Hammersmith Ghost murder case

Last updated

Engraving of the Hammersmith Ghost in Kirby's Wonderful and Scientific Museum, a magazine published in 1804 Hammersmith Ghost.PNG
Engraving of the Hammersmith Ghost in Kirby's Wonderful and Scientific Museum, a magazine published in 1804

The Hammersmith Ghost murder case of 1804 set a legal precedent in the UK regarding self-defence: that someone could be held liable for their actions even if they were the consequence of a mistaken belief.

Contents

Near the end of 1803, many people claimed to have seen or even been attacked by a ghost in the Hammersmith area of London, a ghost believed by locals to be the spirit of a suicide victim. On 3 January 1804, a 29-year-old excise officer named Francis Smith, a member of one of the armed patrols set up in the wake of the reports, shot and killed a bricklayer, Thomas Millwood, mistaking the white clothes of Millwood's trade for a shroud of a ghostly apparition. Smith was found guilty of murder and sentenced to death, later commuted to one year's hard labour.

The issues surrounding the case were not settled for 180 years, until a Court of Appeal decision in 1984. [2] [3] [4]

Ghost

From November 1803, [5] a number of people in the Hammersmith area claimed to have seen, and some to have been attacked by, a ghost. [2] Local people said the ghost was of a man who had died by suicide the previous year and had been buried in Hammersmith churchyard. The contemporary belief was that suicide victims should not be buried in consecrated ground, as their souls would not then be at rest. [6] The apparition was described as being very tall and dressed in all white, but was also said to wear a calfskin garment with horns and large glass eyes at other times. [5]

Stories about the ghost soon began to circulate. Two women, one elderly and the other pregnant, were reported to have been seized by the ghost on separate occasions while walking near the churchyard; they were apparently so frightened they both died from shock a few days afterwards. [7] [8] A brewer's servant, Thomas Groom, later testified that, while walking through the churchyard with a companion one night, close to 9:00 pm, something rose from behind a tombstone and seized him by the throat. Hearing the scuffle, his companion turned around, at which the ghost "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." [5]

On 29 December, William Girdler, a night watchman, saw the ghost while near Beaver Lane and gave chase; the apparition threw off its shroud and managed to escape. With London not having an organised police force at the time, and as "many people were very much frightened," according to Girdler, several citizens formed armed patrols in the hope of apprehending the ghost. [5] [8]

Death of Thomas Millwood

At the corner of Beaver Lane, while making his rounds at around 10:30 pm on 3 January 1804, Girdler met one of the armed citizens patrolling the area, 29-year-old excise officer Francis Smith. Armed with a shotgun, Smith told Girdler he was going to look for the supposed ghost. Girdler agreed that he would join Smith after he had called the hour at 11:00 pm, and that they would "take [the ghost] if possible." They then went their separate ways. [5]

Just after 11:00 pm, Smith encountered Thomas Millwood, a bricklayer who was wearing the normal white clothing of his trade: "linen trousers entirely white, washed very clean, a waistcoat of flannel, apparently new, very white, and an apron, which he wore round him". [9] Millwood had been heading home from a visit to his parents and sister, who lived in Black Lion Lane. According to Anne Millwood, the bricklayer's sister, immediately after seeing her brother off, she heard Smith challenge him, saying "Damn you; who are you and what are you? Damn you, I'll shoot you." after which Smith shot him in the left of the lower jaw and killed him. [5]

After hearing the shot, Girdler and Smith's neighbour, one John Locke, together with a George Stowe, met Smith, who "appeared very much agitated"; upon seeing Millwood's body, the others advised Smith to return home. Meanwhile, a constable arrived at the scene and took Smith into custody. Millwood's corpse was carried to an inn, where a surgeon, Mr. Flower, examined the body on 6 January and pronounced death to be the result of "a gunshot wound on the left side of the lower jaw with small shot, about size No. 4, one of which had penetrated the virtebre [sic] of the neck, and injured the spinal marrow." [5]

Trial of Francis Smith

Smith was tried for willful murder. The deceased's wife, Mrs. Fulbrooke, stated that she had warned him to cover his white clothing with a greatcoat, as he had already been mistaken for the ghost on a previous occasion.

