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

[TheRockingRev]

yes but the question im asking is whether they were up to date and when were they released ive seen 4 photos of when i look at them they could be 4 different people This could understandably cause confusion to witnesses

I have pondered this too. The most current photo was the one where she's holding a beer - but not sure if this was one used by the police. The big problem is is it's a side profile so isn't that great for recognition.

 

[mrC]

as i recall ruths friends dident much care for that picture they thought it gave the wrong impresion of her

 

[TheRockingRev]

as i recall ruths friends dident much care for that picture they thought it gave the wrong impresion of her

It's interesting that they never released any other photos of her. I can't believe her friends, or the groups she was part of, didn't have a photo of her. It's this reason, JMO, that makes me think they were covering for her and, without any new photos being circulated, allowed her to slip easily into obscurity.

 

[mrC]

theres another pgoto of her in a school uniform but i think that was taken a fair while before she went missing as she looks much smaller

 

[Konstantin]

It's interesting that they never released any other photos of her. I can't believe her friends, or the groups she was part of, didn't have a photo of her. It's this reason, JMO, that makes me think they were covering for her and, without any new photos being circulated, allowed her to slip easily into obscurity.

It's definitely interesting that the photos available of Ruth all do look quite different but then she was at an age where her looks would be changing as she grew from essentially a child into a very young woman.

I think there was some criticism, perhaps by the journalist who took on Ruth's case, that her parents supplied her school photo where she's in her uniform and looked much younger. My feeling is that her parents were perhaps rather concerned with appearances and propriety in general and thought that the school photo presented Ruth at her most presentable and demure.

It is possible the police didn't actually ask her friends for photos of her or that her parents, as her next of kin, and given her age, had the ultimate control over which ones were used.

I don't at all think her parents are guilty of anything more than being not completely forthcoming about Ruth's issues relating to her birth mother and running away before, again because of their desire to avoid scandal and gossip perhaps that would not help Ruth's case. I think the suggestions made on this site about her parents and her birth mother are awful and out of order. But I do agree that it could have been helpful to put out a more recent or useful photo of Ruth.

I also think her parents believe Ruth ran away and had help rather than her disappearance being due to abduction or murder (of course, Ruth could have run away and then, being vulnerable, have been exploited but there is no evidence of that). So the newspaper appeals were more to her to please come home than to the public to find her.

If some of her friends knew more than they are letting on I would not be surprised but the thing about some missing persons cases is that the missing person does not want to be found, and that is a distinct possibility here.

 

[TheRockingRev]

It's definitely interesting that the photos available of Ruth all do look quite different but then she was at an age where her looks would be changing as she grew from essentially a child into a very young woman.

I think there was some criticism, perhaps by the journalist who took on Ruth's case, that her parents supplied her school photo where she's in her uniform and looked much younger. My feeling is that her parents were perhaps rather concerned with appearances and propriety in general and thought that the school photo presented Ruth at her most presentable and demure.

It might be as well as it presented her as vulnerable too. Remember she wasn't actually far off being classed as an adult, when public perceptions of helping change slightly.

It is possible the police didn't actually ask her friends for photos of her or that her parents, as her next of kin, and given her age, had the ultimate control over which ones were used.

Possibly, but there would be no reason not to share them at some point in the years since.

I don't at all think her parents are guilty of anything more than being not completely forthcoming about Ruth's issues relating to her birth mother and running away before, again because of their desire to avoid scandal and gossip perhaps that would not help Ruth's case. I think the suggestions made on this site about her parents and her birth mother are awful and out of order. But I do agree that it could have been helpful to put out a more recent or useful photo of Ruth.

I also think her parents believe Ruth ran away and had help rather than her disappearance being due to abduction or murder (of course, Ruth could have run away and then, being vulnerable, have been exploited but there is no evidence of that). So the newspaper appeals were more to her to please come home than to the public to find her.

I do believe that they knew she ran away, but they couldn't say specifically as that would have a lot more questions put their way. As you stated above, it would involve scandal and gossip. By not putting current photos out it would mean that people wouldn't be actively looking for Ruth as much - it would also mean that because of this time would elapse and by that time she would be old enough to live on her own anyway.

If some of her friends knew more than they are letting on I would not be surprised but the thing about some missing persons cases is that the missing person does not want to be found, and that is a distinct possibility here.

Absolutely - and if her friends were aware of this, she may have told them not to say anything, or release photos. As per your above, she was probably helped to make her disappearance and this would have been by her friends.

 

[Konstantin]

Absolutely - and if her friends were aware of this, she may have told them not to say anything, or release photos. As per your above, she was probably helped to make her disappearance and this would have been by her friends.

