- Joined
- Jan 20, 2017
- Messages
- 3,750
- Reaction score
- 15,920
HOw strange!
UK UK - Ruth Wilson, 16, Dorking, 27 Nov 1995
- Thread starter missacorah
- Start date
HOw strange!
jonmarbles
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2018
- Messages
- 164
- Reaction score
- 163
i missin persons group did one but i think the police have just washed there hands of this one.
Not sure if it has been shared before but a useful summary of both facts and press sources. I was especially interested in the cutting from the Daily Telegraph from 7 April 2002 where Mark Williams-Thomas, who has been very keen to be a public face in this case, is quoted as saying the Ruth Wilson case 'bore striking similarities' to the Milly Dowler case. Even allowing for the fact that this was before the tragic facts of the Dowler murder were uncovered, this statement is rubbish and makes you question both the thinking and motives of Williams-Thomas.
Dowler disappeared on her way home, having been caught on cctv arriving at her home rail station not far from her home. She had no known reason to leave, was only 13 years old and showed none of the prior planning of Ruth Wilson. Williams-Thomas (a former policeman who was part of the Wilson case) and Surrey Police have a history and I assumed it was Surrey Police who were at fault (given their history in other matters). I am now thinking that they may have a point when disregarding any input from Williams-Thomas.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2017
- Messages
- 3,750
- Reaction score
- 15,920
I was looking to see if I could find anyone in the past here has discussed her similarity to the actress with the same name but couldn't find anything. The 2nd photo in this link bears a striking resemblance in my own opinion. I know she is also meant to be born in Surrey and has a slightly different birth year, but many actors do give different birth years. JMO. Has this been dicussed before here? Share a million stories – actress Ruth Wilson launches Book Week at St John’s Academy - Marlborough News
I do agree about the similar appearance and had wondered in the past, but the actress comes from a well documented family with some well known members so I think we can be sure the similarity is just coincidence.
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2018
- Messages
- 1,434
- Reaction score
- 7,261
Interesting l've never seen it. Will have a look in the group.
<modsnip>
Actor Ruth has a family history that was subject to a docudrama she herself starred in.
Well two things have struck me. 1. She had a fair but of money. Presumably she had a Saturday job (those were the days!) But even so..she would have needed money to disappear. She paid for the flowers, the meal out.. girl had been saving. It was unusual even for then for a teen to have that amount of money. So that suggests if this was a planned disappearance she had been planning it for a long time.
I take issue with the article saying her friend disappeared at the same time; she didn't, she moved away. Apparently Ruth asked to go with them.
The other thing is...why did she send the flowers only to her mum? I appreciate it's odd to send flowers to a bloke, even if that bloke is your dad. But but but. If it was a sign, it was only to mum. It wasn't to both of them. Stick it mum..? What had mum done to warrant this? I'm ok mum? Not l'm ok mum and dad? I don't think life in the Wilson household was all that rosy at all.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2017
- Messages
- 3,750
- Reaction score
- 15,920
I also fall more on this as the most likely
While the body in theory should have been discovered had she committed suicide at Box Hill, could she in fact have done so somewhere else? The North Downs Way covers a fair old distance and contains plenty of woodland, and secluded offshoots.
That said, it still seems quite unlikely that someone would have been able to kill themselves near that quite popular trail without being discovered at some point. Ruth Wilson was also clearly not dressed for walking a long way in the cold and dark.
That said, it still seems quite unlikely that someone would have been able to kill themselves near that quite popular trail without being discovered at some point. Ruth Wilson was also clearly not dressed for walking a long way in the cold and dark.
Littlegreenlady
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2014
- Messages
- 351
- Reaction score
- 714
If I recall, it was her Step mother and not her real mother. She had been told her mother had died when she was younger but shortly before she disappeared, she had found out that her mother had killed herself, and that it had been kept secret. I wonder if the flowers were some kind of specific message to her step mum based on that. Maybe there had been some kind of argument, and she had said something to the stepmum, and then sent flowers to apologise?
JMO
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2017
- Messages
- 3,750
- Reaction score
- 15,920
Who documented the family? any links?
