Was Lizzie Borden a notorious killer or wrongly accused?

It was an unspeakable crime. A double murder that captured the eye of the whole nation.

“48 Hours” and correspondent Erin Moriarty are taking a recent have a look at a chilly case … a really chilly case. It occurred in 1892 and we’re presenting it to a brand new jury to see if they’ll separate truth from fable.

The defendant was the 32-year-old daughter of the victims. Her identify: Lizzie Borden.

Cara Robertson: The crimes had been so violent … that many thought that Jack the Ripper had come to America.

Los Angeles creator Cara Robertson has been residing with Lizzie Borden for a very long time.

Cara Robertson: I started to check Lizzie Borden once I was an undergraduate. I used to be thinking about looking for a subject for my school thesis.

Thirty years later, her thesis grew to become a remarkably detailed have a look at the accusations in opposition to Lizzie Borden and her high-profile trial. “The Trial of of Lizzie Borden,” was revealed by Simon and Schuster, a division of Viacom/CBS.

Cara Robertson: Basically, the case was about whether or not or not somebody like Lizzie Borden may have dedicated these brutal crimes.

And in 1893, a jury of 12 males agreed she could not, returning a unanimous verdict of not responsible.

Cara Robertson: This was the form of crime that simply couldn’t have been dedicated by a girl.

However regardless of being acquitted, time and well-liked tradition have without end solid Lizzie as one among America’s most infamous killers. So, did she do it or not?

To assist unravel this thriller, “48 Hours” introduced collectively a staff of paid consultants.

Two extraordinarily skilled legal professionals.

Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi: My identify is Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi. I used to be a prosecutor for 21 years on the Brooklyn D.A.’s Workplace.

Matt Troiano: My identify is Matthew Troiano. I am a prison protection legal professional in New Jersey.

And two equally seasoned investigators.

Erin Rubas: My identify is Erin Rubas and I’m against the law scene investigator and a former murder detective.

Andrew Schweighardt: I am Andrew Schweighardt. I am a Criminalist on the New York Metropolis Workplace of the Chief Medical Examiner.

Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi: I used to be sucked proper in. I used to be sucked in from the attitude that this occurred over 100 years in the past.

Matthew Troiano: I feel it is related now the identical manner it was related then. And it is simply a captivating story.

That story begins in Fall River, Massachusetts in1892.

Distinguished native businessman Andrew Borden was rich, but in addition frugal, selecting to dwell there along with his second spouse Abby Borden, only a block from the middle of city. The home is modest, even by Nineties requirements, with virtually no indoor plumbing or fuel lighting.

Erin Moriarty: He was low cost …

Cara Robertson: He was identified to be on the excessive finish of Yankee frugality.

You possibly can’t analyze the crime with out seeing the place all of it befell. So “48 Hours” introduced crime scene investigator Erin Rubas to the Borden home.

Erin Moriarty [outside Borden house]: What’s necessary? What do you actually wanna see for your self?

Erin Rubas: I wanna have the ability to take myself again into the crime scene, based mostly on what I’ve learn. I need to have the ability to form of put these items collectively which can be lacking.

And he or she is ready to do this as a result of the home, oddly sufficient, is now a mattress and breakfast, and restored within the fashion of the time, full with precise crime scene images and shows.

Erin Moriarty [inside dining room]: To your left is a duplicate of Andrew Borden’s cranium. And to your proper is Abby Borden.

Erin Rubas: I’d positively say that whoever did this, this was private, this was loads of anger, and loads of rage.

Cara Robertson: Lizzie Borden is a reasonably unremarkable lady. … She was single. … She was lively … in her native church. … Emma Borden is Lizzie’s Borden’s older sister. And at all times performed a little bit of a maternal position with respect to Lizzie.

Emma, on the time of the murders, had been out of city for 2 weeks visiting mates.

Erin Moriarty: And Abby Borden? How would you describe Abby Borden?

Cara Robertson: Abby Borden, she’s usually solid within the story because the, you already know, the evil stepmother. However in reality, she might effectively have been the nicest individual in the home.

Which brings us to the late morning of August 4, 1892. Lizzie, standing on the facet door of the home, tells her next-door neighbor Adelaide Churchill that her father has been killed.

Erin Moriarty: And does the neighbor see any blood on Lizzie?