It's not unlikely.

And there would be little point in releasing photos of her at age 16 some years later as she would not look like that any more. The young woman in the newsagents who Ruth's parents believe was Ruth had very short hair, for example.

 

[Mayfly]

I have just had a look at the Wilson family tree on Ancestry.co.uk and was surprised to see Ruth listed as born 31st Jan 1979, died 27th Nov 1995. So the owner of the tree must believe she is deceased

Her mother is listed as Nesta Burdenshott Gate Landeg 1st May 1948 to Jan 1983 and her father is Ian G Wilson born 1954.

There also appear to be other trees relating to well known cases (Hindley, West, etc.) so the owner may not actually be a relative.

 

[Konstantin]

I have just had a look at the Wilson family tree on Ancestry.co.uk and was surprised to see Ruth listed as born 31st Jan 1979, died 27th Nov 1995. So the owner of the tree must believe she is deceased

Her mother is listed as Nesta Burdenshott Gate Landeg 1st May 1948 to Jan 1983 and her father is Ian G Wilson born 1954.

There also appear to be other trees relating to well known cases (Hindley, West, etc.) so the owner may not actually be a relative.

You can make trees for anyone. It's a good way to trace people's family members as Ancestry suggests relatives and it is pretty good. There was a lot of effort put into trying to trace Nesta's family by people when Ruth's case got attention a few years ago after Martin Bright's work. I would imagine that the person who made the tree was trying to see if they could find Nesta's family to see if Ruth had contacted them or something.

We have no idea if she is alive or dead but there is no evidence she is dead, and the case remains a missing persons enquiry. I wouldn't read anything at all into the person putting that Ruth was deceased. They might have just wanted a way to record when she went missing.

 

[espehop]

New here, but I've read about this case many times and feel it's a planned voluntary disappearance (or at least began as one). Below are some observations gleaned from diving into YouTube/Reddit threads, etc, over the years:

- Ruth spent a lot of time using library computers in the weeks before disappearing - it's believed she was actively looking into her mother's death. She may have gone alone into London to seek out her mother's records and potentially made contact with her mother's side of the family. Whether or not anyone in her mother's family knew of Ruth's plans to disappear and hid or protected her is unknown - you'd assume this is unlikely as they'd be concerned for her welfare (and would presumably tell her dad of such plans), but it's interesting to consider. For Ruth to be looking into her mother's death, there had probably been tension in the home for some time between her and her father (and maybe even her sister, who is victimised the same way by the family cover-up, but may not have shared the same point of view on it). Ruth could have been planning to act out and leave for months in advance, and the finding out of the full truth about her mother was the final straw.
- The content of the notes left on the hill has never been released to the public. This is probably because whatever the notes say is embarrassing/shameful for the family and makes it clear that Ruth was choosing to leave to "punish" her father for the cover-up around her mother's death. The flower delivery was almost certainly a sarcastic gesture to the step-mother - a pitying nod towards someone who is married to a liar who drove his first wife to suicide, in Ruth's view. There's a dramatic nature to the leaving of the notes/Vermouth on Box Hill and to the flower delivery that speaks to a real bitterness from Ruth and to some serious consideration and planning. The lack of engagement with the media by the family since the disappearance speaks volumes. It can only really be inferred that they know that she left deliberately and that they think it will only be resolved as a private matter, not with a public appeal. It's also definitely possible that the police have (or have had, at one time) proof of life and have told the family this, and the family have declined to make it public. There's some ambiguity around how "open" the case has been over the years.
- It would absolutely have been possible, in the mid-1990s, for a confident and smart 16-year-old to plan in advance and save up cash from a weekend job in order to eventually "disappear" into London. If you continued to work on a cash in hand basis and had a couple of trusted people looking out for you (old friends who knew of your plan all along and/or new sympathetic allies you had met) you could sustain this for some time, despite all of the obvious potential threats in this situation. It really looks like Ruth in the newsagent video, and her family, who don't say much at all, have publicly said so, which is very telling. There may have been an eventual need for Ruth to acquire a new identity, but there's a more straightforward possibility: live as someone's common-law wife, using only your partner's bank accounts and surname, for many years. Maybe you don't get a driving licence or passport until you can find a way to fudge the application process after a long time has passed - maybe you don't ever work formally again and live simply as a housewife. I hope that this is what happened for her, rather than anything exploitative or untoward.

