01x01 - Lizzie Borden

[bunniefuu]

The case of Lizzie Borden
has gripped America

for nearly 130 years.

It was a double homicide
that led

to a sensational
trial of the century.

And most curious of all,
after all this time,

the Borden murders
are still unsolved.

I'm Dr. Lindsey Fitzharris.

I'm a medical historian
and best-selling author,

with a PhD in the
history of science

and medicine from
Oxford University.

I've written about the
pioneering days of surgery,

about syphilis,
plagues, and pandemics

and even books
made of human skin.

Some might say I'm obsessed
with the macabre and with
death.

But I think the way people die

tells us a whole lot
about how they lived.

I'm going to explore some of
history's most famous lives

by looking at them through
their extremely curious deaths.

This is my investigation room

and here is my science lab

where Dr. Raychelle Burks

will be doing tests
and experiments for me.

And here is where my
crime-solving partner

former Scotland Yard
detective Brian Hook

helps me piece together
my investigations.

Call it biography with a twist.

A biography from the morgue.

I've always been fascinated
by Lizzie Borden.

She's part of American
folklore,

her story known to
every child here,

with its own grisly
skipping-rope rhyme.

We can all recite along.

"Lizzie Borden took an ax,
gave her mother 40 whacks.

"and when she saw
what she had done,

she gave her father 41".

The rhyme is unambiguous,

Lizzie m*rder*d her
father and mother,

in fact, her stepmother,

and she did it in the most

gruesome way imaginable,
with an ax.

You may think you know
everything about this case

but I've got some
surprises for you!

Let's start with the
day of the murders,

the 4th of August 1892,

in the town of Fall River,
Massachusetts.

It was a sunny summer morning
in this riverside town.

The Bordens were a model
family.

The father was a
wealthy businessman,

the mother a devoted wife,

and the two Borden sisters were
pillars of the local church.

They were the kind
of family that

New Englanders aspired to be.

At least up until now.

Here is the crime scene.

The Borden home is still there

and you can even stay the night
and soak up the atmosphere.

What we know is that that
morning at around 11:15,

Lizzie reports that she enters

the house she shares with
her parents and sister.

She goes into the quaint
genteel sitting room

and on the sofa she
finds her father,

Andrew Borden, dead
from a savage attack.

It looks like he's been
struck multiple times.

She calls the maid,
Brigitte Sullivan,

and the police are summoned.

And worse is yet to come.

Bridget and a neighbor
who has arrived to help

climb the stairs
to the second floor.

They enter the guest bedroom,

where they find the body
of Lizzie's stepmother, Abby.

She too has been
hacked to death.

It's a shocking double m*rder.

I've been working with former

Scotland Yard m*rder squad
detective, Brian Hook,

to start compiling a list
on his investigations board.

So, Brian, talk me
through the victims

-and the suspects in this case.
-Hook: Okay.

Fitzharris:
That's the Borden house.

Hook: Yep.

We have our first victim,
Andrew Borden.

He's the head of the household.

He's 69 years old.

And then we have Andrew's
second wife,

Abby, she's 64.

Fitzharris: She's
Lizzie's stepmother.

Hook: We actually have some
crime scene photographs.

-Hook: That's Andrew...
-Fitzharris: Wow.

And Abby showing the position
of the body.

Fitzharris: It's so horrifying.

Hook: We have the elder sister,
Emma, she's 42.

She lives with the family

but on the day of the murders

she was away at a dress
fitting.

Then, we have Lizzie.

Fitzharris: Ah, yes,
very recognizable.

Hook: She's 32.

Also in the house, the maid.
She's called Brigitte.

Fitzharris: And she
was there on the day?

Hook: Yeah.

And then, we have John Morse.

Now John Morse is the
brother-in-law of Andrew.

Fitzharris: Now this guy looks
sketchy to me, Brian.

I think he looks like
he's up to something.

I guess, as a detective,
you wouldn't

necessarily convict him
on his looks, but.

Hook: It's difficult to present
that as evidence to a court.

Fitzharris: This is a
really full house,

there's a lot of suspects here.

Should we be considering
anybody else?

Hook: Yeah, I think so.

I don't think we can discount
an unknown intruder.

Fitzharris: Yeah,
this is a classic whodunit.

This is something
that Sherlock Holmes

would have loved to have
solved.

This is a brutal attack.

The community of Fall River has
never seen anything like it.

Some even speculated that Jack
The Ripper had come to town.

In fact, just
before the murders,

neighbors reported seeing

a stranger knocking
at the Borden's door.

