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

RE: [40Whacks] door being slammed

Expand Messages
  • Rev COAL
    ... I don t know where that came from, either...Jeff seems to have come up with that one out of the blue... As I ve stated in other posts, the only
    Message 1 of 11 , Mar 3, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Muriel Arnold wrote:

      >I think some one is mistaken. I never, ever, said anything about a door
      >being slammed in any messenger's face.

      I don't know where that came from, either...Jeff seems to have come up with
      that one out of the blue...

      As I've stated in other posts, the only door-slamming I can think of is
      regarding the argument Lizzie claimed Andrew had a few weeks before the
      murders with a man who wanted to rent some property from Andrew for some
      purpose that Andrew found objectionable.

      There was no argument by anyone with anyone at the front door the morning of
      the murders, definitely no accounts of the door being slammed. The only
      accounts given by witnesses out on the street were of seeing a mysterious
      someone at the Borden's front door, some saying they just saw the person
      knocking on the door, some actually having a person speaking to someone
      inside the house at the front door. But not one of these accounts has the
      person arguing nor has the door being slammed on this person.

      Lizzie didn't come downstairs that morning until sometime between 8:45 and
      9; Andrew left the house almost immediately afterwards while Lizzie was
      having her morning coffee and nibbling on cookies. Bridget hadn't started
      washing windows yet, so she would have witnessed any argument Andrew would
      have had with anyone at the front door if it indeed had happened.

      The witnesses outside the house put the visitor at the front door well after
      9, some accounts having it going onto 10....well after Andrew had left the
      house.


      >What I had wanted to cover was the pinhead spot of blood. Here goes.
      >1. For sure Lizzie didn't do it in the nude because there would have been
      >no blood found on the underskirt.

      Agreed. Even discounting the fact that the time it would have taken her to
      completely disrobe, commit the murder, immaculately clean herself, and then
      get completely dressed again can't fit into the timeline for EITHER murder,
      as you point out the fact that there was, as Jeff contends, a spot of Abby's
      blood on Lizzie's underskirt negates the whole "Lizzie-Did-It-In-The-Nude"
      joke of a theory.


      >2. When and how did that spot of blood get on that underskirt?

      Perhaps Lizzie pricked her finger with a needle while sewing a new button or
      waist-ape onto it....


      >If Lizzie killed Abby while wearing a dress, which dress had she worn?

      And how had Abby's blood gotten on the underskirt and not on the outer
      garment? If blood DID get on the outer garment, how did Lizzie clean it so
      that nothing would be visible to Bridget?

      Remember, Bridget never said that Lizzie was wearing something different at
      11am than she had worn at 9am -- IOW, Lizzie had the same dress on when
      Bridget saw her when Andrew came home, and when Lizzie called her downstairs
      after Andrew had been killed, as she had worn when she first came downstairs
      just before 9....

      Jeff argues that no one else could have killed Abby because they would have
      dripped blood on themselves and on the carpet/stairs afterwards; well, if
      there was all that dripping blood, Lizzie would have dripped it into her
      bedroom and have had it all over what she was wearing....


      >How had Lizzie manage to avoid anyone or everyone seeing the blood spot on
      >that dress? You can't wash blood away completely.

      Well, yes you can....but you have to wash it right away, with plenty of cold
      water and an adequate cleansing agent....Lizzie either would have had to
      change what she had been wearing, or put a dress with an obvious wet spot
      back on....neither of which Bridget saw.


      >That spot would have stuck out like a sore thumb, and Lizzie did not burn
      >her light blue dress till three days after the murders, the day after the
      >police asked for >the dress she had worn.

      AND the day after they had torn the place up (including ripping paneling
      from the wall) searching for both the murder weapon and any bloody clothing
      -- neither of which were found.

      The dress burning incident has always bothered me just as much as Bowen's
      burning of the piece of paper....but not because it suggests that Lizzie was
      burning the dress she had worn when she allegedly committed the murders.

      No, if you take a close look at what Alice Russell stated was said by both
      Lizzie AND Emma, it comes across as if the dress burning was EMMA's idea...

      It could have been what the sisters' said it was, a dress stained with paint
      -- but in their minds (and esp. Emma's), it may have looked like blood, so
      perhaps Emma told Lizzie to burn it before anyone found it -- and only when
      Russell pointed out how bad it looked to do it did it dawn on them (at least
      on Lizzie) that it would have been better to let the police have it.

      Some important questions about this dress are why it wasn't found by the
      police the day before? And if it indeed was the dress worn to commit one or
      both murders and was stained with blood, why would Emma and Lizzie decide to
      wait to burn it with Alice Russell nearby? The fact that they decided to
      burn it with her almost as a witness gives weight to their claim that it was
      only paint, and not blood, on the dress.


      >4. Lizzie would have had time to change and hide the dress she wore after
      >killing Abby, but impossible for her to have done so after killing her
      >father,

      But the problem with her changing her dress after killing Abby is the fact
      that Bridget stated that Lizzie wore the same dress from the time she first
      came downstairs at 9 to the time Lizzie called Bridget downstairs after
      Andrew was murdered...so Lizzie in fact never did change her dress.

      And where did she hide the bloodstained dress so that the FRPD wouldn't find
      it when they later tore the house apart searching for it?


      >Mrs. Raymond had made Lizzie two dresses. Were both cut alike?

      Well the really big question is just what sort of dresses were made? Were
      they "public" outfits that would be worn when one went outside the house?
      Or were they more simple "house dresses" that one only wore inside?

      It really IS an important question, because a "public" outfit would be the
      intricate contraption that I have previously described as the norm for
      Victorian dresses....

      But a housedress that was meant to just be worn inside (never outside of the
      house) for doing housework, laundry, etc., would have been a much simpler
      affair, usually a one-piece dress that buttoned up the front -- and usually
      of cotton, so that it could be easily washed and ironed at home and wouldn't
      need much fuss.

      If they were housedresses that were made up then yes, they could have been
      done from one pattern, just using different fabric to vary the dresses from
      one another.

      If they were more intricate public outfits that were made, then I doubt the
      same pattern would have been used for both outfits.


      >Victoria Lincoln had the light blue one cut out just like the heavy Bedford
      >cord winter dress. That makes no sense. Why would Mrs. Raymond use the
      >same pattern for Lizzie's light blue dress that she used for Lizzie's
      >Bedford cord?

      Also, it's very hard to adapt a pattern meant for a heavy-weight, winter
      material to have leight-wight, summer material lay right. IOW, the work
      involved to adapt a "winter" pattern for "summer" fabric or a "summer"
      pattern to work with "winter" fabric would be more work than it would be
      worth....


      >Didn't the physicians say the murderer leaned over Abby's body while
      >striking her and the blood squirted forward? Even if she raised her arm
      >over her head with each swing, if blood dripped from the hatchet, it would
      >have landed on her shoulders or upper back.

      YES!

      Jeff argues that no one other than Lizzie could have killed Abby because of
      all that blood dripping from the hatchet would have left a trail (but
      doesn't address the question of why Lizzie avoided leaving a trail to her
      bedroom in his scenario)....

      But that dripping blood, as you point out Muriel, would have dripped down
      the hands and arms of whomever was wielding it....and not only have gotten
      it on their arms, shoulders, and back, but also on their head and hair and
      the back of their neck....

      And there was no running water on the upper floor -- whomever the killer was
      would have only a pitcher and basin with which to wash up with....


      >What bloody trail?

      The question I've been repeatedly asking, too....


      >Lizzie would have had to run back to her room, dripping in blood,

      But no blood trail from the guest bedroom to her room, nor any blood IN her
      bedroom....


      >in order to get her sanitary towels to wipe up the blood

      As I've previously stated, those things were perhaps 2 to 3 inches in
      diameter and maybe 5 to 7 inches long....just how MANY of those things would
      she have had to use to clean up all that blood?

      While those homemade items were fairly adquate for their intended purpose,
      namely to ABSORB menstrual blood, they were pretty poorly suited for the
      purpose of being used as washcloths....


      >and hiding the towels in the pail with her other sanitary towels.

      She would have needed to use so many that it would have looked like Lizzie
      was hemmoraging and in need of medical attention...


      June ;-)
    • Patricia Stephenson
      Blood or no blood.....Mrs. Churchill testified that the dress that Lizzie had worn the morning of the murders was NOT the dress that she handed over to the
      Message 2 of 11 , Mar 3, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Blood or no blood.....Mrs. Churchill testified that the dress that Lizzie had worn the morning of the murders was NOT the dress that she handed over to the police.
        Mrs. Churchill looks like a real no nonsense type of person....okay maybe you can't tell that from a photo, however, she was up close and personal with Lizzie, and was very definite in her answer.  I don't think she would testify under oath regarding this matter unless she was ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that she knows what she saw.  Otherwise, if she was not AP, she could have simply stated that she thought it was the dress, but she was not sure 100% sure.
         
        My money is on Mrs. C.  So then you have to ask yourself why wouldn't Lizzie hand over the correct dress?  There must have been some very incriminating evidence on the right dress considering how many witnesses saw it on her.  From what I understand she changed into her pink wrapper at someone's suggestion, but did anyone actually suggest that?
         
        I do not believe that Mr. Borden bunched up his coat and used it for a pillow.  I think that was used as a coverup, and then wadded into a pillow.
         
        Patsy
        Rev COAL <ynrchyldzwylds_hobby@...> wrote:
        Muriel Arnold wrote:

        >I think some one is mistaken.  I never, ever, said anything about a door
        >being slammed in any messenger's face.

        I don't know where that came from, either...Jeff seems to have come up with
        that one out of the blue...

        As I've stated in other posts, the only door-slamming I can think of is
        regarding the argument Lizzie claimed Andrew had a few weeks before the
        murders with a man who wanted to rent some property from Andrew for some
        purpose that Andrew found objectionable.

        There was no argument by anyone with anyone at the front door the morning of
        the murders, definitely no accounts of the door being slammed.  The only
        accounts given by witnesses out on the street were of seeing a mysterious
        someone at the Borden's front door, some saying they just saw the person
        knocking on the door, some actually having a person speaking to someone
        inside the house at the front door.  But not one of these accounts has the
        person arguing nor has the door being slammed on this person.

        Lizzie didn't come downstairs that morning until sometime between 8:45 and
        9; Andrew left the house almost immediately afterwards while Lizzie was
        having her morning coffee and nibbling on cookies.  Bridget hadn't started
        washing windows yet, so she would have witnessed any argument Andrew would
        have had with anyone at the front door if it indeed had happened.

        The witnesses outside the house put the visitor at the front door well after
        9, some accounts having it going onto 10....well after Andrew had left the
        house.


        >What I had wanted to cover was the pinhead spot of blood.  Here goes.
        >1.   For sure Lizzie didn't do it in the nude because there would have been
        >no blood found on the underskirt.

        Agreed.  Even discounting the fact that the time it would have taken her to
        completely disrobe, commit the murder, immaculately clean herself, and then
        get completely dressed again can't fit into the timeline for EITHER murder,
        as you point out the fact that there was, as Jeff contends, a spot of Abby's
        blood on Lizzie's underskirt negates the whole "Lizzie-Did-It-In-The-Nude"
        joke of a theory.


        >2.  When and how did that spot of blood get on that underskirt?

        Perhaps Lizzie pricked her finger with a needle while sewing a new button or
        waist-ape onto it....


        >If Lizzie killed Abby while wearing a dress, which dress had she worn?

        And how had Abby's blood gotten on the underskirt and not on the outer
        garment?  If blood DID get on the outer garment, how did Lizzie clean it so
        that nothing would be visible to Bridget?

        Remember, Bridget never said that Lizzie was wearing something different at
        11am than she had worn at 9am -- IOW, Lizzie had the same dress on when
        Bridget saw her when Andrew came home, and when Lizzie called her downstairs
        after Andrew had been killed, as she had worn when she first came downstairs
        just before 9....

        Jeff argues that no one else could have killed Abby because they would have
        dripped blood on themselves and on the carpet/stairs afterwards; well, if
        there was all that dripping blood, Lizzie would have dripped it into her
        bedroom and have had it all over what she was wearing....


        >How had Lizzie manage to avoid anyone or everyone seeing the blood spot on
        >that dress?  You can't wash blood away completely.

        Well, yes you can....but you have to wash it right away, with plenty of cold
        water and an adequate cleansing agent....Lizzie either would have had to
        change what she had been wearing, or put a dress with an obvious wet spot
        back on....neither of which Bridget saw.


        >That spot would have stuck out like a sore thumb, and Lizzie did not burn
        >her light blue dress till three days after the murders, the day after the
        >police asked for >the dress she had worn.

