Lizzie Borden: An Analysis of Historical Theories and Familial Dynamics
- Daniel Holland
- Aug 4, 2023
- 9 min read
Updated: Dec 23, 2025
The story of Lizzie Borden, an American woman tried and acquitted for the 1892 axe murders of her father and stepmother in Fall River, Massachusetts, remains one of the most infamous and perplexing criminal cases in American history.
The Borden Family: Wealth and Tension
Lizzie Andrew Borden was born on July 19, 1860, into a prominent and affluent family. Her father, Andrew Jackson Borden, was a successful businessman with interests in real estate and various local industries. Despite his wealth, Andrew was notoriously frugal, a trait that caused friction within the family. Lizzie's mother, Sarah Anthony Morse Borden, died when Lizzie was a young child. Andrew remarried three years later to Abby Durfee Gray, creating a stepfamily dynamic that added further tension to the household.
The Borden family resided in a relatively modest home compared to their financial status. This choice was a constant source of discontent for Lizzie and her older sister, Emma, who yearned for a lifestyle that reflected their social standing. Relations within the household were strained, particularly between Lizzie and her stepmother, Abby. The sisters reportedly believed Abby married Andrew for his money, intensifying familial discord.
The Murders: A Day of Horror
On the morning of August 4, 1892, the tranquility of Fall River was shattered by the brutal murders of Andrew and Abby Borden. Abby was killed first, struck multiple times with a hatchet-like weapon in the guest room. Andrew met a similar fate later that morning while napping on a couch in the sitting room. The gruesome nature of the crimes shocked the community and drew intense media scrutiny.
Lizzie's behaviour following the discovery of the bodies was peculiar and inconsistent. She claimed to have been in the barn when the murders occurred, yet her alibi and statements to the police were contradictory. Suspicion quickly fell upon her, and she was arrested and charged with the murders.
Motive and Theories: Unravelling the Mystery
The motive behind the murders of Andrew and Abby Borden remains a topic of debate among historians and criminologists. Several theories have emerged over the years, each attempting to explain why Lizzie Borden might have committed such heinous acts.
Inheritance and Financial Gain: One of the most prevalent theories is that Lizzie and Emma were motivated by financial gain. Andrew Borden's frugality and control over the family's wealth were sources of deep resentment. The sisters feared losing their inheritance to Abby, especially if Andrew decided to reallocate his assets or draft a new will favouring his wife. By eliminating both Andrew and Abby, Lizzie would secure a significant inheritance.
Abuse and Family Tensions: Another theory suggests that Lizzie may have been driven by long-standing abuse and familial tensions. Some historians speculate that Lizzie suffered emotional and possibly physical abuse at the hands of her father. The animosity between Lizzie and her stepmother, coupled with the oppressive atmosphere created by Andrew's stringent control, may have reached a breaking point, resulting in violent retribution.
Mental Illness: The possibility of mental illness has also been considered. Lizzie's erratic behaviour before and after the murders, as well as her alleged episodes of kleptomania, hint at underlying psychological issues. If Lizzie was suffering from an undiagnosed mental disorder, it could have contributed to her capacity for violence.
The Trial: A Media Sensation
Lizzie Borden's trial began in June 1893 and quickly became a national sensation. The proceedings were heavily influenced by the gender norms and societal expectations of the time. Lizzie, a well-educated, unmarried woman from a respectable family, did not fit the typical profile of a violent criminal. Her composed demeanour and the lack of direct evidence against her played in her favour.
The defence skillfully exploited these factors, portraying Lizzie as a dutiful daughter unjustly accused. The prosecution's case was hampered by the absence of a murder weapon directly linked to Lizzie and the lack of blood evidence on her clothing. After a trial lasting 14 days, the jury deliberated for just over an hour before returning a verdict of not guilty.
Conclusion: The Enigma Endures
The acquittal of Lizzie Borden did little to quell public fascination with the case. She lived the remainder of her life in Fall River, ostracized by many but maintaining her innocence until her death in 1927. The Borden murders remain an enduring mystery, with each theory offering a different lens through which to view the events of that fateful day.
