jump to navigation

Gert wrote a post and I commented, but I see my comment is a post in itself. May 1, 2012

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family.
Tags: ,
comments closed

of course she’s a coward – and her alter-ego Pilgrim/Chimp/Brian is one too.
answer MY charges Joan – WHY did you lie in your book about the duration of the order of protection you got against me in 1993 – in your book you say it was for one year – but the actual court document says it was for six months. And why did you say you were arrested? When you were merely SUMMONED into court. And why did you say in your book that I was arrested and placed on probation? When all I got was a six month order of protection?

ANSWER THIS! And answer WHY were you calling my job for six months trying to get me fired? Why were YOU writing letters to my fiance and sending them to his mother’s house? Why were YOU calling his mom on the phone to the point that my brother-in-law grabbed the phone and swore at you and threatened to call the police on you. ANSWER THIS!

ANSWER JOAN – COWARD! COME ON – OUT WITH IT! AND YOUR LATEST LIE ABOUT ME LYING TO ABDO!!! What kind of slime woman are you? TELL US NOW why you wrote that letter to me in 1999 telling me that John got the next door neighbor pregnant and they had a baby girl in 1994.

Yes – 1994 – the year when the order of protection ended – the year you started accusing me of computer hacking at my job – the year you started calling my job trying to get me fired.

IF – and that’s a big IF Pilgrim/Chimp/Brian really IS not you – WHY DON’T YOU TELL HIM THE DAM TRUTH! AND THEN COME CLEAN AND TELL THE WHOLE WORLD THE TRUTH!

and the truth is: YOU LIED IN YOUR BOOK, YOU LIE ABOUT ME ON THE INTERNET, AND YOU LIED AGAIN LAST WEEK. Cowardly liar.

AND ASSHOLE – I SCANNED AND POSTED THE ACTUAL COURT DOCUMENTS RIGHT HERE ON THIS BLOG – THAT PROVE YOU ARE A LIAR. SO TAKE PILGRIM/CHIMP/BRIAN,  HOLD HIS HAND AND BOTH YOU SHOVE IT.

Joan, my dear, your lies are going to make you food for the immortals.

by her own words, on her own website, Joan Wheeler admits to fraud December 24, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

Here is a screenshot that I took of Joan Wheeler’s “About” page on her Forbidden Family website.
this is her trying to justify her publishing MY childhood photo on the back of her book. I took this screenshot on December 24, 2011 0500 (5:00am).

Carefully read what she has to say:
“This photograph of my natural family was taken in Autumn of 1955. My mother is pregnant with me. This is the only family “portrait” I have. My deceased natural mother’s sister (my aunt) sent the photograph to my adoptive aunt who then gave the  photograph to my adoptive parents in 1956. My adoptive mother gave me the photograph when I was 18 years old and newly reunited with my natural family.”

Okay, first – we have no way of knowing exactly what month this picture was taken – it could have been early summer 1955. Because I, (in my father’s arms), am awful small for a three year old. This picture could have even been taken in 1954 when I was 2 years old. – Whatever – the other point is – even if Mom was pregnant – (she looks fat – NOT pregnant) – Joan was NOT a legal entity when the photograph was taken.

Joan admits right here that she was not given a paper copy of the photo until she was 18 years old in 1974. Since I and other members of the extended Herr family – my mother’s siblings and their children also had copies of this same photo – it shows us that this photo was widely distributed AFTER my mother’s death. This photo could have been taken by any number of persons – my paternal grandmother, who only lived a few blocks from us, a member of the Herr family, heck, it could even have been taken by our landlord Mr. Johnson. (not Williams, Joan – JOHNSON).

In the terms and conditions set forth by Trafford Publications for their authors, it is stipulated that the author must own the sole copyright to the work and ALL IT’S CONTENT.

So how does Joan Wheeler think she owns the sole copyright of a photograph that she is NOT in, was NOT the photographer, did not even see it, or own a COPY of until 18 years AFTER the photo was taken?

And Joan, my dear, if I find out that you took MY baby picture and took out a copyright/patent on MY baby picture – YOU ARE GUILTY OF FRAUD!

That’s right readers, (pay attention Lori Corangelo) – JOAN WHEELER DEFRAUDED TRAFFORD PUBLICATIONS WHEN SHE SIGNED THE CONTRACT WITH THEM. AND I WILL GO AFTER JOAN VIA MY ATTORNEY IF I FIND OUT THAT SHE OBTAINED A FRAUDULENT COPYRIGHT ON MY PHOTOGRAPH. – and you will end up in jail – or the psych ward – I don’t care which – just as long as you get put away so you can stop your lying on the internet and stop your lying mouth!

Atttention Lori Corangelo; Amfor (Americans for Open Records) re: Joan Wheeler, Forbidden Family December 11, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

LORI CORANGELO AND OTHERS: I think you’d better read this: from the pdf. file of Trafford’s Publishing’s “Terms and Conditions.” These are the Terms and Conditions that Joan Wheeler agreed to when she signed (under false pretenses) her contract with Trafford and the ones that she VIOLATED – she had hate speech in her book, obscene language, had me saying things that I didn’t, labeled me as a computer hacker with a criminal record and used MY photograph. 

 http://www.trafford.com/uploadedFiles/Trafford/Common/Trafford%20Terms%20and%20Conditions_ebook%20pricechange_11182011.pdf

 2. YOUR LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY
2.1. You represent that you are the sole copyright owner of the Work and all of its content.

 2.2. You represent that the Work does not infringe upon any statutory or common law right of copyright, libel or privacy of any third party.

  2.4. You further represent that the Work does not contain illegal, unlawful or objectionable material including, but not limited to, pornography, obscenity or hate speech. You acknowledge that the Work is not plagiarized and does not include falsely attributed statements of third parties.

 3.(Trafford’s Legal Responsibility
3.2. We reserve the right to refuse to provide and/or to discontinue ALL Services upon our discovery of any violation by you of these Terms and Conditions, any other actions, omissions or misconduct by you with respect to Work, and/or your performance under these Terms and Conditions. In the event a complaint is made by a third party regarding the Work, we reserve the right to suspend the Services in accordance with Section 7.1 until such time as the complaint is satisfactorily resolved, as determined by us in our sole discretion.

Now Lori go and read these two posts and read them word for word so you can UNDERSTAND what Joan Wheeler did -

Joan Wheeler FINALLY announces the demise of her book Forbidden Family, but still shows evidence of her silly delusions

My complaint to Trafford Publications concerning the slander and libel contained in the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler

 Tell us again Lori of how Joan made a “mistake” – you are full of shit, and so is Joan.

You want open records Lori? That equates to the TRUTH, does it not Lori? We are open and TRUTHFUL here on our blogs. Can you handle the TRUTH Lori?

My complaint to Trafford Publications concerning the slander and libel contained in the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler November 30, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Our Family History, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

Here it is – at long last – my official complaint to Trafford Publications – the complaint that made them take a look at the book they published. The contract they had with Joan Wheeler was that the book was “ready-to-publish” that is, all editing for content had been done already.

Let me explain. Trafford is a publishing vehicle for authors to self-publish their works. Trafford offers several packages. They offer editing services, but Joan opted out of that. I wonder why? Because one of the articles of the standard contract Trafford offers to their prospective authors is: no obscenities. Yet on page 370 Joan publishes a post card that she received in the mail that had obscenities written on it. (and as usual – she blames ME for it – even tho the handwriting is not mine). – Anyway, she slipped that in under Trafford’s nose – she told Trafford that the book had already been edited for content. Therefore, nobody at Trafford ever read the entire manuscript – they took Joan at her word and published it.

Joan also signed the contract that stated that no slander or libel was contained in the book. She signed the contract under false pretenses. In my last two posts, A Letter I wrote to the district attorney in 1995 sheds light on Joan Wheeler’s harassments of me and refutes the lies on pages 325-333 in her book Forbidden Family  and  Graphics of scanned court documents, etc. that prove without a doubt that Joan Wheeler is a liar in her book Forbidden Family,  I outlined many lies contained in only pages 295 – 342, and provided actual court documents and actual letters (one hand-written by Joan, one typed out, and contains a hand-written note by Joan), that refuted those lies contained in only less than 50 pages in that hideous 600 page plus book.

When Joan signed the contract with Trafford, they took her word the book contained no slander or libel and published the book. When they received my complaint (along with one from Gert), it took them from January 2011 to May 2011 to research my complaint. In other words – someone from Trafford FINALLY sat down and read the garbage they had unwittingly published.  Not only did they have to read the garbage that Joan wrote – they had to look through the court documents that I sent them. Then they had to sift through all the convoluted lies and twisting of facts, events, dates that Joan did on those few 50 pages and that I outlined in my post A Letter I wrote to the district attorney in 1995 sheds light on Joan Wheeler’s harassments of me and refutes the lies on pages 325-333 in her book Forbidden Family .

The result? Trafford’s editors and legal staff agreed that Joan, by signing the contract under false pretenses, LIED to them and pulled the wool over their eyes. Their only recourse was to: PULL THAT GARBAGE BOOK  FROM PUBLICATION.

I also pointed out to Trafford that the photograph on the back cover of that garbage book is of ME and my siblings and parents. Joan had no right to publish that photograph. It was taken in 1955. Joan was not born until 1956.She was adopted out a year later. She was given COPY of it almost 20 years later. Copies of that family photograph were distributed to many family members during the 1950′s and 1960′s. One of the articles in the contract that Joan entered into with Trafford was that she “was the sole copyright owner of all content of the work.” She did not, and DOES NOT own the copyrights to MY photograph. Joan has a little blurb on her website that the faces are blurry and obscured by text – that is just her trying to get out of the mess that SHE alone got herself into. When I pointed out to Trafford (in a telephone call with Eugene Hopkins, at 11:am on May 9, 2011), that Joan did not get permission from ME (orally or written) to publish MY photograph – Mr. Hopkins agreed right then and there to PULL THE BOOK FROM PUBLICATION!

That happened on May 9, 2011, and to this day, November 30, 2011, Joan, in her delusional state, her continual REFUSAL TO FACE REALITY – still has a link on her website that directs “buyers” of this garbage book to a sales page on Trafford’s website – a page THAT NO LONGER EXISTS because Trafford pulled it down!

Joan Wheeler is a pathological LIAR – she not only lies to people to their face, she lies on the internet. She spent more than half of her life writing her precious book – the book that she invested so much wasted time and energy on – finally got the stupid thing published, but then got it pulled because she not only LIED in the book – she LIED to the publisher that it contained no lies.

AND this delusional LIAR has a facebook page promoting this book. A DEAD BOOK!  Ok, she made the page over a year ago – but it’s still in existence. BUT – she recently (October 2011) created an account on The Huffington Post, using this page. A page that promotes a DEAD BOOK! (because she can’t register on Huffington under her regular facebook page – thanks to her posting some lying shit about us back in March 2011 – and she got booted off of Huffington).  So what does she do - she re-registers under false pretenses. Using a dead book. Will she never learn NOT TO LIE?

So here is my complaint. There is a list of documents – I’m not going to post them all. Go here to this post to see only a couple of them. They are enough to back up my TRUTH of what happened. And to show how Joan Wheeler LIED in her book about me.

Part 1 of complaint of Ruth Sippel Pace

Re: book, Forbidden Family, by Joan Wheeler, published by Trafford

 Submission by Ruth Sippel Pace, birth sister of Joan Wheeler, author of the book Forbidden Family.

 For consideration of Trafford Publishing to rescind their contract with Ms. Wheeler regarding the publication of this book, on the grounds that the book contains many falsehoods, slanderous statements about me, Ruth Sippel Pace and other members of my family. The book also contains references to my life, which are personal in nature, and the author has not been given my permission to discuss with anyone, nor publish them in a book.

    Also, my photograph is published on the back cover, my face is clear, even though it is a picture of me as a child. I never gave permission for this picture to be published. The picture of my father’s face is clear. The author’s stance of her changing the names of living person’s in the book is enough to provide privacy does not hold up to the fact that she uses her own real name, Joan Wheeler in the book, identifies the city of her birth and the city of the birth of her birth siblings, as that of Buffalo, New York. Any person with any reasonable intelligence and who ever knew my father, would recognize his picture on the back cover of the book and put names to people mentioned in the book. My father worked for the city of Buffalo in Buffalo’s City Hall for more than 30 years and is well known. We also have a large family, and the Wheeler clan is also very large. Also, the details of Joan’s adoption have been publicized in the past, via a television interview of Joan and myself (together), and newspaper interviews of Joan and my father (separately). In the case of the television interview, both my face and Joan’s were in clear view, and our names were given on camera. In the newspaper articles, both my father, and Joan, had their photographs published, with their names published with the photos.

 In a conversation between my sister Gert McQueen and Mr. Tubio, Mr. Tubio requested the most telling of the lies we have found in the book Forbidden Family. I will start by refuting Joan’s narration of court cases that Joan and I were involved in against each other. This narration is on the following pages: 314 – 317, 322-333, 362-368. Unfortunately, Joan not only lies about actual events that happened between us, and the court cases, but mixes up the court cases with each other until there is such a convoluted narration of these events, that I have to resort to first telling you in a few short paragraphs, exactly what happened before I can point out any slanderous comments that are contained in these pages. I do have, scanned copies of actual court documents that support the truth of what happened. These are included at the end of this email, are listed as thus:

 01 -Joan’s complaint July 9, 1993

02a – restraining order Aug 9,93 – Feb 9,94

02b – closeup dates restraining order Aug 9,93 – Feb 9,94

02c – closeup name restraining order Aug 9,93 – Feb 9,94

03 – Joan’s letter to Albany, New York Dec 31, 94

04 – Ruth’s complaint 3-7-95

05 – Joan’s letter to John

06 – summons April 19 95

07  – certificate from Buffalo Police Academy 8-29-98

08  – Ruth’s petition to Family Court 6-4-99

09 – summons to Family Court 6-4-99

10 – temporary restraining. 6-4-99

11 – one year restraining order June 24, 99 – June 24, 00

 When it is necessary to refer to these evidence documents, during my narrative and the narrative contained in the book, I will be referring to them by their assigned number.

My second email contains the remainder of the many lies and invasions of my privacy that are contained in this book.

 I have listed the page number first, then the quote from the book in bold, and my objection/telling of the truth follows. Joan Wheeler refers to me, Ruth Sippel Pace as Brenda in her book. It is my contention that Ms. Wheeler’s purpose for writing the book is a means of revenge and hurting people that have ever disagreed with her. There are many personal attacks on me in this book. Throughout the book, Ms. Wheeler portrays me as an uneducated inner city ghetto dweller with a foul mouth and a person who drinks all the time. I have found many personal hateful slurs directed at me in this book. I believe she included these slurs in an attempt to hurt me, as she has done many things to me in the past 25 years to hurt me. For example, she made a complaint to my job that I was a computer hacker. After they investigated me, found me innocent, and told her this, she would NOT accept it. She called my job almost everyday for several months trying to get me fired. This book is just a continuation of Ms. Wheeler’s hate campaign against myself and others. Throughout the book, Ms. Wheeler puts words into other people’s mouths, those words usually are her own thoughts and she does this to lend credence to her fantasy that people agree with her on the topic she is writing about. And to lend credence that people actually DID agree with her, as she reports in the book.

    Right from the beginning, Ms. Wheeler presents a falsehood:

Page xvi

“I believe I have written a fair and accurate account.” “ This is my story as it happened to me.”

 I have caught Ms. Wheeler in many out and out lies that cannot be construed as a faulty memory, the most telling is blatant falsifications of actual court proceedings between Ms. Wheeler and myself and the decisions of the court.

     The court proceedings between me and Joan had their beginnings in 1990 when Joan and her ex-husband stole several hundred dollars from me. Between 1990-1992, there were many arguments between us over this. The theft of the money was one of previous misdeeds Joan had done to me.  It got to the point that in disgust, I told Joan I wanted nothing more to do with her. In February 1993, just before Valentine’s Day, I received a greeting card in the mail. Actually, the envelope was addressed to me. Inside was a Valentine’s Day card, for my husband, supposedly from Joan’s children. It was not a Valentine’s card that children hand out, it was a specialty card, for a “special Uncle.” (this was just the beginning of Joan’s playing games with the mail. I received many envelopes addressed to me, but the letter inside was for my sister Gert (who did not live in Buffalo, or the envelope was addressed to me and my husband, with the letter for me. Joan would also manipulate the return address and zip-codes so that if I attempted to refuse it and “return to sender” the post office’s machines would spit it back for delivery back to me). In May 1993, another envelope addressed to me arrived, inside was a forged letter – supposedly from my 10 year old nephew to my husband, but on close examination, you could tell the sloppy printing was Joan’s.

    During this time, Joan was receiving annoyance phone calls and she suspected me. She called the police and the phone company and arranged to have her line tapped. To ensure that I would call her, she sent a Father’s Day card, supposedly from her children, to my husband, and again, the envelope was addressed to me. And I took the bait. I called her, and she said, “hold on.” Click. ?? I called back. “Hold on.” Click. I called again, “Joan, this is Ruth.” I intended to ask why the envelopes were addressed to me, but the contents were for my husband, but then Joan swore at me and hung up. I got tired of her game and gave up.

    The following week, my electricity was cut off, as my husband and I were undergoing some financial difficulties. Knowing that Joan owed me over $700.00, I called her. I was crying and said, “Joan, I need help.” She hung up on me. I tried a couple more times. She kept hanging up on me. I got angry and called her and swore at her.

    Shortly afterwards, I got a call from Buffalo Police Detective Martin Harrington, who wanted to know why I was calling Joan. I told him exactly what I just wrote here. He said he believed me, and would recommend that Joan drop any charges against me. She went ahead and filed harassment charges on me, signing the complaint on July 9, 1993. (DOC 01) I do not have the summons for that court case, but appeared in front of Judge Robert Russell on August 9, 1993, where Joan was granted a six-month Order of Protection against, on ACD. (Adjournment on Consideration of Dismissal). (DOC 02a). The writing is hard to read, so you must look at DOCS 02b and 02c to make out my name, and dates of the duration of the six-month restraining order – August 9, 1993 to February 9, 1994.

     Sometime in 1994, Ms. Wheeler’s medical bill from my employer (Buffalo General Hospital) got mixed up with a bill from another patient. Ms. Wheeler accused me of computer hacking and lodged a formal complaint with my employer. I was investigated and found innocent but Ms. Wheeler would not accept this. For several months, beginning in the fall of 1994 and continuing through January 1995, she was calling various departments in the hospital and telling numerous people how “bad” I was.  On December 22, 1994, a child abuse call was made against Ms. Wheeler. The caller identified themselves as me, saying that Ms. Wheeler had sex with my husband in front of her children. On December 31, 1994, Ms. Wheeler wrote to the New York State Department of Social Services, Child Abuse Maltreatment Register, in Albany, New York, to request a copy of the information of that call. (DOC 03).  In that letter, Joan refers to our court case of August 9, 1993, and informs them that I was put on six months “probation.”

    As my then fiancé, John Pace was named in the child abuse call, he was involved in talks with the Child Protective Services people, but HE NEVER TOLD ME ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING, BECAUSE HE KNEW THAT I DIDN’T PLACE THE CALL. HE WANTED TO KEEP ME OUT IT, WHILE HE WAS TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON.

    The first I heard of this was in February 1995, when I received a large manila envelope from Ms. Wheeler. Inside were copies of letters that she wrote to the mayor of Buffalo, the commissioner of our local (Erie County) social services department, the formal complaint she wrote to my employer, and the letter of December 31, 1994 that she wrote to Albany New York. When I read the lie about me being placed on probation in 1993, I filed harassment charges against Ms. Wheeler on March 7, 1995.  (DOC 04). On March 17, 1995, Ms. Wheeler sent a letter to my fiancé via his mother’s house begging him to ask me to drop the charges and urged him to leave me. (DOC 05).

    We appeared before Judge Margaret Anderson three times, because it was adjourned twice due to a lack of time in the courtroom for the first two dates. On the first date of April 3, 1995, Judge Anderson instructed the court that no children were to be brought to the court. At the next court appearance of April 19, 1995, (afternoon session), (DOC 06), Ms. Wheeler did bring her two children, but they stayed out in the hallway with her friend Carol, even though it was a school day. At one point in the court, while we were waiting for our case to be called, I left to use the ladies room. I saw Carol and the children, but said nothing. Our case was adjourned to a date in May 1995. On this date, Judge Anderson dismissed my case against Ms. Wheeler, saying that “sisters should get along.” I thanked the judge for considering my case and left.

    I continued receiving harassing letters from Ms. Wheeler through the next several years. I ignored her. In the meantime, I involved myself in organizing a block club for my street, and became a neighborhood activist to improve the quality of life in my neighborhood. As part of this, I took a short course through the Buffalo Police Academy to be a VIABLE volunteer (Volunteers in Aiding Buffalo Law Enforcement). To be considered for this, candidates had to undergo a background check, and since I had a clean record (the one six-month restraining order had been summarily dismissed, because I had abided by the judge’s instructions to me to stay away from Ms. Wheeler). I had no arrest record, no record of probation, nothing. I was awarded my certificate and appointment to the VIABLE program on August 29, 1998. (DOC 07).

    On February 15, 1999, I received another letter from Joan, and in it she tells me that her son saw me driving past her house (DOC 08). This was a lie, as I didn’t even have a car at that time. I called her house to tell her to leave me alone and a male answered, and I hung up, saying nothing. I then sent her a letter telling her to leave me alone. I told her that I did not have a car, did not drive past her house. And that since she had a man now, she should concentrate on her own life and to leave me and MY man alone.

    Then on February 23, 1999, I received an envelope addressed to me. I did not recognize the return address, but inside was a letter to me from Ms. Wheeler, informing me that my husband had gotten the next door neighbor pregnant and the child was born in 1994 (totally untrue, as the only children born to women living in that house were 2 boys). (DOC 09).

    I met with the woman who lived at the address on the envelope – she was Carol, Joan’s friend who was in the court with Joan’s children. Carol told me that the previous year, Joan had been asking for a “hit man” to take me out. I went to the District Attorney’s office and they said that because it was hearsay, they couldn’t do anything about it. I spent the next two months trying to get harassment charges filed against Joan. I got another manila envelope from Joan, which I refused to open. I returned it, marking it “return to sender” and Joan then manipulated the return address and it came back to my house. I decided to return it to her in person. A neighbor drove me to Joan’s house. His car was leaking transmission oil and he kept a can of oil on hand. He suggested I put the oil on the envelope to prevent Joan from putting it in the postal service again. Which we did and I threw the envelope up on her lawn.

     This resulted in Joan calling my house and swearing at me. I talked to several people and they suggested I petition Family Court, as the District Attorneys were tired of the both of us sisters and not taking this matter seriously. On June 4, 1999, I did just that. (DOC 10). They listened to my complaint, and in front of me, they went into the court computer system and found the two previous court cases involving Ms. Wheeler and myself (1993 and 1995). They typed this information onto the complaint that I signed, issued a summons for both me and Joan to appear in Family Court on June 24, 1999. (DOC 11), and granted me a temporary restraining order ON THE SPOT (DOC 12). On June 24, 1999, Judge Margaret Szczur made the temporary restraining order permanent. (DOC 13).

 Now we shall examine how Ms. Wheeler presents these facts in her book Forbidden Family.

 Pages 314 – 315

Joan is discussing a conversation she is having with Det. M. H. The subject of her threatening to report our sister Kathy to the British Immigration Department comes up, as well as a couple of my pets.

 Det. H. did not know that there was any threat to call The Home Office – Back in 1989, Joan got into a snit with Kathy and said to me, “I ought to call immigration on her.” (as a revenge tactic). I told her not to do that. And I hadn’t told Kathy what Joan threatened to do, because Joan promised me she wouldn’t make the call. I eventually did tell Kathy, but it was AFTER this alleged conversation takes place. Joan alleges that the detective asks Joan who Brandy Sippel is, because supposedly, my phone bill is listed under that name. Which is false. Joan tells the detective that Brandy is one of my cats. False, Brandy was my dog. She mentions another one of my cats on page 315, Francoise (this conversation with the detective is supposedly taking place in February 1993). My cat Francoise had been put to sleep in 1992.

 Page 316 time frame – February/March 1993

“the detective issued a warrant for Brenda’s arrest to appear in a Buffalo Court. A Restraining Order was then issued to keep her away from me for a year.”

 Lie. Joan signed the complaint about annoyance calls from me on July 9, 1993, not in February or March 1993. The calls weren’t made until June 1993. see documents 01, Also an arrest warrant was NOT issued. What was issued was a summons to me by the court, not the detective, to appear in court. When a person is summoned into court, and they do NOT appear, THEN an arrest warrant is issued, and this warrant is issued by the COURT, not any police officer. As I did appear in court, no arrest warrant was ever issued, and I was never placed under arrest. Also the Order of Protection was for a period of six months, NOT one year. (DOCS 02a, 02b, 02c).  And this was issued ACD – Adjournment on Consideration of Dismissal, which means that if I stayed away from Joan for the six months, all charges would be dismissed. I did abide by the court’s orders – I stayed away from her and the charges were dismissed. We appeared in court on August 9, 1993, and the Order of Protection was for the dates August 9, 1993 – February 9, 1994.

 Pages 323-324

Joan is describing an event that took place on Saturday, July 31, 1993 (but she reports in the book it was for August 1, 1993. She and ex-husband were moving and had enlisted the help of my husband. Joan reports that I followed him to her house in my car, began screaming at him in the street, went up to Joan and accused her of having an affair with my husband. Joan says that four witnesses heard me screaming in the street. On page 323 she says: “The Restraining Order against Brenda wasn’t good enough to keep her away. On August 1, 1993…”

 Lies, character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace.

As we had not appeared in court yet, nor the restraining order set in place yet, I was in no violation of a restraining order on July 31, or August 1, 1993. I did not follow my husband in my car, we did not have a car at the time. I took the bus there. I had told my husband in the past I did not want him going to Joan’s house because of the trouble she was causing me. He continued to go there to visit with the children. I also repeated this request on July 31, 1993, and Joan overheard me, as she was standing nearby. I was not screaming at him in the street. I did not at any time accuse them of having an affair. I would also like to know who the four witnesses to my screaming are. I did not see four people outside the house. I did see ONE woman standing in Joan’s doorway, while Joan was standing outside the doorway, while my husband and I were on the sidewalk in front of the house. After I talked to my husband, who agreed to return home, I went across the street where Joan’s husband Colby Bell was putting things in his car. As I went to talk to him, it was JOAN who started the screaming, at her husband Colby — that he was not to talk to me. Joan then yelled at MY husband, who was walking down the street away from Joan’s house, that he should not be listening to me and he better leave me. It was at THIS point that I did yell back at Joan to shut up, and just because she can rule over HER husband, she wasn’t going to rule over mine, nor me. It was at this point, two of her friends came out of the house and they were looking at disgust at Joan.  I then left and walked down the street to join my husband.

 Page 325

“Brenda didn’t abide by the Order. She continued telephoning me at Brian’s house. Four months of harassment followed. … I had just come home from filing yet another harassment charge against Brenda in a different town jurisdiction.”

 Lies, character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace, contradictory statement by Joan.

I did abide by the Order. I did not telephone Brian’s house, as I did not know where he lived, nor the phone number. I did not harass Joan for four months. No additional harassment charges were filed against me in 1993. The contradiction and proof of this lie: if I were in violation of the restraining order, and she did indeed file additional harassment charges against me, I would have been placed under arrest. This did NOT happen.

 Page 328

“The harassment charges against Brenda were dropped.”

 Lie. There were no additional harassment charges against me.

 Pages 328-329

Joan describes an event in early December 1993 of a child abuse call that was placed against her and the call also implicated my husband. “It was obvious that Brenda made this ‘anonymous’ report.”

 Lie, character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. The child abuse call was made on December 22, 1994. The caller identified themselves as Ruth Sippel and named my husband. It is NOT obvious that I made this call. What IS obvious is that if I were going to make a prank child abuse call, I would NOT use my real name, nor name my husband and risk him getting into trouble. See DOC 03, Joan’s letter to the New York State Department of Social Services, Child Abuse and Maltreatment Register, in Albany, New York, dated December 31, 1994, which lists the correct date of the child abuse call, which was December 22, 1994. In this letter, Joan states: “We know this report was made by Ruth.” How could she “know?” The matter had just begun it’s investigation. Also Joan states, regarding the court case in 1993 over the telephone calls and she was granted the six months restraining order: “Ruth was found guilty and placed on six months probation.” Here we see ABSOLUTE PROOF of Joan’s history of lying to people about me. And to official people in law enforcement and child protective services!

 Page 329 time frame – December 1993 to about March 1994

“What followed the allegations of child abuse and neglect were three months of court dates waiting for the first charges to be cleared.”

 Lies. There were NO court dates between Joan and I during these months. See DOC 10, of my petition to Family Court, June 4, 1999, that lists the 2 prior court case between Joan and I were in 1993 and 1995, NOT 1994.

 Page 329-330 time frame – early 1994

“Our only recourse was to seek and Order of Protection. Three months of court dates followed. I brought my children to court as they were part of the case and needed to see for themselves just what was going on.”

 Lie, there were no court dates between Joan and myself in 1994.

Admission to possible child abuse – Joan does not say that her children were required to be in court, she says she BROUGHT them to a court case between adults. In 1994, her children were aged 10 and 7. Why would anyone drag young children to court to witness this?

 Pages 329 –330 time frame in the book – early 1994

“Three months of court dates followed.”