        AND  the day after they had torn the place up (including ripping paneling
        from the wall)  searching for both the murder weapon and any bloody clothing
        -- neither of which were found.

        The dress burning incident has always bothered me just as much as Bowen's
        burning of the piece of paper....but not because it suggests that Lizzie was
        burning the dress she had worn when she allegedly committed the murders.

        No, if you take a close look at what Alice Russell stated was said by both
        Lizzie AND Emma, it comes across as if the dress burning was EMMA's idea...

        It could have been what the sisters' said it was, a dress stained with paint
        -- but in their minds (and esp. Emma's), it may have looked like blood, so
        perhaps Emma told Lizzie to burn it before anyone found it -- and only when
        Russell pointed out how bad it looked to do it did it dawn on them (at least
        on Lizzie) that it would have been better to let the police have it.

        Some important questions about this dress are why it wasn't found by the
        police the day before?  And if it indeed was the dress worn to commit one or
        both murders and was stained with blood, why would Emma and Lizzie decide to
        wait to burn it with Alice Russell nearby?  The fact that they decided to
        burn it with her almost as a witness gives weight to their claim that it was
        only paint, and not blood, on the dress.


        >4.  Lizzie would have had time to change and hide the dress she wore after
        >killing Abby, but impossible for her to have done so after killing her
        >father,

        But the problem with her changing her dress after killing Abby is the fact
        that Bridget stated that Lizzie wore the same dress from the time she first
        came downstairs at 9 to the time Lizzie called Bridget downstairs after
        Andrew was murdered...so Lizzie in fact never did change her dress.

        And where did she hide the bloodstained dress so that the FRPD wouldn't find
        it when they later tore the house apart searching for it?


        >Mrs. Raymond had made Lizzie two dresses.  Were both cut alike?

        Well the really big question is just what sort of dresses were made?  Were
        they "public" outfits that would be worn when one went outside the house? 
        Or were they more simple "house dresses" that one only wore inside?

        It really IS an important question, because a "public" outfit would be the
        intricate contraption that I have previously described as the norm for
        Victorian dresses....

        But a housedress that was meant to just be worn inside (never outside of the
        house) for doing housework, laundry, etc., would have been a much simpler
        affair, usually a one-piece dress that buttoned up the front -- and usually
        of cotton, so that it could be easily washed and ironed at home and wouldn't
        need much fuss.

        If they were housedresses that were made up then yes, they could have been
        done from one pattern, just using different fabric to vary the dresses from
        one another.

        If they were more intricate public outfits that were made, then I doubt the
        same pattern would have been used for both outfits.


        >Victoria Lincoln had the light blue one cut out just like the heavy Bedford
        >cord winter dress.  That makes no sense.  Why would Mrs. Raymond use the
        >same pattern for Lizzie's light blue dress that she used for Lizzie's 
        >Bedford cord?

        Also, it's very hard to adapt a pattern meant for a heavy-weight, winter
        material to have leight-wight, summer material lay right.  IOW, the work
        involved to adapt a "winter" pattern for "summer" fabric or a "summer"
        pattern to work with "winter" fabric would be more work than it would be
        worth....


        >Didn't the physicians say the murderer leaned over Abby's body while
        >striking her and the blood squirted forward?  Even if she raised her arm
        >over her head with each swing, if blood dripped from the hatchet, it would
        >have landed on her shoulders or upper back.

        YES!

        Jeff argues that no one other than Lizzie could have killed Abby because of
        all that blood dripping from the hatchet would have left a trail (but
        doesn't address the question of why Lizzie avoided leaving a trail to her
        bedroom in his scenario)....

        But that dripping blood, as you point out Muriel, would have dripped down
        the hands and arms of whomever was wielding it....and not only have gotten
        it on their arms, shoulders, and back, but also on their head and hair and
        the back of their neck....

        And there was no running water on the upper floor -- whomever the killer was
        would have only a pitcher and basin with which to wash up with....


        >What bloody trail?

        The question I've been repeatedly asking, too....


        >Lizzie would have had to run back to her room, dripping in blood,

        But no blood trail from the guest bedroom to her room, nor any blood IN her
        bedroom....


        >in order to get her sanitary towels to wipe up the blood

        As I've previously stated, those things were perhaps 2 to 3 inches in
        diameter and maybe 5 to 7 inches long....just how MANY of those things would
        she have had to use to clean up all that blood?

        While those homemade items were fairly adquate for their intended purpose,
        namely to ABSORB menstrual blood, they were pretty poorly suited for the
        purpose of being used as washcloths....


        >and hiding the towels in the pail with her other sanitary towels.

        She would have needed to use so many that it would have looked like Lizzie
        was hemmoraging and in need of medical attention...


        June  ;-)




        Yahoo! Mail
        Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

      • Muriel Arnold
        Hi Patsy: Reporter John Manning, describing Mrs. Churchill when he first entered the Borden house at 11:35, said she was hysterical. But, she could have been
        Message 3 of 11 , Mar 3, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Patsy:
          Reporter John Manning, describing Mrs. Churchill when he first entered the Borden house at 11:35, said she was hysterical.  But, she could have been a no-nonsense persron as, being told Lizzie had been arrested, the reporters noted that she did not appear to be much affected by the news.
          I cannot picture Mrs. Churchill and Caroline Kelly beings chums with Miss Russell.  Mrs. Churchill's father had been mayor of Fall River, and Caroline Kelly was the wife of a doctor.
          Why didn't Lizzie give them the right dress?
          Do you really believe that Lizzie gave the cops the wrong dress when at least 13 police officers had been there before noon and had had a chance to see and talk to Lizzie before Dr. Bowen told her to go to her room.\
          Dr. Dolan originally claim ed he was he who had removed her dress from the hall closet.  No one at police headquarters at this time questioned whether or not it was the right dress.  Nor did they at the Hearing.
           
          Who suggested Lizzie change dress?
          Lizzie testified at the inquest that "they" told her she should change dress.  The only ones upstairs at this time were officers Patrick Connors and John Riley.  Knowlton, instead of pursuing this line of questioning, changed the subject.  I claim he "KNEW" who the they were.
          Enough of Lizzie for one day.
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 3:30 PM
          Subject: RE: [40Whacks] door being slammed

          Blood or no blood.....Mrs. Churchill testified that the dress that Lizzie had worn the morning of the murders was NOT the dress that she handed over to the police.
          Mrs. Churchill looks like a real no nonsense type of person....okay maybe you can't tell that from a photo, however, she was up close and personal with Lizzie, and was very definite in her answer.  I don't think she would testify under oath regarding this matter unless she was ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that she knows what she saw.  Otherwise, if she was not AP, she could have simply stated that she thought it was the dress, but she was not sure 100% sure.
           
          My money is on Mrs. C.  So then you have to ask yourself why wouldn't Lizzie hand over the correct dress?  There must have been some very incriminating evidence on the right dress considering how many witnesses saw it on her.  From what I understand she changed into her pink wrapper at someone's suggestion, but did anyone actually suggest that?
           
          I do not believe that Mr. Borden bunched up his coat and used it for a pillow.  I think that was used as a coverup, and then wadded into a pillow.
           
          Patsy
          Rev COAL <ynrchyldzwylds_hobby@...> wrote:
          Muriel Arnold wrote:

          >I think some one is mistaken.  I never, ever, said anything about a door
          >being slammed in any messenger's face.

          I don't know where that came from, either...Jeff seems to have come up with
          that one out of the blue...

          As I've stated in other posts, the only door-slamming I can think of is
          regarding the argument Lizzie claimed Andrew had a few weeks before the
          murders with a man who wanted to rent some property from Andrew for some
          purpose that Andrew found objectionable.

          There was no argument by anyone with anyone at the front door the morning of
          the murders, definitely no accounts of the door being slammed.  The only
          accounts given by witnesses out on the street were of seeing a mysterious
          someone at the Borden's front door, some saying they just saw the person
          knocking on the door, some actually having a person speaking to someone
          inside the house at the front door.  But not one of these accounts has the
          person arguing nor has the door being slammed on this person.

          Lizzie didn't come downstairs that morning until sometime between 8:45 and
          9; Andrew left the house almost immediately afterwards while Lizzie was
          having her morning coffee and nibbling on cookies.  Bridget hadn't started
          washing windows yet, so she would have witnessed any argument Andrew would
          have had with anyone at the front door if it indeed had happened.

          The witnesses outside the house put the visitor at the front door well after
          9, some accounts having it going onto 10....well after Andrew had left the
          house.


          >What I had wanted to cover was the pinhead spot of blood.  Here goes.
          >1.   For sure Lizzie didn't do it in the nude because there would have been
          >no blood found on the underskirt.

          Agreed.  Even discounting the fact that the time it would have taken her to
          completely disrobe, commit the murder, immaculately clean herself, and then
          get completely dressed again can't fit into the timeline for EITHER murder,
          as you point out the fact that there was, as Jeff contends, a spot of Abby's
          blood on Lizzie's underskirt negates the whole "Lizzie-Did-It-In-The-Nude"
          joke of a theory.


          >2.  When and how did that spot of blood get on that underskirt?

          Perhaps Lizzie pricked her finger with a needle while sewing a new button or
          waist-ape onto it....


          >If Lizzie killed Abby while wearing a dress, which dress had she worn?

          And how had Abby's blood gotten on the underskirt and not on the outer
          garment?  If blood DID get on the outer garment, how did Lizzie clean it so
          that nothing would be visible to Bridget?

          Remember, Bridget never said that Lizzie was wearing something different at
          11am than she had worn at 9am -- IOW, Lizzie had the same dress on when
          Bridget saw her when Andrew came home, and when Lizzie called her downstairs
          after Andrew had been killed, as she had worn when she first came downstairs
          just before 9....

          Jeff argues that no one else could have killed Abby because they would have
          dripped blood on themselves and on the carpet/stairs afterwards; well, if
          there was all that dripping blood, Lizzie would have dripped it into her
          bedroom and have had it all over what she was wearing....


          >How had Lizzie manage to avoid anyone or everyone seeing the blood spot on
          >that dress?  You can't wash blood away completely.

          Well, yes you can....but you have to wash it right away, with plenty of cold
          water and an adequate cleansing agent....Lizzie either would have had to
          change what she had been wearing, or put a dress with an obvious wet spot
          back on....neither of which Bridget saw.


          >That spot would have stuck out like a sore thumb, and Lizzie did not burn
          >her light blue dress till three days after the murders, the day after the
          >police asked for >the dress she had worn.

          AND  the day after they had torn the place up (including ripping paneling
          from the wall)  searching for both the murder weapon and any bloody clothing
          -- neither of which were found.

          The dress burning incident has always bothered me just as much as Bowen's
          burning of the piece of paper....but not because it suggests that Lizzie was
          burning the dress she had worn when she allegedly committed the murders.

          No, if you take a close look at what Alice Russell stated was said by both
          Lizzie AND Emma, it comes across as if the dress burning was EMMA's idea...

          It could have been what the sisters' said it was, a dress stained with paint
          -- but in their minds (and esp. Emma's), it may have looked like blood, so
          perhaps Emma told Lizzie to burn it before anyone found it -- and only when
          Russell pointed out how bad it looked to do it did it dawn on them (at least
          on Lizzie) that it would have been better to let the police have it.

          Some important questions about this dress are why it wasn't found by the
          police the day before?  And if it indeed was the dress worn to commit one or
          both murders and was stained with blood, why would Emma and Lizzie decide to
          wait to burn it with Alice Russell nearby?  The fact that they decided to
          burn it with her almost as a witness gives weight to their claim that it was
          only paint, and not blood, on the dress.


          >4.  Lizzie would have had time to change and hide the dress she wore after
          >killing Abby, but impossible for her to have done so after killing her
          >father,

          But the problem with her changing her dress after killing Abby is the fact
          that Bridget stated that Lizzie wore the same dress from the time she first
          came downstairs at 9 to the time Lizzie called Bridget downstairs after
          Andrew was murdered...so Lizzie in fact never did change her dress.

          And where did she hide the bloodstained dress so that the FRPD wouldn't find
          it when they later tore the house apart searching for it?


          >Mrs. Raymond had made Lizzie two dresses.  Were both cut alike?

          Well the really big question is just what sort of dresses were made?  Were
          they "public" outfits that would be worn when one went outside the house? 
          Or were they more simple "house dresses" that one only wore inside?

          It really IS an important question, because a "public" outfit would be the
          intricate contraption that I have previously described as the norm for
          Victorian dresses....

