:

Jimmy S. Windeskog @ Wed Dec 08, 2004 12:22 pm wrote:

So we don't know if he did that. But it sounds reasonable that he didn't, because that door was usually kept on the spring-lock (only) during the day (after Lizzie usually unlocked it- which she says she didn't that day).

Dear Kat
Were did Lizzie say that she did not unlock the front door?

____________

That's it- I can't find any more:


Trial
Bridget
Q. Were you in the habit of tending the bell calls at the front door?
A. Yes sir, when Mr. Borden or Mrs. Borden was not at home, but when they were in the sitting-room I did not go to the door.

Q. At any time when you answered the bell call did you find the door locked in the way you described this morning?

MR. ROBINSON. Wait a moment. I object to that.

MR. MOODY. It has been suggested that it may appear hereafter on the testimony of Miss Lizzie Borden that it was her habit to unlock the door in the morning and leave the door on the spring lock only.

MR. ROBINSON. I suppose that is not now before the Court.

MASON, C.J. We exclude it.

MR. MOODY. The witness is yours unless something has escaped us. I tried very hard that there should be nothing.

Thanks a lot Kat!

But if Lizzie did not think that the door had been unlocked that morning - how dose she think the note came in?

If Lizzie made up the note her self, shoulnt she think of unlocking the front door so who ever came with it could have give it to someone in the house?

The more one learns about this, the less one understands...

Maybe a Whitehead child would come to the side door if one brought a note?
I think we once tried to figure out the "etiquette" of family vs. Visitors, front door or side door?

Anyway, it's a good question- but what about "a man came?"
Who unlocked the door for that? A business deal would probably come to the front door.

PS: What did Livia do for Rome?

Well, I guess this take us back to Lincon again,and the man or woman she said saw the front door open and close as a stange man stod out side the door... Damn Lincon, she seams alone to have this information.

The expression "I did it for Rome" is from when Livia, the wife of the romean Emperor Augustus comes in the part of "I, Claudius" when she lies on her death bed and confesses to her grand child Claudius what part she had playd in the Roman empire as the wife of the Emperor.

She had killed her husband Augustus when she thougt that he was a weak leader for Rome. When he died hes will told Rome that Livas youngest son Germanicus should be the new Emperor. That is not Livias plan, so she kills of Germanicus also, so her yoldest son Tiberius could take the crown. But it dose not end there, she also is behind the masterplan that makes Caligula the new Emperor when Tiberius dies (by Caligulas hand).

On her death bed she confesses this, but points out that she did noting for her own sake, "I Did It For Rome".

Well that is what the play by Robert Graves teaches us. In reallity ther is no proof that Liva commited any murders, but she DID have a great influens and probolby was the most powerful woman in the world in her time.

The play was made for TV in the 80:s and is 12 hours long (12 episods). If you get a chanse to see it it really is a must.

Come to think of it, I may have a thing for woman accused for murder...

Well, for what its worth, found this in Robinson's closing argument at the Trial:

"Now I think you and I will agree about this evidence. The cellar door was undoubtedly locked. I mean the one outside. I have no doubt of that. The front door, in the usual course, so says the evidence, was bolted up by Lizzie Wednesday night and unbolted by her Thursday morning. Now they assume she bolted it Wednesday night, but they are not going to assume, I suppose, that in the usual course she unbolted it Thursday morning; but I do, because that is the evidence; leaving only the spring lock on when she unbolted it. They say, You do not know that. Well, I say, You do not know it, and you have got the burden of proof, not I. It was fastened by the bolt when Bridget let Mr. Borden in; that is true; the bolt and the key.

Now how it was afterwards---because there is one officer who says it was bolted afterwards---is of no consequence except as bearing upon the escape of the assassin by the front door. You get the point. It does not make any difference whether it was bolted afterwards or not so far as anybody's coming in is concerned, but it does make a difference as to whether he went out the front door, because if he did he couldn't have bolted the door behind him when he went out; and it doesn't appear anybody else did, and that is all the significance it has.

Thanks.
That guy's statement is not evidence and it actually contradicts evidence.
"Closings" are like quoting authors- and I personally stay away from them. They can lie, misrepresent etc. Look what happened with the note theory/Bridget in closing.
Please may I ask, is the second part a quote too or you speaking?

