Lizzie Borden Society Forum

Simple question: did Lizzie do this.... BY HERSELF.... yes or no??

Without qualification BOBO? Yes I do! But I guess you knew that anyway!

Yes, I believe she did.

I don't know. Either by herself with Emma's foreknowledge or with someone close to her doing the actual killing.

No. I don't believe she did it so maybe I should disqualify myself right there. I am open to the idea she knew who did it and protected them. That said my answer is still no.

irina wrote:No. I don't believe she did it so maybe I should disqualify myself right there. I am open to the idea she knew who did it and protected them. That said my answer is still no.

No you do not "disqualify" yourself! Your answer counts as good as mine. THX

But you haven't given us an answer, BOBO!

Curryong wrote:But you haven't given us an answer, BOBO!

Curryong, you know that I believe as you.... lol. Lizzie did it, alone, and the hatchet ended up on Crowes barn.

Lizzie didn't do it; she didn't know who the killer was. Lizzie was totally innocent.

Franz wrote:Lizzie didn't do it; she didn't know who the killer was. Lizzie was totally innocent.

IN MY MIND.... Lizzie was a totally deprived "B".... She attempted to poison the entire household . She's a liar of the first degree. And a sorry one at that. Her own words speak for themselves. That said.... Franz I love your post... Keep em coming!!

To be fair though, BOBO, the evidence that she 'attempted to poison the entire household' is sparse at best! The whole thing of Lizzie going into the pharmacy to buy Prussic acid was never tested in court.

We don't know whether she managed to purchase any elsewhere, but when you consider pooey pears, mutton broth probably on the turn, iffy fish, perhaps adulterated bread, all available in the Borden household in the days before the murders, then she probably wouldn't have needed it!

I agree with your other comments, though!

I believe she did it.

BOBO wrote:Simple question: did Lizzie do this.... BY HERSELF.... yes or no??

No.

MysteryReader wrote:

BOBO wrote:Simple question: did Lizzie do this.... BY HERSELF.... yes or no??

No.

MysteryReader has made you, as we say in Australia, 'a happy little vegemiter,' Franz! Translation 'Very, very pleased!'
Smile.

The circumstantial evidence points to Lizzie being involved. Either she killed them alone or she had an accomplice. Her testimony, and words to different people contradict and are so suspicious, that it points to lying, and lying to cover up lies. I am open to an accomplice though...it would explain the lack of blood on Lizzie.

Yes, I agree it would, Possum. However, if we put aside Bridget as a 'possible,' then we are back to Uncle John as the middleman hiring someone, or ---- two maiden ladies trawling the farms nearby or bars of Boston, New York, etc. in search of a hit man. An unlikely scenario at best!

It's not as if, with all due respect to debbie, there were lovers, boyfriends, or indeed helpful brothers, cousins in the background. In many ways it would be great if there were. It would certainly widen the field and provide hours of debate.

I also agree, Possum. At this point in time, I don't believe Uncle John has anything to do with the murders. I believe Lizzie, alone, committed the murders, and Dr. Bowen was an accomplice in covering up for her.

Do you, twinsrwe? Do you believe there was something between them or was he just being gallant? Do you believe that he smuggled a hatchet out, or burned something important for her in the stove?

Curryong wrote:MysteryReader has made you, as we say in Australia, 'a happy little vegemiter,' Franz! Translation 'Very, very pleased!'
Smile.

Curryong wrote:Do you, twinsrwe? Do you believe there was something between them or was he just being gallant? Do you believe that he smuggled a hatchet out, or burned something important for her in the stove?

Yes, I believe there was something more between Dr. Bowen and Lizzie than a patient/doctor relationship, as well as a neighbor/friend relationship. Dr. Bowen testified that he did not go to the Borden house on social calls, and that most of his visits there were on business or as a physician. Yet, he escorted Lizzie to her church and sat in the Borden seat, while the rest of the Borden family was away on the farm in Swansea. Dr. Bowen was a member of the First Baptist Church in Fall River, yet he accompanies Lizzie to the Central Congregational Church??? I find this action quite suspicious.

From the Witness Statements September 25, 1892. Harrington & Doherty:

Mrs. Jane Grey, No. 215 Second street. “Dr. Bowen’s character is al least suspicious. Four years ago, while the Borden family were summering over the river on the farm, Lizzie remained at home. One Sunday evening during this time, she and Dr. Bowen came to church together, and sat in the Borden seat. I myself saw them this evening. At the time, and since, there was much comment on this act. Some remarked how courageous she was to remain in the house alone; but others replied in a knowing way, perhaps she has very acceptable company.

