Lizzie Borden Society Forum

http://www.dimensionsinfo.com/what-is-t ... a-hatchet/

I bought an old Doctor's bag at a thrift store... I don't have a hatchet-- but I do have a yardstick. I think an average sized hatchet would have fit into the one I have.... But just barely-- and it would have been hard had there been many other things in it.

So Doctor Bowen could have sneaked the hatchet out....

Doctors bags seem to have come in many shapes and sizes in those days, didn't they? I think some did resemble large Gladstone bags but others were more box-like, hard leather items. I'm not quite sure how compartmentalised they would be. I would imagine the ordinary General Practitioner on his daily round having to have a certain number of full bottles of medicine, perhaps a dozen or so, thermometer, a syringe or two, rolls of bandages, etc. as well as his instruments' case.

What if they were out on their rounds in a rural area. Would that require, say, a small bag of plaster of Paris, in case of setting a broken limb? I agree with you, there wouldn't be too much room left for any but the smallest hatchet! I read once that it was the habit of some Victorian doctors to fit their stethoscopes into a pouch fitted inside their top hats. It seems very insanitary to me, but anyway a stethoscope wouldn't take up too much room!

As I've said before, IF the 'guilty' hatchet had no identifying marks I can't imagine why the killer didn't just throw it down near Andrew's body!

While I don't discount Dr. Bowden's involvement or knowledge somehow in the incident, I do question him becoming involved criminally. To know something or suspect something and stay quiet is one thing...but to hide evidence makes him an accomplice to a double homicide, which could have been punishable by death or imprisonment. I'm not sure someone who graduated from medical school and had a thriving practice would throw it all away to haul a murder weapon away in a medical bag. Especially given the fact that we hear no more of him in Lizzie's life after she was acquitted.

Doctors in the US have long been put on pedestals. No one would have questioned Bowen running in and out. Nobody would have checked anything. I doubt police even "frisked" people in those days. Whether or not he would do such a thing would depend on his deeply held beliefs. First do no harm. WHAT IF (and I don't believe this muck), but what if Dr. Bowen knew Lizzie had been sexually abused by her father, and he believed she finally snapped and didn't deserve to be punished? Of course he would want to distance himself in the future, but at the moment of passion he might make risky decisions.

On the other hand I would think a doctor's mind would see it as normal that a murderer would leave the weapon behind. Perhaps he even had other experiences with murder scenes. It seems to me only an idiot would think it necessary to hide a murder weapon if one was there. Of course I favor the idea that the weapon left with the killer, either for him to defend himself if caught, or because it was a tool of trade belonging to the perpetrator which he did not want to lose. (Jack the Ripper certainly did not leave knives behind for example.)

Totally off topic, but Aamartin, I LOVE the decor in your photos. Your house? Someone has great decorating skills!!!

Yes-- My dining room. Some call it too much, I call it attention to detail!

Do your guests ever humour you, Anthony, and talk over the Borden murders at dinner parties?

Actually, it would be dangerous indeed, I agree, for Dr Bowen to be actually smuggling murder weapons out for Lizzie. What if one of the policemen milling around injured himself and he had to open his bag there and then! I do think he was an old smoothie, and probably had indulged himself in some mild flirtation with Lizzie, to which she might have responded, but that's all.

I do think Bowen would, within reason, assist Lizzie, if he felt the police were harassing her, but I have to admit that, like Possum, I have reservations about him going any further. He had a wife and child and a busy practice. A lot to risk!

Aamartin wrote: I think an average sized hatchet would have fit into the one I have.... But just barely-- and it would have been hard had there been many other things in it.

Thus the importance of breaking off the handle first...

No, Lizzie broke the handle off for him. Bowen didn't have to do a thing except pop the blade into his bag!

Several years ago I tried to break the handle from an old hatchet. I pounded it on cement and even tried a vice-- throwing my full weight into it. My partner at the time attempted to do it as well. He is taller than me by 3 inches and strong. We couldn't do it.

