Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [40Whacks] Even More Bundy

Expand Messages
  • Jeffrey Tesch
    Muriel s theory: Kind of hard to explain, but here goes. The murder of Mrs. Borden was unpremidatated. Bridget had cooked breakfast, did the dishes, had a
    Message 1 of 22 , Nov 11, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Muriel's theory:

      Kind of hard to explain, but here goes. The murder of Mrs. Borden was
      unpremidatated. Bridget had cooked breakfast, did the dishes, had a
      hangover and was queasy to her stomach. She heard Mrs. Borden tell
      Lizzie
      she was going to buy meat for dinner (lunch down here), and by the time
      she
      finished doing the windows, she would have to start cooking dinner.
      All Bridget was asking of Mrs. Borden was to agree to postpone the
      window
      washing, but Mrs. Borden refused. That was the straw which broke the
      camel's back so to speak.
      Benjamin Buffinton, on the 9th of September, said Mrs. Borden's murder
      had
      not been premidatated, and Mr. Borden's was the removal of somebody out
      of
      the way.

      ***Why is does Buffinton's opinion carry more weight than Fleet, Medley,
      or Harrington, cops who actually testified at trial? But if he was
      right, it supports the fact that Lizzie killed Abby as a long simmering
      rage erupted and killed Andrew to 1) inherit money 2) create illusion of
      roaming maniac, 3)remove guilt of him knowing she killed Abby (see
      Lincoln - Lizzie knew he wouldn't protect her as during daylight robbery
      investigation.***

      According to my findings, it told me Mr. Borden was still in the sitting
      room when Bridget killed Mrs. Borden. Mrs. Borden's digestion had
      stopped two hours after eating, (and Morse said they
      ate at 7:00), Andrew would have known that Bridget and Mrs. Borden were
      both
      upstairs around 9:00. Bridget had no choice but to kill him when he
      came
      home and took his usual morning nap (Bridget claimed he did that) before
      dinner.
      Had Mrs. Borden agreed to postpone the windows washing, there would have
      been no murders.

      ***If no one else will say it I will: This Theory Is
      Ludicrous!!!
      (Nothing personal, Muriel, but have you ever been in the house itself?)
      This dog don't hunt...

      It reminds me of an article I read claiming Dr. Bowen was the killer
      because supposedly no one saw him enter the house - therefore he was in
      there all along killing Abby and Andrew, and popped out of hiding to
      examine Andrew!

      There's a book out that claims JFK was killed by an errant secret
      service gunshot. Another book claims Jack the Ripper was the Duke of
      Clarence. The list goes on and on. But manipulating the facts to fit a
      preconceived theory doesn't make it so...

      JT



      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Original Message
      > Patsy751@...
      > To: 40Whacks@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 4:38 PM
      > Subject: Re: [40Whacks] Even More Bundy
      > I feel it would be cowardly not to weigh in on the
      > JT/Muriel discussion because I really enjoy Muriel's
      > enthusiasm if not her theory. In order to accept the
      > window washing fiasco, I would have to envision
      > Bridget hunting for an axe, climbing those stairs, and
      > hacking Mrs. Borden beyond the beyond. It just seems
      > to me that she could have become fed up, and tendered
      > her resignation. It is also harder to believe (as a
      > motive) considering the scope of her duties in the
      > house which did not seem all that overwhelming to me.
      > It seems to me that everyone in that household chipped
      > in to keeping the house. I don't find it all that
      > surprising that Bridget would become frightened that
      > she was about to be arrested. Considering the times
      > (no Irish no apply ), she probably figured that she
      > might be under suspicion because of her station in
      > life, the fact that she didn't see a stranger in or
      > around the house during the window washing, and that
      > maybe even she couldn't imagine a daughter killing her
      > parents.
      > Patsy
      >
      >
      >
      > __________________________________________________
      > Do you Yahoo!?
      > U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
      > http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
      >
      > ---WHODUNIT???---
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >


      ---WHODUNIT???---

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • PatriciaLu@aol.com
      In a message dated 11/11/2002 10:19:17 PM Eastern Standard Time,
      Message 2 of 22 , Nov 11, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 11/11/2002 10:19:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, jtesch@... writes:


        Another book claims Jack the Ripper was the Duke of
        Clarence.


