All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Feb. 11, 2020 - Skeptoid
17:38
Skeptoid #714: Killing the Hammersmith Ghost

Some possible explanations for this infamously deadly 19th century haunting near London. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Vigilante Kills Innocent Man 00:08:39
Few ghost stories result in someone actually being killed by the specter, and even fewer have someone killing the ghost.
Isn't the ghost supposed to already be dead?
But in London in 1803, that's exactly what happened.
A vigilante out hunting for the ghost actually shot and killed it, and then discovered he'd killed an innocent man who happened to be dressed in white.
But the Hammersmith ghost case should be remembered best for what can go wrong when the public gets in a mass panic about something and takes matters into their own hands.
The Hammersmith Ghost is today on Skeptoid.
A quick reminder for everyone, you're listening to Skeptoid, revealing the true science and true history behind urban legends every week since 2006.
With over a thousand episodes, we're celebrating 20 years of keeping it focused and keeping it brief.
And we couldn't have done it without your curiosity leading the way.
And now we're even offering a little bit more.
If you become a premium member, supporting the show with a monthly micropayment of as little as $5, you get more Skeptoid.
The premium version of the show is not only ad-free, it has extended content.
These episodes are a few minutes longer.
We get rid of the ads and we'll replace them with more Skeptoid.
The extended premium show available now.
Come to Skeptoid.com and click Go Premium.
You're listening to Skeptoid.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Killing the Hammersmith Ghost This famous historical ghost case from London in 1803 is notable in that it impacted the English criminal justice system, but also in that it involved actual specters, court testimony, one real death, and possibly two more rumored deaths.
Most descriptions of the case today put it all down to mistaken identity.
But in point of fact, that's about the least interesting aspect of it.
Today, we're going to examine several possible explanations and identify the one that best fits the facts for this tall, white-clad phantom that might rise up and grab you as you pass the cemetery at night.
The basic facts of this case, which are the ones you'll find reported most often, is that there was a ghost scare in the Hammersmith district of London.
Frightened residents attributed one or more deaths to the ghost, and so a number of vigilante groups went out in pursuit of it.
One night, one such vigilante encountered an all-too-human bricklayer walking home wearing his all-white work uniform.
He did not respond to hails, and the vigilante shot him dead, believing him to be the ghost.
Peripheral to our focus today, but still significant, is that the case ended up becoming somewhat pivotal in establishing English case law.
Should a person acting in good faith, but under a mistaken belief, still be guilty of murder?
The question of whether a mistaken belief can be a valid defense for murder can get quite thorny when you follow all the threads and come to questions like the apparent threat of imminent harm.
The United Kingdom finally ironed this out in 2008, 204 years after the Hammersmith ghost.
Roughly, what it comes down to today is that if the defendant perceives force is necessary to prevent harm due to some mistaken belief of his, and he's relying on that belief honestly and not unreasonably, he's entitled to the defense.
But enough of that.
Back to our story.
The ghostly rumors had been floating around Hammersmith since December 1803.
The area was then quite suburban with lots of farming and gardening.
It was said that a man who had committed suicide by cutting his own throat had been buried in the graveyard of St. Paul's Chapel of Eves.
A common belief at the time was that the soul of one who had committed suicide could never be at rest in consecrated ground.
Thus, it was excusable for many people to suspect that a ghost might be on the loose, perhaps even a belligerent one.
One resident, Thomas Groom, told this frightening story.
I was going through the churchyard between eight and nine o'clock with my jacket under my arm and my hands in my pocket when some person came from behind a tombstone, which there are four square in the yard, behind me and caught me fast by the throat with both hands and held me fast.
My fellow servant, who was going on before, hearing me scuffling, asked what was the matter.
Then whatever it was gave me a twist round and I saw nothing.
I gave a bit of a push out with my fist and felt something soft like a great coat.
And afterward, a popular rumor arose that a similar event took place with far more dire consequences.
This creepy tale was reported in the book Old and New London.
One poor woman, while crossing near the churchyard about 10 o'clock at night, beheld something, as she described it, rise from the tombstones.
The figure was very tall and very white.
She attempted to run, but the supposed ghost soon overtook her.
And pressing her in his arms, she fainted, in which situation she remained some hours, till discovered by the neighbors who kindly led her home when she took to her bed and died two days afterwards.
