Fred Dinenage: Murder Casebook - Brides in the Bath Murders Extract - YouTube Fred Dinenage: Murder Casebook - Brides in the Bath Murders Extract Want to watch this again later? Sign in to add this video to a playlist. Need to report the video? Sign in to report inappropriate content. The interactive transcript could not be loaded. Loading... Rating is available when the video has been rented. This feature is not available right now. Please try again later. Uploaded on Aug 25, 2011 A short clip from the episode about George Joseph Smith known as the Brides in the Bath Murderer. (C) Talent TV South. First broadcast on Crime and Investigation Network. Please visit for more information or 'like' page at Category The 'Brides in the Bath' Murders | The 'Brides in the Bath' … | Flickr The 'Brides in the Bath' Murders The 'Brides in the Bath' Murders 1912-1914 George Joseph Smith became known in 1914 as the ‘Brides in the Bath Murderer’.

A callous crook, he murdered women he had conned into marriage weeks, and sometimes just days after their wedding. Always insuring their lives and having had them make out a will in his favour, he thought he had found a foolproof get rich quick scheme. A cold-hearted con-man whose crimes were motivated purely by financial gain, he was born in the East End of London in 1872 and by the age of nine had been sent to reform school for thieving. He left at 16 with a talent for exploiting women. George Joseph Smith (January 11, 1872 – August 13, 1915) was an English serial killer and bigamist. In 1915 he was convicted and subsequently hanged for the slayings of three women, the case becoming known as the "Brides in the Bath Murders". As well as being widely reported in the media, the case was a significant case in the history of forensic pathology and detection. It was also one of the first cases in which similarities between connected crimes were used to prove deliberation, a technique used in subsequent prosecutions.

Between 1912 and 1914, he left three brides dead in baths after taking them for every penny. Smith made the drownings look like accidents and collected inheritance and life insurance without suspicion. GEORGE JOSEPH SMITH, one of the most atrocious English criminals ever, was born on January 11, 1872, at Roman Road, Bethnal Green, his father being George Thomas Smith, an insurance agent, and his mother Louisa Smith, nee Gibson. The son early displayed criminal tendencies, and seems to have been sent to the reformatory at Gravesend at the tender age of nine, remaining there till he was sixteen. Smith later went to Bristol, where he set up a small shop at 389 Gloucester Road as a second-hand furniture dealer. At 368, in the same road, dwelt Edith Mabel Pegler with her mother. On July 1 she advertised for a situation as housekeeper, where a servant was kept. Smith replied to a advertisement, and she speedily consented to keep house for him, although he was not in a position to afford a servant.

After a week' acquaintance, Smith had so captivated Miss Pegler' s maiden heart, that she consented to be his, although his means were very nebulous a mythical aunt who allowed him money, and " that he went about the country dealing." The marriage was solemnised at St. Peter's Registry Office, Bristol, on July 30, by special licence, Smith having married for the first time in his real name, describing himself as thirty-three years of age, a bachelor and general dealer, son of George Smith, deceased, figure artist . Later Police enquiries showed that Smith had conducted seven bigamous marriages between 1908 and 1914. At the age of 26, in January 1898, using the name of George Love, Smith had married, legally and for the first time, 18-year old Caroline Thornhill in Leicester. They moved to London, and she worked as a maid for a number of employers, stealing from them under her husband's tuition. Caroline Love was arrested in Worthing, trying to pawn some silver spoons, and she was sent to prison for 12 months.

On her release she incriminated her husband, who was then jailed for two years in January 1901. On his release , Mrs Love fled to Canada. In June 1908 Smith met a widow from Worthing, Florence Wilson, and married her three weeks later. By 3rd July he had left her after taking £30 she had withdrawn from her savings account, and selling all her belongings. By 30th July 1908 he had married Edith Pegler in Bristol who had replied to his advertisement for a house keeper. Then, in October 1909 he married Miss Sarah Freeman, using the name of George Rose. He also married Alice Reid in September 1914, using the name of Charles Oliver James. Smith more smartly attired! Smith apparently had a masterful, hypnotic way with some women, a trait which was only exceeded by his ruthlessness in acquiring their money. When he appeared at the Old Bailey, charged with murdering Alice Burnham, Bessie Munday and Margaret Lloyd, Detective Inspector Neil demonstrated to the jury the method of drowning his victims by raising their knees whilst they were in the bath.