Yes, I'm afraid that, unless it broke in the course of the killer's exertions, the old axe handle and blade the police desperately dragged into court had nothing to do with the murders. It, (the handle and blade,) had probably been hanging around in the cellar for ages. It might have been broken by Andrew long before.

I lean towards the hatchet found a year later on the neighbor's shed roof. Lizzie came in from out back, right from the area the hatchet was found, simple to throw it up there where it couldn't be seen from the ground. EVEN if Lizzie was not the killer, whoever the killer was could throw the hatchet up there, why chance getting caught walking down the street hiding a bloody hatchet??? It always irked me that people who believe Lizzie was innocent point to no murder weapon found in the home...no murder weapon was found OUTSIDE the home either, that proves nothing except that someone hid it well- Lizzie or someone else.

I think when people say that the weapon was not "found in the home" (PossumPie's words), it should mean the whole property of the Borden house, even the immediate vicinity of the house included. In that zone the weapon was not found. Certainly Lizzie could have hidden it successfully. But this indicates undoubtedly more Lizzie's innocence than her guilt.

Curryong wrote:Do your guests ever humour you, Anthony, and talk over the Borden murders at dinner parties?

Actually, it would be dangerous indeed, I agree, for Dr Bowen to be actually smuggling murder weapons out for Lizzie. What if one of the policemen milling around injured himself and he had to open his bag there and then! I do think he was an old smoothie, and probably had indulged himself in some mild flirtation with Lizzie, to which she might have responded, but that's all.

I do think Bowen would, within reason, assist Lizzie, if he felt the police were harassing her, but I have to admit that, like Possum, I have reservations about him going any further. He had a wife and child and a busy practice. A lot to risk!

No-- None of my 'real life' friends share my Lizzie interest!

The way a hatchet/axe blade gets broken is if the head misses the mark and the handle strikes something solid. There is some physics involved which I can't remember, but the simple description is how it happens. I think it was Victoria Lincoln who came up with the theory of Lizzie using a vice in the barn to break the handle. Impossible! One could make a point about an old, weak, half rotten handle but usually if the handle is in poor shape the head is loose and wobbly.

Yes, exactly, irina! I've long come to the conclusion that the hatchet that appeared in court, with its thick layer of ashes and missing handle, (in fact there's evidence that the handle itself was in two pieces) wasn't 'the one'!

Absolutely, Curryong! Then there are those who say if that broken hatchet isn't the weapon there is no case. As Possum has observed that is nonsense too. I think maybe there would have been no trial without the broken hatchet since the police so desperately put that forward as the weapon. Talk about ignoring Occam's razor on that one! That's why others can come up with ideas about Lizzie using the vice in the barn, etc.

According to Michael Martins, curator of the Fall River Historical Society, the handleless hatchet was not the actual weapon.

The following video starts out rather strangely, but continue to watch it. Right around 5:15, Michael talks about the Handleless Hatchet:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C77TckcWHlk

Interesting video. Thanks for posting it!

I've cut a lot of wood with Axes and Hatchets. First the handle is usually oak or ash. You are NOT going to break it on purpose without a LOT of effort. Yes, I have broken an older one, but even if she put it in a vise and worked at it...not quickly enough for her needs. The broken idea is very implausible. Whoever killed them hid an entire hatchet head and handle.

I got into quite a lively debate with an old member awhile back about all the hiding places in a home that it could have been placed in. Think about your own home, there are places no one would know to look. Even under your couch or bed, if you look, there is material stretched across it. A tug on a corner, drop the hatchet in push the upholstery pin back in place, and even if you moved the couch/bed, and looked under, you would not see a hatchet- it is up inside the furniture. Under my corner cupboard is about 4 inch space where my cats knock their toys. BUT if I reach up there, there is a board going across that makes a nice little "shelf" a hatchet could sit on (I actually tried it b/c the member kept insisting the police checked "everywhere") Everywhere is a relative term. There are "obvious" places the checked...in closets, up under the eves, behind furniture, but I guarantee that they did not tap every piece of kick-board molding around the house to see if maybe one was loose and had a space behind it. Remember in the days before banks were insured, you hid your money in and around your home. Even if a thief had all day, you wanted it hidden such that it wouldn't be found. People had loose floorboards in closets etc. they had valuables hidden in. My first apartment was the second floor of an old house. In the corner of the dining room there was a very short piece of floorboard that could be pushed on, and would slip right out. I shined a light down there in the space beneath the floor hoping for some forgotten treasure, but there was nothing. But I could have hidden a large ax under there it was that much room. NO cop would have found that.
I think we make too much of the "lost" murder weapon. Lizzie's house was NOT completely searched until days later, and in testimony the cops admitted they only very casually searched on the day of the murder, and then really only for the killer who might still be hiding in the house.