All of Fall River immediately
assumed the m*rder*r

must have been some kind
of unknown intruder.

The Borden case first captured

the imagination of
Dr. Cara Robertson

when she was an
undergraduate at Harvard.

Robertson: The first
assumption was that

this must have been a mad man,

probably an immigrant, based

on the prevailing
criminological theories of the
day,

who had somehow gotten in

and decided to hack
the Bordens to death.

There really seemed to be no
other obvious explanation.

The police found in
the basement a hatchet,

the handle had been broken
off, apparently freshly.

And the thought
that a woman would

pick up such a masculine
weapon,

and so brutally k*ll,
seemed almost unbelievable.

Fitzharris: At the time of
the Borden murders,

forensic science
was in its infancy.

These crime scene photographs

are some of the
earliest ever taken.

But the Victorians
weren't short of ideas

that might help unmask
an unknown intruder.

Some Victorians believed
that a crime scene photograph

wasn't always necessary because

the m*rder*r's face
could be captured

on the retina of the victim.

Could the eyes of the dead hold
the key to solving a m*rder?

In the 17th Century,

a Jesuit friar called
Christopher Scheiner

claimed to observe a faint
image

on the retina of a
frog he dissected

and started a whole new
scientific pursuit, optography.

The idea was taken
up in the 1870s

by the German physiologist
Wilhelm Kuhne.

His experiments with
rabbits and frogs

aren't for the faint-hearted.

He tied these poor creatures up

and forced them to
stare at bright objects

for hours at a time
before decapitating them

and removing their eyes.

Kuhne then cut
the eyeballs in half

and using an alum solution
and sulfuric acid

to fix the pigment
into an image,

he created what he
called an optogram.

Intriguingly, one
optogram appeared

to show a barred window that

a rabbit had been
forced to stare at.

The Victorians quickly latched

on to the idea that optography

could be used as a tool
in forensic investigations

and an image of
the m*rder*r's face

could be found burned into the
eyes of the hapless victim.

Murderers even began destroying
their victims' eyeballs.

Just in case!

Despite our fascination
with optography,

no murders have ever been
solved

using this strange
and gruesome process.

I need to get a better sense

of the layout of the
Borden house at Fall River,

the occupants, their movements,
and their alibis.

Brian's going to talk
me through the timeline.

Hook: Seven o'clock
in the morning,

we have Andrew, John, and Abby,

having breakfast in the
kitchen.

And then at 8:45, the first
person to leave is John.

Robertson: John Morse
left the house

after breakfast that morning

and he seemed to have an alibi

out of an Agatha Christie
novel.

He claimed that
he had been riding

on a horse car with six
priests.

The streetcar conductor
did not remember him

but did remember the priests.

The police were able to confirm

that John Morse had indeed gone

to visit other relatives

some distance from
the Borden household,

and so he seemed
to be in the clear.

Hook: 9:15,
Andrew leaves the house.

And the other thing
that we must remember

is, Emma, is not there
at all, she's away.

Fitzharris: Historian
Dr. Stefani Koorey

is a specialist on
Victorian Fall River.

Koorey: Emma is in Fairhaven.

She's visiting a friend who
happens to be a seamstress,

she's going to be
fitted and measured

and clothes are being
made for her there.

She's been in Fairhaven
for a number of days

and is not due to come back
for a number of more days.

Hook: The next relevant
thing is 9:30.

Abby, Andrew Borden's wife,

the stepmother of
Lizzie and Emma,

goes upstairs to carry
on doing some cleaning

in the guest room that
John has occupied.

And at this point, we also
know that Brigitte, the maid,

is sent out to do
some window cleaning.

Fitzharris: Okay.

Hook: Then we come to 10:45.

Andrew comes back into the
house from doing his business.

He then goes into
the sitting room

and lies down on the sofa
to have a little nap.

The maid, Brigitte, goes
upstairs to her loft bedroom

and she has a bit of a rest.

Now we have to rely on

Lizzie's statement
to the police.

She tells them that
after Andrew came home

she leaves the house
through the back door

and goes to the barn to look

for some lead weights
for a fishing trip.

When she comes back in at
11:15,

she's horrified
to find her father

bludgeoned to death on
the drawing room sofa

and she calls for Brigitte.

Fitzharris: So, what happens
at that point?

Hook: Well, the police arrive

and they start to
look around the house.

Abby's body is found
in the guest bedroom.

Fitzharris: And it's here that
police and doctors

make a significant
discovery that will

have a major bearing on
the m*rder investigation.

