UK UK - Ruth Wilson, 16, Dorking, 27 Nov 1995

New Posts

All publicity is good publicity (so they say).

What I can't understand is if she did run off with an older male then why hasn't she contacted anyone since (as she got older)?

There are three possible scenarios in my mind.

1. Voluntarily missing and now to embarrassed to re-connect with family after so long/homeless/drug addicted
2. Voluntarily missing originally but has since came to harm

I lean towards the second personally...
 
I lean toward the possibility that she is still alive for several reasons;

* she clearly planned to leave, having arranged for the flowers to be delivered on the Wednesday.
* she was clearly acting with purpose in Dorking having gone from the town to the rail station.
* her previous behaviour (visits to Box Hill which emerged after she went missing) fits with a planned exit.
* everything points to her being very bright and fairly mature.
* there is no evidence of harm, which is remarkably unusual in the UK after so long (if harm has occurred).

I hope I am right.
 
I meant two possibilities in my previous post! Can't edit it now duh...

I can't understand what would make a 16 year old want to leave though and never come back. She was still a child in my eyes and will have changed a lot since then.

I'm sure we can all remember being radically different when we were 16 to being an adult.
 
Very interesting Guardian article which does shed new light on the case. I am not sure it changes my view that she is alive but it certainly fills in the question of motive for whatever happened. I think the background greatly reduces the possibility that she was the victim of a predator - that would be too coincidental given the family issue and timing. So it leaves suicide, choosing to disappear or being the victim of someone close to her and aware of her issues. Whilst suicide is not impossible, it is remarkably difficult to organise so that no body is found after 20 years. And I am sure the police looked closely at family members and acquaintances given they knew about the family issues. So, together with the evidence of planning to leave, I would rule out involvement of family as unlikely. That only leaves choosing to disappear. I do not think the issue of driving or passport is relevant. Acquiring a new identity was still possible in the mid-90s in a way that would be harder today (although it would be impressive for a 16 year old) - and with a new identity could come a passport and other options. The question which flows from this is obvious; she would have needed money (to disappear and acquire an identity). Is there any evidence that she had access to money, at least £1-2000?

I will also look to watch the documentary.

I should add one more point. The Family Liaison Officer for Surrey Police on this case was Mark Williams Thomas, who is now a TV programme maker specialising in crime stories. In 2002 he wrote a critical report on the investigation, but included the view that Ruth could still be up there (Box Hill), due to the inadequacy of the police enquiries. No she couldn't - barring a miracle. Box Hill is not remote. It is the most popular beauty spot in Surrey, overrun with cyclists, bikers and dog walkers at the weekend. And, as I pointed out in an earlier post, it was the climbing section of the cycle road race at the 2012 Olympics. If she had committed suicide on Box Hill it is hard to see how she would not have been found by now.
 
I'm coming to this case cold, I don't think I've ever heard of it before, but just watched the documentary.

I don't want to be too critical as this was done with the best intentions IMO.

There's a lot of padding to get it up to 30 minutes. I don't think there's a lot of new information, but it was good for me to get see what was already known.

There was an intention from Surrey police to take part, but that was withdrawn when they thought it may be critical of their investigation. I think that may have made it a lot more productive if it had happened. (I don't think they were critical of SP, so hopefully they may collaborate at a later date.)

New info (I think):

Ruth was unhappy after learning her bio-mother had committed suicide rather than dying from falling down the stairs as she was told. (My sentence from above post that I never finished for some unknown reason.). Ruth was 4 when her mother died, so I'm not sure this was really the wrong thing to do. I couldn't imagine being in that position, so I'm not going to criticise it, I honestly don't know how I'd handle it, but obviously it would have been upsetting when Ruth found out the truth.

Ruth was confiding in a friend who moved/ran away (this wasn't too clear) to Sheffield shortly before she went missing. The friend thought she may have wanted to join her.

The 'not having a passport' was her friend saying she didn't have one 'as far as she was aware'. So I'm not not sure that's conclusive.

Friends thought she planned to go missing. Friend in Sheffield thought she's committed suicide.

Ex-boyfriend replied to the filmmakers, said he doesn't think about it anymore and has sort of compartmentalised it to stop emotions. Journalist thought that was odd, I thought it was reasonable.