Whether the culprit was actually a ghost or just a mischievous person was not finally the point, though.
If this being, whomever or whatever it was, was going around killing people, it needed to be stopped.
So a number of vigilante parties formed, there being no organized police force in Hammersmith at the time.
One such vigilante, a Mr. Girdler, had previously seen the white shrouded ghost himself and even pursued it.
During the later court testimony, he described how he lost the ghost when it slipped the sheet or tablecloth off and then got it over his head.
It was just as if his head was in a bag.
The reports were not all of a white shrouded being, though.
During court testimony, Anne Millwood, sister of the deceased bricklayer, said the talk of the ghost she'd heard was that sometimes it appeared in a white sheet and sometimes in a calfskin dress with horns on its head and glass eyes.
The description was mirrored by Girdler's vigilante partner, John Locke.
In white sometimes and sometimes in the skin of a beast, a calfskin or something of that sort.
On patrol by himself one evening, Francis Smith, 28 years old, encountered the figure of Thomas Millwood as he stepped out of his father-in-law's house just after 11 p.m.
Millwood was dressed in plasterer's clothes, described as, quote, linen trousers entirely white, washed very clean, a waistcoat of flannel, apparently new, very white, and an apron.
Smith cried out, Damn you, who are you?
And what are you?
Damn you, I will shoot you.
And so he did.
A single shot that broke Millwood's jaw and penetrated his spine.
Writing for the Charles Fort Institute, historian Mike Dash described what happened next.
Smith, when he realized his mistake, was horrified.
He gave himself up immediately and was swiftly charged with murder and tried at the Old Bailey less than a week later.
Though the prisoner's hurried surrender and obvious contrition stood him in good stead, the prosecution accepted Smith's version of events, and the jury was plainly anxious to show mercy.
Instead of finding the customs man guilty of murder, they returned a verdict of manslaughter instead.
It was left to the judge to explain that such a verdict was not possible and that the prerogative of mercy lay not with the jury, but with the crown.
Smith was promptly found guilty of murder, sentenced to death, then reprieved that same evening by the king.
In the end, he served only six months in jail.
Listener-Supported Skeptoid Program 00:08:55
In a world that can feel overwhelming, spreading thoughtful, evidence-based content is one of the best ways to make a positive impact.
Ask your local public radio station to air the Skeptoid Files, a 30-minute radio-friendly version of Skeptoid that pairs two related episodes promoting real science, true history, and critical thinking.
And in these challenging times for public media, we're offering these broadcasts for free to radio stations, available on the PRX Exchange or directly from Skeptoid Media.
It's an easy ask.
Just send a quick message to your station's programming director.
By helping to bring the Skeptoid files to the airwaves, you'll help promote the essential skills we all need to tell fact from fiction.
Just go to your local station's website, find the programming director's email address, or just their general email address.
You can even use the telephone.
I know that might sound crazy.
It's an old legacy device that allows real-time voice communication.
I know that's weird, but hey, it's an option.
The world can feel chaotic, but you're not powerless.
When you promote critical thinking, you can help your community tell fact from fiction.
And that's how we shape a better future.
In uncertain times, spreading good ideas can make you feel helpful, not helpless.
Let's stand up for reason, truth, and understanding together.
Get them to air the Skeptoid files from Skeptoid Media, available on the PRX Exchange, and they'll know what that is.
But those months were not quiet.
As we see often, one highly publicized ghost sighting begets another, and another.
And this time, even as Smith's trial was underway, the St. James Park ghost grabbed the headlines.
Near where Buckingham Palace now stands, two sentries of the Coldstream Guards outside the Wellington barracks, in separate incidents, both reported a horrific sight.
One signed the following statement.
About half past one o'clock in the morning, I perceived the figure of a woman without a head rise from the ground at the distance of about three feet before me.
I was so alarmed at the circumstance that I had not power to speak to it, which was my wish to have done.
But I distinctly observed that the figure was dressed in a red striped gown with red spots between each stripe, and that part of the dress and figure appeared to me to be enveloped in a cloud.
In about the space of two seconds, whilst my eyes were fixed on the object, it vanished from my sight.
Both men were so affected, they had to be hospitalized and publicly declared their belief that it was a ghost.
