ands of her stepmother and father? There is no evidence to support this idea. Radin, I think, is seduced by the story that Bridget, in her old age, almost confessed during an illness that she supposed was her last (Porter 28). Radin’s account is possible, but his hypothesis is missing a motive; Bridget never showed signs of hostility towards the Bordens. Also as for Lizzie and Bridget being lovers, that also has no strength what so ever.The next theory is that Lizzie killed her parents. Gross proposes that Lizzie did indeed murder her parents, but that she could not have brought off the crime successfully without Bridget's assistance. It was Bridget who spirited away -- virtually under the very noses of the police -- the murder weapon and the bloodstained dress. Gross suggests the possibility that Lizzie plotted the murders with Bridget. Gross is also missing a motive, but answers most of the rest of the questions: Why didn’t Bridget hear 200lb Abby fall to the ground? What happened to the murder weapon? Why did Lizzie pay for Bridget’s return to Ireland? This explains the mutually non-accusatory testimony of Lizzie and Bridget with respect to each other. Gross points out that only the two of them were in the house when the two-hundred-pound Abby Borden fell heavily and noisily to the floor after being struck. He finds significance in Bridget's passage being paid so that she could return to Ireland -- was it Lizzie's part of the bargain? He also attaches importance to Bridget's "almost-death-bed confession" over half a century later, when Bridget was living in Butte, Montana (Porter 56).Conclusion:The discovery of a murder weapon, or even just a clue left by the murderer, like bloody clothes or a footprint, would be enough to lift the fog draped over this case. A concrete motive for any of the persons thought physically capable of completing the crime could also very easily seal the case, finally bringing the century ...