About the robbery, I think Mrs. Fish, or her daughter in law of Hartford knows more or less about it, if they wish to tell.

(Harrington & Doherty)

Where was Dr. Bowen’s wife? Why did he choose to be with Lizzie rather than his wife? I don’t believe Lizzie and Dr. Bowen were having an affair, but they were apparently closer than a physician/patient relationship indicates. I find it very strange that Dr. Bowen escorts Lizzie to her church, but then testified that he made no social calls at the Borden house. Really???

I also find it strange that Dr. Bowen was the first person Lizzie asked Bridget to get when she ‘discovered’ her father was killed. How did Lizzie know Bridget was still alive? Why was her first thought to ask for Dr. Bowen, and then when he was not available, her second thought was to ask for Alice Russell, instead of the police before either of these two people? Now, if Lizzie actually thought her father was only injured she'd want a doctor first and then the police, which would make sense. However, if Lizzie knew her father was dead, then it makes absolutely no sense that she would want a doctor rather than the police.

Lizzie testified that she didn’t know her father was dead when she sent Bridget for Dr. Bowen, but Bridget contradicts this when she testified that Lizzie said, “…father’s dead…’.

Lizzie
Inquest
78(35)
Q. Who did you send Maggie for?
A. Dr. Bowen. She came back and said Dr. Bowen was not there.
Q. What did you tell Maggie?
A. I told her he was hurt.
Q. When you first told her?
A. I says "Go for Dr. Bowen as soon as you can, I think father is hurt."
Q. Did you then know that he was dead?
A. No, sir.


---

Bridget at the Trial, p240:

"Q. What is the next that occurred as you were lying upon the bed?
A. Miss Lizzie hollered, "Maggie, come down!" I said, "What is the matter?" She says, "Come down quick; father's dead: somebody come in and killed him."

---

According to Assistant City Marshal John Fleet, who spoke with both Lizzie and Bridget on August 4, 1892, Lizzie knew her father was dead. The following is from the Witness statements, page 2-3, dated August 4th. The first statement is what Mr. Fleet says Lizzie told him, and the second statement is what Bridget told him:

“I was ironing handkerchiefs in the Dining room, which I left and went in the barn, up stairs, and remained there for half an hour. Bridget had gone up stairs, and when I came back I found father dead on the lounge, and went to the back stairs and called Bridget (servant) down stairs. Told her that some one had killed father, and told her to get Dr. Bowen.”

---

"...Went up stairs at 10.55 to fix my room. After I had been in the room about ten minutes, Lizzie called me down stairs, saying that her father was dead, some one had killed him, go and get Dr. Bowen. ..."


So, there you have; on the day of the murders, both Lizzie and Bridget are in agreement as to what Lizzie said: Father was dead, someone had come in and killed him.
Yes, I do believe Dr. Bowen smuggle a hatchet out of the house via his medical bag, on the day of the murders. As for his note burning incident, I haven’t actually formed a belief, at this point in time.

I find it suspicious that Dr. Bowen was the family doctor before the murders, but after the trail we don’t hear of any connection between him and the Borden girls. Why??? I wonder if Dr. Bowen may have realized that his actions with Lizzie, before and after the murders, were threatening his profession as a physician, and therefore the physician/patient relationship between him and the Borden girls had to cease.

I think there is something odd about Dr. Bowen. My how times have changed! Hard to believe that a married man escorting a single woman to CHURCH, could be an almost scandal. WOW!

Mostly I'm here to comment on Curryong's, "Happy little vegemiter". I think I understand what it means but that's interesting. Vegemite is loved or hated I hear. Never had any. I'm going to have to remember that one.

There is a TV ad for Vegemite called 'Happy little Vegemites' on You Tube, from the 1950's, long before I came to Australia. There's a saying in Australia "Well, you're a happy little vegemiter, aren't you!" whenever a person appears particularly happy and cheerful.

When I came here and confessed to not liking Vegemite very much it was taken for granted that 'Well, people not born here wouldn't, would they!' It is all linked with being an Aussie, like loving sport and the beach! My three children were born here and of course they like it!

It's ironic that it's now owned by an international company. When the company put cheese in a particular variety of Vegemite and called it I think, Cheesimite, it made the news and everyone was disapproving. That name soon vanished!

It is nice on toast with melted cheese.