On Saturday evening, he and I were at home, for he lived with me; he said he had frightened two ladies and a gentleman who were coming along the terrace in a carriage, for that the man said, he dared to say there goes the ghost; that he said he was no more a ghost than he was, and asked him, using a bad word, did he want a punch of the head; I begged of him to change his dress; Thomas, says I, as there is a piece of work about the ghost, and your cloaths[sic] look white, pray do put on your great coat, that you may not run any danger;

Mrs. Fulbrooke's testimony at the Old Bailey trial [5]

Millwood's sister testified that although Smith had called on her brother to stop or he would shoot, Smith fired the gun almost immediately. Despite a number of declarations of Smith's good character, the chief judge, Lord Chief Baron Sir Archibald Macdonald, advised the jury that malice was not required of murder – merely an intent to kill:

I should betray my duty, and injure the public security, if I did not persist in asserting that this is a clear case of murder, if the facts be proved to your satisfaction. All killing whatever amounts to murder, unless justified by the law, or in self-defence. In cases of some involuntary acts, or some sufficiently violent provocation, it becomes manslaughter. Not one of these circumstances occur here.

Lord Chief Baron Macdonald [10]

The Lord Chief Baron observed that Smith had neither acted in self-defence nor shot Millwood by accident; he had not been provoked by the supposed apparition nor had he attempted to apprehend it. Millwood had not committed any offence to justify being shot, and even if the supposed ghost had been shot, it would not have been acceptable, as frightening people while pretending to be a ghost was not a serious felony, but a far less serious misdemeanour, meriting only a small fine. [8] The judge closed his remarks by reminding the jury that the previous good character of the accused meant nothing in this case. Macdonald directed the jury to find the accused guilty of murder if they believed the facts presented by the witnesses. After considering for an hour, the jury returned a verdict of manslaughter. Macdonald informed the jury that "the Court could not receive such a verdict", and that they must either find Smith guilty of murder, or acquit him; that Smith believed Millwood was a ghost was irrelevant. The jury then returned with a verdict of guilty. After passing the customary sentence of death, [1] Macdonald said that he intended to report the case to the King, who had the power to commute the sentence. The initial sentence of hanging and dissection was commuted to a year's hard labour. [2]

The huge publicity given to the case persuaded the true culprit to come forward: John Graham, an elderly shoemaker, had been pretending to be a ghost by using a white sheet to frighten his apprentice, who had been scaring Graham's children with ghost stories. [11] [12] There is no record of Graham ever being punished. [8]

Effect on UK law

The question of whether acting on a mistaken belief was a sufficient defence to a criminal charge was debated for more than a century until it was clarified at the Court of Appeal in the case R v Williams (Gladstone) (1984), concerning an appeal heard in November 1983. The appellant, Gladstone Williams, had seen a man dragging a younger man violently along the street while the latter shouted for help. Mistakenly believing that an assault was taking place, Williams intervened and injured the apparent assailant, who was actually attempting to apprehend a suspected thief. Williams was subsequently convicted of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. At the appeal, Lord Chief Justice Lane referred to the historical debate:

(the case) raised issues of law which have been the subject of debate for more years than one likes to think about and the subject of more learned academic articles than one would care to read in an evening.

Lord Chief Justice Lane [13]

Lane went on to clarify the problematic issue:

In a case of self-defence, where self-defence or the prevention of crime is concerned, if the jury came to the conclusion that the defendant believed, or may have believed, that he was being attacked or that a crime was being committed, and that force was necessary to protect himself or to prevent the crime, then the prosecution have not proved their case. If, however, the defendant's alleged belief was mistaken and if the mistake was an unreasonable one, that may be a peaceful reason for coming to the conclusion that the belief was not honestly held and should be rejected. Even if the jury come to the conclusion that the mistake was an unreasonable one, if the defendant may genuinely have been labouring under it, he is entitled to rely upon it.