          But a housedress that was meant to just be worn inside (never outside of the
          house) for doing housework, laundry, etc., would have been a much simpler
          affair, usually a one-piece dress that buttoned up the front -- and usually
          of cotton, so that it could be easily washed and ironed at home and wouldn't
          need much fuss.

          If they were housedresses that were made up then yes, they could have been
          done from one pattern, just using different fabric to vary the dresses from
          one another.

          If they were more intricate public outfits that were made, then I doubt the
          same pattern would have been used for both outfits.


          >Victoria Lincoln had the light blue one cut out just like the heavy Bedford
          >cord winter dress.  That makes no sense.  Why would Mrs. Raymond use the
          >same pattern for Lizzie's light blue dress that she used for Lizzie's 
          >Bedford cord?

          Also, it's very hard to adapt a pattern meant for a heavy-weight, winter
          material to have leight-wight, summer material lay right.  IOW, the work
          involved to adapt a "winter" pattern for "summer" fabric or a "summer"
          pattern to work with "winter" fabric would be more work than it would be
          worth....


          >Didn't the physicians say the murderer leaned over Abby's body while
          >striking her and the blood squirted forward?  Even if she raised her arm
          >over her head with each swing, if blood dripped from the hatchet, it would
          >have landed on her shoulders or upper back.

          YES!

          Jeff argues that no one other than Lizzie could have killed Abby because of
          all that blood dripping from the hatchet would have left a trail (but
          doesn't address the question of why Lizzie avoided leaving a trail to her
          bedroom in his scenario)....

          But that dripping blood, as you point out Muriel, would have dripped down
          the hands and arms of whomever was wielding it....and not only have gotten
          it on their arms, shoulders, and back, but also on their head and hair and
          the back of their neck....

          And there was no running water on the upper floor -- whomever the killer was
          would have only a pitcher and basin with which to wash up with....


          >What bloody trail?

          The question I've been repeatedly asking, too....


          >Lizzie would have had to run back to her room, dripping in blood,

          But no blood trail from the guest bedroom to her room, nor any blood IN her
          bedroom....


          >in order to get her sanitary towels to wipe up the blood

          As I've previously stated, those things were perhaps 2 to 3 inches in
          diameter and maybe 5 to 7 inches long....just how MANY of those things would
          she have had to use to clean up all that blood?

          While those homemade items were fairly adquate for their intended purpose,
          namely to ABSORB menstrual blood, they were pretty poorly suited for the
          purpose of being used as washcloths....


          >and hiding the towels in the pail with her other sanitary towels.

          She would have needed to use so many that it would have looked like Lizzie
          was hemmoraging and in need of medical attention...


          June  ;-)




          Yahoo! Mail
          Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

        • Rev COAL
          ... So why didn t Bridget speak up on that point? She was the only living person who could definitively state whether it was the dress Lizzie had actually
          Message 4 of 11 , Mar 4, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Patricia Stephenson wrote:

            >Blood or no blood.....Mrs. Churchill testified that the dress that Lizzie
            >had worn the morning of the murders was NOT the dress that she handed over
            >to the police.

            So why didn't Bridget speak up on that point? She was the only living
            person who could definitively state whether it was the dress Lizzie had
            actually worn or not....


            >Mrs. Churchill looks like a real no nonsense type of person....okay maybe
            >you can't tell that from a photo,

            Indeed you can't....and as Muriel pointed out, Churchill's reaction/behavior
            right after the murders was pretty hysterical, only surpassed by Bridget,
            perhaps....


            >however, she was up close and personal with Lizzie, and was very definite
            >in her answer.

            She was very definite in stating that Lizzie had absolutely no blood on
            herself or on her dress, also.... ;-)


            >I don't think she would testify under oath regarding this matter unless she
            >was ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that she knows what she saw.

            People testify under oath what the absolutely positively BELIEVE that they
            saw -- that can be a far cry from being the OBJECTIVE truth.



            >I do not believe that Mr. Borden bunched up his coat and used it for a
            >pillow. I think that was used as a coverup, and then wadded into a pillow.

            Fine. His coat was worn by the murderer and then wadded up and put under
            his bloody pulp of a head....

            How did the murderer avoid getting blood on themselves at THAT point? How
            could Lizzie, who you posit is the culprit, have not gotten blood on herself
            at that point, or if she did, how did she have enough time to immaculately
            clean herself before calling Bridget downstairs?


            June ;-)
          • Patricia Stephenson
            It is difficult for me to believe that a pollce officer suggested that Lizzie change her dress. I think it would be a very strange thing to say. I can t even
            Message 5 of 11 , Mar 4, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              It is difficult for me to believe that a pollce officer suggested that Lizzie change her dress.  I think it would be a very strange thing to say.  I can't even make those words come out of a man's mouth..(of that time period)...."Gee Miss Lizzie why don't you make yourself more comfortable".  The only "they" I can imagine making the suggestion would perhaps be Miss Russell. 
               
              Patsy
              Muriel Arnold <muriella@...> wrote:
              Hi Patsy:
              Reporter John Manning, describing Mrs. Churchill when he first entered the Borden house at 11:35, said she was hysterical.  But, she could have been a no-nonsense persron as, being told Lizzie had been arrested, the reporters noted that she did not appear to be much affected by the news.
              I cannot picture Mrs. Churchill and Caroline Kelly beings chums with Miss Russell.  Mrs. Churchill's father had been mayor of Fall River, and Caroline Kelly was the wife of a doctor.
              Why didn't Lizzie give them the right dress?
              Do you really believe that Lizzie gave the cops the wrong dress when at least 13 police officers had been there before noon and had had a chance to see and talk to Lizzie before Dr. Bowen told her to go to her room.\
              Dr. Dolan originally claim ed he was he who had removed her dress from the hall closet.  No one at police headquarters at this time questioned whether or not it was the right dress.  Nor did they at the Hearing.
               
              Who suggested Lizzie change dress?
              Lizzie testified at the inquest that "they" told her she should change dress.  The only ones upstairs at this time were officers Patrick Connors and John Riley.  Knowlton, instead of pursuing this line of questioning, changed the subject.  I claim he "KNEW" who the they were.
              Enough of Lizzie for one day.
              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 3:30 PM
              Subject: RE: [40Whacks] door being slammed

              Blood or no blood.....Mrs. Churchill testified that the dress that Lizzie had worn the morning of the murders was NOT the dress that she handed over to the police.
              Mrs. Churchill looks like a real no nonsense type of person....okay maybe you can't tell that from a photo, however, she was up close and personal with Lizzie, and was very definite in her answer.  I don't think she would testify under oath regarding this matter unless she was ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that she knows what she saw.  Otherwise, if she was not AP, she could have simply stated that she thought it was the dress, but she was not sure 100% sure.
               
              My money is on Mrs. C.  So then you have to ask yourself why wouldn't Lizzie hand over the correct dress?  There must have been some very incriminating evidence on the right dress considering how many witnesses saw it on her.  From what I understand she changed into her pink wrapper at someone's suggestion, but did anyone actually suggest that?
               
              I do not believe that Mr. Borden bunched up his coat and used it for a pillow.  I think that was used as a coverup, and then wadded into a pillow.
               
              Patsy
              Rev COAL <ynrchyldzwylds_hobby@...> wrote:
              Muriel Arnold wrote:

              >I think some one is mistaken.  I never, ever, said anything about a door
              >being slammed in any messenger's face.

              I don't know where that came from, either...Jeff seems to have come up with
              that one out of the blue...

              As I've stated in other posts, the only door-slamming I can think of is
              regarding the argument Lizzie claimed Andrew had a few weeks before the
              murders with a man who wanted to rent some property from Andrew for some
              purpose that Andrew found objectionable.

              There was no argument by anyone with anyone at the front door the morning of
              the murders, definitely no accounts of the door being slammed.  The only
              accounts given by witnesses out on the street were of seeing a mysterious
              someone at the Borden's front door, some saying they just saw the person
              knocking on the door, some actually having a person speaking to someone
              inside the house at the front door.  But not one of these accounts has the
              person arguing nor has the door being slammed on this person.

              Lizzie didn't come downstairs that morning until sometime between 8:45 and
              9; Andrew left the house almost immediately afterwards while Lizzie was
              having her morning coffee and nibbling on cookies.  Bridget hadn't started
              washing windows yet, so she would have witnessed any argument Andrew would
              have had with anyone at the front door if it indeed had happened.

              The witnesses outside the house put the visitor at the front door well after
              9, some accounts having it going onto 10....well after Andrew had left the
              house.


              >What I had wanted to cover was the pinhead spot of blood.  Here goes.
              >1.   For sure Lizzie didn't do it in the nude because there would have been
              >no blood found on the underskirt.

              Agreed.  Even discounting the fact that the time it would have taken her to
              completely disrobe, commit the murder, immaculately clean herself, and then
              get completely dressed again can't fit into the timeline for EITHER murder,
              as you point out the fact that there was, as Jeff contends, a spot of Abby's
              blood on Lizzie's underskirt negates the whole "Lizzie-Did-It-In-The-Nude"
              joke of a theory.


              >2.  When and how did that spot of blood get on that underskirt?

              Perhaps Lizzie pricked her finger with a needle while sewing a new button or
              waist-ape onto it....


              >If Lizzie killed Abby while wearing a dress, which dress had she worn?

              And how had Abby's blood gotten on the underskirt and not on the outer
              garment?  If blood DID get on the outer garment, how did Lizzie clean it so
              that nothing would be visible to Bridget?

              Remember, Bridget never said that Lizzie was wearing something different at
              11am than she had worn at 9am -- IOW, Lizzie had the same dress on when
              Bridget saw her when Andrew came home, and when Lizzie called her downstairs
              after Andrew had been killed, as she had worn when she first came downstairs
              just before 9....

              Jeff argues that no one else could have killed Abby because they would have
              dripped blood on themselves and on the carpet/stairs afterwards; well, if
              there was all that dripping blood, Lizzie would have dripped it into her
              bedroom and have had it all over what she was wearing....


              >How had Lizzie manage to avoid anyone or everyone seeing the blood spot on
              >that dress?  You can't wash blood away completely.

              Well, yes you can....but you have to wash it right away, with plenty of cold
              water and an adequate cleansing agent....Lizzie either would have had to
              change what she had been wearing, or put a dress with an obvious wet spot
              back on....neither of which Bridget saw.


              >That spot would have stuck out like a sore thumb, and Lizzie did not burn
              >her light blue dress till three days after the murders, the day after the
              >police asked for >the dress she had worn.

              AND  the day after they had torn the place up (including ripping paneling
              from the wall)  searching for both the murder weapon and any bloody clothing
              -- neither of which were found.

              The dress burning incident has always bothered me just as much as Bowen's
              burning of the piece of paper....but not because it suggests that Lizzie was
              burning the dress she had worn when she allegedly committed the murders.

              No, if you take a close look at what Alice Russell stated was said by both
              Lizzie AND Emma, it comes across as if the dress burning was EMMA's idea...

              It could have been what the sisters' said it was, a dress stained with paint
              -- but in their minds (and esp. Emma's), it may have looked like blood, so
              perhaps Emma told Lizzie to burn it before anyone found it -- and only when
              Russell pointed out how bad it looked to do it did it dawn on them (at least
              on Lizzie) that it would have been better to let the police have it.

              Some important questions about this dress are why it wasn't found by the
              police the day before?  And if it indeed was the dress worn to commit one or
              both murders and was stained with blood, why would Emma and Lizzie decide to
              wait to burn it with Alice Russell nearby?  The fact that they decided to
              burn it with her almost as a witness gives weight to their claim that it was
              only paint, and not blood, on the dress.


              >4.  Lizzie would have had time to change and hide the dress she wore after
              >killing Abby, but impossible for her to have done so after killing her
              >father,

              But the problem with her changing her dress after killing Abby is the fact
              that Bridget stated that Lizzie wore the same dress from the time she first
              came downstairs at 9 to the time Lizzie called Bridget downstairs after
              Andrew was murdered...so Lizzie in fact never did change her dress.

              And where did she hide the bloodstained dress so that the FRPD wouldn't find
              it when they later tore the house apart searching for it?


              >Mrs. Raymond had made Lizzie two dresses.  Were both cut alike?

              Well the really big question is just what sort of dresses were made?  Were
              they "public" outfits that would be worn when one went outside the house? 
              Or were they more simple "house dresses" that one only wore inside?

              It really IS an important question, because a "public" outfit would be the
              intricate contraption that I have previously described as the norm for
              Victorian dresses....

              But a housedress that was meant to just be worn inside (never outside of the
              house) for doing housework, laundry, etc., would have been a much simpler
              affair, usually a one-piece dress that buttoned up the front -- and usually
              of cotton, so that it could be easily washed and ironed at home and wouldn't
              need much fuss.