Since this topic is "How Would You React" I will put this here:
On TV tonight (Court TV or A&E Case Files) there was the story of a woman whose husband was killed. They think she did it and then they decide she hired a hit. They find a connection to her client by cell phone calls the night of the murder. They think he was hired. The point I'm getting at is they brought up the fact that police had logged a couple of 911 calls from the home in the weeks prior to the murder. Apparently the wife called in a couple of different breaking and enterings, with robbery.

This part reminded me of the robbery at the Borden house in 1891, and the stories Lizzie continued to tell about seeing strange men loitering around the house at night. I wonder if there was 911 back then, Lizzie would have called these sightings in? It would have set the stage for assuming a robbery or a prowler for the time the murders did happen.

She didn't have 911 but she could have reported it in person the next day if she felt it was all that suspicious, and she didn't, only to friends yes? Not sure if that looks good or bad Miss Lizzie

Thanks for clarifying what 'cellar door' Sawyer locked, Harry. I am so concerned about that outside cellar door, I didn't even think about the interior door. Thanks for the picture, too!

I'm not sure if that door is original to the house. But taking the tour recently, the guide was showing us doorknobs on doors that were still the original ones. Incredible but true!

Audrey, good point about Lizzie not knowing if maybe Bridget was the killer when she called for her. I never thought of that.

Thanks for the witness statement of Mrs. Churchill, jamfaws. I had remembered she did not go in the guest room. I think Bridget testified that Bridget ran in. I'll go a-huntin' for that testimony. I'd like to re-read it myself anyway. (I love the photo you use on here! May I ask who she is? A relative maybe?)

The spring lock on the front door was not reliable. During the time after the murders, Mrs. Holmes and Mrs. Brigham were there a lot every day to support Lizzie. One of the ladies did a test on that lock and testified about it later on. I believe she found that sometimes the lock worked and sometimes it didn't. (Another piece of testimony I will try to find and post.)

The sheets, with Bridget asking Mrs. Churchill if two would be enough - I always thought that was an innocent question. Andrew was 5'11" - kind of tall for back then? - and he was really dripping. And how did Bridget know if Bowen was gonna wrap him up or what.

That sheet incident has been part of the legend of Lizzie. It's been passed around as gospel that when Dr. Bowen asked for a sheet, Lizzie said, "Better get two."

How did Dr. Bowen know where the key was? And what the key unlocked? He said at the trial that he knew the Bordens both professionally - as patients - and socially. But when asked if he visited their home often, he said he did not. I suppose Lizzie told him where and what the key was at the time. But I don't think I ever read that she had...
Did he know his way around that house better than one would think?

augusta @ Thu Dec 09, 2004 1:45 pm wrote: (I love the photo you use on here! May I ask who she is? A relative maybe?)

Hi Augusta, thanks for asking about the picture, you're spot on! it is in fact my great, great maternal grandmother, Victoria Latight (not sure of the spelling) I believe she was born in Germany although I don't know anything about her, my grandmother gave me the picture some years before she died, i'm not sure when Victoria died, but I do have another picture of her when she is much older, the picture I put is edited, the original includes Victoria and her sister (see below) her sister looks kinda scary to me in that pic thanks for asking- Cheers Aaron

P.S.Does anyone know How I would date a picture like that?

on the issue of lizzie's behavior immediately following the murders -- it gets very confusing if you don't bear in mind that lizzie's account of the morning as she reports in the Witness Statements is quite different from her Inquest testimony.

i consider it important that lizzie is pressured by knowlton into bringing up the note. inquest lizzie saw/heard absolutely nothing that morning. with murder morning lizzie, it's different.

if i observe lizzie's apparent reaction (and forget about anything she said at any time) -- she wants to hang in the doorway until people come. as was noted by someone else, she very gradually re-enters the house until finally she is in her upstairs bedroom where she doesn't want to be bothered. i wonder if her thinking was that she could sort of slither out of being implicated merely by the presence of others, particularly the ladies, whom she seems to nag into going upstairs to find abby. i'm still not sure i understand the psychology of this.

one way of looking at it is that lizzie wanted to go to her room but knew she could not until abby was found because she herself did not want to be the one to find the body. i consider this, because you might wonder why she just did not keep her mouth shut about "looking for abby". impatience about going to her room and getting some privacy, etc.? this seems rather cold and flippant, doesn't it? the whole thing about hearing abby come in and look for her etc., -- as a tactic this is so stupid. so what we are hearing is someone upset by the horror of the murders -- but it is this horrible thing that is upsetting her -- there is no grief for the victims.

jamfaws @ Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:43 am wrote:
P.S.Does anyone know How I would date a picture like that?

