The Trial of Lizzie Borden Part 2
Day 7June 12, 1893
Moody began the day's proceedings by providing an oral argument to the court as to why it should admit Lizzie Borden's inquest testimony into evidence. Citing other cases that had been both brought before the courts of the Commonwealth and other jurisdictions, Moody meticulously showed that the handling of Lizzie's inquest testimony, especially the exclusion of her attorney, was perfectly in keeping with the statutes of the Commonwealth.
In arguing Lizzie Borden's inquest testimony should be excluded, Defense Attorney Robinson pointed out that the warrant for Lizzie's arrest had been issued before her inquest testimony, and that the warrant was being held by the Marshal during the period of her testifying. He also noted that the first warrant had been disposed of after her testimony, and that a new warrant had then been issued, a tactic that he characterized as a "colorable evasion of the law." Somewhat histrionically, Robinson also referred to the state's intentional disposal of the first warrant as "worse than the burning of a dress!" He graphically described how the Commonwealth did not use the Inquest as a forum to discover who committed the murder, but instead employed the proceedings as an act of coercion designed to obtain incriminating evidence from a prime suspect – one who had been charged with the crimes but had not been legally arrested.
Moody's response to Robinson's argument was blunt: "It is magnificent, but is it not the law!" He claimed that Robinson had presented a lot of "vocal gymnastics and fireworks." Moody insisted that the proceedings had been performed within the strict rules of the statutes; pointed out that Lizzie Borden's liberty was never restricted during the course of the investigation; that the police who guarded the house had shown no discrimination towards her as a suspect, any more than they would have towards John Morse or Bridget Sullivan; and that it had been perfectly proper for a criminal investigation to be pursued against the people who were actually in the house where the murders occurred.
After a short break, the three justices trying the case ruled that Lizzie Borden's inquest testimony was not admissible as evidence in the case before the court. The justices were convinced that at the time that Lizzie made her inquest statements, she had been legally under arrest, and statements under those conditions were inadmissible.
This ruling served as a huge blow to the prosecution. Had it been placed before the jury, Lizzie's inquest testimony, which Knowlton privately called a "confession", may have sent her to the gallows. Upon the announcement by the court of this crucial ruling, Lizzie Borden broke down into visible tears of joy.
ALBERT C. DEDRICK
Albert C. Dedrick was a physician who examined the dead bodies on August 4th. He testified that the blood coming from Abby Borden was of a ropey, coagulated consistency, and that the blood coming from Andrew Borden was more of a "cozy character." Based on this and the relative temperatures and stiffness of the bodies, he concluded that Mrs. Borden had died first.
JOSEPH HYDE
Joseph Hyde was a police officer assigned to watch the Borden house on the evening of August 4th. At about a quarter to nine in the evening, he was positioned in the southeastern part of the Borden yard. From this vantage point, he witnessed, through the windows of the house, Lizzie Borden and Alice Russell walk through the sitting room and descend into the cellar. Russell had a lamp, and Lizzie was carrying a pail. Alice Russell went into the privy, and then joined Lizzie in the wash room. Russell seemed, according to Hyde, very visibly nervous and appeared to be frightened of going into the wash cellar. Lizzie washed out her pail and filled it with water, then the two ladies returned to the upstairs bedrooms. Hyde went on to testify that some fifteen minutes later, Lizzie Borden went back down to the cellar on her own, and stooped down in the wash room in the area where the victims' bloody clothes were sitting in a pail. Then she returned upstairs.
DR. WILLIAM A. DOLAN
William A. Dolan was a physician of Fall River and a medical examiner for Bristol County. By happenstance, he was passing 92 Second Street at about 11:45 a.m. Entering the house, he was greeted by Dr. Bowen and shown the bodies, which he examined. He testified that Mr. Borden's wounds were still oozing and that the blood had not yet coagulated, while Mrs. Borden's blood was dark and coagulated. After having the bodies photographed, Dolan performed an initial autopsy on each, availing himself of the undertaker's boards at hand in order to do so. He removed each victim's stomach, sealing them in jars and then sending them, along with samples of the family's milk, to Professor Wood at the Harvard Medical School. He testified that the bodies as pictured in the crime scene photographs were in the same position in which he found them, but that the hands of Abby Borden in the photos were not as outstretched towards the head as he remembered them being.