Her wiki entry is a decent summary of a strange family, but her birth record can also be found on ancestry.
Ruth would now be in her 40s. While there certainly is evidence that she had planned her disappearance, I find it infuriating that Surrey Police refused to cooperate with the documentary, but more suspiciously, her own father.
I'd say that although Ian Wilson may not have played a direct role in her disappearance, he likely did in the reason. In October 1995, Ruth came to believe that her biological mother's death was not as she had been told. She was told that Nesta (her mother) had died on December 10th 1982 after accidentally falling down the stairs. Soon, she travelled to London to examine her mother's death certificate. The actual cause of death was suicide by hanging. According to a 2018 interview, her childhood friend Catherine Mair, Ruth thought that her childhood was based upon a foundation of secrecy and lies.
Less a year after Nesta's death, in 1983, Ian remarried, which brings up the possibility of an extra-marital affair that she may have found out about shortly before she died. It is possible that he wanted to silence Nesta and brutally murdered her, staging her death as a suicide to throw off the investigation and turn the suspicion away from him.
Ruth disappeared on Monday 27th November 1995, just two weeks shy of the thirteenth anniversary of her mother's death. There had reportedly been numerous sightings of her in the Dorking area by people who knew her well.
On October 6th 1996, it was believed that Ruth was spotted on the outskirts of London five days earlier after a L!VE TV appeal.
On the first anniversary of her disappearance in November 1996, a young girl was captured on CCTV at a newsagents in Dorking, two miles from Box Hill. The girl appeared distressed and made an unusual request for a copy of all the local newspapers, and was visibly upset when told that at least one of the papers were sold out. The owner saved the footage and reported the incident to police.
Initially both Ian and her stepmother Karen denied that the girl was Ruth, but over time became convinced that it was, stating so in an article published in The Times newspaper on January 2nd 1997.
In 2008, there was a sighting of Ruth in Canada. Because there were a lack of clarity and details on the exact location of this sighting, I find this lead to be fairly unreliable. It was claimed by another childhood friend, that at the time of her disappearance, Ruth didn't have a passport which would have made international travel a lot harder, although travel to countries like Ireland or France would have been much easier in 1995, even without a passport. Rules and regulations were changed significantly after 9/11, so it bears the question:
If Ruth has left the country, how would she have applied for a passport between 1995 and now without being found?
I am very much critical of Surrey Police's refusal to further probe Ian Wilson in his ex-wife's death and his daughter's disappearance and believe that both he and Karen (Ruth's stepmother) could be hiding evidence or know something that could blow the case wide open. I also want them to speak with the taxi driver who dropped Ruth off at the bridleway near Box Hill, if they are still alive.
Anyone could be hiding anything, so I think it's very important that police start by interviewing Ian and Karen again.
I'd say that although Ian Wilson may not have played a direct role in her disappearance, he likely did in the reason. In October 1995, Ruth came to believe that her biological mother's death was not as she had been told. She was told that Nesta (her mother) had died on December 10th 1982 after accidentally falling down the stairs. Soon, she travelled to London to examine her mother's death certificate. The actual cause of death was suicide by hanging. According to a 2018 interview, her childhood friend Catherine Mair, Ruth thought that her childhood was based upon a foundation of secrecy and lies.
Less a year after Nesta's death, in 1983, Ian remarried, which brings up the possibility of an extra-marital affair that she may have found out about shortly before she died. It is possible that he wanted to silence Nesta and brutally murdered her, staging her death as a suicide to throw off the investigation and turn the suspicion away from him.
Ruth disappeared on Monday 27th November 1995, just two weeks shy of the thirteenth anniversary of her mother's death. There had reportedly been numerous sightings of her in the Dorking area by people who knew her well.
On October 6th 1996, it was believed that Ruth was spotted on the outskirts of London five days earlier after a L!VE TV appeal.
On the first anniversary of her disappearance in November 1996, a young girl was captured on CCTV at a newsagents in Dorking, two miles from Box Hill. The girl appeared distressed and made an unusual request for a copy of all the local newspapers, and was visibly upset when told that at least one of the papers were sold out. The owner saved the footage and reported the incident to police.