 Lies, mixing up years of court dates. The court case Joan is referring here happened in 1995, the case that I brought against her, appearing before Judge Margaret Anderson three times, because it was adjourned twice due to a lack of time in the courtroom for the first two dates. On the first date of April 3, 1995, Judge Anderson instructed the court that no children were to be brought to the court. At the next court appearance of April 19, 1995, (afternoon session), (DOC 06), Ms. Wheeler did bring her two children, but they stayed out in the hallway with her friend Carol, even though it was a school day. At one point in the court, while we were waiting for our case to be called, I left to use the ladies room. I saw Carol and the children, but said nothing.

 Page 330

“The court broke for lunch. The room full of people went to the lobby. My ten-year old son and seven year old daughter went up to the drinking fountain. I was at their side. Aunt Brenda came up to them and yelled, “You see what your mother is doing to me? You see? She drags you in court to see your poor Aunt go through this.”

 Lie. This never happened. NEVER. We were NEVER in court in 1994. At no time did I EVER disrespect her children. Telling sign this is a lie (despite the actual court documents): Joan does not say she approached a court bailiff, the prosecutor, judge or any one of many sheriff’s deputies that are always standing on guard to prevent these kinds of altercations. 

 Page 330

“Mom and I were granted an Order of Protection against Brenda in the summer of 1994. It was good for one year.”

 Lie. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. Again, refer to DOC 10, my petition to Family Court, June 4, 1999, that lists the 2 prior court case between Joan and I were in 1993 and 1995, NOT 1994.

    Also, how could Joan and her mother and her children attend three months of court case in early 1994, Joan and her mother obtain an Order of Protection against me in the summer of 1994, over a child abuse call that HAD NOT BEEN PLACED YET? The call was not made until December 22, 1994, and we have Joan’s letter to Albany (DOC 03) to prove this.

   Also, nowhere in the book does Joan refer to the harassment charges I placed against her in 1995.

 Page 332

“Toward the end of May 1994 … my mother were … in the middle of ugly court dates against Brenda.”

 Lie, as stated above, there were no court dates for any court case between Joan and me in 1994.

 Pages 332- 333 – time frame 1994

Joan is describing the mix-up of her hospital bill. On page 333, she writes: “ A letter arrived a month later stating the error was attributed to a computer glitch and that my sister wasn’t involved. I wasn’t convinced. I called the head of the billing department and told him everything that was going on and that I wanted no further contact from Brenda.”

 Admission of Joan’s invading Ruth’s privacy. Proof of Joan having delusions. Proof of Joan not accepting what is true. She made a complaint of computer hacking against me. My employer investigated her complaint. Found that I did not do it. COULD not do it, as I work 11pm to 7am and the computers on the nursing stations ARE NOT EVEN CONNECTED TO THE BILLING DEPARTMENT COMPUTERS. My employer told Joan I was innocent, but Joan refuses to believe it. She is so full of hate against me, that no matter what nice thing any one says about me – she will fly into a rage over it and will not accept it.

 Page 333 – time frame in the book 1994

“A few days later, a padded manila envelope appeared on my front lawn. I picked it up. It was covered with a slimy greasy substance that I guessed to be cooking oil. … I was stupid enough to open it up. A note inside stated that ‘You, Joan, have been cut out of my life forever.’ Out tumbled photographs. … cut from ordinary 35 mm photos … they were photos of me, photos of my children. Since there was only one of my sisters living in Buffalo, I knew who had done this—-Brenda.”

 Lies, mixing up calendar years of events. As I had already indicated in my narration of The Feud between Joan and myself in the beginning of this complaint, this envelope was the one that I had received from JOAN in the year of 1999. This is the one that I refused to accept, marked “return to sender,” but Joan had manipulated the return address zip code so that the envelope would not returned to her house, but come to my house. This was the envelope that I decided to return to her in person. A neighbor drove me to Joan’s house. His car was leaking transmission oil and he kept a can of oil on hand. He suggested I put the oil on the envelope to prevent Joan from putting it in the postal service again. Which we did and I threw the envelope up on her lawn.  (Ruth’s note, November 30, 2011 – When I submitted this complaint, I made an error – I myself had mixed up a couple of events. My neighbor D. did have a car that leaked transmission fluid. At the time that John and I did not have a car. And he would take me grocery shopping – we would frequently have to stop to add transmission fluid, as I would have to a few years later, when I got a clunker car. I only realized my mistake a few months ago (July 2011) when I found a manilla folder that contained the actual letter that I wrote and then I realized my mistake. I’m human, just like everybody else. And when I make a mistake, I own up to it. Joan whines that her book is “to the best of her recollection.” But there is NO way that can be true – I can allow SOME forgetfulness – but to be saying we were in court when we weren’t – to say the court ruled this or that way, when it didn’t, to say that I was arrested, when I was not, to say that she herself was arrested, when she never was – is NOT forgetfulness – it is out and out LIES).

   Also, I never sent “cut up” photos of her to her EVER. I did cut her pictures out of photos in my personal photo album, but I had thrown them in the garbage. She only knows of the “cut up” photos, because she had looked at my photo albums in the year 2003 and saw that she had been cut out of my personal photos. We see Joan in all her vindictive glory here, she herself sent me the manila envelope, to make sure she would get it back unopened, I had to resort to putting oil on it so she could not use the post office again in her harassment of me. Then she reports the wrong year of the event, then she takes an event that happened in another year, and pads up her hate campaign against me to say that I was the responsible for the envelope in the first place. AND sent her photographs in an envelope that came from her originally, and I returned to her UNOPENED!

 Page 361

Ms. Wheeler describes herself calling my cousin on the phone and screaming at her.

 Admission of Ms. Wheeler harassing Gail.

 Page 363

Ms. Wheeler describes that Gail called the police. And that the Town of Eden, New York police called her on the phone. And then she was summoned into court for harassment.

 This is true. Because Gail knew of the harassment that I was receiving from Ms. Wheeler and as she was going through a divorce, as well as battling cancer, she was not going to accept being harassed.

 Page 363

Ms. Wheeler describes her talking to her friend Carol who suggested to Joan to write me a letter using her return address. The letter I received was a hate letter informing me that my husband got the next door neighbor pregnant.

Ms. Wheeler describes me as harassing Carol. (DOC 09)

 Lies, twisting of facts, not reporting the facts as they happened.

Yes, I got a letter from Joan from that address. However, Carol did NOT give Joan permission to use her address. And this is a contradiction of Joan’s behavior. She does not want letters from me, but goes ahead and writes letters to me. When I received the letter from Carol’s house, I went to her house. She wasn’t home and the name on the mailbox was not Joan. I left a note listing my name and address and asked why a harassing letter from Joan came from her house to me. I returned to her house a few days later and Carol said that her and Joan had been friends, had a falling out, and no, she did not give permission for Joan to use her address. Carol said that by doing this, Joan was showing her anger at both me and her. Carol began harassment charges on Joan the next day. While I was at Carol’s house, she informed that Joan had made a death threat against me and the next day, I also began harassment charges against Joan. This was also the same month that the Town of Eden Police (and NOT Gail) filed harassment charges against Joan.

    See DOCS 08 and 09 to see the hate mail that I was receiving from Joan. 09 was the one that came with Carol’s return address and we see again Joan’s history of lying about the outcome of the court cases. She once again states that I was placed on six months probation, which I was not.

 Page 364

Ms. Wheeler says that she was arrested three times in one month due to these three harassment charges.

 Lies. She was not arrested. She was “summoned” to appear in court. An arrest warrant would have been issued if she did not appear in court. Since she did appear for all three of these harassment charges, she was not arrested. Please see accompanying documentation that she was “summoned” into Family Court due to my harassment charge against her. (document number 08).

 Page 364 time frame 1999

Ms. Wheeler describes the judge (a male) as not letting me talk and that he kept cutting me off, and that me and my best friend sat directly in front of her and her mother. She also says that I was waving around a document from the Buffalo Police Academy. She does say that in the court case between me and her, I was given a one-year Order of Protection against her.

 Lies. Combining two different court cases. Contradictory behavior of the judge as reported by Joan.

 The court case that the judge dismissed my harassment charges against Joan was in 1995. It was Judge Margaret Anderson who dismissed the charges saying “sisters should get along.” Judge Anderson did let me speak, and yes, I was not pleased with her decision, but I accepted it. I did not have the document from the Buffalo Police Academy until 1998, where I attended a course there. (DOC 07). A pre-requisite would be a thorough background check on me conducted by the Buffalo Police Department showing that I have a clean record. Which I had, despite Joan saying on page 316 that I was placed under arrest. Part of my harassment charge against Ms. Wheeler was her slandering me by saying that I had an arrest record.

    The court case in 1999 was in Family Court, under Judge Margaret Szczur, who also let me speak, and granted me an Order of Protection against Ms. Wheeler for the duration of one year. I did show the certificate of my graduation from the Academy as proof that I did indeed have a clean record. I did not wave it around, I handed it to the judge. The course was in conjunction with my work with the Newburgh Coalition of Block Clubs, under the supervision of then Police Commissioner Rocco Diina, and my city councilman __ . Incidentally, it was Councilman ____ who suggested to me that I institute harassment charges against Joan through Family Court.

    If the judge would not let me speak and present my case, why then would she grant me the Order of Protection against Joan.

 Page 365

Ms. Wheeler describes myself and my best friend as loudly proclaiming in the court that we were superior to her because we took the police course.

 Lies. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. Mixing up 2 different court cases. My friend did not take the course with me. My friend was not in the court in this case either. The date she accompanied me was in April 1995. As I did not attend the Academy until 1998, this could not have happened. At no time during the three court cases that I was involved in with Ms. Wheeler did I show any disrespect to any judge or court official, nor did I act out in court.

 Page 365

Ms. Wheeler describes me as throwing computer discs at her in the courtroom. She says her manuscript was on the hard drive of the computer and “it was clear that Brenda downloaded the files.”

 Lies. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. When I was at her friend Carol’s house, Carol had told me that she had received as a gift, an old computer from Joan.. She had called Joan a week prior to come and take it back. Joan refused. Carol put it out on her back porch. She informed Joan that it was going in the garbage. When I came to her house, Carol gave it to me, as it was now her property and she could do what she wanted with it. She also gave me a box that contained computer discs. I brought them with me to the court and when Joan’s lawyer approached me to ask me a question, I gave the discs to him to give to Joan, as they were labeled as chapters of her book. I had not looked at the discs. Her manuscript was not on the hard drive of the computer, but on separate computer discs. And how can anyone determine if someone downloaded files by simply looking at a disc?

   As to me throwing things in a court room, if I had thrown computer discs at her in the court room, I would have been arrested for contempt of court. This did not happen, because I never disrespected the court, nor Joan.

 Part 2 of complaint of Ruth Sippel Pace

Re: book, Forbidden Family, by Joan Wheeler, published by Trafford

 Page 8

“We got drunk one night…Brenda picked up the phone…we were drinking and got silly. Brenda panicked…didn’t know what to do. “ “I remember that phone call, I didn’t know anyone by the name of Brenda. I heard giggles and the phone went dead.”

 I, Ruth called Joan at 1:30pm from Gert’s workplace, a dentist’s office, during a non-patient day, we knew Joan’s name, but not her address. I began calling Wheelers in the phone book. When Joan answered, I did not give my name at all. I did ask for Joan, did ask where she was at bowling the previous night. Joan asked what number did I want, I repeated her number but changed the last digit, Joan told me I had the wrong number, I apologized, said goodbye and ended the call. I was NOT drunk, nor panicky.

 Page 100 – time frame – 1974

“Two days before I left for college, Brenda took me to meet Aunt Doris…she lived 75 miles from Buffalo.”

 I, Ruth, did not know how to drive in 1974, did not learn to drive until 1976.

 Page 174 time frame 1978

“I had Momma’s wedding dress for only four weeks. … my anger at my sisters and father got the better of me. I drove to Brenda’s house. I threw it (the dress) at her.”

 I loaned Ms. Wheeler the dress for the purpose of her having it cleaned and some minor sewing repairs done in the year 1978. She did not return it to me until late 1983, after many pleadings from me to return it. I finally had to ask my father to intervene. Ms. Wheeler brought the dress to my father’s house where I picked it up. The cleaning and repairs were never done.

 Page 186 time frame 1980,

Ms. Wheeler wanted to go public with her adoption story.

“Brenda called and said she was uncomfortable.”

 Lie. In 1980 or 1981, I accompanied Ms. Wheeler to WGRZ television studios to be interviewed by reporter Rich Kellman on our separation and reunion.

 Page 257

“I didn’t want to live in a trailer park to become trailer trash.”

 Bigotry, hate language, value judgment on people who live in trailer parks. 

 Page 263.

 Ms. Wheeler is quoting my father about my father’s second wife, being taken in an ambulance to the psych center. Supposedly he told Ms. Wheeler the arrangements were made for the ambulance to come around noon on a school day, and we kids were coming home for lunch.

“The ambulance attendants took her away in front of the kids.”

 The arrangements that were made were that we kids were picked up at school by social workers and taken to the foster home, so that WE WOULD NOT SEE OUR STEPMOTHER TAKEN AWAY SCREAMING IN AN AMBULANCE. We kids NEVER witnessed this. My father would NOT have made arrangements for this to occur as we were coming home from lunch, as he protected us.

 Page 270 time frame 1988

Ms. Wheeler describes in 3 paragraphs a funeral of my maternal aunt. She says that her adoptive mother attended the funeral. Ms. Wheeler describes my maternal uncle snubbing my father at the funeral and a conversation in the car with my father reminiscing about my mother, “I lost my wife and that man still blames me. How could I stop her from dying?” Then Ms. Wheeler quotes her adoptive mother as giving sage advice to my father about life and dying.

 I was at the funeral. Ms. Wheeler’s adoptive mother did NOT attend the funeral. My uncle may have snubbed my father, they did not get along. I was in the car. My father did NOT say this about my mother. My father very rarely talks about my mother. Ms. Wheeler’s adoptive mother did not give advice to my father in the car, as she was not there.

 Pages 276, 277, 278

Ms. Wheeler describes a fictitious account of her friend Dr. Rene Hoksbergen coming to my house and talking to me about adoption. In these pages, Ms. Wheeler describes me and my husband as exchanging dirty looks, portrays  me as a wild-woman, jumping up and down, waving my arms in the air, screaming at Dr. Hoksbergen and Ms. Wheeler. She also describes Dr. Hoksbergen lecturing me as though I were a child.

 Dr. Hoksbergen NEVER came to my house, and this incident NEVER took place.

 Page 277

“Oh Brenda,” I said, casting a disgusted look at her. “You’re just pissed off because you were trying to get pregnant and couldn’t. Just because you were using a fertility clinic to get pregnant with your partner, something I didn’t know when I wrote my article against sperm donors, doesn’t mean what I wrote is directed at you.”

 Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. Invasion of privacy of Ruth Sippel Pace. (what does my not getting pregnant have to do with Joan’s life?) Hate language, insensitivity to infertile women, as well as a blatant lie. This speech never happened. But, I was not pissed off because I couldn’t get pregnant. Hurt, yes. Also I never went to a fertility clinic. I never objected to any article that Ms. Wheeler wrote about sperm donors.

 Pages 296, 297, 298  time frame 1992

Ms. Wheeler describes a scene at a Fourth of July outing in a local park with my father, my brother, my sister Gert McQueen and myself, where Gert and I are supposedly mocking her.

“Heh, she’s useless.” My sisters said sarcastically.

“Yes,” my father continued. “and I want you to know that we want you, Joan, to stop living in the past. You don’t need to be writing about adoption in the newspaper. You should find something worthwhile to do with your life. Taking care of children and writing aren’t getting the bills paid. Look at the others. They’ve done things with their lives. Where are you?”

Ms. Wheeler continues with a description of insults from Gert and “more giggling.”

 This is all totally untrue. Ms. Wheeler continues to the middle of page 298 with the description of this totally fictitious scenario. Ms. Wheeler describes a get-together at my father’s house that she was not invited to. There was no get-together, as my stepmother was at her daughter’s house celebrating her grand-daughters third birthday. Ms. Wheeler knew about this party as she was complaining about it to me on the phone the day before.

 Pages 299, 300

Ms. Wheeler describes a conversation that she had with her mother about the fictitious scene on pages 296-298.

 Character assassination of Leonard Sippel, (my father) Gert McQueen and Ruth Sippel Pace

I did not witness such a conversation, but it could not have happened has the “ridiculing” of Joan never occurred. Ms. Wheeler describes her mother as saying that we sisters started the family gathering in the park. In reality, my dance troupe was booked as performers for the Friendship Festival months in advance by our leader, M. W. with the Buffalo and Erie County Arts Council and The Buffalo Parks Department. As a coincidence, my brother came to town to visit. It was our father who suggested we meet at the park for a small reunion. My neice’s third birthday party was also scheduled with no thought of insulting Joan, her mother, or her husband.

 Page 308

“…my sisters wrote harassing letters in the months after our family reunion of 1992.”

Ms. Wheeler, in italics, presents a narrative that is attributed to have been written by Gert McQueen, Kathy Inglis and Ruth Sippel Pace.

 Lies; character assassination of Gert McQueen, Kathy Inglis and Ruth Sippel Pace.

We never wrote harassing letters to Ms. Wheeler.

The letter that Ms. Wheeler attributes to us was never written by any of us three sisters. We believe that Ms. Wheeler wrote this narrative to make it seem that we three sisters “ganged up” on her.

 Page 309

“Why did they attack my work in the Adoption Reform Movement?”

 Lie. We never attacked her work in any adoption reform movement.

 Page 310

Ms. Wheeler continues, in italics, her false narrative of a letter supposedly written by us three sisters. — “My sisters included copies of the long, handwritten letters they wrote to the nine adoption reform movement organizations in the United States at the time. My sisters slandered me in an attempt to ruin my credibility as an advocate for adoption reform.”

   Out of desperation, I called one adoption leader, Joe Soll, Director of the Council of Equal Rights in Adoption in New York City. Yes, he received my sister’s hateful letters.”

 Lies, character assassination of Gert McQueen, Kathy Inglis, Ruth Sippel Pace and Joe Soll.

In an email exchange in May 2010 between Gert McQueen and Joe Soll, Mr. Soll denies ever receiving: 1. a letter from any or all of us sisters; 2. a telephone call from Ms. Wheeler regarding this letter. In his email, Mr. Soll says that what is written about him in the book is “patently false.”

 Page 311

“Harassment from my three older sisters continued… Hate mail arrived at my house…” Ms. Wheeler quotes her ex-husband as saying to her “You’re crazy just like your sisters.”

 Lies, character assassination of Gert McQueen, Kathy Inglis and Ruth Sippel Pace

We sisters did not send harassing hate mail to her.

 Page 312

“My sisters telephone my house morning, noon and night and in the middle of the night when most people are asleep. My young children often answered the phone and I heard my sisters – their aunts – yelling obscenities at them.”

 Lies. We did not call her house. We did not yell obscenities at her children.

 Page 312, 313

Ms. Wheeler lists obscene language and attributes this language to us.

“You f.. B….”  “You w….”  “You a….. . You f…. c….” “P… on you, you m…-f…”

 Lies. Obscene and pornographic language.

 Page 359

Ms. Wheeler in italics relates a fairly decent letter that she attributes to have written to our brother. I have never seen the original, so I have no way of knowing if what she writes here is true. But in this letter, she tells our brother “…my mother and my children and I are still hounded by harassing mail and phone calls from Brenda and company.”

Returning to the book, Ms. Wheeler then writes “I sent a similar letter to my sisters. I added that whatever they had against me needed to be talked out, resolved, so we could be a family again.”

 Lies, character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. Slander of Ruth Sippel Pace to her brother.

The letter that I received from Ms. Wheeler was not nice. It was to accuse me of harassing her that her son saw me drive past their house. Which was impossible, because I did not have a car at that time. A few days later I got another letter from Joan. It was to inform me, falsely, that my husband had gotten the next-door neighbor pregnant. – The house was vacant. See DOCS 08 and 09. Read those letters and see if you can find the sentence “whatever they had against me needed to be talked out, resolved, so we could be a family again.”

 Page 359, 360

“My sisters retaliated with yet more hate mail and vicious phone calls. Brenda and her best friend, a tough streetwise woman from the West Side, got in on the act and telephoned my mother, yelling obscenities…Mom held the phone to her ear and mind. I’d hear Brenda’s voice and her best friend’s voice, shouting at us. … “A year of hate mail followed. The envelopes had disguised handwriting and no return address so the police couldn’t trace the mail.”

 Lies. Character assassination of Ruth’s friend.

No phone calls were made by me or my friend to Joan or her mother. No hate mail was sent to Joan.

 Page 360

Ms. Wheeler describes a scene in a grocery store where my friend accosted her and swore at her.

 Lies, obscene language. My girlfriend lived on the East Side of Buffalo, Ms. Wheeler lives in a northern suburb of Buffalo, where she does her grocery shopping. My friend did not have a car, and wouldn’t drive 5 or 6 miles to a grocery store, when there was one less than a mile from her house. Telling sign this is a lie: Ms. Wheeler does not say that she went to a security guard at the store, or even called the police.

 Page 360

Ms. Wheeler involves my cousin Gail, who at the time was battling cancer and going through a divorce. Ms. Wheeler describes taking her car to be repaired and the repair person was one of my cousins, who I had not seen for more than 20 years. Ms. Wheeler says “exactly 10 days later, an anonymous envelope … arrived in the mail….I knew it was Brenda. (the envelope supposedly contained an defaced article about adoption reform).

 Lies. I did not send her any envelope with any article on adoption reform.

 Page 360, 361

Joan describes her sending me a letter begging me to stop bothering her and then I called her on the phone..

 Lies. I did not receive any letter from Joan at this time, nor did I call her.

 Page 365, 366 time frame 1999

Ms. Wheeler describes a falling out she had with my step aunt and uncle and attributes that falling out to me gossiping about her.

 Lies, I had not seen, nor spoken to my step aunt and uncle since about the early 1980’s.

 Page 366

Ms. Wheeler describes herself and her mother being “barraged by harassing phone calls. I recognized the voices as being Brenda and her best friend…”

 Lies, my friend and I did not call her house.

 Page 370

Ms. Wheeler shows a photocopy of a letter she received in the mail that contains pornographic language. She accuses me of sending this to her. It is not my handwriting.  She also blames my friend. Further she states “their language reflected the lifestyles they had chosen.”

 Lies, slander. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace and her freind Hate language directed towards Ruth Sippel Pace and her friend. My lifestyle includes a 38 year career as a Patient Care Associate/Nurse Aide at Buffalo General Hospital; organizer and leader of a block club on my street; member of the Newburgh Coalition of Block Clubs, which entailed meetings with local elected officials and police officers; being a VIABLE volunteer with the Buffalo Police Department; I am a former professional Middle Eastern Dancer, former board member of the Beledi Club, an organization for Middle Eastern dancers, and Buffalo and Erie Arts Council. In my job I served on various committees designed to improve delivering quality patient care; I have worked in the following departments in my long career at the hospital: Medical Intensive Care Unit, Respiratory Care Unit, Hospice Unit, Kidney Transplant Unit, as well as various medical/surgical units. Due to my work as a neighborhood activist, I organized a rodent containment petition from the 4 streets surrounding my home, (of which I own, one mortgage having been completely paid off, a second mortgage obtained to replace roof), delivering the petition to the mayor of Buffalo, NY. In 1997 when the Newburgh Coalition of Block Clubs obtained an empty storefront to use as their offices, my husband and I volunteered many hours to provide manual labor, such as installing drywall, painting walls and furniture. As members of the Coalition, I contributed to the monthly newsletter, and helped with the production and distribution of the newsletters, and attended monthly meetings of the Coalition, and did volunteer work at the Coalition Carnival.

 I have attended meetings of the Buffalo Common Council, The Niagara Frontier Transit Authority (to help improve public transportation in Buffalo and the surrounding area), organized neighborhood clean-up drives, block parties on National Night Out. Because of much of my civic volunteering, I have been urged by many people to enter local politics. I include in my personal friends, the director of a well known local art center, several local elected officials, two well-known noted cardiologists, one internal medicine physician, one urologist and two other doctors who I have known since their days as interns in the hospital. I maintain friendships with many registered nurses and other nurses aides. I also trained as a union steward in my local labor union representing nurses aides: SEIU 1199, but eventually turned down the appointment of union steward. This does not deter many nurses aides, as well as registered nurses to approach me on advice on our union contract.

  For the past 10 years, I also have supervised the production of a bi-monthly newsletter of a local Star Trek fan club, of which two years ago, I became the head of. For this group, I have helped organize local Star Trek conventions and manned tables at conventions, greeting fans and Star Trek celebrities alike. I have formed several personal friendships with some Star Trek celebrities. I will not “name-drop” here, and I only mention my friendships with these celebrities, local politicians and health care professionals to point out that I am far from the foul-mouthed ghetto trash that Ms. Wheeler portrays me as in her book.

 My friend has trained as para-legal and also has had many accomplishments in her life.  We are highly insulted to have been labeled as foul-mouthed, ghetto trash.

 Page 375

Ms. Wheeler describes a scene that happened during my cousin Gail’s wake. She alleges that “Dad asked me to make peace Brenda. I approached Brenda with an outstretched hand to shake her hand. ‘I’m sorry for your loss,’ I said. Brenda ran away from me, waving her arms in the air. Through her tears she managed to flash an intense angry glare at me.”

 Lie. Ms. Wheeler did approach me at the wake, calling my name. I ignored her, trying to keep the peace. She called me again. I turned and said “What?” Ms. Wheeler said, “I’m sorry, I know how much Gail meant to you.” I put my hand up to stop her. She was 10 feet away from me. I told her to just leave me alone. I burst into tears and did run out of the funeral home, and my husband and my father both followed me outside. My husband held me and my father said “Joan should not have said anything to you. I will talk to her.” I told my father, “Tell her to leave me alone. Just tell her to leave me alone.”

 Page 381

Ms. Wheeler describes looking at my personal photo albums that I brought to Arizona to attend my brother’s funeral. She recognizes where I had cut her pictures out of my personal photo album.

 This is the basis of her accusation that I had sent her those pictures. I had not – I had thrown the pictures in the garbage.

 Page 382

Ms. Wheeler describes another guest at my brother’s house as objecting to my having my sibling’s birth certificates in my personal photo album.  Ms. Wheeler has woman saying she is a government worker and is telling me that I have these birth certificates illegally.

 Lies. There was no guest at my brother’s house who was a government worker. I obtained my siblings birth certificate legally at Buffalo City Hall by showing proper identification and paying a fee of $35.00 for each birth certificate. As I noted in my introduction, throughout the book, Ms. Wheeler puts words into other people’s mouth, those words usually are her own thoughts and she does this to lend credence to her fantasy that people agree with her on the topic she is writing about. This is one example. Ms. Wheeler cannot obtain HER original birth certificate because she doesn’t have proper identification as a SIPPEL. Therefore she is angry because I do have the proper credentials to obtain SIPPEL birth certificates. To lend credence to her argument that I have the documents illegally, she picks another guest at the house and like a ventriloquist, she writes what she thinks the guest will look good saying in the book.

    The information I was gathering is for the purpose of having a complete family tree. The birth certificates are kept together with my mother’s death certificate. This information is that which used to be included in pages of a family’s bible. This sort of information gathering on families has been done for centuries. Incidentally, NO ONE in the family has objected to my having my siblings birth certificates. My father looked at my photo album while in Arizona, as well as my sister-in-law and my brother’s son. They all saw the birth certificate of my brother, and no one had any objection.

 Page 382

Ms. Wheeler continues her rant about my having my siblings birth certificates and notes that I did not have my younger half-brother’s birth certificate in my photo album. She states “I made a mental note of the deeper meaning in Brenda’s chopped up photo album. This was her attempt to make sense out of her…severed family life.”

 Lie, personal misguided interpretation of someone else’s thoughts. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace.

How does Ms. Wheeler know what is in my thoughts? I object to having someone publishing their interpretations of my thought processes published in a book. The reason my younger brother’s birth certificate was not in my photo album was because I had not obtained it at that time, due to time and financial restraints. I did obtain it a few years later and it is in my photo album right now. As to the “chopping up” of my photo album, I had just begun in the year 2002 to obtain the documents and actually organizing my photos. They were in boxes, and now were in albums. And my photo albums are even more chopped up now – I have scanned into my computer a full album’s worth of photos, documents and greeting cards into my computer. And those that I have not given away, or put away to be given to other family members, have been shredded and destroyed. I have done all the work up to the year 1970. If Ms. Wheeler saw my photo albums today with no physical evidence of anything prior to 1970, she would put forth the misguided diagnosis that I have tried to destroy my life prior to 1970. Ms. Wheeler did not ask me WHY my photo album was “chopped up” to include the true reason as to why some things were missing from the album, in her book and she certainly did not obtain my permission to put her interpretations of my life and thoughts into her book. I fail to see what MY goal of scanning into my computer a complete family tree and history of our family has to do with HER adoption and adoption reform work.

 Page 383

Ms. Wheeler describes me as looking at a picture of her son and giving a disgusted grunt and turning away from his picture.

 Lie. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace.

 I looked at the picture, nodded, and said, “Mmm.” I was trying to keep the peace by remaining silent. And this is also indicative of Ms. Wheeler’s contradictory attitude towards my thoughts and words and behaviors. If I do or say something regarding her or her children, husband or adoptive mother, or anyone else for that matter, she jumps on me. If I don’t say anything, thinking that by remaining silent I will keep the peace, Ms. Wheeler interprets my silence as haughtiness or a refusal to acknowledge her presence. If I acknowledge her presence, she psycho-analyzes my words and deeds and always finds me in the wrong. In Ms. Wheeler’s eyes, I am damned if I do anything and damned if I don’t do anything. Read the book you published – you will see almost every other page is an attack on Brenda. “Brenda did this, Brenda did that. Brenda DIDN’T do this, Brenda DIDN’T do that.” I can’t win no matter what I do or don’t do. Her hatred of me jumps right off the pages of this book.