Despite the cheers from the courtroom audience, the majority of the press, and women’s groups over Lizzie’s acquittal, her life was forever changed. Just two months after being found innocent, Lizzie and Emma relocated to a spacious Victorian house on The Hill. However, she faced rejection from many residents there and in the Central Congregational Church. Lizzie became a curiosity in Fall River, trailed by children and subjected to stares whenever she ventured out in public. Seeking solace, she retreated to her home, only to be bothered by local kids with pranks. Four years post-acquittal, a warrant was issued for her arrest in Providence on charges of shoplifting, which she apparently resolved.
Lizzie took pleasure in trips to Boston, New York, and Washington, D.C., indulging in fine dining and theater performances. A rift between her and Emma emerged in 1904, leading Emma to leave the house in 1905, after which the sisters apparently never reunited. Both passed away in 1927, with Lizzie preceding Emma by nine days. They were laid to rest beside their father.
Looking Back at Suspects
So if Lizzie wasn't the killer (as the jury believed) who was? Let's take a look at the suspects -
Suspect One: Bridget Sullivan, the Maid
At the time of the murders at 92 Second Street only one person besides the immediate family was known to be in the house. Bridget Sullivan a twenty five year old Irish immigrant employed as the Bordens live in maid was present throughout the morning. Emma and Lizzie referred to her as Maggie. According to the medical evidence Abby Borden was killed at around 9:30 in the morning and Andrew Borden closer to 11. Sullivan told police she was washing windows during the attacks an account Lizzie supported. Sullivan later testified on Lizzie’s behalf stating that nothing out of the ordinary had occurred in the house that morning a claim demonstrably untrue given the violence that followed.
If Sullivan had no involvement why would she mislead investigators. Writer C Cree has suggested a simple explanation. As a domestic servant Sullivan depended on reputation and references to secure future work. Casting doubt on the household or its members would have placed her own livelihood at risk. There is no clear motive linking her to the killings unless one ventures into speculative fiction. A frequently cited example appears in Ed McBain’s 1984 novel Lizzie which imagines a secret romantic relationship between Sullivan and Lizzie discovered by Abby Borden. Even within that fictional framework Sullivan is portrayed not as the killer but as a possible accomplice after the fact.
The only physical evidence that raised suspicion was a pail of blood stained rags discovered in the basement. Sullivan denied any knowledge of them while Lizzie told police they were menstrual cloths. In 1892 the subject was considered so delicate that investigators declined to pursue the matter further.
Suspect Two: Antonio Auriel and the Disgruntled Worker Theory
In the 1890s Fall River had a large population of Irish and Portuguese immigrants many of whom were viewed with suspicion by the town’s established residents. Within that hierarchy Portuguese labourers occupied the lowest social position. Many worked in the textile mills owned or financed by Andrew Borden who was widely regarded as a hard and unsympathetic employer.
When police first arrived at the Borden house their initial assumption was not a domestic crime but a robbery gone wrong carried out by a Portuguese labourer. This was despite the fact that nothing had been stolen. Within hours several men were detained including farmhand Antonio Auriel who was arrested at 2:15 in the afternoon while drinking in a local saloon. All had solid alibis and no known connection to the Borden family and were quickly released.
As Cree has noted Auriel represents a broader category rather than a credible suspect. Variations on the same idea recur throughout the case history disgruntled employee disgruntled tenant disgruntled farmhand. Any could have been accused and had Lizzie pointed to a specific individual he would almost certainly have been arrested. Historian Cara Robertson has observed that one of the more striking aspects of the case is that Lizzie did not attempt to deflect blame onto immigrant workers despite the likelihood that such an accusation would have been readily accepted.