On August 11th, at Oak Grove Cemetery, Dolan performed the official autopsies on both bodies, counting the wounds and cataloging them. Using a plaster cast of Andrew Borden's head in the courtroom, Dolan explicitly described each of the ten incised wounds he had found, and how he had removed the skull and boiled away the flesh. Dolan went through the same exercise with Mrs. Borden, describing the eighteen wounds he had measured, and discussing the possibility that some of the blows may have penetrated a previous wound. He went into a detailed description of the blood spots found on the crime scenes.
Dolan caused a stir by agreeing that a woman of ordinary strength could have caused the observed wounds with a hatchet, and that, in his opinion, Mrs. Borden died anywhere from an hour to an hour- and-a-half before her husband had.
Upon cross-examination by Adams, Dolan was pressed into admitting that the claw-headed hatchet was adequate to cause the wounds that were inflicted on the victims, while also acknowledging that the handle-less hatchet found in the cellar might not have been. He also revealed that a flap wound found on Abby's head suggested that, at one point during the attack, the victim and the assailant had been facing each other.
Day 8
June 13, 1893
DR. WILLIAM A. DOLAN (Resumed)
In the continuation of the cross-examination, Dr. Dolan addressed the various wounds and blood spots, speculating as to the direction of the blows, the possibility that the assailant would be splattered by the blood coming off the swinging blows of the hatchet, and the question of whether a person of ordinary strength could have delivered the blows. Dr. Dolan gave the defense a cool run for its money, calmly stepping through the courtroom tactics, even causing one of the trial's most surreal moments when he demonstrated a hatchet blow by swinging a hatchet at the head of the court stenographer. He also evoked the gruesome image of the assailant sitting astride Abby Borden's body after she had crashed to the ground, bruising her nose and forehead, and swinging the hatchet downward at the back of her head. Given the gruesome imagery, it is small wonder that the proceedings had to be suspended for a time while one of the jurors recovered from a fainting fit.
DR. WILLIAM S. WOOD
Dr. William S. Wood was a physician and chemist who taught chemistry at the Harvard Medical School and who assisted in cases, including capital crimes, that required knowledge of physiological chemistry. On August 5th, he had received four jars, two of which contained milk from the Borden residence, the other two containing the stomachs of the two victims. He noted that the digestion in Mrs. Borden's stomach was not as far advanced as the digestion in Mr. Borden's; and concluded that there was no sign of any irritant or poison, including prussic acid. Wood concluded that the interval between the two murders was about an hour and a half.
On August 10th, Dr. Wood received from Dr. Dolan a trunk of items which contained hair samples from the victims, two axes, the claw-headed hatchet, hair found on one of the hatchets, Abby's braid, a blue dress skirt and waist, and samples of the blood-stained carpets. He thoroughly tested the axes and hatchets for blood and was unable to find any. He also determined the hair to be from an animal, possibly a cow. The blue dress waist he found had not even have a suspicion of blood upon it anywhere. However, on the skirt he found a pin-point of blood, barely one-sixteenth of an inch in diameter, that he determined must have come from the outside and soaked its way in.
Upon cross-examination, Wood admitted that the pin-point stain found upon the blue skirt may or may not have been caused by menstrual blood.
FRANCIS W. DRAPER
Francis W. Draper was a physician, a medical examiner for Suffolk County, and a professor at the Harvard Medical School. He aided in the autopsies at Oak Grove Cemetery. After Draper described in great detail the various wounds that were inflicted upon Mr. and Mrs. Borden, a request was made to produce the actual skull of Andrew Borden. Dr. Dolan was summoned, and the skull was brought into the courtroom to aid in Draper's testimony. Draper then proceeded to fit pieces of tin of varying length into the wounds to demonstrate the width of the blade and the angle of the blows.
Lizzie Borden left the courtroom at the time the skull was produced.
DAVID W. CHEEVER
David W. Cheever was a physician and professor of surgery at the Harvard Medical School. Based upon the temperature of the bodies, the relative amount of digested food in the stomachs, the coagulation of blood from Mrs. Borden and the liquidity of the blood from Mr. Borden, Cheever concluded that Mrs. Borden had died first, and that the two deaths occurred anywhere from an hour to two hours apart from each other. Cheever discussed the blood coming from the victims' wounds and the high probability of the assailant being splattered with it, as had often happened to him when he had been engaged in performing surgery to a patient's head.