 

[Antonia]

You can make trees for anyone. It's a good way to trace people's family members as Ancestry suggests relatives and it is pretty good. There was a lot of effort put into trying to trace Nesta's family by people when Ruth's case got attention a few years ago after Martin Bright's work. I would imagine that the person who made the tree was trying to see if they could find Nesta's family to see if Ruth had contacted them or something.

We have no idea if she is alive or dead but there is no evidence she is dead, and the case remains a missing persons enquiry. I wouldn't read anything at all into the person putting that Ruth was deceased. They might have just wanted a way to record when she went missing.

A possible reason for marking Ruth as deceased on Ancestry is so that she shows up if anyone else searches or adds her, that means the trees created by different users can be linked and information shared more easily.

 

[SovietKitsch]

It really looks like Ruth in the newsagent video, and her family, who don't say much at all, have publicly said so, which is very telling.

Thanks for the great write up. Is the CCTV from the newsagents available to the public? I can't seem to find it online.

 

[Konstantin]

Thanks for the great write up. Is the CCTV from the newsagents available to the public? I can't seem to find it online.

BBC News - CCTV clue to missing schoolgirl Ruth Wilson

news.bbc.co.uk

It is here, but the file that the BBC uploaded is so old it no longer plays. I don't think it is anywhere else.

 

[Konstantin]

Ruth spent a lot of time using library computers in the weeks before disappearing - it's believed she was actively looking into her mother's death.

Do you have a source for this? It's interesting because in 1996 there would not be much on the internet, which was still in its infancy then. Ruth would surely have been more likely to look at paper records (she went to London to find her mother's death certificate) or microfiches of old newspaper articles, if any were indeed written about her mother's death.

I agree with you that this was a planned disappearance -- everything points to that -- and that Ruth likely had help. Her case has never been reclassified as a murder despite her being missing for decades, which suggests the police also believe this. I think if Ruth had informed the police or Missing People (where her profile is still up) that she was alive and well, they would not have an open misper case for her. And they would inform her family, even if Ruth didn't want them to know where she was.

The police have said that there were credible sightings of Ruth in the Dorking area after her disappearance and her parents' belief that the person in the CCTV was Ruth would hold some weight. So, it does seem the police believe that Ruth is most likely alive or was after her disappearance (it was a long time ago and anything could have happened).

I do believe Ruth had help (whether from her friends who have stated publicly they don't know what happened to her, or from someone outside of that group of school friends). Whether the person or people who helped her know what happened to her or where she is now, who knows. Young people who run away are vulnerable. I would strongly recommend reading Shelley MacKenney's book -- Shelley ran away when she was older than Ruth and considerably more streetwise, and narrowly escaped being abducted:

https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/11372944.catford-bank-employee-who-went-missing-after-200k-debt-spiraled-out-of-control-gets-book-published/

Her book is on Kindle and is really worth reading to understand how hard being a missing person is -- Shelley's family never reported her missing to the police so unlike Ruth she did not have that pressure. She could use her NI number to work, which Ruth could not.

 

[Officer Dibble]

Do you have a source for this? It's interesting because in 1996 there would not be much on the internet, which was still in its infancy then. Ruth would surely have been more likely to look at paper records (she went to London to find her mother's death certificate) or microfiches of old newspaper articles, if any were indeed written about her mother's death.

I agree with you that this was a planned disappearance -- everything points to that -- and that Ruth likely had help. Her case has never been reclassified as a murder despite her being missing for decades, which suggests the police also believe this. I think if Ruth had informed the police or Missing People (where her profile is still up) that she was alive and well, they would not have an open misper case for her. And they would inform her family, even if Ruth didn't want them to know where she was.

The police have said that there were credible sightings of Ruth in the Dorking area after her disappearance and her parents' belief that the person in the CCTV was Ruth would hold some weight. So, it does seem the police believe that Ruth is most likely alive or was after her disappearance (it was a long time ago and anything could have happened).

I do believe Ruth had help (whether from her friends who have stated publicly they don't know what happened to her, or from someone outside of that group of school friends). Whether the person or people who helped her know what happened to her or where she is now, who knows. Young people who run away are vulnerable. I would strongly recommend reading Shelley MacKenney's book -- Shelley ran away when she was older than Ruth and considerably more streetwise, and narrowly escaped being abducted:

https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/11372944.catford-bank-employee-who-went-missing-after-200k-debt-spiraled-out-of-control-gets-book-published/

Her book is on Kindle and is really worth reading to understand how hard being a missing person is -- Shelley's family never reported her missing to the police so unlike Ruth she did not have that pressure. She could use her NI number to work, which Ruth could not.

I have always believed she ran away to start a new life.

Even if she did via missing persons contact her family to say she is alive (which I highly doubt she would) it is my opinion that her parents would keep this to themselves.