Curryong wrote:There is a TV ad for Vegemite called 'Happy little Vegemites' on You Tube, from the 1950's, long before I came to Australia. …

Is this the TV ad you are thinking of?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yA98MujNeM&feature=kp

Twinsrwe, wasn't it Mrs Jane Gray who told the police the scandalous news that Lizzie and Dr Bowen had sat together in Church? Mrs Gray was Abby's stepmother, lived close by, didn't like Lizzie one bit, and probably relished telling that particular titbit! Not that I blame her! If the news got around, and Phoebe Bowen got to hear, no wonder he never did it again! I believe the Mrs Fish that Mrs Gray refers to was Priscilla Fish, Abby's older sister, so if it was getting around the family and wider, no wonder it spread.

Do we add sending for Dr Bowen rather than the police to the list of Lizzie's odd actions/sayings on that Thursday! I suppose if I was playing devil's advocate I would say "Well, he was the family physician and lived conveniently over the road." Dr Bowen didn't pay social calls to the Bordens, I believe, because although he was a success with the ladies of the household that wasn't the case with Andrew. Andrew either didn't like 'old smoothie' Dr Bowen, or didn't approve of doctors generally (including paying for them!)

It's a truism isn't it that people in the 19th century didn't behave in the way we would today. For instance, I believe the Bowens had a telephone and why Bridget didn't ask Mrs Bowen to ring the police when she had ascertained that the doctor was out, is also a mystery. However, none of these people had the benefit of watching C.S.I. and countless other detective stories. Sad, really! Smile.

Oh, twinsrwe, if Dr Bowen smuggled the hatchet out, then the guilty weapon can't be the Crowe's Barn one! NOooo! That is one of my treasured beliefs, and you've shattered it! Smile.

I believe Bowen turned up to the coming home party after the trial thrown for Lizzie by her friends, but you are correct, I don't think he associated with the sisters much afterwards. Did he note all the cold-shouldering of Lizzie by the folk of Fall River and decide it was bad for business to be their physician after a while? Rather dishonourable, but quite probable.

Yes, twinsrwe, that's the one! TV only began in Austraiia in 1956 (the year the Olympics came to Melbourne), so it is a very early ad. There have been many more since then, of course. Odd to think that most of those young performers are now in their 60's!

Is it possible there would be a stigma to calling police to a home? Weren't doctors go-betweens for their patients and some social issues sometimes? What was the role of police in Lizzie's Fall River. Even in my time there was a little bit of stigma if police had to be called to the home for something. Could Lizzie have been hoping that Dr. Bowen could make it all go away? (If she was innocent) did she hope her father was only severely injured and that Bowen could help him? Her first sight of Andrew's face probably shocked her into thinking him murdered but possibly she had second thoughts or hopes?

Now I'm going to watch the vegimite ad. Looking forward to it! Thanks for providing it!

I think that's a very true observation, Irina, especially in middle-class neighbourhoods of the time. Imagine the net curtains twitching! Even in my childhood it was the case. There was a shame attached to it.

Lizzie may have, in the immediate aftermath of her father's death, hoped that Bowen, family physician and friend, would hold her hand (figuratively speaking, of course) if police questioning became too much. After all, I don't suppose she thought of the police as being gentlemen! He could also administer a sedative or two.

I think police were considered to be lower class people. We have the stereotype of the Irish policeman in the day when businesses had "Irish need not apply" signs.

There's another thought about Bowen. I don't think this is original with me but maybe worth mentioning here. Did the murderer leave the weapon as we would expect should be the normal course, and did Bowen on his own choose to remove and secrete it? It's far fetched but maybe worth pondering for a moment. (Of course if it was a medical instrument I would suppose he would have taken it. Unlikely a medical instrument was used though.)

Or we could expand on my pet theory. A DRUNKEN stranger staggered through Bowen's yard on the way to the Borden's pear tree. He stumbled over and picked up Bowen's hatchet left by the back door where the maid chopped kindling. This hatchet belonging to the doctor's family, was beautifully monogrammed with the doctor's initials "SB" and the family crest.....(This is how it's done Franz. Go for it!)

Irina and Curryong, I think you both made very valid observations. No matter Lizzie was killer or not, her psychology immediately after the discovery of ther father, and her psychology during that period, are something always fascinating for me, and IMO they deserve a deeper discussion.

P.S.: You pointed out something that I never thought about before, for example, the class level of the policemen.

In England too, policemen were considered (and were) from the working class. Even as late as the 1930's they were considered 'nuisances' by the middle classes, especially in the matter of prosecuting motor car drivers and collecting fines for radio fees!