 Page 383

Ms. Wheeler describes my husband (Larry in the book) as telling her that I found her “children’s photos in his wallet and yelled at him that she didn’t want him to have anything to do with me and that included cutting off ties with my children.’

 Lie. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace.

 Ms. Wheeler has no way of knowing of any personal conversation I had my husband.  But I did tell him that I did not want him going to Joan’s house because of the trouble she was causing me. He continued to go there to visit with the children. I also repeated my request on July 31, 1993, when he went to her house to help the family move. She over heard me say this to him, and twists the truth around to make me look as though I were a spying shrew, hen-pecking my husband. 

    I don’t look in my husband’s wallet. I did know of the pictures of Ms. Wheeler’s children in his wallet, because my husband showed them to me. And they are still there. I have scanned into my computer those photos only about six months ago, and my husband returned the pictures to his wallet in front of me. As to the subject of “chopping up” photos, Ms. Wheeler needs to answer for her own crime, to which she admits to in the book on page 358:

“once a month or so, I scrambled through the house, bagging up my children’s personal belongings, toys, books, gifts, even Russian nesting dolls I’d given my daughter – and threw them away….During these rages I screamed at my children as if I hated them.”

And she told a cousin of ours two years ago that she her own children’s photos, toys, school work, art work, IN FRONT OF HER OWN CHILDREN.  (of course she didn’t put that in the book).  If her narration in the book of me yelling at my husband for him having photos of her husband or cutting her out of my personal photo album is supposed to be a crime, she is way more guilty than I ever could be. Again, we see where Brenda (supposedly) does (almost) the same thing that Ms. Wheeler does, and should burn in hell for it, whereas Ms. Wheeler is an angel.

 Page 385

Ms. Wheeler describes me as hugging her at the side of our brother’s casket. “We hugged as we sobbed. But her arm dropped as suddenly as she reached out. That would be the last hint of love between us.”

 Half Lies. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace

 I did reach out to her. She was standing to my right. I did reach out with my right arm and put it over her shoulder and drew her to me. I do not recall how long I held her. I was grieving my brother and naturally reached out to my sister. Again we see Ms. Wheeler’s psycho-analyzing my every move. If I hung on to her too long, I suppose she would say that I was accepting her back into my life, which I don’t want. I only wanted to comfort her over the death of our brother. In simply reaching out to her in my grief, I showed that I didn’t hate her. And this was only 3 weeks after my meltdown at my cousin Gail’s funeral.

 Page 388

Ms. Wheeler describes an email exchange between regarding actions on a family photo web site I was building.

“Then I made the mistake of bringing up the past in a private email to Brenda. She flew into a rage, wrote me back saying the website was no place to discuss family dirty laundry, even though I didn’t post my email on the website. … I responded by terminating the email account I opened just for communicating with Brenda.”

 Lies. Twisting of the facts.

In 2003, I did build a website. At our brother’s house in Arizona, Ms. Wheeler and I exchanged emails. I needed her email to send an invitation to her to the website. In order to be a member of the website, members DID have to provide the website with their email. Everything was going fine from October 2003 to December 2003. Ms. Wheeler posted a photograph that had my two oldest sisters as children with Santa Claus. Ms. Wheeler had the wrong year on it. I corrected the year. Also moved the photo to the proper forum. As I knew the correct year and as the owner of the site, I had the right to do this. In January 2004, it was Ms. Wheeler who flew into a rage because I had “tampered” with her photo, and accused me of plotting against her. At this time, I did not own a computer of my own. I was doing all online work on public computers. When Ms. Wheeler sent the angry email to me, I was sick for a week and not able to get to a computer. The email got buried. I saw it in April 2004, and could not believe the nonsense. For three months, we were getting along, building a family photo website, (which should dispel any erroneous conclusions that I was trying to make sense out of my severed life, as she puts forth on page 382. (see what I mean about her contradictory interpretations of me? And how she contradicts herself in her own book?). I did answer her email as soon as I saw it. I asked her why was she bringing up the past – why can’t we just go forward? I never said anything about posting family dirty laundry on the website or in my email – (I still have the actual email exchange that proves what she said to me, and my response). 

 Page 389

Ms. Wheeler quotes my father as saying “Education, that’s what I needed….if I had more education, I would have kept you. … if I had education, none of this would have happened.  If someone would have told me how to keep you.“

 Lies. Character assassination of Leonard Sippel

Although I was not present to hear this conversation, I know my father would not, COULD not have said this. My father WAS educated. He worked as a civil engineer/draftsman in Buffalo’s City Hall in the Streets Department. (Ms. Wheeler portrays him as an uneducated laborer, working as a machinist in the book). Ms. Wheeler is insinuating here that if my father was better educated he would not have given her up for adoption. It wouldn’t have mattered. The bare fact is that whatever level of education my father had, whatever occupation he had, he still would have had to go to work everyday to earn money to support his family. He could not do this with an infant. There were no daycare centers in 1956, nor welfare system as we have today. Nor was any family member able to help out. My father’s hands were tied. It is Ms. Wheeler’s continual refusal to face these facts that has her once again, putting words into people’s mouths to support her delusions and fantasies.

 Page 393

Ms. Wheeler discusses her mother sharing photographs of her with her aunts and says: “…my aunts gave these pictures to my natural mother’s sister.”

 Lie. My aunt Catherine had only ONE photograph of Joan, taken of her First Holy Communion.

 Page 423

“…my sisters and brother suffered serious, extended childhood trauma. These facts resulted in them imposing trauma on me…”

 Lies; speculation on MY childhood experiences; character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace, Gert McQueen, Kathy Inglis and Leonard Sippel Jr.

These are NOT facts, these are Ms. Wheeler’s statements due to her personal faulty interpretation of our childhood, of which she did not share. Ms. Wheeler is not trained as a doctor, psychiatrist, psychologist or any where in the medical field. She has a degree in social work, but as she has never worked as such, she has no experience in the field. Also, I was never interviewed by a qualified child psychologist (much less Ms. Wheeler) in a medical or similar setting about my childhood. What are Ms. Wheeler’s qualifications to pronounce judgment on MY mental health, my childhood, my life experiences? Or my siblings? And she has no right to publish her OPINIONS on this matter concerning me or my family. I would suggest anyone reading this paragraph read again my life accomplishments, (listed above) and consider my lack of any substance abuse, criminal record or any other anti-social behavior. Read The Book and read Ms. Wheeler’s own admissions of her anti-social behavior, alcoholism, thoughts and threats of suicide.

 Page 490

Ms. Wheeler is describing my father (her natural father)

“Poor, advanced to working class 1950’s, advanced to middle-middle class in 1970’s.”

 Lies, character assassination of Leonard Sippel

Ms. Wheeler does NOT portray the true facts about her own natural father, my father.

My father started work for the City of Buffalo in Street Paving Department as a civil-engineer/draftsman on July 20, 1953 and maintained that position until his retirement on September 17, 1988. From 1965 to 1970, he also maintained a part time second job as salesman at Sears. In 1965, he bought a house, the first in his family to own property. He also had 4 teenagers at home, which in the 1960’s, as well as today, is an expensive obligation. Kids and houses are NOT cheap. My father married his third wife in October 1970, and after having a child with him (along with her two daughters from a previous marriage), went back to work as a nurse’s aide in 1972. I was also employed as a nurse’s aide and lived at home and helped take care of the children. The reason my father “advanced to middle-middle class in the 1970’s was because for the first time in his life, he was a member of a two-income family (actually three-income, when I was there 1972 – 1974).  My father sold his house in 1975 and took a spacious apartment. The rent was cheaper than the mortgage and all the expenses related to owning a house. This also helped his financial status.

 Page 491

Ms. Wheeler is discussing my father’s second wife.

“How this step-mother was removed from the home, in front of her son and step-children was a form of cruelty to her and emotional trauma to the children. Witnessing their mother and step-mother being carried away in a straight-jacket had lasting effects on them.”

 Lies. We children NEVER witnessed this. I myself did not learn of her being taken away in a straight jacket until about 15 years when my sister Gert told me about it. What happened was – my stepmother was having severe mental problems. My father told me once that she was examined by a doctor and it was decided that she should be placed in the psychiatric hospital in Buffalo. He told me that it was all arranged and the day she was placed there, social workers came to our school and picked up us children and took us to the foster home (Gert and Kathy) and the orphanage (me and my brothers).  My father was with me and my brothers – I remember him holding my hand as we entered the orphanage run by the Catholic nuns and the huge statue of St. Joseph welcoming us. Gert was about 12 at the time. She told me about 15 years ago, that when she was about 17 or 18, she went back to our old neighborhood to visit some old friends and the mother of one of our childhood friends (who lived across the street from us) told her of the day that our step-mother was placed in the ambulance, in a straight jacket, and she was screaming. All the neighbors witnessed it and they all said it was sad, but were glad that we children were not around to see it. Even the times that my stepmother came home from the psych center and me and my brothers came home from the orphanage, our landlord, landlady, and neighbors NEVER told us what happened. As I said, I myself never knew about it until about 15 years ago (c 1995), much less witnessed it in 1959. Ms. Wheeler had been adopted out of our family in 1956, her family moved to Tonawanda, New York and was not there.

 Page 529, 530, 531, 532

Ms. Wheeler again is accusing me and my sisters of harassing her.

(529) “…their joint letter writing campaign after our family reunion in 1992. The following year they wrote lengthy letters to the major adoption reform organizations to tell them what an asshole I was.” (530) “…looking back, now I can see they are tortured souls.” (531) “Each one of my sisters had something to hide, something they did not want me to write about, which I have not written about. … They chose to harass and mock me, so I wrote about it.”  “Harassing my husband…Calling our home and yelling obscenities at the our young children. … Calling the home of my boyfriend…. Calling the Child Abuse Hotline and accusing my then 80 year old mother, and me, of sexual abuse.”

 All lies. Slander, threats.

Many of these lies have already been addressed. But now is added this new statement that each one of her sisters have something to hide. This implies a threat. I have no idea to what Ms. Wheeler is alluding to here. I have nothing to hide. As I stated above: I do not engage in criminal or anti-social behavior, do not abuse substances (I barely drink), I have had a long career as a health-care worker (38 years with the same employer), and have been involved in the performing arts and as a neighborhood activist. When I took a course at the Buffalo Police Academy, a background check was done on me, and nothing showed up. So just what is my secret that Joan Wheeler thinks she has over me?

 Page 531

“I wrote about my sisters, and anyone else, at the point where our lives intersected.”

 Lie. Falsely writing about me and my siblings witnessing my siblings witnessing our step-mother being placed in an ambulance is not a point where our lives intersected. As I stated above, Ms. Wheeler was adopted out of our family in 1956, and the event took place in 1959. Yes, the Wheelers did coincidentally lived one block over in 1956, then they moved three blocks away shortly after adopting her, and in 1957, they moved several miles away from us. Ms. Wheeler’s life did not intersect with ours until 1972, when I was placing phone calls to Wheelers in the phone book and her life did not fully intersect with ours until 1974 when we were physically reunited with her.

Even so, this “intersection” of our lives does not give her the right to violate our privacy and tell lies about us in this book.

 Page 532

Ms. Wheeler discusses our brother.

“Our sisters poisoned him against me for 11 years.”

 Lies, speculation.

We did not “gossip” to our brother about Joan.  And how does she even know a time duration for this? It was Joan herself who was calling him, writing letters to him and trashing us to him and his wife that turned him against Joan. He quite naturally became disgusted with having his sisters trashed. Proof – Ms. Wheeler admits to trashing us to him on page 359, as I have already addressed this issue. I repeat it:

page 359

Ms. Wheeler in italics relates a fairly decent letter that she attributes to have written to our brother. I have never seen the original, so I have no way of knowing if what she writes here is true. But in this letter, she tells our brother “…my mother and my children and I are still hounded by harassing mail and phone calls from Brenda and company.”

A Letter I wrote to the district attorney in 1995 sheds light on Joan Wheeler’s harassments of me and refutes the lies on pages 325-333 in her book Forbidden Family November 27, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

The purpose of this blog is to refute the book “Forbidden Family” by Joan Wheeler. Several times, on several posts, since this blog’s inception in November 2009, I have addressed several key points of lies contained in the book, and told the truth behind those lies. The true stories were also chronicles of the harassments that I endured from Joan Wheeler over the course of many years.

Two months ago, I pulled out a manilla folder that contained some old paperwork concerning Joan Wheeler. I found several old letters. I have scanned into my computer these letters, and while watching episodes of my favorite soap opera, Young and the Restless, I have transcribed these letters.

This post contains the transcript of a two page letter that I wrote to the District Attorney, and the City Court of Buffalo, to be used in conjunction with the harassment charge that I brought about against Joan Wheeler in March 1995. Copies of this letter was sent to the police detective who handled Joan’s annoyance phone call case against me in 1993, This post also contains references to other posts and scans of court documents and links to those posts and documents. All links will open in a new window, so you will not lose this post while looking at the physcial evidence – actual court documents that prove without a shadow of a doubt that Joan Wheeler LIED in her book. She cannot gloss over these things by saying the book was her point of view or to the best of her recollection. She puts forth things like a fictious three month court battle in 1994 (never happened), I (and her) were arrested. Nope – nobody was arrested. She says she had more than one order of protection agains me – nope – there was only ONE and it was for six-months, then dismissed. She says I was placed on probation – nope – and she knows it. Her “point of view?” About court proceedings? Well, if her point of view of court rulings were different from what the court’s actual decisions were – then she is either DELUSIONAL  or a filthy LIAR! Either way, it negates her claim that her book  is “truthful.” – by the way, my next post will be my actual complaint to Trafford Publications, which contained the scans of the actual court documents which proved I was – never arrested, never sentanced to probation, there were NEVER any court proceedings in 1994, and the one and only Order of Protection Joan received against me (or anybody for that matter) was for six months. Because of these falsehoods – which proved Joan SLANDERED me, the book Forbidden Family was pulled from publication.

By the way – in her book, she says on page 316 that a restraining order was issued against me for one year. She doesn’t give the dates but I will – it was for August 9, 1993 to February 9, 1994. Joan lies about this. See the graphic here. She also says that on August 1, 1993, I violated that restraining order. No, the restraining order was not in effect until August 9. On page 325 she claims that I spent 4 months calling her on the phone. Wrong – never did that. On page 328-29 she says that I called in a false child abuse call on her in early December 1993.- She then says on page 329 that three months of court battles. So that would mean January, February and March 1994. But if the Order of Protection was in effect until February 1994, or as Joan says, until August 1994, I would have been in violation of the Order – right? She says on page 330 “Mom and I were granted an Order of Protection agains Brenda (me) in the summer of 1994. It was good for one year.”
WRONG – Because if an Order of Protection was already in effect from 1993 – they would have put cuffs on me, arrested me and thrown me in jail! THIS NEVER HAPPENED! In 1998, I attended a class at the Buffalo Police Academy to be a VIABLE volunteer for my work in my block club. A thorough background check was done on me – a pre-requisite for this class was to have a clean record – the background check showed NO ARREST RECORD, NO PROBATION RECORD – NO VIOLATION OF ANY ORDER OF PROTECTION.

To recap – in 1989 – 90 Joan stole hundreds of dollars from me. Despite numerous promises to repay me and then actually telling me that she would not – I never got my money back. Because I dared tell her off in January 1991, she began sending me harassing letters. In early 1993 I began receiving envelopes addressed to me, but inside were greeting cards from her kids to my fiance (now husband). But those cards had Joan’s handwriting on them. One letter came in June 1993 and I called her up. She said “hold on.” click. disconnected! I redialed – same thing! I redialed – again! WTF? I said to myself “fuck that crazy idiot.” The following week, my electricity was shut off. Joan owed me money. I called her up – same damn thing. I borrowed some money from neighbors then called Joan back and did swear at her. – admit it – you’d do the same thing. The bitch had a trace-trap on her line because she was getting annoyance calls – but not from me. BUT to make sure that I would get “caught” she sent the letter, knowing I’d call – and she played me AND the police. What could I do? I did call her – and she took me to court and she got a six-month order of protection against me. See the post “Did Joan’s 10 year old son write that letter I got in June 1993? Or did Joan herself? “  You can see for yourself, how Joan forged a letter to make it look like her own 10 year old son wrote a letter to my fiance. But the envelope was addressed to me. And it did not say “Dear UNCLE John.” That lowlife Joan stooped that low to involve her own child to manipulate me, the phone company and the police.

In February of 1994, Joan began receiving hospital bills for a patient whose name was similar to hers.But in the book she said it was in May 1994.  She called Buffalo General Hospital where I work and accused me of hacking into the computer system and tampering with her bill. She was told at that time it was impossible for me to access the hospital billing computers. Joan would not accept that. She then set out to force Buffalo General Hospital to believe that I was guilty of this. From about September 1994 up to April 1995, Joan placed almost daily phone calls to various people and departments in the hospital. I was never told about these calls until January 1995. I met with various people in the hospital and hospital administration. They had already told people to hang up when Joan called. But some of her calls did get through.

In the meantime, on December 22, 1994,a child abuse call was made against Joan Wheeler and my fiance (now husband) John. The caller identified themself as me. Joan then wrote a letter to New York State Child Abuse Center in Albany, New York (Dec 31, 1994) accusing me of this phone call. In her letter, she referenced the annoyance phone call court case, where she was given a 6 month order of protection against me. She lied to an official New York State agency by saying that I was sentanced to probation. (slander). This letter can be seen here.

Beginning in January 1995, Joan then proceeded to write slanderous letters about me to various elected officials, including the mayor of Buffalo. She then assembled copies of these letters and sent them to me in February 1995. When I received them, I saw one letter to the Director of Patient Accounts of Buffalo General Hospital. I spoke to him and he told me the full extent of what Joan had been doing – the almost daily phone calls, etc. See the letter she wrote to him here. And in this letter – she has the correct date and time duration of the six month order of protection of 1993 – but she lies to him and says that I was sentanced to probation. Also, this is a letter of complaint concerning a mixed-up bill – but she has private details of my childhood and my medical history. Yet she’s constantly screaming she wants HER privacy maintained, but she cares nothing about anybody else’s privacy!  Hypocritical lying Bitch!

I called the police detective that handled Joan’s annoyance phone call case against me and he sent me a warrant card to fill out to start a harassment charge against Joan. When Joan received her summons into court, she wrote letters to my fiance and sent them to his mother’s house. She wrote letters to my future mother-in-law as well. In those letters, she pleaded with John to get me to drop the charges. She then urged him to leave me. She trashed me to my future mother in law, and asked her to appear in court against me. My future mother-in-law had never even met Joan. See the letter here.

Unfortunately, the judge assigned to my case, Margaret Anderson dismissed the charges, saying we were sisters and should get along. I filed a complaint with the district attorney’s office and they sent out an assistant district attorney to my house who yelled at me saying they had better things to do than fix a fight between sisters. She made me promise not to contact Joan.  That promise was easily made by me, since I was not contacting Joan. But I did tell her that she needed to go tell Joan the same thing. She did so, and the phone calls to my employer stopped. I have always felt that I was victimized three times over these events: first by Joan, second by the court, and third by the district attorney. Sigh. But in any case, Joan stopped her harassment for three years. I had three years of peace until out of the blue, on May 25, 1998, Joan sent me a letter. The envelope was addressed to me and John, but the letter inside was for Gert, about a guy in South Carolina talking shit about Gert to Joan’s ex-husband. And this had WHAT to do with Ruth? I sent Joan a letter of no contact but then 9 months later, Joan contacts me AGAIN (February 1999) using a friend’s return address (without her knowledge) and informed me that my fiance got the next door neighbor pregnant. See post “Harassing letter from Joan Wheeler to Ruth Sippel Pace in May 1998″-  Never mind the district attorney told both of us not to contact each other. But Joan thinks she is above the law. This post also contains the scanned copy of  the envelope, sent certified mail to me- that I sent back to her with my notes to her on it.

I just want to relate something that happened after Judge Margaret Anderson dismissed my case in 1995.  Joan and her mother left the courtroom before me and my friend Francine. By the time we stepped on the escalator to go down, they had stepped off the escalator and turned and were almost directly below us to our right. And Joan looked up at us – and fucking smirked! That’s what made Francine yell “You fucking bitch – Ruth may not be able to touch you – but I sure will!” and started  running down the escalator. I ran after her and stopped her – by this time Joan’s smirk had disappeared and she was truly scared. The security guards started coming. I said to Francine “let the bitch go. She’s not worth us going to jail over. She’ll get her just rewards one day for this shit.” – There were security guards, people, lawyers all over the place and heard me say that. And when I did, Joan put her head down said nothing, and kept on walking – and everybody saw it – they may not have known what was going on – but they knew – from the way Joan slunk out of there – who was the lady and who was the tramp.

Now how does Joan relate all this stuff in her book? First, she doesn’t say anything about the escalator scene but Oh my god, the lies in that filthy book! First, she gets the dates all mixed up. She claims that the child abuse call was made in 1993. – She says this because she wants to present it as though I made the call as revenge for her pressing charges for the annoyance calls. She then says that SHE pressed charges against me in 1994 and because it involved her children – she brought them to court. (Judge Anderson told the court NOT to bring children to court, but Joan brought them once – and they stayed outside in the hallway with an adult babysitter). Joan then says we had “three months of court battles.” – Wrong – in 1994, we were NOT in court at all. see this graphic from 1999 which shows there were only two court proceedings between Joan and me – 1993, and 1995. This research was done by the court itself.  In 1995, we were in court for the charges that I pressed against her – three times – about 15 minutes in front of the judge each time. The first was when Joan was arraigned, and it was adjourned to a later date. When we appeared, the court ran out of time, the judge suggested mediation, which Joan refused. So we went in front of her a third time, where she dismissed it. In Joan’s book, she says that in 1994, she was granted a one-year order of protection against me. Wrong. The only order of protection she was granted was the one in 1993 for six months. see graphic here. Joan also says on page 316 that a warrant was issued for my arrest. This is false, a lie, slander and libel. I have never been arrested in my life. (and since I presented the actual court documents to Trafford Publications, who published Joan’s lying book, they saw the clear slander and libel that Joan committed against me – and because of that – they pulled her book from publication).

On page 314 Joan, in regards to the annoyance phone calls in 1993, says the detective asked her “Who is Brandy Sippel?” She  then explains that Brandy is my cat. She then quotes the detective as saying “Well she’s got  Brandy paying the bills in her residence! No kidding! The phone bill is in the name of Brandy Sippel!” Joan then states that she told him to be on the lookout for Francois. “He’s my sister’s other cat! Maybe he’s paying the gas bill!’

I blogged about this before. But I want to point out that Brandy was my dog. Joan put this little anecdote in her book to make me out to be someone who is an ass. No, my phone was listed as Brittany Sippel, to keep her from finding out my number. And the letter I found and have transcribed below proves it. And since my phone bill was under the name of Brittany, not my dog or my cat, for Joan to be stating in her book that the detective was laughing at me for doing so, she is putting words in the mouth of a Buffalo Police Detective. -n other words – she was LYING! And we have proof of it – in the letter of January 7, 1995 that she wrote to our niece Karen, she admits that she knows the phone number is under Brittany Sippel. see post written by Gert McQueen Evidence of how Joan Wheeler sets people against each other and how she exploits and tries to enlist my daughter into committing crimes!”

In regards to her receiving a hospital bill for someone whose name was similar to hers, Joan writes about this on page 332. Previously she had said that I worked in the billing department at the hospital. WRONG! I have been employed as a nursing assistant (nurse’s aide) in the night shift since being hired at BGH on September 18, 1972. Except for 4 years (1976 – 1980) when I worked the day shift (7am – 3pm), I worked the night shift – 11 pm – 7am. Joan only puts down in her book that I work in the billing department to lend credence to her accusation of me.

Listen, everybody knows that companies put into place computer security systems – they have the ability to trace every, and I mean EVERY keystroke you do. Joan puts down in her book that she first received a mixed-up bill in May 1994, but in her letter to Buffalo General Hospital in 1995, she claims it was done in February 1994. So which date was it Joan? You really need to GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT if you’re writing a TRUTHFUL book! – Anyway, in 1994, she complains – they check into it. Because they have to. I totally understand that. It was attributed to a typing mistake and Joan was told this. Joan was told that the computer terminals on the nursing stations were not even connected to the billing computers. Joan didn’t believe them. Then in December 1994, another error occured. And Joan called again. They checked again. They found the error – it occured on December 14, 1994. When I met with Mr. P.S., he told me the exact date and time: December 14, 4pm. – Sorry, even if I worked the day shift (7am – 3pm) I would not be in the building at the time). Joan wasn’t going to have it. She was not going to accept the fact that I was innocent. She set out calling my job almost every day – like she had started a couple of months earlier. She was going to CHANGE the fact that I didn’t do it – and get me fired in the process. – I ask you – is this coming from a rational person? Joan needs to be f’king locked up in the psych ward.

So let us examine a couple of things. December 14, 1994 was on a Wednesday (google a 1994 calendar). The error occured at  4pm. The bill was printed out and placed in an envelope and put in a bin for outgoing mail. I don’t know if the bin went to the US Postal Service that day or the next. But at any rate, let’s give it until the following Monday, December 19, for it to arrive at Joan’s house. (I have direct deposit – I get my paystub in the mail only 2 days after payday – so the mail is really fast). Joan spends that day on the phone screaming and yelling at different people at the hospital about me. (I know  this, because I spoke to several of them). Joan is yelling that I did it. She does not believe that I didn’t, COULDN’T have done it. SUPERVISORS are telling her that not only didn’t I do it, but I COULDN’T have done it. (and she puts right in her book that she didn’t believe them). Three days later, on December 22, someone calls child abuse on Joan, identifies themselves as me, accuses Joan and MY fiance as abusing Joan’s children. Now I find this timing very interesting. – Then Joan starts writing letters to the mayor of Buffalo, a state senator, the district attorney, the commissioner of social services, my neice. And in those letters, she’s accusing me of all sorts of nonsense, and blabbing MY personal, private medical history.

THEN, she makes copies of these letters – and mails them to me. Not to mentioin the almost daily phone calls to my job, telling them to fire me. When I press charges of stalking and harassment against her – she writes to MY fiance, urging him to leave me. – So this was all a revenge plot by Joan against me – for something I had nothing to do with – her mixed up hospital bill! She set out to 1. break me and John up (something she’d been trying to do for years – from 1993-1999), 2. get me to lose my job. 3. ruin my reputation.

On page 333 – Joan relates that she received an envelope that was full of cut-up pictures of her that she recognized as being from my photo album.She says that she got this a few days after she got a letter from Buffalo General Hospital telling her that I was innocent of the billing error. She says the envelope was smeared with cooking grease. – No – she is deliberately mixing up things again. To make it look as though I tampered with her bill, called child abuse on her, harassed her for revenge for the court case of 1993. – She takes events from 1993, 1994, 1995, 1999 and 2003 and mixes them up into a different timeline, even taking words from a letter I sent her in 1999, and has me saying them in person in 1994! Okay – I think I know what’s going on – the Joan Wheeler we know is really from an alternate universe, where things happened in different years. My court documents and personal letters are from a different reality than Joan’s. Yeah – that’s it. That explains it. Joan is not from this planet. uh huh, I always thought so.

I mentioned earlier that Joan brought her kids to the court, but they stayed out in the hallway. I went out to the bathroom and stopped at the water fountain for a drink. The baby sitter and Joan’s kids never left the bench they were sitting on. Words were never exchanged. In 1999, when I received the letter from Joan with her friend’s return address, I was so angry, I wrote her back and I told her a whole bunch of stuff. I have already transcribed this letter and scanned it and will be posting it soon. (there’s just so much convoluted stuff involved here). I mailed it to Joan. She sent it back. I had not put a return address on it. She had opened it, read it, probably photocopied what I wrote, put it back in the envelope and stapled it, wrote my address for a return address and marked “refused – return to sender” and dropped it in a mailbox. When I got it, I saw what she did, and said to myself – oh, no, she is not going to play her little post office games with me! Now John and I had been without a car for several years – and just two weeks prior to me getting her letter to me saying that John got the next-door neighbor pregnant, we had bought a car from John’s nephew. It need transmission work, we were waiting for our income tax refund check to fix it. In the meantime, it was leaking transmission fluid and it was necessary to keep a few cans of the fluid in the car and keep pouring it in the engine. I kept it on the floor behind the driver’s seat, so I wouldn’t have to keep opening the trunk. To prevent a mess, the opened cans were kept in a metal tray.

 Now, in addition to the “revelation” that my infertile husband got another woman pregnant, was the accusation that Joan’s son saw me drive past their house! This was an impossibiltiy! When I had received the letter, I HAD NO CAR! By the time I had written to Joan, she received it, and sent it back, we had gotten Jamie’s car. I was so angry when I received it back, I took the envelope and jumped in the car. I threw the envelope on the back seat, and it fell into the tray with the transmission fluid. Oh well, I thought – she won’t be able to drop it back in a mailbox now. THEN I drove to her house and threw it up on her lawn. Oh and by the way – the letter she sent me in 1998 about the guy in South Carolina threatening Gert? It contained her ex-husband’s phone number. So when I got home – I called him long distance and I told him the whole dam thing – that no, I did not drive past Joan’s house – so either their son is a liar or Joan is lying by stating that. AND I told Colby about the letter and the tranmission fluid.