Koorey: The police
investigating the crime

found something
immediately suspect.

They looked at Abby

and they found her
blood to be coagulated.

It was dark, it was sticky,
it was dried on the carpet.

It had happened a while ago.

Whereas Andrew's, believe it
or not, was still dripping.

It was still dripping.

So, it was fresh.

His death was very close
to when he was discovered.

So, you have this
difference in time.

Fitzharris: That's a
critical observation.

It appears that Abby is k*lled
first, then Andrew,

perhaps as much as
an hour or two later.

That's a really big time window

and the police don't know
what to make of that.

Robertson: Once it became clear
that a fair amount

of time had elapsed
between the two deaths,

it became unlikely that
the k*ller was an outsider.

It was a small house

and there weren't very
many places to hide.

Fitzharris: The finger
of suspicion now points

towards the members
of the household,

one in particular,
however unlikely.

Robertson: Lizzie Borden
ticks all the boxes

of conventional upper
middle class femininity.

She is a church-going woman,

she even teaches a
Sunday school class.

And the thought that she would

so brutally k*ll her
father and her stepmother

seemed almost unbelievable.

But she seemed oddly composed

for someone who had
discovered such a tragedy.

And that coolness was thought

to be suspicious by the
police and by many others.

Fitzharris: Against all odds,

as the investigation
gathers pace,

Lizzie becomes
the prime suspect.

It's 1892.

Lizzie Borden is at the
center of one of the most

infamous and brutal murders
in American history,

the double homicide of her
father and her stepmother.

Her evidence at the Borden's
inquest is her downfall.

Koorey: In the inquest,
where Lizzie Borden

was not represented by counsel,

she gave inconsistent answers

as to her whereabouts that day.

She couldn't remember
if she was upstairs,

if she was in the barn,

she had different
answers depending

on when the question was asked.

Because of that,
she said some things

that made people think,
well she must be guilty.

Fitzharris: At the close
of the inquest,

Lizzie is arrested and
incarcerated in the county
jail.

Fall River is in shock.

Surely a gentle woman
of Lizzie's standing

could not have committed
these brutal murders?

There's a lot that's changed

in criminal investigation
since the 19th Century.

I want to use all
the tools I can

to find out what really happens

that morning nearly
130 years ago.

I think it's time
to meet the victims.

I've had this replica body
created out of ballistic gel,

which behaves just
like a human body.

Meet Andrew Borden.

With this, I'll be
able to do some tests

to help me analyze the crime.

Andrew Borden
doesn't know his wife

is already dead
when he's attacked.

And Abby is in here.

Abby's alone in the guest
room when she's k*lled.

She doesn't stand a chance.

The question on
everyone's lips is,

could a small 32 year old woman

really have hacked two
family members to death?

To find out, I'm going
to restage the murders.

I'll get to see just how much
force will have been needed

and crucially, I'll
also get a clear idea

of how the blood would have

splashed over the attacker
and the crime scene.

But I'm going to
need some help first.

Who better than my ex-cop
Brian?

So, how do we get started?

You just happen
to have a hatchet

behind your back,
don't you, Brian?

Hook: Yes, I do.

I mean, it looks
really small to me.

Hook: I think you'll find
it'll do the job.

Fitzharris: I'm giving
Brian the task

of delivering the first blow.

Oh, yeah, look at that.

Hook: Yep.

That is virtually identical
to the wounds she suffered

and it was a really strong
blow.

Fitzharris: Yeah, you can
definitely see

the marks right there.

Hook: Yeah, if it didn't
render her unconscious,

it certainly would have
knocked her to the floor.

Fitzharris: It was recorded in
the autopsy doctor's

testimony to the court

that Abby was still
alive at this point

because there were
bruise marks on her face

from when she hit the floor.

Hook: After the first
blow we know that Abby

ended up between the bed and
the chest of drawers face down,

and at that point the assailant

would have gone in
literally for the k*ll.

Fitzharris: Abby suffers 18
blows to her head.

Hook: This was a
frenzied attack.

Blow after blow after blow.

It was so obvious after
three or four blows

that that person would be dead

and then to carry on, and
carry on, and carry on.

And it's almost as if
they carried on until

they ran out of strength
or ran out of breath.

Fitzharris: Let's take a look
at the second m*rder, Andrew.

Hook: Okay.

Well, this is
where he was found,

he was having a sleep in
the lounge of the house.

And undoubtedly, by indications
at the crime scene,

this is also where he
was definitely k*lled.

