Lizzie Borden Society Forum

Now that we have discussed the possibility of Lizzie being on drugs when the killings occured, here is a poll to see how successful our argument has been in filling in the gaps of Lizzie's personality and potential for crime, in persuading those who think Lizzie was innocent.
Does this seem feasible to you, or is branding Lizzie as a drug addict as bad or worse than claiming she did kill?

viewtopic.php?t=924&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=0

I have thought about that, but trueley doesn't make sense to me......"Being high" she would have been caught overlooked something.......might have let something slip.....and probably clumsy probably wouldn't have even had good enough "aim" to kill. It seems to much like the murders were pre-planned.

And if she was on anything......like cocain or opiates. she wouldn't be hungry! Even if on a diet she DEFINITLY would not have eaten 3 or 4 pears epecially at one time.
just my thoughts.

Not to say she wasn't on something "usually" just not during the murders I think.

Nona @ Wed Apr 13, 2005 11:43 pm wrote:And if she was on anything......like cocain or opiates. she wouldn't be hungry! Even if on a diet she DEFINITLY would not have eaten 3 or 4 pears epecially at one time.
just my thoughts.

I'll gather you don't have any personal experience with opiate use? I have, and had no problem pigging out on food while on powerful opiates.

I do not believe she was on any drugs. I already posted some of my feelings about it in the other thread. If she was addicted to any opiate, there definitely would've been withdrawal symptoms...some pretty severe symptoms. I do not see anything in what we know of Lizzie's life that leads me to believe she was addicted to drugs.

I'll gather you don't have any personal experience with opiate use? I have, and had no problem pigging out on food while on powerful opiates.

Robert..., what did you find was the effect on your brain from the 'powerful opiates' you were 'on' ? Do you feel you came through the experience unscathed ? I have no personal experience in the consumption of these compounds.


Tracy...

Robert..., what did you find was the effect on your brain from the 'powerful opiates' you were 'on' ? Do you feel you came through the experience unscathed ? I have no personal experience in the consumption of these compounds.

Utter tranquility and peace of mind. Pure mental clarity. And all you body feels undescribably pleasant. If heaven exists, it must be like an eternal opiate high.

Opiates don't make one crazy. They cause perfect sanity. Violence would be pointless. It would disturb staring at your navel while in a state of total bliss.

As for why many become severely addicted to opiates, read above.

I was unscathed by the use of opiates. The only thing I find scathing is that they are not legally available.

I haven't decided either way, tho I think there could be signs- and it could be a link we have been missing.
About Lizzie eating those pears tho- we don't know she really did that, I guess because no one looked for the cores.

(If we were there, we'd look for the cores! )

I don't remember where it was noted, but what about when Lizzie was first put in prison and had that protracted vomiting spell. Could that have been a withdrawal from drugs of some kind?

"Opiate withdrawal is an acute state caused by cessation or dramatic reduction of use of opiate drugs that has been heavy and prolonged (several weeks or longer).

Opiates include heroin, morphine, codeine, Oxycontin, Dilaudid, methadone, and others. The reaction frequently includes sweating, shaking, headache, drug craving, nausea,vomiting, abdominal cramping, diarrhea, inability to sleep, confusion, agitation, depression, anxiety, and other behavioral changes."

Wow...what you are saying Susan, sounds so much different from what Robert seems (to me) to be describing about the effects of these drugs. Robert makes taking drugs sound like the ultimate great adventure, while what you say, and what I had always thought about drug use, make it seem like a hell I would wish on no one. This is a very interesting discussion.


Tracy...

I think she was loaded on something. Here is something to thing about. Maybe she was on a diet and straving herself and took some kind of "diet pill" that had some kind of something in it? Think that could have whacked her out or something.

ack! is there anyway to recast a vote I misclicked! No I don't think she was on drugs at the time of the killing.

Starving oneself and killing sprees don't go hand in hand especially on hot days in August it would take far too much energy that a dieting starving corseted 5'4" chick would have. That isn't to say she wasn't using diet pills of some sort, but it giving her the the power to kill both A&A is ludicrous you can tell by the roundness of her face that she was not a rail thin long term coke fein.