Convolution time again: contained in that letter in the greasy envelope was my asking Joan why were her kids in court in 1995. I said I went to the bathroom and water fountain, Dennis looked bored, Catherine was sleeping. What does lying Joan say about this in her book? She took MY words – water fountain – on page 330 changes the year to 1994, (she can’t even lie correctly) and says that when the court broke for lunch, she and the kids were at the water fountain and I walked up to them and yelled “See what your mother is doing to me? You see? She drags you in court to see your poor Aunt go through this!” No, in my letter in the greasy envelope in 1999 I said “why were the kids in court after the judge said NOT to bring kids to court? To drag them in there to see their dirty Aunt Ruth abusing their mother?” So we see how Joan takes words out of my mouth and twists them to lie! Now Joan said on the bottom of page 329 to the top of page 330: she filed charges of harassment against me for the child abuse call: “We couldn’t prove conclusively that she made the ..call. but we could prove continued harassment in various forms throughout the years. Our only recourse was to seek an Order of Protection. Three months of court dates followed. I brought my children to court as they were part of the case and needed to see for themselves just what was going on.” She then relates the buillshit about the water fountain. She then says that in the summer of 1994, she was granted a one year Order of Protection against me. WRONG, WRONG WRONG!

She didn’t prove ANY harassments from me because I didn’t harass her! But she does say just WHO had been harassing her for more than 20 years – a member of the adoptive family – he had been sending her filthy things for years – and I was getting the blame for it. And not only does Joan admit on pages 344-345 that he had been found out – she doesn’t clear MY name – because she hates me and wants to make out that I did all sorts of things to her – when I didn’t! Listen, if she had conclusive proof in 1994 that I harassed her – why didn’t the court arrest me and throw me in jail? This is all nonsense – lies, blaming me for things other people had done. The whole section of her book, pages 295 to pages 342, covering years 1992 – 1995 are so full of twisted lies, pure hate, blaming Ruth for other people’s actions  – it was JOAN who refused to send Kathy’s belongings to England – not Ruth,(they were in JOAN’S house, not mine.  It was JOAN who was responsible for them. It was KATHY who called our father for help in getting her things. It was DAD who called Joan and yelled at her. It was JOSELYNE who called Joan and yelled at her for upsetting Dad. RUTH was not involved in any of that – yet – Joan wrote me a letter saying “Because of you … blah, blah, blah, and then puts it in her book that all that was MY fault. I’m sitting at MY house, minding MY business, yet I”M the one getting blamed for 1. Joan’s own actions, 2. Kathy’s actions, 3. Dad’s actions, 4. Joselyne’s actions. Can I slap the shit out of her now? pleeeaasee? God help me when I saw that book and saw pages 295 – 342, I couldn’t believe it! And I cried – how could someone of my own blood do this to me? When I had done NOTHING to her. All I ever did was love her. In 1990 I had hundreds of dollars stolen from me by her. I called her in 1993 for that money and got hauled into court. She tried to get me fired from my job! She tried to break me and John up. Filthy letters followed, one telling me my infertile husband got another woman pregnant. And then to read this shit in her filthy book. -Now you know why I have this blog.

In 1999, after I received her letter telling me that John got another woman pregnant, because she had contacted me in 1998 after the DA told her not to, and I wrote her telling me to leave me alone, I had grounds to press harassment on her. In the court papers – drawn up by the court itself – it listed all previous court dates between me and Joan. it correctly showed our case in 1993 where she was granted a SIX-MONTH order of protection against me. It correctly showed MY case against Joan in 1995 that was dismissed by Judge Margaret Anderson – It did NOT show ANY court case between us lasting three months in 1994, nor did it show ANY one-year order of protection granted Joan in the summer of 1994. If that was the case – if Joan was truly granted a one year order of protection against me from summer of 94 to 95 – what the hell was she doing stalking and harassing me in the spring of 1995? That would be like the kettle calling the pot black! see the graphic here of this court document.

As to the cut-up photos in the greasy envelope- nope – never sent them to her. Yes, I cut her pictures out of my photo album and threw them in the trash.Way back in 1991!  In 2003, when we went to Arizona for my brother’s funeral, I brought my photo albums for the family to see. (Joan belittles me in her book for this – said I was doing a “Show and Tell” – and why not? Is there something wrong in passing around family photos? Oh, I see, it’s when RUTH passes around family photos  for family members to see – THEN it’s wrong. I’m sure that EVERY family shares family photos at a family gathering. But when RUTH does it, it’s wrong. Do you see what I mean about the hate Joan has for me? It’s perfectly obvious – it’s practially jumping off the pages of her hideous book. And for those people like HeatherUK of the adoptee forum to think this is a wonderful book – Heather – you are an ass that you can’t see this hate.

Anyway, she recognized where her pictures were cut out – and between 2003 and 2009 when that filthy book was published, went in and changed dates and events around, trying to reshape the past. But Joan forgot she mailed me all that stuff back in the 90′s – with her own handwriting on it, and she forgot that I kept the court documents. Joan may have presented in her book that Ruth was a lying, conniving bitch, but the TRUTH wins out in the end – it is not Ruth who was and is lying, conniving bitch – it is JOAN MARY WHEELER, who was always the lying conniving bitch – as she still is to this day.

So here is the letter that I wrote for the courts, the district attorney and the police.

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

Enclosed are two letters written by Joan Wheeler concerning me, Ruth Sippel. One is a letter written to my niece Karen Finken, who resides in B., New York; and who sent these letters to me to give to the proper authorities.

The other letter is written to Mr. P.S., the director of patient’s accounts at Buffalo General Hospital, where I have been employed as a nursing assistant for the past 22 years. In this letter, Ms. Wheeler accuses me of entering the hospital computer system and changing the address on a bill that she had received. Apparently, in February (1994) and December 3, 1994, Joan Wheeler received a bill intended for a J.Wheeler. (name censored by Ruth Pace, November 2011)

I first became aware of this accusation on January 3, 1995, by my immediate supervisor, G.W., RN, who had received a telephone call from Ms. Wheeler in December 1994. During this call, Ms. Wheeler accused me of conspiring with someone in the billing department in order to “mess up her bill.”

Ms. W. told Ms. Wheeler that the computer terminals at the nursing station where I work can not access the hospital billing system. However, Ms. Wheeler kept insisting that I had done it, and asked Ms. Williamson “Don’t you know what kind of people you have working for you?” Ms. W. told her that she had known me for more than 15 years, and that I was an exceptional worker.

Ms. W. called patient accounts and they told her that when Ms. Wheeler had called them, they had explained to her that it was a simple typing error and it had been corrected while she still on the phone with them. I spoke to a supervisor in the billing department (whose name I cannot recall), the first week of January, 1995. This woman verified that Ms. Wheeler had called, and the problem had been corrected.

I also spoke to Mr. S. on February 16, 1995, and he told me that he had checked into Ms. Wheeler’s complaint, and found that it appeared to be an honest mistake, and he told Ms. Wheeler that.

However, Ms. Wheeler has continued to call Buffalo General Hospital demanding to speak to supervisors about my “behavior,” although she had been told that I had nothing to do with it.

I was informed by a secretary at the nursing office that during the late afternoon of February 9, 1995, nearly two months after the problem was taken care of, Ms. Wheeler called and wanted the names of my supervisors so that she could “write letters to them.” I have also been informed of at least 4 other occasions in December and January, where Ms. Wheeler had called the hospital and either demanded to speak to my supervisor or to obtain the names of other supervisory personel.

I have alerted hospital administration to this problem, and Ms. E.F., of the Human Resources Department has also been of great help and support to me. My employers are aware that I am not the cause of Ms. Wheeler’s billing problems and these events are not related at all to my performance of my job. In fact, I received an excellent job evaluation on March 1, 1995.

I maintain my innocence in any problems that Ms. Wheeler may have concerning her bills from Buffalo General Hospital. I was not even working either December 13, or December 14 when the last error occured (December 14, 1994).

I attended the hospital’s computer training class only recently, (March 8, 1995), and on March 22, I received my assigned secret password that will allow me access to the nursing station computer terminal. I can only access the programs that pertain to the nursing care for the current patients on my nursing unit.

I object to Ms. Wheeler calling the hospital and accusing me of all sorts of harassing behavior towards her and discussing my private family matters. She also did this as long ago as 1987, calling Mrs. C. M.-H. told me that Ms. Wheeler had told her details of our family history. I also object to Ms. Wheeler informing Mr. S. details of my private home life, my private medical problems, and of my previous dealings with the court. I also fail to see what my having been in an orphanage while I was a child has to do with Ms. Wheeler’s erroneous bill.

She accuses me of trying to “do something” to her, but on page 2 of her letter to my niece, she admits that she tried  to sabotage my relationship with my fiance by telling him that “he had better think twice if he wants to continue living with a woman who would accuse him of child abuse.” I maintain my innocence of any call made to child welfare about Ms. Wheeler and am also angry that someone would involve my fiance in it. My fiance believes in my innocence, and did not let this accusation stop him from presenting me with a diamond engagement ring on Christmas morning, 1994.

In another letter that Ms. Wheeler wrote to my niece, she admits that she (Ms. Wheeler), knows that I am listed with the phone company under “Brittany” Sippel. I had requested to be listed under that name to prevent Ms. Wheeler from obtaining my unlisted phone number. Since I had never informed her of this, the only way Ms. Wheeler could have found this information would be for her to call Directory Assistance and asking for any listing for my home address. For obvious reasons, I do not want her to have my phone number and I am concerned that she is trying to obtain it.

Ms. Wheeler has also recently written letters to Anthony Masiello, mayor of Buffalo, State Senator Anthony Nanula, Erie County District Attorney Kevin Dillon, and Erie County Social Services Commissioner Deborah Merrifield. Ms. Wheeler sent me copies of these letters which I subsequently passed along to Detective Martin Harrington, of the Buffalo Police Department, as proof of Ms. Wheeler’s harassment of me. These letters are also libelous against me in their content, and in her letter to Commissioner Merrifield a reference is made to a “detailed family history” that Ms. Wheeler apparently sent to Ms. Merrifield. I have not seen this “detailed family history,” but I am sure my name is mentioned in it, since the purpose of all this letter writing is nothing less than a vicious smear campaign against me. (Ruth’s note – as these are public officials, I have not censored their names.)

I respectfully ask the court to tell Ms. Wheeler to stop writing letters about me and stop placing phone calls in an obvious attempt to damage my good name and reputation at Buffalo General Hospital.
Respectfully submitted,

Ruth B. Sippel

Graphics of scanned court documents, etc. that prove without a doubt that Joan Wheeler is a liar in her book Forbidden Family. November 27, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

Here are some documents that I scanned into my computer. Just click on each picture to see the larger version. They are very interesting. These are actual court documents. These have been posted in the past – they prove without a doubt that Joan Wheeler lied about the court proceedings between me and her. Come on, Joan – explain – you’re the one who’s always saying adoptees are looking for “truth.” So here’s the truth. Let’s hear your explanation!

First up: the ruling of Buffalo City Court in August 1993 giving Joan a six-month order of protection against me for annoyance phone calls. The dates were from August 9, 1993 to February 9, 1994. It was NOT for August 1 as she puts in her book. As for the court giving me her new address after she moved, that was done to tell me where I was not supposed to go – but she put in her book that she complained because now I had her new address. Big deal – I didn’t go there, didn’t call her – didn’t know her boyfriend’s name – not like the lying crap she put in her book. If I violated the order of protection, and she called the police like she said in the book, I would have been arrested. Since I was NEVER arrested, (because I didn’t violate the order of protection), and the court reviewed my conduct in February 1994, (and they found I was “clean”), the order of protection was dismissed. Of course Joan puts her own little spin on the events in her book. – Oh by the way – she says in her book that in early December  1993 I called child abuse on her and then she took me to court. Well, wouldn’t that be IN THE MONTHS THE ORDER OF PROTECTION WAS IN EFFECT? According to Joan’s timetable of events – it would – but I’m sorry to break it to you – events and things that Ruth did or didn’t do – didn’t happen the way Joan says in her book. She’s  a filthy liar. The writing is hard to see – so what I did is this: the first graphic is the complete document. The second is a closeup on my name – Ruth Sippel – the third one is a closeup of the dates – a very sloppy clerk put the end date for the beginning date, then crossed it out – but you can see the begin date (you really have to look) as August 9, 1994 and the end date of February 9, 1994.

Next is this one from Family Court from 1999. This is to show that  Joan lied when she said  we spent three months in court in 1994 and in the summer of 1994 she was granted a one-year restraining order against me. I took her to court for harassment in early 1999 – the COURT CLERK went into the computer to research any court proceedings between me and Joan. The COURT COMPUTER correctly showed the 1993 case wherein Joan received the SIX MONTH Order of Protection against me and the 1995 case wherein Judge Anderson dismissed the harassment charges I filed against Joan. The COURT COMPUTER did not show ANY court dates in 1994 – Why? BECAUSE WE WERE NEVER IN COURT IN 1994! Read Article #5 on this document, near the bottom of the page to see ALL court dates of  ALL court proceedings between me and Joan – you will not see one for 1994. Because Joan is a LIAR!

This graphic is of the actual letter Joan wrote to Albany, New York about the false child abuse call that was placed against her on December 22, 1994. On page 328 – 329 she says the call was made in early December 1993. (She did this to show her readers how I was violating the Order of Protection, but I have the proof right here – and in this letter, she tells the New York State Child Abuse and Maltreatment Center that I was placed on probation in 1993. SLANDER! Because if you go back and look at that 1999 printout from Family Court – it says no such thing!

This one here is a doozy – this is a letter that Joan wrote to the Director of Patient Accounts where I work with her filthy accusations of me tampering with her bill. Notice on page 2 she says “The six month probation period ended on February 9, 1994.” SLANDER! I WAS NEVER SENTANCED TO PROBATION – I WAS GIVEN AN RESTRAINING ORDER TO STAY AWAY FROM JOAN – Probation and an order of protection are two different things! Not only does this prove her slandering me to someone where I work – but it proves that she knew the correct dates and duration (six months) of  the restraining order and LIED when she said in the book it was for one year.

Here’s the summons that Joan received ordering her to court to answer my charges of harassment. Notice the date she was to appear – April 3, 1995. And look at the note she wrote – to MY fiance and to MY future mother-in-law!

Here’s another doozy letter from Joan – sent to MY fiance at his mother’s house – clear evidence of her trying to break me and John up – “are you leaving her?” And look at how she’s pressuring him to work on me to drop the charges and trying to involve my future mother-in-law, who never met Joan. She only had the woman’s address because she drove me and John there once. Obviously she made a note of it, but stupid cow that she is – she got the zipcode wrong! Oh – but doesn’t she have 2 college degrees? Isn’t she smart enough to look up a correct zipcode?

So there you have it – and these are not the only documents I have. I have posted other things in the past on this blog, but there are some things that haven’t gotten up yet. And I’m only half done in refuting that filthy lying book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler. Joan- get ready to eat some crap. Because the truth is coming out – it’s been coming out for two years now – you lied in that book, the truth was shown to your publisher and because of  your lies and your SLANDERING me and others – your book is dead. oh, too bad!

Harassing letter from Joan Wheeler to Ruth Sippel Pace May 1998 October 12, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

Hey guys! You know how Joan Wheeler is always saying how she NEVER harasses her birth sisters, but it’s her birth sisters who are ALWAYS harassing her? She says in her stupid book she’s never bothered me or anybody else. She says all over the internet, and on the Adult Adoptees Advocating for Chance that because she’s never bothered us, she can’t understand why we keep bothering her.

Well, yesterday, Gert and I wrote a couple of blog posts over at Gert’s blog. My post (which is actually a companion piece to Gert’s – is called “Harassing letter from Joan Wheeler to Ruth Sippel Pace in May 1998. You really need to see it – so you can see the REAL Joan Wheeler.

Adoptees: you’re always clamoring for the TRUTH – well, here ya go! Do you dare to put your money where your mouths are? Are you TRULY advocating for CHANGE?  Ya wanna see how one of your own is playing you guys for fools? Will you accept my challenge? Or simply pull the blankets over your heads in denial? – I don’t know about you guys – but if someone is playing me for a fool – I’d wanna know – so I could put a stop to it – because I won’t be played for a fool. But I guess you guys ENJOY being someone’s fool.

Harassing letter from Joan Wheeler to Ruth Sippel Pace in May 1998

Reality is Truth. But all Joan Wheeler knows is self-delusions, fantasies, and lies July 15, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

by Ruth Pace

I was listening to an old motivational tape of mine and stumbled upon the following. It is from a tape that I had labeled “Living Without Limits.” I didn’t write down the speaker’s name, but I think it  might be Dr. Wayne Dyer. I transcribed the part of the lecture that I thought is very pertinent to this problematic person Joan Wheeler, who doesn’t seem to differentiate between reality/truth and fantasy/lies. Here is the transciption of the lecture:

And now for the first component of living without limits which could very well be described as the foundation for survival itself, and that is, REALITY.

Now what exactly do I mean by reality? I don’t want to be misunderstood here. Well my definition of reality is very simple and straightforward. Reality isn’t the way you wish things to be or the way they appear to be but the way they actually are.

Now by the way you wish things to be, I’m referring to the constant struggle that takes place within each of us between the real and the ideal. Between reality and what we would like reality to be. And it’s absolutely imperative that you learn to differentiate between the two.

Reality is Truth. And unfortunately the real problem is that most people do not love Truth. But instead they try to make true that which they love. They have it backwards.

As Robert De Ropp says in his fascinating book “The Master Game,” “Man inhabits a world of delusions. And because of these delusions, makes dangers for himself and others.”

Reminds me of Ashleigh Brilliant, the great humorist, some of you may be familiar with, who once remarked, “I have abandoned my search for truth and am now looking for a good fantasy.”    

Seriously, I totally agree with DeRopp, I think self-delusion is probably the chief cause of most unhappiness in the world today.

In my comment to my last post, I refer to Joan’s cyberbullying page, where she has posted lies about me and my sisters. Some of them twisting of the facts. For example she has posted on that site, that I got her phone number from my father – yes I did. On November 3, 2009 – because my then 85 year old father was tired and I calledJoan AS A FAVOR to tell her that a family member died. On the phone Joan subjected me to a barrage of yelling obscentities that even her daughter (who in an email exchange via myspace the next day, came running down the stairs to see what her mother was screaming about).

So here is some info: “Doris Ohl was born June 05, 1919 in Buffalo, Erie, NY, and died October 31, 2009 in Silver Creek, NY. She married (1) Michael W. Herr in Buffalo, Erie, NY, son of Jacob Grant Herr and Gertrude H. Stoll. She married (2) Lou LoManto.”

Doris and Michael were Joan’s original godparents, and Joan Wheeler’s original name was Doris Michol Sippel. (None of this information is private, Joan plasters this all over the internet, and the info on Doris was taken from an online internet family tree. 

Addendum: July 16, 3:00am, ok, I was doing research – do you know that hotmail saves EVERY email you send? So I found the original email from my Uncle. –


From:   To:   Subject: RE: Aunt Doris
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:39:56 +0000

Hi Uncle Rich
thank you forwarding this to me. Can you send me Wayne’s email so I can send him my condolences?
 
Everything is going fine. I had a small vacation, which I used for housework. lol. all the stuff you never seem to get to, like getting behind furniture and degreasing cabinets. Also had to clean out the utility room. got a new washing machine, the old one went kaput. I found some missing socks amidst the dust bunnys back there. lol.
 
Love
Ruth
 


Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 08:33:33 -0500
From:  
To:  Subject: Fw: Aunt Doris

Received this from Wayne about his Mother (Uncle Mikes first Wife.)
Dad, Opa and Uncle Rich
—–Forwarded Message—–
From: Wayne D Herr
Sent: Nov 1, 2009 7:57 AM
To: silverdick1 .. judy , Richard Herr
Subject:

We spent a very hard week this week, but last night @ 9:45pm  Mom pasted after a very hard week for her. I believe she is happy now, she was ready. Eileen and I were with her so she did not have to die alone. This past sunday she told me she was going to see Edmund and she might even talk to Michael. Thank you for your prayers.

     Love
       Wayne

———————————————————————–

Joan’s self-delusions and the facts are that Joan cannot accept the REALITY and the TRUTH that her “mean and nasty” sister Ruth couldn’t possibly call her on the phone for the simple reason of doing her father (and Joan) a FAVOR. Further, she cannot STAND for the TRUTH of the phone call to be made public. Instead, Joan twists the FACTS of the event of November 3, 2009 and reports it on the internet that I called her as an act of harassment.

The phone call was made by ME, around 5pm. Later that evening, around 10pm, I emailed my niece, Joan’s daughter via myspace. We were myspace buddies and facebook buddies at the time. Here is the transcription of the email exchange between her and me, and the graphics are the actual screen shots of that exchange that I captured on July 14, 2011.  I also have included a screen shot of Joan’s blog (also captured on July 14, 2011, that shows Joan’s version of the phone call. Notice she says really nothing about the phone call. Because deep down, she knows the TRUTH about that phone call – that I obtained the phone number from a tired 85 year old man, as  A FAVOR TO BOTH HIM AND JOAN to let Joan know that her original godmother and namesake had died. AND Joan fails to tell everyone HER subsequent actions! After screaming obscenities at me, subjecting me to verbal emotional abuse, she then called my father and SCREAMED AT HIM – AN 85 YEAR OLD MAN, WHO WAS NOT FEELING WELL THAT DAY! That is called ELDER ABUSE! And of course, Joan doesn’t tell what happened when SHE made an abusive phone call to an elderly man – that the call was terminated when the tired elderly man HUNG UP ON HER!

So why isn’t the COMPLETE TRUTH about that phone call of November 3, 2009 published on Joan’s blog? Because she doesn’t want to tell the truth – she always presents HER twisted version of the truth – she wants people to think that I, Ruth Pace am a bitch, and all I do is harass her by getting her phone number from relatives and call her up and bother her. But Joan can whine on a forum that when another relative died, she wasn’t notified – well, because when she was notified of a relative’s passing, she went all f’ing crazy! Who does Joan thinks she is? That she can treat people like dirt and they have to accept it? This is why Joan is an outsider – she has no family – either birth or adoptive – BECAUSE SHE HAS ALWAYS TREATED US LIKE DIRT.

So here is the transcript of the myspace email:

  Nov 3, 2009 RE: something happened today
Ladymoondancer ~ saysTo: *~*~They call me Cat, Kit… (@myspacecom)  I got an email, (from a relative)that my Uncle Mike’s first wife Doris died on Saturday, Oct. 31. Uncle Mike and Aunt Doris were your mom’s original godparents and she was named for them (Doris Michol).
so I thought she should know about it. I called the old number but it was disconnected so I called my father and he gave me your mom’s number. So I called her. She asked how I got the number. I told her. She said “Big mistake.” then she said she didn’t want any contact from me. Fair enough I thought. She was calm at this point, but then she said tersely, “Thank you for telling me about Aunt Doris, but I do not want to hear from you. My mother is dying.” (I have heard this, and I felt bad, I thought, shit, this is bad getting bad news now and all.
But then you mom said, “She (her mom) does not want to hear from you.” (I was not calling for her). Then your mom started screaming about her sisters. She said that I threw her out of the family.
Cathy, I just sat there staring at my computer screen. I was in shock. She was screaming so hard I could not understand what she was saying. I did hear “you are not my sister.” She was ranting and raving. I started crying. I didn’t know what to do. All I did was call her to tell her that her godmother had died. I got angry. I did not call to make trouble. I swear to you Cathy. I did not. I swear on the soul of my unborn son that I lost in 1985. I did not call to make trouble, but dammit, why should I be subjected to her verbal abuse? So I said “You know what? You’re right. You’re not my sister. You don’t know how to behave like a sister. so fuck you.”  and then I hung up.
Cathy, I was so upset. I wanted to go to my dad’s house. I left my house with my washing machine running. I only grabbed a sweater and my keys. I was still in my slippers. I was crying so hard then when I was on Genesee St. I couldn’t see. I stopped at my cousin’s house and she calmed me down. I went on to my Dad’s. In the meantime, she had called him and when she started screaming at him, he hung up on her.
He had told me a couple of weeks before that he had thrown her out of his house because she was whining again about no money. He told her to get a job, like we have all been telling her for the past 25 years. She said she didn’t like Polish people. Well his mother came from Poland and we are all part Polish, so what the heck? She wanted money from him to fix her car.
When I got home, there was a message on my answering machine from the Town of Tonawanda police that “Ruth Sippel Pace, Gertrude McQueen and Kathy Inglis are NOT to have any contact with Joan Wheeler.”
Now where did Gerty and Kathy get in this?
I swear to you Cathy, your mom needs a psych consult. My father said she is mentally ill, and I see that. I am sorry to tell you this, but I believe it. All she had to say was, “Thank you for telling me about Aunt Doris. Goodby.”
there was no reason for her to off on me like she did, or call the cops on me. If she hauls me into court for harassment, all she is going to get is a psych consult. Because I will insist on it. She threatened my life once before. The district attorney knows this.
I am not going to write to you again about this. I just wanted you to know what went down. I undertstand that she is your mother and you love her.
But geez, she is my little sister, I love her too. Why the hell would I have called to tell her about Aunt Doris? I can’t stand this anymore. I’m done. I didn’t call her to make trouble I swear. I won’t make the same mistake again. (Ruth’s note, July 15, 2011 – This was all written on November 3, 2009, just a couple of weeks before Joan’s book was published. Notice how I tell my neice that Joan is “my little sister and I love her.” Because why would I have been crying like that from getting abuse from someone whom I loved? BUT when I read that horrible book – when I saw how almost every page was lie and hate against me over and over and her disgusting things she said about my mother’s deadbody my heart turned to stone against her. Yes, after 30 years of crap from her, there was still love there, but no longer. And Joan did all to herself. Yes, I mention my son that I lost – June 1985, Saied Ali, my heart. After years of trying to concieve, and I lost my only child. And Joan was there – she drove me home from the hospital – and in her book, she makes a mockery of my miscarriage. My only child – my baby, and Joan mocked his loss. – That is why any remaining love I had for Joan left me when I read that filthy book). now, back to the original email of Nov. 3, 2009″

ps I already shredded the piece of paper that I wrote her phone number on. I did not memorize it. I swear to you, I will not call her, I will not drive over there. I will not contact her. I am done. I try to do the right thing and all I get is a kick in the teeth AGAIN. no more.

 Nov 4, 2009 RE: something happened today
*~*~They call me Cat, Kitty Cat*~*~ saysTo: Ladymoondancer ~
look im sorry bout wat has happened. 
 i originally wrote a message earlier but then i guess time warner decided to have a hiccup so it never sent, which gave me another chance to write with out being so mad. i am very sorry bout aunt doris’s passing. its too bad yet another person who probably was good has gone. i am sorry that mom did that. i guess my question to u is- y would u think shed wanna hear some one has passed, coming from u?…..u know better.lol. as to how she feels and how u feel. i think it best to stay clear of us. i would not tempt her. i know u said u wipe ur hands of her. not to sound like a bitch- but it would be best. i hope this means Kathy and Gertrude too. no contact with her at all. no smart things from her blogs or anykind of publication she has. she has it in her head u all are like gonna do ur best to hurt her….which if u r i have to say- so not cool……anyways, i understand u all r getting old, but my mom has good reason to think none of u wont try anything- the wheeler’s r fucking nuts!…well u sippels are a piece of work too….lol… i want to make it clear that none of u will not come into contact with my mom, my brother, or my nana- none of them want it or can handle it. as for me. if either of the other 2 wanna have any contact- they will have to ask u to write me a message via myspace. i do not want any disturbances from anyone- i want my own life. i deserve it. i wanted things to go different- i hoped everyone would get over everything so that when times like these came- we’d all be civil. i was surely wrong. mom just has alot of hurt. not saying none of u dont, but i see it of course more form her. if any one else passes- let maryelle or joselyn contact mom. gpa sippel should have known better not to give my moms number out to anyone. so yea- i was there kind of when u called. i was taking a shower- and thought something was wrong. she was crying and yelling that u had called. i got mad and thought- here we go again. i told her i didnt give a crap bout watever happened between u 2. but yea she was very distrought. so please- fo my sake- no more contact, ever- from any of u in any form. leave her alone- let her write her lil things online- its a free country and the internet is free- i mean we allow freaky ass porn!- let her do her shit in peace. let her, my brother and my nana be in peace. and im sorry for the way everything went down. it was a fragile time for everyone and i am sorry. i wish i knew this doris woman, she must have been a good woman. and please- no response to this other than- telling me that u will keep ur promise and tell the other 2 to stay away from us. thanks, and sorry again.