Day 9
June 14, 1893
RUFUS B. HILLIARD
Rufus B. Hilliard was City Marshal of Fall River on the day of the murders and during the subsequent investigation. Hilliard received a phone call at 11:15 a.m. from John Cunningham telling him that there was trouble at the Borden house, after which he dispatched Officer Allen. He personally arrived at the Borden house about three o'clock, did not have any discussion with Lizzie Borden, and did a cursory examination of just two rooms on the first floor. He accompanied the search party on Saturday, August 6th, at which time a thorough search of the house was made from top to bottom. That evening he was back at the Borden house with Mayor Coughlin. Even at eight o'clock at night, the street was filled with nearly three hundred people, most of whom Hilliard ordered his policemen to remove. Hilliard recalls the uncomfortable conversation in which Lizzie Borden was informed by the Mayor that she was suspected of the crime. Hilliard also described the gathering of the evidence, which included pieces of the house itself, the hatchets and axes, and the bloody handkerchief, and confirmed the chain of evidence. He described in great detail the search of the house performed on August 6th.
JOHN W. COUGHLIN
John W. Coughlin was a physician and surgeon from Fall River who, on August 4th, 1892, was also the Fall River Mayor. He accompanied Marshal Hilliard on the Saturday night visit to the Borden residence, during which Coughlin, in direct response to a blunt question posed by Lizzie Borden, informed her that she was indeed under suspicion of murder. His account of the event does not contradict that of Marshal Hilliard's; however, during both of their testimonies, the court did not permit any discussion of how the evening before, John Morse had been surrounded in the streets by several hundred people and the safety of the Borden home was in question. Morse's ordeal was highly significant to the proceedings because the defense was contending that Hilliard and Coughlin's visit on Saturday evening was actually an intentional effort at entrapment. If the prosecution could prove that the Marshal and the Mayor were seriously concerned for the Borden household's safety, then the visit could be cast as not part of an attempt to have Lizzie Borden self-incriminate herself. Instead, it could be portrayed to the jury as a visit made by the Mayor and Marshal to persuade the Borden family to take steps to protect themselves.
MRS. HANNAH GIFFORD
Mrs. Hannah Gifford was a garment-maker who was employed by the Borden sisters. She testified that in the spring before the murders, she heard Lizzie speak some harsh words about her step-mother, calling her a "mean old thing." The defense objected to the testimony, claiming that the conversation was too remote in time to be probative of Lizzie's feelings towards Abby at the time of the murders, several months later.
MRS. ANNA H. BORDEN
Mrs. Anna H. Borden was a Fall River resident who had accompanied Lizzie Borden in 1890 during her tour of Europe. Her testimony concerned her perception of Lizzie's feelings of unhappiness about her home during their trip. However, objections from the defense led to a ruling that the testimony contained statements from Lizzie that were too ambiguous and too remote in time from the murders to be meaningfully relevant.
LUCY COLLET
THOMAS BOWLES
PATRICK McGOWAN
JOSEPH DESROSIER
JOHN DENNY
ARUBA P. KIRBY
The prosecution now called several witnesses, all of whom were at various locations around the Borden home at the time of the murders. Lucy Collet was on the piazza of Doctor Chagnon's house; Thomas Bowles was washing a carriage in Mrs. Churchill's yard; Joseph Desrosier, along with John Denny and Patrick McGowan, were working in Crowe's yard; and Aruba P. Kirby, who lived north of Doctor Chagnon's house, had a clear view of what could have been an escape route for the killer. None of these people saw anyone going into or out of the Borden yard, nor could any of them report witnessing anyone escaping from that property.
MRS. HANNAH REAGAN
Mrs. Hannah Reagan was the matron at the Fall River police station at the time that Lizzie Borden was brought in as a prisoner; Lizzie was ultimately to remain in Reagan's care for nine days. She testified that during the time that Lizzie occupied the matron's room, she overheard a conversation between the Borden sisters. Lizzie, with much agitation, purportedly said to Emma: "You have given me away, haven't you?" Then the two Borden sisters allegedly sat in silence for almost two hours, until Attorney Jennings appeared, at which point Emma left without saying a word.
ELI BENCE
Eli Bence was the pharmacist at a drug store on South Main Street. He took the witness stand, but was then was asked to step down while the defense lawyers' arguments for the exclusion of his testimony were made to the court. Bence would have testified that on August 3rd, a woman, whom he believed to be Lizzie Borden, entered the drug store in which he was employed and attempted to buy prussic acid. She claimed it was needed to clean a sealskin cape. She left after Bence denied her the sale.