              If they were housedresses that were made up then yes, they could have been
              done from one pattern, just using different fabric to vary the dresses from
              one another.

              If they were more intricate public outfits that were made, then I doubt the
              same pattern would have been used for both outfits.


              >Victoria Lincoln had the light blue one cut out just like the heavy Bedford
              >cord winter dress.  That makes no sense.  Why would Mrs. Raymond use the
              >same pattern for Lizzie's light blue dress that she used for Lizzie's 
              >Bedford cord?

              Also, it's very hard to adapt a pattern meant for a heavy-weight, winter
              material to have leight-wight, summer material lay right.  IOW, the work
              involved to adapt a "winter" pattern for "summer" fabric or a "summer"
              pattern to work with "winter" fabric would be more work than it would be
              worth....


              >Didn't the physicians say the murderer leaned over Abby's body while
              >striking her and the blood squirted forward?  Even if she raised her arm
              >over her head with each swing, if blood dripped from the hatchet, it would
              >have landed on her shoulders or upper back.

              YES!

              Jeff argues that no one other than Lizzie could have killed Abby because of
              all that blood dripping from the hatchet would have left a trail (but
              doesn't address the question of why Lizzie avoided leaving a trail to her
              bedroom in his scenario)....

              But that dripping blood, as you point out Muriel, would have dripped down
              the hands and arms of whomever was wielding it....and not only have gotten
              it on their arms, shoulders, and back, but also on their head and hair and
              the back of their neck....

              And there was no running water on the upper floor -- whomever the killer was
              would have only a pitcher and basin with which to wash up with....


              >What bloody trail?

              The question I've been repeatedly asking, too....


              >Lizzie would have had to run back to her room, dripping in blood,

              But no blood trail from the guest bedroom to her room, nor any blood IN her
              bedroom....


              >in order to get her sanitary towels to wipe up the blood

              As I've previously stated, those things were perhaps 2 to 3 inches in
              diameter and maybe 5 to 7 inches long....just how MANY of those things would
              she have had to use to clean up all that blood?

              While those homemade items were fairly adquate for their intended purpose,
              namely to ABSORB menstrual blood, they were pretty poorly suited for the
              purpose of being used as washcloths....


              >and hiding the towels in the pail with her other sanitary towels.

              She would have needed to use so many that it would have looked like Lizzie
              was hemmoraging and in need of medical attention...


              June  ;-)




              Yahoo! Mail
              Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.


              Yahoo! Mail
              Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

            • Patricia Stephenson
              P.S. Don t you find it interesting that Mrs. Churchill was hysterical? I think that would be a normal reaction. Lizzie on the other hand discussed the
              Message 6 of 11 , Mar 4, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                P.S.  Don't you find it interesting that Mrs. Churchill was hysterical?  I think that would be a normal reaction.  Lizzie on the other hand discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over.  Not only that but if she did not commit the murders then (considering the short amount of time that had passed) she literally could have placed herself in the house with a maniac who might wish to kill a witness.
                Let me tell you if I came in the house and saw my father's eyeball sitting on his cheek, all you would have seen of me would have been the same as what you see when the road runner exits in a cartoon.
                 
                Patsy

                Muriel Arnold <muriella@...> wrote:
                Hi Patsy:
                Reporter John Manning, describing Mrs. Churchill when he first entered the Borden house at 11:35, said she was hysterical.  But, she could have been a no-nonsense persron as, being told Lizzie had been arrested, the reporters noted that she did not appear to be much affected by the news.
                I cannot picture Mrs. Churchill and Caroline Kelly beings chums with Miss Russell.  Mrs. Churchill's father had been mayor of Fall River, and Caroline Kelly was the wife of a doctor.
                Why didn't Lizzie give them the right dress?
                Do you really believe that Lizzie gave the cops the wrong dress when at least 13 police officers had been there before noon and had had a chance to see and talk to Lizzie before Dr. Bowen told her to go to her room.\
                Dr. Dolan originally claim ed he was he who had removed her dress from the hall closet.  No one at police headquarters at this time questioned whether or not it was the right dress.  Nor did they at the Hearing.
                 
                Who suggested Lizzie change dress?
                Lizzie testified at the inquest that "they" told her she should change dress.  The only ones upstairs at this time were officers Patrick Connors and John Riley.  Knowlton, instead of pursuing this line of questioning, changed the subject.  I claim he "KNEW" who the they were.
                Enough of Lizzie for one day.
                ----- Original Message -----
                Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 3:30 PM
                Subject: RE: [40Whacks] door being slammed

                Blood or no blood.....Mrs. Churchill testified that the dress that Lizzie had worn the morning of the murders was NOT the dress that she handed over to the police.
                Mrs. Churchill looks like a real no nonsense type of person....okay maybe you can't tell that from a photo, however, she was up close and personal with Lizzie, and was very definite in her answer.  I don't think she would testify under oath regarding this matter unless she was ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that she knows what she saw.  Otherwise, if she was not AP, she could have simply stated that she thought it was the dress, but she was not sure 100% sure.
                 
                My money is on Mrs. C.  So then you have to ask yourself why wouldn't Lizzie hand over the correct dress?  There must have been some very incriminating evidence on the right dress considering how many witnesses saw it on her.  From what I understand she changed into her pink wrapper at someone's suggestion, but did anyone actually suggest that?
                 
                I do not believe that Mr. Borden bunched up his coat and used it for a pillow.  I think that was used as a coverup, and then wadded into a pillow.
                 
                Patsy
                Rev COAL <ynrchyldzwylds_hobby@...> wrote:
                Muriel Arnold wrote:

                >I think some one is mistaken.  I never, ever, said anything about a door
                >being slammed in any messenger's face.

                I don't know where that came from, either...Jeff seems to have come up with
                that one out of the blue...

                As I've stated in other posts, the only door-slamming I can think of is
                regarding the argument Lizzie claimed Andrew had a few weeks before the
                murders with a man who wanted to rent some property from Andrew for some
                purpose that Andrew found objectionable.

                There was no argument by anyone with anyone at the front door the morning of
                the murders, definitely no accounts of the door being slammed.  The only
                accounts given by witnesses out on the street were of seeing a mysterious
                someone at the Borden's front door, some saying they just saw the person
                knocking on the door, some actually having a person speaking to someone
                inside the house at the front door.  But not one of these accounts has the
                person arguing nor has the door being slammed on this person.

                Lizzie didn't come downstairs that morning until sometime between 8:45 and
                9; Andrew left the house almost immediately afterwards while Lizzie was
                having her morning coffee and nibbling on cookies.  Bridget hadn't started
                washing windows yet, so she would have witnessed any argument Andrew would
                have had with anyone at the front door if it indeed had happened.

                The witnesses outside the house put the visitor at the front door well after
                9, some accounts having it going onto 10....well after Andrew had left the
                house.


                >What I had wanted to cover was the pinhead spot of blood.  Here goes.
                >1.   For sure Lizzie didn't do it in the nude because there would have been
                >no blood found on the underskirt.

                Agreed.  Even discounting the fact that the time it would have taken her to
                completely disrobe, commit the murder, immaculately clean herself, and then
                get completely dressed again can't fit into the timeline for EITHER murder,
                as you point out the fact that there was, as Jeff contends, a spot of Abby's
                blood on Lizzie's underskirt negates the whole "Lizzie-Did-It-In-The-Nude"
                joke of a theory.


                >2.  When and how did that spot of blood get on that underskirt?

                Perhaps Lizzie pricked her finger with a needle while sewing a new button or
                waist-ape onto it....


                >If Lizzie killed Abby while wearing a dress, which dress had she worn?

                And how had Abby's blood gotten on the underskirt and not on the outer
                garment?  If blood DID get on the outer garment, how did Lizzie clean it so
                that nothing would be visible to Bridget?

                Remember, Bridget never said that Lizzie was wearing something different at
                11am than she had worn at 9am -- IOW, Lizzie had the same dress on when
                Bridget saw her when Andrew came home, and when Lizzie called her downstairs
                after Andrew had been killed, as she had worn when she first came downstairs
                just before 9....

                Jeff argues that no one else could have killed Abby because they would have
                dripped blood on themselves and on the carpet/stairs afterwards; well, if
                there was all that dripping blood, Lizzie would have dripped it into her
                bedroom and have had it all over what she was wearing....


                >How had Lizzie manage to avoid anyone or everyone seeing the blood spot on
                >that dress?  You can't wash blood away completely.

                Well, yes you can....but you have to wash it right away, with plenty of cold
                water and an adequate cleansing agent....Lizzie either would have had to
                change what she had been wearing, or put a dress with an obvious wet spot
                back on....neither of which Bridget saw.


                >That spot would have stuck out like a sore thumb, and Lizzie did not burn
                >her light blue dress till three days after the murders, the day after the
                >police asked for >the dress she had worn.

                AND  the day after they had torn the place up (including ripping paneling
                from the wall)  searching for both the murder weapon and any bloody clothing
                -- neither of which were found.

                The dress burning incident has always bothered me just as much as Bowen's
                burning of the piece of paper....but not because it suggests that Lizzie was
                burning the dress she had worn when she allegedly committed the murders.

                No, if you take a close look at what Alice Russell stated was said by both
                Lizzie AND Emma, it comes across as if the dress burning was EMMA's idea...

                It could have been what the sisters' said it was, a dress stained with paint
                -- but in their minds (and esp. Emma's), it may have looked like blood, so
                perhaps Emma told Lizzie to burn it before anyone found it -- and only when
                Russell pointed out how bad it looked to do it did it dawn on them (at least
                on Lizzie) that it would have been better to let the police have it.

                Some important questions about this dress are why it wasn't found by the
                police the day before?  And if it indeed was the dress worn to commit one or
                both murders and was stained with blood, why would Emma and Lizzie decide to
                wait to burn it with Alice Russell nearby?  The fact that they decided to
                burn it with her almost as a witness gives weight to their claim that it was
                only paint, and not blood, on the dress.


                >4.  Lizzie would have had time to change and hide the dress she wore after
                >killing Abby, but impossible for her to have done so after killing her
                >father,

                But the problem with her changing her dress after killing Abby is the fact
                that Bridget stated that Lizzie wore the same dress from the time she first
                came downstairs at 9 to the time Lizzie called Bridget downstairs after
                Andrew was murdered...so Lizzie in fact never did change her dress.

                And where did she hide the bloodstained dress so that the FRPD wouldn't find
                it when they later tore the house apart searching for it?


                >Mrs. Raymond had made Lizzie two dresses.  Were both cut alike?

                Well the really big question is just what sort of dresses were made?  Were
                they "public" outfits that would be worn when one went outside the house? 
                Or were they more simple "house dresses" that one only wore inside?

                It really IS an important question, because a "public" outfit would be the
                intricate contraption that I have previously described as the norm for
                Victorian dresses....

                But a housedress that was meant to just be worn inside (never outside of the
                house) for doing housework, laundry, etc., would have been a much simpler
                affair, usually a one-piece dress that buttoned up the front -- and usually
                of cotton, so that it could be easily washed and ironed at home and wouldn't
                need much fuss.

                If they were housedresses that were made up then yes, they could have been
                done from one pattern, just using different fabric to vary the dresses from
                one another.

                If they were more intricate public outfits that were made, then I doubt the
                same pattern would have been used for both outfits.


                >Victoria Lincoln had the light blue one cut out just like the heavy Bedford
                >cord winter dress.  That makes no sense.  Why would Mrs. Raymond use the
                >same pattern for Lizzie's light blue dress that she used for Lizzie's 
                >Bedford cord?

                Also, it's very hard to adapt a pattern meant for a heavy-weight, winter
                material to have leight-wight, summer material lay right.  IOW, the work
                involved to adapt a "winter" pattern for "summer" fabric or a "summer"
                pattern to work with "winter" fabric would be more work than it would be
                worth....


                >Didn't the physicians say the murderer leaned over Abby's body while
                >striking her and the blood squirted forward?  Even if she raised her arm
                >over her head with each swing, if blood dripped from the hatchet, it would
                >have landed on her shoulders or upper back.

                YES!

                Jeff argues that no one other than Lizzie could have killed Abby because of
                all that blood dripping from the hatchet would have left a trail (but
                doesn't address the question of why Lizzie avoided leaving a trail to her
                bedroom in his scenario)....

                But that dripping blood, as you point out Muriel, would have dripped down
                the hands and arms of whomever was wielding it....and not only have gotten
                it on their arms, shoulders, and back, but also on their head and hair and
                the back of their neck....

