Customer Reviews

Lizzie Borden: The Untold Story

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

To me the book is a clear 4.5 star book, so I had a hard time in deciding 4 or 5 stars. Read the other review of this book, as he does a nice job in explaining the good and bad of the book. Things I liked about this book..... It brings up ideas, and mentions facts that have been left out of many Borden books. Radin knew how to write a good book. This wasn't the first book I've read on Lizzie Borden, but it is one of the best I have read. The first Lizzie Borden book I read was - LB by Arnold Brown. I would say Brown's book, or Radin's would be the best to start off with. True Brown say's that Lizzie didn't do it, and Radin points the finger at "Maggie" - However, both of these book are very entertaining and even if you do not believe the conclusion of who they pick as the killer, they do not taint the whole book with a bunch of BS. They do a really good balanced job in telling the Borden tale. Both books are great starting points. To be honest, Radin's conclusion of blaming Bridget isn't so wild of an idea. He doesn't force it down your throat either. The only thing I really didn't like, was his bashing of other books on Lizzie. Bashing almost to the point of - My book is best because the other books state this, that, and so on. He should have just explained his book, and let others decide on the other books out there...... By the way, most of his statements about the other books are true. However, Pearson's Trial of Lizzie Borden doesn't deserve the page after page of bashing Radin gives it. I have read the original Trial Transcript (not in whole) and Pearsons book. True Pearson is one sided, but his book also has some interesting thoughts and information you can't find in other books. I'd start with Radin's book, and then read 40 whacks, and in my opinion the best balanced book (despite the title) - Lizzie Didn't Do It! by William Masterton. However, if your new to the Borden murders, I wouldn't start with Masterton's book. I'd read this one or Brown's first.

Edward D. Radin covered hundreds of murder trials as a news reporter, and received awards for distinguished fact-crime reporting. In the 1950s he was given the "signed confession" of Lizzie Borden and used scientific investigation as to its authenticity (Chapter XI). Radin hired a Questioned Document Examiner, who explained why it was a forgery. Radin explained the falsity behind two legends of Lizzie. He pointed out that Edmund Pearson's "Trial of Lizzie Borden" was so one-sided as to be a hoax. Radin corrected that story, but also bent his story by pointing suspicion at Bridget. Lizzie said "it wasn't Bridget ...", and the same lack of evidence against Lizzie also applied to Bridget!

Charles Henry Putnam said Lizzie was "a nice girl, fond of outdoor activities, fun to be with, a very pleasant companion". Those who didn't know Lizzie had a different opinion. Most knowledge of the crime came from Edmund Pearson's book, not the original sources. Radin studied the trial testimony, the preliminary court hearing, portions of the inquest, and newspapers from that time. Lizzie Borden was innocent. The assumptions of guilt was due to caste and class prejudice against the wealthy mill owners. A newspaper war resulted when the upstart 'Fall River Globe' blamed Lizzie, and the establishment newspaper defended her. An unstated cause was the human emotion where people like to look down on someone else. Radin's book shows his skill as a newspaper journalist in describing events (Chapter II). But he does omit or censor facts, such as the name of the heir who had been forced to go along with Andrew Borden's low offer. Fall River pioneered in the manufacture of cotton cloth.

Radin assumes a "lack of display of normal tenderness" based on the question to Lizzie whether Mr. and Mrs. Borden were "happily united". This was a trick question that could trap Lizzie into admitting too much knowledge for a Puritan maiden. The bedroom placement may answer that question. One fact unmentioned by most writers was that the 1890s saw the worst depression until the Great Depression of 1929-1949. A publicized murder trial kept people's minds off their own problems. Remember the Lindbergh kidnapping? James J. Kirby tells of his favorable impression of Lizzie before the murders. Lizzie's charity work distinguished her from the rest of the family; would she keep her father's secret no matter what? She was "a very kind person throughout her life".

Much has been made of Alice Russell's story that Wednesday night, but was it ever corroborated? Could it have been created to force Lizzie to testify at the trial? Hiram C. Harrington's story has too many details to have resulted from a few minutes of discussion; I think it was created as a provocation (Chapter VI). Arguments over Lizzie created many brawls (Chapter VII). Lizzie was supported by feminists and the WCTU. Chapter VIII summarizes the trial, "one of the most mysterious of the celebrated cases of the century". When Lizzie described the contents of the basket it could have been from prior knowledge. Chapter IX explains the case against Edmund Pearson and his biased writings. This is an important analysis. Chapter X tries to solve the case from the known suspects. Radin suggests Bridget's testimony was a detriment to Lizzie, so Bridget could not have been rewarded with a "big bundle" of cash. [Unless it was all part of the show, as per Arnold R. Brown.] Radin uses differences in testimony to cast suspicion on Bridget, but people remember differently. Radin is wrong in claiming that it takes longer to wash inside windows than outside windows (practical experience). The fact that Lizzie, Emma, and Uncle John slept in the house suggests they knew they would be safe there; Bridget didn't know and stayed away. The big fault in Radin's solution is its claim that he was a better judge of the facts than the dozens of people who were there at the scene. No, and his failure to mention Bertha Manchester says so. David Kent's "Forty Whacks" is easier to find and more modern than this book.

This book has been surpassed by David Kent's Forty Whacks: New Evidence in the Life and Legend of Lizzie Borden, but it remains on of the best books on the case.

Kent and Radin are two of the only authors to leave me with the impression that they have actually weighed the case before coming to a decision, or in Kent's case, a non-decision.

Radin has done a great deal of work researching and clearing away gossip and legend. His book was obviously a jolt - Victoria Lincoln was apparently so annoyed at having her story about knowing an axe murderess ruined that she rushed out to write her vastly inferiorA Private Disgrace: Lizzie Borden by Daylight.

I also recommend, with reservations, Robert Sullivan's book Goodbye Lizzie Borden. Sullivan produces a lot of information about the trial, the jurors and a copycat crime that is not in most sources. He makes a convincing case that Lizzie Borden might have gotten off even if she was guilty, but unfortunately confuses this with proving that she is.

This book is the absolute worst crime book about the Lizzie Borden Case.I think it's out of print,however it may be on library shelves still.Radin also wrote a silly book on the Lindbergh kidnapping case,that was total fiction.Radin's books may be red herrings that were placed around to throw off the blood-hounds.If you read enough about crime ,you will see the fallacies of Radin's stories.