Alice Russell testimony ommissions

[camgarsky4]

Alice Russell left out key information when she testified at the Inquest and Preliminary hearing and when she gave police statements immediately after the murders.

For some reason, all "we" (aka Lizzie Borden ecosystem) talk about is that she held back the story about seeing Lizzie burn her dress. Alice shared this information when the Grand Jury reconvened and, of course, at the trial.

But what she also didn't share until her likely second appearance in front of the Grand Jury were details about Lizzie and her discussion the evening of August 3rd. At the Inquest she confirms that Lizzie did call on her, but Knowlton doesn't pry deeper and Alice doesn't volunteer any insights.

What is a bit bewildering about this omission at the inquest and preliminary hearing is that presumably, Alice thought Lizzie innocent at this early stage of the case. If her wish was for Lizzie to be cleared at either public event, telling about Lizzie's concerns and worries shared with Alice would seem like something to tell police, Knowlton and Jennings. But it doesn't seem she did.

Thoughts on why she wouldn't cough up her conversation with Lizzie August 3rd to law enforcement before the Grand Jury?

[Inspector]

I believe Alice knew all along that the visit from Lizzie was incriminating, but as the days passed she was weighing it all, and processing the relationship of the conversation .

Even today it is hard to understand how anyone could do this sort of deed, and subconsciously I think we try to somehow at least partially, make some rationale of why.

Alice was in a tougher spot , and must have been asking herself, how is this possible?

The dress burning was the deal breaker.
Alice was there to see Lizzie’s demeanor, facial expressions, and hear the voice of her long time friend, and make a learned decision of Lizzie’s involvement.

I’m not as knowledgeable as many of y’all, but thought I’d give my opinion on how Alice may of felt.

[Inspector]

Emma’s testimony beginning at page 1539 is hard to believe. She just happened to see the very dress in question, hanging on a nail, the Saturday of the search.
The dress that was on a nail, she just happened to need?!
That very dress, on that day?

Just hanging there, and no officer saw that paint stained dress?

Someone is not telling all.

I’ve always thought that Emma was a big protector of her sister.

[camgarsky4]

You 'nailed' (pun intended) a key observation. The police were looking for blood stains. I would imagine paint stains would catch the eye of someone looking for blood stains EVERY TIME. And it was just hanging on that nail. I suppose Lizzie could have worn it that very Saturday after the funeral, but that seems unbelievable since there was company at the house from the funeral into the evening, so Lizzie wouldn't wear what was basically a house dress. Therefore, the dress had to be on that nail when the police did their search while the family was at the funeral.

Warning Will Robinson.....YET TO BE PROVEN STATEMENT:
I already had on my 'to do' list to dig up the testimony that describes how Lizzie did where the stained dress periodically, including in the days after the crimes....I believe. That info would fit with your observation above. Why would they decide to burn a dress that she does wear relatively frequently the very morning after told she is a suspect and the first morning without Bridget hanging out in the kitchen. Who cares that police were outside the house. They were outside the house.

Maybe we should start a new thread.....'Burning the Dress'

[Inspector]

I have to say. Having just finished Knowlton’s closing arguments, I have gained a lot of respect for him.
Obviously a Christian man who didn’t wish to be in his predicament, yet compelled by duty, and morality, he stayed the coarse.
To my SURPRISE he covered some key areas we have been discussing. He raised the question, why no one has found the screen window that Lizzie claimed to fetch the tin for.

He trusted Mrs Reagan told the truth on the stand, but made a mistake in letting a sly reporter get the scoop.Then Mrs Reagan realized that it could hurt her female roommate Lizzie. He attributed all the debacle to Mrs Reagan trying to smooth things out , but NOT because the conversation between Lizzie and Emma didn’t happen.
—makes sense—-

Then he actually attacks this very “dress on the nail” subject, and pretty much sees it just as we have.
I must say WOW, I didn’t expect to see that in his closing arguments, and also how he seemed to be knowledgeable of God, and conscience .

Overall a powerful closing argument, and one that had a undertone of mercy that came from his compassionate heart, yet still steadfast to present the factual evidence.

The Bedford cord had been worn since May by Lizzie, as he pointed out to the jury, it must have been hid during the Saturday search because it should have been found in the closet by Seaver, and Fleet.

Similarly, he sees Emma as innocently compelled to protect her sister as he goes over the dress burning, hiding, and Hannah Reagan incidents.

One more interesting thing that I didn’t remember being attributed to him…
He presented the theory that the Prince Albert may have been used by Lizzie, and folded under his head.

Reading all the Inquests, witness statements, hearings, and trial testimonies has been a little exhausting, but Knowlton really made it worthwhile there at the end.

—-Much Respect for Knowlton

[camgarsky4]

He smoked Robinson when it comes to the closing arguments. But without a good explanation of where the murder weapon went and no alternative for the jury but to hang her or find her not guilty.....not guilty it was.

Unanswerable....but wonder if outcome different if she was charged with manslaughter and a prison term vs. capital murder.

[Inspector]

Good question!
I bet the jury, and her defenders had to deal with their actions in some capacity for a long time.
It seems Emma did.