The Buck Ruxton case: forensic investigation and criminal justice

Buck Ruxton

From the perspective of being a death scene investigator, the Buck Ruxton case was very unique and trend-setting for a number of reasons. The concept of a perpetrator killing a witness and/or a lover due to perceived or verified infidelity was nothing new, then or now, but a lot of the other components of the case and how it was solved were absolutely groundbreaking at the time and in several ways.

One thing that made the case quite unique was the fact that the murderer was a doctor. This probable became quite clear because of the way the bodies were dismembered in such a way so as to conceal their identities but the case was groundbreaking in the sense that fingerprint technology and other forensic methods were used to identify the body and the time of death. Analysis of the maggots on the body as well as looking the newspapers used to wrap the body were both instrumental in establishing cause and time of death and that along with the fingerprint identification sealed Ruxton's fate (NIH, 2013).

Another one of the ways that Ruxton was caught red-handed was much more basic and that was the fact that the newspaper in question was a "slip" edition that was unique to certain areas of the United Kingdom which made it much easier to pin on Mr. Ruxton. Tracking down the fact that the newspaper was a unique edition as well as the use of subscription lists to narrow down the potential recipients even further by looking at subscription lists for the paper made the case against Ruxton all the more better and airtight as it narrowed down the list of theoretical suspects greatly. If the newspaper was not unique to an area that Ruxton was in, this would have made pinning the murder on Ruxton a much more difficult task to accomplish. This is because the precision in which the bodies were dismembered and the distance from the murder scene and/or home of Ruxton or the victims was quite large (more than 100 miles)(NIH, 2013).

Something else that happened tied Mr. Ruxton to the disposal sites and that was his denial that he was ever in Scotland during the aftermath of the murder which was proven entirely wrong by the fact that he had apparently clipped a bicyclist in Scotland and also had an encounter with a Scottish police officer. Not only did this homework regarding where he was prove Ruxton was a liar, it also proved that he was tied to the area of the disposal of the bodies and this, in conjunction with the newspaper copies and the actual forensics, helped to seal Ruxton's fate because all of those aspects against Ruxton melded together could not be explained by Ruxton or his counsel in a way other than the fact that he was the murderer (NIH, 2013).

The triad of convicting a murderer is method, motive and opportunity and all three were very prominent in this case. The method, of course, was the dismemberment and disposal of the bodies and Ruxton was tied to both of those through this knowledge of medical terminology and physiology. He certainly had the opportunity and he could explain a series of unfortunate coincidences where he was tied to the edition of the paper used to wrap the bodies as well as why he happened to be in Scotland around the time of the disposal, not to mention the fact that he blatantly lied about it and was proven to be lying beyond a reasonable doubt (NIH, 2013).

Finally, though, Ruxton certainly had a motive and that was the fact he felt that Isabella was committing infidelity whilst engaging in her outgoing and socializing habits at the parties with the social elites that Ruxton and his wife were affiliated with or otherwise knew. The murder of the supposed eyewitness also made complete sense. The motive of Ruxton to kill the two women was obviously compared to any/all motives that other people would have to kill the two women at that time and there was likely not a lot of people that had a reason to kill those two women aside from Ruxton so the prosecution and conviction of Ruxton made sense in many ways (NIH, 2013).

That all being said, the conviction of Ruxton almost certainly would not have happened if the forensic evidence were there including his apparently inability to explain his presence in Scotland at exactly the worst time and only after he lied about it. He was a doctor that was well-respected and he had a family with his wife. He was generous with his services and often gave out services for free if a patient did not have the means to pay. This would not be something that many would ascribe to a double-murderer who murdered his wife in a fit of jealously and relish to hide the crime from a witness (Scotsman, 2013).