The family declined to any involvement. They did respond to the filmmakers to do so, and it seemed as though they were torn whether to do so or not. Obviously their involvement would help to raise the public profile, but it's up to them, can't criticise them for that.

Overall, not great, but a few new snippets, and it's always good to get more interest, more awareness, maybe get more people to come forward. If so it may lead to something more worthwhile.

As I said at the start, I believe the people involved with this have good intentions. I hope it starts to lead somewhere. But I have a feeling it may be more searches which reveal the truth.

I need to read this thread properly rather than just skimming, but I thought Ruth was seen at a pub. No mention of that in the doc.

Maybe other posters felt differently about the doc. Would be interested to find out other views.
 
Just watched the documentary. It is better than I expected but does not change my view on what happened, although any of the three possibilities remain open. I think that a lot of the investigators narrative is based on the assumption that a 16 year old could not successfully disappear voluntarily. Whilst very difficult it is not impossible, and cases of women not much older such as Lori Ruff show it is possible. The only thing that bothers me from the documentary is the attitude of Surrey Police. I can understand them being cautious but, given their failure over 20 years you would expect more willingness to engage to seek new leads. I have only two explanations for this; firstly they may have other evidence and possible suspects and cannot imperil an investigation by going public. Or secondly they may be incompetent - and given the history of Surrey Police leadership in recent years that is possible (there have been repeated allegations of senior officers - named in press stories - who have either misbehaved or failed in their duties). I should make clear that this is not a corruption issue as with some small town US forces, but rather a leadership culture in Surrey Police which circles the wagons under any questioning.

ps; I note the question about the pub in the previous post. Ruth was dropped near to a pub, but she did not go in and it has just been used as a convenient marker over the years to show where the taxi left her.
 
OK, given Albion's post above about how well used the area is I I'm not so sure about suicide and searches in the area now. Not sure what to think.
 
It says "according to one report, within another two days police discovered three notes hidden under a bush at Box Hill – one to her parents, one to her best friend and another to a male friend" here: https://scepticpeg.wordpress.com/2018/04/28/missing-operation-scholar-ruth-wilson/.


If that is the case then there are several questions that arise; the most significant are: how could she be confident that these notes would be found? and: what were their contents?


It's pretty clear that whatever their contents they must be important to the investigation. Another question is: why haven't the police released information about the contents - after all this time there can be no argument for withholding this important information. Of course, the police always know more than they're willing to make public but after the time that has elapsed since her disappearance there must now be a benefit in making this sort of evidence available.
 
MelmothTheLost said:
I don't think there is any mystery there. At that time it was very common for teenagers from 14 up to have a Saturday job, typically in a shop of some sort. Younger kids, from 11 up, often had a paper round. It's only more recently that employing teenagers like this has declined drastically, partly due to elfnsafety and partly due to teens being more immature these days and being less willing to work.



If she was seeing an older man it would have had to be someone within her existing circle of acquaintance or at one remove. This was pre-internet and therefore pre-internet-grooming of kids and teens by paedophiles. One assumes the police made all of those enquiries at the time and it would have been noted if an older male within her circle of acquaintance also disappeared around the same time.

The other question is whether she had a passport and could have left the country. On the whole the mid 1990s were a fairly benign time so it's possible she could have left the UK on a ferry to France without even needing a passport to leave (though she would have needed one to get back into the country).
Click to expand...

She may have met someone at the music store she worked at. It was mentioned in the story with her sister,,,


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I had seen the story about the three notes (and about empty paracetemol packets and vodka bottles), but had discounted them as uncorroborated, not appearing in any other reliable (ie MSM) source and (if the paracetemol and vodka existed) not having a proven link to Ruth - Box Hill is used by lots of people. If the story was confirmed it would be significant. The fact that a trained journalist and ex-policeman did not have the sources to corroborate it makes it doubtful to me.

I was interested in the new witness who thought they saw her walking on the Reigate road with a suitcase. It would be very important to try to get a fix on the date and time of that possible sighting, the location on the Reigate road, and the direction she was walking. Why? If the sighting is of her (and took place before her disappearance) it may suggest she had stashed the case somewhere to be picked up later (at a friends or somewhere near where she was dropped). If the sighting was after her disappearance it may indicate where she was heading (back home, or to Dorking station possibly, since she took the taxi from there, suggesting she had some other reason for having gone to the station). If she was heading home it reintroduces the random predator possibility (but this still seems unlikely). If she was heading toward Reigate and away from Betchworth I have no idea what she may have been doing. Reigate is several miles down that road (unlike back to Dorking) and there is nothing much on the way.