I think anything is possible. She could have been PMS-ing or something. I know plenty of men think us women do trip out once a month. Maybe she did. lol

I voted yes, it is possible. I was trying to see what her mindset might be at the time of the murders, and being under the influence of drugs while committing a crime is very conceivable.

Is it possible that maybe she was in a black-out and committed the murders? I mean she did give the police different stories about where she was at when the murders were committed.

I don't believe in anyone's *black-out* story. Anyone who commits a felony, I mean.

Dieting is tied to the possibility of hypoglycemia to me. But it could include reactions to something she might be taking to diet as well. As a member said: We don't know what Lizzie looked like between diets (? if she did) or between photographs for that matter!
I do think if she took anything tho, and killed, it would more likely be an amphetiimine or upper.

It's an interesting point of Nona that on drugs she'd be more likely to screw up...

Actually, before I became a family woman, I had quite a bit of expierience with different kinds of drugs .I was sould searching.finding myself. And no......I COUDN't eat.didn't want to those were my "Skinny days" which is why I dont believe she was on anything if she murdered....

I voted "not enough info"..I don't recall any reference to Lizzie dieting or losing weight ?
From the way Lizzie acted before and after, the only
drug that comes to mind is Prozac. I'm a child of
the 60's and experimented also..yuch the mushrooms and pot and opiates all take you right out the world. Lizzie was definitely herself, from all
accounts.

I voted NO. I too have known someone who took cocaine, as I stated before. This person became addicted to the point that they were thrown out of their own home for their behavior. I do not see anything in what we know of Lizzie's life to indicate she was taking anything. I do not believe withdrawal symptoms last for one bout of vomiting and are gone. I also cannot believe that since every penny she ever got was from Andrew, her spending money to buy drugs would not raise some kind of questions about the habit. If she was "stocking up" as it has been implied, why were no drugs found during the search of the house? I think if they would've stumbled across something like that, and a large cache, that it would've been noted.If she bought it from a druggist they might also have noted the frequent purchases, especially if they were large ones. I just cannot believe that if she was indeed doing this, it would not have come out somehow. And when and how would Lizzie have had the time to get rid of it her "stash"? There was basically always people in that house with her from the time Mrs. Churchill got there until she was arrested. Whatever else Lizzie was, she was not a drug user.

( sorry late edit: Also, if she was in the habit of using drugs, I cannot see her selling the half house back to Andrew. This was the only income which was HERS to do with as she pleased with no questions asked. Yet, she sold it back.)

theebmonique @ Thu Apr 14, 2005 8:23 am wrote:Wow...what you are saying Susan, sounds so much different from what Robert seems (to me) to be describing about the effects of these drugs. Robert makes taking drugs sound like the ultimate great adventure, while what you say, and what I had always thought about drug use, make it seem like a hell I would wish on no one. This is a very interesting discussion.


Tracy...

There is no contradiction between what Susan wrote and what I wrote. Susan wrote about the symptoms of withdrawl from opiates. Withdrawal symptoms only happen when someone is an addict. Occasional recreational users don't get withdrawl symptoms.

I voted yes there's a possibility.

Here's something that I'm willing to bet on. For a few days prior to the killings she was most likely on SOMETHING. And do you know the kinds of stuff that went into products used to treat "female periodic complaints" in those days?

Lizzie's period ended Wednesday. If she wasn't still on something on Thursday, she was coming off of something.

Allen @ Thu Apr 14, 2005 1:41 pm wrote: I do not see anything in what we know of Lizzie's life to indicate she was taking anything. I do not believe withdrawal symptoms last for one bout of vomiting and are gone.

Lizzie did have morphine at her disposal. Dr. Bowen prescribed it for her starting from the Friday after the murders. The dosage was 1/8 of a grain, which he doubled on Saturday and continued giving it to her. So, if my fractions are correct, she was then receiving a 1/4 of a grain of morphine to take. From what I can gather, could be wrong, it seems that the standard dose of today is 1/2 of a grain in tablet form. We don't know for a fact if she ever took the morphine, but, she could have from the Friday after the murders up until the Thursday she was arrested and stopped, which may have caused the vomiting? She may then have started taking it again.

From the Trial, Volume 1, page 328-Dr. Bowen on the stand:

Q. You know when she was arrested?
A. I know the date, but not the day.

Q. Was she not arrested Thursday, the week following, that is a week from the day of the tragedy?
A. I don't remember that.