There were so many tabboos and lines that must not be crossed in Lizzie's day and also into the next century. Feminists of her time seemed to think she finally cracked under the strictures of the time. I reject simple greed as a motive IF Lizzie did it, that she did it to get rich, get a fancy house & freedom from her parents. On the other hand she and Emma may have sincerely feared being left penniless if Andrew at the wrong time. In a sense they were caught in the social climate. How would it have looked if Andrew's daughters had to go and flip crab cakes at the local McLobster of whatever they would have had in Fall River in 1892? If greed is a motive or cause I would suggest it is a complex form of greed laced heavily with fear.

Anyway I would be curious to know when or if an upper middle class family felt it was OK or necessary to call police into a situation.

Curryong wrote:Yes, twinsrwe, that's the one! TV only began in Austraiia in 1956 (the year the Olympics came to Melbourne), so it is a very early ad. There have been many more since then, of course. Odd to think that most of those young performers are now in their 60's!

Yes, I agree, it is strange to think these young performers are now in their 60's.

I found some information on this ad, that I hope you will find interesting:

HAPPY LITTLE VEGEMITES (1959) #VEGEMITE90

There were a number of versions of the 'Happy little Vegemites’ jingle recorded in the 1950s. This is the most famous version: a family affair for the Parker family recorded in the EMI Studios in Sydney in the late 1950s. It includes singer Betty Parker, dubbed the queen of commercials, imitating a child’s voice, as well as her younger siblings Julia and Stephen Parker, who were children at the time. The solo voice at the end of the song belongs to Betty’s daughter, Linda Marcy.

Alan Weekes, a jingle writer for advertising company J Walter Thompson in Sydney, composed the tune but it was Bob Gibson, a famous band leader and musical director, who set the style by arranging it as a 6/8 march. The marching arrangement of the tune of Happy Little Vegemites has been used in advertising campaigns for Vegemite ever since.

HERE IS THE FULL STORY REGARDING THIS AD:
http://aso.gov.au/titles/ads/happy-litt ... tes/notes/

irina wrote: I would suggest it is a complex form of greed laced heavily with fear.

Rage. Whoever did this was enraged, and the perpetrator was either Lizzie or Lizzie complicit with someone else.

Curryong wrote:Twinsrwe, wasn't it Mrs Jane Gray who told the police the scandalous news that Lizzie and Dr Bowen had sat together in Church? Mrs Gray was Abby's stepmother, lived close by, didn't like Lizzie one bit, and probably relished telling that particular titbit! Not that I blame her! If the news got around, and Phoebe Bowen got to hear, no wonder he never did it again! I believe the Mrs Fish that Mrs Gray refers to was Priscilla Fish, Abby's older sister, so if it was getting around the family and wider, no wonder it spread. .. .

Yes, it was Mrs. Jane Gray who told Harrington & Doherty this piece of information. I agree, if true, it was a scandalous action. In Lizzie’s time, it would have caused a huge amount of gossip, not only by Abby’s family members, but the citizen’s of Fall River, as well. I have also wondered why the members of Lizzie’s church snubbed her after her acquittal; was it because they thought she was guilty of killing Andrew and Abby, or because they had already portrayed her as a morally unfit person, who now had been tried for murder. We know for a fact that even though she was acquitted, she was ostracized for the rest of her life by the citizens of Fall River.

Curryong wrote:… Do we add sending for Dr Bowen rather than the police to the list of Lizzie's odd actions/sayings on that Thursday! I suppose if I was playing devil's advocate I would say "Well, he was the family physician and lived conveniently over the road." Dr Bowen didn't pay social calls to the Bordens, I believe, because although he was a success with the ladies of the household that wasn't the case with Andrew. Andrew either didn't like 'old smoothie' Dr Bowen, or didn't approve of doctors generally (including paying for them!) ...

Well, sending for Dr. Bowen instead of the police was indeed odd. So, yes, it should be added to the list, especially since Lizzie knew Andrew was dead. It's true Dr. Bowen was the family physician and conveniently lived across the street, but why not Dr. Kelly, who lived right next door to the Bordens, or Dr. Chagnon, who lived on 3rd street behind Mrs. Churchill’s house?

Curryong wrote:… It's a truism isn't it that people in the 19th century didn't behave in the way we would today. For instance, I believe the Bowens had a telephone and why Bridget didn't ask Mrs Bowen to ring the police when she had ascertained that the doctor was out, is also a mystery. However, none of these people had the benefit of watching C.S.I. and countless other detective stories. Sad, really! Smile. ...