Cara Robertson: The neighbor comes over instantly and sees completely no blood.

Erin Moriarty: Nothing on her face, her fingers, her clothes?

Cara Robertson: Nothing. She appears — completely offered.

Police discovered Lizzie’s father stretched out on the sofa within the sitting room bludgeoned to loss of life.

Erin Rubas: [in the house looking at a photo] It is fairly brutal. It is positively —  I imply, his total face is brutally bashed in.

However what of Andrew’s spouse Abby? Lizzie, sitting within the kitchen with that neighbor Adelaide Churchill, gives a solution.

Cara Robertson: She remarks that she thinks maybe she heard her stepmother are available. At which level, Bridget Sullivan [the maid] and Adelaide Churchill, the next-door neighbor, go upstairs and discover the physique of Abby Borden.

Erin Moriarty: [in the guestroom]: This proper over right here is the place Abby Borden is discovered lifeless, face down.

Cara Robertson: That scene is, if something, extra horrible. … Abby suffered 19 blows. … She’s face down and far of her the again of her head has been hacked.

Cara Robertson: You possibly can think about the stress that was on the police to come back upon a scene like that. … The belief at first was that it should have been a deranged outsider as a result of the crimes had been so stunning. However when it grew to become clear that nobody had been noticed within the neighborhood … then suspicion turned to the individuals in the home.

Erin Rubas: The home was triple locked within the entrance door, and the again door was locked. And the one door that might have been unlocked was the facet door.

Cara Robertson: They needed to discover a suspect. They usually fixed upon Lizzie Borden as an apparent alternative.

Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi: She is the one one that might’ve dedicated these crimes.


On Saturday August 6, whereas Andrew and Abby Borden had been being laid to relaxation, information of their homicide was spreading far and quick.

Cara Robertson | Creator: The brutality of the murders alone was sufficient to make this front-page information throughout the nation.

On the identical time, the Fall River Police Division was starting its investigation.

Erin Moriarty: How would you describe the state of forensics in 1892?

Andrew Schweighardt | Criminologist: It was very primitive. … I feel in some ways it was the proper time for any individual to probably get away with against the law like this.

In addition to police, the Borden home was crowded with docs, reporters, neighbors, and even a number of passersby.

Andrew Schweighardt: So, something actually that was found at that crime scene was critically compromised as a result of we do not know when or by whom it was deposited.

Cara Robertson: They take up items of carpet. They … rely blood stains. … They seek for proof … of blood on any clothes.

What they discover, although, are extra questions than solutions. One truth is obvious: Abby was killed earlier than Andrew.

Andrew Schweighardt: His loss of life was so current that his accidents had been famous to have been oozing moist, liquid blood. He was additionally heat to the contact. Then again, Abby, who was upstairs, had matted, coagulated blood, darkish blood on her accidents. She was additionally chilly to the contact.

5 days later, throughout a police inquest, Lizzie provides her model of what occurred that morning.

Cara Robertson: 5 individuals get up within the Borden home. … Andrew and Abby Borden, Lizzie Borden, the housemaid, Bridget Sullivan, and Lizzie’s uncle, John Morse.

Andrew’s brother-in-law, John Morse, visiting from out of city, was staying within the visitor room.

Erin Moriarty [in the Borden guest room] That is the place John Morse had stayed the evening earlier than.

Cara Robertson: We all know that John Morse left within the morning to go go to different kinfolk in a distinct a part of city. … And Andrew Borden … walked into the middle of city to go to a number of the buildings that he owned. Abby Borden went upstairs to scrub up the visitor room.

Lizzie says that she was within the eating room ironing. And Bridget Sullivan was exterior washing home windows when, about 9:30 within the morning, police imagine Abby Borden fell to the ground, murdered.

Cara Robertson: Abby Borden was … a brief lady. However she weighed about 200 lbs.

Erin Moriarty: And did Lizzie hear something in any respect?

Cara Robertson: She claims to not have heard something.

In line with Lizzie’s testimony, Andrew returned residence at 10:45 a.m., greeting each the housekeeper and Lizzie, after which retired to that sitting room to take a nap on the sofa. In line with the medical expert, 45 minutes later, Andrew Borden was additionally lifeless.

Erin Rubas: [in Borden house looking at couch]: That was the chance proper there. … He is on that sofa, and he is sleeping … and there was your alternative.