    
Nov 4, 2009 RE: something happened today
Ladymoondancer ~ saysTo: *~*~They call me Cat, Kit…

o(k I hear ya.
I agree with you that it was not a smart thing to call. but as I said, I only wanted to let her know about Aunt Doris.
but you know, you are a little unfair. you say steer clear of Dennis and your Nana. I understand you are only looking out for your family. I am not looking to call them. Neither is Gert or Kathy.
As for your mom’s blog, well, yeah, it’s a free country and all, like you say, so why is it, that only the sippels must censor themselves? Your mom can go on and on and say this and that about us. but the minute we say ANYTHING, it’s always, “don’t do that. it will hurt Joni.”
What about my hurt? Do you think I like being labeled scum of the earth? When all I ever did was set limits? Like telling your mom and dad, that I will not be disrespected?
Did I ever call somebody’s place of employment for 6 months straight and tell them that they have a thief and a computer hacker working for them? do you know how embarrased I was? do you know how embarrased I was when I met Mayor Anthony Maseilo and he saw my name tag and said, “Ruth Sippel, now where do I know that name from?” from the crazy letters your mom wrote to him. When here I am, at a symposium for block clubs, and passed a course at the Buffalo Police Academy, doing things in local government, only to have the mayor look at me like I’m crazy thanks to your mom.
So I’m supposed to sit back and let this happen to me year after year after year?
Or your mom calling the immigration department in England to scheme to have Kathy deported from there and sent back to Buffalo, when it was always Kathy’s dream to live there. Or how Kathy gets a letter from some college professor in Holland who proceeds to tell Kathy how to live her life because your mom has told him some lies about her.
So we are supposed to get hurt over and over?
And everything was ok for the past few years until your mom goes on the internet on her blog and singles out THE SIPPEL SISTERS. and slanders us.
internet is free speech? ok, so I have the free speech too. It works both ways. and this is something your mom refuses to see.
She wants us to respect our privacy, and not to gossip about her,  but she runs into Francine’s brother and then starts telling him about what a bitch I am. And he’s like, hey, I’ve known Ruth since I was 1 year old, and she’s my aunt, and who is this whackjob and then he finally has to tell her to shut up in the middle of the muffler shop and he gets his boss looking at him, and I have to hear it from his other brother.
As for the Sippels being a piece of work, well yep. That’s right. Gert put herself thru school and became a dental hygeinist. Worked for the government. Retired a few years, is now an artist. Kathy scrimped and saved and emigrated to another country, became an accomplished guitarist and school teacher. Me, I have held the same job for 37 years. Am renovating my home. Was a professional dancer for a time. Board member of the Beledi Club, an organization for belly dancers. organized and head up the block club on my street. My brother before he died, worked in a hospital, studied medieval warfare. And all of us are artists and writers. I am head of a local Star Trek fan group.
And all of us have never stolen money from each other, maybe have snipped at snapped at each other, but always came back to hugs and kisses. Never tried to set each other up with the police and the courts. Never been arrested. Never sent false letters telling them that their spouse was unfatithful, never called false child abuse on each other.
As for my father “should have known better to give your mom’s phone number out.”
Why? I told him why I was going to call her. So she got kicked out of his house a few weeks ago? And whose fault is that?
so everything is always the fault of somebody else. Your mom is mentally ill, there is no reasoning with her. I am not out to hurt her. Neither are my sisters. But ask yourself, who is out to hurt whom? Do you think I was just all happy go lucky to open a letter and read my spouse got a women pregnant, and the house was vacant? So it was a lie.
And why did your mom sent me that? to have me say, O I’m so happy to hear this letter. No, the person who is doing the hurting is your mom. And then she gets surprised to find out that nobody likes her. or wants her in their life. and she has only herself to blame.

and now, here’s Joan’s version of that phone call, short and sweet, but all twisted to make it sound that I was harrassing her. Who’s the liar?

 1. Gert McQueen – July 15, 2011
Ruth reports in the above post that…

When I got home, there was a message on my answering machine from the Town of Tonawanda police that “Ruth Sippel Pace, Gertrude McQueen and Kathy Inglis are NOT to have any contact with Joan Wheeler.” Now where did Gerty and Kathy get in this?

Gert here:
When I was told about that phone message, I got the police phone number and officer’s name from Ruth and I call him. He told me that I HAD NOTHING TO WORRY about because that police station, where Joan Wheeler lives, KNOWS ALL ABOUT HER. They recognize her constant calls about harassments and that I ought to just ignore the phone message.

As I told the police, HOW DID two other people, miles and an ocean away from Joan Wheeler get lumped together with another person who made a LEGITMATE phone call? The reason is because Joan Wheeler lumps the three of us together as one unit and believes that we are OUT TO GET HER. The police are FULLY AWARE of Joan’s behavior and mental outlook.

In January of this year, just before our Dad died, Joan had gone unannouced to Dad’s home, where she was told NOT TO GO TO, and she gave a phone number to my step-mother who threw it in the garbage. In other words no body wanted the number. Days later, when the decision was made to call Joan and inform her of Dad’s passing, the question was asked ‘where is Joan’s phone number?’ and the answer was ‘IN THE GARBAGE’. It was fished out in order to phone Joan to inform her of Dad’s death and WHEN she was able to have her personal and private (away from all family members) viewing.

To be perfectly clear…no one WANTS Joan’s number, in fact we all wish she would remove her TWO WEB sites that are slanderous, libelous and full of lies about us and our families and fade into the sunset…

It’s time for Joan Wheeler to get the message…you have lost, give it up already!!

 Reply
 Ruth – July 15, 2011
Gert is right to point out that in January of 2011, Joan shows up at our father’s house WHERE SHE WAS TOLD NOT TO COME. We see here, Joan’s double standard. She is thrown out of our father’s house late summer 2009, and told never to return – reason? She insulted my father’s blood lineage (and her own – what an idiot) and his religion. (boy I know that one – because she insulted my relgion, AND Gert’s, AND Kathy’s).

ALSO – the day my father died, January 11, 2011, my husband and I rushed to the hospital. There were a total of 8 family members there – and then my brother and his girlfriend came, making a total of 10. While we were saying our goodbyes to Dad, the phone rang – my stepsister answered it, it was Joan. She held the phone at arms length – “what should I tell her?” We all shook our heads – my stepmother said “I don’t want her here.” M. said on the phone, “sorry, you just missed him.” and hung up. 20 minutes later, the phone rang again. I picked it up. “This is Joan Wheeler, can I speak to my father?” I said, “sorry, he’s not available.” Hey – he could have been in x-ray or getting a ct scan! But then Joan starting calling his house and leaving messages AFTER SHE HAD BEEN TOLD NOT TO CALL THE HOUSE!

Gert reported to me later that she went with our stepmother and was sitting at the kitchen table while my stepmother was clearing her messages and on one message Joan says “I will keep calling until I find out about my father.”

Who the hell does she think she is? She was told DON’T CALL. Yet she calls and ADMITS that she will keep calling an elderly woman! This is HARASSMENT and ELDER ABUSE!

And this two-faced bitch gets on the internet and reports that I harassed her when I merely called to tell her that her namesake died? And further calls an elderly man and screams at him for giving me her phone number?

Oh, so let me get this straight – JOAN CAN GIVE OUT ORDERS AND BITCH AND COMPLAIN WHEN SOMEBODY GOES AGAINST THOSE ORDERS! But when Joan is GIVEN the same dam orders, (don’t call) – SHE CAN IGNORE THE ORDERS!

Oh no way Joan honey, you don’t get to be a dam dictator, and tell everyone how to run their lives, and disregard their set boundaries. And then report on the internet how people go against YOUR dictated orders, but don’t report how YOU go against other people’s wishes.

Now you know why people HATE Joan and run the hell away from her!

2. Ruth – July 15, 2011 
Here’s an interesting email I just got from Gert – who was reminiscing about Joan and her ways.

“I remember a time when I came to visit Dad, and I took Ginette (our stepmother) shopping and she told me that when Joan would take her shopping Joan would put items in the cart and not until they got to the check out would Joan mention that she put the items in the cart and she didn’t have any money to pay them. Ginette said she never told Dad!! what a slease ball she is….

I remember when she invited us over, when she had her first apartment, and she said she was going to have spagetti and meatball and I have to bring the meat! And ofcourse I did…

Ruth here – yep – this is the kind of shit that Joan has done to us year after year – she’s a scam artist, a thief – her and her ex-husband scammed me out several hundred dollars!

Oh, I know how sweet and lovely and how innocent she can portray herself to be. I am a very intelligent person – I am very computer savvy, I own my house, have worked at my job for going on 39 years, trained to be a union steward, am well respected by my peers and colleagues,and yet got scammed! That is why I’m not too surprised at Jennifer Willett, Pastor Ruth Willert, Mara, Heather, Daisy, Laura, and others who listen to Joan’s whines and all think that I am a bitch and Joan is the saint. — Joan has a way of sugar coating things – and is very very sneaky. She knows that civil, well mannered people are NOT going to make a fuss at the checkout – and my stepmother is no dummy either – She was educated at the Sorbonne University in Paris (French version of Yale or Harvard).

This is the purpose of this blog – to shed the light on the misdeeds and the words of the bully called Joan Mary Wheeler.

4. Ruth – July 19, 2011
Just wanted to add a little thing about the myspace email exchange between me and my niece – my niece didn’t respond further.

Because she knew what I said was true, and COULDN’T respond, for all her bravado on saying “the Sippels are a piece of work.” – cute little dig there, I see the apple didn’t fall far from the tree. – But when I said she was unfair and pointed out that yeah, we Sippel siblings have careers and jobs and interests and DON’T mess with people – she couldn’t respond.

And as for her saying in regards to her mother putting stuff on the internet, “let her write her lil things online-” and I tell her NO WAY! Guess she couldn’t respond to that one either!

My stepmother told me in 2004 that my niece had a bit of a mouth on her – oh yeah? humph – she mouthed off all right and when she got put in her place – that was the end of that!

Because yeah, I’M A SIPPEL AND I AM A PIECE OF WORK – A PIECE OF WORK THAT IS A FORCE TO BE RECKONED WITH!

I do not take slander and libel against me laying down, whether it is in print or on the internet. And no, I will NOT let Joan write her lil things online – because those “lil things” are lies and slander designed to TARNISH MY REPUTATION along with other members of my family.

Joan Wheeler admits to punishing people for deeds and statements they did not do or say. July 9, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, mental illness, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

I was reading our last post and something Joan said hit close to home:

“About two years before my adoptive mother died, I was thinking about this and the fact that this aunt and my adoptive parents knew I had sisters and brothers when I was adopted, and NO ONE from the adoptive family wanted me to know about them,, so I took this up with my therapist. “Does your mother know how you feel?” was the question. I spent a yar and half crying to my mother about these two issues and she finally said, “But I didn’t say that to you!” (about the comment made at my adoptive father’s funeral). My adoptive mother never appologized for keeping me away from my siblings all of my life. BUt my aunt and my cousins definately felt I was wrong to be in a reunion with my natural father and my siblings. My adoptive mother died this past March. The cousin who made that remark was present in the room when my mother was dying, so was her mother and her sisters. Two sisters appologized and tearfully hugged me as my mother lay dying. My aunt never appologized. My natural father died this past January.” (all misspellings are Joan’s)

Pay attention to this line: “I spent a yar and half crying to my mother about these two issues and she finally said, “But I didn’t say that to you!” (about the comment made at my adoptive father’s funeral).”

This is so typical of Joan. She punishes people for things THEY HAVE NOT DONE OR SAID TO HER! Why did she spend a year and a half crying to her mother over something her mother DID NOT SAY?? Like it was her mother’s fault for something that her cousin said?

All through her book, Joan has taken words said by one person, and stuffed them into other people’s mouths!  For example, in her totally fictitious telling of a visit by Prof. Rene Hoksbergen to my house in 1987 (he NEVER stepped foot in my house), she has me saying to Hoksbergen “why is she putting our family business out in public?”

I never said that to Joan – EVER! In another incident, in the book, she relates a tale of an email exchange that she and I had in early 2004 and again, she has me berating her for “airing our family’s dirty laundry in public.” I had kept the printouts of that email exchange and scanned them and posted them here on this blog. NOWHERE in the email exchange did I say that. And you can read that email exchange here.

Gert and I noticed that many times statements that Joan attributes to her birth sisters were actually spoken by her amother. In her effort to paint everyone in her life with the same attitudes and oral statements, she takes statements from her mother and has other people saying them. This lends credence to her delusional ideas that everyone in her life is against her and out to get her.

I’ve been saying through out this blog, for a year and a half now, that Joan contradicts herself left and right. And I said before that she is on a path of punishment to anyone who supports adoption, and for some reason which I haven’t quite figured out why – she is on a path of punishment of her own birth sisters.

     And we have here her own admission of her own contradictory way of thinking. And her pattern of punishing people for something they did not do! She relates in her book about her acousin’s statement at her afather’s funeral. She has said the same thing on the internet before. Now she admits she was PUNISHING HER AMOTHER FOR THIS STATEMENT WHEN HER AMOTHER DID NOT SAY IT.

So let’s get this straight- in 1982, a cousin says a stupid thing to Joan. From 1982 to 2009, she’s been letting this thing fester inside of herself, and directing that festering anger at the cousin and her amother who did NOT say it. FOR 27 YEARS JOAN WAS  DIRECTING THAT FESTERING ANGER AT AN INNOCENT PERSON!

Like I said, Gert and I found many instances in the book where she has attributed statements to one person, when it was actually said by another person. And Joan says her book was written by her point of view.

Well her point of view is absolutely delusional, and that book is nothing but a chronicle of a deranged mind.

1. Gert McQueen – July 11, 2011
Ruth said:
And Joan says her book was written by her point of view.
Well her point of view is absolutely delusional, and that book is nothing but a chronicle of a deranged mind.

Gert adds:
this is totally correct! The book was (that’s past tense) nothing about adoption reform or how to deal with being an adoptee. The book was (that’s past tense) a detailed account of Joan’s mental view point, was not based on any real accounts with real people and a expression of her intense rage at being adopted. The book is Joan’s personal DIARY of her inner thoughts, views and opinions and as such is a work of demented fiction!

And Joan Wheeler believed that she was going to make tons of $ from that book and have a movie deal out of it!!! Delusional thinking will do that for you!

Reply
 Ruth – July 11, 2011
What is amazing to me, especially in light of Jennifer’s recent comment, is that people don’t see that when someone publishesa book that is THEIR VIEWPOINT AND OPINION, it is no longer a work of NON-FICTION!

What further amazes me is that Joan says in her book that I have an arrest record, and that at one point in time, she herself was arrested 3 times in one month! Neither she, nor I were ever arrested! When Joan put that in her book, the book ceased to be TRUTH. And when any person writes in a book that they were arrested three times in one month, when they never were, and other people like Jennifer continue to support, all I can do is say WHERE THE HELL ARE PEOPLE’S BRAINS?

I once challenged any and all law-enforcement personell who might be reading this blog to do criminal background checks on me and Joan. One of Joan’s supporters, who at one time left a couple of obscenity-laden comments here on this blog is a police officer. I wonder if she took me up on my challenge – because she hasn’t been back since. At least SOMEbody finally used their brains.

A call to arm against the nasty sisters. – Joan Wheeler calls in the big dudes to sic it to us – roflmao! June 17, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

by Gert McQueen

For those that have not seen the recent events on line here is the link to see Joan Wheeler’s article and all the comments.

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial-page/from-our-readers/my-view/article450236.ece

On June 15, 201, Joan noticed that Ruth and I had commented on her article and so she goes to the adult adoptee’s forum and places this call to arm against her sisters!!! 

 
« Reply #11 on: Today at 12:42:25 PM »
 

For those of you who care to comment further, I need your help. The sisters who still stalk me on this forum have made comments online following this article about how they were able to pull my book from the publisher because of the lies that I told. First,, my article iin the Buffalo News has nothing to do with reunion, and second, the publisher pulled the book without an attorney representing me so I am having my own attorney look into the matter. Thirdly, the book was written from my point of view, not theirrs,, so of course they would disagree. This is all so very costly, both in money and emotional energy for me. They insist on publicizing their own blogs which continute to be filled against me.
****
 This call resulted in only ONE person, Laura, coming after me on the comments and I just put her in her place. There have been no other supporters and no one is talking about it…just where are Joan’s supporters? Anyway…
 
This call for help, by Joan to her adoptee friends, contain quite a lot of valuable information. It proves that Joan still believes her own propaganda…that she is being stalked! It doesn’t hurt to say this again…reading online articles and blogs and commenting on them is NOT any form of stalking. If anything, Joan is guilty of stalking the birth sisters because she still HAS not one but two, count them 2, blogs wherein she slanders us, continually. So until Joan Wheeler removes the blogs that talk about us in slanderous ways, we shall continue to watch, monitor and comment on her words.
 
She attempts to draw the attention to the fact that the book was pulled only because WE SAID she lied. She does not accept the fact that the book was indeed pulled, that is why she still promotes the book. Then she goes into the reasons why we sisters have no business commenting on her article. One, that the article has nothing to do with reunion…that is very telling…she can only think about us in ‘reunion’ mode…she does not see nor acknowledge any wrong doing on her part…its all the nasty sisters.
 
Second, she says “the publisher pulled the book without an attorney representing me so I am having my own attorney look into the matter.”
 
Oh she is waiting for her attorney…like she has one on retainer!…to look into the matter, so that the book will be reprinted no doubt! Ha what a laugh, she is on Social Security Disability and the state of NY pays the Legal Aid lawyers that she hounds to get help from!  Fact is that there was NO NEED for an attorney to represent her in the matter. It was a matter of a CONTRACT between Joan Wheeler and Trafford Publishing! Trafford’s lawyers took 4 months looking over the content of the book and the evidence that we sent them and they ‘covered’ their own backsides BEFORE they contacted Joan to inform her that they were pulling the book. Joan signed a contract and the contents of the book were in violation of the contract. She was told she could REWRITE it. They told both me and Ruth that if any rewrite was submitted, it will be looked at very very closely. So Joan could wait forever for her attorney from legal aid to tell her she doesn’t have a leg to stand on…or…Joan could just take me to court and sue my sorry ass for bothering her! I welcome an attorney…please please send a attorney after me!!!
 
Third she says: “the book was written from my point of view, not theirrs,, so of course they would disagree.”
 
Very very telling…same old rap…and not rap music…this is Joan’s story and she’s sticking with it, don’t confuse her with the truth that will only cause her head to explode! POP there goes Joan’s head! She can’t get it…she can not write something, about other people, from her point of view, and call it truth. She can not understand why we ‘disagree’ with her view. Doesn’t matter anymore Joan…keep speaking your rap, keeping popping up on public forums so that we can blow your logic and your view to shreds! At some point even a dog learns to stop doing something if he gets hit enough times!
 
Joan says: “This is all so very costly, both in money and emotional energy for me.”
I’m very glad to know that this is costly to her! It’s about time that she pay a bit for all the years and the continued harassments that she has done and is doing to us…pay baby pay! But what money is she spending on this? She doesn’t have a lawyer to pay…if she did…she would have me in court already. I don’t have to get a lawyer, cause getting one will cost me money and there is NOTHING that Joan has that I could gain from any damages because Joan Wheeler is a disabled person with on income or assests.
 
The cost of her emotional energy is again something that I’m very glad to hear…pay baby, pay!! You have done it all to yourself…all your words, in that book, are going to be coming back to haunt you. I am not done, there is a lot of things that have not gotten on this blog but in due time it will and I hope that each and every blog post causes you more emotional energy loss.
 
Finally she says: “They insist on publicizing their own blogs which continute to be filled against me.”
 
How does she know that our blogs (actually only one) are filled against her? She obviously is reading it! She can’t keep away…we see the stats, we know the sites that come and read it and Joan is right there, checking on what we say…so why doesn’t Joan just learn to give it up!
 
Joan, you lost, your book is garbage and untruthful, it is libelous and will not be reprinted, start over with writing your life…hey Mara said you have enough material on your nasty sisters to write a second book…so go for it…but next time make sure you don’t mention that ‘forbidden family’ cause we shall haunt you forever!
 

1. Lisa Marie – June 17, 2011
Congratulations on having her book pulled.

Reply
 2. Ruth – June 18, 2011
Thank you Lisa
as to Joan’s call for the calvary charge –
hee hee hee
She called , they ignored.
“What? What was that? A call to go over to your sister’s blog and leave hate messages? Um, we did that in February 2010. Then some of us did it in May 2010, then we did it again, um when was it? Geez, we don’t remember. — so let’s get this straight- you keep whining to us about your big bad birth sisters, you keep trashing them on different internet forums, oh yeah, that’s right – in March 2011, you told lies on The Huffington Post about them, invading their privacy, trashed your own grandfather, and got yourself kicked off the Huffington Post. So now what? You want us to come and swear at your sisters again?, sorry, we got better things to do. Been there, done that.”

 

Joan Wheeler admits to having told lies in her book Forbidden Family June 17, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

by Ruth Pace

Joan didn’t like the fact that Gert and I read her editorial in The Buffalo News and like a little girl, went running to the adoptee forum for help again. 

  Re: The Buffalo News finally published my article on adoptees birth certs! « Reply #11 on: Today at 12:42:25 PM »

 


For those of you who care to comment further, I need your help. The sisters who still stalk me on this forum have made comments online following this article about how they were able to pull my book from the publisher because of the lies that I told. First,, my article iin the Buffalo News has nothing to do with reunion, and second, the publisher pulled the book without an attorney representing me so I am having my own attorney look into the matter. Thirdly, the book was written from my point of view, not theirrs,, so of course they would disagree. This is all so very costly, both in money and emotional energy for me. They insist on publicizing their own blogs which continute to be filled against me.

 Look at this sentence again – “…have made comments online following this article about how they were able to pull my book from the publisher because of the lies that I told.”

 Joan does not say “because of the lies THEY ALLEGE I TOLD,” but says “because of the lies I told.” Typo? Not a chance – this is a classic Freudian slip of the tongue/hands on keyboard. This whack job is fairly SCREAMING for help. She is so lonely, her tormenting mama died. The only life she has ever known is strife and torment. So like a little child, she comes running to bait Gert and me – FOR ALL THE ATTENTION WE CAN GIVE HER! She has no family – she says this all the time. All she ever wanted was her birth family. When she first found out she was adopted when she was 16, she made the conscious decision to SEEK OUT HER BIRTH FAMILY. She WANTED to be connected with us – she still CRAVES THAT CONNECTION.

 Over and over she says she is incomplete. She wants her family. So she does things to get our attention. And in a sick way, she self-sabotages what she wants. This is classic behavior of a delusional sick person – any therapist will tell you that.

 Where are the guys in the white coats?

now look at this sentance: “They insist on publicizing their own blogs which continute to be filled against me.”

see how she says blogS – again, we see how she EXAGGERATES everything. We have only ONE blog, we put a link to only ONE blog on the News website. So her sentance should have read “They insist on publicizing their blog (singular) that (singular) continues (singular, even tho it ends with an s, because it refers to ONE item).” – either she is a liar, an exaggerator, an imbecile, or a delusional lunatic. – take your pick – because she did NOT tell the truth in that sentance. There was no link to multiple blogS, only one. Readers – go check it out – here is the link – go see if  we publicized ONE blog or multiple blogS. Then you will be able to see that there is something seriously wrong with Joan.  

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial-page/from-our-readers/my-view/article450236.ece

 

face it Joan – you need to change your address to 400 Forest Ave. – Buffalo Psychiatric Center

Joan Wheeler, con artist, scams the writer’s group she is in to promote her own agenda of adoption reform – in Joan’s own words May 25, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Announcements and updates, Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

 by Ruth Sippel Pace

Earlier today, May 25, 2011, I posted Joan Wheeler has conned another person about her book of lies, Forbidden Family Part 2. In it I copied and pasted Joan’s own words from the Adult Adoptees Advocating for Change forum. I want to do that again, in this post, to highlight Joan’s behavior, a behavior that I did not touch on in my previous post. – Her USING and MANIPULATING people again – those being the members of this writing group that she joined several months ago.

 Joan went out on a recon-mission to promote her agenda. Think about this timing… she tells the forum about the writer’s group and her proposed infiltrating into that group to get them to talk about BC and adoption etc. Over time some of these people probably had brought the book, she did have about 3 books sold in April and that got her all excited and asked this poor woman to help her with a ‘thank you’ to those nasty sisters. And this was ALL DONE BEFORE TRAFFORD CALLED HER. (about pulling the book from publication).

 Here is Joan’s own words on what she wanted the writer’s group for:

 writers’ groups and adoption reform

« on: February 18, 2011, 12:36:14 PM »

1adoptee:
Hi gang! I found a new avenue to get adoption reform issues to the general public: local writing groups.

Here’s what I’ve been doing for the last few months. I found a local writer’s group and started attending meetings. I sat in for awhile before bringing in some of my own writings. When I got up the courage, I brought in a first draft of an online comment in response to an article posted on some online Newspaper.

The group I belong to requires members to pass out copies of their works. Members read and reflect on what’s written, and then write down their critique of the piece. A moderator goes from person to person and each one says out loud what they like, dislike, and ways to improve the piece. After everyone gets a chance to talk, the author of the piece addresses the group’s concerns.
 
So when it was my turn last night, I passed around a draft of a comment I was working on. The critique is supposed to center around the writing itself, but, as you know, people get caught up in their perceptions of adoption and then give their opinions of adoption, without really understanding that the piece I wrote is about adoption reform. We had a rousing discussion of what adoption is, and when it got to my turn to speak, I pointed out that every adoptee has two birth certificates and there is pending legislation in various states for adoptee access to their sealed records. This was an excellent way to educate the general public, at least the people in the room, and, at the same time, get feedback on my own writing style.

So, for those of you out there who are writers, pop in at your local writers group. Bring your own works with you, share them, and spread the word!

  Re: writers’ groups and adoption reform

« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2011, 11:56:59 AM »

1adoptee:
Yeah, the rainbow-farters are all upset and they whine, “Why should I adopt a child if this stuff is going on?” and the usual, “My sister adopted three kids and my friend has an adopted child…” It was really hard not to bite their headds off, but I said this isn’t about adoptive parents,, this is about an adoptee’s right to her original birth certificate. The room of about ten people found it difficult to focus on why I brought my one-page letter to them. It was a draft and I wanted suggestions as to how to make it a better essay. One or two of the people actually focused on the group’s activities: writing! Next meeting I’ll bring copies of my original and amended birth certificates for them to see what really happens…should be interesting to hear the discussion then! Fear, yeah, I fell it. But it also feels good to get the message out!

 end of comments

Notice how she disrespects the group members and calls them “rainbow farters.” And she wanted to bite their heads off. Then she says she will bring her birth certificates to the next meeting. Is the group a WRITER’S group or a POLITICAL group? As usual, Joan wants to ram HER agenda down people’s throats. It would have been a different story if Joan were asked by the membership to bring in her BC’s and enlighten them, but noooo, Joan doesn’t WAIT to be asked – she simply TAKES OVER AND RAMS HER OWN OPINIONS DOWN OTHER’S THROATS and if they disagree with her – she smells and feels their “fear,” calls them names – and fairly relishes the idea that she will be disrupting the next meeting. As of this writing, that meeting has taken place. Joan does not report on the forum what transpired.

 Joan uses and manipulates people – she is a true bully. She is a mastermind at conning people.

 As for the “rainbow” farters –  they are adults (I think). As for myself, I happen to like rainbows. They are pretty. Much prettier than the two-faced compliments that Joan doles out to those who she wants to use. If she has a use for you, she’s all nice to your face. But see in JOAN’S OWN WORDS, what she REALLY thinks of the writer’s group.

Joan Wheeler has conned another person about her book of lies, Forbidden Family Part 2 May 25, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Announcements and updates, Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Lessons in Life, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

 by Ruth Sippel Pace

In my post of May 24, 2011, Joan Wheeler has conned another person about her book of lies, Forbidden Family,  I blog about how a poor woman got conned into buying one of the few remaining copies of this lying book. She then wrote a “review” of it on amazon.com. The “review” was no such thing. The “review” was simply adoptee rhetoric about birth certificates, and bringing up the subject of Barrack Obama and Donald Trump, which has nothing to do with the book. And it is clear, the woman didn’t read the book very well. Anyways, in doing some research, we find that this woman is a youth pastor, is a writer, and is part of a writer’s group in the north suburbs of Buffalo, NY.

 In Gert’s post of May 10, 2011, Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family has been pulled from publication part 2 – Joan thanks her birth sisters for exposing her lies. Gert tells of Joan adding a page on her Forbidden Family site, which she uses as a dig against us birth sisters, under the tab “Thank You”. Gert says in her post: “… she (Joan) has found herself a writing ‘coach’, for these 4 paragraphs are NOT fully Joan Wheeler’s words. How do I know? Because I have read and know Joan’s writing style and her choice of words, as they are written in her book and on various web sites, and they are not used in this smug ‘thank you’. “

 It is now clear who her writing coach is: Ruth Willerth of Smattersings Books, a self-described Christian writer and a youth pastor.

 Now back on February 18, 2011, and February 22, 2011, Joan, under her member name of 1adoptee, on the Adult Adoptees Advocating for Change forum posted the following:

 writers’ groups and adoption reform

« on: February 18, 2011, 12:36:14 PM »

1adoptee:
Hi gang! I found a new avenue to get adoption reform issues to the general public: local writing groups.

Here’s what I’ve been doing for the last few months. I found a local writer’s group and started attending meetings. I sat in for awhile before bringing in some of my own writings. When I got up the courage, I brought in a first draft of an online comment in response to an article posted on some online Newspaper.

The group I belong to requires members to pass out copies of their works. Members read and reflect on what’s written, and then write down their critique of the piece. A moderator goes from person to person and each one says out loud what they like, dislike, and ways to improve the piece. After everyone gets a chance to talk, the author of the piece addresses the group’s concerns.
 
So when it was my turn last night, I passed around a draft of a comment I was working on. The critique is supposed to center around the writing itself, but, as you know, people get caught up in their perceptions of adoption and then give their opinions of adoption, without really understanding that the piece I wrote is about adoption reform. We had a rousing discussion of what adoption is, and when it got to my turn to speak, I pointed out that every adoptee has two birth certificates and there is pending legislation in various states for adoptee access to their sealed records. This was an excellent way to educate the general public, at least the people in the room, and, at the same time, get feedback on my own writing style.

