Relatives Sought for Jigsaw Murder Victims Following Rediscovery of Remains

A university storeroom has yielded the rediscovery of the skulls belonging to two women murdered 90 years ago in the Jigsaw Murders, prompting a search for their relatives. The 1935 deaths of Isabella Ruxton and Mary Rogerson, whose remains were located in Moffat, Dumfries and Galloway, garnered international attention. This case was pioneering in forensic science, as Edinburgh University assisted in compiling evidence against Dr Buck Ruxton, who was subsequently executed by hanging for the murder of his wife. The university has now ascertained that the skulls and additional skeletal remains are still held within its archives. Efforts are underway to locate the women’s family members to ascertain their preference regarding the return of these remains. Professor of anatomy Tom Gillingwater stated: “We want to do the right thing by Isabella and Mary and, if appropriate, return them to their families so they can be laid to rest.” The university opted to launch a public appeal via the BBC rather than contacting families privately, due to uncertainty regarding whether Isabella and Buck Ruxton’s three orphaned children were ever informed of their father’s execution for their mother’s murder. The homicides, which acquired the moniker “Jigsaw Murders,” occurred in Lancaster in September 1935. Journalists converged on Dumfries and Galloway following the discovery of dismembered and disfigured human remains under a bridge spanning a stream close to Moffat. The remains were transported to Edinburgh University, where forensic scientists, in collaboration with colleagues from Glasgow University, reconstructed the body parts. Concurrently with their grim undertaking, a separate investigation was progressing in Lancaster, located in north west England. Dr Buck Ruxton had offered multiple accounts regarding the disappearance of his wife, Isabella, and their nursemaid, Mary Rogerson. The well-known general practitioner harbored jealousy over his wife’s associations with other men. Prior to her disappearance, she had accused him of domestic abuse, but local law enforcement had not intervened. Mary’s family, not Ruxton, filed the missing persons reports for Mary and Isabella. Scottish investigators established a connection between the two women and the remains discovered near Moffat. Definitive identification of the bodies was still required, and their assailant, who possessed surgical expertise, had meticulously attempted to impede this process. Ruxton’s attempts to evade justice were thwarted by innovative forensic methods that verified the remains belonged to Isabella and Mary. This identification proved vital to the prosecution’s argument in what was characterized as “the trial of the century.” Ruxton appeared in the dock at the Assize Court in Manchester five months subsequent to the discovery of the bodies. The jury was presented with an image of Isabella, which scientists had superimposed onto an X-ray of one of the skulls recovered from the ravine—a pioneering use of such evidence in a courtroom. The match was unsettlingly precise. During the trial, it was revealed that a novel fingerprint analysis technique had been employed to identify Mary. Furthermore, scientists examined insects discovered on the remains to ascertain the time of their demise. Ruxton received a conviction for his wife’s murder. Although he had also faced accusations of killing Mary, that charge was withdrawn prior to the trial. Two months following his conviction, substantial crowds assembled outside Manchester’s Strangeways Prison for his execution by hanging. Tom Wood, a former assistant chief constable, authored a book about the case, titled Ruxton: The First Modern Murder. He remarked: “It was one of the most important criminal investigations of the 20th Century, not because of the horror of the case and the dismemberment of the bodies, but because of the forensic science.” He further elaborated: “Put simply, anything before the Ruxton case was ancient history. Anything after the Ruxton case is modern, integrated, forensic science-led investigation.” For the subsequent decades, the women’s bones remained within Edinburgh University’s extensive anatomical collection, kept in boxes within a vault, alongside other case evidence. It is presumed that their retention was for the purpose of additional medical research. Both Professor Gillingwater and Tom Wood contend that this decision ought to be evaluated within the framework of the ethical norms prevalent at that historical period. Professor Gillingwater stated: “If you’re asking me if I would have done the same thing with my 21st Century lens, absolutely not.” He added: “But at the time what those scientists did in this investigation was remarkable and revolutionary.” Mr Wood expresses his belief that it is improbable the women’s families were aware they conducted funerals without the entirety of their loved ones’ remains. He remarked: “I can understand why they did it. These were men of science. These were men who were determined to improve criminal investigation and they would have used these body parts to do that. This was not some cruel disregard. These remains were kept for the advancement of science.” Professor Gillingwater indicated that the remains were “found or re-found” subsequent to an inquiry from a Dutch academic specializing in the history of forensic medicine. He commented: “The overriding feeling was that OK, these are not perhaps being treated with the full level of care and respect that we would want.” Although the Scottish government informed the university that its retention of the remains was lawful, the institution resolved to ascertain whether they ought to be repatriated to the women’s families. Nevertheless, this presented a further predicament. Isabella and Buck Ruxton’s three young children were placed in foster care, and it remains unknown if they were ever informed of their parents’ deaths. Mary Rogerson is understood to have family members residing in the Morecambe area, whereas Isabella’s sister, Jeannie Nelson, resided in Edinburgh when the murder occurred. Following consultation with ethics experts, the university chose to broadcast an appeal via the BBC. Professor Gillingwater stated: “The guidance was very clear, that we should not be approaching people who may not be aware that they were related to these ladies.” He added: “If there are any relatives of Isabella or Mary who believe that they would like to have the remains returned to them, we would be delighted to talk to them about what the next steps might be.” The university assures that all discussions will be conducted with the utmost confidentiality, and families should not perceive any obligation to come forward. Contact can be initiated via a dedicated section on the university’s website.