Suspect Three: Emma Borden the Elder Sister
With no convincing external suspect investigators turned their attention inward. Emma Borden was nine years older than Lizzie and far less is known about her inner life. Some writers have argued that if resentment and frustration were sufficient motives then Emma may have had stronger reasons than her younger sister. She had known her biological mother longer and experienced Abby Borden’s arrival as a more direct displacement. As Robertson has noted Emma was old enough to feel that loss sharply.
Both sisters were kept under close control by their father and neither was permitted to court. By their early forties Emma in particular faced the social reality of permanent spinsterhood. She also carried a personal burden. On her mother’s deathbed Emma had promised at the age of twelve to look after Lizzie for the rest of her life.
Emma was not in Fall River on the day of the murders. She had been staying with friends in Fairhaven roughly fifteen miles away for two weeks. In a speculative 1984 account Frank Spiering proposed that Emma returned unexpectedly carried out the murders and relied on Lizzie’s perceived innocence to shield her from suspicion. According to this theory the sisters acted in concert motivated by inheritance.
Following Lizzie’s acquittal the sisters sold the Second Street house and moved to a large property on the Hill naming it Maplecroft. They lived together until 1905 when they became estranged and never reconciled.
Suspect Four John V Morse the Maternal Uncle
John Morse the brother of Lizzie and Emma’s deceased mother arrived from Iowa the night before the murders without luggage and with little explanation. A butcher by trade he had long engaged in small scale business dealings with Andrew Borden particularly involving livestock. While not overtly fraudulent Morse was viewed by some as unreliable and opportunistic.
Morse testified that he ate breakfast with Andrew and Abby before leaving for the post office at 8:45 in the morning. He then visited relatives and returned home by trolley. Several witnesses confirmed the broad outline of his movements. What unsettled observers was the precision of his testimony. He recalled the trolley number the driver’s hat badge and even the number of priests riding alongside him.
On returning to Second Street after the murders Morse reportedly walked around the back of the house and paused to pick a pear seemingly oblivious to the gathering crowd. Public suspicion quickly followed and at one point he was trailed by an angry mob. George B Fish Andrew Borden’s brother in law later told reporters that Lizzie and Morse had arranged the killings and hired someone else to carry them out. His explanation for the motive was blunt. They wanted Andrew and Abby out of the way.
Suspect Five: William Borden the Alleged Illegitimate Son
In 1991 writer Arnold R Brown introduced a new and controversial theory in Lizzie Borden The Legend the Truth the Final Chapter. He argued that Andrew Borden had fathered an illegitimate son named William during his first marriage and that the child had been raised within the extended family as a cousin.
Brown claimed William’s existence was widely whispered about among the Bordens although no documentary proof has ever surfaced. He pointed to ambiguous courtroom exchanges in which Lizzie was repeatedly asked how many children her father had. Brown interpreted this as a veiled reference to the alleged son rather than a simple clarification.
In this version of events Andrew Borden was preparing to revise his will prompting conflict among family members. Morse’s visit and Emma’s absence were both framed as connected to this dispute. Brown suggested that William was secretly admitted to the house the night before Abby was killed when she surprised him in the morning. Andrew was then murdered and William fled. As Robertson has noted the difficulty with this theory is straightforward. It is not supported by evidence and remains an exercise in imaginative reconstruction rather than historical analysis.
Suspect Six: Jose Correa de Mello and the Axe Murderer Parallel
Finally there is the possibility that neither Lizzie nor any family associate was responsible. On the 30th of May, 1893 nine months after the Borden murders Bertha Manchester was found killed with an axe in Fall River. The timing was striking. It occurred just days before Lizzie’s jury was sequestered and newspapers immediately drew comparisons.
Headlines emphasised the parallel and public anxiety briefly surged. The Manchester case however was resolved conventionally. A Portuguese labourer named Jose Correa de Mello was arrested and convicted. His crime involved a failed robbery that escalated into murder. Contemporary reporting was openly prejudiced but the essential fact remains that de Mello was not even in the United States when Andrew and Abby Borden were killed. He served nearly twenty years for the Manchester murder and maintained his innocence throughout.
Comments