It’s a story with a plotline straight out of a Netflix documentary: a sudden, intense fire, a body inside the building, burned beyond recognition, insurance claims filed, an investigation launched, tangled plot uncovered, and not one but two murders discovered. The difference here is that this particular crime took place in 1872, and the resolution of it involved not just a guilty verdict for one William Udderzook, it was also the first case in the state of Pennsylvania that would be decided based on photographic evidence. In a nutshell, a conspiracy was hatched between Udderzook and his brother-in-law, Winfield Goss—an elaborate scheme to defraud four insurance companies from whom Goss had obtained several life insurance policies, totaling $25,000, the equivalent of well over half a million dollars in today’s currency. The men, who were living in Maryland, conspired to fake Goss’ death in a fire while Goss hid out under an assumed name here in Chester County. There are conflicting theories about whether the body later discovered in the fire and presumed to be Goss was actually murdered by one or both men or... otherwise acquired, but we digress. The insurance companies smelled a rat and refused to pay, the “widow.” Goss sued and won, and the insurance companies appealed in court. At issue were several pieces
of circumstantial evidence, including the fact that, although the face of the body in the fire was burned beyond recognition, the teeth of the corpse were in poor condition and Goss reportedly possessed a healthy set of chompers. Then, while the appeal of the insurance companies was getting underway, the dismembered body of a man was discovered in Chester County. Although the arms and legs of the corpse were dismembered from the body and found buried nearby, the face was intact. The man who found the body was shown a photo of Goss, provided by the Prosecutor, and he said it did indeed match the face of the body he’d discovered. Udderzook was found guilty of both the insurance fraud conspiracy and the subsequent murder of his brother-in-law to cover it up. It seemed that the late Mr. Goss had a propensity for excessive alcohol consumption, and, faced with the prospect of being exposed by the investigation/appeal by the insurance companies, Udderzook became concerned that Goss would slip up and reveal their scheme. He was convicted based on that photo identification.
JULY 2018 THEWCPRESS.COM
29