Attorney Robinson argued that the testimony was not pertinent to the crimes for which Lizzie Borden was charged; that the events to be described by Bence were too remote in time and so not relevant; and that the evidence, even if allowed, would not have a tendency to prove that Lizzie Borden had killed her father and step-mother with a hatchet. He emphasized that in the days before the murders, Lizzie showed no malice towards Mrs. Borden, or any behavior exhibiting a tendency towards violence against her; and so the attempted prussic acid purchase could not be, he contended, be reasonably interpreted in that light. Oddly enough, Robinson never seemed to actually deny that Lizzie Borden had, in reality, attempted the purchase. He even claimed that buying prussic acid, a legal act in itself, could be for the purpose of killing a cat (which was not an illegal act at that time in Fall River).
Moody argued that the testimony was being offered to show pre-meditation on the part of the defendant, and that it had a direct and probative bearing upon her state of mind. He mentioned the sickness that the various members of the Borden household had experienced in the days leading up to the murders, and the conversation that Lizzie had had with Alice Russell the night before during which she mentioned the possibility of her family being poisoned. Moody argued that the relevant question was one of deliberation and premeditation, and whether the act of the attempted prussic acid purchase showed a tendency towards intent. In support of Bence's tesitimony being allowed, Moody cited several other state cases in which similar evidence had been submitted.
The court was adjourned at the end of the day, with its decision concerning the exclusion of the prussic acid evidence taken under advisement and yet to be announced.
Day 10
June 15, 1893
CHARLES H. LAWTON
HENRY H. TILLSON
NATHALIEL HATHAWAY
While the justices were considering what their ruling on the prussic acid evidence should be, three more witnesses were called by the prosecution. These included a chemist, a fur clothier, and a chemist, all called to testify that no innocent uses could be made of prussic acid. The witnesses attempted to prove for the Commonwealth, amidst aggressive objections from the defense, that prussic acid was an extremely dangerous substance, and was not generally used to clean clothing, Robinson, in his cross-examination, read a litany of dangerous chemicals and gases that were commonly used in households including arsenic (then being marketed with the name "Rough On Rats"). As a final flourish to the prussic acid testimony, Dr. Dolan was recalled to the stand to state that prussic acid "is one of the most volatile drugs that we have."
The justices then ruled on the Bence prussic acid evidence, finding in favor of the defense's position and excluding it from presentation to the jury. This was, obviously, a dramatic ending to the case for the Commonwealth. Admission of the prussic acid evidence, as well as Lizzie Borden's inquest testimony, would have been very damaging to Lizzie; the court's rulings in favor of the defense on these issues may well have saved her from the gallows.
THE OPENING ARGUMENT FOR THE DEFENSE
Some of his points included the following observations:
- Lizzie had no motive and no real evidence had been presented that would prove that the relations between she and Abby Borden were troubled. There was even less motive for Lizzie to kill her father, and yet the government claimed that one person did both deeds.
- Witnesses had been presented to show that no one saw a killer escape from the Borden house; by contrast, not a single person could be found to testify that Andrew Jackson Borden had left his house and went to the bank that morning, and yet it was manifest that he did leave the house.
- Jennings told the jury that the defense would establish that the dress that Lizzie burned did in fact have paint on it, and that she performed the burning in the clear light of day before witnesses because it was a perfectly innocent act. The defense will also prove, Jennings stated, that on the morning of August 4th, Lizzie did in fact have on the exact dress she claimed.
Martha Chagnon was the daughter of Doctor Chagnon and a neighbor of the Borden family that occupied a house on Third Street which had a fence also bordering the Borden's property. At approximately 11:00 o'clock at night, Miss Chagnon heard something coming from the Borden yard that sounded like pounding on wood. The prosecution was quick to point out that an ice house adjoined Chagnon's property, that it was common for blocks of ice to be dumped onto wooden floor planks. When Miss Chagnon was insistent that the sound didn't come from that direction, Knowlton repeatedly queried her as to possible alternative scenarios; this had the effect of disorienting her until she lapsed into silence.
MARIENNE CHAGNON
Marienne Chagnon was the wife of Dr. Chagnon who, along with her daughter Martha, had heard the pounding noise in the backyard on the evening of August 3rd. Upon cross-examination, Knowlton suggested that she may have mistaken the noise of dogs trying to break into an ash barrel for some bones for the mysterious noise and even claimed that when she had heard a policeman recreate the noise, she had verified the resulting noise resembled what she had heard.