His assistant, a nurse in a bathing costume, herself required artificial respiration after the court room demonstration, and Smith was duly convicted. Smith's trial took place during the dark days of the First World War, and the Judge, Mr Justice Scrutton, remarked upon the irony that "..while this wholesale destruction of human life is going on, for some days all the apparatus of justice in England has been considering whether one man should die..." The jury returned their Guilty verdict in 22 minutes, and Smith was executed on Friday 13th August at Maidstone prison by John Ellis. Caroline Thornhill, whom Smith had married legally, was now a widow, and she married a Canadian soldier the day after Smith's execution. Done ExecutedToday.com » 1915: George Joseph Smith, Brides in the Bath murderer 1915: George Joseph Smith, Brides in the Bath murderer August 13th, 2011 Meaghan (Thanks to Meaghan Good of the Charley Project for the guest post. -ed.) On this day in 1915, serial uxoricide George Joseph Smith was hung by the capable John Ellis at Maidstone Prison in the UK.

Smith had committed three murders and various forms of larceny as well; he’d earned his noose several times over. Two things tend to trip people up when they’ve seemingly committed the perfect crime: either they brag about it to impress others, or they repeat the crime using the same methodology as before, since it worked so well the first time. Either of those actions greatly increases the risk of the criminal’s getting caught. Smith made the latter mistake. He was in a sense a victim of his own success. Smith was born on January 11, 1872. His criminal record began when he was sent to a reformatory at nine and served a seven-year sentence. In young adulthood he was in and out of prison on theft- and fraud-related convictions. His complicated marital career began when he married Caroline Beatrice Thornhill, a domestic servant, in 1898. Smith persuaded her to steal from her employers. Caroline served time in prison as a result, and implicated her husband, who got two years for his role in the thefts. After George Smith’s release, Caroline thought it wise to put a few thousand miles between herself and her estranged husband, and so she left the UK for Canada.

She never filed for divorce, however. Smith remained legally married to her for the rest of his life, so none of his numerous other marriages were legal. Unlawfully Wedded … The guy wasn’t good-looking, but he could charm like any good con artist. A year after his marriage to Caroline, Smith bigamously married another woman. He cleaned out her saving account and then deserted her. Between 1908 and 1914, he married no fewer than seven additional women, usually under an alias, and deserted most of them after a short time, sometimes only a matter of days — but not before he helped himself to their possessions and bank accounts. As true crime writer Harold Schechter tells it in his book The Serial Killer Files: The Who, What, Where, How, and Why of the World’s Most Terrifying Murderers : Smith initially limited himself to scamming gullible spinsters out of their life savings by luring them into bigamous marriages … The moment Smith had his hands on his new bride’s money, he would disappear. Usually telling her he was going out on an errand — to pick up a newspaper or buy a pack of cigarettes — he would never return.

On one occasion, he brought his newlywed wife to the National Gallery of Art and, after viewing some paintings, excused himself to go to the bathroom. She never saw him — or her life savings — again. That particular bride was named Sarah Faulkner. Smith had already plundered £350 in cash from her and her jewelry as well, and while she was waiting for him to return from the loo he was back at their hotel, swiping her clothing and the rest of her money. The only wife that didn’t fit this pattern was Edith Pegler. Smith was away from her side for months at a time on “business trips” and when he returned it was always to ask for money, but he never left her for good and they remained together for seven years. As to whether he actually harbored some form of affection for her or whether he just didn’t want to kill his cash cow while it was still milkable, we can only speculate. Yet all these women were, in a sense, lucky. Smith may have broken their hearts and taken their cash, but he left them their lives.

… ‘Til Death Do Us Part The first unlucky wife was Bessie Mundy, whom Smith murdered on July 13, 1912. They’d married in August 1910, but he left her after persuading her to give him £150 in cash. On the way out the door, he accused her of giving him a venereal disease. Eighteen months later, Bessie ran into Smith on the street. Somehow, the charmer got his ex to forgive him and resume their relationship. In fact, Smith wanted to get his hands on Bessie’s £2,500 inheritance, but it was in trust and he couldn’t touch it. After their reunion, the couple drew up mutual wills, naming each other as beneficiaries. Bessie willed her husband £2,579. Less than a week later, she was mysteriously dead. Smith rented a house for them in Herne Bay and had a new cast-iron bathtub installed. Tragically, Bessie drowned in the bath. Her husband said he’d been out buying dinner and returned to discover the body.