Lord Chief Justice Lane [13]

The appeal was allowed, and the conviction quashed. The decision was approved by the Privy Council in Beckford v The Queen (1988) and was later written into law in the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, Section 76. [14]

See also

Related Research Articles

In jurisprudence, double jeopardy is a procedural defence that prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same charges following an acquittal or conviction and in rare cases prosecutorial and/or judge misconduct in the same jurisdiction. Double jeopardy is a common concept in criminal law. In civil law, a similar concept is that of res judicata. Variation in common law countries is the peremptory plea, which may take the specific forms of autrefois acquit or autrefois convict. These doctrines appear to have originated in ancient Roman law, in the broader principle non bis in idem.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">M'Naghten rules</span> Guideline governing legal pleas of insanity

The M'Naghten rule(s) (pronounced, and sometimes spelled, McNaughton) is a legal test defining the defence of insanity, first formulated by House of Lords in 1843. It is the established standard in UK criminal law, and versions have also been adopted in some US states (currently or formerly), and other jurisdictions, either as case law or by statute. Its original wording is a proposed jury instruction:

that every man is to be presumed to be sane, and ... that to establish a defence on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong.

The defence of property is a common method of justification used by defendants who argue that they should not be held liable for any loss and injury that they have caused because they were acting to protect their property.

The urban survival syndrome, in United States jurisprudence, can be used either as a defense of justification or of excuse. The first case using, unsuccessfully, the defense of "urban survival syndrome" is the 1994 Fort Worth, Texas murder trial of Daimion Osby.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Derek Bentley</span> British man hanged but later pardoned (1933–1953)

Derek William Bentley was a British man who was hanged for the murder of a policeman during a burglary attempt. Christopher Craig, then aged 16, a friend and accomplice of Bentley, was accused of the murder. Bentley was convicted as a party to the crime under the English law principle of joint enterprise, as the burglary had been committed in mutual understanding and bringing deadly weapons. The outcome of the trial, and Home Secretary David Maxwell Fyfe's failure to grant clemency to Bentley, were highly controversial.

Barry Michael George is an English man who was found guilty of the murder of English television presenter Jill Dando and whose conviction was overturned on appeal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shooting of James Ashley</span> 1998 killing of unarmed man in UK

James Ashley was a British man who, while unarmed and naked, was shot dead by police in his flat in St Leonards-on-Sea, East Sussex, on 15 January 1998. Armed officers raided the building on the suspicion that Ashley kept a firearm and a quantity of cocaine there, and to arrest him and another man in connection with a stabbing. Neither a firearm nor a significant quantity of drugs was found, the other man was not present, and it later emerged that Ashley was not implicated in the stabbing. Ashley, likely woken by the noise of the raid, was out of bed when an armed police officer entered his bedroom. On seeing the officer, Ashley raised one arm and the officer reacted by firing a single shot. Later that morning, Sussex Police chief constable Paul Whitehouse held a press conference in which he praised the conduct of the operation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Geoffrey Lane, Baron Lane</span> British judge (1918–2005)

Geoffrey Dawson Lane, Baron Lane, was a British Judge who served as Lord Chief Justice of England from 1980 to 1992. The later part of his term was marred by a succession of disputed convictions. Lane's critics claimed that his refusal to believe that police evidence could be institutionally corrupt, and his reluctance to overturn the verdict of a jury, "represented a dangerous hindrance to justice". His failure to allow the appeal of the Birmingham Six in 1988 led to calls for his resignation following their successful appeal in 1991; an editorial in The Times "urged him to go", while 140 members of parliament signed a House of Commons motion to that effect.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lords of Chaos (criminal group)</span> 1996 teen criminal group