Q. I ask you about the morphine that you were giving her and on Friday you gave one-eight of a grain, which is the ordinary dose, I understand, mild dose, and on Saturday you doubled it, you gave it, sent it, and she had it on Monday and Tuesday, and how long did she continue to have that?
A. She continued to have that all the time she was in the station house.

Q. After her arrest, was it not?
A. And before.

Q. In other words she had it all the time up to the time of her arrest, the hearing, and while in the station house?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. So that before the arrest, she was one, two, or three days before the private inquest, she was there when she had been given for several days this double dose of morphine?
A. Yes, sir.

Lizzie could have sent her *stash* off with Dr. Bowen. They were closeted in her room at one point, the door locked, and they deferred entrance to the police for a few minutes, or moments.
That might be when Lizzie was giving him her inventory...

Here I go again- telling unsupported stories of Lizzie sick at home a lot before her arrest and not barely even coming downstairs and not seeing her relatives. Dr. Bowen was sent for quite a few times, according to The Boston Globe. At one point he stopped coming! He said he thought she'd be all right.

Well, my last word on the subject is I think the idea that Lizzie was on drugs is ludicrous.

How about a clinical depression?
I talked to a friend today who was born on Lizzie's birthday and she mentioned a theory of Lizzie having a depression.
My friend never had it but thought someone could kill in that state.
I don't know about that but told her I'd offer it up here...

Kat @ Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:00 am wrote:How about a clinical depression?
I talked to a friend today who was born on Lizzie's birthday and she mentioned a theory of Lizzie having a depression.
My friend never had it but thought someone could kill in that state.
I don't know about that but told her I'd offer it up here...

I have a clinically diagnosed form of depression, which type of depression do you refer to? I have been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Even in my most depressive states murder has never crossed my mind. Although you would be surprised what sort of thoughts DO cross my mind. I can only speak from my own experience with it, everyone is different, with differing degrees and features.So what is true for me, would not necessarily be true for someone else. But I have struggled with it since I was young.

I don't know what kind. I don't know much about depression. I thought maybe suicidal thoughts might be more in line with this problem rather than thoughts of murder.
There is a theory that Lizzie's alleged attempt to buy prussic acid was to commit suicide if the murders did not go off as planned- if she was arrested.

It's funny- I just realized this- that those here who think there's no way Lizzie was on drugs may also be some of the same who believe that Lizzie tried to poison the old folks.
Drugs is drugs.
If I believed Lizzie was on drugs, used drugs, thought about drugs, then I think I'd be more likely to believe that she did take the next step to poison.
And the next step to something totally out of that line, by using a bladed weapon, because she was not herself, nor thinking logically.

You can definitely tell if someone is clinically depressed. My mother was diagnosed with manic depression in the 70's, I guess they call it Bipolar now. Anyway, before she was diagnosed, she would have extreme mood swings. She could be in hyper-drive mode where she thought she was Superwoman, and she would stay in this hyper state for weeks, then she would switch to this drained, tired person, and be so depressed she could not get out of bed. I remember she spent 3 months in bed, unable to function. She has been on medication for years now, and everything is under control. She was prescribed Lithium, and thank god for that!

Lizzie certainly could have had a deep depression. Look at Andrea Yates. For all we know the family may have been covering up Lizzie's illness. She could have been talking about the devil talking to her and doing weird things behind closed doors. If she started scaring the family with her crazy thoughts maybe the father and step mother decided to tell her they had to send her away for treatment if she didn't get a grip. Which she did- on the hatchet handle.

I think anything is possible. It all boils down to that we willl never know what kind state she was in, what her state of mind was, nothing. We don't even know who did it!!

Allen @ Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:19 am wrote:Well, my last word on the subject is I think the idea that Lizzie was on drugs is ludicrous.

Far from ludicrous. They were easily and legally available in her day. And her own doctor is known to have prescribed her morphine. The problem is that this is yet another case of speculation. There are lots of possibilities in this case. I prefer theories with solid evidence to support them.

Anything is possible. We really don't know her state of mind. She could have been as sober as a bed bug, or drunk as fish. We just don't know.