      • PatriciaLu@aol.com
        In a message dated 11/11/2002 10:19:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, ... Just as an aside, Patricia Cornwell has an excerpt from her about-to-be-released book on
        Message 3 of 22 , Nov 11, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 11/11/2002 10:19:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, jtesch@... writes:


          Another book claims Jack the Ripper was the Duke of
          Clarence.


          Just as an aside, Patricia Cornwell has an excerpt from her about-to-be-released book on how she believes she solved the Ripper murders in this month's Vanity Fair. I'd seen her on one of the Dateline-type shows a while back talking about her theory, and it's interesting.

          Pat
        • Muriel Arnold
          Hi J.T. Sorry, but I did not say Bridget told Mrs. Churchill about the note first. I said that Lizzie was told by Mrs. Borden about the note in the dining
          Message 4 of 22 , Nov 11, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi J.T.
            Sorry, but I did not say Bridget told Mrs. Churchill about the note first.  I said that Lizzie was told by Mrs. Borden about the note in the dining room.  Mrs. Churchill said Bridget told her that Mrs. Borden told her, Bridget, about the note in the sitting room and hurried off in answer to it.
             
            According to Lizzie's inquest testimony, she did not know where her mother went, as she, Lizzie, left her mother in the dining room.  Bridget also told reporters on the 9th of September that Mrs. Borden had received a note shortly before nine.  And, seeing how Lizzie, on entering the kitchen, saw Bridget about to fill a pail of water to wash the windows because Mrs. Borden wanted her to.  Conclusion:
            Bridget was told to wash the windows shortly after 7:00, while Mr. and Mrs. Borden were at the breakfast table and not at 9:00 like Bridget tried to get everybody to believe.
             
            Lizzie did not lie about the contents of the note, because Bridget said the same thing.  Bridget was not repeating what Lizzie "told" her.  Had that been the case, Lizzie would not have told Bridget what her mother did after mentioning the note.
             
            Lizzie changing her story five times concerning her trip to the barn:
            She told Dr. Bowen and Mrs. Churchill, the first ones there, that she was gone from the house not more than five minutes.
             
            Her conflicting testimony later on could very well have been caused by Bridget.  Lizzie was not deaf.  It was Bridget who claimed Mr. Borden came home at 10:40, changed it to 10:45, or between 10:45 and 10:50, and Lizzie sounded the alarm at 11:10.  Lizzie was trying to account for all those extra minutes Bridget threw into the deal.
             
            What about Bridget?  Lizzie said Bridget let her father in, came into the kitchen, told her he had forgotten his keys and went up to her room.  She joined her father in the sitting room, helped him changed coats.  That took took two to three minutes and went directly to the barn.  Mr. Borden was seen entering his home at 10:52.
             
            10:52, add Lizzie's two to three minutes, and you have Lizzie going to the barn at 10:55, was there about five minutes,  returned to the house, and found her father.  The time would now be 11:00.
             
            NOW FOR BRIDGET AND WHAT SHE DID BETWEEN 10:55 AND 11:00
             
            1.She went upstairs to finish her bedroom windows [two of them], begun the day before.  The noise she made raising and lowering her windows prevented her from hearing Mr. Borden being killed.  Yeah, right.
             
            2.  After Mr. Borden returned home, she cleaned the dining room and went up to her bedroom at 10:50.
             
            3.  The "Providence Journal" had it that Bridget let Mr. Borden in, attended to one or two other matters in the kitchen and then went upstairs to her room.
             
            4.  Bridget told another reporter that when Mr. Borden came home, Lizzie ordered her upstairs.  She went up and sat on her window seat, looking into the back yard and saw no one.
             
            5.  Bridget claimed she talked down to a friend on the sidewalk.  [If true, then she could not have seen what was going on in the back yard.]
             