Initially both Ian and her stepmother Karen denied that the girl was Ruth, but over time became convinced that it was, stating so in an article published in The Times newspaper on January 2nd 1997.
In 2008, there was a sighting of Ruth in Canada. Because there were a lack of clarity and details on the exact location of this sighting, I find this lead to be fairly unreliable. It was claimed by another childhood friend, that at the time of her disappearance, Ruth didn't have a passport which would have made international travel a lot harder, although travel to countries like Ireland or France would have been much easier in 1995, even without a passport. Rules and regulations were changed significantly after 9/11, so it bears the question:
If Ruth has left the country, how would she have applied for a passport between 1995 and now without being found?
I am very much critical of Surrey Police's refusal to further probe Ian Wilson in his ex-wife's death and his daughter's disappearance and believe that both he and Karen (Ruth's stepmother) could be hiding evidence or know something that could blow the case wide open. I also want them to speak with the taxi driver who dropped Ruth off at the bridleway near Box Hill, if they are still alive.
Anyone could be hiding anything, so I think it's very important that police start by interviewing Ian and Karen again.
There have been several case reviews by Surrey Police over the last 25 years. The most recent was certainly in the last 5 years and carried out by a Chief Superintendent (Jon Savell). Whilst I have no great regard for Surrey Police (as I have said before) I am pretty sure that any oversights in the original investigation have now been thoroughly followed up. As for reinterviewing; I would be sure that they confirmed the taxi drivers story through taxi firm logs and/or cctv (as she took the taxi from Dorking station). Again, repeating something I have said before, a real question for me is why she was at the station. Dorking station is out of the town and she should have been able to get a taxi in town - so did she have another reason to be there such as looking at train times? And I am not sure of the purpose of further interviews of the parents. They were extensively interviewed before and it seems unlikely they have more to add. Going beyond a simple review of past statements would undoubtedly leak to the press and risk lazy journos inventing stories. Past experience of cases such as Christopher Jefferies would make any police force wary of such risks.
Whilst this is an odd case there are no grounds to suspect anyone of involvement based on the known facts. The real problem is that the facts all point to a voluntary disappearance and the real question is what happened next.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2017
- Messages
- 3,750
- Reaction score
- 15,920
I assumed she walked to the station as that is where she knew taxi's were.
I don't agree that they have followed things up thoroughly. Far too many incidents of these types of cases having flaws in their investigations.
I live about 8 miles from Dorking and know it well. The reason I mentioned the station/taxi issue is because I know she had no reason to go there from the town centre in order to get a taxi. Dorking station is on the Leatherhead road, a 15 minute walk from the middle of the high street (and the library). It is usually easy to pick up a taxi at Dorking Halls (the concert venue at one end of the high street and on the way to the station). It would even have been quicker for her to pick up a taxi at Deepdene station (a second Dorking station on the way to the main station, there are several on different lines) as that is nearer the high street. It is possible she went to the main station simply because there were no taxis when she tried other locations, but it seems surprising.
There have been a lot of fingers pointed at Surrey police in this case and, as I said, I know they can have faults - but those are usually to do with dodgy behaviour by senior officers. You are presuming that any faults have not only occurred in the initial investigation, but have continued through the multiple case reviews conducted in the past 25 years. This is despite some quite good work, including dog searches of not just the main area of Box Hill, but also harder to get to areas such as the old quarry. What I do wonder is what the police (and possibly the family) could know that is not in the public domain. There are the notes, the content of which is unknown. Then we have the visit to Sheffield and obvious suspicion that the friend was in on the plans. Police protocol means that if they do have information about a missing person they would not release that information if requested not to do so. However, the case reviews suggest they do not know her whereabouts.
I will end with my hope, said before, that she is safe and watching all the efforts to find her, and having a good laugh at us.
One of many unanswered questions that I have is:
Where could Ruth have been in the time between her disappearance and the potential sighting of her on CCTV at the newsagents in Dorking a year later?
