Lured Into A Trap: The Heartbreaking Disappearance of Margaret Ellen Fox
In June 1974, 14-year-old Margaret Ellen Fox took the bus to meet a man who had responded to her add for babysitting services. She has never been heard from again
Background
On the morning of June 24, 1974, 14-year-old Margaret Ellen Fox left her home and made her way to a bus stop near her family’s house in Burlington, New Jersey. Margaret was accompanied by her younger brother, Joe, who waved goodbye as she boarded the 8:40 a.m. bus to take the seven-mile trip to nearby Mount Holly.
Margaret was in good spirits that day, as she had just recently begun her summer vacation after finishing 8th grade at St. Paul School in Burlington.
That morning, Margaret was on her way to meet a man named John Marshall, who had responded to a classified ad that Margaret and her cousin had placed in a local newspaper advertising their babysitting services.
At about 9 a.m., Margaret arrived at her stop and exited the bus. Shortly after stepping off the bus, Margaret Ellen Fox vanished, never to be seen again.
In the days and weeks immediately following her disappearance, many strange and unsettling aspects of the case would come to light.
Margaret Ellen Fox
By all accounts, Margaret Fox was well-loved by family and friends. Though somewhat small in stature, Margaret regularly roughhoused with her brothers and very much enjoyed outdoor activities like swimming and ice skating.
In June 1974, Margaret and her cousin Lynne placed an ad in a local newspaper that advertised the girl’s babysitting services.
Margaret’s parents had previously been apprehensive about letting her babysit for strangers by herself. However, after much persistence by Margaret, her father, David, relented and allowed her to place the ad.
Unfortunately, in hindsight, the classified ad must have stood out like a glowing neon sign to any predator who saw it. The ad read:
BABYSITTERS - Experienced. Teen girls. Love kids. Work at your house. Call
Shortly after the ad was printed, Margaret’s cousin Lynne was contacted by a man claiming he was looking for a babysitter. However, the man wanted her to come to his home in Mount Holly. She declined his offer, as Lynne’s mother would not allow her 11-year-old daughter to work out of town.
“John Marshall”
The man then called Lynne’s cousin Margaret and inquired about hiring her as a babysitter. He said his name was John Marshall and that he needed somebody to watch his 5-year-old son during the week from 9:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. He offered to pay Margaret $40 per week.
Margaret agreed to meet with John on Friday, June 21st. However, before she was to meet John, he called the Fox home to explain that there had been a sudden death in the family and asked to move the meet-up date to Monday, June 24th.
During these initial phone calls, Margaret’s father spoke to John on the phone and apparently put his concerns at ease because David allowed Margaret to take the job.
Perhaps he felt more reassured when John mentioned that his wife would pick Margaret up when she arrived in Mount Holly. He told them to look out for a red Volkswagen.
Looking back, the question arises: if “John” or “his wife” had a car, why couldn’t they just pick Margaret up from her parent’s house, considering it was only seven miles away?
Sadly, the answer seems rather obvious.
Disappearance
Before boarding the bus to Mount Holly, Margaret’s parents had instructed her to call them as soon as she arrived at Marshall’s house.
As the hours passed, and Margaret’s call did not come, her parent’s concern grew. They then called the phone number that Marshall had given them.
The phone continued to ring until it was finally picked up by someone who broke the news that the number they had called was for a public pay phone. The pay phone was located outside of an A&P grocery store in Lumberton, about two miles from Mount Holly.
Margaret’s mother searched the phone book, attempting to call any John Marshall in the area. Meanwhile, David Fox drove the streets of Mount Holly looking for Margaret.
Margaret’s parents reported her missing shortly after midnight on June 25th.
Investigation
Fortunately, in Margaret’s case, the police treated her disappearance as a likely abduction rather than a runaway and investigated it as such.
Police were able to interview several passengers who were on the same bus as Margaret the morning she disappeared. A few of them remembered seeing her.
One woman distinctly remembered Margaret because her young son had been playing with Margaret’s hair when she turned around and began a conversation with the child.
The woman described Margaret as having “smiley eyes.” “Like someone who was happy.”
The last known sighting of Margaret Fox was shortly after she got off the bus around 9 a.m. on June 24th. She was last seen talking to a young man in a red Volkswagen near the intersection of Mill and Main Streets.
It is believed that Margaret had asked the man if he was John Marshall since she had been told to look for a red Volkswagen, and the intersection was very close to where Margaret had agreed to meet.
However, police were able to locate the man and interviewed him several times and ultimately concluded that he was not involved in Margaret’s disappearance.