Since Smith claimed his bride suffered from epilepsy and that she’d had a seizure the day before she died, it was easy to believe she’d simply had an unfortunate accident. In spite of his newfound wealth, Smith had Bessie consigned to a pauper’s grave and even returned the slightly-used bathtub to the ironmonger for a £1 17s. refund. This, perhaps, is where Smith might have counted himself lucky and checked out of the homicide business — or at least thought about a different m.o. Instead, hubris and habit got him hanged. The Brides of Bath murder victims: from left to right, Bessie Mundy, Alice Burnham, and Margaret Lofty. Next to go was Alice Burnham, who was making a goodly living as a nurse. Smith married on November 4, 1913, and became her widower on December 13. Alice and her new husband were honeymooning at a seaside boardinghouse in Blackpool when she drowned in the bathtub while he was supposedly out getting eggs. Smith, who claimed she had a weak heart, had insured her life for £500. She too was buried on the cheap.

Margaret Elizabeth Lofty died in her London home a little over a year later, on December 18, 1914. Newspapers reported she had drowned in the bathtub while her husband — identified as Robert Lloyd — was out buying tomatoes. He and the landlady found the body. Lofty and “Lloyd” had married only the day before and, appropriately enough, the ceremony was performed in the city of Bath. Although it was initially classified as death by misadventure, Margaret’s murder ultimately lead to Smith’s downfall. Rotten luck, it was: Alice Burnham’s father read an account of her death in the newspaper and, even though the husband had a different name, he couldn’t help but notice that Margaret’s death was suspiciously similar to his daughter’s. Joseph Crossley, who was the couple’s landlord at the time of Alice’s death, noticed the same thing. Since both the Burnhams and Crossleys had taken a dislike to Smith from the get-go, they both wrote the police, asking them to open an investigation. Authorities quickly determined that George Joseph Smith and Robert Lloyd were the same man. They sure had the same playbook.

Margaret had made out a will just hours before she died, naming her husband the sole heir to her estate. She had also withdrawn her life savings from the bank the same day, and three days before she had taken out a £700 life insurance policy on herself, with her husband as the beneficiary. Ka-ching. When the grieving widower showed up at the insurance office to collect on Margaret’s policy, he was arrested. Lloyd/Smith was initially charged with putting a false name on a marriage certificate, but bigamy and murder charges would follow fast. When news of the arrest was published, a police chief from Kent read the story and told the London police about Bessie Mundy’s death, which was strikingly similar to the other two. Forever Hold Your Peace But how could he could have drowned the women in the tub, without leaving marks of violence on their body? Margaret had only a small bruise on her elbow. For answers, the police turned to renowned pathologist Bernard Spilsbury . The first thing he did was exhume the bodies to determine whether the women had, in fact, drowned. They had. After experimenting with the very same bathtub Margaret Lofty died in, he determined how it might have happened.

John Brophy, a crime writer, describes it chillingly: With honeymoon playfulness he would enter the room where his bride was already in the bath, admire her naked beauty, bend over her fondly, and, still murmuring endearments, hold her feet. Suddenly, he would tug her feet upward, jerking her head at the end of the bath, below the water, so that in a few moments she would be drowned with no bruises on the body or other signs of assault or resistance. Effective. Actually, you can see why he stuck to his system. When Smith went to trial, it was only for the murder of Bessie; British law didn’t permit him to be tried for multiple murders in one go. However, the prosecution wanted to bring evidence in the Lofty and Burham deaths into the trial, arguing that they indicated a criminal “system.” The judge allowed it, setting a precedent that would be used in later criminal cases . In pretrial investigations later described in court, Spilsbury demonstrated his murder theory using Bessie’s bathtub and a female police officer in a bathing suit.

It worked all too well: she lost consciousness immediately and they had to drag her out of the tub and perform artificial respiration to revive her. No wonder the jury was only out for twenty-two minutes before it delivered a guilty verdict. Caroline Thornhill, Smith’s legal wife, returned to Britain for his trial. She married a Canadian soldier the day after his execution. The “Brides in the Bath” case has remained vividly alive in British memory. The historian Harold Nicholson compared Smith’s behavior to Adolf Hitler’s in his 1939 book, Why Britain is at War ; Smith was mentioned in novels by Evelyn Waugh, Agatha Christie and Dorothy Sayers, and in 1952 the case was made into an episode for the true-crime radio show The Black Museum . Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here . You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser. More recently, in 2003 the murders were featured into made-for-TV movie called The Brides in the Bath . Warning: Video contains NSFW naked ladyparts. Oh, and homicide. Part of the Themed Set: Branded .