Ruth had asked Catherine if she could join her in Sheffield once everything settles down, but it wasn't possible at the time. This could suggest that Ruth may have lived in Sheffield (and/or the surrounding area) at some point between 1996 and 2008, when she may have moved to Canada. However, no sightings of her have ever been confirmed since she was dropped off at Box Hill on November 27th 1995, so Ruth could still be in the UK. This is backed up by the 2018 interview with her childhood friend Roxy Birch who suggested that Ruth didn't have a passport or driving license. How would she have been able to obtain one in the 13 years between when since she disappeared in 1995 and when the sighting in Canada was posted on MySpace in 2008, without being found? Something doesn't add up... although travel to countries like Ireland or France was relatively easy at the time and was supposedly possible without a passport.
What I also find strange is that no age-progressed images (APIs) have ever been released by Surrey Police or Missing People, unlike in the case of 16 year-old Jaime Cheesman who went missing from her friend's home in Grimsby in 1993. An API of Jaime was released in 2016 to show how she may look in her late 30s or early 40s, after a sighting of her was reported in Alnwick in 2011.
Why has no-one done that in the case of Ruth? Someone is hiding something that could solve the case, whether it be her father, Surrey Police, Catherine or someone who has not been investigated thoroughly enough, such as the taxi driver.
(Apologies if I reiterated too much information from my last post)
Where could Ruth have been in the time between her disappearance and the potential sighting of her on CCTV at the newsagents in Dorking a year later?
Ruth had asked Catherine if she could join her in Sheffield once everything settles down, but it wasn't possible at the time. This could suggest that Ruth may have lived in Sheffield (and/or the surrounding area) at some point between 1996 and 2008, when she may have moved to Canada. However, no sightings of her have ever been confirmed since she was dropped off at Box Hill on November 27th 1995, so Ruth could still be in the UK. This is backed up by the 2018 interview with her childhood friend Roxy Birch who suggested that Ruth didn't have a passport or driving license. How would she have been able to obtain one in the 13 years between when since she disappeared in 1995 and when the sighting in Canada was posted on MySpace in 2008, without being found? Something doesn't add up... although travel to countries like Ireland or France was relatively easy at the time and was supposedly possible without a passport.
What I also find strange is that no age-progressed images (APIs) have ever been released by Surrey Police or Missing People, unlike in the case of 16 year-old Jaime Cheesman who went missing from her friend's home in Grimsby in 1993. An API of Jaime was released in 2016 to show how she may look in her late 30s or early 40s, after a sighting of her was reported in Alnwick in 2011.
Why has no-one done that in the case of Ruth? Someone is hiding something that could solve the case, whether it be her father, Surrey Police, Catherine or someone who has not been investigated thoroughly enough, such as the taxi driver.
(Apologies if I reiterated too much information from my last post)
nacentaeons
Active Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2018
- Messages
- 55
- Reaction score
- 209
I have never seen it. It was on a BBC News page but it has long since stopped working.
Following up on the questions raised by Red390, a few thoughts (but no answers).
Prior to 1998 driving licences were paper and did not carry a photograph. You could apply for a provisional licence from 15 (although you could not drive a car until 17 or a moped until 16). Although identity proof would be needed the lack of a photo on the licence would make it easier to get a licence under a false name (or through a helpful friend). Having obtained a licence this could then be used as an identity proof to apply for other papers (although not sufficient on its own) and could even be used to pursue an Irish passport or citizenship given a suitable ancestry (real or adopted). So it was easier in the 1990s - but still not easy.
Prior to 1998 driving licences were paper and did not carry a photograph. You could apply for a provisional licence from 15 (although you could not drive a car until 17 or a moped until 16). Although identity proof would be needed the lack of a photo on the licence would make it easier to get a licence under a false name (or through a helpful friend). Having obtained a licence this could then be used as an identity proof to apply for other papers (although not sufficient on its own) and could even be used to pursue an Irish passport or citizenship given a suitable ancestry (real or adopted). So it was easier in the 1990s - but still not easy.
Similar threads
Online statistics
- Members online
- 174
- Guests online
- 661
- Total visitors
- 835