WE might as well say that she killed her parents because she was pms-ing and had cramps because it was her time of the month.

Personally, I think she did it regardless of her state of mind.

Allen

It was brave of you to mention your bi-polarness to us. I know that that is a hard thing to live with.

I also have some personal expiereince-MY EX husband was bi-polar/paranoid-delusional/scitzo-effective. That was officially his diagnosis.

The bi-polarness would make him swing into "manic" states. Either he was soooo crazy happy and alive. OR, he was, wayyyyyyyy depressed or angry. The paraniod-delusional part- he was afraid of god and the devil. He had a whole good v's evil personality conflict going on. He was very paraiod the devil was going to get him-revelations/judgement day was gonna happen. HE swore he saw demons.

He swore that he thought I was a demon trying to take him to hell. And that's when he tried to kill me.nearly succeeded to. He definitly was not himself. I looked into his eyes...and I saw nothing.cold ,dark, blank.like no one was in there during those times. He was not himself. Then it would pass and he didn't know what happened.like it was someone else controling him........and he'd cry.

I still talk to him on the phone or mesanger. I havn't seen him in 8 years. He's on alot of medication......he's now a ward of the state......he lives with our good friend who takes care of his affairs. He is only 28 years old.

I think it's very possiable Lizzie had some form of mental illness, it could have been passed down. Her mother had problems.......Sister passed away....from (what was it called?() something with the brain? And her father SURE WAS PARANOID if you ask me.all those damn locks. Maybe she commited the murders in a similar "state".

Alice Borden (the middle sister) died at age two or three of complications from hydrocephalus Nona.

I guess we will never know what happened on that day.

Golaszewski @ Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:34 am wrote:

Allen @ Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:19 am wrote:Well, my last word on the subject is I think the idea that Lizzie was on drugs is ludicrous.

Far from ludicrous. They were easily and legally available in her day. And her own doctor is known to have prescribed her morphine. The problem is that this is yet another case of speculation. There are lots of possibilities in this case. I prefer theories with solid evidence to support them.

That's why I asked about her checkbook and banking records. It could be very revealing.

Lynn

I don't for one minute belive Lizzie was on any drugs. There is NO evidence of that.

But let's go out on the ledge a little further:

Morphine is a derivative of Opium.

Fall River was known at the time to have Chinese opium dens, perhaps one or two even on Second Street.

Lizzie taught a Chinese man.

The Chinese are known to have had tong wars using hatchets!

Maybe he was her source for drugs and hatchets.

Yeah, right.

Angel @ Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:26 am wrote:Lizzie certainly could have had a deep depression. Look at Andrea Yates. For all we know the family may have been covering up Lizzie's illness. She could have been talking about the devil talking to her and doing weird things behind closed doors. If she started scaring the family with her crazy thoughts maybe the father and step mother decided to tell her they had to send her away for treatment if she didn't get a grip. Which she did- on the hatchet handle.

In even the most profound depression, you don't hear voices or have hallucinations. Andrea Yates, poor woman, was suffering from both schizophrenia and post-partum psychosis.

Time for some definitions.

According to the government's mental health dictionary at http://www.mentalhealth.samhsa.gov/reso ... onary.aspx

Depression is a mood disorder characterized by intense feelings of sadness that persist beyond a few weeks. Two neurotransmitters-natural substances that allow brain cells to communicate with one another-are implicated in depression: serotonin and norepinephrine.

    
Schizophrenia is a mental disorder characterized by "positive" and "negative" symptoms. Psychotic, or positive, symptoms include delusions, hallucinations, and disordered thinking (apparent from a person's fragmented, disconnected and sometimes nonsensical speech). Negative symptoms include social withdrawal, extreme apathy, diminished motivation, and blunted emotional expression.

According to the government's health information site for women at http://www.4woman.gov/faq/postpartum.htm

There are three types of PPD women can have after giving birth:


The baby blues happen in many women in the days right after childbirth. A new mother can have sudden mood swings, such as feeling very happy and then feeling very sad. She may cry for no reason and can feel impatient, irritable, restless, anxious, lonely, and sad. The baby blues may last only a few hours or as long as 1 to 2 weeks after delivery. The baby blues do not always require treatment from a health care provider. Often, joining a support group of new moms or talking with other moms helps.