Fitzharris: Alright, I'm gonna
have a go at this one,

but let me get ready first.

Hook: Glasses on.

Fitzharris: I've got
my glasses on.

-Hook: There we go.
-Fitzharris: Alright.

Andrew Borden is asleep
when he's attacked.

I'm almost there.

Hook: I think that's it.

Fitzharris: Andrew suffers 10
blows to his head.

It is a bloodbath,
it's a literal bloodbath.

What can we learn from this?

Hook: I mean,
catastrophic injuries

and blood all over the place.

Fitzharris: I mean, it would
have been all over

that person wouldn't it?

And I'm a woman,
I was able to do that.

Do you think that a petite
woman could do this crime?

Hook: I know from my past
cases, even small people,

when they get the hate,
it gives them strength,

so yeah, it's a distinct
possibility.

Fitzharris: From our
reconstruction

we learn two things,

that a small 32 year old woman

could have committed
these brutal murders

and that the attacker would
have been covered in blood.

Lizzie was not covered in blood

when the crime was discovered.

But that didn't stop
the Fall River police

from taking Lizzie into
custody.

While Lizzie languishes
in the county jail

awaiting the decision
of a grand jury,

Alice Russell, a family friend,

comes forward with a
bombshell revelation

that piles yet more
suspicion on Lizzie.

Koorey: Alice Russell went
off to the police

and said I saw her burn a dress
on Sunday after the murders.

Lizzie rips up the dress
and she burns it,

right in the stove,
in the kitchen,

on Sunday, with police
outside guarding.

If Alice Russell
hadn't told them

that she had burned a dress,

there would be no
trial of Lizzie Borden.

Fitzharris: With
this revelation,

Lizzie's fate is sealed.

On December 2nd, 1892,
nearly four months

after the deaths of her
father and stepmother,

a grand jury indicts Lizzie
on charges of m*rder.

In 1892, a brutal double m*rder

like this carries
the death penalty.

Hanging was popular
for its simplicity

as it could be carried out in
large numbers almost anywhere.

In 18th Century London,

there was a permanent
gallows erected at Tyburn,

which locals called
"the deadly nevergreen",

the tree that bore fruit
all year long.

For those who gazed upon it,

it was a chilling reminder
that life outside the law

could be nasty,
brutish, and short.

Those who were hanged
in earlier centuries

died by slow strangulation.

It wasn't until the British
hangman William Marwood

invented the long drop method
of execution in the 1870s

that hanging became more
humane.

By calculating the
length of the drop

in relation
to a person's weight,

Marwood was able to ensure

the victim's neck
broke upon falling,

which enabled a swifter,
cleaner death.

He went on to develop
a mathematical table

which could be used
as reference.

But what of Lizzie Borden?

How long will her rope be
if she's convicted?

Assuming that she is
roughly 126 pounds,

according to the 1892
long drop table

she would require a 6'9" drop.

A long drop for
such a small woman.

On June 5th 1893,
nearly 10 months after

the deaths of her
father and stepmother,

Lizzie Borden goes on trial
for the double homicide.

There is little or
no physical evidence

to connect Lizzie
to the murders,

no fingerprints,
no bloody footprints,

no eyewitness reports.

Nothing.

But this demure,
middle class woman

is accused of this
terrible crime

and from the start

reports from the court
grip the nation.

It's one of the first
in American history

that fuels, and is fueled,
by newspapers

and the victorian version
of gossip magazines.

Dr. Cara Robertson
has spent 20 years

researching and writing
the story

about the Lizzie Borden trial.

Robertson:
This is the courtroom,

in New Bedford, Massachusetts

in which Lizzie Borden was
tried

for the m*rder of her father
and her stepmother.

People queued for hours
to get seats

in the relatively
small courtroom.

I'm in Lizzie Borden's seat,

where she sat during
the duration of the trial.

She was on trial for her life

and as her counsel
repeatedly point out,

the only possible sentence
was death.

The prosecution was
relatively straightforward.

It was simply that
only Lizzie Borden

had the opportunity
to commit the murders.

The defense didn't
need to present

one single alternative theory,

what they needed to
do was poke holes

in the story of the
prosecution.

Fitzharris: And while
Lizzie watches on,

the nation is captivated.

Will she hang for m*rder?

The Lizzie Borden trial starts

as it will continue,
with sensational drama.

One of the prosecutors
in his opening statement

reveals something
that shocks everyone,

the skulls of Andrew
and Abby Borden.