The papers reported that others had seen it too.
The Times published a debunking very soon after.
Their investigation asserted that a pair of students from nearby Westminster School set up Phantasmagoria equipment in an empty house across the street and hoaxed the poor guards.
Phantasmagorias were still reasonably new at the time.
the classic application used what was called a magic lantern.
This was a camera obscura in the form of a box with a projection lens on one side, or even just a pinhole.
Inside the box, an image, or even a small model of an object, was placed, made as bright as possible with a lantern.
An image would thus be projected onto an opposite wall.
In the most elaborate phantasmagoric performances, such as those performed on the stage, a light see-through fabric could be hung to make the specter almost appear to be standing beside the performer.
Today, this seems like a very poor explanation.
With nothing more than a lantern, this was well before the invention of the electric light, it would be extraordinarily difficult to get such a projection bright enough to be visible over anything more than a very short distance.
At any distance, the image would have been hopelessly big and diffuse.
Decent focus would have been nearly impossible to achieve, and without an obvious fabric screen in front of the soldier, the image would have only been visible on the flat side of a building.
But this was said to have been across the street facing toward the soldiers, the geometry making this explanation implausible.
Phantasmagoria shows had been playing in London since 1801, so they were still new and novel, and some percentage of Hammersmith locals might have seen one.
Those who had probably told amazingly exaggerated accounts to their friends, 50% of whom were illiterate in London at that time.
And it's no surprise that people may have had an inflated idea of what a magic lantern may have been able to accomplish.
In Skeptoid number 550, we told the tale of the mad gasser of Mattoon, a case of mass hysteria driven by irresponsible news reporting.
Mass hysteria doesn't mean people are running around hysterically in the streets.
It's much more subtle.
People tend to make interpretations based on expectations, and when the newspapers, or other popularly shared information, set specific expectations, in this case, a ghost, it's common and normal for us to err on the side of that expectation when we see anything unusual.
It can even be something that we may not even notice in the absence of those expectations.
If we can believe the sworn court testimony, there were people in town who had been attacked and who had seen someone wearing a white sheet.
With that kind of information out in the wild, among a public for whom belief in ghosts was the norm, the extraordinary outcome would have been one in which there was no Hammersmith ghost and no headless woman in St. James Park.
No phantasmagorias or accursed suicide victims needed.
A footnote that may be of interest to some.
Most sources say that Smith killed Millwood with a shotgun.
There's no contemporary source for this.
The only gun described in the court testimony was Girdler's pistol.
A medical examiner named Flower stated that there was a single gunshot wound of small shot, quote, about the size of number four.
If it was indeed a shotgun pellet, it could have been either 3mm birdshot by the English system, unlikely to have broken a man's jaw, or 6.1mm buckshot, equivalent to about a .24 caliber pistol round, within the scope of error of Flower's estimate.
Which one the excitable Mr. Smith actually carried is lost to history.
Some other people we suspect of being mere phantasmagoric projections include Skeptoid Premium Supporters Evander Dusen, J.K. Fossnight, Brian and Emma Dorland, and Lena Schiller.
Thanks to your support, our little staff here at Skeptoid Media is able to produce not only this program, but others as well.
The In Fact and Feeding Tube video series and documentary films such as Principles of Curiosity and Science Friction.
You can find out all about these at skeptoid.org.
And it's all clean-tagged, classroom-friendly, and much of it comes with accompanying educational materials.
Join us in this work.
Become a donor today at skeptoid.com.
You're listening to Skeptoid, a listener-supported program.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Hello, everyone.
This is Adrian Hill from Skookum Studios in Calgary, Canada, the land of maple syrup and mousse.
And I'm here to ask you to consider becoming a premium member of Skeptoid for as little as five US dollars per month.
And that's only the cost of a couple of Tim Horton's double doubles.
And that's Canadian for coffee with double cream and sugar.
Why support Skeptoid?
If you are like me and don't like ads, but like extended versions of each episode, Premium is for you.
If you want to support a worthwhile non-profit that combats pseudoscience, promotes critical thinking, and provides free access to teachers to use the podcast in the classroom via the Teacher's Toolkit, then sign up today.
Remember that skepticism is the best medicine.
Next to giggling, of course.
Until next time, this is Adrienne Hill.
From PRX
Export Selection