I’ve looked over and over the paper’s and I think that Lizzie Borden didn’t kill her parents, for multiple reasons. The first reason is the defense exploited the government about the timing isn’t right. The second reason is that Charles Gifford and Uriah Kirby reported seeing a strange man near the house. Last but not least the third reason is they found an ax head and assumed it was hers, and they had no proof that it was.
On pg 4 paragraph 3 sentence 5&6 it states,” The defense also exploited the government’s own timeline, which allowed from eight to thirteen minutes between Andrew Borden’s murder and Lizzie’s call to Bridget Sullivan. Robinson tried to suggest the difficulty of washing blood off one’s person, clothes and murder weapon of
…show more content…
Here’s the statement, “Charles Gifford and Uriah Kirby reported seeing a strange man near the Borden house around 11 o’clock on the night before the murders.” not only did these to citizens see this man the household Doctor saw him as well. “Dr. Benjamin Handfy testified that he saw a pale-faced young man on the sidewalk near 92 Second Street around 10:30 on August 4.”
On pg 3 on the 3rd paragraph it states,”... prosecutor described Lizzie as the only person having both the motive and opportunity to commit the double murders, and then pulled from a bag the head of the axe that he claimed Lizzie used to kill her parents.” Now let’s focus on the word claimed. The definition of claim is, “ State or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.” Meaning that the prosecutor didn’t have any evidence to prove that the axe was her’s.
I’ll admit that Ms. Lizzie Borden did give confusing and contradicting answers while on the stand, when you’ve been stressed, accused of killing your own parents, and prescribed morphine. I’m sure you’d give some confusing answers too. Doctor Seabury agreed that the morphine he prescribed might account for some of the confusing and contradicting