I seem to have sparked a bit of debate on one or two issues so thought it may help to clarify my comments.
I know Box Hill very well. I live in Guildford, which is 10 miles from Box Hill and still visit that area (the NT property and Dorking) several times a year. In the past when I had retrievers and a springer we would walk them on Box Hill as a change from time to time. So my comments about the numbers of people in the area are based on my observations from walking there (you can hardly move some weekends for cyclists). The whole area is also riddled with public rights of way (footpaths, bridleways) used by walkers and dog walkers. I know from my dogs that they would head into the undergrowth and trees and would alert (or more likely be stubborn and refuse to move) if they found something of interest. With hundreds of dogs each day (and more at weekends) doing that I cannot believe a body would remain unfound unless in a wholly inaccessible place. And the only such place I can think of would be the slopes of the unused quarry - which I assume were checked. The area where Ruth was dropped is at the back of Box Hill, so is one of the less frequented areas and would be used more by locals than visitors - but there are still plenty of those.
Over the several decades I have lived in Surrey I have seen enough reports of the failings of Surrey Police to be wary of assuming that they will have done a good job. There have been multiple scandals about the personal behaviour of their senior command, but these have rarely been in connection with police business (they have a nasty habit of selecting senior officers who behave oddly). But whatever the personal failings of their senior officers, Surrey Police is a large, well resourced organisation with 2000 officers and specialists in most areas of policing. They also have very close working relationships with the Met Police (due to proximity) enabling them better access to other specialists and facilities than many forces. For all these reasons I find it hard to think they would fail to conduct basic policing not only in the initial enquiry but also in subsequent reviews. I do find their behaviour when interviewing Ruth's friend in Sheffield interesting. That definitely seems to suggest they believed she was still alive. Whether that was a default assumption or had some basis I do not know.
One of the primary sources of assuming failures on the part of Surrey Police is Mark Williams-Thomas. He is a former Surrey police officer and now a journalist, who acted as police liaison officer with the Wilsons. I would be careful in placing reliance on him as a source. He left Surrey Police in unclear circumstances and was charged (and cleared) of blackmail 2 years after leaving the police. I also note that he has commented on the possibility of Ruth still being on Box Hill. He must know the area and its heavy usage and, for me, this statement damages his credibility. He may be quite accurate in his view of the initial investigation, but he may also have an agenda.
In regards to the conditions when the taxi driver dropped Ruth. In November at 4.30 it would have been dark but not yet pitch black. I would have assumed the taxi driver was expecting Ruth to either be going to the pub or to one of the nearby houses. I have driven that road a few times over the years and there are quite a number of houses nearby. So the comment about thinking it was strange is most likely a retrospective view based on what subsequently emerged and his view in the mirror as he drove off. The area is rural (by Surrey standards), but I could take people to 100 more remote spots in Surrey (and there is nowhere which would classify as remote compared with US definitions of remote).
Finally, coming back to the taxi driver. It is because it is such basic policing that I make the default assumption that his story is to be believed. I would also expect that their would be CCTV to confirm his pick up of Ruth (since it was at Dorking station, which would have had coverage even at that time - always assuming it was the main station). If she ordered the taxi by phone there may also be a despatcher record). In all probability the taxi driver would also have gone onto another recorded job, providing a limit to his time window with Ruth. I am not saying it is impossible that he is involved; just that it seems highly improbable given what we know, and that we should be careful about thinking otherwise in these circumstances.
So, in conclusion, I do not know what has happened. I favour the planned disappearance as I see no convincing evidence of suicide, and the coincidence of personal circumstances intersecting with a predator seems unlikely. But all are possible and it is just a matter of opinion which seems most probable.
I know Box Hill very well. I live in Guildford, which is 10 miles from Box Hill and still visit that area (the NT property and Dorking) several times a year. In the past when I had retrievers and a springer we would walk them on Box Hill as a change from time to time. So my comments about the numbers of people in the area are based on my observations from walking there (you can hardly move some weekends for cyclists). The whole area is also riddled with public rights of way (footpaths, bridleways) used by walkers and dog walkers. I know from my dogs that they would head into the undergrowth and trees and would alert (or more likely be stubborn and refuse to move) if they found something of interest. With hundreds of dogs each day (and more at weekends) doing that I cannot believe a body would remain unfound unless in a wholly inaccessible place. And the only such place I can think of would be the slopes of the unused quarry - which I assume were checked. The area where Ruth was dropped is at the back of Box Hill, so is one of the less frequented areas and would be used more by locals than visitors - but there are still plenty of those.
Over the several decades I have lived in Surrey I have seen enough reports of the failings of Surrey Police to be wary of assuming that they will have done a good job. There have been multiple scandals about the personal behaviour of their senior command, but these have rarely been in connection with police business (they have a nasty habit of selecting senior officers who behave oddly). But whatever the personal failings of their senior officers, Surrey Police is a large, well resourced organisation with 2000 officers and specialists in most areas of policing. They also have very close working relationships with the Met Police (due to proximity) enabling them better access to other specialists and facilities than many forces. For all these reasons I find it hard to think they would fail to conduct basic policing not only in the initial enquiry but also in subsequent reviews. I do find their behaviour when interviewing Ruth's friend in Sheffield interesting. That definitely seems to suggest they believed she was still alive. Whether that was a default assumption or had some basis I do not know.
One of the primary sources of assuming failures on the part of Surrey Police is Mark Williams-Thomas. He is a former Surrey police officer and now a journalist, who acted as police liaison officer with the Wilsons. I would be careful in placing reliance on him as a source. He left Surrey Police in unclear circumstances and was charged (and cleared) of blackmail 2 years after leaving the police. I also note that he has commented on the possibility of Ruth still being on Box Hill. He must know the area and its heavy usage and, for me, this statement damages his credibility. He may be quite accurate in his view of the initial investigation, but he may also have an agenda.
In regards to the conditions when the taxi driver dropped Ruth. In November at 4.30 it would have been dark but not yet pitch black. I would have assumed the taxi driver was expecting Ruth to either be going to the pub or to one of the nearby houses. I have driven that road a few times over the years and there are quite a number of houses nearby. So the comment about thinking it was strange is most likely a retrospective view based on what subsequently emerged and his view in the mirror as he drove off. The area is rural (by Surrey standards), but I could take people to 100 more remote spots in Surrey (and there is nowhere which would classify as remote compared with US definitions of remote).
Finally, coming back to the taxi driver. It is because it is such basic policing that I make the default assumption that his story is to be believed. I would also expect that their would be CCTV to confirm his pick up of Ruth (since it was at Dorking station, which would have had coverage even at that time - always assuming it was the main station). If she ordered the taxi by phone there may also be a despatcher record). In all probability the taxi driver would also have gone onto another recorded job, providing a limit to his time window with Ruth. I am not saying it is impossible that he is involved; just that it seems highly improbable given what we know, and that we should be careful about thinking otherwise in these circumstances.
So, in conclusion, I do not know what has happened. I favour the planned disappearance as I see no convincing evidence of suicide, and the coincidence of personal circumstances intersecting with a predator seems unlikely. But all are possible and it is just a matter of opinion which seems most probable.