On this day.. George Joseph Smith - Brides in the Bath - Serial Killer - Murder UK - The UK's leading murder database FACTFILE Born in Bethnal Green, East London , he was hanged in Maidstone prison on Friday 13th August 1915, at age 43. Smith was a stereotypical cockney, full of charm and wit, with a wicked sense of humour. But this cockney had a darker side, a distain for women that led him to drown three women in as many years. It is not known if Smith did kill anymore than the three, but it is certain that he would have killed again if he had not been caught. Smith had been a petty criminal in his youth, and after marrying his first, and only legal, wife 19 year old Barbara Thornhill in 1898, he discovered that women were easy prey. Several years and several beatings later in 1910 he met 33 year old Beatrice (Bessie) Mundy. He married Bessie, who was intelligent, attractive, and had a bank balance of ï¿½2,500, at Weymouth in the name of Henry Williams.

They settled in Herne Bay, Kent, and after Bessie had made a will leaving everything to her supposed husband, Smith visited the local ironmongers to buy a bath. He the took Bessie to a doctor stating that she suffered from fits. On the 13th July 1912 the doctor was called to the house. He found Bessie dead, she was in the bath naked, but with her head under the water, Smith claimed that she must have had a fit. All her assets went to Smith after an inquest recorded a verdict of death by misadventure. Smith moved on, this time to Southsea, there he met 25 year old Alice Burnham, they married on 4th November 1913. The "Happy" couple moved to Blackpool, after finding accommodation, with a bath. Smith took his new bride to the doctors, claiming she suffered from fits. On 12th December, just a month after the wedding, Alice was found dead in the bath. Smith quickly collected the ï¿½500 life insurance policy and moved on.

Next Smith married wealthy Clergyman's daughter Margaret Lofty, his seventh bigamous marriage, once she had taken out a life insurance policy for ï¿½700. They were married in, Bath! on 17th December 1914, and settled in a dwelling, with a bath, in Highgate, London. On this occasion Smith used the name of Mr. & Mrs. Lloyd, he had used many name for his many marriages, including, Lloyd, Love, Rose & Williams The next day followed the trip to the doctors, but the doctor could find nothing wrong. Once they got home Lloyd (Smith) suggested she have a nice warm bath> He got the landlady to fill the bath and then sat and played the harmonium, the landlady later recalled that the tune he had been playing was "Nearer My God to Thee". Fifteen minutes later there was a knock at the front door, it Was Smith, "Just popped out to get some tomatoes for Mrs. Lloyd's supper" Smith claimed.

Smith asked if his wife was yet out of the bath, the landlady said she had heard nothing, the two of them went upstairs and found Margaret Lloyd dead in the bath. Again a verdict of death by misadventure was recorded at the inquest. The case received huge publicity, and even made the "News of the world". Reading the Article was the father of Alice Burnham who thought the case was remarkably similar to that of the death of his daughter. The police were informed and after a lengthy investigation into George Joseph Smith and his various aliases the death of Bessie Mundy was also discovered. On 22nd June 1915 Smith stood trial at the Old Bailey in London charged with the murder of Bessie Mundy at Herne Bay. Although not charged with the other murders, they were given as evidence, the jury took just 22 minutes on 1st July 1915 to find George Joseph Smith guilty of murder. On Friday 13th July 1915 he was hanged in Maidstone prison by hangman John Ellis. The other four wives having given a huge sigh of relief.

THE BRIDES IN THE BATH MURDERS – NEW EVIDENCE SUGGESTS GEORGE JOSEPH SMITH MAY HAVE BEEN INNOCENT - Read more - OPCGLOBAL “Eighth Day-Wednesday, 30th June, 1915. Closing Speech for the Defence. Mr. MARSHALL HALL May it please your lordship, gentlemen of the jury, this case is without parallel in the history of English crime, and very extraordinary from any point of view. At a moment like the present, when the flower of our youth are laying down their lives for their country, does it not strike you as a great tribute to the national character of level-headedness that, with all the panoply of pomp and law, we have been assembled day after day to inquire into the facts of this sordid case, and to decide whether or not one man should go to an ignominious death or not? It is a great tribute to our national system of jurisprudence.