So, for those of you out there who are writers, pop in at your local writers group. Bring your own works with you, share them, and spread the word!

 Re: writers’ groups and adoption reform

« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2011, 11:56:59 AM »

1adoptee:
Yeah, the rainbow-farters are all upset and they whine, “Why should I adopt a child if this stuff is going on?” and the usual, “My sister adopted three kids and my friend has an adopted child…” It was really hard not to bite their headds off, but I said this isn’t about adoptive parents,, this is about an adoptee’s right to her original birth certificate. The room of about ten people found it difficult to focus on why I brought my one-page letter to them. It was a draft and I wanted suggestions as to how to make it a better essay. One or two of the people actually focused on the group’s activities: writing! Next meeting I’ll bring copies of my original and amended birth certificates for them to see what really happens…should be interesting to hear the discussion then! Fear, yeah, I fell it. But it also feels good to get the message out!

End of comments

Now, let us review this evidence:

 Joan went out on a recon-mission to promote her agenda. Think about this timing… she tells the forum about the writer’s group and her proposed infiltrating into that group to get them to talk about BC and adoption etc. Over time some of these people probably had brought the book, she did have about 3 books sold in April and that got her all excited and asked this poor woman to help her with a ‘thank you’ to those nasty sisters. And this was ALL DONE BEFORE TRAFFORD CALLED HER,. So then when she gets the word that the book is being pulled she harasses and browbeats this woman, Joan is an expert browbeater, to purchase the book so that she could do a review…remember you have to be a customer to write a review…that’s why the woman HAD TO BUY the book to leave a new and revised ‘agenda’ for the book. What bullshit.

 Well, here is my message to Pastor Ruth and the other members of that writer’s group: discuss long and hard about the book Forbidden Family – learn your lessons well: how NOT to try to con your publisher. How NOT to lie and say it is a non-fiction book that is the truth, when it is full of slander and libel. How NOT to publish a photograph that you don’t own the copyrights to.

Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family is a case study on how NOT to write and publish a book.

Pastor Ruth and her writer’s group ought to print out this email I sent to Mr. Eugene Hopkins of Trafford Publishing. They need to study it and further learn from Joan Wheeler’s mistakes.

May 16, 2011 –

Eugene Hopkins

Trafford, Author Solutions

Dear Mr. Hopkins,

I am the younger sister of Gert McQueen, with whom you have been in discussions with for the past few months over the book that your company published, “Forbidden Family” by Joan M. Wheeler.

I know that you had received our complaint about this book back on January 21, 2011. I also emailed you my co-complaint on this book. Included in my email, I attached several scanned official court documents pertaining to court cases between Ms. Wheeler and myself.

It is my understanding that recently you remarked to Gert that you were reluctant to get involved in a “family squabble.” Mr. Hopkins, Ms. Wheeler ceased to be a legal family member to us when she was adopted out of our family in 1957. Although we were reunited in 1974, I cut ties with her in 1990 after she stole hundreds of dollars from me. She further alienated herself to me in 1993 when she filed a false police report against me, over phone calls that I placed to her house, (in response to a letter she sent me). I called her house, and she said to me “hold on,” and hung up on me.  She then reported to the police that I was placing threatening calls to her. I was summoned into court and Ms. Wheeler was granted a six-month order of protection against me.

In her book, that your company published, she records this incident, but claims that I was placed under arrest (I was not.), that she was granted a one-year order of protection against me (it was for six-months), that I was placed on probation (I was not), and that I have a criminal record (I do not). 

I covered this and more in my emailed complaint to you and provided the actual court documents that prove that Ms. Wheeler lied, committing the crime of LIBEL in her book, that your company published.

In another part of her book, Ms. Wheeler describes a three month court battle between me and her in the year of 1994. This is completely false.

Also, on the back cover of the book, which your company published, is a family photograph that is of my parents, my siblings, and myself. Ms. Wheeler herself is NOT in the photograph at all – and the picture was taken BEFORE Ms. Wheeler was not even born, therefore, she wasn’t even a member of the family pictured on the back of her book. I have never given Ms. Wheeler permission, orally, or in writing, permission to use my photograph on her book. Also, since the photograph was taken sometime mid-1955, and Ms. Wheeler was born on January 7, 1956, and then 4 months later adopted out of the family, she does not OWN this photograph. She may “own” a paper copy of this photo, but since she was NOT a legal member of the family depicted in the photo, she does NOT have the legal right to publish it and gain monetary gain from it.

Whether you think of me and Ms. Wheeler as “family members” or not has no bearing on the basis of our complaint – that is being that Ms. Wheeler (and your company) has/have published my picture without my legal consent. In lying about a three month court case between us in 1994, and lying about the length of time the order of protection granted to her in 1993, Ms. Wheeler is presenting falsehoods about the City Court of the City of Buffalo. When Ms. Wheeler presents in her book that I was placed under arrest, she is presenting falsehoods about the Buffalo Police Department.

Further, may I ask you Mr. Hopkins, should a person be subjected to such slander and libel with no recourse, simply because they are related to the perpetrator? The issue of Ms. Wheeler being related to me and Gert is a NON-issue. Ms. Wheeler lied in her book. That is all that should concern you.

Gert tells me that several times in her conversations with you, you have told her that our complaint is in your legal department, and you have yet to hear back from your lawyers.

On your website is the Terms and Conditions for authors to agree to when submitting their work for publication. I cite the following items that Ms. Wheeler is in violation of YOUR own Terms and Conditions.

2. YOUR LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY

2.1. You represent that (i) you are the sole copyright owner of the Work and all of its content.

   Ms. Wheeler is in violation of this because she has MY likeness on the back of her book, WITHOUT my consent.

2.4. You further represent that the Work does not contain illegal, unlawful or objectionable material including, but not limited to, pornography, obscenity or hate speech. You acknowledge that the Work is not plagiarized and does not include

falsely attributed statements of third parties.

.    Ms. Wheeler is in violation of the second sentence, because as I pointed out above, she has lied about actual court proceedings between her and me.

I further cite YOUR Terms and Conditions as presented to authors on your website:

7. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT

7.1. Suspension of Services. Upon a breach, default, or failure by you to comply with these Terms and Conditions or the failure to cooperate with us in the provision of any Services, we will have the right to suspend any or all performance until you cooperate with these Terms and Conditions and/or cooperate with us in the provision of Services.

Since I have just pointed out that Ms. Wheeler IS in violation of 2.1 and 2.4 of YOUR Terms and Conditions as presented on your website, Mr. Hopkins, you have NO choice, but to pull the book Forbidden Family off the market, your website, and your advertisement of it on Amazon.com. I don’t understand why your lawyers cannot come up with a timely interpretation of your own terms and conditions, the definition of the term libel, and the application of the term libel to Ms. Wheeler’s statements of me in her book that you published.

On page 670 of the Tenth Edition (1994) of the Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary are the following definitions of the term LIBEL:

-          A written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression.

-          A statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt.

-          Defamation of a person by written or representable means

-          The act, tort, or crime of publishing such a libel

I believe that all four definitions cover what Ms. Wheeler has done in her book. By falsely reporting in her book that I have an arrest record, she is conveying a unjustly unfavorable impression.

You have stated to Mrs. McQueen that you do not want to be in the middle of a “family squabble.” This is no “family squabble.” It is accurate accusation of libel and a justifiable demand for the pulling of this book.

I expect to be hearing shortly on your decision to do a right and lawful action: the pulling of this libelous book.

Thank you for your help in this matter.

Very sincerely yours,

Mrs. Ruth Pace

cc: Kevin Weiss; Kevin A. Gray; Gert McQueen

Gert McQueen answers the secret is out – more evidence of misdeeds and lies by Joan Wheeler May 19, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

by Gert McQueen

There are many essays or blog posts that I have written that have not been seen yet on this blog. Seeing that we are discussing and showing our EVIDENCE I feel it is time for the following to be posted. It is part of a larger essays where I discuss many pieces of evidence about Joan’s lying. And we do have the physical documents to go with it. Here we go:

The next pieces of evidence are in connection to the article The secret is out that Joan wrote in 1990 published in England and the aftermath from it. This article caused great concern because in the article Joan uses her sisters’ real names, interestingly enough not mine. In any event, the publication of that article is what caused certain letters to be written, alerting those agencies, listed in the article, that privacy was not afforded to the persons mentioned in the article. These letters were not ‘harassments’ but legitimate letters of concern for the breach of privacy the author committed. It is only Joan who turns these letters into gross obscene letters in her fabrication of telling of them. 

As I have stated in previous posts, I did not write any letters to Joan and it is a falsehood for Joan to write in her book on pg 308 ‘…my sisters wrote harassing letters in the months after our family reunion of 92’. Which sisters? She does not say, so how can anyone be sure whom Joan is referring to? (Ruths’ note: as usual, Joan lumps all three of her sisters as one entity. Only thing is, we didn’t write harassing letters to her, either individually or collectively.) On pg 310 she writes ‘…the 40 page letter that my sisters put together…’ and ‘…my sisters included copies of long handwritten letters they wrote to the nine major adoption…’ Wrong! Joan does not name the sisters because there were no sisters, in the plural. Ruth and I never wrote to those nine major adoption agencies listed in the article. Kathy wrote legitimate letters of concern for the breach of privacy; all else is pure nonsense and fabrication by Joan. Furthermore, Kathy wrote an seven-page letter, not 40 pages; Joan loves hyperbole! (see graphics #4a-4g below).

Hyperbole…exaggeration: deliberate and obvious exaggeration used for effect.

Again, we shall revisit this issue, when I return to the book, after I complete this presentation of the evidence of Joan’s own behavior of fabrication, telling lies, doing harassments, and other deeds that are not in her book. For now it is sufficient to state that we three sisters, who are refuting the lies of Joan, possess proof that she is a liar and user of hyperbole solely for the effect of putting us sisters in bad light.

As part of the fallout from the breach of privacy and Joan’s consistent disregard for returning Kathy’s personal property to her, Kathy in England , demanded her property returned to her. There were negotiations; monies sent by Kathy to Joan, for shipping, back and forth letters, but all of Kathy’s efforts were stalled by Joan because Joan had excuse after excuse for not sending them.

Evidence here: In two letters that Joan wrote to Kathy (ca.1992) we learn from Joan, in one, ‘…yes I did receive the money order…put it in a special account for when I have time to pack everything for you…can’t do it right now…don’t have a car…can’t do anything right now…Colby lost his job…trying to cope with unemployment…I am working two part-time jobs…pay is low…with this new upset…going and finding your scrapbooks will just have to wait…. the records are safe…I’ll let you know when I can get the stuff together…before Christmas…’  and in another ‘…have been sad that our relationship ended abruptly and that I have caused you pain…felt the need to reach out to you…need to apologize for overstepping my bounds in your life…I respect your right to privacy and am sorry for my past behaviors…I ask forgiveness…and hope that we can be friends again…since I’m rather busy now, I will try to pack up your things sometime before Christmas…working two part-time jobs and will be going back to college in the fall…’ (see graphics 1 and 2 below).

So we see from Joan’s own words; that she did receive money to send Kathy’s things back to her, that she put the money in a special account, for when she has time, but she can’t do it now, no car, husband lost a job, coping with unemployment, working two jobs, pay is low, new upset, getting your stuff will just have to wait, let you know when I can get the stuff to you later but sad that our relationship ended abruptly and I caused you pain, need to reach out to you, to apologize, respect your right to privacy, sorry for past behaviors, ask forgiveness, can be friends, but I’m rather busy now, will try to pack your stuff before Christmas, working two jobs and going back to college in the fall.

Would you, reader, buy that brunch of boloney? She was given the money to ship the items but found excuses for not doing so and yet she has the money and time to go back to college! How nice! Priorities!

Neither did Kathy, buy it that is, and when Kathy puts the pressure on to get her property back, Joan enlists the ‘big guy’; Dr. Rene Hoksbergen, the very same that wrote the forward of this book of lies and fabrications! It ought to be noted that the last time the good Dr. saw a ‘draft’ of the book was in 2006, three years before publication! Joan has done extensive rewrites since he saw it. I wonder if Dr Hoksbergen would approve of the published work? Perhaps I shall write him! I’ll think about that!

In the meanwhile, I’ll just inform folks with, yes that’s right, evidence here, just what Dr Hoksbergen said to my sister Kathy on Joan’s behalf. (see graphic #3 below). It ought to be remembered that Joan is a very good con artist. Joan can play the part of the misused, misunderstood adoptee, that the birth family seems to go out of their way to make life miserable for her. This letter by Dr Hoksbergen was written to Kathy in April 1993.

In part he says: ‘…you will be amazed that you suddenly get a letter from a complete stranger…(goes into his educational and professional backgrounds)…connected with the phenomenon of adoption …conference in 1987 I met your sister Joan Wheeler…tried to help her with some of her questions and problems…I very well know the complexity of her life situation and emotional stress this often gives to her…sometimes we have to give adoptees some more time and understanding then we do in other occasions…conference in April I had a long discussion with Joan about many important family related questions. It has become clear to me that she is very sad about the problems she seems to have with you. It is a pity that rather uncomplicated questions of yours, has given deep going emotional stress to at least Joan and as far as I understand also to you. Let me be more clear: you have asked her to send back your goods…last year Joan had a lot of material problems…not having a car, losing her jobs etc…Joan does not have the money…(goes into detail about weight and costs)…it is an idea to ask Joan what precisely you definitely want to have back as soon as possible…the rest could be taken back slowly, when you visit your friends and relations in the USA…to my opinion problems like these should not divide people…related…who might need each other…when people live far away from each other…things easily might become complicated…I would ask you to forgive Joan what you think she did wrongly…I’m sure that her intensions are good…but she has problems to carry out the things you asked her…I know she would love it so much to have a good friendship with you…she has tried to see you in Liverpool…but she does not have the money for it…it is a useful idea if you write me back about your suggestions…if you prefer this in stead of writing directly to Joan…I know that she very much want to solve the problems you have with each other…’

Okay! Here’s what I see in this communication; first and foremost intimidation by a professional with the use of a condescending tone to a woman who has already paid to have her personal property return and is being denied justice. Secondly, what I see is, the continuation of the mixture of intimidation as well as a good dose of browbeating, which btw is somewhat common with the professional attitudes of doctors.

‘phenomenon of adoption’  …since when is adoption a phenomenon?

‘complexity of her life situation and emotional stress’ …do only adoptee have complexity and emotional stress, is this some kind of new ‘condition’ that the rest of the population doesn’t have?

‘give adoptees some more time and understanding then we do in other occasions’ …again, what makes the adoptee some kind of special needs person? Does this mean they are in the same category as the physically and mentally ‘challenged’ individuals are in (for those that are not PCs they are commonly called retarded)?

‘she is very sad about the problems she seems to have with you’ …oh so Joan needs a professional to communicate that sentiment?

‘it is a pity’ …no shit!

‘Let me be more clear’ …by all means, what he is saying is that Kathy and by extension the rest of the birth family ‘needs’ to understand the special conditions that the adoptee has and we must alter our views. (Ruth’s note: the birth family is not considered to be human, with our own human needs, desires, etc. ONLY the adoptee matters. – BULLSHIT – I am just as IMPORTANT as the adoptee, they are NOT the center of the universe, just because in their view, they got shafted. LOTS of people the world over get shafted every day, adopted or not. Life sucks. DEAL WITH IT.)

‘Joan does not have the money’ … she was given the money, what happened to it and even if she wasn’t given the money why is it that she can’t give back someone else’s property? (Ruth’s note: What happened to this money, that Joan says she put in a “special account?” I know what happened to it – the same thing that happened to MY money that Joan and I had in a joint checking account for the purpose of buying real estate in 1990 – Joan STOLE it – used if for HER living expenses).

‘had a lot of material problems’ …is Joan the only person in the world with problems, does not Kathy have anything in her life that should be considered here?

‘the rest could be taken back slowly, when you visit your friends and relations in the USA’   …an assumption that Kathy will be visiting the USA, was never in the negotiations to begin with, that’s a direct attempt at turning the whole thing back onto Kathy.

‘to my opinion’ …amazing that he didn’t send Kathy a bill for his opinion, what did it cost Joan for getting the doctor to write this letter? (Ruth’s note: I wonder as well. All evidence points to  Joan and the doctor being waaay beyond professional ties.)

‘‘ask you to forgive Joan what you think she did wrongly’ …excuse me! what right does this guy have to say such a thing?

‘that her intensions are good’ …intensions my ass, any intelligent person knows that following through is what matters!

‘to have a good friendship with you’ …that falls squarely onto Joan’s shoulders and no one else!

‘it is a useful idea if you write me back.’ …no thank you!

‘that she very much want to solve the problems you have with each other’ …we have heard that before!

So there you have it, the evidence of Joan Wheeler’s own behavior of fabrication, telling lies, doing harassments, and other deeds that are not in her book, Forbidden Family.

Ruth’s additional note – examine carefully Dr. Hoksbergen letter to Kathy – Joan told him that it would cost about $500.00 to ship her belongings to her. Really? Kathy enlisted the help of our father to get her belongings back. My father never owned a car, never learned to drive. So what he did, was TAKE A TAXI-CAB to Joan’s house and get Kathy’s belongings and took them to his house, packed them up and shipped them over to Kathy in three different shipments. On July 7, 1993, the first shipment went out, costing my father $52.75. On August  7, 1993, the second shipment went out, costing $45.95. On November 23, 1993, the third and final shipment went out, costing $52.95. The total my father paid was $150.95 – far less than the $500.00 Joan led Dr. Hoskbergen to believe. And this bullshit happened only 3 years after Joan conned me out of several hundred dollars! Joan is a liar, a thief and a con-artist. She belongs in jail! The letters she wrote to Kathy in 1992 (graphics 1 and 2, are the same kind of nonsense she had feeding me in 19990 and 1991 about the money she stole from me. Apologies, crocodile tears, promises of repayment, excuse after excuse why she couldn’t pay me back, blah, blah, blah, until I finally had enough of her lies and bullshit and turned my back on her completely – I lost around $700.00 to her, and that doesn’t even cover the interest I was paying every month – yes, interest – it wasn’t even MY money Joan stole – it was money I borrowed from the bank – Joan put me into debt – I couldn’t afford to fix my car, I was forced to take a bus in the snow and cold, while Joan drove a car, which she fixed with MY (borrowed) money! As I noted above – this money was in a joint checking account to buy real estate – Joan stole it for her own day-to-day living expenses. After I washed my hands of her in 1991, she went to find another mark – she tried to play Kathy for a fool – she got 50 bucks out of Kathy. Now you know why her birth sisters turned their backs on her. Joan also did NOT return all of Kathy’s belongings: missing are valuable Beatles collectibles: Beatles bubble gum sets, copies of The Beatles Fan Club magazine, a signed sketch by original Beatle member Stuart Sutcliffe. By not returning these items (and others) – Joan is guilty of THEFT. Joan has been asked for years to return these items, I personally saw them in the attic of her house on Swinburne St. in the late 1980′s, so she cannot LIE and say she doesn’t have them.

See the graphics 5a and 5b, below – my father’s receipts! Proof positive that Joan is a liar and a con-artist and LIED to her palsie-walsie, Dr. Rene Hoksbergen. And Dr. Hoksbergen, was so stupid as to be conned by Joan, stuck his nose into our family business, and got a complaint made to his employer, Utrecht University about his unprofessionalism. He apparently didn’t learn his leasson, because in 2006, he was conned by Joan again into writing a forward to her lying book. Unless he wasn’t really conned after all – won’t be the first time a man was drawn into a woman’s web. Just look what Arnold Schwarzenegger did! The bigger they are – the harder they fall. Arnold just fell. Joan just fell. Who’s next? I sent Dr. Hoksbergen a private message via facebook for his explanation and a public apology for his contribution to this lying piece of trash book. He hasn’t responded yet. If he doesn’t, I’ll know my assessment of him is correct.

1. April 27, 1992 Joan apologizes to Kathy (breach of privacy, using Kathy's name in Secret is Out article, offers up excuses

 
  

2. mid 1992, Joan admits to receiving Kathy's money order, offers MORE excuses

3. Rene Hoksbergen's letter to Kathy, April 19, 1993; says cost to ship her belongings will be $500.00

 

4a Kathy's letter to Hoksbergen, May 2, 1993, page 1

 

4b Kathy's letter to Hoksbergen, May 2, 1993, page 2

 

4c Kathy's letter to Hoksbergen, May 2, 1993, page 3

 

4d Kathy's letter to Hoksbergen, May 2, 1993, page 4

 

4e Kathy's letter to Hoksbergen, May 2, 1993, page 5

 

4f Kathy's letter to Hoksbergen, May 2, 1993, page 6

 

4g Kathy's letter to Hoksbergen, May 2, 1993, page 7

 

5a Shipping receipts, July 17, 1993 - $52.75 and August 7, 1993 - $45.95

 

5b Shipping receipt November 23, 1993 - $52.25

 
 
 

 

 

The Secret is Out – An examination of Joan Wheeler’s failure to protect her birth sister’s identities in her book Forbidden Family May 15, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed
 
 by Ruth Sippel Pace

Joan Wheeler likes to point out that she changed my name in her book Forbidden Family, thereby “protecting” my identity. What nonsense. Just because she changed my name to “Brenda” doesn’t mean she protected me at all. She claims that we identified ourselves on our blog AFTER the book was published, thereby relieving her of the duty of “protecting” us.

    This is an excerpt from a recent blog post by Gert McQueen:

And here are more lies. It was Joan herself that made public our real identities, not once but several times. On Pg 634, footnote #15 of Forbidden Family she references her article The Secret is Out, written and published in 1990 where Joan published our full real names. We objected to that then and as Joan tells it, we harassed her. No! If she was not ‘outing’ the identities of us in the book Forbidden Family then WHY did she put in the reference to an article that identifies us and where anyone could find that information?

So what is this article “The Secret is Out?” It is a short article that Joan wrote in the late 1980’s. It was published in October 1990 in the UK in the “Quarterly Journal of British Agencies for Adoption and Fostering,” pages 22-27. It was also published in 1991 in The Netherlands in the book “Kind van Andere Ouders (Child of Other Parents),” edited by Professor Rene Hoksbergen (yes, Joan’s good palsie-walsie) and Has Walenkamp, Chapter 10, pages 155-163.

In its original publicized version, Joan identifies herself as Joan Wheeler, being born as Doris Michol SIPPEL (my maiden name). She also mentions the HERR family (my mother’s maiden name). She changed Gert’s name to Gillian, but left my name, my sister Kathy’s name, and our brother’s family nickname of Butch, INTACT. These are all on page 23 of the British publication, and page 155 of the Dutch publication. In addition, she identifies Kathy again on page 26 of the British publication and page 161 of the Dutch publication AND identifies the city of Kathy’s residence of Liverpool England.

She changed Gert’s name because Gert had already threatened her with a lawyer, and although in 1989 – 1990, Kathy and I were becoming embroiled in our own conflicts with Joan, we hadn’t yet reached the point of bringing in solicitors and attorneys. HOWEVER, Joan did not ask Kathy or me if she could publish our names, or our cities of residence. We did not even know that this article was being written until it came out and Joan sent us each photocopies of it. I was too busy to do any kind of complaint about it, but Kathy sent a letter to Barbara Fletcher, editor of the British publication.

On Joan’s website, she posts scans of both the British and the Dutch versions of her article. With the British article, our names are blacked out, and in the Dutch version, our names are whited out. In both versions, the cities of residence of both Kathy and me are still intact, as well as our maiden name of Sippel and our mother’s maiden name of Herr.

So what does this mean? This means that 21 years ago, Joan invaded our privacy by PUBLISHING OUR TRUE NAMES WITHOUT OUR CONSENT OR KNOWLEDGE! By blacking/whiting out our names on her website, shows she is covering her ass! And does she think people are stupid? You can clearly see that SOMEBODY’S name was PRINTED AND PUBLICIZED and she merely blacked out and whited out their names. The damage had been done when the article was first printed! Covering her tracks 20 years later just shows everyone that she is backtracking and scrambling to save her lying face. And as Gert pointed out, she refers readers of her book to this article – where our names are published! Changing a person’s name in the body of the book, then referring the readers of the book to an article that has the person’s true name in it, IS NOT PROTECTING THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSON.

Below are several graphics. Secret numbers 1 to 6 are the original published British article with our names and cities of residence intact. Secret number 7 is an establishing shot of Joan Wheeler’s Forbidden Family website. Secret number 8 is the British page with our names blacked out. Secret 10 is the British page with Kathy’s name blacked out, but with her city of residence still visible. Secret 13 is the portion of the page of the Dutch version, with our names whited out. Secret 14 is the Dutch version with Kathy’s name whited out, but the city of her residence is still visible. graphics Secrets 9, 11, and 12 were not needed for this post.

Now, members of the jury – examine the evidence. Can you convict Joan Wheeler, beyond a REASONABLE DOUBT that she invaded our privacy in 1990 and 1991, by publicizing our names without our knowledge or consent? Can you convict Joan Wheeler beyond a REASONABLE DOUBT that she failed to protect our identities by referring to this article in her book Forbidden Family?

Yes, the secret is indeed out – that Joan Wheeler is a liar, and she did NOT protect our identities in her book, and she was the one who identified her birth sisters first – way back in 1990! The glove fits. And if the glove fits, you can NOT acquit.

And by the way, my posting of these documents in no way violates any copyright that Joan Wheeler has for her article “The Secret is Out.” The article contains MY name, and the only person who owns the right to that name is ME. I do not claim any ownsership to this article, only my name. Indeed, the person responsible for writing such nonsense AND violating other people’s privacy is of course none other than Joan M. Wheeler. Who in the world would want to try to claim ownership of material that disrespects other human beings. It sure ain’t my work – I’m only reclaiming MY good name and reputation that Joan Wheeler has been trying to sully by dragging it through the mud. Those days are over!

Joan Wheeler has slapped MY name on her website and on her cyberbulling page. I claim the right to discuss MY name in any manner I see fit. I also claim the right to discuss MY life in any manner I see fit. Joan does not have any right to MY name or MY life. Least of all to try to make money about MY life. Need money Joan? Then get off your butt and get a job. You don’t use MY back to support you. Get yourself your own life and write about it – but keep MY life and MY family’s lives OUT of it – You ceased to be a Sippel in 1956. We tried to reunite with you, but by the 1980′s you got yourself THROWN out. That’s the real secret – Joan lost her birth family twice – once through adoption, through no fault of hers. The second time through banishment – through EVERY fault of her own actions and words.

The Secret is Out original page 1

 

The Secret is Out original page 2

 

The Secret is Out original page 3

 

The Secret is Out original page 4

 

The Secret is Out original page 5

 

The Secret is Out original page 6

 

Secret 7 – establishing shot of Joan Wheeler’s Forbidden Family website.

Secret 8 - British page with our names blacked out.

 

Secret 10 - British page with Kathy’s name blacked out, but with her city of residence still visible.

 

Secret 13 - portion of the page of the Dutch version, with our names whited out.

 

Secret 14 - the Dutch version with Kathy’s name whited out, but the city of her residence is still visible

 

Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family has been pulled from publication part 2 – Joan thanks her birth sisters for exposing her lies. May 10, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Announcements and updates, Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, Statements from The Three Sippel Sisters.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed
by Gert McQueen
 
On Joan Wheeler’s web site for Forbidden Family she wrote a Thank You on May 6, 2011. In her usual way of hiding new attacks upon blood family she placed it under a new ‘tab’ on the site…she believes herself to be clever.  

 She wrote this mocking thank you in response to finding out, on May 6, that Trafford Publications, who publishes her book, told her that there were some problems with the book, they were pulling the book, but she did have the ‘option’ of a rewrite. Besides Joan’s general stupidity two other things are very obvious with this ‘thank you’ of Joan’s.

 Number one, Joan really doesn’t have a CLUE as to what she was told about her book…that it was PULLED, that it will NOT be printed AGAIN, until or unless, there is a REWRITE. That means that after all current physical books are gone there will NOT BE ANY MORE PRINTED. Any inquiry to purchase the book, be it bookseller or individual, must go to Trafford to order the book, because they print it, but will find that it is NO LONGER AVAILABLE. How do I know? Because I’ve been talking to Trafford Publications for over 4 months!

 Number two; she has found herself a writing ‘coach’, for these 4 paragraphs are NOT fully Joan Wheeler’s words. How do I know? Because I have read and know Joan’s writing style and her choice of words, as they are written in her book and on various web sites, and they are not used in this smug ‘thank you’.

 As usual I quote Joan’s word, in italic, and then I answer. I may break up her paragraphs for easier commenting and understandings. 

 Joan said: Adoption is a controversial issue. As with any issue, there are more ways than one to view it. I have written a book which puts forth my personal experiences as an adoptee and while I speak from my own point of view, there are issues which other adoptees may have encountered.

 Gert says: The blood family’s objections are not with any issues of adoption. Any of our personal views and opinions on that ‘controversial’ issue has nothing to do with what we have against and with Joan Wheeler or her book. Joan cannot use and abuse relatives for the sake of telling HER story…without impunity…there are consequences; that is the blood family’s objections not adoption itself. We also object to Joan’s insistence on saying that we, the blood family, have suffered or are suffering because she was adopted! What utter garbage! That thought and belief is strictly a fabrication and figment of Joan’s mind due to her and only her upbringing and has no basis on truth or reality in relationship to the blood family! Joan has lived her life with adoption syndromes and has projected all that crap upon others to promote her agenda. She hasn’t a clue as to what kind of a person I am…why…because she hasn’t had any meaningful contact with me for over 30 years and the two contacts she did have she manipulated to suit her own purposes in the book! 