Police had been positive that they had the “when,” however there was nonetheless the query of “why.” What was the motive? Lizzie might have given police that reply throughout the inquest.

Erin Rubas: Lizzie and her sister, Emma, each actually desired to dwell a manner higher life, and so they actually resented their father for not offering that for them.

Cara Robertson: Andrew determined, basically, to bail out his spouse’s half sibling by shopping for a home and placing it in Abby’s identify. … And thereafter, you discover — that the home is a scene of a chilly conflict.

Erin Rubas: Clearly Lizzie was not completely happy that that home was going to go her stepmother’s sister.

Erin Moriarty: However sufficient to supply a motive for that form of vicious killing?

Erin Rubas: They had been brutal.

Actually brutal sufficient to mark the perpetrator with proof.

Erin Rubas [in sitting room]: I’d assume there would positively be blood on her.

And but…

Cara Robertson: Probably the most fascinating components of this case is that … apart from across the our bodies, there is no blood discovered wherever.

If, in reality, Lizzie Borden is the killer, how did she not have any blood spatter on her? Her neighbor stated she was spotless. So, the place was the blood? Police searched the home and solely discovered two cases of blood proof: a minute spot on one among Lizzie’s undergarments and a bucket of bloody cloths within the cellar washroom. Lizzie gave them a really private clarification for each. She was menstruating.

Erin Rubas: I feel that again then it was such a private concern that, let’s face it, who’s going to problem that?

Andrew Schweighardt: If we had been to have that in the present day, may we present, OK, is that this Lizzie’s blood? Or is it Andrew and Abby’s blood?

Additionally puzzling and really suspicious: Lizzie’s option to burn a gown within the kitchen range the day after her father’s funeral.

Cara Robertson: Lizzie and Emma claimed that the gown had been stained with paint and … wanted to be burned. They usually thought that was as a time as any.

Andrew Schweigardt: For me probably the most worthwhile piece of proof … is the gown that Lizzie burned. If she’s liable for this, it might have blood from the victims on it. And that might be very tough for Lizzie to elucidate.

And with no gown, there was nothing to elucidate. It appeared the extra they regarded the much less investigators discovered. Till down within the cellar …

Erin Moriarty [in the basement]: It says right here that the hatchet was discovered …

Cara Robertson A specific hatchet head was present in a field of deserted instruments.

It grew to become often known as the “handleless hatchet” and can be a topic of debate for years to come back.

Cara Robertson: It solely had a bit of a deal with. And in response to the police, it was a recent break.

Andrew Schweighardt: This specific hatchet head virtually regarded prefer it had been intentionally coated with a layer of ash.

Cara Robertson: It is about 3-and-a-half inches of a slicing blade. And that appeared in step with the injuries on Andrew and Abby’s physique.

Andrew Schweighardt: She may’ve … rapidly rinsed off that hatchet head, thrown it in a pile of ash to obliterate any … lingering blood, after which simply tossed it within the cellar to make it appear like an previous piece of junk.

Erin Rubas [in Borden house]: There are infinite locations on this home to cover stuff …

If it was the homicide weapon, police later found it won’t have been Lizzie’s first weapon of alternative.

Cara Robertson: Somebody who was recognized as Lizzie Borden tried to purchase prussic acid the day earlier than the murders.

In 1892, prussic acid, a deadly poison, was solely obtainable with a health care provider’s prescription.

Cara Robertson: The lady … stated that she wanted it to place an edge on a seal-skin cape. And we all know that Lizzie Borden did, in reality, have seal-skin capes.

However the pharmacist stated he by no means heard of it used that manner and refused to promote it to her.

Cara Robertson: After which as a result of she was unable to get the poison, she turned as an alternative to a available family implement.

Erin Moriarty: The hatchet?

Cara Robertson: That is proper [chuckles].

It could appear the police got here to the identical conclusion and on the shut of the inquest, the chief of police positioned Lizzie Borden underneath arrest for homicide.


On June 5,1893, 10 months after her arrest, Lizzie Borden sat within the superior courtroom in New Bedford, Massachusetts on trial for homicide.

Cara Robertson: The primary day of Lizzie Borden’s trial – attracted – an enormous crowd, reporters had been detailed from across the nation. …Folks waited for hours in line.

It was referred to as the trial of the century … the nineteenth century.