                And there was no running water on the upper floor -- whomever the killer was
                would have only a pitcher and basin with which to wash up with....


                >What bloody trail?

                The question I've been repeatedly asking, too....


                >Lizzie would have had to run back to her room, dripping in blood,

                But no blood trail from the guest bedroom to her room, nor any blood IN her
                bedroom....


                >in order to get her sanitary towels to wipe up the blood

                As I've previously stated, those things were perhaps 2 to 3 inches in
                diameter and maybe 5 to 7 inches long....just how MANY of those things would
                she have had to use to clean up all that blood?

                While those homemade items were fairly adquate for their intended purpose,
                namely to ABSORB menstrual blood, they were pretty poorly suited for the
                purpose of being used as washcloths....


                >and hiding the towels in the pail with her other sanitary towels.

                She would have needed to use so many that it would have looked like Lizzie
                was hemmoraging and in need of medical attention...


                June  ;-)




                Yahoo! Mail
                Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.


                Yahoo! Mail
                Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

              • Patricia Stephenson
                P.S. Don t you find it interesting that Mrs. Churchill was hysterical? I think that would be a normal reaction. Lizzie on the other hand discussed the
                Message 7 of 11 , Mar 4, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  P.S.  Don't you find it interesting that Mrs. Churchill was hysterical?  I think that would be a normal reaction.  Lizzie on the other hand discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over.  Not only that but if she did not commit the murders then (considering the short amount of time that had passed) she literally could have placed herself in the house with a maniac who might wish to kill a witness.
                  Let me tell you if I came in the house and saw my father's eyeball sitting on his cheek, all you would have seen of me would have been the same as what you see when the road runner exits in a cartoon.
                   
                  Patsy

                  Muriel Arnold <muriella@...> wrote:
                  Hi Patsy:
                  Reporter John Manning, describing Mrs. Churchill when he first entered the Borden house at 11:35, said she was hysterical.  But, she could have been a no-nonsense persron as, being told Lizzie had been arrested, the reporters noted that she did not appear to be much affected by the news.
                  I cannot picture Mrs. Churchill and Caroline Kelly beings chums with Miss Russell.  Mrs. Churchill's father had been mayor of Fall River, and Caroline Kelly was the wife of a doctor.
                  Why didn't Lizzie give them the right dress?
                  Do you really believe that Lizzie gave the cops the wrong dress when at least 13 police officers had been there before noon and had had a chance to see and talk to Lizzie before Dr. Bowen told her to go to her room.\
                  Dr. Dolan originally claim ed he was he who had removed her dress from the hall closet.  No one at police headquarters at this time questioned whether or not it was the right dress.  Nor did they at the Hearing.
                   
                  Who suggested Lizzie change dress?
                  Lizzie testified at the inquest that "they" told her she should change dress.  The only ones upstairs at this time were officers Patrick Connors and John Riley.  Knowlton, instead of pursuing this line of questioning, changed the subject.  I claim he "KNEW" who the they were.
                  Enough of Lizzie for one day.
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 3:30 PM
                  Subject: RE: [40Whacks] door being slammed

                  Blood or no blood.....Mrs. Churchill testified that the dress that Lizzie had worn the morning of the murders was NOT the dress that she handed over to the police.
                  Mrs. Churchill looks like a real no nonsense type of person....okay maybe you can't tell that from a photo, however, she was up close and personal with Lizzie, and was very definite in her answer.  I don't think she would testify under oath regarding this matter unless she was ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that she knows what she saw.  Otherwise, if she was not AP, she could have simply stated that she thought it was the dress, but she was not sure 100% sure.
                   
                  My money is on Mrs. C.  So then you have to ask yourself why wouldn't Lizzie hand over the correct dress?  There must have been some very incriminating evidence on the right dress considering how many witnesses saw it on her.  From what I understand she changed into her pink wrapper at someone's suggestion, but did anyone actually suggest that?
                   
                  I do not believe that Mr. Borden bunched up his coat and used it for a pillow.  I think that was used as a coverup, and then wadded into a pillow.
                   
                  Patsy
                  Rev COAL <ynrchyldzwylds_hobby@...> wrote:
                  Muriel Arnold wrote:

                  >I think some one is mistaken.  I never, ever, said anything about a door
                  >being slammed in any messenger's face.

                  I don't know where that came from, either...Jeff seems to have come up with
                  that one out of the blue...

                  As I've stated in other posts, the only door-slamming I can think of is
                  regarding the argument Lizzie claimed Andrew had a few weeks before the
                  murders with a man who wanted to rent some property from Andrew for some
                  purpose that Andrew found objectionable.

                  There was no argument by anyone with anyone at the front door the morning of
                  the murders, definitely no accounts of the door being slammed.  The only
                  accounts given by witnesses out on the street were of seeing a mysterious
                  someone at the Borden's front door, some saying they just saw the person
                  knocking on the door, some actually having a person speaking to someone
                  inside the house at the front door.  But not one of these accounts has the
                  person arguing nor has the door being slammed on this person.

                  Lizzie didn't come downstairs that morning until sometime between 8:45 and
                  9; Andrew left the house almost immediately afterwards while Lizzie was
                  having her morning coffee and nibbling on cookies.  Bridget hadn't started
                  washing windows yet, so she would have witnessed any argument Andrew would
                  have had with anyone at the front door if it indeed had happened.

                  The witnesses outside the house put the visitor at the front door well after
                  9, some accounts having it going onto 10....well after Andrew had left the
                  house.


                  >What I had wanted to cover was the pinhead spot of blood.  Here goes.
                  >1.   For sure Lizzie didn't do it in the nude because there would have been
                  >no blood found on the underskirt.

                  Agreed.  Even discounting the fact that the time it would have taken her to
                  completely disrobe, commit the murder, immaculately clean herself, and then
                  get completely dressed again can't fit into the timeline for EITHER murder,
                  as you point out the fact that there was, as Jeff contends, a spot of Abby's
                  blood on Lizzie's underskirt negates the whole "Lizzie-Did-It-In-The-Nude"
                  joke of a theory.


                  >2.  When and how did that spot of blood get on that underskirt?

                  Perhaps Lizzie pricked her finger with a needle while sewing a new button or
                  waist-ape onto it....


                  >If Lizzie killed Abby while wearing a dress, which dress had she worn?

                  And how had Abby's blood gotten on the underskirt and not on the outer
                  garment?  If blood DID get on the outer garment, how did Lizzie clean it so
                  that nothing would be visible to Bridget?

                  Remember, Bridget never said that Lizzie was wearing something different at
                  11am than she had worn at 9am -- IOW, Lizzie had the same dress on when
                  Bridget saw her when Andrew came home, and when Lizzie called her downstairs
                  after Andrew had been killed, as she had worn when she first came downstairs
                  just before 9....

                  Jeff argues that no one else could have killed Abby because they would have
                  dripped blood on themselves and on the carpet/stairs afterwards; well, if
                  there was all that dripping blood, Lizzie would have dripped it into her
                  bedroom and have had it all over what she was wearing....


                  >How had Lizzie manage to avoid anyone or everyone seeing the blood spot on
                  >that dress?  You can't wash blood away completely.

                  Well, yes you can....but you have to wash it right away, with plenty of cold
                  water and an adequate cleansing agent....Lizzie either would have had to
                  change what she had been wearing, or put a dress with an obvious wet spot
                  back on....neither of which Bridget saw.


                  >That spot would have stuck out like a sore thumb, and Lizzie did not burn
                  >her light blue dress till three days after the murders, the day after the
                  >police asked for >the dress she had worn.

                  AND  the day after they had torn the place up (including ripping paneling
                  from the wall)  searching for both the murder weapon and any bloody clothing
                  -- neither of which were found.

                  The dress burning incident has always bothered me just as much as Bowen's
                  burning of the piece of paper....but not because it suggests that Lizzie was
                  burning the dress she had worn when she allegedly committed the murders.

                  No, if you take a close look at what Alice Russell stated was said by both
                  Lizzie AND Emma, it comes across as if the dress burning was EMMA's idea...

                  It could have been what the sisters' said it was, a dress stained with paint
                  -- but in their minds (and esp. Emma's), it may have looked like blood, so
                  perhaps Emma told Lizzie to burn it before anyone found it -- and only when
                  Russell pointed out how bad it looked to do it did it dawn on them (at least
                  on Lizzie) that it would have been better to let the police have it.

                  Some important questions about this dress are why it wasn't found by the
                  police the day before?  And if it indeed was the dress worn to commit one or
                  both murders and was stained with blood, why would Emma and Lizzie decide to
                  wait to burn it with Alice Russell nearby?  The fact that they decided to
                  burn it with her almost as a witness gives weight to their claim that it was
                  only paint, and not blood, on the dress.


                  >4.  Lizzie would have had time to change and hide the dress she wore after
                  >killing Abby, but impossible for her to have done so after killing her
                  >father,

                  But the problem with her changing her dress after killing Abby is the fact
                  that Bridget stated that Lizzie wore the same dress from the time she first
                  came downstairs at 9 to the time Lizzie called Bridget downstairs after
                  Andrew was murdered...so Lizzie in fact never did change her dress.

                  And where did she hide the bloodstained dress so that the FRPD wouldn't find
                  it when they later tore the house apart searching for it?


                  >Mrs. Raymond had made Lizzie two dresses.  Were both cut alike?

                  Well the really big question is just what sort of dresses were made?  Were
                  they "public" outfits that would be worn when one went outside the house? 
                  Or were they more simple "house dresses" that one only wore inside?

                  It really IS an important question, because a "public" outfit would be the
                  intricate contraption that I have previously described as the norm for
                  Victorian dresses....

                  But a housedress that was meant to just be worn inside (never outside of the
                  house) for doing housework, laundry, etc., would have been a much simpler
                  affair, usually a one-piece dress that buttoned up the front -- and usually
                  of cotton, so that it could be easily washed and ironed at home and wouldn't
                  need much fuss.

                  If they were housedresses that were made up then yes, they could have been
                  done from one pattern, just using different fabric to vary the dresses from
                  one another.

                  If they were more intricate public outfits that were made, then I doubt the
                  same pattern would have been used for both outfits.


                  >Victoria Lincoln had the light blue one cut out just like the heavy Bedford
                  >cord winter dress.  That makes no sense.  Why would Mrs. Raymond use the
                  >same pattern for Lizzie's light blue dress that she used for Lizzie's 
                  >Bedford cord?

                  Also, it's very hard to adapt a pattern meant for a heavy-weight, winter
                  material to have leight-wight, summer material lay right.  IOW, the work
                  involved to adapt a "winter" pattern for "summer" fabric or a "summer"
                  pattern to work with "winter" fabric would be more work than it would be
                  worth....


                  >Didn't the physicians say the murderer leaned over Abby's body while
                  >striking her and the blood squirted forward?  Even if she raised her arm
                  >over her head with each swing, if blood dripped from the hatchet, it would
                  >have landed on her shoulders or upper back.

                  YES!

                  Jeff argues that no one other than Lizzie could have killed Abby because of
                  all that blood dripping from the hatchet would have left a trail (but
                  doesn't address the question of why Lizzie avoided leaving a trail to her
                  bedroom in his scenario)....

                  But that dripping blood, as you point out Muriel, would have dripped down
                  the hands and arms of whomever was wielding it....and not only have gotten
                  it on their arms, shoulders, and back, but also on their head and hair and
                  the back of their neck....

                  And there was no running water on the upper floor -- whomever the killer was
                  would have only a pitcher and basin with which to wash up with....


                  >What bloody trail?

                  The question I've been repeatedly asking, too....


                  >Lizzie would have had to run back to her room, dripping in blood,

                  But no blood trail from the guest bedroom to her room, nor any blood IN her
                  bedroom....


                  >in order to get her sanitary towels to wipe up the blood

                  As I've previously stated, those things were perhaps 2 to 3 inches in
                  diameter and maybe 5 to 7 inches long....just how MANY of those things would
                  she have had to use to clean up all that blood?

                  While those homemade items were fairly adquate for their intended purpose,
                  namely to ABSORB menstrual blood, they were pretty poorly suited for the
                  purpose of being used as washcloths....


                  >and hiding the towels in the pail with her other sanitary towels.

                  She would have needed to use so many that it would have looked like Lizzie
                  was hemmoraging and in need of medical attention...


                  June  ;-)




                  Yahoo! Mail
                  Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.


                  Yahoo! Mail
                  Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

                • Muriel Arnold
                  Hi Patsy: You mentioned that ... Lizzie on the other hand discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over ... With the articles, fome
                  Message 8 of 11 , Mar 4, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Patsy:
                    You mentioned that ..."Lizzie on the other hand discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over"...
                    With the articles, fome 12 different newspapers, not a single one did I read that said Lizzie discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over.
                     