SIR EDWARD MARSHALL HALL The prosecution have been driven to prove, for the purpose of their case, not only that the prisoner murdered Miss Mundy, which is the only charge upon the indictment but that he murdered all three of those women. The only principle on which that has been allowed is to prove a system of murder. You must not be prejudiced by the admitted fact that the prisoner has been guilty of bigamy four times, or allow your minds to be warped by the fallacious and specious argument that, because he had done reprehensible things at Blackpool and Highgate he should be condemned as the son of man likely to have committed the murder of Miss Mundy.

I cannot say there is an absence of motive, but, as a learned judge said in this building a few days ago, "motive may be an important factor, but it cannot convert suspicion into proof." Before I leave the question of motive, let me remind you that the policies on the lives of Alice Burnham and Margaret Lofty were “endowment" policies, and not "all-life" policies; and you have it in evidence that the premium on a £1000 all-life policy was about the same as on a £500 endowment policy. Would a man contemplating murder have taken out what, in the event of sudden death, was the less remunerative policy? A man who could commit such crimes as are alleged in this case is not only a criminal, but a monster almost without parallel. Your minds will revert to the prisoner's ejaculation the previous day, "I am not mad.” Do you believe any sane man could have done what the accused is charged with doing? But no question of sanity has been raised here. If my learned friend's conclusions are sound, the prisoner has committed one of the most diabolical series of crimes that any records of any country have ever produced.

One has to go back for a parallel to the days of the Borgias, when systematic poisoning extended over a period of years; but then there was political atmosphere, which raised the ordinary commission of small crimes above the level of the commonplace. The calling of evidence as to the other two cases impliedly proves that the evidence in that of Miss Mundy is not conclusive. Is there one of you who, if Miss Mundy's case stood alone, and you knew nothing of the prisoner's antecedents, would say he was satisfied that the prisoner was guilty of her murder? I venture to think no one would dare to take on himself that awful responsibility. I am therefore entitled to ask you now to hesitate before you find such a verdict. The calling of expert medical evidence by the prosecution has opened the door to the worst form of Americanism in the administration of British justice. Had the prisoner not been the pauper he is or had he been possessed of unlimited means like some recent American criminals, he might have procured experts to say that the cause of death was other than that stated by the experts for the Crown. I submit it is a very dangerous procedure that should be watched with the greatest possible care, and an absolute limit put upon it.

It has reached its extreme limit in this case. One of the oldest rules of our criminal practice is for the time abrogated, and the Crown was allowed to call export, medical evidence to contradict, to explain away, the evidence already given by other witnesses who are the Crown's own witnesses. It will not have escaped your notice that the prisoner has not given evidence; if he had done so he would have had to be subjected to cross- examination on his past life and incidents, which would have brought us no nearer to the truth. [As no evidence had been tendered by the defence of Smith's good character and no imputations had been cast on the character of any Crown witness, Smith could not have been cross-examined as to his past life, except to so far as it was directly relevant to the charge E.R.W.] My learned friend would have asked you not to believe one word of his story it has been shown he is not truthful, and has lived a life of duplicity far many years. One thing that stands out in the case is the relations with Miss Pegler of this alleged master of crime.

That girl, who for seven years has lived with this man and loved him, who now that she knows the truth that she never was his lawful wife, that he was a bigamist, and had not even been faithful to her, has gone into the box and told her story. She admitted that he was always kind and fond of her, and implied that she was fond of him, and that she had forgiven him that which women found most difficult, to forgive, his infidelity to her. Can this man be the unmitigated monster suggested by the evidence for the Crown? The theory put forward by the prosecution is that the prisoner murdered the woman by pulling up her feet, and so drowning her. I maintain that if you take the trouble to examine the bath and take the measurements of it and of the body, it is physically impossible to drown the woman in that way in 8 inches of water; it is impossible, and it is incredible.