The Lords of Chaos was a self-styled teen militia formed on April 13, 1996, in Fort Myers, Florida, United States. It was led by Kevin Donald Foster. The group gained notoriety for a crime spree that ended on April 30, 1996, with the murder of one of the boys' teachers, Mark Schwebes, the Riverdale High School's band director.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Homicide Act 1957</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Homicide Act 1957 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It was enacted as a partial reform of the common law offence of murder in English law by abolishing the doctrine of constructive malice, reforming the partial defence of provocation, and by introducing the partial defences of diminished responsibility and suicide pact. It restricted the use of the death penalty for murder.

Self-defence is a defence permitting reasonable force to be used to defend one's self or another. This defence arises both from common law and the Criminal Law Act 1967. Self-defence is a justification defence rather than an excuse.

In the criminal law of Australia, self-defence is a legal defence to a charge of causing injury or death in defence of the person or, to a limited extent, property, or a partial defence to murder if the degree of force used was excessive.

In English law, provocation was a mitigatory defence to murder which had taken many guises over generations many of which had been strongly disapproved and modified. In closing decades, in widely upheld form, it amounted to proving a reasonable total loss of control as a response to another's objectively provocative conduct sufficient to convert what would otherwise have been murder into manslaughter. It only applied to murder. It was abolished on 4 October 2010 by section 56(1) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, but thereby replaced by the superseding—and more precisely worded—loss of control defence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Glasgow ice cream wars</span> 1980s turf war between rival gangs

The ice cream wars were turf wars in the East End of Glasgow, Scotland, in the 1980s between rival criminal organisations selling drugs and stolen goods from ice cream vans. Van operators were involved in frequent violence and intimidation tactics, the most notable example of which involved a driver and his family who were killed in an arson attack that resulted in a twenty-year court battle. The conflicts generated widespread public outrage, and earned the Strathclyde Police the nickname of "Serious Chimes Squad" for its perceived failure to address them.

On 14 October 2004, Pádraig Nally, an Irish farmer living in County Mayo, Republic of Ireland shot dead Irish Traveller John "Frog" Ward, who had been trespassing on his property. In November 2005 Nally was sentenced to six years' imprisonment for manslaughter. His conviction was quashed in October 2006 and, after a retrial in December 2006, he was found not guilty of manslaughter.

R v Quick [1973] QB 910 is an English criminal case, as to sane automatism and the sub-category of self-inducement of such a state. The court ruled that it may not be used as a defence if the defendant's loss of self-control was on the part of negligence in consuming or not consuming something which someone ought to but the jury must be properly directed so as to make all relevant findings of fact. The ruling stresses that automatism is usually easily distinct from insanity, in the few cases where the lines are blurred it is a complex problem for prosecutors and mental health professionals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">World's End Murders</span> Crime in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1977

The World's End Murders is the colloquial name given to the murder of two girls, Christine Eadie, 17, and Helen Scott, 17, in Edinburgh, in October 1977. The case is so named because both victims were last seen alive leaving The World's End pub in Edinburgh's Old Town. The only person to stand trial accused of the murders, Angus Sinclair, was acquitted in 2007 in controversial circumstances. Following the amendment of the law of double jeopardy, which would have prevented his retrial, Sinclair was retried in October 2014 and convicted of both murders on 14 November 2014. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 37 years, the longest sentence by a Scottish court, meaning he would have been 106 years old when he was eligible for a potential release on parole. He died at HM Prison Glenochil aged 73 on 11 March 2019. Coincidentally, he died on the same day the BBC's Crimewatch Roadshow programme profiled the murders.