I believe it is true that the people of the 19th century, did not behave as we do today. After finding her father had been killed, Lizzie yelled out for Bridget – how did she know Bridget didn’t kill him? Why send the only other living person in the house, out to find a doctor. Why did she stay in the house after sending Bridget out, not once but twice. Either Lizzie alone killed Andrew and Abby, or she knew who did. If the latter is true, then she allowed that person to kill her beloved father, as well as her not so beloved step-mother, and then took the rap for murder. If she was not the killer, then she was an accomplice to murder.

Curryong wrote:… Oh, twinsrwe, if Dr Bowen smuggled the hatchet out, then the guilty weapon can't be the Crowe's Barn one! NOooo! That is one of my treasured beliefs, and you've shattered it! Smile. ...

I’m sorry to have shattered your treasured belief; I certainly didn’t mean to. You could very well be correct in believing that the hatchet found on the roof of Crowe’s barn is the actual murder weapon. I find both ideas fascinating to think and speculate about.

Curryong wrote:… I believe Bowen turned up to the coming home party after the trial thrown for Lizzie by her friends, but you are correct, I don't think he associated with the sisters much afterwards. Did he note all the cold-shouldering of Lizzie by the folk of Fall River and decide it was bad for business to be their physician after a while? Rather dishonourable, but quite probable.

OK, I missed something here – I didn’t know there was a coming home party for Lizzie after the trial. We will probably never know why Dr. Bowen didn’t associate with Borden sisters after the trial. It’s another mystery to the Borden murders.

twins, I was just joking about the treasured belief! With regard to the other doctors, Dr Kelly was Irish and we all know about the prejudice then by WASPS. Dr Chagnell was French-Canadian and probably regarded as almost as bad! (My apologies to anyone with Irish, French or Canadian ancestry). No, Lizzie wanted her kindly friend, and no substitutes!
Smile.

Lizzie's actions and conversation after Andrew's death are capable of several interpretations, aren't they? That's what makes this case so fascinating! Yes, I believe she did it, of course, but she and Emma could have been cold-blooded enough to plan for an assassin to come in and finish Andrew off. As far as Abby was concerned I truly believe (with no evidence to support it, whatsoever,) that Lizzie murdered her and probably enjoyed doing it.

I posted on the person who threw the homecoming party ages ago, in connection to Phoebe Bowen, who in my opinion wasn't so keen on Lizzie. She didn't stay very long on that Thursday and left Alice and Mrs Churchill to fuss over the bereaved orphan!

Instead, Phoebe hotfooted it back home across the street and, in my opinion, phoned up this woman who threw the party later for Lizzie, to tell her about the murders.

Later that afternoon this woman, whose name I can't remember but who knew Lizzie, turned up at the Borden house and stayed for absolutely hours. I'm sure her name was Marianne somebody. I'll have to look back through the threads. She and her husband hung around with Emma and might have been there when Lizzie was arrested, I just can't remember! Anyway, it was at her house that the party took place.

Who knows why Lizzie was so supported throughout the trial and then so ostracised afterwards by the people of Fall River. Public opinion can turn so quickly! I think afterwards maybe people had a think and decided "Well, she MUST have done it! " It might have been that Victorian thing of staying away from any whisper of anything nasty like a murder, because having a ghastly and brutal murder in your home was a disgrace.

It might have partly been because she immediately bought a large and expensive house and filled it with fine furniture and books and bought jewellery for herself. The townspeople may have felt that was quite vulgar. Who knows!

twinsrwe, thank you very much for posting the links and info about the original Vegemite ad. To anyone who might be tempted to buy some and try it with cheese, please don't lather it thickly on the toast. Just a scraping, please!


Irina, I would love to see Lizzie (time-travelling) in the 19th century equivalent of a Barnacle Bill's uniform, serving out fish and chips and calamari in a box! Do you have Barnacle Bill's seafood take-always in America?

With reference to our earlier postings about the police force being looked down on in 'respectable' middle class circles, I am sure that such families called in the police only with the greatest reluctance. Incidentally, isn't it odd that Andrew was given quite a bit of leeway to drop the police pursuing the case at the time of the 'daylight robbery' in 1891? I'm reading a 1930's English case at the moment, in which the victim's father, an elderly man of some influence, felt that the County force wasn't doing a good enough job of investigation of his son's murder. He therefore tried to put pressure on the Chief Constable (Police Chief) to order Scotland Yard to be brought in!