I agree that if she fell foul of anyone other than a random attacker it would have been someone she knew as social media did not exist. However, the coincidence of meeting a sociopath at precisely the same time as she learns of her family tragedy and decides to leave, seems a stretch. And I am sure the police must have ruled out the obvious first ports of call (family, boyfriend, school friends, village acquaintances). I would also assume, if this were a planned abduction and murder, that such an individual would have offended more than once. But the only other similar offence against a youngster in the immediate area (of which I am aware) was the murder of a schoolboy in 1968, which led to a conviction in 1999 of someone who was living over 100 miles away when Ruth went missing.

Putting to one side the issue of possible local suspects, it seems to me that the key questions now are;
* What are the details of the new possible sighting
* What was she doing at Dorking Rail Station before she got the taxi (as I have said before, that is not the obvious place to get a taxi from Dorking, being out of the town).
* Did she have a passport? I am sure the police know this as they could have asked the passport office. If she did not I am surprised since it is common practice in the UK for secondary schools to organise overseas trips (my daughters cost me a fortune, including the Lake Tahoe ski trip which she spent entirely in shopping malls!).
* How reliable are the sightings of Ruth over the 2 years after she disappeared? I believe her parents identified her from the shop tape, but that may have been hope. If those sightings are reliable it again points in only one direction.
* Did she have money and, if so, how much? I know that my daughter, who worked at weekends in a shop 10 miles from Dorking,when she was 16, could have saved £2-3000 without me knowing. And that was only 10 years ago.

ps: Ruth's birth mother was Nesta Landeg (an unusual name, focused in Wales). She married Ian Wilson in 1976 in Wales and I thought she was an only child (and her parents, Ruth's grandparents) died before Ruth went missing. However, a family tree on Ancestry suggests Nesta had a sibling, so it is possible Ruth has an uncle or aunt (and cousins) alive from her birth mother. Unfortunately details on Ancestry are private as they are still alive.
 
RSW123 said:
There was a song by Public Image LTD, released about 1989 called The Flowers of Romance. It has direct references to Box Hill and starting again. I wonder if it was in her music collection.
Click to expand...

Not to mention "I sent you flowers"(!!)
 
Very bizarre. Ruth and Andrew Gosden always remind me of one another.

I feel that Ruth sending her mother the bouquet is a sign that she knew she was leaving for good.

This to me means one of two things - either she was running away and didn't intend to go back OR she was going to take her own life.
 
MelmothTheLost said:
The other question is whether she had a passport and could have left the country. On the whole the mid 1990s were a fairly benign time so it's possible she could have left the UK on a ferry to France without even needing a passport to leave (though she would have needed one to get back into the country).
Click to expand...

I also wonder about a possible ferry crossing to Northern Ireland, from where she could have simply hopped over the border into Ireland. Definitely no passport needed for that one! No language difference either, so less intimidating. Ruth would have had French lessons at school, although her ability to speak the language well depends very much on her aptitude for the subject...

Who knows. But its one of those rare cases where there can be a lot of hope that Ruth is still alive somewhere.
 
In order to intentionally disappear so effectively, if that is what has happened in this case, it is obvious that Ruth would have needed a new identity. Whilst it is possible (still) to acquire a new identity in the UK it has never been completely simple, although it would have been easier in the mid-90s, before social media and the need to create an online back story to be really convincing. However, one key item in a new identity (certainly if you remain in the UK, and it can be useful elsewhere) is a National Insurance Number. This is similar to the Social Security Number in the USA, and means you can work normally (rather than cash in hand), can open bank and similar accounts (who require it as part of their id checks) and are eligible for benefits. Why is this interesting?

National Insurance Numbers in the UK are automatically allocated and mailed when you reach 16, Ruth's age. Trying to get a new number at an older age is possible but harder as questions will be asked about why you do not already have one (US readers should remember that UK records are centralised, including other records such as birth and death, making checks easier). The usual reason will be coming in from abroad - but then you will be asked to produce a foreign passport or similar. At 16 you can just call up the authorities and tell them you have not received your number - and they will send you a new one, almost with no questions asked as they will assume an error on their part. So all you need is an address to send the new number to, an identity (which may be as simple as assuming a deceased identity and getting a birth certificate - easy) and you are set. With the new id and number you can work, get a passport in the new id and travel where you want.