[At least 11 inches, and probably more, see the evidence of Dr, French, “I venture to think that, after the removal of the body, the water still measured … “] If the prisoner had caught hold of her feet, she would at once have realised that something abnormal was going to occur, unless you think that her head was forced under water, in which case there would be marks. There was no sign of a struggle. If you tried to drown a kitten it; would scratch you, and do you think a woman would not scratch? The woman would realise the felonious intention of the man, and unless she was drugged, of which there was not a particle of evidence would try to save herself by putting out her arms. The broad principle in this case is that there is not sufficient evidence on which you can safely come to an affirmative, verdict that the prisoner is guilty. The other verdict open to you is one of not guilty, which would mean that you doubt whether his guilt has been proved. If you find affirmatively, it means that each and all of you on your oaths present that there is no other reasonable, probable explanation of the case except that the prisoner murdered the woman.

Can you dare you accept such a responsibility? The other verdict commits you to no such dangerous or extravagant assertion. A verdict of not guilty may mean simply that you are not all quite sure. Can you be sure that the prisoner is guilty? You must remember that Dr. Spilsbury has said, with all his expert knowledge, that he dare not say that it was impossible for it to have been an accident. It was Scrutton J who made the crucial ruling on "similar fact evidence" that ensured the conviction. Evidence now uncovered shows that Sir John Simon made sure that Scrutton would be the trial judge even though his experience in criminal law was limited. He wrote The Contract of Affreightment as Expressed in Charter-parties and Bills of Lading (1886). Over a century later, this is still the standard text, while several of his other legal works remain useful. He was a difficult judge especially after he was disillusioned by the Asquith Government promise of a promotion to the House of Lords. It never came. As usual the British Government used Tom Scrutton for the purposes required then renaged on their promise. Sir John Simon resigned over the affair according to secret government documents.

His reputation as a difficult judge and disillusioned judge after the Smith trial may explain his failure to achieve further promotion on merit to the House of Lords, since he was unquestionably well qualified on experience and ability. He continued as a Court of Appeal judge reserving his bench to commercial matters. He never again touched a criminal case and died in 1936 taking the secret of the brides in the bath murder with him. George Joseph Smith: a bride too far | blackpoolcrime George Joseph Smith: a bride too far When Alice Met George On Wednesday 10 December 1913 as darkness was falling a newly- wed couple knocked at the door of a boarding house at 16, Regent Road, Blackpool. They were answered by Mrs Crossley the landlady. Alice the bride was big and bonny and independent minded. She supported the suffragette movement and had qualified as a nurse in spite of coming from a comfortable background. The gentleman was dapper. They asked anxiously if a bath was available. Baths were a rarity in Edwardian Blackpool . The couple had already rejected a boarding house in Adelaide Street because it did not have a bath.

The landlady Mrs Crossley showed them the combined bedroom and sitting room and they agreed to stay there. That first night they went out. Regent Road joins Church Street and from there it is a short walk to the Promenade passing the Winter Gardens. At the Promenade the Pier and Blackpool Tower are within easy walking distance. The next day they went out to buy chops for lunch. In those days guests would buy their own food but the landlady would prepare it. George bought chops. They had lunch at 1.00 and since Alice had a headache they went to see Doctor Billing who prescribed for Alice’s headache and stomach ache. They returned with butter and milk for their tea and in the evening they went to the cinema. On Friday 12 December they had a breakfast of bacon. They bought stewing steak for lunch which they had at one o’clock. They went out and returned at 5.00 for tea. They went out and Alice asked if she could have a bath on her return. Alice had written to her sister: “I have the best husband in the world. “ She posted the letter and they returned just before 8.00. Alice went for her bath.

Alice, Margaret and Joseph Crossley sat down for a meal. They noticed water running down the wall and guessed that Alice Smith had overfilled the bath. George appeared with two eggs for their breakfast with two eggs for their breakfast in the morning. George rushed downstairs saying: “Fetch Dr. Billing she knows him. Dr Billing and George Smith lifted her out of the bath and Dr Billing pumped her stomach but she was dead. Joseph Crossley returned from work and met Police Sergeant Robert Valiant and George Smith. The three went to the Police Station in King Street which adjoins Regent Road. George Smith had an unsentimental attitude and was prepared to sleep in the room where his dead wife lay. However Margaret Crossley told him he would have to move next door. Next morning saw George Smith arranging the cheapest possible funeral at Layton Cemetery. At 11.30 the sent a telegram to Alice’s family. Her mother and brother Norman immediately started a journey to Blackpool. This came as a bit of a shock to George Smith who saw them on Sunday morning and asked the undertaker John Hargreave if he could arrange a more expensive funeral.