Lizzie's reaction is dramatic,
she faints.

The intention of the
prosecution

is to use the skulls
to demonstrate

the extreme wounds
caused by the hatchet.

But the display backfires,

the sight of Lizzie fainting

creates sympathy for her,
at least in some observers.

They do find one major
piece of evidence, though,

and remarkably it still exists.

You can see a grisly
collection of artifacts

from the Borden murders
at the Fall River museum,

including the hatchet that
was found in the basement.

Koorey: The significance
of this handle-less hatchet

was that it presented
in the jurors' mind

the exact size of
the m*rder implement.

They actually fitted it
into the literal skulls

that were presented at trial,

to show how the wounds
were inflicted.

The defense contested,
logically,

that because there
was no handle,

it couldn't be a m*rder weapon
and no handle was found.

However, the break
between the handle

and the hatchet itself
looked clean and new.

The handle-less hatchet
had a hair on it.

It was considered
quite a discovery.

The hair was sent to
Harvard University

along with the hatchet
to be examined.

However, the hair was
determined

to be bovine in nature, a cow,

and the wood that was left
in the top of the hatchet

was soaked to see if there
would

be any blood residue in that
area, but there wasn't any.

There was not enough evidence

to show it was the
actual m*rder weapon.

Fitzharris: By day six
in Lizzie's trial,

the prosecution case
is struggling.

Another blow to the
prosecution comes

when the judge rules Lizzie's
inquest testimony inadmissible

because it was given
without her lawyer present.

Her vagueness and confusion

at the hearing had
aroused suspicion.

But I need to examine what
caused that erratic behavior

in an otherwise level-headed
and forthright woman.

This is one for my
scientific investigator,

analytical chemist
Dr. Raychelle Burks.

Burks: In the days
after the m*rder,

Lizzie was prescribed morphine.

Fitzharris: So, when does
this all come out?

Burks: It comes out
in the courtroom.

Let's take a look
at the transcript.

The doctor is being asked.

"I ask you about morphine
that you were giving her

"and you tell me on Friday
you gave 1/8th of a grain,

"which is an ordinary dose,

"I understand, a mild dose.

"and on Saturday you doubled
it.

"She had it all the time
up to her arrest,

"the hearing, and while
in the station house?

"Answer, yes, sir".

Fitzharris: So, let me
get this straight,

she's on a double
dose of morphine,

an incredibly strong drug.

Burks: Yes.

Fitzharris: We've all
heard of morphine,

it's still a vital part
of the doctor's palette

for pain relief
and palliative care.

But in Lizzie's day it was a
different thing altogether.

In the late 19th Century,

morphine use was
not only widespread,

it was a national epidemic.

The opioid epidemic of its day.

Thought of as a wonder drug,

by 1895 roughly one
in 200 Americans

were in the throes of
addiction.

It all started in
the early 1800s

when German pharmacist,
Frederick Sertuerner,

made a medical breakthrough

that went on to revolutionize
pain control.

Sertuerner conducted
experiments on rats, stray
dogs,

and even on himself,
in an attempt to separate

the pain-k*lling alkaloid
from the opium poppy plant.

Finally, he did it.

He named the drug morphium
after the Greek god of dreams.

This was later
changed to morphine

following the standardized
naming of alkaloids.

Morphine was used
in popular medicines

throughout the Victorian era,
even for children.

Morphine and alcohol
mixtures were marketed

as perfectly harmless
and pleasant.

One of the most popular,
ayer's cherry pectoral,

contained three grams of
morphine in each bottle.

By today's standard,

a terminally ill patient
might expect

to receive a fraction
of that dosage.

Even morphine's
inventor succumbed

to the most deadly
side effect, addiction.

Proving the age-old warning

to never get high
on your own supply.

Lizzie would have
been given morphine

because it was
routinely prescribed

by the Victorians to deal

with what they called
women's issues,

the vapors, hysteria,
depression, and mood swings.

But what the drug
actually does to the body

is block the pain signals
from traveling

along the nerves to her brain,

which would make
Lizzie feel euphoric

and maybe even suffer
hallucinations.

Burks: And we must remember,
she was under tremendous
stress.

Her father and stepmother
have just been m*rder*d.

She's being questioned
about that m*rder.

Fitzharris: Yeah, so just
because she's changing her
story

doesn't mean she's
intentionally lying,

she could have
just been confused.

The inadmissibility of
Lizzie's inquest testimony

is a major strike against
the prosecution's case.

But they believe they still
have an ace up their sleeve.