So, if she planned to disappear with a new identity, Ruth chose the best and easiest time in her life to acquire the new identity. Is this what she did? I don't know. But if I were looking into this, and the records still exist, I would be looking at requests for replacement National Insurance Numbers for females aged 16/17 in the period leading up to the disappearance date.
 
Legally Bland said:
The 'not having a passport' was her friend saying she didn't have one 'as far as she was aware'. So I'm not not sure that's conclusive.
Click to expand...

At that time it was the practice for children to be on the passport of one or both parents until the child turned 16 when he or she then got their own passport.

This changed in 1998 because of the rising number of cases of one parent abducting children and taking them out of the country following marital breakdown or disagreement between parents. The main problem was with Muslim fathers taking their children to Muslim countries, including forced marriages of younger teenage girls, though there was also a growing number of cases involving children where one parent was British and the other an EU national. Since 1998 a child has needed its own passport from birth if it is to leave the country.

So at the time of her disappearance Ruth could only recently have acquired a passport of her own and would probably have been excited enough about this to have mentioned it to a close friend.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/babies-must-have-own-passports-1176056.html
 
alb1on said:
* Did she have a passport? I am sure the police know this as they could have asked the passport office. If she did not I am surprised since it is common practice in the UK for secondary schools to organise overseas trips (my daughters cost me a fortune, including the Lake Tahoe ski trip which she spent entirely in shopping malls!).
Click to expand...

It used to be the norm for school groups to travel on a group passport, which was a one-off collective document that included specific information about each child on the trip. I went on a school trip through Belgium, Germany and Austria in 1974 and I did not have a passport until after I went to university some years later.
 
Legally Bland said:
Ruth was unhappy after learning her bio-mother had committed suicide rather than dying from falling down the stairs as she was told. (My sentence from above post that I never finished for some unknown reason.). Ruth was 4 when her mother died, so I'm not sure this was really the wrong thing to do. I couldn't imagine being in that position, so I'm not going to criticise it, I honestly don't know how I'd handle it, but obviously it would have been upsetting when Ruth found out the truth.
Click to expand...

Having just watched the documentary and I have questions around her mother's suicide.

1. Why did she kill herself?
2. Did the suicide come out of the blue or was there some longstanding health reason, mental or physical for it?
3. Was Ruth's father playing away at the time and if so was Ruth's subsequent stepmother the Other Woman in the case?

What did come out of it was that Ruth was deeply unhappy about something in her home life. What were the relationships really like between Ruth and her father and Ruth and her stepmother? It's not at all uncommon for a stepmother to resent stepchildren, especially stepdaughters, intensely since they are a constant reminder that there was a wife or longterm partner before her.

And I'm afraid I'm automatically suspicious of church-going-pillars-of-the-community types. All too often there's a deep thread of hypocrisy underneath the public facade. There was a clear implication that Ruth's father's position in the local community, being a prominent church-goer and parish councillor, was deterring local people from speaking to the investigators - which really swings my dodgy-o-meter into the red.

Maybe I'm reading too much between the lines of the documentary but I really felt they were hinting the answer lay at home, one way or another.
 
I just used to get one of these until I went outside of Western Europe for the first time in 1994. It was so easy to get, just pop down the post office. I'm pretty sure I had them before I turned 16 when travelling with my parents.

attachment.php


Wikipedia says they were stopped in 1995. This link says they were stopped 1st January 1996.

https://www.passport-collector.com/document-british-visitors-passport-history/

You'd imagine they would have kept records of who they were issued to, but I really don't know.
 

Attachments

  • british-visitors-passport-1966_1_ac6fcc19a7371cccfb8e7009d5316631.jpg
    british-visitors-passport-1966_1_ac6fcc19a7371cccfb8e7009d5316631.jpg
    36.2 KB · Views: 234
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 74 more.
Total: 3,497 (members: 75, guests: 3,422)

Online statistics

Members online
75
Guests online
3,422
Total visitors
3,497
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,112
Messages
17,963,380
Members
228,686
Latest member
Pabo1998
Back
Top