JOHN W. GROUARD
Mr. John W. Grouard was a painter who helped to paint the Borden house in May of 1893. His testimony established that the house had been painted at that time; that Lizzie had directed the painting; and that she was physically near a large batch of paint. This testimony was offered to show how Lizzie's dress had become stained with paint.
MARY A. DURFEE
Mary A. Durfee made an attempt to testify that she had seen Mr. Borden arguing with a man on his property. She recalled the man claiming to Mr. Borden that he had been cheated, and that he would "fix" Mr. Borden for it. Before Durfee could testify, the prosecution objected; the justices ultimately excluded the evidence from the jury on the grounds that it was too remote in time from the occurrences of the crimes.
CHARLES N. GIFFORD
Charles N. Gifford was a citizen of Fall River who lived in a house north of Dr. Chagnon's house at the time of the murders. On the evening of August 3rd, at approximately 11 o'clock that night, Gifford saw a strange man, apparently a tramp, sitting silently on the steps who did not respond to questioning. Gifford even lit a match in front of the man's face but did not recognize him.
URIAH KIRBY
Uriah Kirby was a citizen of Fall River who lived in a house north of Dr. Chagnon's house at the time of the murders. On the evening of August 3rd, at approximately 11 o'clock, he also saw the strange man sitting on the steps of Gifford's house. Kirby yelled at him, but the man didn't respond, so Kirby went into his own home.
MARK P. CHASE
Mark P. Chase was a barn hostler who worked across the street from the Borden house on the day of the murders. He testified that he saw an open box buggy sitting outside the Borden house at approximately ten minutes to eleven in the morning, occupied by a man with a brown hat and black coat. Upon cross-examination, Knowlton succeeded in having Chase admit that the horse and buggy could have been a lot closer to Dr. Kelly's property than it was to the Bordens'; and that there was nothing to indicate that the buggy was not one that belonged to a patient of Dr. Kelly's.
DR. BENJAMIN J. HANDY
Dr. Benjamin J. Handy was a physician of Fall River. He testified that at approximately 10:30 in the morning, he saw a young, pale man, noticeably paler than usual, walking down Second Street by the Borden property. Handy related that the man's eyes were fixed upon the ground; he was moving very slowly, and seemed to be weak, almost staggering, and he seemed mentally agitated. Upon cross-examination, Knowlton tried to shatter Handy's insistence that the man was acting strangely, and tried to have Handy admit, without great success, that the man might just have been someone walking and lost in thought.
DELIA S. MANLY
Delia S. Manly was Alice Russell's sister-in-law. She testified that about 9:45 a.m. on the morning of the murders, she and a friend stopped alongside a horse team standing between the Borden and the Churchill houses in order to look at some pond lilies. She noticed a young man about thirty, clad in light clothing, standing by the Borden property. Upon cross-examination, Knowlton had Manly admit there seemed to be nothing particularly unusual about this man about which it would be worth making a fuss about.
JEROME C. BORDEN
Jerome C. Borden was a lumber man of Fall River. On August 5th, 1892, at approximately two o'clock in the afternoon, he walked up to the Borden house and opened the door to enter. In doing so, he caused alarm to the house's residents. Although the objections of the prosecution made it difficult to determine the exact reasoning underlying the defense's offering of this testimony, it seems as if the defense was seeking to establish that the spring lock that secured the front door was not sufficient to do so, and that it could easily be opened.
WALTER P. STEVENS
Walter P. Stevens was a reporter for one of the Fall River newspapers. He arrived with Officer Mullaly at the crime scene, and did his own search of the yards and the barn. Upon cross-examination, Knowlton tried to establish that Stevens had no idea as to when Officer Medley had been in the barn, whether before Stevens had been, or after him. Officer Medley had claimed that, during his examination of the barn, he had seen no disturbances in the second floor dust, and particularly no footprints. This absence of disturbances in the dust would undercut Lizzie's alibi, so Steven's testimony that he might have been in the barn himself before Medley had been tends to cast some doubt on the conclusions of Medley's investigation.
ALFRED CLARKSON
Alfred Clarkson was a steam engineer living in Fall River. On the day of the murders, he arrived at the Borden home, presumably as a passerby, and went up into the barn around 11:40 a.m., before the arrival of Assistant Marshal Fleet and Officer Medley. He described several people who were also up in the barn at that time, supporting the conclusion that Officer Medley's experiment with the dust on the floor of the barn could not have been valid, and that Lizzie Borden could have been exactly where she said she was at the time of the murders: on the second floor of the barn, eating pears and looking for metal.