Cara Robertson: What I feel is hanging … is that most of the individuals most within the case had been ladies.

Erin Moriarty: Why? Why are these ladies keen to place apart their lives to attend the trial?

Cara Robertson: This was the trial of a girl who appeared to have transcended the boundaries of her intercourse in such a violent manner. The ladies, I feel, had been curious to see…the monster.”

Whereas they had been welcome to observe, on the time, ladies weren’t allowed to take a seat on the jury.

Cara Robertson: There will not be, in reality, ladies jurors till 1951 in Massachusetts.

Regardless of the inflexible requirements of the occasions, the proceedings of the trial had been surprisingly acquainted to our consulting attorneys.

Matthew Troiano | Protection legal professional: From what I’ve learn, you can take this trial transcript … and put it into 2020 and it might principally be the identical.

Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi | Prosecutor: Each the prosecutors and the protection attorneys got here in with loads of the identical arguments that I’d think about in the present day.

In entrance of a panel of three judges and a jury of 12 males, the prosecutor started his opening assertion with a easy premise.

Cara Robertson: … that Lizzie Borden is the one individual with the chance and the motive to have dedicated the crimes.

Nevertheless it was how he wrapped up his open that shocked the courtroom.

Cara Robertson: He alludes to the truth that he has the skulls of the victims.

Erin Moriarty: So, the prosecutor has the precise heads of the victims within the courtroom?

Cara Robertson: Sure. … And Lizzie Borden responds by fainting.

Over the following week, the jury hears from a parade of prosecution witnesses.

Cara Robertson: The prosecution works very methodically and lays out the proof.

Proof of who was killed first

Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi: If Andrew had been killed first, then robotically Abby’s household will get a part of the cash … the place if she’s killed first, all the things is only for the ladies.

Proof matching the skulls to the suspected homicide weapon …

Andrew Schweighardt: …to point out that the scale of the accidents on the cranium … aligned with the scale of probably the most possible homicide weapon which was the hatchet. 

And testimony of Lizzie’s capacity to wield that hatchet.

Cara Robertson: The medical consultants all stated {that a} lady of unusual construct and unusual power may have dedicated the murders.

However there’s one factor the judges do not enable the jury to listen to.

Cara Robertson: A number of the prosecution’s finest proof is stored from the jury. Most notably … her … alleged makes an attempt to purchase prussic acid earlier than the murders.

Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi: If she’s on the market getting poison, that’s completely one thing the jury ought to contemplate when two individuals in her residence had been discovered lifeless the following day.

Erin Moriarty: Was it proper to maintain that out?

Matthew Troiano: As a protection legal professional, positive, proper? Vastly prejudicial, probably not related.

After 9 days, the prosecution rests and Lizzie’s protection staff goes to work.

Cara Robertson: The protection is way more thinking about telling a narrative… that she’s simply an unusual individual caught on this unbelievably horrible scenario.

Matt Troiano: Clearly, there is a lack of proof. After which there is a second a part of, “Hey, we simply do not assume that she did this.”

The protection wanted solely two days of witness testimony to make its case, and it is a case for affordable doubt.

Matthew Troiano: You can not reply the questions that must be answered right here, and that is affordable doubt.

Erin Moriarty: What was … probably the most highly effective protection?

Cara Robertson: Probably the most highly effective witness in her protection was her sister Emma. Emma testified that it was her thought, quite than Lizzie’s to burn the gown. Which makes it looks as if it was a way more harmless factor to do.

Lizzie Borden by no means testified and after 3 weeks, the trial ended with closing arguments. However earlier than the jury was charged, Lizzie did have the final phrase.

Cara Robertson: And he or she says, “I’m harmless. I depart it to my counsel to talk for me.”

And with that, the case went to the jury.

Cara Robertson: The courtroom is packed. Individuals are additionally standing … out within the corridors and across the entrance of the constructing ready for some form of phrase.

They did not have to attend lengthy. The jury took lower than two hours to achieve a verdict.

Matthew Troiano: The foreman, it is reported, virtually cannot comprise his pleasure …

Cara Robertson: “… and simply says, “Not responsible.”

Erin Moriarty: Simply blurts it out?

Cara Robertson: Blurts it out, yeah.

Cara Robertson: At that time, Lizzie Borden falls into her chair as if shot, and places her head on the rail. … In the meantime, the courtroom erupts into cheers. And there are cheers exterior that could possibly be heard a mile away.

Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi: Possibly that is the prosecutor in me, however I used to be shocked she was acquitted. …  It’s so clear to me, as a lot as it may be, that she is responsible.

Matthew Troiano: Now, whether or not or not they thought it was “not responsible” or “harmless,” who is aware of? However they actually did not assume she was responsible.

Andrew Schweighardt: And I feel on the finish of the day they only did not wanna imagine that such a horrible, horrific crime may’ve been carried out by any individual like Lizzie Borden.

However now in 2020, would a jury of women and men come to the identical conclusion?


In 1893, Lizzie Borden was discovered not responsible by a jury of 12 males who could not imagine a girl was able to such acts of utmost violence. However how would a jury of women and men vote in 2020?

To attempt to reply that query, “48 Hours” employed a jury recruiting agency to search out us a panel of women and men who had by no means heard of Lizzie Borden after which paid them to determine the case. This isn’t a retrial, however a presentation, argued by our consulting attorneys, in their very own phrases, with none steering from “48 Hours.”

Erin Moriarty [to jurors]: That is the case of Lizzie Borden.

The foundations had been easy. Solely proof offered within the unique trial could possibly be offered right here, and all info needs to be presumed to be true 

Prosecutor Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi and protection legal professional Matthew Troiano delivered their opening statements:

ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: This case is about bitterness, resentment and concern. … Greed was what drove Lizzie Borden to do what she did. … Only one evening earlier than these two innocents are bludgeoned in their very own residence, the defendant goes to see a buddy. … She, out of nowhere volunteered she’d been feeling depressed and so frightened about many anonymous, faceless enemies that her father had. … And he or she left with this: “I am afraid one thing’s going to occur.” … Lizzie Borden is responsible of her dad and mom – her father and her stepmother’s homicide. And the proof by the tip will show that to you past any affordable doubt. Thanks.

MATTHEW TROIANO: It is a lady of 32 years previous who’s accused of probably the most vicious and heinous homicide that one may think about. … What would you anticipate to see throughout the individual and on the individual that did this? Blood? A whole lot of blood, proper? … There is not any blood on her in any respect…. There is not any blood on her fingers. There is not any blood on her face. … There is not any blood wherever on her. … The fact right here, women and gents, is the proof is missing. The story is sweet, however the proof is missing. And if you’re going to come again and convict any individual of this crime … you higher get a little bit bit greater than a narrative. … Thanks.

Subsequent, prosecutor Nicolazzi calls on her consultants to elucidate the proof: the locked doorways, the hatchet, the pail of bloody rags and that burned gown. Nevertheless it’s the blood proof, or quite the shortage of it, that’s her greatest problem:

ERIN RUBAS | Crime scene investigator: It’s my perception that this was carried out from somebody dealing with him and instantly virtually over high of him.

ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: And it is truthful to say that even with that variety of wounds, there was not … a complete lot of blood.

ERIN RUBAS: That is right.

ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: With Abby Borden, what number of wounds had been noticed on her physique?

ANDREW SCHWEIGHADRT | Criminologist: There have been 19 wounds noticed on Mrs. Borden, 18 to the again of her head on the precise facet and one on the base of her neck.

ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: Attainable to commit these murders and never get loads of blood on you, based mostly on the kind of wounds that we had?

ERIN RUBAS Completely.

ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: Did he have any defensive wounds?

ERIN RUBAS: None that had been noticed.

And why would not the victims combat again?

ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: If somebody sees somebody who’s acquainted … may that contribute to a scarcity of preliminary defensive wounds?


ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: Did they get well something by way of any doable weapon?

ERIN RUBAS: A hatchet head.

ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: Is there something concerning the dimension of the particular hatchet that was recovered that might preclude a girl from utilizing it?


ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: Regardless of the scale?

ERIN RUBAS: Regardless of the scale.

ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: I’ve nothing additional.

The protection’s cross-examination, Troiano once more focuses on the shortage of blood:

MATT TROIANO: You’d agree that on the level that clearly the item hits that supply of blood, there’s going to be blood that comes out from it? Is that right?

ERIN RUBAS Sure. I feel that does depend upon the specifics. However sure.

MATT TROIANO: However actually, so far as you already know, there was no gown that was discovered that might have had blood spatter on it. Is that right?