The dress-burning
that got Lizzie

indicted in the first place.

But the defense went
on the counterattack.

They took a risk
and put Lizzie's

older sister, Emma,
on the witness stand.

Robertson: Emma testified
that she is the one

who told Lizzie to just burn
this old rag of a dress.

It was just an innocent
household occurrence,

it was their custom and
practice

to just burn up old clothing.

Fitzharris: The
prosecution's case has yet

another hole punched
in it by the defense.

Their only argument now
was that only Lizzie

had the opportunity
to commit the murders.

After a three-week trial,

the jury prepares to deliver

its verdict on Lizzie Borden.

Guilty or not guilty?

Robertson: The verdict
was a moment of great drama.

There was an extra
rush for seats,

so much so that
additional policemen

had to be detailed
to cover the gates.

It seemed like there was
a human wall of people.

Koorey: Lizzie Borden sat
in court and she listened

and she held her face
behind her fan

and didn't let people
see her expressions.

Robertson: The jury was out
less than an hour and a half

and they filed in with
what one reporter described

as a look of fixed
determination on their face.

Koorey: She was acquitted
right on the spot.

Robertson: Lizzie Borden
fell, as if shot.

Men wiped away tears
from their eyes.

In fact, one reporter
said that he thought

that at least two of the judges
were also crying

and generally speaking
pandemonium.

And it became clear that some

in the social set
had supported her,

particularly in the church.

But many at the time,

particularly the working
classes of Fall River,

really thought that she had
just gotten away with m*rder.

This is not the verdict
that most people expected.

* Lizzie Borden took an ax

* And gave her mother
40 whacks *

* When she saw
what she had done *

Koorey: Well, everybody
thinks Lizzie did it

because of the rhyme,

"Lizzie Borden took an ax,
gave her mother 40 whacks.

"and when she saw what she
had done, gave her father 41".

And there's absolutely nothing
truthful about that rhyme,

the number of blows is wrong,
the people involved,

the father is the only part
that was true.

That rhyme was started
while the trial was going on

and it was so catchy that
it got into the water supply

and everybody knew
her from that.

And it's funny, still people go

"Oh, she was acquitted?
I thought she was guilty".

Because they assumed
that she must

have been found guilty
because of the rhyme.

* Let's just hope
she won't find you *

* Or she'll give you 42 *

Fitzharris: Despite
the not guilty verdict,

the rhyme helped
perpetuate suspicion

that Lizzie is the k*ller.

So, the first thing
to tackle is,

if Lizzie didn't do it, who
did?

Lizzie Borden is acquitted.

If she didn't m*rder Andrew
and Abby Borden, who did?

Let's look at Brian's first
thought, an unknown intruder.

Hook: Andrew was known
as a successful

and shrewd businessman
who had made enemies.

So, we can't rule out
that unknown intruder.

Koorey: Lizzie felt that there
were certain people

who might not have
liked her father.

She brought up the fact
of this angry man

and in fact she actually
says at one point

that he had come that morning

at nine o'clock and
had banged on the door.

Fitzharris: So, it is
possible that there was

a stranger around
the house that morning.

But we also know
that the two murders

were believed to be an
hour and a half apart.

Who kills one person

and then waits 90 minutes
before k*lling another?

As a Scotland Yard detective,

Brian has investigated
several unusual m*rder cases.

Hook: That timing comes
from one of the doctors

that was at the scene that day.

And what he calculated was that

the drying of the blood clots
and the blood spatter

between Abby
and then Andrew, he says,

was an hour and a half
difference.

Burks: This is before
there was intensive

research into blood clotting.

And it really depended

on just personal experience
and observation.

Hook: Yeah.

Fitzharris: So,
what we're saying is

our timeline might be all off.

Hook: Yes, and there's
another thing

I've been looking at
which might help.

Even though the events took
place in the same house,

each of the rooms have
a differing micro climate.

The room where Abby is,
is on the second floor

so it would have been subject

to sunlight entering
through the window.

Now the room where Andrew
was is on the first floor

but on the other side
of the house

so would be in the shade

and it could be, possibly,

as different as three
or four degrees.

This is going to affect
the blood drying times.

Fitzharris: Well, this is huge.

This means that instead

of the murders being
an hour and half apart.

It could be as small
as 15 to 20 minutes.

What does that mean for us?

Hook: Well, I think it means
this is a burglary gone wrong.

Fitzharris: But a burglary?

It doesn't really
match the frenzied,

kind of passionate
nature of this crime.

