Reading John Corrado’s analysis of the Borden murders made me think of yet another true crime show I caught on cable about the case.
One “expert” interviewed stated that Lizzie must have been sexually assaulted by her father because of the nature of his wounds. The fact that she obliterated his face was consistent with a rape victim’s wish to destroy her violator.
Reasonable assumption or psycho-babble horseshit? Just wondering.
There’s a gigantic assumption being made between the observation (that the wounds were “consistent with” those that a vengeful rape victim might inflict) and the conclusion (Lizzie “must have been” sexually abused). My vote’s for psycho-babble.
Nothing to add—exceopt that I’ve read everything written on the case (what, you’re surprised?) and must congratulate John on one of the most accurate and succinct articles on it I’ve seen.
Yes, I know I should add a link to the column here . . . but the damn Board is downloading so slowly today it would take me three hours to do so.
THe Lizzie and Brigid where having an affair always struct me as a little weak. She told her father what happened-that her stepmother had caught her-why would she do that? By all accounts, I’m sure Lizzie knew her father wouldn’t take her side. That just didn’t make sense.
I too found it an interesting report. I however was surprised that Evan Hunter’s book Lizzie was referenced as a source. The book (full title: Lizzie: a Novel) is a work of fiction and while using historical facts to build its story, was not intended to be any sort of expose of how the murders actually occurred. The report seems to believe the story requires some sort of debunking, when it never claimed to be the truth to begin with!
That having been said, the book itself is a great read, as is most of Hunter’s work. (He is probably best known for his 87th precinct series written as Ed McBain, but also wrote Blackboard Jungle as well as the screenplay for Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds.) A check with Amazon says the book is out of print, but I suspect most libraries would have it.
First off, thanks to all for the praise and support; I’m honored (especially for the praise from Eve, a published biographer! Cool!).
vogue- Well, even though it’s a work of fiction, it’s a work of historical fiction, and the book is well researched and in many points based upon accurate events. It’s just that the main points of Hunter’s fictional premise are based upon fictional events- something that apparently has been lost on some readers. Note that the person who asked the question said they had seen a ‘Lizzie-ologist’ on TV make such a claim. For all we know, that was Hunter talking about his book and his fictional story. Or it’s someone who read Hunter’s book and didn’t think of it as fiction. Or it’s someone who came to the same conclusion, but I haven’t seen any references to such a theory before Hunter’s book came out. So in the end, I just have to point out that most of the theory well-springs from Hunter’s work of fiction, and that the ‘conclusive evidence’ in it is all sprung from Hunter’s imagination.
I suppose I could have simply said that, but that’d make a damn small Staff Report. 'Course, it’s not like they pay me by the word. Maybe next time someone asks, “Is such-and-such true?” I’ll just answer, “No.” and claim to be done.
Yeah, Dex wouldn’t kill me for that. 'Course he wouldn’t.
Hi, John. I liked your column very much, but I have a few bones to pick about a few of your statements. First, John Morse wasn’t Abby’s brother, he was the brother of the first Mrs. Borden. It also wasn’t that hot that day (I read this in the Lizzie Borden Quarterly, I think). Your assessment of Andrew and Abby’s temperment puzzled me as well. In the books I’ve read they weren’t that bad. Andrew was seen as a cheap old no-nonsense Yankee, but not as nasty and spiteful. And Abby was always described as “retiring”. Lizzie and Emma were thought to have rejected Abby and been money-hungry, not the other way around. As for the illegitimate son, if you are referring to William Borden (not John) from the book by Arnold Brown, I don’t think it was ever proven that he was Andrew’s son.
At least one writer/researcher thought the best murder candidate was the maid, Bridget Sullivan. I forget the writer’s name, but he wrote a play in the 1960’s, “The Lights Are Warm And Colored,” to illustrate his thesis. It all fit together pretty neatly in the play.
Just for the record, in case anyone had doubts, questions that have one word or one sentence answers don’t make it as Staff Reports. Sometimes we just send back the answer to the person putting the question: Yes, it’s true; or No, it ain’t. More often, we don’t bother, because we get hundreds of emails each week and it’s a pain in the butt to try to answer any.
So, no, John, I wouldn’t have done you physical harm, but I might have aimed a withering sneer in your direction.
I’ve read two books on the Lizzie Border murders, including Victoria Lincoln’s admirable “A Private Disgrace”. To me, one of the most compelling and suggestive details about what the maid Bridget thought of Lizzie’s guilt is that Bridget never spent another night under the same roof with Lizzie, from the time the murders were discovered. Yes, she claimed at the time that she didn’t want to be in the same house with the dead bodies (they were laid out on the dining room table before the funeral), when she went across the street to stay with a neighbor’s maid, but she never returned while Lizzie lived there.
She was a friendly witness to Lizzie at the trial, perhaps because Lizzie had always kind to Bridget, but Bridget also knew too much about Lizzie and the murders to feel safe in that house any more.
Two pieces of evidence against Lizzie that were not mentioned here were:
a detective who visited the barn loft shortly after the murders, where Lizzie claimed to have been at the time when the murders occurred, saw when he stood at the top of the ladder with his eye on the same level as the loft floor, that the dust covering the floor was undisturbed by any footprints.
Lizzie had tried to buy Prussic acid from a druggist not long before the murders, claiming that she needed it to clean a a stain from a fur. Prussic acid is poisonous, and was not used as a stain remover.
Former FBI profiler John Dougles covers the Borden case in his latest book, The Cases That Haunt Us, and compiles the evidence against Lizzie pretty convincingly. If I’m remembering correctly, BTW, his profiling experience leads him to believe that everybody who kills a close relative tries to somehow “wipe out” their identity. (He mentions, but reaches no conclusion on, the incest charge.)
One reason for the lack of blood and it hasn’t been canvassed, is that blood will not spray or flow if there is no pressure to drive it, ie., the couple were dead before their heads were mashed. And they had been dead long enough for all body functions to stop. Have a think about this line!
Maralinn brings up the John Douglas book. Let’s bring up his observation…the suspect population is small: Emma, Lizzie, and possibly Abby’s half-sister, Sarah Whitehead.
We can reasonably eliminate Sarah. As he points out not only did Sarah and Abby have a close relationship, she had no problem with the Bordens.
Anyway, long story short, Douglas goes over the different theories and comes to a simple conclusion: greed.
Andrew had already turned over real estate holdings to Abby and her half-sister as early as 1887 and Lizzie and Emma both feared they would increasingly be cut out of their father’s estate.
He points out that the night before the murders Andrew and John Morse discussed business with each other in the first floor sitting room. And he mentions some indication that Andrew was seeking advice about his will. Whether or not Lizzie had been gradually trying to poison her parents, this discussion with Uncle John could have been a precipitating stresser that made an act urgent.
What I find interesting is what happened to Bridget.
She didn’t speak of the Borden murders until 1943 when she contracted a severe case of pneumonia and believed she was going to die. She called her closest friend saying she had a secret to confide. By the time the friend arrived Bridget was getting better and said nothing.