Further into the trial, there was a day dedicated strictly to the forensic discoveries. During this time Dr. Dolan, the examiner, was called to the stand to testify. The skulls of Abby and Andrew Borden accompanied Dr. Dolan and his testimony. He provided evidence that criminalized Lizzie, but that was not what the jury or media cared about. Specifically, the Author of the article “Dr. Dolan on the Stand”, wrote about the atmosphere in the courtroom that morning. He described the audience, how unlike other days, only men were present. According to the author, women were encouraged to stay home due to the graphic testimony that occurred. Women were incapable of stomaching the gory details of the murder due to their fragility. Furthermore, …show more content…
The judges who presided over the case dismissed a bloody pail and cloths that was brought as evidence against Lizzie. The police discovered the pail filled with blood, water, and cloths in the Borden’s cellar during their investigation on August 4th, 1892. The authorities claimed the bloody bucket proved the killer used the cellar to clean up after the two homicides, further incriminating Lizzie. Despite the hefty evidence, the court dismissed the provided evidence. The three judges concluded that this could have been the blood from menstruation. During the 20th century, this was not an outrageous claim. Women would tend to their menstrual cycle by using cloths as protection. Yet, the only reason why this evidence was removed from the court and the trial was because she was a woman. Had a man who lived with women sat in Lizzie’s position, the idea most likely would never be discussed. The dismissal of the provided evidence furthered the pity Lizzie received from the media and public alike. Clearly, Lizzie received a copious amount of support from the media and indirectly acquired support from the judicial system. From the beginning, the court was favorably imbalanced for Lizzie. Her future rested solely in the hands of white, educated men. During the 19th century, these types of men’s beliefs largely mirrored the Cult of True Womanhood, defined by Barbra Welter. If Lizzie faced a fair trial, the court room lacked one two things: a seemingly unbiased media presence and
My initial impressions of the parties involved were that they were both very formally prepared for the trial. Mr. Hansen and Connor were the first to arrive to the court room and be seated at their counter. Both were dressed in formal attire, with several documents in their possession. Shortly after, Ms. Brough and Ruesch arrived, also dressed in formal attire. They also possessed
Lizzie is now dead, she died of some type of disease but the case is still open to this day. There is still a lot of people trying to find out if Lizzie did the crime or not but who really knows? Nobody does maybe Lizzie or one of the Borden family knows but why do they still care huh/ there is no reason to find out unless you are really into it. Lizzie had many dresses but there is one in particular it was a pretty blue corduroy dress. The police said they needed it because they saw a stain on it Lizzie claimed it was from paint
The break-ins are a major clue for Lizzie’s innocence. In the trial, the police never found an evident weapon. Yes, they found many axes around, but none of them had any traces of blood. They searched long and hard and found nothing.
During the 1820’s and 1830’s, New England was undergoing a major transformation. With the Industrial Revolution underway, thousands of individuals packed up their belongings and relocated from the farms into the cities. As the Industrial Revolution emerged, thousands of girls took the opportunity as a means of obtaining freedom and independence to gain knowledge, income, and a sense of belonging. The murder of Sarah Cornell and the trial of Avery resulted in a clash between two emerging institutions in New England modernization during their lifetime, the textile mills and the Methodist Church, both of which believed that the opportunity for future growth relied heavily on a favorable verdict from the jury. This decision would determine both institutions future respectability and progress, as both Sarah and Avery’s reputation would reflect the reputation of the new economic development and methodist denomination.
color...put the URL below your paraphrased note. During the time of the murder women were considered weak and never had there been a murder where a woman is the suspect. This is why her story became so well known. As for the lack of forensic science in this day and age Lizzie was never proven to be the killer and to this day almost 120 years later she’s still not proven guilty.
A local drug store owner had said that the day before the murders Lizzie had tried to buy a poison from the store and he would not allow her, since back in that day that is how women would kill people. Lizzie during the time of her trial was found burning a dress that she claimed had a paint stain on it. Lizzie had feminists on her side saying that she was being prosecuted for no reason. Later on in her trial she had paid the ex-governor of Massachusetts as her lawyer. Lizzie Borden was acquitted on June 20, 1893.
It happens that the cashier of the drug store in Lizzie’s town claimed that she entered the store just the day before the misdeed, asking for Prussic-Acid, which can be remarkably deadly when used in the wrong ways (Carlisle and Savage). The request was very odd, but because of the risk of this acid being so deadly, no purchase was ever made, making this hard to use against her in court (Carlisle and Savage). What makes this even more questionable is many friends of the Borden’s recalled the night before the murder Andrew had become exceptionally ill after dinner, and his wife Abby had even suggested the possibility of poison (Booth 51). This contributes to the possibility
The scandalous 19th century trial of Lizzie Borden, a wealthy women who so is accused of murdering her parents with an ax, is back. Despite if you believe that Lizzie killed them or not, is your opinion. Lizzie had much evidence to be blamed for. Perhaps not all the blame should be aspired towards her, but there is enough evidence that can charged against her. Even though Lizzie adored her father, but she completely hated her stepmother.
Lizzie Borden is Guilty Many cases were named “Trials of the 19th Century”. Lizzie Borden’s trial was one of them. Lizzie was put on trial for the murder of her father and step mother.
Some of the time Lizzie and her sister Emma would not eat with the elder Borden. Lizzie did not eat with them the day so they expert said maybe Lizzie felt she did have to because she was going to kill them (Berni, C. (1997). After, the murder had taken place Lizzie had burnt a dress and then claimed it had red paint on it. Lizzie was know to shoplift from local stores.
Throughout the book, she provided unexpected evidence that the reader would not have known about. She supplied historical evidence to back up each claim, demonstrating how politicized the church was during the trials. Roach detailed the accused's connections to the accusers, as well as their relationships with those in positions of power throughout the trials. She also discusses how gender influenced how the trials played out because women were frequently the targets of allegations and faced unique challenges in defending their own
The media was everywhere within this trial. It had captured the attention of everyone in the state of Ohio and the country. They held a “pre-trial” to the first trial where it was just the town criticizing and accusing Dr. Sheppard. This was unconventional and unprofessional on many levels; something like this should have never been allowed to happen. During the first trial there were more people of the media than there were of court officials and people who were a critical part of the trial.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you are here because one person in this courtroom decided to take law into her own hands. The defendant, Mrs. Dominique Stephens, murdered the man that she vowed to love. This sole act by the defendant is violation of all morals and her husband’s right to live. Afterwards, she even felt guilty about this violation of justice and called the cops on herself, and she later signed a written statement stating that she is guilty of the murder of Mr. Donovan Stephens. Then the defendant later recanted this statement and said that she only killed Mr. Stephens in self defense.
Within the incisive “Polly Baker’s speech,” Benjamin Franklin satirizes the patriarchal structure of the judicial system that unfairly judges women. Franklin utilizes a sardonic persona of a “poor” 18th century women being “persecuted for the fifth time, for having a bastard child” who only wants her “fine remitted.” Through his judicious use of hyperbole and his persona’s rhetorical conditional statements, Franklin produces a sarcastic tone in Polly Baker’s speech and ridicules the “great men” who enforce the institutionalized bias against women under the rule of law.
Kate Chopin’s short story “The Story of an Hour” is set in the late 1800s – a time when women were considered inferior to men. Women had traditional roles as wives and mothers. In this 19th century patriarchal society, Chopin shows us Louise Mallard, the main character, who does not comply with the female gender norms of the Victorian period. When Louise learns about the death of her husband, her reaction and the reaction of her sister and the doctor tell us a great deal about gender stereotyping during this time. Louise Mallard is described to us as “firm” and “fair.