Hook: I disagree.

I've dealt with a case,
a homicide,

where the poor
unfortunate victim

was hit 38 times with a hammer,

and that was a burglary
that just went wrong.

Fitzharris: So, how does that
theory work for you?

Burks: Nothing was taken,
there's no forced entry,

all of the typical
things that people

think about with a burglary.

Fitzharris: I agree with
Brian that the gap

between the murders might
be less than 90 minutes.

Making the unknown intruder
solution at least possible.

But I also agree with Raychelle

that human behavior tells us
that this is not a burglary.

Katherine Ramsland is a

professor of
forensic psychology.

Her analysis takes us
further in this direction.

Ramsland: When you look at
the crime scene,

it's pretty clear
that whoever did this

had to have known things
about the family routines,

the layout of the house,

the fact that Andrew worked
about a block away,

he usually came home
mid-morning

to take a little nap.

So, somebody would have had

to have been pretty
close to the family.

When you look at the
potential suspects

it looks more like an inside
job than anything else.

Fitzharris: Only the family
members and the maid

would have known these
intimate family details.

If we put Lizzie
back in the frame,

what motive could she have
had to k*ll the Bordens?

So, Brian, why might Lizzie
have wanted these people dead?

Hook: Well,
the main motives that

have been attributed
to Lizzie are these.

Money.

Fitzharris: That's always
a classic motive.

Koorey: Andrew Borden
had done well for himself.

He was the president of a bank,

he was a businessman, he owned
property, he was a landlord.

His value in land and cash

was probably about $350,000,

that's probably four to six
and a half million today.

Robertson: Lizzie and Emma
had a quite modest existence,

despite their father's wealth.

Their social life
revolved around the church

and it was said that they would

have liked to have lived
on a grander scale.

They certainly
would have preferred

to live in the Elite
Residential District known as
The Hill

rather than in the small

converted tenement house
in the Fall River flats.

Hook: Freedom.

Lizzie was living in
a stifling atmosphere

in the house and she
wanted out of that.

Fitzharris: He was
a very Victorian man,

he's very controlling and
that would also lead to hatred.

As unemployed spinsters,

Lizzie and Emma's existence

entirely depends on handouts
from their father.

Andrew Borden has left no will,

so if he dies before Abby,

the sisters' stepmother
will inherit everything.

And the sisters
have good reasons

to be fearful for their future.

Koorey: The dynamic of the
Borden family was ordinary

and cordial until an
incident that happened

where Abby Borden's half-sister

was going to be
evicted from her home

and Andrew decided
to buy the house,

so that Abby's half sister
wouldn't be evicted.

Ramsland: There was tension
in the family

because Andrew had begun to
sign properties over to Abby,

who was Emma and
Lizzie's stepmother.

Koorey: And the girls,
they called them the girls

even though they're grown up,
Lizzie and Emma,

found out about it
and were very upset.

Ramsland: Their feeling was if
Andrew, their father, was to
die

and Abby inherited everything

and then she was to die,

her sister would
inherit everything

they thought belonged to them.

So, they felt that that cut
them out of their inheritance.

Koorey:
Lizzie stopped taking

her meals regularly
with the family.

She pulled herself away

from the ordinary family
that she once belonged to.

Robertson: Lizzie was
a forthright person

and she expressed her dislike

of her stepmother
to many people.

Relations in the house
were tense.

There was a cold w*r
between the generations.

It was not a happy home.

Ramsland: I see this
as a self-preservation.

It's rightfully mine,
I need this for my own future,

and my father's taking
this away from me.

So, I really see
her having a motive

that she feels very
justified in doing this.

Fitzharris: Lizzie Borden
might have had

a convincing motive
for murdering

Abby Borden and her father,

she believed her
inheritance was at risk.

But how on earth could
she have done it?

The lack of blood on
Lizzie Borden's clothes

when the police arrived
at the m*rder scene

has puzzled historians
for years.

Robertson: Lizzie Borden was
seen between the two murders

and then was seen almost
immediately after the murders.

On both occasions, she is
entirely free of blood.

Fitzharris: So, if Lizzie
commits the murders,

how does she clean herself
up in the available time?

Brian's experience
at crime scenes

has turned up something new.

Hook: Well, I think
we should look

at the two murders separately.

We know that Abby was k*lled
after Andrew left for work.

We also know from
the reconstruction

there was an awful lot of
blood.

I was absolutely covered in it.

Fitzharris: So,
if Lizzie did k*ll Abby,

she would have had to clean up

before Andrew got home
to take his nap.