Investigators believe that a stranger likely abducted Margaret as a crime of opportunity after seeing her ad in the newspaper and luring her into a trap. They believe he was either a local or someone familiar with the area.
Interestingly, at the time of Margaret’s disappearance, a man named John Marshall worked as an employee at the A&P grocery store in Lumberton, where the calls originated.
Marshall has been interviewed by police numerous times and has passed several polygraph tests. At present, he is not considered a suspect.
Some have theorized that this name was deliberately used as a red herring to misdirect investigators.
Ransom Call
As volunteers in Burlington and Mount Holly searched for Margaret, her parents passed out photos of their daughter to anyone they came across in a desperate attempt to find Margaret.
In the hours after she was reported missing, authorities made the decision to record all incoming and outgoing phone calls to the Fox home.
On June 28, four days after Margaret was last seen, an unidentified man called the home, and Margaret’s mother answered. The man spoke quickly, saying, “Ten thousand is a lot of bread, but your daughter’s life is the buttered topping.” The caller then abruptly hung up.
The next day, the family received a letter repeating what the caller said on the phone. It also instructed Margaret’s parents to put $10,000 in a box with blue wrapping, “same as Margaret’s blouse.”
The author of the letter claimed that Margaret was okay and that they had only “torn her blouse and broke her glasses.”
Margaret’s parents withdrew the money and waited for instructions telling them where to leave it. However, those instructions never came. Then, on June 30th, another letter arrived, which read, “$10,000 was a lot of bread. But your daughter’s life was the buttered topping.”
The letter chillingly uses the past tense, indicating that things had gone wrong. Interestingly, this letter ends by stating “So Long Again,” with the S, L, and A highlighted.
At the time, the SLA or Symbionese Liberation Army was very much in the news after the political extremist group famously kidnapped heiress Patty Hearst earlier that year.
It has not been determined if the letters were sent by the person or people responsible for Margaret’s disappearance or if they were sent as a prank or hoax. Investigators believe that if the kidnapper sent the second letter, the SLA angle was most likely an attempt at misdirection.
The fact that the ransom call and subsequent letters began almost immediately after the media first covered Margaret’s story means that the timing has to be considered.
Legacy and Unanswered Cases
Many unanswered questions remain in the heartbreaking disappearance of Margaret Fox. In the 50 years since her disappearance, there have been virtually no new leads.
In 1976, two years after she vanished, a man confessed to her abduction and murder. However, police checked the man out, and it was determined that he was in the hospital on the day that Margaret went missing. The man was ultimately cleared as a suspect.
In 2019, the FBI finally released the ransom call recording in hopes that someone may recognize the voice. Unfortunately, after 45 years, it is unlikely to yield results.
Investigators working the case were frustrated by the lack of interagency cooperation. It seemed like they were competing against each other rather than working collaboratively.
Unfortunately, as seems to happen far too often, potentially crucial evidence and original case files were lost or destroyed, further hindering detectives who reexamined the case decades later.
Several law enforcement officials who investigated Margaret’s case have stated that her case was the one that most disturbed them during their careers.
Margaret Ellen Fox was loved and remembered by those who knew her. Her father, David, never gave up the search for his daughter, continuing up until the day he died.
Also telling is that Margaret was listed as one of the surviving children in her mother’s obituary.
Margaret’s case is still being actively investigated, and anyone with information is asked to contact the FBI or Burlington Police Department.
Sources:
MARGARET ELLEN FOX, FBI, fbi.gov, https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/kidnap/margaret-ellen-fox
“The Disappearance of Margaret Ellen Fox - Trace Evidence #96” Youtube, Uploaded by Trace Evidence Podcast, 14 November 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cfuta4wFjbw
Comegno, Carol. “NJ cold case: FBI releases audio file in 14-year-old babysitter's 1974 disappearance.” Courier Post, 24 June 2019, https://www.courierpostonline.com/story/news/local/south-jersey/2019/06/24/
Margaret Ellen Fox. The Charley Project, Updated June 25, 2019, https://charleyproject.org/case/margaret-ellen-fox
Thank you for sharing this story, it is disheartening to read of yet another case where there is a victim and no real explanation of what happened or who is responsible. This suggests that many do get away.
There were two aspects we wanted to further ponder about. First, is it common practice not to release voice recordings? One understands that these decisions are difficult, but how are these determinations made? The other is that there appear to be structural challenges to successfully completing investigations given the lack of interagency collaboration. Why do these obstacles remain and what are ways in which they could be overcome?