Thanks for the article, Constantine.
But all in all it is a terrible article. And badly written at that!
Where to begin
For one, Abby was not hit with the blunt end of the axe and left beyond recognition. Wrong! Andrew was bludgeoned beyond recognition, but not with the blunt end of the axe.
The maid was not on the third floor washing windows when Lizzie called her after her father was discovered. Wrong!
Though the maid testified about hearing Lizzie laugh, she never said she did so while Lizzie was supposedly killing her parents as the writer implies. Wrong!
There was no Portuguese man at the house, or any house, on the day of the crime. Wrong!
Fall River was not a small town. At the time of the crime Fall River had a population of around 75,000. That's not a small town. Wrong!
The photo of Lizzie together with her sister is not Lizzie at all, or her sister. Wrong!
The Borden house was not locked on the day of the crime, unless you assume a screen door with a small hook is considered a locked house. The way the writer tells it implies that the house was completely locked. Anyone could have entered. Screen material is not a a stumbling block or hindrance to a murder. Wrong!
Bridget Sullivan never testified that Lizzie burnt a dress with white spots on it. Wrong!
There was no proof that the population of fall river was jealous of Lizzie's money and hated her because she was wealthy. It was not that simple. Wrong!
And Abby Borden would not have inherited her husbands entire estate if he had died and she had lived. Without getting into it, Massachusetts law at the time was not that simple and clear cut as the author implies. Wrong!
Did I say this was an awful article. Infested with cliche's and platitudes. The setup of the site is attractive. I like the way the article is broken up by photos and such. But after reading it I feel like my brain shrunk.
