Sep 22, 2026 · 1h 11m
Lizzie Borden’s acquittal still leaves the blood evidence unexplained
Legally Brunette: Lizzie Borden
The episode revisits a notorious unsolved historical question while separating the documented 1892 case from Netflix’s fictionalized retelling.
- 1Lizzie Borden faced murder charges after contradictory statements, disputed evidence, and an investigation that never resolved the physical case.
- 2An all-male jury acquitted Borden despite arguments involving a blue dress, prussic acid, and the victims’ displayed skulls.
- 3The hosts suspect Borden may have acted with Bridget Sullivan, but acknowledge that the missing blood evidence remains unexplained.
Don't miss
The hosts confront the central contradiction: Lizzie may have been responsible, yet the crime scene offers no clear blood evidence explaining how the murders happened.
The brief
Emily Simpson, Tamara Judge, and Teddi Mellencamp use Netflix’s Monster as a starting point, then reconstruct the Borden murders from the historical record.
The case turns on a baffling crime scene: Abby and Andrew Borden were killed separately, yet investigators found no clear blood trail or decisive evidence implicating Lizzie or Bridget Sullivan.
The hosts examine Lizzie’s burned blue dress, cellar clothing, contradictory statements, alleged prussic-acid purchase, and the prosecution’s dramatic display of the victims’ skulls.
An all-male jury acquitted Lizzie, who inherited her father’s estate and later lived in isolation, while her sister Emma eventually became estranged from her.
The hosts argue Lizzie may have had Bridget’s help, but their theory cannot explain how the killer avoided leaving the physical evidence the case should have produced.
The discussion separates documented history from Monster’s invented relationship and exaggerated abuse, leaving Lizzie’s responsibility asserted but not physically demonstrated.