            6.  Bridget told reporters that she let Mr. Borden in, attended to one or two other matters and went up to her room.
             
            7.  She let Mr. Borden in and went upstairs to lie down.  Her back ached.
             
            8.  Bridget said Mr. Borden returned home.  She went upstairs and threw herself on the bed.  In less than five minutes, Lizzie called for her to come down.  [August 12]
             
            9.  Bridget had told Benjamin Buffinton that she heard the City Hall clock strike 11:00 just before Lizzie called her downstairs.
             
            10.  Bridget dropped all of the above and settled for being upstairs for some three to four minutes when she heard the City Hall clock strike 11:00.
             
            11:  One last thing.  Bridget stated she spoke to Mr. Borden about five minutes before Lizzie sounded the alarm.  She never repeated that statement. 
             
            Okay JT, Lizzie told different stories about her trip to the barn.  God knows how many times she was asked questions over and over again. 
             
            Look at Miss Russell.  At the hearing, she said she couldn't remember much of that day, as it was all confusion.   And yet, it was not her who found her father dead after being gone from the house about five minutes and half an hour later find that her stepmother had also been killed. 
             
            In all the murder cases you investigated, I bet you never once came across one where the murderer, so damn sure of himself, sounded the alarm as quickly as Lizzie did.  Dr. Dolan testified that it had taken two to three minutes to kill Mr. Borden.  According to Bridget, she spoke to Mr. Borden five minutes before Lizzie sounded the alarm.  So, if it is as you claim, Lizzie sure was one smart cool cookie.
            Muriel
             
             
             
            Muriel Arnold
            Author of  Lizzie Borden Hands of Time
            For more information
            muriela@...
            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:42 PM
            Subject: RE: [40Whacks] Even More Bundy

             

             

            Muriel wrote:

             If I remember correctly, Radin had Lizzie calling Bridget downstairs at 11:10.  My research shows Lizzie sounded the alarm at 11:00 and at 11:10,  Dr. Bowen entered the Borden house.

             

                        ***SO WHAT!!!!  Why do you mention this constantly?  Perhaps your research was flawed…  Case in point:  you insist that Bridget told Mrs. Churchill about the note first, ignoring Moody’s re-direct that FIRMLY established Lizzie as the source of the “sick note” story.  Perhaps Gov. Robinson duped you like he did the jury – read Professor Wigmore’s scathing rebuke of Robinson regarding this matter in the American Law Review.

                        Lizzie lied about the contents of the note.

             

            As for Victoria Lincoln, you can have her.  She formed a theory and included only that which suited her purpose.

             

                        ***Isn’t that what you did with your book?  Talk about irony!  Bridget’s “lies” about whether Andrew rang the doorbell or not are incriminating, yet Lizzie changing her story five times when asked her whereabouts during Andrew’s murder means nothing to you.  To dissect her evolving alibi is to see two completely different versions of her trip to the barn.

             

            JT

                        

             

             

             

            Author of  Lizzie Borden Hands of Time
            For more information
            muriela@...

            ----- Original Message -----

            Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 9:56 PM

            Subject: RE: [40Whacks] Even More Bundy

             

             

             

            Muriel wrote:

            What I was saying was that this window washing was the straw that broke the camel's back.  I say this was not the first time that Mrs. Borden got Bridget mad about something.

             

                     ***Bridget was quoted as saying she would have left the Borden’s and found other employment but she couldn’t leave Mrs. Borden.  Abby’s servants always spoke well of her.

                        I think everyone will agree that Lizzie was the one who kept getting mad about something Mrs. Borden did.

             

            How do we know whether Andrew Borden gave Lizzie and Emma a bunch of them that he didn't use? 

             

                     ***Read your Rebello.  The tickets were numbered.  Only “Mrs. Borden’s room” was ransacked by a thief who entered a locked house and avoided Lizzie, Emma, and Bridget.  Andrew knew who did it…  

             

            Okay J.T., I won't argue with you.  You are determined Lizzie was guilty. 

             

                     ***I’m not determined – I KNOW she did it.  I’ve studied thousands of cases and there’s nothing complex about this one.  Of course Lizzie did it!  That’s the beauty of it…

             

                       Is there even one other person in this group who buys into Muriel’s Radin rehash theory? 