Someone said there was a "stick" in the firebox of the cook stove. Some authors tried to suggest this was the broken hatchet handle except I think police did find the handle. I don"t see why the whole hatchet couldn't have been chucked in the firebox, shoved under half burnt coal. Those old cook stoves had lots of places to hide things. Possibly the ice box did too. When Lizzie was burning the dress she had pulled it out of a kitchen cupboard or something. You are very right, Possum about hiding places. Plus some Victorian furniture had secret hiding places. I own one of those pieces.

This is theoretic of course because i believe the killer took the hatchet. If the hatchet was hidden in the house it quite likely would have/could have been moved from one place to a place the police had already searched.

irina wrote:Interesting video. Thanks for posting it!

You're welcome! Glad you found it interesting.

Unless it had already been deposited on the roof of the Crowe's barn, says she hopefully!

I like the Crowe's barn hatchet too. Just where an intruder would throw it once he felt free and clear and not likely to have to kill any witnesses on his way to freedom.

PossumPie wrote:I've cut a lot of wood with Axes and Hatchets. First the handle is usually oak or ash. You are NOT going to break it on purpose without a LOT of effort. Yes, I have broken an older one, but even if she put it in a vise and worked at it...not quickly enough for her needs. The broken idea is very implausible. Whoever killed them hid an entire hatchet head and handle.

I got into quite a lively debate with an old member awhile back about all the hiding places in a home that it could have been placed in. Think about your own home, there are places no one would know to look. Even under your couch or bed, if you look, there is material stretched across it. A tug on a corner, drop the hatchet in push the upholstery pin back in place, and even if you moved the couch/bed, and looked under, you would not see a hatchet- it is up inside the furniture. Under my corner cupboard is about 4 inch space where my cats knock their toys. BUT if I reach up there, there is a board going across that makes a nice little "shelf" a hatchet could sit on (I actually tried it b/c the member kept insisting the police checked "everywhere") Everywhere is a relative term. There are "obvious" places the checked...in closets, up under the eves, behind furniture, but I guarantee that they did not tap every piece of kick-board molding around the house to see if maybe one was loose and had a space behind it. Remember in the days before banks were insured, you hid your money in and around your home. Even if a thief had all day, you wanted it hidden such that it wouldn't be found. People had loose floorboards in closets etc. they had valuables hidden in. My first apartment was the second floor of an old house. In the corner of the dining room there was a very short piece of floorboard that could be pushed on, and would slip right out. I shined a light down there in the space beneath the floor hoping for some forgotten treasure, but there was nothing. But I could have hidden a large ax under there it was that much room. NO cop would have found that.
I think we make too much of the "lost" murder weapon. Lizzie's house was NOT completely searched until days later, and in testimony the cops admitted they only very casually searched on the day of the murder, and then really only for the killer who might still be hiding in the house.

I wholeheartedly agree on the implausibility of ANYONE easily breaking a hatchet handle. I tried and ended up slathered in ointment.

They didn't search like they do today. From the sounds of it, they didn't 'toss' the place. The bundle in Emma's closet was undisturbed. I have an old house, built in 1883 and there are plenty of places I think I could hide a hatchet and survive a police search.

Agreed. It does NOT prove Lizzie did it, but it takes the "wind out of the sails" of those who say she Couldn't have done it b/c no hatchet was found in the house.