Re: FW: [40Whacks] The Cases That Haunt Us Part 2
- Hi Patsy:Check the inquest statements. Lizzie said all she told Bridget was that her father was hurt. Again, we have Bridget saying Lizzie told her her father was dead; her father was hurt; her father had been killed, then at the trial, claimed Lizzie told her that her father was dead, but it didn't matter as he was dead anyway.Like Bridget, Abby could not have come in and gone upstairs without Lizzie seeing her. What Lizzie had heard was the front door being opened and closed. Bridget verified that this happened while she was out back talking to the Kelly maid across the fence. The Kelly maid said that conversation occurred shortly before Mr. Borden came home.Muriel----- Original Message -----Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 4:00 PMSubject: Re: FW: [40Whacks] The Cases That Haunt Us Part 2HI Muriel,If Lizzie did not think her father was actually dead, then why did she tell Bridget to come downstairs because "Someone has come in and killed father"?I was referring to the back bedroom right down the stairs from the kitchen where Lizzie yelled up.Patsy
Muriel Arnold <muriella@...> wrote:Hi Patsy
I haven't the faintest idea of just when it first came out that Lizzie discussed the weather first before asking Mrs. Churchill to come over.Lizzie was not concerned about Abby when she found her father. She didn't actually know he was dead. Her immediate concern was to get him a doctor as quickly as possible, thus she yelled for Bridget to come down and go get Dr. Bowen. Tell me something. What good would it have done to yell for Abby? She could have done nothing whatsoever.Personally, I believe she didn't know who had come in the front door. Bridget, out in the back yard, also had claimed to hear the front door open and close, but had paid no attention to it. Had Lizzie been thinking straight, she would have wondered why, when her father came home, he rang the bell. Bridget let him in. Lizzie should have wondered what the hell was Bridget doing at the front of the house? How had she managed to come in the back way, as Bridget claimed she had, pass her unnoticed and let her father in? Lizzie had spent most of the morning in the kitchen. There was no way Bridget could have gotten to the front of the house without going by Lizzie.Patsy, time and time again, Bridget would say this or that happened and Lizzie was nowhere around. She told reporters that all had gotten sick after dinner Wednesday and threw up. This Bridget later said Lizzie disappeared after breakfast and did not look unwell that day.Bridget did whatever she wanted with Lizzie. What I can't believe was Bridget's claiming Lizzie laughed upstairs while she struggled to unlock the door to let Mr. Borden in. Yet on August 4th or 5th, Bridget told reporters she let Mr. Borden in, left him to re-lock the front door, attended to one or two other matters and went up to her room, leaving Lizzie ironing in the kitchen.The hardest part, when following Bridget's versions of events, is figuring out when she is telling the truth. You have to compare them, whenever possible, to Lizzie's side of the story, and sure enough, when Bridget agreed, you can assume that that was what happened, only Bridget put her own ending to it. And, if they didn't like it, she changed it over and over again; she aimed to please.There seems to be a little confusion as to why Lizzie, who thought she'd heard Mrs. Borden come, didn't yell for her to come down. Are you referring to the front bedroom, or Mrs. Borden's bedroom at the back of the house?Even Bridget recalled hearing the front door open and close, so it was the front door which was involved.Before I forget. Don't what I was thinking of, but Smith's drugstore is at the corner of Columbia and South Main. But it definitely is not around the corner from Lizzie Borden's house.Muriel----- Original Message -----Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 11:51 AMSubject: Re: FW: [40Whacks] The Cases That Haunt Us Part 2Dear Muriel,To me it just seems irrelevant whether Lizzie called up once or twice. This is what bothers me. Since Lizzie claimed that she thought she heard Mrs. Borden come in (assuming that she is totally innocent) why didn't she yell for her??? Her bedroom was right at the top of the stairs (I've slept there!!!), and she would have been down in nanoseconds. Instead she calls for Bridget who is two floors away! If we follow this thought then when Mrs. Churchill came over, why didn't Lizzie tell her that she had been calling for Mrs. Borden and no one responded. Why wasn't she frantic or upset that Mrs. Borden didn't answer her. If I came upon my father hacked to death, and I couldn't get a response from my stepmother, let me tell you, I would have run outside and stayed out there in case the murderer was still in the house.Instead Lizzie DISCUSSES THE WEATHER with Mrs. Churchill first, and then asks her to come over. Yikes.I think her mind was going a million miles an hiour trying to make sure that she didn't trip herself up. After reading the book "Small Sacrifices" about Diane Downs and watching the Scott Peterson case, I can just see Lizzie's flat affect. I think she justified the killings in her mind as being deserved.Patsy
Muriel Arnold <muriella@...> wrote:Hi Patsy:I'll make only one remark about your, "...if Lizzie tried to implicate Bridget, then Bridget would know Lizzie was guilty..."Patsy, Lizzie never tried to implicate Bridget for the simple reason Lizzie thought Bridget had gone upstairs, and when she called up to her (Bridget), Bridget came down those back stairs. Okay. Now, let's look at Bridget:\First she said Lizzie had to call up to her once or twice before she heard her because her bedroom door was closed. This she changed to having come right down when Lizzie called her. She also was responsible for claiming the Portuguese who worked for the Bordens might have done it. Is it any wonder that the reporters accused her of having an angelic face, telling the supposedly telling the unvarnished truth, while at the same time having such a faulty memory.Have a great dayMuriel----- Original Message -----Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 2:23 PMSubject: Re: FW: [40Whacks] The Cases That Haunt Us Part 2Jeffrey Tesch <jtesch@...>
Great points one and all.
