answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

Lizzie Borden died from pneumonia on June 1, 1927 in Fall River, Massachusetts.

User Avatar

Elise Greenholt

Lvl 10
3y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar
More answers
User Avatar

Otis Steuber

Lvl 10
2y ago

Yes, Lizzie Borden died on June 1, 1927

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago

Considering they didn't have DNA back in the days when Lizzy Borden allegedly killed her parents there was little they could do to punish Ms. Borden. Ms. Borden got off on a technicality ... she was never read her rights. There is also here say that many of the men on the jury couldn't believe a woman could commit such a heinous crime.

Did Lizzy Borden really kill her parents? I have studied this particular case for quite sometime and I don't believe she did, but Ms. Borden is the only one that knows the truth.

Lizzy was spoiled and adored by her father. He always bought her gifts and the last thing he gave her was a ring. She would often sit on her father's lap (unusual for those days and considering she was in her 30s.) Not once, since anyone has considered looking over the case have they thought that it's highly possible that there was incest in the family involving the spinster Lizzie and her father. I often wonder about that.

There was no evidence to support the fact that Ms. Borden killed either of her parents. The maid was hanging up clothes and no one heard anything. I find it odd that two people could be bludgeoned to death with an ax and screams were not heard. The myth is that Lizzy gave her step-mother 40 whacks and her father 41, but there was nowhere near those amounts of wounds however grizzly the bodies looked.

One person who was over-looked in this scenario was Lizzie's sister. Te years older and not as pretty as Lizzie nor getting the attention from the father that Lizzie got it could well have been the sister, but unfortunately no one will ever know.

Ms. Borden could no longer stay in her hometown because many thought she'd gotten away with murder (especially the women) and she was snubbed. In those days not only being a spinster, but a curse of murder put upon a woman such as murder would finish that woman's life off.

Ms. Borden and her sister bought a home in Falls River. From gossip an argument ensued between the two sisters and her sister moved out. Lizzie died and very shortly after her sister died as well. Lizzy is buried near her parents, but there was no mention of her sister.

Most of the information above is erroneous. Lizzie did not get off on a technicality because she wasn't read her rights, she was tried and aquitted. She never left her hometown- she and her sister did buy a house in Fall River and lived out the rest of their days, but Fall River was their home town and was where the murders took place. The killings are even called "The Fall River Tragedy". The sister could not have committed the crimes because she was out of town when it happened, and had been out of town for two weeks prior. They sent her a telegraph telling her of the murder and she returned that night. There was never any mention of Mr Borden giving Lizzie a ring, in fact they spoke in court about how Mr Borden always wore a ring that was given to him by Lizzie, he was wearing it when he was killed and he was buried wearing it as well.

Given the evidence of the case, my view is that there is no way that Lizzie Borden could have killed her parents. The timeline shows that Mrs Borden was killed first, around 9:30am. There was blood splatter on the floor and wall in front of the body, on the bed to the right of the body, on the dresser to the left of the body and on the window behind the body, giving a pretty clear indication of where the killer stood while swinging the hatchet. Yet Lizzie Borden was seen by their maid and her father throughout the morning wearing the same clothes and hair style that she was wearing prior to her stepmother's death and she had no blood on her at all.

Her Father left the house around 9am and came home around 10:45am. The maid was washing the windows inside the house and went upstairs to her attic room at approximately 10:55am. The police station got the call that Mr Borden was murdered at 11:15am. When Lizzie found her father's body she called out to the maid to come down and then she sent the maid to walk over to the Dr's house. The Dr was not home, and a neighbor sent one of her workers down to a paint shop where they had a telephone and they called the police. So, that process would take at least 5 minutes, probably more. But for the sake of argument let's say 5 minutes, which would put Lizzie calling the maid down at 11:10am.

That gives us a 15 minute time frame between when Mr Borden was last seen alive at 10:55am and when he was found dead by Lizzie at 11:10am. The prosecution says that during that 15 minutes Lizzie got the hatchet from wherever she hid it after killing her stepmom, killed her father by hacking him with the hatchet 11 times, went down to the cellar and hacked off the handle of the hatchet with an axe (allegedly because it was covered in blood), covered the hatchet head with ashes and put it in a box of other hatchets and put the box up on a 6-foot high shelf. Then, she threw the hatchet handle in the fire, went upstairs, changed her clothes, underclothes and shoes (which was a lot more complicated at the time then just throwing on jeans, a tee-shirt and a pair of sneakers) and hid her bloody clothing. Then she washed her hair of blood, somehow dried it and then fixed it up so that not a hair was out of place, went back downstairs and called the maid.

This timeline to me is preposterous. There is just no way that she would have the time to do all of these things in 15 minutes. Also, the prosecution first started to suspect Lizzie after she made conflicting statements. She said one thing to witnesses and police directly after the murders, and then 7 days later when she was officially questioned by police her story was slightly different in some parts. BUT, during the trial it came out that the Dr had started giving Lizzie double doses of Morphine (for her nerves) the day after the murders and had continued to give Lizzie double doses of Morphine every day after that, even while she was in police custody. Morphine in that dose has be proven to "affect the memory and change and alter the view of things and give people hallucinations". So, it is no wonder that there were conflicting statements in her recollection of what happened that day, and I highly doubt that modern courts would even find testimony given under the influence of Morphine admissible in court.