 So, our issues are with the way Joan Wheeler has portrayed us individually and collectively as a family, with gross dishonor, with the pure intent to magnify and sensationalize a tragic death of a mother and those that were left behind. We totally object to Joan’s ‘views’ of our lives and her attempts to capitalize on us for mere financial gains because she doesn’t work, never has worked and needs a source of income. Not on our backs!

 She says that she has told her experiences as an adoptee…no…she has put forth her ‘point of view’. That point of view is not the reality, from those that have suffered from her, over the years, and continuing on with the publication of this book. We the blood family NEVER gave her any permission to use our lives for her personal crusade against adoption. Our refuting blog’s purpose is to set forth the truth from Joan’s lies and gross misrepresentations. There is no one that will gain any insights to help them with their own struggles of adoption by believing what Joan Wheeler has written about HER PERSONAL EXPERIENCES, for Joan is a mentally ill person! Buyer and reader beware!

 Joan said: I could not have written this book without the assistance, albeit unintentional, of my natural family. As it happened, I was found by siblings I did not know existed. It is due only to that that this book was made possible. The full-blooded sisters who found me have, through blogs which can only be described as hostile, have contributed enormously to bringing Forbidden Family to the attention of those who are interested in the different aspects of adoption and what happens when siblings are separated by adoption. For their assistance in doing so, I thank them.

 Gert says: Yes, indeed the natural family knew nothing about the fact that Joan was planning, for years, on using our lives for a smut filled book directly from her diseased mind where she ‘exposes them all’ (Joan’s words pg 452 of her book). That is why Joan could NEVER follow up with the many attempts, by various blood relatives, at reconciling with her over the years, for to do so, would mean that Joan’s book and her life story, as she knew it, could not be written or published.

 So what did the blood family get for ‘finding’ her? Nothing but pain and grief! And, she can’t even tell the story, here, truthfully! She says ‘the full-blooded sisters who found me have’…what happened to the full-blooded brother who was also there in the finding of her? Forget the fact that he is now dead but, like our father, had suffered at the hands of Joan and who distanced themselves from her years before their deaths. No, Joan only wants to go after the sisters because we are standing in the way of her fantasies, for every time she mentions the blood family we answer her!

 She also is lying here by saying that we have ‘blogs’, there is only one that is refuting her lies! Again, Joan is a liar for it is Joan herself that has two blogs where she very much attacks the blood family. We are hostile? Well depends on which side of the fence you happen to be on! From our side it is Joan who is hostile as in her second blog against us. Joan’s belief that we ‘have contributed enormously to bringing Forbidden Family to the attention of those who are interested in the different aspects of adoption and what happens when siblings are separated by adoption’ is yet another figment of her misguided understanding of how people are viewing her. If Joan is thinking of her fellow adoptees, well then, she is only one of many sick individuals that feed on each other’s sick lives. They are her fellow victims, they are only interested in browbeating the world into seeing their views and they deserve each other. On the other hand, I have seen for myself how sane thinking people view the angry words of people like Joan who is only kidding herself that she is helping her cause.

 What actually happens to siblings separated by adoption? I don’t really know and don’t give a damm. I know what I suffered, by the hands of a sibling that was placed in adoption and then reunited with us! My life before her was great! I was not suffering from lack of knowing her! The 8 years that she was in life… was total hell! My life after I divorced and banished her from my life was doubly great! I did not suffer from lack of her in my life ever! I am only NOW SUFFERING because she wrote a lying book about my life and family and has the gall to rub salt in old wounds that she caused in the first place. No, adoption separation is not the issue; the issue is Joan’s sick interference in the lives of others! Beware!

 Joan said: If you have read their blogs, you will find their views of my book, and of me, and will read their personal accounts of what it means for them to have found their long-lost baby sister. Yes, you will find their bitterness, jealously, resentment, accusations and allegations which they have made. You can then form an idea of the real, concrete issues surrounding adoption, particularly, my adoption and the detrimental effects that separating siblings has on all involved.

 Gert says: Here again, Joan is fantasying, she really believes she is the great savior for those in adoption trauma, what bullshit. I don’t dwell on what ‘it means to have found their long-lost baby sister’ for I know, first hand. Joan has this warp view that because we ‘lost’ her we are ‘damaged’…far from it! Joan has a theory and she has tried to make us fit into her theory, problem is, we don’t buy her theory and neither does anyone else that is sane and/or wants to keep a crazy person away from them. No thank you Joan…I have been very happy in my life since that day in 1981 when I told you to GET LOST. It is only since you published a book of lies in 2009 that I have even a thought of you and now you have my FULL ATTENTION, the attention that YOU WANTED all your life, but never had. Stop projecting your loses onto your sisters, we don’t give a damm about you. What point of Joan’s life are we jealous of? Got me! No thank you! I have my own life, always had my own life, like my own life and am not jealous of anyone. Again, Joan is showing the world her own lack of character!

 Joan said: Without the assistance of my full-blood sisters and their blogs, it is doubtful that Forbidden Family could have achieved the level of publicity it has. I recognize that, as with any controversial issue, there will be those who will take one side without examining the other and those who are willing to allow others to do their thinking for them. These people are not my audience I am speaking to those who have the insight to examine both sides of an issue, and only then draw whatever conclusions they chose.

 Gert says: There is a great deal of difference between publicity and sales. There is also the level in the kind of publicity one gets. Contrary to what Joan believes the publicity, of this book of lies, that has come from us sisters, is exactly what we have intended…to show the world how crazy Joan Wheeler is and how to counter such a individual if one, such as Joan, is in their lives. So, Miss Joan, once again you have misread what actual reality is! And again, Joan is showing us her faulty logic and double-speak to confuse the reader. READ DEEPLY here! She is clever with words…and she believes every word of her own propaganda.

 Joan said: My intention in writing this book was not to attack or impugn anyone, but merely to relate my personal experiences in the hope that it may be of benefit to others. Any discrepancy in names, or dates, are due to me trying to protect the anonymity of those involved (they themselves have gone public with their identities), but the incidents and circumstances are accurate.

 Gert says: Why does she feel the need to tell us, again, her intentions…of course it was to attack and impugn, the entire book is a raging attack on everyone and everything that favors adoption! Does Joan really believe that the world is full of fools and that they can’t see the details of a mentally ill person in the name of Joan Wheeler as she tells her life story?

 And here are more lies. It was Joan herself that made public our real identities, not once but several times. On Pg 634, footnote #15 of Forbidden Family she references her article The Secret is Out, written and published in 1990 where Joan published our full real names. We objected to that then and as Joan tells it, we harassed her. No! If she was not ‘outing’ the identities of us in the book Forbidden Family then WHY did she put in the reference to an article that identifies us and where anyone could find that information? And then why on the web page for Forbidden Family does she have our names? Why does she have a SECOND web page, with our names were she spreads more vicious lies and hate? Why does she go on the Adult Adoptees Advocating for Change and tell our names and whine and cry and ask for their help in beating us up?

 And the incidents and circumstances are NOT accurate, as Joan portrays them, that is why there is this refuting blog…to tell the truth.

 Further more Joan went out on the Internet and made public our identities…and here is the proof.

 from a google search:   

Personal Injury Law Questions – I am a disabled social worker on

Dec 19, 2009 Refuting Some of Joan Mary Wheeler’s Statements « Refutting There is another sister by the name of Gert McQueen who lives in Watertown,
www.justanswer.comPersonal Injury LawCached
 
 Customer Question

I am a disabled social worker on SSI; limited income. I just published a book that is memoir and social activism. I am an adoptee reunited with my natural family for 35 years. My three old sisters (ages 57, 61, 62) have been harassing me by various methods for over three decades, and so have adoptive relatives. They attacked me for: writing articles in the paper for adoptees’ civil rights to our sealed birth certificates and now, because I have published my book. I’ve had numerous Orders of Protection, but they keep bothering me. I want them to stay away from me forever. No contact at all. My sisters that I was reunited with have used hate mail, hate phone calls to invade my home and homelife. They’d die down for a few years, and then start up again. They even charged my then-80 year old adoptive mother with sex abuse, and me, because, according to the workers who showed up at the door, “I was having sex with my sister’s boyfriend on the living room couch and my mother forced the kids to watch.” We went through three months of court in 1997 to clear our names. Now, my sisters are publically humiliating me. They shut down my two former blogs because they do not want me to write a book about my life. Yes, I followed a lawyer’s advice on how to write a book. I am an adoption activist. They read my website, twist what I say, and then they post malicious and libelous material on their blogs naming me outright. I went to the police. No help. Freedom of Press. Really? What they are writing is turned away readership from my blog, which means, I have not only lost credibility, but business in not selling my book. How can I get them to cease and desist? Thank You, Joan Wheeler Buffalo, New York USA My website: http://forbiddenfamily.com My book’s sales link: http://www.trafford.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000137652 My sisters’ blogs to attack me: http://chayelet.wordpress.com/ — Kathy Inglis uses the name of Chayelet. This woman lives in Liverpool, England • ruthsippelpace.wordpress.com/…/my-journal-of-joan-wheelers-abuse/ – Cached This woman lives in Buffalo, New York, several miles away from me. • Refuting Some of Joan Mary Wheeler’s Statements « Refutting There is another sister by the name of Gert McQueen who lives in Watertown, New York. How can I protect myself from them?

Submitted: 465 days and 17 hours ago.
Category: Personal Injury Law
Value: $15
Status: CLOSED
 
 Optional Information

State/Country relating to question: New York
Already Tried:
Police, no help, they said Freedom of Speech so my sisters can say anything online that they want to, even namimng me outright and maliciously defmaing me. I feel my personal and professional reputation has been ruined. I cannot afford to pay for a lwyer as my income in only$697 per month. But I could sell the book and write more books. Please look at those websites and tell me what I can do. Also, the one inn Liverpool states that I haev tried to deport her. I have no idea what she is talking about. I have not seen her since 1979 when I visited Liverpool, UK. We last spoke on the phone in 1988. The three sisters have written me a letter “throwing” me out of the family in 1992. I do not have contact with tham at all, but they find ways to harass me. Like getting my unlisted phone number from another relative and calling me. Now, it is cyber bullying and stalking and nalicious attacks upon me. Can I get them to pay me restitution for malicious defamtion of character and lying which drives people away frommy website?

 Accepted Answer
 You can stop your sisters and you can sell your books. You can sue them for harassment and intentional infliction of emotional distress. This way you could get monetary damages and an injunction to stop them from bullying you on their blogs. If they are preventing people from buying your book, you may also have a claim tortious interference with contract. You can also sue them for libel and slander, for lying about on their websites. You may also have another claim for tortious interference with contract because they froced you to shut down your websites. However, you will need a lawyer who can take this case to trial. There are personla injury lawyers who charge on a contingency fee basis. This way, they do not get paid unless you win. Call your local bar and ask for names of personal injury lawyers who specialize in these types of claims. Research these names. Go on www.marindale.com. Good luck and remember to press accept so that I may get credit.

Read more: Personal Injury Law Questions – I am a disabled social worker on SSI; limited income. I just – JustAnswer http://www.justanswer.com/personal-injury-law/2whab-disabled-social-worker-ssi-limited-income-just.html#ixzz1GoJRY46R

 And continuing on… what information does Trafford Publishing give to their potential authors…here are a couple of interesting points taken from their site.  (Ruth’s note: the sentances underlined below are the key points that Joan violated in her book and was the basis of the PUBLISHER’S decision to pull the book.- and what we have been saying on this blog since December 2009!)

 What is considered libel?

Libel has a variety of definitions throughout the United States depending on each state’s laws, but in general it is a written false defamation, or the publication of any statement that could cause damage to an individual or organization’s character or reputation.

 How can I protect myself against libel in publishing?
Although truth is in most cases a defense in a libel case, it is often difficult and lengthy (thus expensive) to prove in court. If your published book tells a true story about events that occurred, the first step to protect yourself is by changing the names of people or organizations in the book. However, simply changing a name from “Jim” to “David” is often not enough. If a person or others can recognize themselves from the situation, places or events even if their name is changed, you can still be sued for libel. Changing the location also helps to distance the story so that it is unrecognizable to real people. You can use a pen name to further distance any recognizable trail back to you or, most importantly, the real person, in order to avoid trouble.

For instance, imagine an individual reader knows you, the author in real life. If you make claims about your husband’s doctor, even if you change your husband’s name and the doctor’s name, but you keep your real name, it is pretty clear to someone involved who you are talking about in reality. By using a pen name and changing the name of people in the book, this will help to further remove the specifics and protect you against any libel claims.

Voicing an opinion is not libelous; however, be careful that you are not actually making an accusatory statement. Even if you say “in my opinion” before a statement, that does not automatically make the statement an opinion if you are speculating or asserting something about someone.

Do not make the following statements or claims, as they are clear grounds for a libel case: Falsely accusing someone of a crime, or having been charged, indicted or convicted of a crime; falsely identifying someone as the carrier of an infectious or loathsome disease; falsely charging someone or an organization with a claim that discredits or disqualifies a business, office or trade and lowers their profitability; and falsely accusing someone as being impotent.

Seriously consider if you are self-publishing a book that makes statements or reveals information that could damage someone, and consult a legal advisor if you are concerned.


Gert says: So there you have it, Joan in her self-importance deemed it a good thing for herself to use her real name and not take the advise of her publisher. She did not want to distance herself from those that she was writing about because she gave more than enough information in the pages of her book for ANYONE who knows the family to IDENTIFY the family and individuals and that is WHAT we sisters have been saying to the world…Joan Wheeler is a liar and her book is garbage and full of hate and disease.

 Joan said: It is my sincere hope that my sisters will continue to help publicize Forbidden Family as it is a must read for those interested in a thoughtful, in depth look at the issues surrounding this unnecessary closed adoption, and the possible ramifications on future families in reunion. And I would like to thank those who have read the book. I hope I have given them as much to think about as the satisfaction they have given me!

 Gert says: Rest assured Joan that we will indeed continue to show light on the book of lies that you wrote! If anyone is really willing to part with $45 to get anyone of the remaining copies of it, perhaps they ought to get you to sign it…for you are indeed a first class act…of stupidity! She is so full of herself to believe that her book is a ‘must read’ and that it is a ‘in depth look’ at the issues! Oh yes, she has given much for people to think about. Where are ALL those positive reviews of this great and wonderful book? There are only four that I have seen and I have debunked them all! So Joan, how about getting all those that you claim have benefited from this great and wonderful book to come forth and write something and put their names to it!

 What is your next act going to be Joan? You bombed with this one! A rewrite? Gosh to rewrite this book of over 600 pages, and take out all the stuff of your birth family will probably leave you with perhaps 200 pages! Better get busy and start that rewrite because this first book is DEAD!   

from Ruth – I shall be putting up my views on Gert’s post tomorrow – May 11, 2011, in the meantime, I have been authorized to post this comment from Kathy Inglis:

 I wasn’t going to comment, but, must say Thanks to Gert for enlightening me with regard to what Trafford consider as Libel. And all thanks to both Ruth and Gert for their tenacity in this matter.

 My one and only comment to Ms Wheeler is that she had better pray I never win the Lottery, because it is only lack of sufficient funds on my part that I have not taken legal action against her, apart from the fact that, even if I had funds, I’d use them for something more worthwhile. But you needn’t think you’re off the hook, sweatheart- that you will never be. Have a nice life, Joni Baby. Your FULL BLOOD SISTER KATHY.

 

aha – we have the evidence and now everyone can see what a lying filthy snake Joan Wheeler is. March 7, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

aha – we have the evidence and now everyone can see what a lying filthy snake Joan Wheeler is.

by Ruth Sippel Pace

This was just sent to me via email, the entire exchange and what Joan Wheeler said on the Huffington Post. She continues with her lies that she had multiple orders of protection against me, when in reality she only ONE. In her delusional mind, and her diarrhea of the mouth, ONE equals MANY. (was she never taught arithmetic?) Also for your consideration is the outlandish and disgusting lie about my grandfather. Joan has now taken the Angry Adoptee too fucking far and shows the world what a BITCH she really is. And this is going to help adoption reform? No! Rational people in congress and supreme court will NOT look at the rantings and ravings of such an irrational delusional liar as Joan Wheeler. For the love of god Joan, SHUT THE F UP!

Joan M Wheeler

Member Since October 2010
Comments (15) | Friends (46)
Joan M Wheeler’s Comments

View Comments: All News Only Blog Only Pending Only   Sort: Newest First Oldest First HuffPost Pick First
huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:43:37 in Living

“How do you get a “full refund” on an adoption? I know adoptees who have had their names cahnged back to the names they were given at birth. That is their right to do so in adulthood. They are re-claimii­ng what was taken from them.”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:32:42 in Health

“To Ruth Sippel Pace, Katherine Sippel Inglis, Gertrude Sippel McQueen

You can search my names on Google, read every comment and post I ever wrote, send follow-up comment postings and email to instigate and aggravate me. You don’t want me in your life so stay out of mine.

You are a destructiv­e force in the goals that I, and other adoption reformers, want to achieve.

I have gone to the police repeatedly to try to stop you. Orders of Protection only work for six months or one year, then, you are back again. New York State does not have Internet Bullying Laws. If New York did have these laws, I would have all three of my sisters arrested and convicted for causing me emotional and financial distress.

My three sisters do prove my point that separating siblings, especially after the death of a parent during childhood, damages the children who bring their mental anguish into adulthood.

My siblings have been inflicting their sick perversion­s and twisted obsessions upon me and my children and my adoptive mother since 1974. It appears that they will continue this right into old age and death. That is how mentally sick they are.

http://cyb­erbulliess­talkers.bl­ogspot.com­/

For adoption reform: http://for­biddenfami­ly.com

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:21:24 in Living

“Since my three sisters do not want me in their lives and I don’t want them in mine, why don’t they leave me alone? I am not bothering them by doing my adoption reform activism. They are dragging themselves and their drama back into my life, time and time again. I am tired of defending myself against their personal attacks on me. In their blogs, they call for me to commit suicide. They say that I desecrated our father’s memorial book.. How? By writing my name in it? He is my father and I am his daugher. I have every right to sign his memorial book at the funeral parlor that nobody wanted me at. I get it. they don’t want me. I don’t want them either. But I am entitled to do adoption reform advocacy because I have been doing this since they found me in 1974. Why they have to continue to invade my life, I do not know. They are hateful people who won’t leave me alone.”

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:15:12 in Living

“My second oldest sister, Kathy, not only invited me to her home, twice, in Liverpool, England (1976 and 1979), but on the second trip there she yelled at me that I “was not her sister” and that she “did not want me there”. She arranged for me to stay in a neighbor’s apartment down the hall. Apparently­, she could not stand the site of me because I “reminded her of THEM” and she did not want to have that horrible memory of the family she left behind in Buffalo, New York, USA. Also, she and her married, rich and famous boyfriend wanted a threesome with me, which I refused. In 1989, Kathy again invited me to Liverpool, but on the night before I was to leave she called me and told me to stay home, saying that my visit would “ruin everything­” for her. Because Kathy badmouthed me to our friends in Liverpool, I lost these people as my friends. I have not spoken to her since, yet she reads my blog constantly and has her own blog to discredit me.”

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:14:21 in Living

“My eldest sister, Gert, sexually molested me repeatedly during the first years of our reunion. No, this was not Genetic Sexual Attraction (as known in adoption psychology­) this was initiated by drug and alcohol to intoxicate and to seduce me. She said it was “a way to get back to Momma”. So my eldest sister had her own idea of sex with me as she missed our dead mother and used me to that end. This first occurred when I was 20 years old and continued for about two years, which was two years after being found by this sister. It does not matter that I was “old enough to know better” because I was vulnerable from being found and having to deal with reunion and betrayal of my adoptive parents at that stage of young adulthood. Additional­ly, my eldest sister was 29 years old at the time and in a position of authority over me (eldest sister to youngest sister). Keep in mind that I was raised an only child, too, and had no counselor or therapist to help me.
Fact is that is that my older sisters were molested by our grandfathe­r and they think I escaped by being adopted. So they blame me for being an adoption activist. They were not adopted, I was, and they weasel into my life every chance they get.”

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:09:53 in Living

“The sister closest in age to me, the fourth youngest sibling, Ruth, has violated my wishes to be left alone as recently as Nov 2009 when she asked our father for my unlisted phone number, which he gave her against my wishes. I had to change my phone number yet again to retain my privacy. Over many years, Ruth has written numerous pieces of hate mail to me, most of which were burned. However, Ruth still sent hateful and obscene letters to me. Ruth has had a fixation against me for decades. She believes I slept with her then-boyfr­iend-now-h­usband (no I did not) and called Child Abuse on me and my 80 year old adoptive mother because she claims I had sex with her man in front of my children and my mother watched, too. This formal accusation took place in 1996, caused disruption for my children, my adoptive mother and I, dragged us through months of court appearance­s. Ruth has showed up at my home in violation of several Orders of Protection that I had against her since the 1980s.

I filed for yet another Order of Protection in 2005, after yet more unwanted contact. Charges were dismissed because the judge was tired of it all. Since I cannot get the police to help me, nor a court of law to defend me, and I cannot reason with any of my three full blood sisters. I want to be left alone.”

Ruth Herr Sippel Pace on Mar 4, 2011 at 17:57:15

“this is the kind of garbage lies that JW posts on the internet about me. She says here she had orderS of protection­against me since the 1980′s, wrong, the only order of protection she ever got against me was in 1993.
http://rut­hsippelpac­e.wordpres­s.com/cate­gory/black­-and-white­-evidence-­of-joan-wh­eelers-lie­s-letters-­court-docu­ments/
If any one is interested in the TRUTH, these posts on my blog, contain scanned actual court documents that PROVE that what JW says here, March 4, 2011 is LIES and again is SLANDERING me and my sisters.
I, Ruth Sippel Pace maintain my right to answer JW’s smearing of MY reputation­.
If Joan wants to silence me on the internet the solution is obvious: JW needs to stop spreading false accusation­s about me and my sisters.”

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:04:13 in Living

“My blood kin sisters have recently banned together to write their own blogs spreading filthy lies about me, saying that I am actively harming them by bullying them. I am not. Just because they say I am does not mean their statements are true. They are doing this all themselves­. They let the world know they were in the book because they identified themselves­. They are the ones bashing me. As instructed by the police and by WordPress and by my own website’s tech support, I have written a blog calling for my sisters to Cease and Desist their cruel behavior (even calling for me to kill myself). Please see the following blog for my statements defending myself: http://cyb­erbulliess­talkers.bl­ogspot.com­/.

There are no cyberbully­ing laws in New York State so I cannot call law enforcemen­t for protection­. I have been the victim of harassment and bullying from my three sisters for many decades. They have taken disagreeme­nts to the extreme.

I have no contact whatsoever with the three sisters who found me. They are mean and unstable people. I want only positive and loving people in my life. My sisters have caused a great deal of torment in my life, but they are not the focus of my reunion nor my life. I, alone, am the adoptee. My book is about my life and how adoption effected me and my immediate adoptive family, my now ex-husband­, and our children.”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 14:39:07 in Health

“Ruth has no business in my life now. We have had no relationsh­ip for over 3 decades. I am being stalked and bullied by my three older natural blood sisters. I want them out of my life but they keep ttrailing after me.

About my adoption: Our mother died when I was three months old. Our father placed me with my adopting parents one month later and I was legally adopted at age 1 year and 1 week. There facts are documented in my adoption papers which I petitioned for legally.”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 11:29:45 in Health

“Dana Seilhan said: “We wouldn’t need birth certificat­­e access legislatio­­n if we’d quit changing birth certificat­­es to begin with.”

Exactly. So why don’t we start legislatio­n across the USA to stop this practice? Someone has to put a stop to it. Access legislatio­n makes no sense when the cycle is not broken. Stop producing false birth certificat­es, start producing truthful adoption certificat­es, and we will eventually see that there is no need for sealed records. So, where’s the new legislatio­n to end the cycle? Get on it!!!”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 3, 2011 at 12:59:47 in Health

“Mres Delacour says: “Why then would you deny my right not to share with my adult children? They don’t need to know they were adopted – they don’t need to be as angry as you all are.”

Keeping secrets as deep as the true identity of your adoptee is surely indicative of a controling and insecure adoptive parent. You don’t need to be so possessive and afraid if you parented your adoptee with love. But I see that you are angry and paranoid. You did adopt someone else’s child and for that, you have evvery obligation to tell the truth: morally, ethically, religiousl­y, and legally. To base any relationsh­ip on lies is a set-up for disaster and pain. I feel sorry for you and your husband and your adoptee. You truley are ignorant of life-cycle adoption psychology­. Shame on you. As an adoptive parent you owe it to yourself to read Nancy Verrier’s books on what the adoptee experience­s. This isn’t about you, this is about the adoptee!”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 3, 2011 at 12:51:18 in Health

“part 2 to Mrs Delacour:

My amended birth certificat­e states all the birth facts: date and time of birth, and hospital, but I am re-named as if I were born with that name, and my adoptive mother is named as having given me birth. That is an outright lie! The one birth fact left off of my falsified birth certificat­e is that there were 4 other children born to the real mother. But I am forced to present this document as proof of my birth. I resent it.

In addition to giving back a civil right to own our original birth certificat­es, I would like to see the eliminatio­n of the amended birth certificat­e as an automatic dictate upon adoption. Instead, replace the amended and falsified birth certificat­e with an adoption certificat­e which states the facts of adoption. Leave the birth certificat­e alone and open to the adoptee. The adoption certificat­e should be open, too. This is the way it is done in more progressiv­e countries such as The Netherland­s and Australia.”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 3, 2011 at 12:50:23 in Health

“Mrs Delacour,

I am not grateful to be adopted. Why would I? My adoptive parents knowingly and willingly prevented me from knowing my own full blood siblings during my childhood and that is child abuse. Yes, my natural father relinquish­ed me to adoption when I was 4 months old just after the death of my mother. He kept the other 4 children. That alone is hurtful, but my adoptive parents knew my father and open visitation could have been arranged. But my so-called loving adoptive parents kept me all to themselves­, alone, in their sheltered cocoon of adoption-l­ove. I should have been told the truth.

Now about the birth certificat­e issue: I was born the 5th child to married parents. My original birth certificat­e states that there were 4 other children born to this mother. I was given a name and my long form birth certificat­e states the date and time of birth in the hospital. My natural father gave this document to my adopting parents when he relinquish­ed me.

(end of part 1)”

Ruth Herr Sippel Pace on Mar 4, 2011 at 14:20:35

“First, the reason JW was adopted was because my dad had to go to work and there was no one to take care of her. Would JW have liked to have lain in a crib unattended for up to 9 hours a day? THAT is child abuse and neglect. She was adopted by people who could take care of her 24/7.

Second, JW states “I should have been told the truth.” JW should begin by telling the truth in all posts on the internet. She was not 4 months old when she was adopted, but 3 months.”

Miss Morgan B Aird on Mar 3, 2011 at 17:35:48

“It is unfortunat­e, Joan, you feel not knowing your biological siblings is child abuse, but it’s statistica­lly proven that it’s not the healthiest thing (psycholog­ically) for a child. Yes, your adoptive parents should have told you about your biological family & no let it be a “hush/tabo­o” thing to talk about, but think of it like this… imagine meeting your family and going home, you wonder: “Why did he keep them and not me? Am I not good enough? Why does my dad not want to take care of me?” all at the age of 5 or 13. We both know that’s something you would not wish on any child, especially during the time in which you are trying to find and define yourself. All your adoptive parents did was love you like your biological family obviously couldn’t. You could have been in the foster care system or killed and put in the garbage like other innocent children who don’t have as loving and considerat­e people as both sets of parents.
You were blessed to be adopted, regardless of how you feel now. I do not know anything about my biological parents and it isn’t until now (26 years later) my adoptive mom wants to seriously talk,other than when I was a child. I have a biological brother that is only 16 months older than me (which she kept), but I love both my parents just the same, because I am here and I am wonderful!”

Wallet Missing For 40 Years Found In NY Crevice

Wallet Missing For 40 Years Found In NY Crevice

Commented Feb 22, 2011 at 11:31:59 in New York

““A Wallet Stolen and Returned, A Birth Certificat­e Stolen, Both Have Sentimenta­l Value”

A wallet stolen 40 years ago and returned to the rightful owner certainly has sentimenta­l value. The person who found the wallet felt “fantastic satisfacti­on” by giving back the wallet after all these years.

But what of adoptees who have had their identities at birth stolen from them? Shouldn’t they be the beneficiar­ies of a society who now realizes the tremendous sentimenta­l value of obtaining one’s own birth certificat­e? Currently, New York and New Jersey are preventing millions of adoptees from accessing their sealed original birth certificat­es by refusing to pass legislatio­n that would reunite adoptees with their original birth certificat­es.

Give adoptees back their civil rights to the truth of their births. Change the law. Let’s make human interest stories out of the positive outcomes that would result from reuniting an adoptee with the true certificat­e that documents the day they were born.