<i>R v Gnango</i> British legal case

Regina v Armel Gnango[2011] UKSC 59 is the leading English criminal law case on the interaction of joint enterprise, transferred malice, and exemption from criminal liability where a party to what would normally be a crime is the victim of it. The Supreme Court held, restoring Gnango's conviction for the murder of Magda Pniewska, that he was guilty of murder notwithstanding the fact that he had not fired the shot which killed Pniewska during the shoot out which led to her death, and that the fatal shot had been fired by his opponent in an attempt to kill him. The judgment of the Supreme Court has been criticised over the alleged extent to which it was designed to mollify public opinion, and in the context of debates over the nature of the doctrine of joint enterprise.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murder of Botham Jean</span> 2018 murder case in Texas

On the night of September 6, 2018, 26-year-old accountant Botham Jean was murdered in Dallas, Texas by off-duty Dallas Police Department patrol officer Amber Guyger, who entered Jean's apartment and fatally shot him. Guyger, who said that she had entered Jean's apartment believing it was her own and believed Jean to be a burglar, was initially charged with manslaughter. The absence of a murder charge led to protests and accusations of racial bias because Jean—an unarmed black man—was killed in his own home by a white off-duty officer who had apparently disregarded police protocols. On November 30, 2018, Guyger was indicted on a charge of murder. On October 1, 2019, she was found guilty of murder, and was sentenced to ten years' imprisonment the following day. The ruling was upheld on appeal in 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Killing of Greg Gunn</span> 2016 shooting by police in Montgomery, Alabama

The killing of Greg Gunn occurred on the morning of February 25, 2016, in Montgomery, Alabama. Gunn, a 58-year-old African-American man, was shot and killed near his home after fleeing from a stop-and-frisk initiated by Aaron Cody Smith, a white police officer. Smith was charged with murder and indicted by a grand jury in 2016. The case came to trial in late 2019 following a change of venue to Ozark, Alabama. Smith was found guilty of manslaughter, and, in January 2020, was sentenced to 14 years in prison.

References

  1. 1 2 R.S. Kirby (1804), "The Hammersmith Ghosts", Kirby's Wonderful and Scientific Museum, pp. 65–79
  2. 1 2 3 "UK | The case of the murdered ghost". BBC News. 3 January 2004. Retrieved 31 October 2011.
  3. Courtney Stanhope Kenny (1911), Outlines of Criminal Law, Cambridge University Press, p. 103
  4. William Hough (1834), The practice of courts-martial, and other military courts, pp. 340–341, The Judge said it must be either murder, or of acquittal. If the jury believed the facts, there was no extenuation that could be admitted; for supposing that the unfortunate man was the individual really meant (ghost), and had been shot, the prisoner would have been guilty of murder.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 "Francis Smith, Killing", The Proceedings of the Old Bailey, 11 January 1804
  6. Lucy Bregman (2009), Religion, death, and dying, Volume 3, p. 110, ISBN   9780313351808
  7. The Newgate Calendar – "Francis Smith: Condemned to Death on 13th of January, 1804, for the Murder of the supposed Hammersmith Ghost, but pardoned soon afterwards", 1804
  8. 1 2 3 4 Martin Baggoley (9 April 2015), "The Hammersmith Ghost and the Strange Death of Thomas Millwood", Crime Magazine
  9. Mike Dash (24 March 2009), Ghosts, witches, vampires, fairies and the law of murder, Charles Fort Institute, archived from the original on 3 September 2011, retrieved 16 September 2011
  10. Medland, Weobly (eds.) (1804). A collection of remarkable and interesting criminal trials, actions at law, and other legal decisions. London: John Badcock. p. 213.{{cite book}}: |last= has generic name (help)
  11. Jennifer Westwood, Jacqueline Simpson (2008), "Hammersmith", The Penguin Book of Ghosts
  12. Steve Roud (2010), "Hammersmith", London Lore
  13. 1 2 Court of Appeal, Criminal Division (1984). "R. v Gladstone Williams". England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). Retrieved 2 November 2011.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  14. Baskin, Eric. "Law relating to Self Defence". British Self Defence Governing Body. Retrieved 2 November 2011.