I saved that photo and will blow it up to look at the vase... (I collect antique glassware and have most of it dated-- I also have TONS of books about old glassware)

The clothing seen in a photo as well as "accessories" can be a good clue when dating a photo....

But you can usually only come within about 10 years.....

Thanks Audrey, here is a close up of the vase cut down from the larger file of the photo (it was too big to put on the site) pity she is covering part of it with that piece of paper! any help would be good, i'm thinking early 1900's, I think my nan was born in 1919, and i'm sure she remembered her as an old woman (much older than that pic) would be great if it was 1892 it looks to me like it's from Lizzies time, but I could be way out.

But then again the vase might have been in the family for years

I once read a good explanation of an anti-social personality, in the clinical sense, not the way we generally refer to ordinary folks as being anti-social. It might have been in an Ann Rule book. Anyway, it boiled down to the fact that true anti-social people have no emotional feelings as we know them. They simply don't feel anything. . . In fact, they sometimes learn to mimic emotion by copying how others react in various situations, but it's really an act.

I've thought about Lizzie in this way, especially when she's trying to explain her own and other people's feelings--were Andrew and Abby a happy, loving couple, did she [Lizzie] feel toward Abby the way a daughter feels toward a mother, etc. She keeps stumbling on these points and saying things like "I don't know how to answer."

It is very, very odd that Lizzie wasn't weeping and wailing over the horrible death of her beloved father. She was too coherant to have been in shock so deeply as to not feel deep grief and what happened. It seems instead that those feelings simply didn't exist in her.

Yes that was me, Eugene- Lizzie at the inside screen door, then the rocker in the kitchen right where the juncture is at the back hall, and then in the dining room on the lounge and then alone upstairs in her room. I don't know how much time she *bought* to be alone in her's and Emma's *suite*, but I guess it was enough. And it's an interesting point that she was slowly trying to get up there just as soon as she could, and yet couldn't, as you say she may have felt, until the body of Abby was found.
Very interesting.

Douglas said the killer can go out of their way not to be the one to find a body. But Lizzie found Andrew?

Yes it's strange, you think if she had done it, she would have went to the barn and stayed there until Bridgett screamed "Orrible Murder" it seems like she really wants Abby found, almost like it's unbearable to wait any longer. But would she have thought that she would have been surrounded by so many people at once? maybe in her minds eye she pictured Alice comforting her while the good doctor wrote out his report, did she think that far ahead that the place would be swarming with people? or maybe she was lost without Emma to support her and needed a place where she could gather herself together without people fussing over her.

That seems odd to me as well Kat, that she would not want to be the one to discover Abby's body, but is the one that discovered Andrew. The only reason I can think of for why she might have "discovered" Andrew's body is she figured that it might be pretty questionable for her to have spent all the time up there in the loft on such a hot day. It was already questioned as to why she should've spent even 15 minutes there.There may be a more likely reason since all I can do is speculate, but it does strike you as odd.

Thanks.
That guy's statement is not evidence and it actually contradicts evidence.

Oh, I wholeheartedly agree with you on that, Kat! Robinson totally manipulates the facts and evidence to suit his cause. But, what I thought was so important and interesting about what he had to say was the issues he focused on, the ones he felt important enough to change the direct evidence or testimony on for the jury to hear and remember at the end.

If you think it clouds the issues too much, I won't post anymore of what he has to say.


Yes, thats a very good point, Eugene! Maybe she was tired of being in the direct line of fire of questions from everyone downstairs and wanted to get away to think for awhile. And Abby was in the way. How much more believeable would it have been if Lizzie had had the ladies walk her up to her room only to have them discover Abby then?