Joan Wheeler born Doris Sippel”

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Feb 11, 2011 at 10:44:53 in Living

“My natural father legally relinquish­ed me to adoption in 1956. He willingly set for the separation of his five children, but inn what was handled as a closed adoption back then, could have easily been guardiansh­ip or even open adoption as it was an open placement. Both sets of parents knew each other and my adoptive parents knew that I had sisters and a brother. What turned my adoption into what I feel like – an abduction – is that my adoptive parents intentiona­lly prevented me contact. I was raised an only child and for no good reason. We could have had a childhood together, but the adults involved and the courts that ruled that I should be forever kept away, hidden in the suburbs, while my siblings lived six miles away. This was cruelty to five children. My four older sibs searched for and found me at my age of 18. I was in total shock being found at that young age. I never fully regained composure from that shock, realizing that the parents who raised me never wanted me to know the truth. It hurts to be treated as a possession­. To be treated with disrespect­, to be held captive as their only daughter when they knew I had sisters and a brother…­The wasted years and the reunion turned sour. We lost so much of life and couldn’t maintain relationsh­ips. Adoption is a cruelty that should not be. Guardiansh­ip and family preservati­on should have been set up.”

Gert McQueen on Feb 14, 2011 at 09:24:12

“It was said: Actually, I was talking about the obvious pain of all 3 of these women.

The recent ‘pain’ is because of the lying book that Joan wrote about all family members and non-member­s in her quest for laying the blame of her miserable life on the doorstep of adoption.

I divorced myself from this woman back in 1982 because of what she did to my family, because I ‘adopted’ my own son and she didn’t like that and my telling her to leave me and my family alone. Ten years later, I attempted a reconcilat­ion, in person, she again betrayed me, attacking my mental health and religion and then another attempt by me by phone in 2005 again was met with more betrayal, she thought I was looking for informatio­n to ‘get her’.

I am in no pain…Joa­n is…becau­se she can not stop the truth, that we sisters are saying, on our blog. If the truth hurts, it is not my family that is hurting, only Joan because she refuses to accept the truth of the life that she was given.”

Ruth Herr Sippel Pace on Feb 12, 2011 at 16:34:56

“I am Ruth Pace, a natural sibling of Ms. Wheeler. Ms. Wheeler is entitled to her own opinions, however misguided on being “abducted.­” But in reality, she was LEGALLY adopted after our mother died, leaving behind a 3 month infant (Joan) and 4 other small children. My father was himself an only child, his parents were elderly, our mother’s siblings also were unable to take in a whole family of 5. Therefore the decision was made to give Joan to 2 parents who could properly care for an infant. My father did NOT “willingly­” separate us. He did what needed to be done. Would Joan liked to have laid unattended in a crib for up to 10 hours a day as an infant? Ms. Wheeler just will NOT accept that in the 50′s there were no day care centers, or welfare system like today, and my father had NO CHOICE.. Ms. Wheeler has also written a book filled with misreprese­ntations such as this about my father, along with many out and out lies.
My sister and I have a blog refuting Ms. Wheeler’s book at http://rut­hsippelpac­e.wordpres­s.com/ where we tell WHY our reunion went sour.”

Gert McQueen on Feb 12, 2011 at 10:13:36

“I’m Gert McQueen a birth sister to Joan Wheeler, See my blog ‘Refuting a Book of Lies; Forbidden Family’ @ ruthsippel­pace.wordp­ress.com Our purpose is truth telling.

The truth about Joan’s book is that is is an extremely long painful account of the author’s own perception­s of her reality where in she fabricates­, exaggerate­s and boldly lies about people and events. She describes her own character flaws presenting them as reasons for why she believes she has been traumatize­d by adoption and in that process doesn’t realize the harm she has done to herself and others. She portrays both the birth and adoptive families is very negative ways and claims to be harassed by us birth sisters. She does not tell of her own negative actions towards the birth sisters or many other people. The author is violently opposed to adoption and adoptive parents and is not truly interested in helping people,

My sisters and I are not hiding anything we say or do about refuting her book or other actions she has said or done to us; we put everything we do on our blog for it is a truth-tell­ing blog. It is the birth sisters’ position that the fact of a publicatio­n of a book of lies and misreprese­ntation is an grave dishonor to our parents, ourselves and other members of our family and the adoptive family.”

huffingtonpost entry

Miracles, the Brain and Adoption

Commented Oct 6, 2010 at 13:03:52 in Living

“This article was very helpful to me as I am both an adoptee and a premie. I was born at 32 weeks, was kept in an incubator for 6 weeks after birth, and it is not clear to me if my mother of father were allowed to visit me. Since my mother was dying, she was bedridden, and I was told she was “shown” me a few times. It is not clear if my mother had nursed me at all.

The primal wound is very much a part of my life, longing for closeness that was taken from me so soon after birth because I almost died and had to be kept in medical isolation to bring up my weight and physical developmen­t. Soon after I was released from the hosptial, my mother died, which led to my relinquish­ment and adoption.

Thank you for your article.

However, I would hardly call adoption “wonderful­”: “Adoption is a wonderful way to start and have a family.” Be careful. Adoption as practiced in America is filled with destructio­n. If adoptive parents would truely be open and honest with their adoptee (mine were not) and adoptees’ the birth certificat­e are not sealed and falsified, and if connection­s with the family of origin are not severed…­then adoption would become guardiansh­ip. Ever here of family preservati­on?

I am for total and complete adoption prevention­.
Joan M Wheeler born Doris M Sippel
http://for­biddenfami­ly.com

Badges (Learn more)
Networker
Superuser
Moderator

Stats Board

Network

Friends 

Getting Back to Basics – Refuting the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler December 24, 2010

Posted by Ruth in a. What is demanded from Joan Wheeler - the purpose of this blog., Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

The past couple of months have been quite busy. Joan Wheeler has been upset because we found and refutted some major lies in her book Forbidden Family, published by Trafford Publishing. We posted an email from adoption expert Joe Soll wherein he said what Joan reported about him in the book was “patently false.” We posted an open letter to adoption expert Dr. Rene Hoksbergen, who wrote the forward to the book, because he wrote an unprofessional review of the book, based on his belief of some Joan’s lies. He never bothered to check out the facts of some of the things Joan alleges in the book, took Joan’s word as gospel truth, and by doing so, is a partner in the sullying of Gert McQueen’s character. Joan didn’t like this, took the stance that we were “pestering adoption experts,” and began attacking us on various places on the internet. And we answered every one of her attacks with our truths!

But now the time has come to get back to the major thrust of this blog – Refuting the Book Forbidden Family.

Gert has already written several posts, and they are backlogged right now. Our method is, Gert writes her review, going through the book page by page, sometimes paragraph by paragraph, then I read it, and the chapters and pages in the book that Gert is writing about, I add my own comments, or whole separate post, and then it all gets posted on the blog. Our next section will be Chapter 22, which begins, coincedentally, on page 222. I have other committments in my life, but this section will be posted the first week in January 2011.

In the meantime, to refresh anyone’s memories, or to get new readers up to speed on some of the more blatant lies we have found in the book, here is a listing of posts wherein we have found lies, and the TRUTH behind those lies. You can find these and more by looking at the list of categories over on the right hand side and seeing posts listed under those categories. by the way, many of these posts are accompanied with graphics – I have scanned actual court documents, photographs, even letters written by Joan herself, which prove without a shadow of a doubt that she LIED in the book.

A Listing of Lies told by Joan Wheeler in her book Forbidden Family and elsewhere

Lies in the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler

the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler is full of lies

Forbidden Family, by Joan Wheeler pages 316, 324, and 330 Clear evidence of lies

A most vile and hateful lie in Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family

A Challenge to Joan Wheeler – Would You Please Explain the Various Court Documents and YOUR own Letters That Prove YOU are a LIAR?

Open letter to Professor Rene Hoksbergen and rebuttal of his “professional” review of Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler

Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family – Personal psychodrama, lies and other things that don’t belong in a book.

Joan Wheeler – Forbidden Family Chapter 14 – Refutted!

Joan Wheeler LIES about Dr. Rene Hoksbergen in her book Forbidden Family

HIGH ALERT EVIDENCE of Joan Wheeler’s lies FROM A PERSON IN AN ADOPTION REFORM ORGANIZATION(Mr. Joe Soll)

 Joan tells a vicious lie about her own godparents on page 319 of Forbidden Family

 Why did Joan Wheeler write her book Forbidden Family? pure and simple: it is for revenge!

 Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family deliberately falsifiies the facts

 Joan Wheeler issues press release for her “new” book – no, it’s still the stupid book of idiotic lies, and even her press release is bull.    (and after we complained to the webhost, her press release got yanked, due to the falsehoods in her book)

 Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler should be revised

 What is demanded from Joan Wheeler – the purpose of this blog.

 Kathy Inglis’ answers to Joan Wheeler’s caricature of her in the book Forbidden Family

 Guessing Game Time – What year did that child abuse call against Joan Wheeler really occur? 1993? 1994? 1995? 1996? Joan has reported all 4 years! -why can’t she make up her mind?

 Joan Wheeler, in her book Forbidden Family, can’t tell the difference between a dog and a cat. WTF?

1. LisaMarie – January 5, 2011 
I have been reading your blog. It makes sense to me. I came to your sight in reading about adoption reform (I oppose adoption reform- I am for mutual consent). I relize that is not your interest. However, that is how I have read about your sister, half orphan. She needs help. She says she is a social worker. I wouldn’t want her to work with anyone I know. Perhaps that is why she is unemployed. I find the whole group of reformers to be full of hate, self centered and many should get psychological help. Any normal person beside reformer could read you blog and understand what went on. A different time, a difficult situation that your whole family has gone through. You and your sisters and dad are dealing with life your sister is stuck in a pity party and will never move on. Her life will be miserable until she gets the help to deal with the issues she has. As much as I would like to say move on forget about her till she gets help I realize that those of us who are not pro the adoption reform movement but blieve in mutual consent who would happen upon your sight would not get to hear the other side of the poor Joan story she portrays in forums and comment sections of articles. Your story needs to be heard. So I say continue your blogging. I’m one more person following. Not knowing your family, being of your generation your story make more sense. A dad with several children to take care of without help at a time where there wasn’t gov’t help he thought he was giving Joan a better chance at life. Your life was no less difficult. We all deal with tragedy, hardships and heartaches. I understand some adoptees including Joan may have feelings about adoption but the fact is your dad and family (as most family do) did the best they could with the situation. It’s to bad Joan lives in a dark place that she can’t enjoy her life and move on. What will happen to her when the reform movement ends her life will really be over. She needs to portray herself as she does, she needs to twist the story to fit her needs, without she has nothing, it is what she lives for. Sad for her, unfortunate for your family. Good luck to you

2. Ruth – January 5, 2011
thank you Lisa Marie
I would love to just throw my hands up in the air and see “fuhgedabout it!”

But what people don’t realize is that in her book, and on the internet, Joan has SMEARED MY CHARACTER! By saying that I, Ruth Pace has an arrest and criminal record is DAMAGING to me. If I were to apply for a new job or career THIS COULD HURT ME!
I HAVE NEVER BEEN ARRESTED IN MY LIFE- I HAVE NEVER BEEN ON PROBATION!
Who does Joan think she is that she LIES about me?
I would sue her, but what would I get? She ain’t got nothing. Would I try to take her house? please – I don’t want it. The county taxes alone are over $2100.00. Mine are only $129.00. – cos we get the veteran’s exemption. And I love my own house. a bit raggedy, but it’s MINE. I already paid off the mortgage once, but put on a new roof and porch.
And oh, the pity party for poor Joan – she has arthritis in her neck – (as she reports in her book). oh my! Well I have scoliosis – curvature of the spine AND arthritis in the spine. Back pain and I are old friends. Yet I work in a job that requires heavy lifting. AND I have a touch of IBS,
AND I have chronic sinus troubles. AND I got hot flashes AND thyroid problems with major fatique problems AND just started 12 hour shifts. But I get my ass to work! It ain’t fun to empty a bedpan with poo, BUT I DO IT TO PUT FOOD ON MY TABLE AND ROOF OVER MY HEAD. With today’s economy, sure, I got my financial struggles too. But then I WORK OVERTIME! I have at times worked EIGHT NIGHTS IN A ROW! Because I AM AN ADULT WHO HAS HAD A JOB WITH THE SAME PLACE FOR 38 YEARS.
So why doesn’t Joan get off her lazy butt and get a job? Because then she would be a self-sufficient ADULT. And then she wouldn’t be wallowing in poverty and then she would have one less thing to whine about and garner sympathy.
I will continue to blog my truth and the reform puppets and Joan can simply lump it. Because I don’t feel sorry for them at all.

. Gert – January 5, 2011
thank you Lisa Marie…you said:
“She needs help. She says she is a social worker. I wouldn’t want her to work with anyone I know. Perhaps that is why she is unemployed.”

We, the birth family, have known that Joan needed help after about the first year we knew her…give or take around 1975! Joan has never worked as a social worker, period and never will. She can’t work because she has too many psychological problems and can’t keep herself together to hold down a job. She herself describes her afflications in great detail in the book, she is only a social worker on paper. She ought become her first client.

And while I think about it, does and will NYState disability know that Joan is collecting $$$ from the sale of that book of lies? If she is collecting any sales monies she had better reported it to the State, if she doesn’t that’s called fraud.

Lisa Marie also said:
“I find the whole group of reformers to be full of hate, self centered and many should get psychological help. Any normal person beside reformer could read you blog and understand what went on.”

I’m guessing that there are some real reformers out there, but, those types that you are talking about, on that forum, which Joan is one, are not reformers, but bullys…they go out on the internet
and browbeat potential adoptive parents and adoptive parents from adopting because they are against adoption because they think adoption is the cause of their individual and collective sicknesses. Instead they ought to grow up and accept the life that was given them and change themselves and be happy for a life…but no…

These people are just plain sick…but that does not given them nor Joan, in this case, the right to lie about my life and those in my family…hence…that is why we have this refuting blog…and yes…we are not done…we shall be back with more…

We have lives, so when our individual lives allow us to get back to business, we shall continue…don’t you worry!

Thank you again, Lisa
“Your story needs to be heard. So I say continue your blogging. I’m one more person following.”

We shall!

A Challenge to Joan Wheeler – Would You Please Explain the Various Court Documents and YOUR own Letters That Prove YOU are a LIAR? November 23, 2010

Posted by Ruth in a. What is demanded from Joan Wheeler - the purpose of this blog., Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

Joan keeps repeating herself over and over and over again that she is NOT a liar. But in my last post about how she has documented FOUR different years that ONE false child abuse call was made in, I posted ACTUAL COURT DOCUMENTS and two of JOAN’S OWN LETTERS that PROVE WITH OUT A SHADOW OF A DOUBT THAT JOAN IS A LIAR!!!

Joan keeps saying that her birth sisters are “bothering” her. But she never says specifically HOW! I have addressed this before on this blog. She either ignores this, or comes up with a new lie! And when that lie is exposed, she won’t come back and explain it. I have caught her in several lies and misrepresentations in her book and her blog. And when I have provided the PROOF of the lie or the misrepresentation, she will NOT explain the lie, but just blindly blunder on and keep saying that she is NOT a liar!

How do you explain her insistence that her book is truthful when she says that she signed a complaint against me in February 1993, but I provide the actual court document that has her signature next to a date in July 1993?

How do you explain the fact that she says that she NEVER wrote harassing letters to hurt me, yet I provide an actual letter that she wrote to my husband and mother in law, in which she urges him to leave me. 

How do you explain the fact that in her book she refers to my pet Brandy as a cat, yet I provide actual City of Buffalo animal license that proves that Brandy was a DOG! This proves that 1. Joan is a liar. 2. Joan doesn’t know what she is talking about. 3. Her book is poorly researched. 4. Her book is NOT truthful.

How do you explain the fact that on the internet she keeps saying that she obtained a one year order of protection against me, when I provide the actual COURT DOCUMENT that says it was for six months? And how do you explain the fact that she wrote letters to Albany New York on December 31, 1994 and to the financial director of my employer and told them that I was placed on probation? But it was NOT probation – it was an order of protection! These are two very different things. I was NOT placed on probation – I was given a restraining order – to restrain from contacting Joan. But Joan contacts me – The restraining order was in summer of 1993, yet in spring of 1994, she’s contacting my husband! And in 1999, she’s writing letters to me! She admits so in her book! And admits that she used a friend’s return address to do so! Oh, but Joan is not harassing me, no, no. Just writing letters to tell me my husband fathered a daughter in a vacant house.

I have reported on this letter several times here on this blog – but Joan refuses to address this issue! Just like in her book- she mentions only 2 events in 1995. Her starting college, and her divorce. Oh, but she doesn’t mention that in the spring of 1995, I pulled her into court for harassment – and I provide that letter to my husband as proof – because she’s pleading with him to leave me, asking him to have me drop the charges – and asking my mother in law to turn against me. – oh no! Joan doesn’t interfere in MY life whatsoever and never did! But I provide PROOF POSITIVE that she did and does. But Joan will not answer to this. – WHY?

In the letter she wrote on January 6, 1995 to the director of financial services of my employer, she accuses me of tampering with her medical bill. She writes a 3 page letter, when only one paragraph would suffice. But in this letter, she gives this man, a stranger to me, personal details of MY life, violating my privacy. But at the bottom of the last page of this letter, she is demanding HER privacy! Why the double standard Joan? YOU get to have privacy, but I don’t? ANSWER THIS QUESTION JOAN, AND ANSWER IT RIGHT NOW!!!

Oh, but Joan doesn’t hurt her sisters, never has. As for her assertions that her book is about her and her alone, and her adoption, then what the hell is MY miscarriage mentioned in it? Along with the falsehood that I went to a fertility clinic. And this falsehood was actually in a sentence that contradicted this!

On page 302, she says this about me: “At one point in her life, she claimed to want children and even went through infertility tests with her pervious boyfriend.” Well if I had only CLAIMED to want children, I wouldn’t have gone through infertility tests, now would I? And right here, Joan makes a mockery of my miscarriage of June 5, 1985, where SHE was in the waiting room with my friend Francine, and even drove me home several days later. The next sentence in her rotten book is really very sweet: “Just as well that she didn’t get pregnant because she said she didn’t know how anyone could do it.”

How dare you Joan? You take a figure of speech and throw it in my face, and throw away MY SON by saying it was a good thing I didn’t get pregnant? I DID GET PREGNANT AND LOST MY CHILD! What the hell is the matter with you? Oh, but you didn’t write that book about your sisters, did you? That book was about YOUR life, YOUR adoption, YOUR adoption reunion and YOUR adoption reform work! THEN WHAT THE HELL IS THIS SHIT ABOUT ME NOT GETTING PREGNANT AND YOUR MOCKERY OF THE LOSS OF MY SON ABOUT? My son, who I named in my heart Saied Ali, is my heart. HOW DARE YOU MOCK ME LOSING HIM? AND WHAT DOES MY LOSING HIM HAVE TO DO WITH YOUR BOOK?

 ANSWER THIS QUESTION JOAN! Oh, but Joan NEVER writes things to hurt her sisters, now does she? Oh no! She doesn’t think that even after 25 years, that I would be mourning my son? Here, how about if HER son gets smacked by a car next week? Would Joan care? I doubt it.

I could go on, and I will – that’s the whole purpose of this blog – to show the world that Joan Mary Wheeler is a liar, a filthy liar at that! She tells the world that she NEVER  wrote anything to hurt her sisters, when I just wrote and said she did. I have provided explicit documentation to prove that she is a liar. But Joan will NOT answer these allegations. She keeps saying that we call her a liar. Yes, we do. Well, Joan, PROVE TO US THAT YOU ARE NOT A LIAR! COME ON, JOAN, SPEAK!

1. Gert – November 24, 2010

I agree with everything that Ruth has said here, in addition, if you noticed in the documents that Ruth posted, as our evidence that Joan lies, that Joan will take any and every opportunity to tell anyone about our lives. She does not care about anyone’s privacy.

Ruth said: “In the letter she wrote on January 6, 1995 to the director of financial services of my employer, she accuses me of tampering with her medical bill. She writes a 3 page letter, when only one paragraph would suffice. But in this letter, she gives this man, a stranger to me, personal details of MY life, violating my privacy.”

In that same letter, Joan tells these strangers things about our(us sisters’)personal lives and our family business…what for? Because Joan has no brains!

Ruth continues: “But at the bottom of the last page of this letter, she is demanding HER privacy! Why the double standard Joan? YOU get to have privacy, but I don’t?”

I agree, what gives here Joan? You want privacy but no one else should have privacy!

come out come out where ever you are Joan and answer the charges against you.

Guessing Game Time – What year did that child abuse call against Joan Wheeler really occur? 1993? 1994? 1995? 1996? Joan has reported all 4 years! -why can’t she make up her mind? November 19, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

Back on December 22, 1994, somebody called child abuse on Joan Wheeler and said a nasty lie about her and MY husband. Joan keeps insisting I made the call. Well, the caller identified themself as me. But I am not so stupid as to make a prank child abuse call and give out my real name! I also am NOT going to call child abuse on my own husband. Why would I do that? I don’t want him to get into trouble.

This call came at the same time that Joan was complaining to my employer that I had hacked into hospital computers and fouled up her bill. Sorry, I work as a nurse’s aide, 11pm to 7am. Don’t have access to the billing computers. The computers on the nursing stations were not even linked to the billing computers. My employer checked into her complaint, found that I was innocent, and told Joan this. But she wasn’t going to have it. She was going to MAKE me guilty. So she called the hospital everyday for several months trying to get me fired.

I have posted here, below, a 3 page letter that Joan wrote on January 6, 1995 to the billing supervisor where I work. In this letter, she accuses me of tampering with her bill. She says the first mix-up occurred in February 1994, and the most recent was on December 14, 1994. She also confirms that the child abuse call was made three days before Christmas 1994 on page 3 of this letter. Since this mix-up with her bill was occurring in December 1994, I believe she made that child abuse call herself, so that I would get the blame, and my fiance John would leave me. She even sent letters to him via his mother’s house telling him to leave me. I have posted below Joan’s own letter to John referring to this harassment charge. Oh poor Joan had an exam on the day we were scheduled to go to court. And she wanted my husband and mother in law to appear for HER.

My employer never told me about Joan’s allegations. They knew I was innocent, and obviously chalked Joan up to be a crackpot.  Because they didn’t fire me, Joan decided to make those phone calls designed to get me fired. In March 1995, I had a problem with my paycheck and came in during the daytime to get the problem fixed. That is when I finally found out about the phone calls to my employer, and I pulled her into court for harassment. I was told that these calls started in the fall of 1994. I was told this by the secretaries of the nursing office. I also talked to hospital administration and they confirmed that they had investigated me and found me innocent. They also confirmed the almost daily phone calls for several months placed by Joan Wheeler trying to get me fired. They told me that I had nothing to worry about – my job was secure, and Joan was a crackpot. They described her phone calls as “bizarre.” And many times, they simply hung up on Joan.

Please note that on page 3 she demands privacy for herself, but gives pertinent details of MY life to this stranger. All she had to do was say that “my sister, who is employed at your hospital, and I do not get along. There has been previous court-related issues between us. Is ts possible that Ruth tampered with my bill?” Why the drama? Why does she go to everybody and blab MY personal life to people, yet DEMANDS privacy for herself? Because she is a bully.

On page 341 in her book, Joan writes that she entered Buffalo State College as a social work student in January 1995, and her divorce became final in the autumn of 1995. Not one mention of my court case against her in April 1995. Yet, she writes letters to my husband referring to the court case, pleading with him to get me to drop my harassment charges against her, because she had an exam on that date. Why wouldn’t she mention this court case in her book? BECAUSE THIS WAS A CASE THAT I, RUTH SIPPEL PACE INITIATED AGAINST HER AND SHE KNEW SHE WAS IN THE WRONG. Unfortunately, the judge threw it out, saying “sisters should get along.” Joan also didn’t mention in her book, and she won’t tell you (but I will) that she not only wrote letters to the financial supervisor where I work, but also the mayor of Buffalo and other elected officials telling them details of my private life! Then she mailed me copies of them! These letters and the phone calls to my employer were the basis of my harassment charge against her. Joan will only report on mail that she received from me – funny how she neglects to report on mail that she sent TO me. Isn’t that strange? Not really, because a bully will have you believe that they do nothing wrong. Here is the letter she wrote to my husband and mother in law referring to the 1995 court case:

On December 31, 1994, Joan wrote to the Child Abuse center in Albany New York. (this was also in the packet of shit she mailed to me). This letter is posted here as well. Please note that she indicates that the date of the call was made in December 1994. She also lies to officials in Albany and says that I was sentanced to six months probation. No, Joan was given a six-months order of protection against for phone calls of June 1993. (Joan says on page 314 in her book that she signed the complaint about those phone calls in February 1993. – which would have been impossible – as this would have been 5 months BEFORE the calls were made). – See the complaint below, dated July 1993.

 

Also on page 2 of the letter she wrote to my employer, she says that I was found guilty on August 9, 1993 for annoyance phone calls and was placed on six months probation. (again, no, it was not probation, it was an order of protection), and this ended on February 9, 1994, but on page 324 in her book, she is relating an incident of August 1, 1993, and says I was in

violation of the order of protection. So she has the date wrong on this – but does correctly state it was an order of protection, and NOT probation.

Joan says on the bottom of page 328 in her book that the child abuse call was made in early December 1993, and on page 329 we went to court over this in 1994. No, we did not. How could we be in court in the spring of 1994 when December 1994 and the call hadn’t occurred yet?

In 1999, Joan sends me this harassing letter stating that the child abuse call and it’s court battle occurred in 1995.

In September 2010, Joan posts on the Adult Adoptees Advocating for Change forum that the child abuse call occurred in 1996. On her new cyberbullying blog, dated October 2010, she still refers to the year 1996 as the occurrance of this child abuse call. Here is the screenshot of her citing that year .

Joan keeps insisting her book is the truth. How can it be? She states in the book the call was made in 1993 and I provide letters here written by her giving the true date of 1994, and a bullshit date of 1995. And I provide the screenshot here where she says it was in 1996.

To sum up:
I was found guilty of making annoyance phone calls to her in June of 1993 – she had baited me with a forged letter from her son to my husband, but the envelope was addressed to me. When I called her, she kept hanging up on me. A week later, my electricity was shut off – I called her for help, as she still owed me money. Money that she STOLE from me.She kept hanging up on me. She reported to the police that I was calling and swearing at her and hanging up on her. She was granted a restraining order against me from August 9, 1993 – February 9, 1994.

On February 1994, a mix-up of her medical bill occurred, and she accused me of doing it. Another mix-up occurred on December 14, 1994. Starting some time in the autumn of 1994, Joan begins calling my employer almost everyday for several months to various departments in the hospital, where Joan was trying to get me fired.

A phony child abuse call was made about Joan on December 22, 1994. This call was made to implicate me, as the caller identified themself as me, and named my husband as the child abuser along with Joan. On December 31, 1994, Joan writes to Albany New York about this child abuse call, and lies to the authorities about me being placed on probation. On January 6, 1995, Joan writes to the financial supervisor at my hospital and correctly gives the dates of the child abuse call, but again lies and says that I was placed on probation. She does give the correct dates of August 9, 1993 to February 9, 1994 of the six months order of protection. but in various places on the internet and in her book, she says that she was granted a one year order of protection. She gives FOUR different years that the child abuse call was made, and in the book says the call was made in early December 1993.

The truthful date of the call was December 22 and the year was 1994. NOT 1993, NOT 1995, NOT 1996. The actual date was December 22, 1994, NOT early December 1993 as she says in the book.

And the truthful date of the order of protection she got against me was August 9, 1993 to February 9, 1994. And it was an order of protection, NOT probation. She signed the complaint against me in July 1993, NOT February 1993.

Seems to me that Joan is either a bullshit artist, a liar, or someone who just writes any old thing that pops up into her head. Whatever, it still produces the same result – it negates her claim that her book Forbidden Family is a truthful book, because she just can not and will not tell the truth.

Joan Wheeler presents herself as a social worker, an adoption reform expert. She pats herself on her back on how “smart” she is. She is soooo knowledgeable about the law (is she a lawyer?) She is soooo knowledgable about adoption law and practices. (again, is she a lawyer?) Yet with all her telling her book and blog readers how smart she is, with her college degrees, she can’t seem to get dates straight in her book and on the internet. And she doesn’t know the difference between an order of protection and probation. Also doesn’t seem to know that the difference between being summoned into court to answer a harassment charge and being placed on arrest. 

Joan – if your book is not selling - perhaps the reason is because you are a liar and you didn’t write your book correctly? All you had to do was stick to the truth of things. It is not my fault people aren’t buying your book – it’s your own fault. If you had stayed to the truth in all things – because when you don’t, people will not trust you, nor believe what you have to say or write. I didn’t hold a gun to your head and force you to write 4 different years about that child abuse call. I didn’t force you to lie about the duration of the order of protection you obtained against me. All I did was what any honorable investigative reporter does – report the truth. What readers do with what YOU write and what I write is up to them. People don’t want to read nonsense from a liar. People don’t want legal or psychological advise from a person who can’t keep important data straight.

You had no business reporting lies about me or anyone else. Now your lies are catching up to you. You have only yourself to blame.

1. Gert – November 19, 2010

Joan, why don’t you just do the right thing…say you are sorry for all the lies you have said in the book and on your web sites and ask to be forgiven by your sisters! That would go a long way to repairing the damage you have done. Start by forgiving yourself and then ask us for forgiveness! You know, Joan, that you must start to do the right thing…Do It!

while we wait for Joan to do the right thing…

Joan is very very worried about how much we sisters are writing about her book, for you see, she is afraid of what is coming up! Yep, Joan knows the truth and she has seen in the past year that we sisters are very determined to expose all lies of Joan’s. So she must ‘head us off at the pass’, so to speak, by continuing her basic rap that we sisters are after her and that we are harming her etc etc.

Do the right thing Joan

—-crash! Ruth destroys the stereo, cos she can’t stand rap music and she can’t stand the friggin whining that she has heard over and over and over and over and over-the same old refrain