                    Sorry gang.  I should keep out of this discussion as it was proposed that the group answer Tesch's  Top 10 Borden Case Mysteries.  Have at it gang.  I'll try to settle for reading what you people come up with, as my research (15 years) has Lizzie entirely innocent, I can't answer him.
                    Muriel
                     
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 11:23 AM
                    Subject: Re: [40Whacks] door being slammed

                    P.S.  Don't you find it interesting that Mrs. Churchill was hysterical?  I think that would be a normal reaction.  Lizzie on the other hand discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over.  Not only that but if she did not commit the murders then (considering the short amount of time that had passed) she literally could have placed herself in the house with a maniac who might wish to kill a witness.
                    Let me tell you if I came in the house and saw my father's eyeball sitting on his cheek, all you would have seen of me would have been the same as what you see when the road runner exits in a cartoon.
                     
                    Patsy

                    Muriel Arnold <muriella@...> wrote:
                    Hi Patsy:
                    Reporter John Manning, describing Mrs. Churchill when he first entered the Borden house at 11:35, said she was hysterical.  But, she could have been a no-nonsense persron as, being told Lizzie had been arrested, the reporters noted that she did not appear to be much affected by the news.
                    I cannot picture Mrs. Churchill and Caroline Kelly beings chums with Miss Russell.  Mrs. Churchill's father had been mayor of Fall River, and Caroline Kelly was the wife of a doctor.
                    Why didn't Lizzie give them the right dress?
                    Do you really believe that Lizzie gave the cops the wrong dress when at least 13 police officers had been there before noon and had had a chance to see and talk to Lizzie before Dr. Bowen told her to go to her room.\
                    Dr. Dolan originally claim ed he was he who had removed her dress from the hall closet.  No one at police headquarters at this time questioned whether or not it was the right dress.  Nor did they at the Hearing.
                     
                    Who suggested Lizzie change dress?
                    Lizzie testified at the inquest that "they" told her she should change dress.  The only ones upstairs at this time were officers Patrick Connors and John Riley.  Knowlton, instead of pursuing this line of questioning, changed the subject.  I claim he "KNEW" who the they were.
                    Enough of Lizzie for one day.
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 3:30 PM
                    Subject: RE: [40Whacks] door being slammed

                    Blood or no blood.....Mrs. Churchill testified that the dress that Lizzie had worn the morning of the murders was NOT the dress that she handed over to the police.
                    Mrs. Churchill looks like a real no nonsense type of person....okay maybe you can't tell that from a photo, however, she was up close and personal with Lizzie, and was very definite in her answer.  I don't think she would testify under oath regarding this matter unless she was ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that she knows what she saw.  Otherwise, if she was not AP, she could have simply stated that she thought it was the dress, but she was not sure 100% sure.
                     
                    My money is on Mrs. C.  So then you have to ask yourself why wouldn't Lizzie hand over the correct dress?  There must have been some very incriminating evidence on the right dress considering how many witnesses saw it on her.  From what I understand she changed into her pink wrapper at someone's suggestion, but did anyone actually suggest that?
                     
                    I do not believe that Mr. Borden bunched up his coat and used it for a pillow.  I think that was used as a coverup, and then wadded into a pillow.
                     
                    Patsy
                    Rev COAL <ynrchyldzwylds_hobby@...> wrote:
                    Muriel Arnold wrote:

                    >I think some one is mistaken.  I never, ever, said anything about a door
                    >being slammed in any messenger's face.

                    I don't know where that came from, either...Jeff seems to have come up with
                    that one out of the blue...

                    As I've stated in other posts, the only door-slamming I can think of is
                    regarding the argument Lizzie claimed Andrew had a few weeks before the
                    murders with a man who wanted to rent some property from Andrew for some
                    purpose that Andrew found objectionable.

                    There was no argument by anyone with anyone at the front door the morning of
                    the murders, definitely no accounts of the door being slammed.  The only
                    accounts given by witnesses out on the street were of seeing a mysterious
                    someone at the Borden's front door, some saying they just saw the person
                    knocking on the door, some actually having a person speaking to someone
                    inside the house at the front door.  But not one of these accounts has the
                    person arguing nor has the door being slammed on this person.

                    Lizzie didn't come downstairs that morning until sometime between 8:45 and
                    9; Andrew left the house almost immediately afterwards while Lizzie was
                    having her morning coffee and nibbling on cookies.  Bridget hadn't started
                    washing windows yet, so she would have witnessed any argument Andrew would
                    have had with anyone at the front door if it indeed had happened.

                    The witnesses outside the house put the visitor at the front door well after
                    9, some accounts having it going onto 10....well after Andrew had left the
                    house.


                    >What I had wanted to cover was the pinhead spot of blood.  Here goes.
                    >1.   For sure Lizzie didn't do it in the nude because there would have been
                    >no blood found on the underskirt.

                    Agreed.  Even discounting the fact that the time it would have taken her to
                    completely disrobe, commit the murder, immaculately clean herself, and then
                    get completely dressed again can't fit into the timeline for EITHER murder,
                    as you point out the fact that there was, as Jeff contends, a spot of Abby's
                    blood on Lizzie's underskirt negates the whole "Lizzie-Did-It-In-The-Nude"
                    joke of a theory.


                    >2.  When and how did that spot of blood get on that underskirt?

                    Perhaps Lizzie pricked her finger with a needle while sewing a new button or
                    waist-ape onto it....


                    >If Lizzie killed Abby while wearing a dress, which dress had she worn?

                    And how had Abby's blood gotten on the underskirt and not on the outer
                    garment?  If blood DID get on the outer garment, how did Lizzie clean it so
                    that nothing would be visible to Bridget?

                    Remember, Bridget never said that Lizzie was wearing something different at
                    11am than she had worn at 9am -- IOW, Lizzie had the same dress on when
                    Bridget saw her when Andrew came home, and when Lizzie called her downstairs
                    after Andrew had been killed, as she had worn when she first came downstairs
                    just before 9....

                    Jeff argues that no one else could have killed Abby because they would have
                    dripped blood on themselves and on the carpet/stairs afterwards; well, if
                    there was all that dripping blood, Lizzie would have dripped it into her
                    bedroom and have had it all over what she was wearing....


                    >How had Lizzie manage to avoid anyone or everyone seeing the blood spot on
                    >that dress?  You can't wash blood away completely.

                    Well, yes you can....but you have to wash it right away, with plenty of cold
                    water and an adequate cleansing agent....Lizzie either would have had to
                    change what she had been wearing, or put a dress with an obvious wet spot
                    back on....neither of which Bridget saw.


                    >That spot would have stuck out like a sore thumb, and Lizzie did not burn
                    >her light blue dress till three days after the murders, the day after the
                    >police asked for >the dress she had worn.

                    AND  the day after they had torn the place up (including ripping paneling
                    from the wall)  searching for both the murder weapon and any bloody clothing
                    -- neither of which were found.

                    The dress burning incident has always bothered me just as much as Bowen's
                    burning of the piece of paper....but not because it suggests that Lizzie was
                    burning the dress she had worn when she allegedly committed the murders.

                    No, if you take a close look at what Alice Russell stated was said by both
                    Lizzie AND Emma, it comes across as if the dress burning was EMMA's idea...

                    It could have been what the sisters' said it was, a dress stained with paint
                    -- but in their minds (and esp. Emma's), it may have looked like blood, so
                    perhaps Emma told Lizzie to burn it before anyone found it -- and only when
                    Russell pointed out how bad it looked to do it did it dawn on them (at least
                    on Lizzie) that it would have been better to let the police have it.

                    Some important questions about this dress are why it wasn't found by the
                    police the day before?  And if it indeed was the dress worn to commit one or
                    both murders and was stained with blood, why would Emma and Lizzie decide to
                    wait to burn it with Alice Russell nearby?  The fact that they decided to
                    burn it with her almost as a witness gives weight to their claim that it was
                    only paint, and not blood, on the dress.


                    >4.  Lizzie would have had time to change and hide the dress she wore after
                    >killing Abby, but impossible for her to have done so after killing her
                    >father,

                    But the problem with her changing her dress after killing Abby is the fact
                    that Bridget stated that Lizzie wore the same dress from the time she first
                    came downstairs at 9 to the time Lizzie called Bridget downstairs after
                    Andrew was murdered...so Lizzie in fact never did change her dress.

                    And where did she hide the bloodstained dress so that the FRPD wouldn't find
                    it when they later tore the house apart searching for it?


                    >Mrs. Raymond had made Lizzie two dresses.  Were both cut alike?

                    Well the really big question is just what sort of dresses were made?  Were
                    they "public" outfits that would be worn when one went outside the house? 
                    Or were they more simple "house dresses" that one only wore inside?

                    It really IS an important question, because a "public" outfit would be the
                    intricate contraption that I have previously described as the norm for
                    Victorian dresses....

                    But a housedress that was meant to just be worn inside (never outside of the
                    house) for doing housework, laundry, etc., would have been a much simpler
                    affair, usually a one-piece dress that buttoned up the front -- and usually
                    of cotton, so that it could be easily washed and ironed at home and wouldn't
                    need much fuss.

                    If they were housedresses that were made up then yes, they could have been
                    done from one pattern, just using different fabric to vary the dresses from
                    one another.

                    If they were more intricate public outfits that were made, then I doubt the
                    same pattern would have been used for both outfits.


                    >Victoria Lincoln had the light blue one cut out just like the heavy Bedford
                    >cord winter dress.  That makes no sense.  Why would Mrs. Raymond use the
                    >same pattern for Lizzie's light blue dress that she used for Lizzie's 
                    >Bedford cord?

                    Also, it's very hard to adapt a pattern meant for a heavy-weight, winter
                    material to have leight-wight, summer material lay right.  IOW, the work
                    involved to adapt a "winter" pattern for "summer" fabric or a "summer"
                    pattern to work with "winter" fabric would be more work than it would be
                    worth....


                    >Didn't the physicians say the murderer leaned over Abby's body while
                    >striking her and the blood squirted forward?  Even if she raised her arm
                    >over her head with each swing, if blood dripped from the hatchet, it would
                    >have landed on her shoulders or upper back.

                    YES!

                    Jeff argues that no one other than Lizzie could have killed Abby because of
                    all that blood dripping from the hatchet would have left a trail (but
                    doesn't address the question of why Lizzie avoided leaving a trail to her
                    bedroom in his scenario)....

                    But that dripping blood, as you point out Muriel, would have dripped down
                    the hands and arms of whomever was wielding it....and not only have gotten
                    it on their arms, shoulders, and back, but also on their head and hair and
                    the back of their neck....

                    And there was no running water on the upper floor -- whomever the killer was
                    would have only a pitcher and basin with which to wash up with....


                    >What bloody trail?

                    The question I've been repeatedly asking, too....


                    >Lizzie would have had to run back to her room, dripping in blood,

                    But no blood trail from the guest bedroom to her room, nor any blood IN her
                    bedroom....


                    >in order to get her sanitary towels to wipe up the blood

                    As I've previously stated, those things were perhaps 2 to 3 inches in
                    diameter and maybe 5 to 7 inches long....just how MANY of those things would
                    she have had to use to clean up all that blood?

                    While those homemade items were fairly adquate for their intended purpose,
                    namely to ABSORB menstrual blood, they were pretty poorly suited for the
                    purpose of being used as washcloths....


                    >and hiding the towels in the pail with her other sanitary towels.

                    She would have needed to use so many that it would have looked like Lizzie
                    was hemmoraging and in need of medical attention...


                    June  ;-)




                    Yahoo! Mail
                    Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.


                    Yahoo! Mail
                    Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

                  • Patricia Stephenson
                    Hi Muriel, It was a statement that Mrs. Churchill made later in life. I would have to review all the books to find where I read it, but it is there. I found
                    Message 9 of 11 , Mar 4, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi Muriel,
                      It was a statement that Mrs. Churchill made later in life.  I would have to review all the books to find where I read it, but it is there.  I found it so amazing that I never forgot it.
                       
                      Patsy

                      Muriel Arnold <muriella@...> wrote:
                      Hi Patsy:
                      You mentioned that ..."Lizzie on the other hand discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over"...
                      With the articles, fome 12 different newspapers, not a single one did I read that said Lizzie discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over.
                       