Upon cross-examination, Knowlton attempted to show the imprecise memory of the witness, establishing that Clarkson could not be sure of exactly what time he had arrived (he acknowledged that he did not consult his pocket watch), and that he could not clearly remember everyone who was then up in the barn.
HYMON LUBINSKY
Hymon Lubinsky was an ice cream vendor who was driving a team and ice cream wagon on the day of the murders. He described how at 11 o'clock that morning, he drove his team out of the stables up near Morgan Street and came up Second Street. As he passed by the Borden house, he saw a woman walking out of the barn and head towards the side entrance. This was, presumably, Lizzie Borden doing exactly what she claimed to have been doing at the time of the murders.
Upon cross-examination, Knowlton pressed Lubinsky into admitting that all he had seen was a woman near the house, with her back to the barn; he had no reasonable basis upon which to infer that she had been in the barn. Knowleton badgered Lubinsky with questions about why he had looked on that particular day, into the Borden yard, and why it was that he couldn't remember if he had seen anyone else in the other yards that he had passed. When asked why he was looking, Lubinsky answered: "Something made me look at it that day. What has a person got eyes for, but to look with?"
CHARLES E. GARDNER
Charles E. Gardner was the owner of a stable in downtown Fall River. On the morning of August 4th, at approximately five minutes past eleven, he assisted Hymon Lubinsky in getting his team out of the stable and onto the street. Then as he was driving his own team through the streets, he heard about the "fight" at the Borden house from a boy on the street.
CHARLES V. NEWHALL
Charles V. Newhall was a man in the saddler business. He had been driving with Charles E. Gardner through the streets of Fall River when they heard about the "stabbing."
EVERETT BROWN
THOMAS E. BARLOW
Everett Brown and Thomas E. Barlow were two youths living in Fall River. On the morning of the murders, they arrived at the house after the alarm had been raised, and entered the barn to look for anyone who might have been found in there. Neither one of them had any idea if they had been in the barn before or after Officer Medley. Much of the cross-examination of the two boys by Knowlton focused on the impreciseness of their testimony in regard to the exact time of their described presence in the barn.
JOSEPH LEMAY
Joseph Lemay was a farmer from the area of North Fall River known as Steep Brook, located about four miles from City Hall. He testified that, on the morning of August 16th, while he was walking through the woods, he heard someone muttering, "Poor Mrs. Borden", and then saw a man seated upon a wall, waving a hatchet defensively. The man seemed to be in a distressed state, and had blood splattered upon his clothing. Lemay testified that the man eventually jumped off the wall, and disappeared into the woods.
Knowlton objected to this evidence in that it had no connection whatsoever to the events of August 4th, and argued cogently that the mutterings of the man, besides constituting pure hearsay, could very well have been a random reference to the crimes without indicating in any rational way the individual's actual participation in them. When Knowlton observed that many people with disordered minds had already by that time confessed to the crimes, the defense rejoined that Lemay's mysterious man was not confessing, since he was muttering without awareness of the witness' (i.e. Lemay's) presence. The defense also argued that the blood on the man's clothing placed him in a different category from that of any disordered people who had subsequently (and unpersuasively) confessed to the crimes.
The court deferred judgment on the admissibility of this evidence until the next morning.
Day 11
June 16, 1893
The justices ruled in favor of the prosecution's position that Joseph Lemay's testimony be excluded.
SARAH R. HART
Sarah R. Hart was the sister-in-law of Delia Manly. Together on the morning of August 4th, 1893, they stopped alongside a carriage in front of the Borden house to look at pond lilies. They noticed a young man, about thirty years old, standing in the gateway to the Borden residence. Hart testified that the man stared back at her, with a somewhat hostile manner, as if she were interfering with his business.
CHARLES S. SAWYER
Charles S. Sawyer was an ornamental painter living in Fall River. He happened to be on Second Street at the time of the alarm, and, hearing that a person had been stabbed, he hurried towards the house and arrived just as Alice Russell and Officer Allen reached it. Officer Allen stationed Sawyer at the side door, giving him explicit orders to stop any unauthorized person from entering the house through that door. Mr. Sawyer stayed there until six o'clock that night. His testimony provides a rare picture of a man on the scene who actually remained throughout the events of the day in one spot, watching the police officers and investigators come and go, the boys swarming around the yard, and the people raiding the barn. Sawyer also gave an unsettling account of just how nervous and creepy everyone on the scene felt.
