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

Re: [40Whacks] Double Jeopardy

Expand Messages
  • Patricia Stephenson
    Hi JT, I never thought much about the fact that Lizzie was only tried for one of the murders. It seems to me that Knowlton never had enough new evidence to
    Message 1 of 2 , Jan 3, 2005
      Hi JT,
      I never thought much about the fact that Lizzie was only tried for one of the murders. It seems to me that Knowlton never had enough new evidence to consider another trial.   I never considered that there were two murderers, and evidently that theory was dismissed quickly.  However, it is interesting to chew on for a minute.  Let's say that Lizzie killed Abby because of course that would probably bring her the most satisfaction, and give her a longer time to clean herself up.  Then she allowed her accomplice to enter and kill Andrew.  
      Did you see the show this past week (it was a repeat) of Detective Tom Lange (from O.J.fame).  It was interesting when they compared the axe thought to be used by Lizzie to the torn scarf that Abby wore, and it seemed to be a perfect fit.
      They also brought up the idea that Lizzie might have been a victim of incest.  That would surely explain the reason for murder although I think that money would be enough.  They also showed a scenerio that had Bridget as an accomplice after the fact. 
      There is nothing new here, but worth looking into.
      Jeffrey Tesch <jtesch@...> wrote:

      I was perusing the November 20th, 1899 edition of the Boston Evening News and ran across an interesting Lizzie item.


      Seems our girl was being shadowed by Pinkerton detectives on suspicion that she was shop-lifting in Boston.  At least that�s the �rumor that has been widely circulated within the past 24 hours.�  Hmm�


      Another Boston rumor that week was �that new evidence had been found there was a possibility of the reopening of the Borden case.�   Knowlten tried to quash this by citing double jeopardy, �no matter what new evidence might be found.�


      Yet a Boston attorney claimed that Lizzie was only arraigned and tried for the murder of Andrew, and that the indictment for Abby�s murder was dropped after the not guilty verdict. 


      I always thought Lizzie was tried for murdering them both, and the single indictments for each murder were dropped.  Knowlten�s statement right after the acquittal (�an entry should be made in those cases of nol prossed by reason of the verdict in this case�) would seem to confirm this.


      Can anyone clear this up? 


      And chew on this:  What if Lizzie killed Abby but someone else killed Andrew?




      (Last 40 Whacks post of the year � who will have the first in 2005?)  


      Do you Yahoo!?
      Send a seasonal email greeting and help others. Do good.

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.