                      Sorry gang.  I should keep out of this discussion as it was proposed that the group answer Tesch's  Top 10 Borden Case Mysteries.  Have at it gang.  I'll try to settle for reading what you people come up with, as my research (15 years) has Lizzie entirely innocent, I can't answer him.
                      Muriel
                       
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 11:23 AM
                      Subject: Re: [40Whacks] door being slammed

                      P.S.  Don't you find it interesting that Mrs. Churchill was hysterical?  I think that would be a normal reaction.  Lizzie on the other hand discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over.  Not only that but if she did not commit the murders then (considering the short amount of time that had passed) she literally could have placed herself in the house with a maniac who might wish to kill a witness.
                      Let me tell you if I came in the house and saw my father's eyeball sitting on his cheek, all you would have seen of me would have been the same as what you see when the road runner exits in a cartoon.
                       
                      Patsy

                      Muriel Arnold <muriella@...> wrote:
                      Hi Patsy:
                      Reporter John Manning, describing Mrs. Churchill when he first entered the Borden house at 11:35, said she was hysterical.  But, she could have been a no-nonsense persron as, being told Lizzie had been arrested, the reporters noted that she did not appear to be much affected by the news.
                      I cannot picture Mrs. Churchill and Caroline Kelly beings chums with Miss Russell.  Mrs. Churchill's father had been mayor of Fall River, and Caroline Kelly was the wife of a doctor.
                      Why didn't Lizzie give them the right dress?
                      Do you really believe that Lizzie gave the cops the wrong dress when at least 13 police officers had been there before noon and had had a chance to see and talk to Lizzie before Dr. Bowen told her to go to her room.\
                      Dr. Dolan originally claim ed he was he who had removed her dress from the hall closet.  No one at police headquarters at this time questioned whether or not it was the right dress.  Nor did they at the Hearing.
                       
                      Who suggested Lizzie change dress?
                      Lizzie testified at the inquest that "they" told her she should change dress.  The only ones upstairs at this time were officers Patrick Connors and John Riley.  Knowlton, instead of pursuing this line of questioning, changed the subject.  I claim he "KNEW" who the they were.
                      Enough of Lizzie for one day.
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 3:30 PM
                      Subject: RE: [40Whacks] door being slammed

                      Blood or no blood.....Mrs. Churchill testified that the dress that Lizzie had worn the morning of the murders was NOT the dress that she handed over to the police.
                      Mrs. Churchill looks like a real no nonsense type of person....okay maybe you can't tell that from a photo, however, she was up close and personal with Lizzie, and was very definite in her answer.  I don't think she would testify under oath regarding this matter unless she was ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that she knows what she saw.  Otherwise, if she was not AP, she could have simply stated that she thought it was the dress, but she was not sure 100% sure.
                       
                      My money is on Mrs. C.  So then you have to ask yourself why wouldn't Lizzie hand over the correct dress?  There must have been some very incriminating evidence on the right dress considering how many witnesses saw it on her.  From what I understand she changed into her pink wrapper at someone's suggestion, but did anyone actually suggest that?
                       
                      I do not believe that Mr. Borden bunched up his coat and used it for a pillow.  I think that was used as a coverup, and then wadded into a pillow.
                       
                      Patsy
                      Rev COAL <ynrchyldzwylds_hobby@...> wrote:
                      Muriel Arnold wrote:

                      >I think some one is mistaken.  I never, ever, said anything about a door
                      >being slammed in any messenger's face.

                      I don't know where that came from, either...Jeff seems to have come up with
                      that one out of the blue...

                      As I've stated in other posts, the only door-slamming I can think of is
                      regarding the argument Lizzie claimed Andrew had a few weeks before the
                      murders with a man who wanted to rent some property from Andrew for some
                      purpose that Andrew found objectionable.

                      There was no argument by anyone with anyone at the front door the morning of
                      the murders, definitely no accounts of the door being slammed.  The only
                      accounts given by witnesses out on the street were of seeing a mysterious
                      someone at the Borden's front door, some saying they just saw the person
                      knocking on the door, some actually having a person speaking to someone
                      inside the house at the front door.  But not one of these accounts has the
                      person arguing nor has the door being slammed on this person.

                      Lizzie didn't come downstairs that morning until sometime between 8:45 and
                      9; Andrew left the house almost immediately afterwards while Lizzie was
                      having her morning coffee and nibbling on cookies.  Bridget hadn't started
                      washing windows yet, so she would have witnessed any argument Andrew would
                      have had with anyone at the front door if it indeed had happened.

                      The witnesses outside the house put the visitor at the front door well after
                      9, some accounts having it going onto 10....well after Andrew had left the
                      house.


                      >What I had wanted to cover was the pinhead spot of blood.  Here goes.
                      >1.   For sure Lizzie didn't do it in the nude because there would have been
                      >no blood found on the underskirt.

                      Agreed.  Even discounting the fact that the time it would have taken her to
                      completely disrobe, commit the murder, immaculately clean herself, and then
                      get completely dressed again can't fit into the timeline for EITHER murder,
                      as you point out the fact that there was, as Jeff contends, a spot of Abby's
                      blood on Lizzie's underskirt negates the whole "Lizzie-Did-It-In-The-Nude"
                      joke of a theory.


                      >2.  When and how did that spot of blood get on that underskirt?

                      Perhaps Lizzie pricked her finger with a needle while sewing a new button or
                      waist-ape onto it....


                      >If Lizzie killed Abby while wearing a dress, which dress had she worn?

                      And how had Abby's blood gotten on the underskirt and not on the outer
                      garment?  If blood DID get on the outer garment, how did Lizzie clean it so
                      that nothing would be visible to Bridget?

                      Remember, Bridget never said that Lizzie was wearing something different at
                      11am than she had worn at 9am -- IOW, Lizzie had the same dress on when
                      Bridget saw her when Andrew came home, and when Lizzie called her downstairs
                      after Andrew had been killed, as she had worn when she first came downstairs
                      just before 9....

                      Jeff argues that no one else could have killed Abby because they would have
                      dripped blood on themselves and on the carpet/stairs afterwards; well, if
                      there was all that dripping blood, Lizzie would have dripped it into her
                      bedroom and have had it all over what she was wearing....


                      >How had Lizzie manage to avoid anyone or everyone seeing the blood spot on
                      >that dress?  You can't wash blood away completely.

                      Well, yes you can....but you have to wash it right away, with plenty of cold
                      water and an adequate cleansing agent....Lizzie either would have had to
                      change what she had been wearing, or put a dress with an obvious wet spot
                      back on....neither of which Bridget saw.


                      >That spot would have stuck out like a sore thumb, and Lizzie did not burn
                      >her light blue dress till three days after the murders, the day after the
                      >police asked for >the dress she had worn.

                      AND  the day after they had torn the place up (including ripping paneling
                      from the wall)  searching for both the murder weapon and any bloody clothing
                      -- neither of which were found.

                      The dress burning incident has always bothered me just as much as Bowen's
                      burning of the piece of paper....but not because it suggests that Lizzie was
                      burning the dress she had worn when she allegedly committed the murders.

                      No, if you take a close look at what Alice Russell stated was said by both
                      Lizzie AND Emma, it comes across as if the dress burning was EMMA's idea...

                      It could have been what the sisters' said it was, a dress stained with paint
                      -- but in their minds (and esp. Emma's), it may have looked like blood, so
                      perhaps Emma told Lizzie to burn it before anyone found it -- and only when
                      Russell pointed out how bad it looked to do it did it dawn on them (at least
                      on Lizzie) that it would have been better to let the police have it.

                      Some important questions about this dress are why it wasn't found by the
                      police the day before?  And if it indeed was the dress worn to commit one or
                      both murders and was stained with blood, why would Emma and Lizzie decide to
                      wait to burn it with Alice Russell nearby?  The fact that they decided to
                      burn it with her almost as a witness gives weight to their claim that it was
                      only paint, and not blood, on the dress.


                      >4.  Lizzie would have had time to change and hide the dress she wore after
                      >killing Abby, but impossible for her to have done so after killing her
                      >father,

                      But the problem with her changing her dress after killing Abby is the fact
                      that Bridget stated that Lizzie wore the same dress from the time she first
                      came downstairs at 9 to the time Lizzie called Bridget downstairs after
                      Andrew was murdered...so Lizzie in fact never did change her dress.

                      And where did she hide the bloodstained dress so that the FRPD wouldn't find
                      it when they later tore the house apart searching for it?


                      >Mrs. Raymond had made Lizzie two dresses.  Were both cut alike?

                      Well the really big question is just what sort of dresses were made?  Were
                      they "public" outfits that would be worn when one went outside the house? 
                      Or were they more simple "house dresses" that one only wore inside?

                      It really IS an important question, because a "public" outfit would be the
                      intricate contraption that I have previously described as the norm for
                      Victorian dresses....

                      But a housedress that was meant to just be worn inside (never outside of the
                      house) for doing housework, laundry, etc., would have been a much simpler
                      affair, usually a one-piece dress that buttoned up the front -- and usually
                      of cotton, so that it could be easily washed and ironed at home and wouldn't
                      need much fuss.

                      If they were housedresses that were made up then yes, they could have been
                      done from one pattern, just using different fabric to vary the dresses from
                      one another.

                      If they were more intricate public outfits that were made, then I doubt the
                      same pattern would have been used for both outfits.


                      >Victoria Lincoln had the light blue one cut out just like the heavy Bedford
                      >cord winter dress.  That makes no sense.  Why would Mrs. Raymond use the
                      >same pattern for Lizzie's light blue dress that she used for Lizzie's 
                      >Bedford cord?

                      Also, it's very hard to adapt a pattern meant for a heavy-weight, winter
                      material to have leight-wight, summer material lay right.  IOW, the work
                      involved to adapt a "winter" pattern for "summer" fabric or a "summer"
                      pattern to work with "winter" fabric would be more work than it would be
                      worth....


                      >Didn't the physicians say the murderer leaned over Abby's body while
                      >striking her and the blood squirted forward?  Even if she raised her arm
                      >over her head with each swing, if blood dripped from the hatchet, it would
                      >have landed on her shoulders or upper back.

                      YES!

                      Jeff argues that no one other than Lizzie could have killed Abby because of
                      all that blood dripping from the hatchet would have left a trail (but
                      doesn't address the question of why Lizzie avoided leaving a trail to her
                      bedroom in his scenario)....

                      But that dripping blood, as you point out Muriel, would have dripped down
                      the hands and arms of whomever was wielding it....and not only have gotten
                      it on their arms, shoulders, and back, but also on their head and hair and
                      the back of their neck....

                      And there was no running water on the upper floor -- whomever the killer was
                      would have only a pitcher and basin with which to wash up with....


                      >What bloody trail?

                      The question I've been repeatedly asking, too....


                      >Lizzie would have had to run back to her room, dripping in blood,

                      But no blood trail from the guest bedroom to her room, nor any blood IN her
                      bedroom....


                      >in order to get her sanitary towels to wipe up the blood

                      As I've previously stated, those things were perhaps 2 to 3 inches in
                      diameter and maybe 5 to 7 inches long....just how MANY of those things would
                      she have had to use to clean up all that blood?

                      While those homemade items were fairly adquate for their intended purpose,
                      namely to ABSORB menstrual blood, they were pretty poorly suited for the
                      purpose of being used as washcloths....


                      >and hiding the towels in the pail with her other sanitary towels.

                      She would have needed to use so many that it would have looked like Lizzie
                      was hemmoraging and in need of medical attention...


                      June  ;-)




                      Yahoo! Mail
                      Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.


                      Yahoo! Mail
                      Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.


                      Brings words and photos together (easily) with
                      PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail.

                    • Muriel Arnold
                      Hi Patsy: What I d read was that Mrs. Churchill set her groceries down in the kitchen which was directly across from the Borden s side door, and seeing Lizzie
                      Message 10 of 11 , Mar 4, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi Patsy:
                        What I'd read was that Mrs. Churchill set her groceries down in the kitchen which was directly across from the Borden's side door,  and seeing Lizzie looked distressed, said something like:  "Lizzie is anything the matter?"
                        But, that's okay, it doesn't really matter whether or not someone wrote that Lizzie discussed the weather before she asked Mrs. Churchill to come over. 
                        Authors have a tendency to embellish on things, like Victoria Lincoln and her characterization of the people living under the hill.  She sure did a job on Mrs. Borden and several others, which she would not have done had they lived "on the hill."  Even their living on the hill still didn't entitle them to much credit.  Take:
                        Jerome Borden:  2nd richest man in Fall River.  He went to the Borden house the day after the murders.  Lincoln claimed it was probably the first and only time he went there.  And there she stopped.  She said nothing about him replacing Andrew as president of the bank, and most certainly not about his living  across the street from the Whiteheads on Fourth Street,  which was definitely the wrong part of town.
                         