             

            I for one grow weary of “goose-stepping” to the shameless promotion of your book within this group.  And you have the nerve to repeatedly denigrate a fine author like Victoria Lincoln, who wrote the best work on this case (epilepsy aside) which happened to win the “Edgar Allen Poe Best Fact Crime Book Award” from Mystery Writer’s of America in 1967.  She got inside Lizzie’s head so deep I still get chills when reading it.

             

            I’ll be leaving the group again soon, because there are real mystery’s out there to solve.  Before I go, I’d like to hear others weigh in on Muriel’s “Bridget did it because she was ticked off” theory.

             

            JT

             

                    

             

            Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 7:56 PM

            Subject: RE: [40Whacks] Even More Bundy

             

             

                  Muriel wrote:

            Hi J.T.

            I agree with you that Ted Bundy most likely killed Ann Marie Burr.

             

                  ***I have not revealed my own conclusion about this yet, so you can’t agree with me.

             

            Bridget Sullivan was as good a liar as Bundy but, she did not start killing at an early age.  She was ticked off at Mrs. Borden's refusal to postpone the window washing.

             

                  ***no one hacks their employer’s head 19 times with an axe because they’re ticked off about an unpleasant chore.  Abby was killed by someone who had evolved years of animosity into a massive orgasm of hate.  WE’RE TALKING 19 BLOWS TO THE HEAD HERE PEOPLE!   It was pure repressed venom unleashed.  Don’t even bother to dispute this, Muriel.  Bridget’s anger would have subsided with the first blow.

                        

                       

                  She agrees with me that Leonard Rebello's book, "Lizzie Borden Past and Present" is the best sourcebook you can lay your hands on.

             

                  ***I agree.  Rebello’s book is the best.  On page 36 we learn that Lizzie gave the horse car tickets she stole during the daylight robbery to several persons who fingered her as the giver when accosted by police after presenting the tickets.  This is why Andrew requested the investigation be dropped.  The “Daylight Robbery” of 1891 was the dry run for the murders, and again the prime target was Abby.  Only this time Lizzie knew Andrew wouldn’t protect her.

             

            J.T.  It is not unusual for serial killers to start early.  14 is the ripe age for them to start.

             

                  ***In a recent study of 200 serial killers only Peter Kuerten (1930 Germany) and Edmund Kemper (1973 California) were found to have murdered before age 14.  But by age 14 all were found to share three characteristics:

            1)       chronic bedwetting; 2) compulsive setting of fires; 3) torture of dogs and cats.

             

                 Muriel, I appreciate your information on Bundy, but I have all 5 books about him, including “The Phantom Prince”, written by the woman who lived with him while he was murdering college coeds. 

             

            JT

             

             

             

             



            ---WHODUNIT???---

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

             


            ---WHODUNIT???---

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


            ---WHODUNIT???---

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

             


            ---WHODUNIT???---

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


            ---WHODUNIT???---

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



            ---WHODUNIT???---

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
          • Jeffrey Tesch
            Pat: I saw the show as well. Her theory is that Impressionist painter Walter Sickert was one half of a Jack the Ripper team with Queen s physician William
            Message 5 of 22 , Nov 12, 2002
            • 0 Attachment

              Pat:

               

              I saw the show as well.  Her theory is that Impressionist painter Walter Sickert was one half of a Jack the Ripper team with Queen’s physician William Gull.  She spent beaucoup bucks buying his paintings and checking them for DNA.

               

              I’ve read the book, Steven Knight’s “Final Solution”.  It’s a wild theory, proving my point that when it comes to unsolved crime, anyone can write a convincing book proving any theory…

               

              JT

               

              -----Original Message-----
              From: PatriciaLu@... [mailto:PatriciaLu@...]
              Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 9:59 PM
              To: 40Whacks@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [40Whacks] Even More Bundy

               

              In a message dated 11/11/2002 10:19:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, jtesch@... writes:



              Another book claims Jack the Ripper was the Duke of
              Clarence.