ERIN RUBAS: Appropriate.

MATT TROIANO: The one blood that’s on an article of clothes … was a 1/16 inch-size pinhead spot of blood on an underdress beneath an outer gown.

ANDREW SCHWEIGARDT: That is right. That was the one piece of blood that was detected.

MATT TROIANO: Any blood on that hatchet?

ERIN RUBAS: Not that was noticed.

And in 1892, with no scientific testing obtainable, remark was the very best and solely instrument at hand.

MATT TROIANO: No different obvious blood wherever else … in the home. Is that right?

ANDREW SCHWEIGARDT: Aside from blood within the quick two areas of the 2 homicides and potential blood within the pail within the cellar, there was no point out of blood elsewhere within the case file.

MATT TROIANO: I feel that is all I’ve. Thanks.

After which each legal professionals make their last arguments to the jury:

MATT TROIANO: I feel what you’ve got heard over the course of the final couple hours are questions … however not proof and never proof past an inexpensive doubt.

ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: This case may be very very like a jigsaw puzzle. However I counsel that while you have a look at all these items, it is not one that’s overly robust to unravel.

MATT TROIANO: You aren’t right here to discover a answer to the puzzle.

ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: You might be right here to determine if against the law was dedicated and if this individual, the defendant, Lizzie Borden, dedicated it. And all of the items of proof say sure.

MATT TROIANO: There isn’t any direct proof right here, proper? And the circumstantial proof is so very weak that it may’t be sufficient. … So, assume these issues by way of. I do know you’ll. … Thanks very a lot.

ANNA-SIGGA NICOLAZZI: The proof is all there. If you use all of it and use your widespread sense … it’s proof of 1 factor: Lizzie Borden, the defendant, bludgeoned her stepmother and her father to loss of life. … And for that, you must discover her responsible. Thanks.

And with that, as soon as once more, Lizzie’s destiny is within the fingers of a jury.

What’s totally different this time is these legal professionals get to listen to the jury deliberate.


Greater than a century after Lizzie Borden went on trial for homicide, a jury of eight individuals have been requested to wrestle with most of the identical questions.

It is an unheard alternative to be within the room for an precise deliberation. It rapidly turns into clear that there are not any simple solutions for our jurors: Frank, James, Michele, Aimee, Michael, Jarrell, Larysa, and Jennifer.

Erin Moriarty: What are the large considerations right here?

Aimee: The prosecutor stated resentment, bitterness and greed. … Nevertheless it simply looks as if overkill if she wasn’t going to lose all the things. … Both she’s a sociopath or presumably not responsible. And that is my solely query.

Michael: I really feel prefer to go for first-degree homicide of each victims, there needs to be malice and forethought, and I do not imagine that was confirmed.

Erin Moriarty: Effectively, you already know these are two totally different counts. So, in case you wished to, you can determine that she’s responsible of 1 and never responsible of the opposite.

Jarrell: Abigail was struck 19 occasions. Such as you stated, that’s overkill. However there’s nonetheless loads of, like I stated, unknowns by way of how do they clear that that up?

Jennifer: I can not determine how she may’ve carried out it and been standing there with nothing – like nothing on her, like home and all the things regular.

Michael: I really feel prefer it hast to be It needs to be somebody aware of the home.

Michele: Additionally aware of the victims, as a result of … they’re clearly aware of the attacker.

Laryza: I am not satisfied past affordable doubt that she’s responsible. … I do not purchase it.

Aimee: However I do not assume the usual is “fully satisfied.” It is past an inexpensive doubt. However that does not imply fully.

Not like the unique jury, this panel has no bother believing a girl may kill. The query is: was it this lady?

Michael: If she does know the best way to kill a pig or livestock, then she is aware of the best way to do it proper.

They imagine she had the motive.

Jennifer: She hated her stepmother.

However there have been nonetheless questions.

Jarrell: Why depart Bridget alive?

Michael: Why depart the bloody rags simply hanging out?

Frank: Pay attention, let’s overlook about accomplices or her motivation. The query is, did she do it?

Erin Moriarty: So, do you need to, you already know, take a vote from everyone on two totally different counts?

After virtually an hour of deliberation, the jurors took a vote.

Erin Moriarty: On the cost of first diploma with the loss of life of Abby Borden?

Frank: Responsible.