                        The Taunton, Mass., library has a few books in their reference room which cannot be taken out.  We went there one day and I picked up one book in which the author has Lizzie killing her parents after a leisurely dinner (lunch for you southern people) and went outside where there were chickens.  That was as far as I got and closed the book.  I couldn't handle it.
                        Muriel
                         
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 8:04 PM
                        Subject: Re: [40Whacks] door being slammed

                        Hi Muriel,
                        It was a statement that Mrs. Churchill made later in life.  I would have to review all the books to find where I read it, but it is there.  I found it so amazing that I never forgot it.
                         
                        Patsy

                        Muriel Arnold <muriella@...> wrote:
                        Hi Patsy:
                        You mentioned that ..."Lizzie on the other hand discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over"...
                        With the articles, fome 12 different newspapers, not a single one did I read that said Lizzie discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over.
                         
                        Sorry gang.  I should keep out of this discussion as it was proposed that the group answer Tesch's  Top 10 Borden Case Mysteries.  Have at it gang.  I'll try to settle for reading what you people come up with, as my research (15 years) has Lizzie entirely innocent, I can't answer him.
                        Muriel
                         
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 11:23 AM
                        Subject: Re: [40Whacks] door being slammed

                        P.S.  Don't you find it interesting that Mrs. Churchill was hysterical?  I think that would be a normal reaction.  Lizzie on the other hand discussed the weather with Mrs. Churchill and then asked her to come over.  Not only that but if she did not commit the murders then (considering the short amount of time that had passed) she literally could have placed herself in the house with a maniac who might wish to kill a witness.
                        Let me tell you if I came in the house and saw my father's eyeball sitting on his cheek, all you would have seen of me would have been the same as what you see when the road runner exits in a cartoon.
                         
                        Patsy

                        Muriel Arnold <muriella@...> wrote:
                        Hi Patsy:
                        Reporter John Manning, describing Mrs. Churchill when he first entered the Borden house at 11:35, said she was hysterical.  But, she could have been a no-nonsense persron as, being told Lizzie had been arrested, the reporters noted that she did not appear to be much affected by the news.
                        I cannot picture Mrs. Churchill and Caroline Kelly beings chums with Miss Russell.  Mrs. Churchill's father had been mayor of Fall River, and Caroline Kelly was the wife of a doctor.
                        Why didn't Lizzie give them the right dress?
                        Do you really believe that Lizzie gave the cops the wrong dress when at least 13 police officers had been there before noon and had had a chance to see and talk to Lizzie before Dr. Bowen told her to go to her room.\
                        Dr. Dolan originally claim ed he was he who had removed her dress from the hall closet.  No one at police headquarters at this time questioned whether or not it was the right dress.  Nor did they at the Hearing.
                         
                        Who suggested Lizzie change dress?
                        Lizzie testified at the inquest that "they" told her she should change dress.  The only ones upstairs at this time were officers Patrick Connors and John Riley.  Knowlton, instead of pursuing this line of questioning, changed the subject.  I claim he "KNEW" who the they were.
                        Enough of Lizzie for one day.
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 3:30 PM
                        Subject: RE: [40Whacks] door being slammed

                        Blood or no blood.....Mrs. Churchill testified that the dress that Lizzie had worn the morning of the murders was NOT the dress that she handed over to the police.
                        Mrs. Churchill looks like a real no nonsense type of person....okay maybe you can't tell that from a photo, however, she was up close and personal with Lizzie, and was very definite in her answer.  I don't think she would testify under oath regarding this matter unless she was ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that she knows what she saw.  Otherwise, if she was not AP, she could have simply stated that she thought it was the dress, but she was not sure 100% sure.
                         
                        My money is on Mrs. C.  So then you have to ask yourself why wouldn't Lizzie hand over the correct dress?  There must have been some very incriminating evidence on the right dress considering how many witnesses saw it on her.  From what I understand she changed into her pink wrapper at someone's suggestion, but did anyone actually suggest that?
                         
                        I do not believe that Mr. Borden bunched up his coat and used it for a pillow.  I think that was used as a coverup, and then wadded into a pillow.
                         
                        Patsy
                        Rev COAL <ynrchyldzwylds_hobby@...> wrote:
                        Muriel Arnold wrote:

                        >I think some one is mistaken.  I never, ever, said anything about a door
                        >being slammed in any messenger's face.

                        I don't know where that came from, either...Jeff seems to have come up with
                        that one out of the blue...

                        As I've stated in other posts, the only door-slamming I can think of is
                        regarding the argument Lizzie claimed Andrew had a few weeks before the
                        murders with a man who wanted to rent some property from Andrew for some
                        purpose that Andrew found objectionable.

                        There was no argument by anyone with anyone at the front door the morning of
                        the murders, definitely no accounts of the door being slammed.  The only
                        accounts given by witnesses out on the street were of seeing a mysterious
                        someone at the Borden's front door, some saying they just saw the person
                        knocking on the door, some actually having a person speaking to someone
                        inside the house at the front door.  But not one of these accounts has the
                        person arguing nor has the door being slammed on this person.

                        Lizzie didn't come downstairs that morning until sometime between 8:45 and
                        9; Andrew left the house almost immediately afterwards while Lizzie was
                        having her morning coffee and nibbling on cookies.  Bridget hadn't started
                        washing windows yet, so she would have witnessed any argument Andrew would
                        have had with anyone at the front door if it indeed had happened.

                        The witnesses outside the house put the visitor at the front door well after
                        9, some accounts having it going onto 10....well after Andrew had left the
                        house.


                        >What I had wanted to cover was the pinhead spot of blood.  Here goes.
                        >1.   For sure Lizzie didn't do it in the nude because there would have been
                        >no blood found on the underskirt.

                        Agreed.  Even discounting the fact that the time it would have taken her to
                        completely disrobe, commit the murder, immaculately clean herself, and then
                        get completely dressed again can't fit into the timeline for EITHER murder,
                        as you point out the fact that there was, as Jeff contends, a spot of Abby's
                        blood on Lizzie's underskirt negates the whole "Lizzie-Did-It-In-The-Nude"
                        joke of a theory.


                        >2.  When and how did that spot of blood get on that underskirt?

                        Perhaps Lizzie pricked her finger with a needle while sewing a new button or
                        waist-ape onto it....


                        >If Lizzie killed Abby while wearing a dress, which dress had she worn?

                        And how had Abby's blood gotten on the underskirt and not on the outer
                        garment?  If blood DID get on the outer garment, how did Lizzie clean it so
                        that nothing would be visible to Bridget?

                        Remember, Bridget never said that Lizzie was wearing something different at
                        11am than she had worn at 9am -- IOW, Lizzie had the same dress on when
                        Bridget saw her when Andrew came home, and when Lizzie called her downstairs
                        after Andrew had been killed, as she had worn when she first came downstairs
                        just before 9....

                        Jeff argues that no one else could have killed Abby because they would have
                        dripped blood on themselves and on the carpet/stairs afterwards; well, if
                        there was all that dripping blood, Lizzie would have dripped it into her
                        bedroom and have had it all over what she was wearing....


                        >How had Lizzie manage to avoid anyone or everyone seeing the blood spot on
                        >that dress?  You can't wash blood away completely.

                        Well, yes you can....but you have to wash it right away, with plenty of cold
                        water and an adequate cleansing agent....Lizzie either would have had to
                        change what she had been wearing, or put a dress with an obvious wet spot
                        back on....neither of which Bridget saw.


                        >That spot would have stuck out like a sore thumb, and Lizzie did not burn
                        >her light blue dress till three days after the murders, the day after the
                        >police asked for >the dress she had worn.

                        AND  the day after they had torn the place up (including ripping paneling
                        from the wall)  searching for both the murder weapon and any bloody clothing
                        -- neither of which were found.

                        The dress burning incident has always bothered me just as much as Bowen's
                        burning of the piece of paper....but not because it suggests that Lizzie was
                        burning the dress she had worn when she allegedly committed the murders.

                        No, if you take a close look at what Alice Russell stated was said by both
                        Lizzie AND Emma, it comes across as if the dress burning was EMMA's idea...

                        It could have been what the sisters' said it was, a dress stained with paint
                        -- but in their minds (and esp. Emma's), it may have looked like blood, so
                        perhaps Emma told Lizzie to burn it before anyone found it -- and only when
                        Russell pointed out how bad it looked to do it did it dawn on them (at least
                        on Lizzie) that it would have been better to let the police have it.

                        Some important questions about this dress are why it wasn't found by the
                        police the day before?  And if it indeed was the dress worn to commit one or
                        both murders and was stained with blood, why would Emma and Lizzie decide to
                        wait to burn it with Alice Russell nearby?  The fact that they decided to
                        burn it with her almost as a witness gives weight to their claim that it was
                        only paint, and not blood, on the dress.


                        >4.  Lizzie would have had time to change and hide the dress she wore after
                        >killing Abby, but impossible for her to have done so after killing her
                        >father,

                        But the problem with her changing her dress after killing Abby is the fact
                        that Bridget stated that Lizzie wore the same dress from the time she first
                        came downstairs at 9 to the time Lizzie called Bridget downstairs after
                        Andrew was murdered...so Lizzie in fact never did change her dress.

                        And where did she hide the bloodstained dress so that the FRPD wouldn't find
                        it when they later tore the house apart searching for it?


                        >Mrs. Raymond had made Lizzie two dresses.  Were both cut alike?

                        Well the really big question is just what sort of dresses were made?  Were
                        they "public" outfits that would be worn when one went outside the house? 
                        Or were they more simple "house dresses" that one only wore inside?

                        It really IS an important question, because a "public" outfit would be the
                        intricate contraption that I have previously described as the norm for
                        Victorian dresses....

                        But a housedress that was meant to just be worn inside (never outside of the
                        house) for doing housework, laundry, etc., would have been a much simpler
                        affair, usually a one-piece dress that buttoned up the front -- and usually
                        of cotton, so that it could be easily washed and ironed at home and wouldn't
                        need much fuss.

                        If they were housedresses that were made up then yes, they could have been
                        done from one pattern, just using different fabric to vary the dresses from
                        one another.

                        If they were more intricate public outfits that were made, then I doubt the
                        same pattern would have been used for both outfits.


                        >Victoria Lincoln had the light blue one cut out just like the heavy Bedford
                        >cord winter dress.  That makes no sense.  Why would Mrs. Raymond use the
                        >same pattern for Lizzie's light blue dress that she used for Lizzie's 
                        >Bedford cord?

                        Also, it's very hard to adapt a pattern meant for a heavy-weight, winter
                        material to have leight-wight, summer material lay right.  IOW, the work
                        involved to adapt a "winter" pattern for "summer" fabric or a "summer"
                        pattern to work with "winter" fabric would be more work than it would be
                        worth....


                        >Didn't the physicians say the murderer leaned over Abby's body while
                        >striking her and the blood squirted forward?  Even if she raised her arm
                        >over her head with each swing, if blood dripped from the hatchet, it would
                        >have landed on her shoulders or upper back.

                        YES!

                        Jeff argues that no one other than Lizzie could have killed Abby because of
                        all that blood dripping from the hatchet would have left a trail (but
                        doesn't address the question of why Lizzie avoided leaving a trail to her
                        bedroom in his scenario)....

                        But that dripping blood, as you point out Muriel, would have dripped down
                        the hands and arms of whomever was wielding it....and not only have gotten
                        it on their arms, shoulders, and back, but also on their head and hair and
                        the back of their neck....

                        And there was no running water on the upper floor -- whomever the killer was
                        would have only a pitcher and basin with which to wash up with....


                        >What bloody trail?

                        The question I've been repeatedly asking, too....


                        >Lizzie would have had to run back to her room, dripping in blood,

                        But no blood trail from the guest bedroom to her room, nor any blood IN her
                        bedroom....


                        >in order to get her sanitary towels to wipe up the blood

                        As I've previously stated, those things were perhaps 2 to 3 inches in
                        diameter and maybe 5 to 7 inches long....just how MANY of those things would
                        she have had to use to clean up all that blood?

                        While those homemade items were fairly adquate for their intended purpose,
                        namely to ABSORB menstrual blood, they were pretty poorly suited for the
                        purpose of being used as washcloths....


                        >and hiding the towels in the pail with her other sanitary towels.

                        She would have needed to use so many that it would have looked like Lizzie
                        was hemmoraging and in need of medical attention...


                        June  ;-)




                        Yahoo! Mail
                        Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.


                        Yahoo! Mail
                        Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.


                        Brings words and photos together (easily) with
                        PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail.

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