JOHN J. MANNING
John J. Manning was a reporter for a Fall River newspaper. At around 11:30 a.m., he heard from his city editor that a stabbing had occurred in Second Street and he was dispatched to the scene. He was initially denied entry by Sawyer at the side door, but then he wisely waited while others came, including some police officers, who allowed him to piggyback into the house with them. Following Doctor Bowen and Officer Doughtry through the house, he witnessed the examination of both victims' bodies, and had a private conversation with Bridget Sullivan. Manning then went to conduct his own search of the yard and the barn. Manning also had a conversation with Hannah Reagan about the story that had been published about the alleged quarrel between the Borden sisters. Reagan, Manning stated, had confessed to him that the story wasn't true.
Manning is distinguished in the trial in that he actually responded to Knowlton's aggressive cross-examination with an effective sarcasm. When asked by Knowlton if newspaper reporters were particularly persistent in their questioning, Manning replied, "Perhaps you can answer that question yourself," to which Knowlton quipped, "I think I could, yes, if I were allowed to."
THOMAS F. HICKEY
Thomas F. Hickey was a reporter for the Fall River Globe as well as the Boston Herald. He testified that Hannah Reagan had told him that the story printed in the newspaper about the quarrel between the Borden sisters was not true, and that she insisted to him that the newspapers who published it needed to retract the story.
Upon cross-examination, Knowlton succeeded in getting Hickey to admit that his visit to Reagan was to undermine the "scoop" that a rival newspaper had achieved with her story.
JAMES E. WINWOOD
James E. Winwood was the undertaker who was responsible for the corpses of Mr. and Mrs. Borden. He was brought to the stand by the defense to testify that Mr. Borden had worn Lizzie's high school ring on his finger when he was murdered, perhaps an attempt to show the loving relations between father and daughter. Winwood, however, couldn't remember anything about the ring, and, in essence, his testimony is largely inconclusive.
MRS. MARIANNA HOLMES
Mrs. Marianna Holmes was a member of the Central Congregational Church, and so was familiar with Lizzie's activities within the church community. From her testimony, we learn that Lizzie was a member of the Christian Endeavor Society, as well as the Woman's Board of the Fall River Hospital, and that Lizzie taught Sunday school to Chinese immigrant children. Holmes was allowed entry into the house after one o'clock on the afternoon of the murders and visited Lizzie in her bedroom, thus witnessing Marshall Fleet's interrogation and the searching of the room by the police officers. Poignantly, Mrs. Holmes also testified that, on the day of the funeral service, Lizzie Borden shed tears upon witnessing her father's body.
Mrs. Holmes also testified that Hannah Reagan had confessed to her that the newspaper story about the Borden sisters' quarrel was not accurate. She also stated that Reagan was willing to sign a retraction if permitted to do so by Marshal Hilliard. CHARLES C. HOLMES
Charles C. Holmes was a banker in Fall River, and the husband of Marianna Holmes. He was present at the district court hearing the day that an affidavit was presented to Hannah Reagan stating that her story to the newspapers was false. Knowlton tried to block this discussion of the affidavit as evidence, on the grounds that the original could not be produced by the defense. Jennings, after having attempted to get Marshall Hilliard to permit Reagan to sign it, gave the original to a newspaper reporter, who never returned it; but the text of the affidavit appeared in a newspaper. The newspaper was produced in court, and read into the record.
JOHN R. CALDWELL
John R. Caldwell was a reporter in Fall River who was present in the District Court during the incident where Jennings attempted to get his affidavit signed. He heard Marshall Hilliard expressly forbid Hannah Reagan from signing the document.
In response to Caldwell's testimony, Knowlton emphasized that the Marshall's having forbidden Reagan from signing the document did not suggest one way or another whether the story was true. Reagan, he contended, would avail herself of the opportunity to appear in court and then to testify as to what she considered to be the truth. MARY E. BRIGHAM
Mary Brigham was a friend of Lizzie Borden's since childhood. She was present in the District Court in Fall River when Hannah Reagan was forbidden by Marshall Hilliard to sign the retraction of her story. Reagan, was quite angry, according to Brigham, and claimed that it was "all a lie from beginning to end."
EMMA L. BORDEN
Emma Borden, a star witness for the defense, testified that it was at her suggestion that Lizzie burned a Bedford Cord dress that had been paint-stained the previous spring. Emma had noticed the dress in the clothes press and had reminded her sister that it needed to be taken care of. On the morning of Saturday, August 6th, Lizzie came into the kitchen with the dress and both sisters agreed that it needed to be burned. Alice Russell witnessed the burning, and, on the next morning, August 7th, she lied to a detective about the dress and also chastised Lizzie for burning it. Placed in context, Russell's comments seemed more of a misunderstanding, and Lizzie was doing exactly what she had claimed to have been doing: burning an old painted-stained dress.