I would like to add just a bit more to what I said about Bridget. As I stated if Lizzie tried to implicate Bridget, then Bridget would know Lizzie was guilty. Otherwise in Bridget's mind why would Lizzie lie? (simply to cast suspicion onto Bridget and away from herself)'
Bridget was afraid to stay in the house with a maniac "loose". I do not think that Bridget thought that the maniac was Lizzie at the time of the murders. I do not think that Lizzie directly asked Bridget to lie about anything. I think could have inferred to Bridget that if she said anything negative about her or her relationship with her father/mother that it would not look good for her which would be a shame considering that she was innocent.
However, I think that as Bridget matured and she remembered that day she might have thought to herself that she had been manipulated by Lizzie. As time passed, maybe things just didn't seem right. By that point though the trial would have been long over. This led to her near miss deathbed confession. I can hear her start the sentece with "I never gave it much thought at the time, but......." Or, "It has always bothered me that......." It can kind of drive you crazy. If only Bridget had added a small piece to this puzzle.
More Musings on Muriels Meglomania:
pps.101-102 1) Knowlton told the jurors he considered the most likely scenario was that Lizzie killed her hated stepmother, then knowing she could not face her father, she had no choice but to kill him too. WRONG
***RIGHT! This is how it went down. And killing Andrew gave the maniacal intruder theory a boost. If Lizzie only killed Abby she would have been convicted unless Andrew forgave her and fixed it somehow.
Interesting point would Andrew have protected Lizzie? Knowing full well she whacked his wife? You can feel Lizzie weighing this during the bad hour between killings. Dead or Alive which Andrew scenario promotes her self preservation?
For this to be true, Lizzie could not have gone to the barn, yet everything Lizzie claimed she saw there, the police found there. Also, had Lizzie been guilty, she would have gone shopping and forced Bridget to discover the bodies.
***Lizzie went to the barn after killing Andrew she needed a quick time out Your statement about forcing Bridget to discover the bodies confirms again that you really dont understand MURDER.
p.107 Bridget killled Abby while Lizzie was in the cellar. But, Andrew was in the sitting room. He must have heard something. He would have told the cops that Abby and Bridget had been upstairs around 9:00.
***While busy moving furniture/whacking Abby in the Guest Room, Bridget could not keep track of Andrew and Lizzies movements. For all she knew they both heard something.
I love the way you have Bridget going down the front stairs (no blood trail) and out the front door (yet locking it somehow). And she still finds time to joke with the Kellys maid while plotting another murder.
Consider that lack of a blood trail. It points right a Lizzie all she had to do was get to her room plenty of time to clean up.
p. 109 1) Author Arnold Brown has William Borden being Andrew's illegitimate son doing the killing, so Lizzie, Emma, Uncle John, Dr. Bowen and Jennings either paid William off, threatened him, or both: COME ON NOW.
Does that make any sense?
***Its as senseless as your theory that Bridget Sullivan became the most cunningly successful rage killer in history.
2) Emma was not the kind of outgoing woman with high social expectation that Lizzie was: WRONG
I claim that neither Emma nor Lizzie were much interested in obtaining high social status.
3) Lizzie was willful and stubborn and liked to be noticed. WRONG
I hold that Lizzie was a loner and cared little if she was noticed or not.
***Confirms my contention that you dont know jack about Lizzie Borden
p.110 1) Lizzie envied her rich cousins and felt she could not invite young men who lived on the Hill to come calling on her in her embarrassing home. WRONG
If such was the case, Lizzie would have killed her parents in 1887, when she was in her twenties.
***Confirms my contention that youre clueless about the psychology of rage killing
p. 112 After discovering her father's body, Lizzie did not leave the house. Mrs. Churchill reported no expression of fear for their immediate safety. Lizzie was just standing there at the side door. SO WHAT?
Lizzie could have fled should a killer appear. She'd sent Bridget for Dr. Bowen, no doubt hoping her father was still alive.
***no doubt hoping her father was still alive? Ludicrous!
p.318 Douglas used to stress it was absolutely critical to look closely at what was going on in and around the victim's family in the days or weeks before the crime. YET:
Douglas found no precipitating factor in the Jon Benet murder. Well, I found none in the Borden murders either. I claim that had Mrs. Borden postponed the window washing, ther would have been no murder.
***No factors? How about Andrew killing the pigeons and Lizzies closed door meeting with Detective Shaw in May? Or Andrews generous buy-back of the Ferry Street house in July? A daughter leaving her friends at the shore and bunking in a rooming house Abby scurrying to the Doctor fearing shed been poisoned Andrew blabbing to an associate about trouble at
home Seedy looking John Morse arriving unexpectedly Lizzie trying murder on for size during her primal therapy session with Alice. A watchful, sullen daughter coming home and not stepping in to greet her uncle.
Youre right Muriel - there was nothing going on
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!