I'm going to go on a limb and assume it's a safe bet most people here are familiar with who she was...and to all those familiar with the case, do you think she was innocent or guilty?


I just read on MSN that a new book is coming out that intends to explore what she was REALLY like and how she was not a violent person, was not a homicidal person, was sorely misunderstood and blah blah blah...I've been into this case since I was 13, granted I was never able to find much on it, just probably what the average Joe knows about it...but from what I've seen of it, it makes no sense. One thing people do NOT seem to look at is if she did NOT kill her father and stepmother, WHO did? I for one never heard of any suspects, of course there is her sister that nobody seemed to look at too much, but I don't know about that one.

One fact that remains, they found an axe head, but the handle had been burnt...okay, if she was innocent, why was the handle burnt off of the axe? Who does that? And why? And they say there was no blood on it and one hair but not matching to either victim, so once again why burn it if it's not incriminating evidence? That doesn't make any sense to me.


Anybody else got any opinions on the whole matter?


And on a side note, I don't know if anybody here knows this, Elizabeth Montgomery from Bewitched, portrayed Lizzie Borden in a 70s TV movie where she performed her killings in the nude (which would explain why her clothes didn't have any blood on them), and later on it was found out that Elizabeth Montgomery was related to Lizzie Borden like the 6th cousin so and so removed or something...I can't imagine what that would be like to play a murderer and later find out they're in your family.

I've never been interested enough to study the case, but the Lizzie Borden House is about a half-hour from me and I guess I'll probably pop in there one day.

I'd like to go there myself some day. I find the idea that the scene of the crime was turned into a bed a breakfast a bit 'morbid' but I think most things in life are.

This is one of those things that the world will probably never know the truth about. There's enough circumstantial evidence to make her look guilty. I would have been surprised if the house wasn't claimed to be haunted.

More than likely she did it but because there was not enough evidence to convict her she got away with it. Maybe she had an argument with her father and in the heat of the moment she went a bit insane.

Lizzie Borden took an axe
gave her mother 40 whacks
when she saw what she had done
she gave her father 41

Tony Marino wrote:

More than likely she did it but because there was not enough evidence to convict her she got away with it. ...

The OJ Simpson of her era.

Tony Marino wrote:

More than likely she did it but because there was not enough evidence to convict her she got away with it. Maybe she had an argument with her father and in the heat of the moment she went a bit insane.

Lizzie Borden took an axe
gave her mother 40 whacks
when she saw what she had done
she gave her father 41

I doubt that was the case though because the stepmother was killed first upstairs and it was almost 2 hours before Andrew Borden got home. Now this same argument was made in Francine 'Burning Bed' Hughes' case that she was temporarily insane but the prosecution asked how that could be when she had the state of mind to set her husband's death trap and wait around hours for one of her kids to get home before finally setting him on fire and driving away.

Personally, I don't think Francine went insane, I think she just had enough and knew torching Mickey was the only way out. I don't know what the motive was in the Borden case, except there seemed to be some mention about making sure he didn't write a new will that left everything to Abby.