Seriously though, from the time of the purchase of the half of the modest Whitehead home, Lizzie and Emma seem to have held some heightened suspicions of Abby's influence over their father. In fact it's been my theory for some time that John Morse may have discussed business with Andrew on that Wednesday night with reference to the Swansea farm, information Lizzie may overheard and felt was unfavourable to her and Emma's interests.

I don't think we have Barnacle Bill's in America. I think there are more likely to be places like that in the eastern part of US. Out here we have Red Lobster which is part of a national chain. I'm far enough away from big cities that I don't get near anything like that. We used to have Skipper's until whitefish (cod) became too expensive. With internet photoshopping there isn't any reason Lizzie couldn't be put into various uniforms, etc. (My present laptop won't even allow me to share my own pictures & photoshopping is out of the question.) When I get another it will be able to photoshop and Lizzie might be a fun subject.

One of my marriages was to a man from high society and there was a stigma to having police come to the house. I think eastern high society may have been even more against that sort of thing.

Knew there was something I forgot in that reply.

In US law if a private person reports a crime, as opposed to the police seeing a crime, the complaining party has the ability/right to drop the investigation. Your example about the Chief Constable, etc. in the US would be the equivalent of someone here wanting the FBI called in on a local case. People want to do that all the time but generally certain criteria need to be there before the FBI will get involved. As we become more federalized the FBI is more and more involved in local things.

I was reading a case where three homeless men got into a fight and one ended up horribly killed. One of the killers had white supremacist tattoos so the FBI was called in. "Hate crime" wasn't mentioned but this was in 1999. These are some scary things that are happening in our country. By all means folks should resist the urge to get "I Love Hitler" tattoos when they are young because it will come back to haunt them if they get arrested!

Curryong wrote:twins, I was just joking about the treasured belief! With regard to the other doctors, Dr Kelly was Irish and we all know about the prejudice then by WASPS. Dr Chagnell was French-Canadian and probably regarded as almost as bad! (My apologies to anyone with Irish, French or Canadian ancestry). No, Lizzie wanted her kindly friend, and no substitutes!
Smile.

Lizzie's actions and conversation after Andrew's death are capable of several interpretations, aren't they? That's what makes this case so fascinating! Yes, I believe she did it, of course, but she and Emma could have been cold-blooded enough to plan for an assassin to come in and finish Andrew off. As far as Abby was concerned I truly believe (with no evidence to support it, whatsoever,) that Lizzie murdered her and probably enjoyed doing it.

I posted on the person who threw the homecoming party ages ago, in connection to Phoebe Bowen, who in my opinion wasn't so keen on Lizzie. She didn't stay very long on that Thursday and left Alice and Mrs Churchill to fuss over the bereaved orphan!

Instead, Phoebe hotfooted it back home across the street and, in my opinion, phoned up this woman who threw the party later for Lizzie, to tell her about the murders.

Later that afternoon this woman, whose name I can't remember but who knew Lizzie, turned up at the Borden house and stayed for absolutely hours. I'm sure her name was Marianne somebody. I'll have to look back through the threads. She and her husband hung around with Emma and might have been there when Lizzie was arrested, I just can't remember! Anyway, it was at her house that the party took place.

Who knows why Lizzie was so supported throughout the trial and then so ostracised afterwards by the people of Fall River. Public opinion can turn so quickly! I think afterwards maybe people had a think and decided "Well, she MUST have done it! " It might have been that Victorian thing of staying away from any whisper of anything nasty like a murder, because having a ghastly and brutal murder in your home was a disgrace.

It might have partly been because she immediately bought a large and expensive house and filled it with fine furniture and books and bought jewellery for herself. The townspeople may have felt that was quite vulgar. Who knows!

I knew you were kidding about your treasured belief in the Crowe Hatchet being the weapon, because you had typed the word ‘Smile’ afterwards. I was also kidding, only I forgot to put a smile emotion after my statement! Sorry.

I think you may be correct in your reasoning of why Lizzie wanted Dr. Bowen instead of the other doctors in the neighborhood. In today’s world, if our primary physician is not available, there is another physician available to see us; this is true for physicians who are on vacation, afterhours, weekends and holidays. I don’t know as though there was a backup physician in Lizzie’s day; I’m thinking there was not.

Could the woman who threw the homecoming party for Lizzie be Mrs. Charles J. Holmes? I did a forum search and found the following newspaper report, which Kat posted on Jul 09, 2004. Is this the party you are referring to?