Postpartum depression (PPD) can happen a few days or even months after childbirth. PPD can happen after the birth of any child, not just the first child. A woman can have feelings similar to the baby blues - sadness, despair, anxiety, irritability - but she feels them much more strongly than she would with the baby blues. PPD often keeps a woman from doing the things she needs to do every day. When a woman's ability to function is affected, this is a sure sign that she needs to see her health care provider right away. If a woman does not get treatment for PPD, symptoms can get worse and last for as long as 1 year. While PPD is a serious condition, it can be treated with medication and counseling.

Postpartum psychosis is a very serious mental illness that can affect new mothers. This illness can happen quickly, often within the first 3 months after childbirth. Women can lose touch with reality, often having auditory hallucinations (hearing things that aren't actually happening, like a person talking) and delusions (seeing things differently from what they are). Visual hallucinations (seeing things that aren't there) are less common. Other symptoms include insomnia (not being able to sleep), feeling agitated (unsettled) and angry, and strange feelings and behaviors. Women who have postpartum psychosis need treatment right away and almost always need medication. Sometimes women are put into the hospital because they are at risk for hurting themselves or someone else.

A good summary of information on the Yates case from a psychological point of view: http://www.psychohelp.at/h/college/abno ... sion.shtml

Lynn

We don't know that Lizzie was not schizophrenic.

Or maybe her parents were dealing with a daughter who had intermittent explosive disorder.

The point I was trying to make was that, for whatever reason or diagnosis, they felt she was getting harder to handle and became frightened for their own safety (remember Andrew asking Emma to let him know where she was, so, if he needed her she would be able to be reached when she went on her visit). They might have been planning to send her away and she couldn't bear the threat of that.

"That's why I asked about her checkbook and banking records. It could be very revealing.

Lynn
__

Lizzie showed her bankbook to Mrs. Brigham, according to Jenning's notes in the book Proceedings, chapter called "The Hip-bath Collection."

"l.  B. Brigham Mrs. George--After murder L. showed her her money and bank book and said 'Why should I do it?' "
........

We have pages from a stock divedend book which pops up on E-bay occasionally which shows the amount of Emma and Lizzie's dividends paid to them.
........

We know Andrew gave the girls the Ferry Street property and they began collecting rents in 1887.
.......

She got an allowance as well.
.......

We know somewhat of her bank balance from Emma & Mr.E. Cook at trial, I believe, but it seems to include her share of the proceeds of the girls selling the house back to Andrew recently.

Emma at trial, 1529:

Q. Do you know what property Miss Lizzie Borden had at the time of the murder?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Will you produce the evidences of it, if you have them with you?
A. (Various vouchers produced)
.... ....

MR. JENNINGS. Deposit, subject to check, of $170 in B. M. C. Durfee Safe Deposit and Trust Company. Deposit, subject to check, of $2000 in the Massasoit National Bank, Fall River. Deposit in the Union Savings Bank, Fall River, $500. A deposit of $141 in the Fall River Five Cents Savings Bank. Two shares of the Fall River National Bank, April 3, 1883. Four shares of Merchants' Manufacturing Company stock, date of certificate March 8, 1880. Five shares of Merchants' Manufacturing Company stock, date of certificate December 22, 1881."

Letter supplementing Cook's testimony at trial, where he had said he didn't know of Lizzie having any deposit at "The Trust Company":

Page 500

"MR. KNOWLTON. .....
'First National Bank,

'Fall River, Mass. June 7th, 1893

'Hon. H. M. Knowlton,

'New Bedford, Mass.


'Dear Sir: ---

'I hasten to correct a statement made by me in Court this morning.

I was asked if Miss Lizzie A. Borden had any money on deposit in the 'Trust Co.', to which I replied, I did not think she had; but I find upon consulting Mr. Arthur W. Allen, Treas. of the B.M.C. Durfee Safe Deposit and Trust Co., that she had an account in said 'Trust Co.' Aug. 4th, 1892, and that her balance at close of business to-day'---meaning that day, I presume,---'is $172.75.

'Should you desire my presence in Court to testify to the same, will come over.

'Very respectively yours,

'Everett M. Cook

'Witness:
'Arthur W. Allen' "

I don't for one minute belive Lizzie was on any drugs. There is NO evidence of that.