Emma also testified that Hannah Reagan's story about a dispute between the Borden sisters was untrue, and that no such incident occurred.
On the cross-examination, Knowlton brought up the real estate transaction that caused trouble between the Borden Sisters and Abby. Andrew had purchased half of Mrs. Whitehead's house for his wife and the sisters found fault with it. As a result of this, there was trouble between the Borden sisters and Abby. Emma did deny that the subsequent purchasing of the Ferry Street house by Andrew for his daughters was a direct result of this fault finding, but Knowlton carefully crafted his questions to elicit answers from Emma which suggested such was the case. Emma admitted that, after the purchasing of the Ferry Street house, relations between Lizzie and Abby returned to normal, but she would not characterize the relationship between Abby and herself. Knowlton pressured Emma into admitting a lack of cordiality between Abby and Lizzie, by parading before her certain slightly contradictory statements that Emma had made in earlier testimony.
Emma held up fairly well on the cross-examination, giving Knowlton little room to attack the truthfulness of her testimony. She downplayed or denied any trouble between Lizzie and Abby; dismissed the Hannah Reagan story; and most importantly, verified that Lizzie's Bedford Cord dress had been soiled with paint and needed to be burned, which then was done by Lizzie, and largely at Emma's suggestion.
MRS. MARY A. RAYMOND
Mary A. Raymond was a dress-maker of Fall River who came to the Borden home during the Spring before the murders and made the Bedford Cord dress that Lizzie was believed to have burned on the morning of August 7th. She verified that the dress had been stained with paint, but while attempting to state that Lizzie got rid of old dresses by burning them, Knowlton deftly got her to admit that she herself did not witness any such burnings.
PHOEBE BOWEN
Phoebe Bowen was the wife of Doctor Bowen, the family physician. Right after the discovery of Andrew's body, Lizzie had Bridget run across the street to fetch Dr. Bowen, who was not then at home. Mrs. Bowen then came across the street and gained entry into the house. She saw Lizzie in the company of women in the kitchen and in her testimony she verified that Lizzie was pale and trembling, and obviously distressed. She also verified that there was no apparent blood upon Lizzie's person.
On cross-examination, Knowlton suggested that Lizzie's clean white hands showed that she had not been out in a dusty barn. He also implied that, since Mrs. Bowen was then looking upon Lizzie as an object of pity, she would not have been as observant as she would have, had she instead then suspected her of murder.
MRS. BRIGHAM (Recalled)
Mrs. Brigham testified that she had witnessed Hannah Reagan in conversation with Edward Porter, a Fall River reporter, and that Reagan had told Mrs. Brigham that she had nothing to tell Porter. Brigham also described how she herself had performed experiments in the Borden house, seeking to determine whether Abby Borden's body would be obscured to anyone standing in the hallway. She explained that she had done this by having John V. Morse lie in the position of Abby's body. Despite Morse's height, and the fact that Mrs. Brigham stood in the doorway of the guest room (Lizzie would have been out on the landing), she could not see Morse, not even his legs.
MRS. ANNIE M. WHITE
Mrs. White, who had been the court stenographer at the inquest, testified that when Bridget Sullivan told the story of what had happened that morning, she described Lizzie Borden as crying after the discovery of her father's body.
THE COMMONWEALTH'S REBUTTAL
RUFUS B. HILLIARD (Recalled)
Marshall Hilliard was asked by the prosecution about his refusal to let Hannah Reagan sign the affidavit that stated the quarrel between the Borden sisters never occurred. The defense objected to this line of questioning. The court sustained the objection and further testimony by Hilliard was excluded.
MICHAEL MULLALY (Recalled)
Officer Mullaly testified that he had spoken with Hymon Lubinsky, the ice cream peddler, who described to him how he had seen a woman crossing from the barn to the house as he passed down Second Street. Upon cross-examination, Robinson got Mullaly to admit that he didn't even bother with small details, such as whether Lubinsky was driving a team or not. Mullaly's testimony thus made him seem unobservant and negligent as a policeman.
ANNIE M. WHITE (Recalled)
Annie M. White testified to validate questions posed and answers given by Emma Borden at the inquest.