Casebook, pg. 228+

"June 21, 1893

MISS BORDEN AT FALL RIVER

Crowds Surround Her Home -- Spends the Night at Mr. Holmes's

FALL RIVER, MASS., June 20 -- The news of Lizzie Borden's acquittal was received with the greatest surprise in this city. Even her warmest friends and most ardent supporters dared not hope anything better than a disagreement after reading the District Attorney's forcible argument in behalf of the Government.

When it was flashed over the wires that the prisoner had been acquitted, the greatest excitement prevailed. Upon the streets the sole topic of conversation was the unlooked-for discharge of Lizzie Borden.

It had been stated that Miss Lizzie would ride over from New Bedford in a carriage, and as the hour of coming was uncertain, a crowd of curious ones assembled early at the Borden homestead to get a glimpse of the woman who in the past ten months has gained such a world-wide reputation. But the hours passed and there were no signs of her coming.

The crowd increased to such an extent that it was necessary to detail a special squad of policemen to keep the street clear. Inside the house a light was brightly burning in the kitchen, where Bridget Sullivan, who, it is said, has resumed her former position, was preparing for the coming of Lizzie and her friends.

At 8:15 p.m., while the crowd was surging about the homestead on Second Street, a carriage stopped at the residence of Charles J. Holmes, 67 Pine Street. The first one to alight from it was Mr. Holmes, and he was followed by Lizzie Borden. Then came Emma and Miss Annie Holmes.
Miss Lizzie did not wait for Mr. Holmes's escort, but bounded up the steps and disappeared within the house. There was no one about the house at the time save a few reporters.

The United Press reporter entered the house and had an interview with Miss Lizzie. The party, which included Mr., Mrs., and Miss Holmes, Emma and Lizzie Borden, Joseph A. Bowen, and Mrs. Jubb was seated in the drawing room.

Miss Lizzie said that she was 'the happiest woman in the world.' She did not care to dwell upon the subject of the trial, and said that the whole party had agreed not to discuss that subject. She said she would probably spend the night at Mr. Holmes's house. She intended to go home, but her friends advised her not to, on account of the great number of people assembled there.

Mr. Holmes's house was thrown open and many visitors were received, but few were allowed to talk with Miss Lizzie.

At the Borden homestead the crowd kept increasing until 10 o'clock, when there were over 2,000 people there. Just before 10 o'clock a band stopped in front of the house and played 'Auld Lang Syne.' ".

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=138&p=2712



On Sep 16, 2008 Harry posted the following newspaper report.

The N.Y. Times reported on June 21st about Lizzie's arrival at the Holmes' house::

"At 8:15 P.M. while the crowd was surging about the homestead on Second Street, a carriage stopped at the residence of Charles J. Holmes, 67 Pine St. The first one to alight was Mr. Holmes and he was followed by Lizzie Borden. Then came Emma and Miss Annie Holmes.
Miss Lizzie did not wait for Mr. Holmes’s escort, but bounded up the steps and disappeared within the house. There was no one about the house at the time save a few reporters.
The United Press reporter entered the house and had an interview with Miss Lizzie. The party, which included Mr., Mrs., and Miss Holmes, Emma and Lizzie Borden, Joseph A. Bowen and Mrs. Jubb was seated in the drawing room.
Miss Lizzie said that she was the "happiest woman in the world." She did not dare to dwell upon the subject of the trial, and said that the whole party had agreed not to discuss that subject. She said she would probably spend the night at Mr. Holmes' house. She intended to go home, but her friends advised her not to on account of the great number of people assembled there.
Mr. Holmes house was thrown open and many visitors were received, but few were allowed to talk to Miss Lizzie."

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3839&p=64332


I wonder if the citizens of Fall River ostracized Lizzie after her acquittal, because each individual believed she was either innocent or guilty; just like we do today, 121 years after the murders. Since they did not have the source documents available to them, and were able to study the case, as we do, I’m thinking most of their opinions were formed through gossip, personal opinions and rumors. We all know how gossip and rumors work, one person can tell the exact same story to 5 people, and those 5 people will add or subtract from the original story, until we end up with 5 different stories. I don’t imagine Lizzie’s actions after the murders and her trial helped to convince the people, who ostracized her, that she was innocent. We also need to keep in mind that the people who supported Lizzie during her trial, and then ostracized her after she was acquitted, knew her on a personal basis.

Curryong wrote:twinsrwe, thank you very much for posting the links and info about the original Vegemite ad. To anyone who might be tempted to buy some and try it with cheese, please don't lather it thickly on the toast. Just a scraping, please! …

You’re welcome, Curryong. Is it true that Vegemite has a salty, slightly bitter, malty and rich in a pleasant savory taste; similar to beef broth?