Aimee: Responsible.

Michael: Responsible.

James: Responsible.

Michele: Responsible.

Jennifer: Responsible.

Laryza: I preserve going again to she seems responsible, however I am not satisfied, so I am again to not responsible.

Erin Moriarty: You are the final one Jarrell.

Jarrell: Responsible. Yeah. Responsible.

Erin Moriarty: You are positive?

Jarrell: Sure. Constructive on that one.

Erin Moriarty: On the cost of first diploma with Andrew Borden?

Frank: Responsible.

Aimee: Responsible.

Michael: Responsible.

James: Responsible

Michele: Responsible.

Jennifer: Responsible.

Laryza: Not responsible.

Jarrell: Not responsible.

Whereas Jarrell was assured Lizzie had deliberate to kill Abby, he believed the homicide of her father was purely spontaneous.

Jarrell. I simply – I do not know if that premeditation factored in with dad.

And with that, the foreman revealed the jury’s verdict

Jennifer: On the cost of first-degree homicide of Abby Borden, we’re a hung jury. And on the cost of first-degree homicide for Andrew Jackson Borden, we’re additionally a hung jury. Thanks.

Cara Robertson: There’s nonetheless one thing profoundly unsettling about the concept that – a girl who appears regular – committing against the law like this.

Erin Moriarty: We heard most of those jurors vote to convict her. However you heard loads of doubt there.

Matt Troiano: There was quite a bit. There have been quite a lot of them that had been expressing doubt. And, you already know, you surprise, is {that a} misunderstanding of the usual? … Or is it simply they’re making a name, proper? … It was fascinating. However on the identical time, troubling at occasions as effectively.

Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi: I feel in case you actually broke it down, people who voted for responsible on the finish actually did categorical that they did assume it was her and that the proof had confirmed it, whereas they could not have expressed it that clearly in that one thought.

Erin Moriarty: So, is it truthful to say that we have not solved the thriller of Lizzie Borden and will probably be argued for an additional 120-something years?

Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi: I really feel like we have solved the thriller of Lizzie Borden. We simply have not solved whether or not she ought to have been discovered responsible or not. As a result of it is a very totally different query.

Matt Troiano: I feel that that is one of the simplest ways to say it. And possibly that is the fantastic thing about the system and possibly it is not.

Clearly, Lizzie Borden did not care what individuals considered her. After her acquittal, she wasted little time getting on along with her life. She stayed in Fall River, simply not within the residence the place the murders occurred.

Cara Robertson: She and her sister Emma – promptly vacate the cramped household home that was a supply of some dissatisfaction.

Inheriting virtually $350,000 from their father’s property, which might be $10 million in in the present day’s cash, Lizzie and Emma purchased the home they at all times wished on the high of the hill within the rich a part of city.

Cara Robertson: She modified her identify from Lizzie to Lisbeth. And he or she named her home, Maple Croft.

It appeared, effectively, unseemly to many locally.

Cara Robertson: Very quickly there are individuals who begin to surprise, “If it wasn’t Lizzie Borden, then who was it?” …   Lizzie Borden finds herself unwelcome on the church the place — she had spent a lot of her time — and which had supplied the muse of her assist throughout the trial.

Twelve years later, even Lizzie’s sister Emma turns her again on her.

Cara Robertson: Emma was deeply troubled by one thing that was occurring in the home such that she felt it was essential to sever all ties along with her sister.

Lizzie, who by no means married, completed out her life as a recluse, alone in her residence along with her canine, till her loss of life in June of 1927.

Erin Moriarty: Did Lizzie ever speak to the press? Did she ever give her facet of the story?

Cara Robertson: No. Lizzie Borden remained silent.

Coincidently, Emma, residing in New Hampshire, died simply 9 days later. They had been each laid to relaxation alongside their father and stepmother.

At present, Fall River, Massachusetts, embraces the girl who introduced a lot notoriety to the city.

Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi: Lizzie Borden took an axe …

Matthew Troiano: … and gave her mom 40 whacks.

Erin Rubas:  … When she noticed what she had carried out …

Andrew Schweighardt: … she gave her father 41.


Might you spend the evening on the scene of against the law? Take heed to Erin Moriarty’s “My Lifetime of Crime” podcast to listen to about her keep on the Borden residence.

Show More

Related Articles

Back to top button