 

[espehop]

Do you have a source for this? It's interesting because in 1996 there would not be much on the internet, which was still in its infancy then. Ruth would surely have been more likely to look at paper records (she went to London to find her mother's death certificate) or microfiches of old newspaper articles, if any were indeed written about her mother's death.

I agree with you that this was a planned disappearance -- everything points to that -- and that Ruth likely had help. Her case has never been reclassified as a murder despite her being missing for decades, which suggests the police also believe this. I think if Ruth had informed the police or Missing People (where her profile is still up) that she was alive and well, they would not have an open misper case for her. And they would inform her family, even if Ruth didn't want them to know where she was.

The police have said that there were credible sightings of Ruth in the Dorking area after her disappearance and her parents' belief that the person in the CCTV was Ruth would hold some weight. So, it does seem the police believe that Ruth is most likely alive or was after her disappearance (it was a long time ago and anything could have happened).

I do believe Ruth had help (whether from her friends who have stated publicly they don't know what happened to her, or from someone outside of that group of school friends). Whether the person or people who helped her know what happened to her or where she is now, who knows. Young people who run away are vulnerable. I would strongly recommend reading Shelley MacKenney's book -- Shelley ran away when she was older than Ruth and considerably more streetwise, and narrowly escaped being abducted:

https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/11372944.catford-bank-employee-who-went-missing-after-200k-debt-spiraled-out-of-control-gets-book-published/

Her book is on Kindle and is really worth reading to understand how hard being a missing person is -- Shelley's family never reported her missing to the police so unlike Ruth she did not have that pressure. She could use her NI number to work, which Ruth could not.

Do you have a source for this? It's interesting because in 1996 there would not be much on the internet, which was still in its infancy then. Ruth would surely have been more likely to look at paper records (she went to London to find her mother's death certificate) or microfiches of old newspaper articles, if any were indeed written about her mother's death.

Hi - yes, this is what I meant, that she was (according to what I remember reading) researching in the local library i.e. presumably looking at old newspapers on microfiche or what have you, rather than on the internet at that time. I'm afraid I don't have a source - I found this info buried in either YouTube or Reddit comments somewhere over the last few years. It appeared in the same place (I think) as the info that she had actively gone to London to look at or obtain her mother's death certificate and that she may have intended to make contact with - or successfully did make contact with - her mother's side of the family. I think there was an inference that she was usually someone who studied hard at the library anyway, but that she was doing this even more often in the weeks leading up to the disappearance, as though working on this additional "project" of the research into her mother.

I agree that Ruth had help and that a few of her friends know more than they have said - but I don't think they necessarily know much more. It may be that all that they knew at the time is that she definitely meant to leave (and had money and plans in place to support herself for a while) and that she wanted them to cover for her. But after all these years, they may be just as much in the dark about the final outcome as anyone else. The friend who was in the process of moving/had just moved to Sheffield is interesting. She appears to have been one of the closest to Ruth in her circle, and her move up north (whether it was alone or with family, I can't recall) might have somewhat inspired Ruth to start thinking about getting away herself.

As you say, it is very telling that it's never been reclassified as a murder enquiry and, again, the point about the family basically agreeing that it's her on the CCTV (which there are still images of online, though it appears the actual video has now been taken down) really makes it seem like more is known by the authorities and the family about this, but just not enough to be able to confidently take her off the missing persons list.

An absolutely fascinating case and really a one-in-a-million type one where you think maybe, just maybe, she made it and got on with her life just fine.

 

[alb1on]

New here, but I've read about this case many times and feel it's a planned voluntary disappearance (or at least began as one). Below are some observations gleaned from diving into YouTube/Reddit threads, etc, over the years:

- Ruth spent a lot of time using library computers in the weeks before disappearing - it's believed she was actively looking into her mother's death. She may have gone alone into London to seek out her mother's records and potentially made contact with her mother's side of the family. Whether or not anyone in her mother's family knew of Ruth's plans to disappear and hid or protected her is unknown - you'd assume this is unlikely as they'd be concerned for her welfare (and would presumably tell her dad of such plans), but it's interesting to consider. For Ruth to be looking into her mother's death, there had probably been tension in the home for some time between her and her father (and maybe even her sister, who is victimised the same way by the family cover-up, but may not have shared the same point of view on it). Ruth could have been planning to act out and leave for months in advance, and the finding out of the full truth about her mother was the final straw.
- The content of the notes left on the hill has never been released to the public. This is probably because whatever the notes say is embarrassing/shameful for the family and makes it clear that Ruth was choosing to leave to "punish" her father for the cover-up around her mother's death. The flower delivery was almost certainly a sarcastic gesture to the step-mother - a pitying nod towards someone who is married to a liar who drove his first wife to suicide, in Ruth's view. There's a dramatic nature to the leaving of the notes/Vermouth on Box Hill and to the flower delivery that speaks to a real bitterness from Ruth and to some serious consideration and planning. The lack of engagement with the media by the family since the disappearance speaks volumes. It can only really be inferred that they know that she left deliberately and that they think it will only be resolved as a private matter, not with a public appeal. It's also definitely possible that the police have (or have had, at one time) proof of life and have told the family this, and the family have declined to make it public. There's some ambiguity around how "open" the case has been over the years.
- It would absolutely have been possible, in the mid-1990s, for a confident and smart 16-year-old to plan in advance and save up cash from a weekend job in order to eventually "disappear" into London. If you continued to work on a cash in hand basis and had a couple of trusted people looking out for you (old friends who knew of your plan all along and/or new sympathetic allies you had met) you could sustain this for some time, despite all of the obvious potential threats in this situation. It really looks like Ruth in the newsagent video, and her family, who don't say much at all, have publicly said so, which is very telling. There may have been an eventual need for Ruth to acquire a new identity, but there's a more straightforward possibility: live as someone's common-law wife, using only your partner's bank accounts and surname, for many years. Maybe you don't get a driving licence or passport until you can find a way to fudge the application process after a long time has passed - maybe you don't ever work formally again and live simply as a housewife. I hope that this is what happened for her, rather than anything exploitative or untoward.

Whilst the facts are correct I have to disagree with the point about proof of life for reasons I have stated before. If the police had proof of life they would not have conducted multiple case reviews in the years since, including one by a superintendent in the last 10 years. And given the history of Mark Williams Thomas with Surrey Police and his pursuit of publicity I do not believe it could have remained private if there was proof of life.

 

[Konstantin]

Whilst the facts are correct I have to disagree with the point about proof of life for reasons I have stated before. If the police had proof of life they would not have conducted multiple case reviews in the years since, including one by a superintendent in the last 10 years. And given the history of Mark Williams Thomas with Surrey Police and his pursuit of publicity I do not believe it could have remained private if there was proof of life.

Yes, the case is very much still an open missing persons case. While they will keep an open mind, it seems the police do not believe that Ruth has been murdered, but that she left of her own free will at least initially and then vanished.

It seems that the police believe the sightings of Ruth in the Dorking area shortly after her disappearance were credible but beyond that, with the possible exception of the young woman in the newsagents that her parents are convinced is her, there has been nothing. Those sightings do suggest also that Ruth ran away of her own accord. Given her age, it is likely she had help in some way. Whether whoever helped her also took advantage of her vulnerability we don't know. If Ruth had given a proof of life to the police and proved it was her to them they would tell her parents even if they would not tell them where Ruth was etc.

If she is alive, it is very clear that Ruth does not want to be found. The saddest part of that is about her sister and the fact that she has had to cope with ambiguous loss and not knowing if Ruth came to harm or why exactly, really, she ran away.

Surrey Police says her case remains a missing person inquiry and it "continues to keep an open mind about what is behind Ruth's disappearance" but "at this time there is no further evidence to support any one particular line of inquiry about what has happened to Ruth".

Surrey schoolgirl vanished after revelation about mum's death

Ruth Wilson was just 16 when she disappeared after getting out of a taxi in a remote woodland area in Surrey while on her way home from school in November 1995

www.getsurrey.co.uk

There is going to be a lot more to this story than we know. We don't know what other struggles Ruth might have had or how those might have clashed with her parents and their conservative viewpoints.

 

[Officer Dibble]

There is a bus stop opposite the (was called Hand in Hand) pub (later called The Tree at Box Hill). Did any buses run in the evening when Ruth disappeared? Any locals here?

I have heard the pub is derelict and due to be pulled down for redevelopment but unsure if that is true or not. Anyone know?

 

[alb1on]

There is a bus stop opposite the (was called Hand in Hand) pub (later called The Tree at Box Hill). Did any buses run in the evening when Ruth disappeared? Any locals here?

I have heard the pub is derelict and due to be pulled down for redevelopment but unsure if that is true or not. Anyone know?

The Tree is not exactly derelict but has been closed and on the market since 2023. As for the bus, the service and operator has changed since 1995. Even today the buses only run every 2 hours and the last one is circa 6pm. I cannot imagine any good reason to go up there to catch a bus when there are (and would have been then) much easier alternatives.