Yes, I think it does have a yeasty, slightly bitter flavour. It is an acquired taste, and as I said previously I can live without vegemite! It is very Australian, however, to have vegemite on your toast every morning!

We form our opinions on everything in life by filtering the facts through our personal filters. Why can two people have the exact same facts and one be a conservative and one be a liberal? Upbringing and experiences. Why can two people read all of the primary documents in this case, and one say she is innocent and one that she is guilty? "Filtering".
In a book that I am currently writing, I use the example that by 8 weeks, an human fetus has a head, body, arms, legs fingers and toes. It feels pain and responds to stimuli. These are proven medical facts that cannot be argued with. The interpretation of the facts is where the arguments start. Pro-Life people say this is a human life and should be protected. Pro-Choice people say a woman should have the choice to terminate the fetus because it is not yet alive. They fight, argue, and pass laws. The facts are exactly the same to both sides, why the disagreement? the interpretation of facts filtered through each side's past experience and beliefs. Occasionally people don't know all of the facts, but even when they find new facts that contradict their belief, they discount the fact rather than change their belief. As more and more factual evidence collaborates the fact that the earth is BILLIONS of years old, Religious groups still hold fast to the idea that the whole world is only 6,000 years old! Millions of Jews, Muslims, and Christians hold this belief despite overwhelming evidence against it. Rather than readjusting their beliefs and not giving up their faith, they refuse to believe the facts. That is why we argue...!

So you are writing another book, Possum. A book about the human condition and, I hope, writing some more about a particular hero of mine, Charles Darwin, who, of course, waited twenty years before presenting his theory of evolution to the world. How many in his day felt their own particular beliefs and value systems challenged as they read 'Origin of Species?

Probably we each of us ought to periodically check and see whether our values, beliefs, attitudes etc have caused our own filter system to become choked, with envy or jealousy or prejudice or a need to be right! Sometimes when we debate with people (and I acknowledge that in my responses too) long-held beliefs about something are challenged and the person reacts with a "No, it isn't because..." and those old beliefs and judgements are reiterated. I think it does get worse with age too, unfortunately. A need to re-think things through, keep an open mind, be unprejudiced in our responses is vital.

Things do change in time in some things, however. Look at the question of race and how it is approached today for instance in comparison to the days of George Wallace. The average young citizen would be appalled at the attitude towards minorities which was held in the 1960's.

I'm older than you by miles, and I remember the unfeeling jokes and comments which were quite common in my childhood. A great many ordinary people, including those who lived through institutionalised racism in South Africa and elsewhere, have had their 'filtering systems' adapted since those days.

BOBO wrote:Simple question: did Lizzie do this.... BY HERSELF.... yes or no??

And now we are talking about the age of the earth??

I am so sorry BOBO! I got carried away! Won't do it again!

Curryong wrote:I am so sorry BOBO! I got carried away! Won't do it again!

Hey NP.... I was trying to pull a funny but it came out wrong...lol. Post all ya like. Sorry if I offended.

I too was having a little joke. I should have put a 'smile' in! Trouble is, we can't see each other's faces! Although-- that might be a problem! ( Joke!)

It's OK, we're all friends!

We all need a core of security in a big and scary world. We need something that is bigger and more powerful than us. Religion fills this void. So can superstition. I'm a convert to Catholicism. I have lived with Muslims. Faith enriches life but there cannot be only one right religion. I am a conservative political writer but I have liberal Democrat friends who share my ideas about morals, poverty, etc. We disagree about how to make these things happen.

I believe God can do anything and that science proves how truly great is God. I have fundamentalist friends who limit God to the 6000 year old earth idea. We had a volcano explode in the northwest, Mt. St. Helens in 1980. My fundamentalist friends were thrilled that scientists found wood petrifying (petrified wood) within a few years of the eruption. This proves it doesn't take billions of years to get things done on earth.

As far as pro-life or not, in the US that discussion is becoming politically perverted beyond recognition. My biggest disgust is that it is always "pro-choice" or "pro-life" but no one is pushing the idea that before that point is reached, everything should be done to prevent the need for a horrible "choice". Sexual activity without moral restraint is encouraged all across society. Meanwhile ObamaCare thinks it can "prevent" chronic diseases through various draconian measures like limiting the size of soda people can buy! Nobody dares speak of REALLY trying to prevent unwanted pregnancy! Unfortunately "pro-choice" has become big business.