John said it could be arranged but the funeral would have to be put back from Monday to Tuesday. Alice’s mother, her brother Norman and George had lunch at the Crossley’s and George Smith played the piano. The next morning John Hargreaves took the coffin to the mortuary at Layton Cemetery and placed Alice in her coffin and screwed down the lid and there was a brief service at the chapel in the cemetery. George Smith had to rush off to get a train and he promised Alice’s mother that he would send Alice’s clothes. George Smith stepped out of their lives. George had not had a happy relationship with his in-laws. Charles, Alice’s father, had taken a particular dislike to him. He regarded him as a spiv and a fortune-hunter. Alice loved her family but was firm in her desire to marry George. She claimed to her family that she had met George at a Congregationalist Service. Charles was seriously alarmed by George Smith. He hired a detective to look into George and tried to withhold money to which Alice was entitled. George was not conciliatory.

When his father in law sent him a letter asking about his background he wrote back: “Sir In answer to your application regarding my parentage etc My mother was a Buss Horse, my Father a Cab Driver, my sister a Rough Rider over the Arctic Regions. My Brothers were all gallant sailors in a Steam roller…Your despised son-in law. “ Mrs Crossley also did not take to George Smith and throughout his eventful life he seems to have encountered people who loathed him. On the other hand he was attractive to some women. For a year nothing was heard of George Smith and the troubling episode was almost forgotten. It is said that Conan Doyle who had visited Blackpool to speak of his spiritualist beliefs remarked on the case to detectives at Scotland Yard. One year later Mrs Crossley was reading the “News of the World” when a story caught her eye: “BRIDE’S SUDDEN DEATH IN BATH, Bride’s tragic fate on Day after Wedding.” She contacted the Blackpool Police. In the meantime Alice’s father had also noticed and contacted the Police at Aylesbury. In January the matter came to the attention of Inspector Neil.

Margaret Lofty had met and married John Lloyd after having her life insured and made a will. On Friday 18th December 1914 the couple were honeymooning in Bismarck Road, Highgate. Margaret Lofty asked for a bath at about 8.00 pm. Miss Blatch their landlady heard splashing in the bathroom. Then she heard the harmonium being played in the Lloyd’s sitting room. John Lloyd was playing: “Abide with me.” John Lloyd went out and later rang the bell. He said he had forgotten the key. He had been out to get some tomatoes for Margaret’s supper. He went upstairs to find Margaret and shouted down for help. Margaret was drowned in the bath. George went out to find a doctor and policeman. As it happened he had taken Margaret to see the Doctor. Inspector Neil had to be careful not to alert John Lloyd. He arranged to keep watch on the Solicitor who was arranging the insurance payment. Eventually John Lloyd and it was quickly established that he was George Smith. There were grounds for suspicion but there were also problems. First of all in each case a Doctor determined that each death was from natural causes. Secondly there was the question of method.

How can you drown a fully grown healthy person without a struggle, and there was no sign of a struggle. Finally if George Smith were charged with murder he would according to legal precedent be charged with one murder and therefore evidence about the other drowned bride would not be available to the jury. It is difficult to see how a jury could convict. Bernard Spilsbury the most eminent pathologist of his time was engaged. Margaret Lofty’s body was exhumed at midnight to avoid publicity. George Smith was charged with making a false statement regarding his name at his wedding which ironically was at Bath. Following the exhumation at Highgate it emerged that another bride had been found in a bath at Herne Bay. Her maiden name was Bessie Mundy. Inspector Neil learned this on 8 February 1915 as he arrived in Blackpool. Her husband had been Henry Williams. He was also George Smith. Inspector Neil was visiting Blackpool for the exhumation of Alice Burnham. He met Bernard Spilsbury at Blackpool Railway Station. The exhumation and examination must have been a grim and heartbreaking business for everybody involved especially Alice’s family.

It was carried out in the mortuary which is still in Layton Cemetery although it is now used to store equipment. People were dying in large numbers in France but the case caught public attention. Pictures of George Smith had been published. A number of other “brides” appeared and also ladies who George Smith had courted and robbed. He was “married” seven times. Strangest of all he did appear to have a regular partner Edith Pegler. He conscientiously returned from jaunts around the drowning brides and collecting insurance mone in time for a traditional family Christmas. George Joseph Smith was tried for the murder of Bessie Mundy. Zeppelin raids had dropped bombs on London and loss of life in France dominated the news but for a time front pages were devoted to the trial. George had reason to be confident. He was represented by Edward Marshall Hall. He was on trial for a death which a Doctor had deemed accidental at the time. Contemporaries rated Edward Marshall Hall as an excellent rather theatrical advocate but had reservations about his grasp of the law. His opponent Archie Bodkin was more matter of fact but had great skill in matters of law.

