[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Jean
Date: 5/3/03
Time: 1:57:18 PM
Remote Name: 209.240.198.61
The thing about the Borden case is that the one women who saw the murderer did go to the police, but they treated her so badly that she never told anyone again until she told her son in law. And the discription was such that it would fit no one else.
Her son in law had worked with the illigitimate son when he was young. And knew that his name was Borden. But he and the son lived in another town. So the people where the trial was held did not know about the son. People just did not travel that far often.
But when you read the book, you realized that it was true, unless the author just made the whole thing up.
Let us say for example that the phone bills of Niole are found hidden in one of the prosecutors houses and has a bunch of Furman calls. Or in Frmans house some object is found that belonged to one of the victums. Then it could be like the Borden case and Jaspers book would fill in the gaps. Knowing Furhman, they would probably find a copy right at Furmans house. And it would all fit.
Of couse other senerios could fit, these are examples of finding the evidence that makes it all fit. What ever the truth might be.
It is even more likely to happen in the OJ case couse we know that many people where afraid of talking, but we do not know whaat they know or why they are not talking.
Also in the Borden case there is still evidence that will come out at some time. Because the defense still has a law office. All their papers about the case are still locked in a safe under their care. Never been realesed because of atorney clien privilage.