But let's go out on the ledge a little further:

Morphine is a derivative of Opium.

Fall River was known at the time to have Chinese opium dens, perhaps one or two even on Second Street.

Lizzie taught a Chinese man.

The Chinese are known to have had tong wars using hatchets!

Maybe he was her source for drugs and hatchets.

Yeah, right.

This is poor logic. There is also no particularly good evidence that Lizzie didn't use drugs. Not only were opiates cheaply and legally available, we know for a fact that her doctor prescribed for Lizzie while in jail morphine apparently as a psychotropic drug. There is nothing that indicates that Lizzie was suffering from a painful disease. Thus either her doctor prescribed it to her:

#1) For its desirable mental effects. A likely reason for her doctor to prescribe it for this reason is that Lizzie was already familiar with the mental effects of opiates, and based on her experience told her doctor that she found it effective as a mind altering drug. OR:

#2) Because her doctor knew Lizzie had an opiate jones, and prescribed morphine so she wouldn't go through withdrawal.

At best the actual evidence points to it being equally likely that Lizzie was familiar with using opiates recreationally as she never used opiates recreationally. As such, I neither believe nor disbelieve that Lizzie was on drugs.

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence!"
--Carl Sagan, Astronomer

Rephrased, the absence of proof that Lizzie didn't use drugs recreationally isn't proof that she didn't use drugs recreationally.

That's why I asked about her checkbook and banking records. It could be very revealing.

Possibly, but not particularly likely. It could be revealing if it indicated that Lizzie was frequently writing checks to a pharmacy. However, back in her day ordinary retail transactions usually were in cash. As such, if Lizzie was buying opiates for recreational use, the most likely scenario if Lizzie was using drugs recreationally is that she would go to the bank, withdraw cash from her checking account, and use that cash to buy drugs from the pharmacy. Things were much different back then than today. Just this week, I used my credit card to buy some cheeseburgers at McDonalds, and also to buy liquor at the local convenience store. Someone with access to my credit card purchase record might be able to figure out quite a bit about my real life habits. However, even today these records wouldn't be particular probative in many cases. While if you had access to my credit card transactions you could know for sure I ate at McDonalds, there would be no evidence that I had bought liquor. At that same convenience store I frequently purchase milk, bread, and Pepsi. All my credit card records would show is that in the last week I bought things at that conveniece store which totalled a certain amount.

I think Harry was referring obliquely to a letter in the LBQ which theorized about Chinamen, Hatchets and Tong Wars. It put forth this same theory, except I think it left out the drugs. It's more tongue-in-cheek than "poor logic" which I admit I wouldn't say to anyone.

We don't know that Lizzie was not schizophrenic.

Or maybe her parents were dealing with a daughter who had intermittent explosive disorder.

The point I was trying to make was that, for whatever reason or diagnosis, they felt she was getting harder to handle and became frightened for their own safety (remember Andrew asking Emma to let him know where she was, so, if he needed her she would be able to be reached when she went on her visit). They might have been planning to send her away and she couldn't bear the threat of that.

Interesting notion. Back then, it was much easier for parents to "send away" a child. Even today it isn't that hard.

BTW: I tried to edit my improper spelling earlier (D-i-v-i-d-e-n-d) but got an "Error" page. Of course I was in error!
It didn't allow my edit! Oh My!

I have never known our Harry to use 'poor logic'. He is one of the most learned and astute members of this forum.


Tracy...

I think Harry was referring obliquely to a letter in the LBQ which theorized about Chinamen, Hatchets and Tong Wars. It put forth this same theory, except I think it left out the drugs. It's more tongue-in-cheek than "poor logic" which I admit I wouldn't say to anyone.

I have a college degree in philosophy. I damn well expect that people will pick apart my posts for logic errors. I take no insult if someone questions the logic of my posts. In fact, I encourage such as if I make a logic error, pointing out will save me future embarassment.

Yippee, he has a college degree.

I'm so impressed.

A degree in philosophy...a B.S. ?


Tracy..

have never known our Harry to use 'poor logic'. He is one of the most learned and astute members of this forum.

Harry is infallible? Please point out any errors of logic that I make.

It's more of an etiquette thing than anything personal to do with you, Mr. G.