In the absence of the jury he made the case that evidence about Alice and Margaret were admissible because they demonstrated “a system.” That meant that there were outstanding similiarities. The judge agreed and Edward Marshall Hall’s task became impossible. There were more than a hundred witnesses, landladies, undertakers, doctors, solicitors. Edgar Wallace, later to stand as MP for Blackpool, reported the case for Tit Bits. Mrs Crossley attended and gave evidence. George enlivened proceedings by shouting that she was “a lunatic.” Bernard Spilsbury the pathologist theorized that the lack of sign of a struggle came about because the head was suddenly immersed in the bath by lifting up the legs and that sudden immersion causes shock which prevents resistance. Edith Pegler his partner was impressively honest, she had no idea of George’s other life. At one stage George warned Edith of the dangers of baths: “I should advise you to be careful of those things, as it is known that women often lose their lives through weak heart and fainting in the bath.” The jury took twenty two minutes to find George guilty. Marshall Hall believed that George hypnotized his victims and more than one survivor mentioned his mesmerizing eyes.

He was also a very strong physically dominating person. Alice Burnham had gonnorhea which goes to show that the life of single women could be more exciting than expected in Edwardian England. This may account for her attachment. She had found a man who accepted her difficulties. George Joseph Smith was hanged at Maidstone by John Ellis on Friday13 August 1915. Game to the last he managed to convince the Bishop of Croydon that he was innocent until Marshall Hall put him right. His last words were: “I am innocent.” What can we make of George? George was self-confident but inept. He said wildly inappropriate things without realizing how other people would react. For example he said about Bessie Mundy: “Was it not a jolly good job I got her to make a will?” There is a mystery about some of George’s past. When did he learn to play the piano? Had he ever been in the army as he claimed? Had he been abroad? There are years missing in his biography. How did he evolve the idea of drowning a bride? Once he got the idea he carried it out in an almost robotic way.

The day after he was executed his only legal wife Caroline Thornhill who had returned from Canada to give evidence married a Canadian soldier she had met. Clearly she did not mourn George. There is a very interesting summary of the case in Jane Robins: The Magnificent Spilsbury Share this: Actors needed for George Joseph Smith, aka 'Brides in the Bath' murderer | StarNow Actors & Extras wanted auditions > Music videos >Actors needed for George Joseph Smith, aka 'Brides in the Bath' murderer Actors needed for George Joseph Smith, aka 'Brides in the Bath' murderer All regions, United Kingdom Casting complete. Applications are now closed. Share Learn more We are looking for several actors who fit the bill for a new documentary series on British criminals and serial killers. The series is being filmed over the next coming months and will we aired sometime next year, each episode will tell the tale of a famous British murder crime of the past and reassess it in todays society. This episode focuses on 'George Joseph Smith', a charming and devious bigamist murderer in the 19th century who's case became known as 'brides in the bath'.

Smith married several women, stole their wealth and possessions before murdering them and moving to his next victim. Reconstructions of the events surrounding Smiths life and the murder will be filmed on the 6th/7th October, which can be discussed according to availability. We hope to film these in Bournemouth/ Southampton and the surrounding areas so local actors are preferable. We are looking to cast the parts of George Joseph Smith as the main role and 3 of his 'brides' for the other roles. As the parts are from a crime in the 19th century, the costume, set and atmosphere will be designed to recreate that period. For the roles we are looking for people with similar physical looks to the following roles (non speaking parts).... GEORGE JOSPEH SMITH Please make sure you have looked at the photographs and bear some resemblence although, as stated, there will not be much detail and we will be able to alter your appearance in costume/make up, as it is very much 19th century. As the piece does not have much budget there will not be set payment but all expenses will of course be covered as well as copies of the piece and an acting credit.

I look forward to hearing from you all! Please feel free to message me with any questions you may have. Location: Southampton, United Kingdom

Question: Convict George Joseph Smith was known as the ‘Brides in the ‘what’ murderer’?
Answer: Bath