The Trial of Lizzie Borden(65)
It almost seemed as if Knowlton had given up. Not only had he been thwarted by Robinson’s nimble lawyering, preventing his expert witnesses from being “qualified” to answer his questions, but he had also seemingly forgotten about his real audience, the jury. The jury, after all, heard no evidence that day. While the lawyers argued about poison, the jury was at loose ends, carefully shielded from the courtroom excitement. The last evidence the jury had heard the prior day was the testimony of the dressmaker Mrs. Gifford, the witnesses that didn’t bark, and Matron Reagan. It was a shocking and potentially catastrophic choice. At best, the prosecution went out with “a dull thud.”
Howard noted that the judges and the lawyers registered the end of the prosecution’s case with professional impassivity. But, he wrote, “I am not so certain about the jury. Every one of them stiffened up in his seat, looked around the courtroom, and seemed pleased that thus far they had proceeded, while Lizzie Borden fairly beamed, the only evidence of unusual excitement being the peculiar rapid motion of her fan, and two or three uneasy shiftings of bodily position.” Howard also reported a rumor that the defense “intended to go to the jury without producing a particle of evidence . . . But that was too sensible to be true.” More poetically, Julian Ralph observed of the underlying mystery: “It is as if the cause were a deep and pitch dark well, and the commonwealth had said, ‘we will rig up a search light and throw its glare into the well and light up the bottom of it.’ They took ten months to build the lamp, and on the first day in court set it up with a great flourish in New Bedford. They turned on the blaze, and it seemed very powerful, but the light only deepens the darkness.”
Chapter 9
SHORT, BUSY, AND VERY IMPORTANT
Ladies’ corner, Boston Globe
Joe Howard used the short recess to survey the crowd: “There were some extraordinary individuals in the room today, some odd developments of human nature, much queer dressing, and one fat old lady, whose bare hands were covered to the knuckles of her fingers with rings and stones, diamonds, rubies and turquoises.” Most to his liking were “[a] noticeable number of very pretty girls.” But he also lamented the “number of the women experts, who are quite confident that they could prove the guilt of the accused if they had a chance.” His colleague Elizabeth Jordan described them as “a sort of self-constituted jury,” much less disposed to favor the prisoner. On a happier note, Susan Fessenden, president of the Massachusetts Women’s Christian Temperance Union, was in the audience lending moral support to the prisoner, as was the lecturer and suffragist Mary Livermore. But Lizzie drew the most comfort from her chief champion, George Robinson. It was Robinson’s jail visits that buoyed her spirits. In the courtroom, she seemed to find emotional support in physical proximity to Robinson, positioning her seat as close behind him as possible. Even then, according to Elizabeth Jordan, she “did not permit him to forget for long that she was there. Her method of calling his attention is by gently and almost timidly touching him on the back or shoulder and leaning forward as he turns his head to her. That is, such is her manner on ordinary occasions, but when some point strikes her suddenly and forcibly the gentle fan touch becomes a quick, sharp poke and she darts her head forward and whispers eagerly, her face slightly flushing with animation.” After days “of being under a subdued but terrific tension,” Lizzie seemed relieved: “Her eyes were brighter than usual.” And her choice of floral bouquet matched her appearance: “In her hand she held the first really gay display of flowers she has had since the trial began.”
THURSDAY, JUNE 15, 1893
* * *
After a ten-minute break, the defense case officially opened at 10:50 a.m. with Andrew Jennings’s opening statement. Using a “low, measured, funereal tone of voice,” he spoke for an hour, averring his longstanding connection to the Borden family: Andrew Borden “was for many years my client and my personal friend. I had known him since my boyhood. I had known his oldest daughter for the same length of time, and I want to say right here and now, if I manifest more feeling than perhaps you think necessary in making an opening statement for the defence in this case, you will ascribe it to that cause. The counsel, Mr. Foreman and gentlemen, does not cease to be a man when he becomes a lawyer.”
Jennings emphasized Lizzie Borden’s excellent reputation, her good works, and her general demeanor: “We shall show you that this young woman had apparently led an honorable, spotless life; she was a member of the church; she was interested in church matters; she was connected with various organizations for charitable work; she was ever ready to help in any good thing, in any good deed.” Having established Lizzie’s good character, he turned the police and prosecutors into villains who “for some reason or other” sought “to fasten this crime upon her.” Carried away by his own rhetoric, Jennings alluded to the drama of Richelieu, especially “that most dramatic scene . . . when the king in the exercise of absolute authority, without right or justice . . . sends to drag the pure and virtuous ward of Richelieu from his arms, how the old Cardinal draws that circle around her, and no man dares to cross it.”
Jennings recovered himself and returned to the flawed legal case against his client. He continued, “Just so, Mr. Foreman and gentlemen, the law of Massachusetts today draws about every person accused of this crime, or any other, the circle of the presumption of his or her innocence, and . . . until it has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he or she is the guilty party, they are not allowed to cross the line and take the life of the party who is accused.” Reasonable doubt, he explained, was “a doubt for which one could give a reason.” For example, he continued, “[i]f you can conceive of any other hypothesis that will exclude the guilt of this prisoner and make it possible or probable that somebody else might have done this deed, then you have got a reasonable doubt in your mind.”