Hook: Well, yes,

and here's another interesting
fact from the trial.

We know that when Andrew
returned from work,

the front door of the house
was locked from the inside.

Brigitte, the maid,
was the only other

person in the house at the
time.

Ramsland: The front door
had three locks.

Typically Lizzie would
have left two unlocked

so that Andrew could
get in for his nap,

but that morning she
had not done that,

so Brigitte had to let him in

and she struggled with the
lock.

She claimed she heard
Lizzie on the stairs

laughing about the fact that

she was having trouble
with these locks.

Fitzharris: So, Lizzie might
have locked the front door

to stop someone
from coming in while

she was upstairs attacking
Abby.

Hook: Yes, that's
exactly what I mean.

Fitzharris: Could
Brigitte have been

an accomplice to the
events that morning?

There is some
compelling evidence.

Ramsland there was a story
that Brigitte

had left the house
the night of the homicides,

with a bundle and no
one had searched her.

What was in that bundle?

We don't know.

Brigitte never said.

Fitzharris: And Brigitte left
the Borden household

after the trial

and soon moved away to Canada,

leaving her part
in this case a mystery.

Was Brigitte's bundle
the bloody dress

that Lizzie was wearing
when she attacked Abby?

And did Brigitte help Lizzie
by removing it from the house?

If so, we now know how
Lizzie and Brigitte

might have dealt
with the bloody dress

Lizzie was wearing
when she attacked Abby.

But now we're left with
Andrew's m*rder and blood
spatter.

Hook: When Andrew Borden
got home at 10:45,

Lizzie would have had
just 30 minutes

to k*ll him and clean up.

And we know that
that's not long,

given the amount of blood
spatter we know was created.

Fitzharris: But, remember,
it was Lizzie who

found Andrew's body
and raised the alarm

so, perhaps she did that
once she had cleaned up.

And our team has
found a key piece

of intel buried inside
the crime scene photo.

Ramsland: Under Andrew's head,
over the arm of the couch,

where his body lay,
was his overcoat.

Now it was a warm day, but
he did like this overcoat,

he took great care of it, he
was a very thrifty frugal man.

The last thing he
would have been doing

was rolling up a wool
coat to put on the coach

to use as a pillow
that he would sweat on.

So, how did it get there?

That was a question.

Nobody examined the coat.

To my mind, that was
a key piece of evidence

as real uncharacteristic of him

to have rolled it up and put it

where then he would
put his head on it,

that didn't make any sense.

Fitzharris: Is this the turning
point of the whole bloody
story?

Did Lizzie slip
Andrew's coat on?

Possibly back to front
like a barber's gown?

This would have shielded
her body from the blood

and all she
would have had to do

is wash her hands and face
before calling for Brigitte.

I've listened to my team,
I've heard the experts,

I've examined all
of the evidence

and now it's time to
deliver a verdict.

Lizzie Borden is at the center

of one of the most infamous

and brutal murders
in American history.

Charged but acquitted

of murdering her
father and stepmother.

Did Lizzie do it

and get away with it,
or has she suffered

the gross injustice
of not being believed?

I think a woman could have
done these brutal murders.

Our reconstruction shows
that it was possible.

And our investigation shows

that she could have
covered her tracks.

We ought to remember that
the acquitted Lizzie Borden

went on to live that life
she feared she might lose.

Robertson: After the trial,
Lizzie Borden and her sister

returned to Fall River and
moved

from the small house
on second street

to a much grander house,

in the Elite Residential
District called The Hill.

And mostly she
surrounded herself

with many of the nicer
material possessions

that she might have wanted

when she was in her small
bedroom on second street.

Fitzharris: After buying
the big house,

then came a car and a chauffeur

and frequent visits to New
York.

She became a fan of the
theater,

forming a friendship
with Nance O'Neil,

one of the top Broadway
actresses of the day.

She lived a prosperous
life for the next 35 years

and died of pneumonia
at the age of 67,

at home in Fall River.

But did she do it?

Did she m*rder her
father and stepmother?

Ramsland: I think society
always has a hard time

with the idea that
women can become violent

because we prefer to see
them as the nurturing,

mothering gender, that they
wouldn't really ever do that.

They do do it, they do it a lot

and we're always surprised

and I don't think we should be

because women can get
just as angry as men.

Fitzharris: My verdict,
the k*ller is Lizzie.

Because she wanted more
and she took it.

* Let's just hope
she won't find you *

* Or she'll give you 42 *