              Just as an aside, Patricia Cornwell has an excerpt from her about-to-be-released book on how she believes she solved the Ripper murders in this month's Vanity Fair. I'd seen her on one of the Dateline-type shows a while back talking about her theory, and it's interesting.

              Pat

              ---WHODUNIT???---

              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

            • Muriel Arnold
              Hi JT: Seeing you apologized for irritating me, guess it s my turn to return the favor and get you and others irrited also. Here goes: JT wrote ....proving
              Message 6 of 22 , Nov 12, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi JT:
                Seeing you apologized for irritating me, guess it's my turn to return the favor and get you and others irrited also.  Here goes:
                JT wrote "....proving my point that when it comes to unsolved crime, anyone can write a convincing book proving any theory..."  Like Victoria Lincoln?
                Have a great day.
                Muriel
                 
                 
                Muriel Arnold
                 
                Author of  Lizzie Borden Hands of Time
                For more information
                muriela@...
                ----- Original Message -----
                Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 7:40 PM
                Subject: RE: [40Whacks] Even More Bundy

                Pat:

                 

                I saw the show as well.  Her theory is that Impressionist painter Walter Sickert was one half of a Jack the Ripper team with Queen’s physician William Gull.  She spent beaucoup bucks buying his paintings and checking them for DNA.

                 

                I’ve read the book, Steven Knight’s “Final Solution”.  It’s a wild theory, proving my point that when it comes to unsolved crime, anyone can write a convincing book proving any theory…

                 

                JT

                 

                -----Original Message-----
                From: PatriciaLu@... [mailto:PatriciaLu@...]
                Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 9:59 PM
                To: 40Whacks@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [40Whacks] Even More Bundy

                 

                In a message dated 11/11/2002 10:19:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, jtesch@... writes:



                Another book claims Jack the Ripper was the Duke of
                Clarence.



                Just as an aside, Patricia Cornwell has an excerpt from her about-to-be-released book on how she believes she solved the Ripper murders in this month's Vanity Fair. I'd seen her on one of the Dateline-type shows a while back talking about her theory, and it's interesting.

                Pat

                ---WHODUNIT???---

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                ---WHODUNIT???---

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
              • Autumn
                Yes, I saw her on one of those shows too a while back and tonight my local news had a segment about her theory. I am not sure what to think. I have never
                Message 7 of 22 , Nov 12, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Yes, I saw her on one of those shows too a while back
                  and tonight my local news had a segment about her
                  theory. I am not sure what to think. I have never
                  really gotten into the ripper case because the suspect
                  list is just about endless and one theory is just
                  about as good as another. It is all fascinating
                  though.

                  Autumn


                  --- Jeffrey Tesch <jtesch@...> wrote:
                  > Pat:
                  >
                  > I saw the show as well. Her theory is that
                  > Impressionist painter Walter
                  > Sickert was one half of a Jack the Ripper team with
                  > Queen's physician
                  > William Gull. She spent beaucoup bucks buying his
                  > paintings and
                  > checking them for DNA.
                  >
                  > I've read the book, Steven Knight's "Final
                  > Solution". It's a wild
                  > theory, proving my point that when it comes to
                  > unsolved crime, anyone
                  > can write a convincing book proving any theory.
                  >
                  > JT
                  >
                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: PatriciaLu@... [mailto:PatriciaLu@...]
                  >
                  > Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 9:59 PM
                  > To: 40Whacks@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: Re: [40Whacks] Even More Bundy
                  >
                  > In a message dated 11/11/2002 10:19:17 PM Eastern
                  > Standard Time,
                  > jtesch@... writes:
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Another book claims Jack the Ripper was the Duke of
                  > Clarence.
                  >
                  >
                  > Just as an aside, Patricia Cornwell has an excerpt
                  > from her
                  > about-to-be-released book on how she believes she
                  > solved the Ripper
                  > murders in this month's Vanity Fair. I'd seen her on
                  > one of the
                  > Dateline-type shows a while back talking about her
                  > theory, and it's
                  > interesting.
                  >
                  > Pat
                  > ---WHODUNIT???---
                  >
                  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
                  > Terms of Service
                  > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
                  >


                  __________________________________________________
                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
                  http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.