There are other things that could be put in a way that makes Lizzie look guilty if you are looking to blame her, but they can also be disputed and do not prove her guilt. The deciding factor for me is that 15 minute time frame. I just do not believe there is any way that she could have done all that in such a short amount of time. They never found any blood on her dress or shoes or on any of the hatchets in the house. They say she is guilty because she burned and old dress two days after the murders (please note, this is a time in which she was under the influence of Morphine). Her best friend is the one that told the prosecution about Lizzie burning the dress, and watched her burn the dress, but she never says that there was any blood on the dress. The police had searched the house up an down many times after the murders but never found any bloody clothes, or any bloody shoes.

The maid was upstairs and Lizzie's stepmother and father were dead. If Lizzie did in fact kill her Stepmother and her Father, why would she call the maid down so soon? Why wouldn't she burn the bloody clothes right then and there? Why wouldn't she have left the house and gone into town to give herself an alibi and let the maid find the bodies? How could a lady of that era be so skilled with an axe to strike such small targets with such accuracy 29 times?

We will never know for sure what happened that day, but for me it seems as though Lizzie Borden was innocent and someone got away with one of the most horrific crimes in history.

The first answer was horribly incorrect. She got off on a technicality because she wasn't read her rights? Miranda warnings weren't even a thing until 39 years after Lizzie Borden's death. The second answer was factual. We don't know but she was acquitted by a jury of her peers and the timeline is fishy.

//Actually, the first answer has a measure of validity. A crushing blow to the prosecution was the judge's decision not to allow Lizzie's testimony from the inquest that preceeded her criminal trial in 1893, due to the fact that at the time she was not represented by an attorney. It was this body of evidence, Lizzie's story changed and contradicted itself repeatedly, not allowed that should have proved to the jury that Lizzie not only was a liar but a killer as well.

I have read the above answers for the innocense of Ms. Borden and they are greatly flawed. It is the opinion of the FBI that indeed, Lizzie was the killer. I have studied this case in depth and there is absolutely no evidence of a killer other than Lizzie. There are of course differing opinions but most are based on the erroneous information that surrounds the case and amatuer slueths that have no idea how real crime works. Like it or not, the first answer is closer to the truth than those that followed it.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago

Lizzie Borden's father Andrew Borden, and step mother Abby Durfee Borden, were brutally murdered on August 4th, 1892 in Fall River MA, by what was believed to be a hatchet, (not an axe and only 30 blows total, unlike the infamous rhyme). In the 1800's few people were convicted of murder unless there was an eye witness, and while Lizzie was arrested and went to trial for the murders she was acquitted for the crimes. She spent the rest of her life shunned by the town folk, but wealthy from the inheritance from her dead father.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

14y ago

Lizzie Borden of Fall River, MA, was accused of the 1892 hatchet murder of her father Andrew J. Borden and her stepmother Abby Borden. She was indicted after the Grand Jury met and her friend Alice Russell testified that she had seen Lizzie burn a dress in the kitchen stove a few days following the murders. Lizzie maintained that the dress was paint-stained. Lizzie's trial was held in New Bedford, MA, at the Superior Court, and lasted two weeks. She was acquitted of all charges after the jury deliberated less than an hour. She lived the rest of her life in Fall River, moving with her older sister Emma from the house where the murders took place to a larger house in the Highlands, known as "the Hill." No one else was investigated for the crimes as the police believed that they had the culprit. However, since the Commonwealth of Massachusetts judged her not guilty, we can say that according to the courts, she did not kill her family. The case remains unsolved to this day. Theories abound, but, so far, there is no solid proof that anyone in particular, including Lizzie, committed these crimes. For further information on this case, please visit http://lizzieandrewborden.com. Stefani Koorey, Ph.D.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

14y ago

The evidence points to yes. A day or so before the murders Lizzy had tried to buy prussic acid in 2 different stores. But a prescription was needed and she did not have one. The morning of the murders both parents were ill with vomiting and stomach cramps. Lizzy claimed to be ill also but she felt well enough to do chores that morning.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

There is really no mystery in relation to this crime. Lizzie Borden was aquitted for the double murder of her father and stepmother in 1892. But although she was aquitted, that doesn't mean she didn't do it. When you put all the pieces together the picture is of Lizzie.

Twenty-four to forty-eight hours before the murders, the Borden's became sick. All assumed it was Bridget, the Borden's maid, and her stew. Andrew, Abbey, and Bridget were obviously ill, to the point that Abbey wanted to confer with the doctor that lived across the street. Lizzie claimed to be ill, but she appeared far healthier than the others. The day before the murders Lizzie had tried unsuccessfully to buy prussic acid, and was refused for lack of a prescription. Had she been able to buy the prussic acid her parents would have died of poisoning instead of falling prey to an ax.

Abbey Borden was attacked and killed an hour and a half before Andrew. It would be nearly impossible for an intruder to remain in the house without being found out. Lizzie and Bridget were at home doing chores.

The motivation for the crimes was money. Andrew was planning to rewrite his will, leaving more to Abbey, less to Emma and Lizzie. This on top of the tension that was ever present in the Borden house.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

11y ago

Although Lizzie was aquitted by a jury that does not mean she was innocent. The evidence says she was the killer. She was the only one that had a motive, opportunity and would gain by the death of her father and stepmother.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

The jury ruled out not guilty. Those people had a more clear view of the one we have now. Anyways, murdering the Borden's while being nude would not work. The murders were about 2 hours apart. Being in the house nude for that time would have been noticeable. Also there was no Plumbing or running water in that house and blood in her skin and hair would be noticeable.

In the related links box below, I posted a question on this category you might want to read.

This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Did Lizzie Borden kill her family?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp