jump to navigation

Joan Wheeler is a dangerous nut – she has had a long history of harassing people. July 21, 2012

Posted by Ruth in Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, mental illness, Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

this is a different sort of post – during a facebook conversation with Gert and me and a couple of our cousins, the question was asked what did Joan Wheeler do to piss off the members of the family of our mom’s sister.

Part 1 She started with Gail because Gail had grown up with Helen Connors’ daughters – Nancy, Fran and Annie – Helen was the childhood friend of Aunt Catherine and the brother of Edward Wheeler.    Joan remembered the Crystal Beach incident when she and Gail were 10 years and they bumped into each other – Gertrude Anetrino – another of Edward Wheeler’s sisters - lived on Sumner St – right around the corner from Bailey and Walden – right where Scheu Park is – where grandpa Jacob Herr and the family lived. – and not far from where I live now.
They used to have nieghborhood days at Crystal Beach – you pre-bought some ride and meal tickets at neighborhood stores for a savings. So in 1966, Gertrude and Helen and all their kids went for Bailey and Walden Day and coincidentally Aunt Catherine went with Ida, Norman and Gail. I don’t know who the adults Aunt Catherine went with, as she didn’t drive. Aunt Catherine and Gail bumped into Dorothy Wheeler and Joan – Gail saw Joan and was confused because she thought it was me, but then it wasn’t. Catherine told her later never to tell me or anyone she saw that girl. Gail then saw Joan’s Holy Communion picture and remembered the kid at Crystal Beach. I don’t know when in Gail’s life she became aware that we Sippels had another sister, but in 1974 when we found her, she told me didn’t like having to lie to me. – this is the one of the “lies” of adoption that Joan is always bitching about – but then she twists things around and in the book BLAMES Gail for not telling her about herself – like – wtf – Gail was a 10 year old kid and didn’t know anything!

Part 2. During the 1970′s me, Joan and Gail would go out discoing and bar-hopping. but Gail never really liked Joan. She sensed from the get-go that Joan was wierd. At her wedding shower (1980), we were having dinner and Nancy and Fran started talking about Joan, and Helen kicked one of them under the table “don’t talk about people behind their back.” I don’t remember which one but they said, “mom, we’re talking about Joan.” – because Nancy, Fran, and Annie grew up with Joan – they knew how wierd she was – apparently she had been wierd all her life. The early 80′s – Gail was busy with her own life as a newlywed and trying to get pregnant. At the same time I was trying to get pregnant. And in 1980, I went back to working the night shift. Neither Gail nor me had much time to spend on Joan. And of course, then we had the troubles with Karen. – Joan felt that Gail was “avoiding her” because the Wheeler cousins were badmouthing her. – but a lot of it was due to what she did to you Gert in 1982. Aunt Catherine was very upset over the whole thing. By the time we had the Herr family reunion at Uncle Mikes house in 1985, EVERYBODY was starting to see Joan for the nut she was and knew what she did to you Gert and were starting to distance themselves from her.

Part 3 – In 1993, Joan’s daughter got sick and this was after Joan stole that money from me and she knew she couldn’t ask me for any family medical history on thyroid problems, so she photocopied a bunch of medical stuff about Cathy and mailed them to Gail. Gail was pissed at her for what she did to me and sent them back to her. Joan waited until after 10 at night and called her on the phone and was screaming at Gail on the answering machine. Kevin wanted to get up and bitch her out, but Gail told him to just ignore her. From time to time, Joan would mail shit to Gail but Gail would always just mark the envelope “return to sender.” which was pissing Joan off even more. By 1994 when Joan ramped up her harassment to me, I sort of withdrew from everybody – and Gail purposely did not call me – because she wanted to prove to everyone that it was not Ruth doing all the trouble at one point Gail called our father up and told him “its not Ruth – it’s Joan.” Joan was now living back with her mother – with no job, kids either in school or day camp (did she ever parent them?) and she had all sorts of time to write letters to me and Gail. I couldn’t get the dam Buffalo Police to listen to me. But in the town of Eden – it was a different story. I don’t remember when – it had to be late 1998 when Joan sent her another letter – and Gail finally went to the police and they sent Joan a letter to tell her to stop contacting Gail – and it was at this time, Gail was battling cancer. When she got the last letter in 1999, she took it right to the police and they called Joan and said “did you send this letter to Mrs. B.? and Joan said yes. “after we told not to contact her?” she said yes. it was the Eden police who started the harassment charge against Joan. – I didn’t know any of this until John and I got married. I didn’t even know Gail and Kevin got divorced. and I am STILL upset that during the last years of her life, Gail purposely did not call me – to protect me – to prove that it wasnt me doing the shit.

Part 4 I can’t remember the exact year – but Joan had a crack in her windshield – and she went to get it fixed and the mechanic was Ray III – Bugsy’s son.  Somehow the two got to talking and found out they were cousins. Ray was nice enough to invite Joan home for dinner. When Gail found out – she told him to leave her alone because she was dangerous. I don’t know what she told him. He started distancing himself from her, and she kept trying to call him. This had to be the late 90′s during the height of her letter writing to lots of people. (my job, the mayor, even Jessica, the 17 year old daughter of Nancy -and Jessica had nothing to do with the family drama! – she was bitching out Jessica and Nancy got her on the phone and told Joan the police would be called if she bothered her daughter again). — I don’t have the letter anymore – but I did get one letter that accused me, my friend Francine, Gail and Ray of “plotting against her.” – I called Francine up and she came over for lunch and then I read the letter to her. she started choking on her sandwich and then said “but but, I never met your cousin Ray.” – Joan in retaliation for this “plot” called Ray’s job to say he fucked up the windshield – trying to get him in trouble on his job. — like she was doing to me at my job.

Part 5 – Joan also managed to get Uncle Mattie’s daughter (I can’t remember her name) and Aunt Bertha’s kids Dennis and  Becky mad at her as well. – Because she has such a lovely way to relate to people.

and with all this shit going on – for more than 25 years and the courts and the district attorney and the police – if Joan goes off the deep end like that nut in colorado – I will hold the authorities responsible – because they have had plenty of notice about this sick bitch.

And that’s also why I sent that letter to Buffalo area therapist Nicole Urdang, who supposedly read Joan’s book and left a book review on amazon.com saying it was a good book. This was a few months after Congresswoman Gabby Giffords was shot. And I told Urdang that she didn’t see the contradictions that Joan made in the book – and that Urdang was a poor therapist because she didn’t recognize that the book is not about adoption reform but a chronicle of a woman losing her sanity. and I told Urdang that she is responsible for egging Joan on. As well as Rene Hoksbergen, Lori Corangelo, Russell Thomas, Susan Thompson Underdahl and recently Brian T. Maloney.

I forgot to mention a name on the list of people that I will hold responsible if Joan Wheeler goes off the deep end.- Buffalo City Court Judge Margaret Anderson.

In 1995 I took Joan to court for harassment because of:
Sometime in 1994 Joan’s hospital bill got mixed up with another patient. Joan ASSUMED I did it and called my job. They investigated and found me innocent. They told Joan this. I work as a nurse’s aide, since 1972. Joan puts in her book that I work as a billing clerk to lend credence to this bullshit. The computers on the nursing station are not connected to the billing computers. The mistake was traced to a typo made at 4pm. I worked at that time 11pm to 7am. Not to mention the fact that they can trace everything you do on the computer. But Joan KNEW I did, even though she was told I didn’t. So she set out to change the facts. To change history. She called my job repeatedly for six months trying to get me fired. This is a hospital for god’s sake and we have better things to do than put with a lunatic! Like taking care of sick people and saving lives!
In December 1994, Joan called child abuse on herself, posing as me, She then wrote to Albany NY and told the Child Abuse authorities that I had been placed on probation due to annoyance phone calls. No, it was a six-month order of protection. In February 1995, I received a packet in the mail – from Joan – it contained photocopies of letters she had been writing to: Erie County District Attorney Kevin Dillon, Erie County Commissioner of Social Services Deborah Merrifield,  NYS Senator Anthony Nanula, Buffalo Mayor Anthony Masiello, and the Patient Finacial Services Director of my employer. All these letter contained false accusations of me, and telling these elected officials and people at my job that I can’t pregnant, I hate her because she has kids, I hate her because she killed my mom. I’m not married but I’m living a man who’s not the same race as me. I have an arrest record, I am a criminal. AND she wrote letters to my fiance telling him to break up with me. She contacted my future mother in law, trying to tell her I was evil.
So I took all those letters, including the ones to my fiance and his mother and filed harassment charges on her. At one point while I was standing in front of Judge Margaret Anderson, she was looking at the letters and picked one up, turned to the person standing to her right, and said “she wrote to Kevin?” (the district attorney Kevin Dillon). And she was laughing. A judge was laughing at the clear stalking and harassing letters that Joan had written about me. She then dismissed my harassment charges saying: “sisters should get along.”

Oh thank you very much Judge Margaret Anderson – you have clear evidence of someone stalking me, harassing me, writing letters of character assassination, and you dismissed it all. YOU enabled Joan Wheeler to continue to harass me up to the present.

YOU put it in Joan’s sick head that she could harass me and get away with it.

Through the years, when I have told the story of this and showed those letters to people, they were shocked that a city court judge saw all the clear evidence and dismissed it. And we all have one name for that judge and it ain’t very pretty!

 1. Ruth

AND in November 2009, when I called Joan on the phone to tell her that our Aunt Doris died, she started screaming at me – hurling obscenities at me – I got in my car and went to my cousin Nancy’s house and she calmed down – all I did was make a legitmate phone call, – that even after all the harasment that Joan did to me, that I, her sister, would take the time to tell Joan that the woman she was originally named for (Doris) had passed. What did I get in return? I got hit with a barrage of verbal abuse!
After I left Nancy’s house, I went to my dad’s – where he got a screaming phone call from Joan. He told me then that Joan is mentally ill. By the time I got home – there was a message on my answering machine – from the Town of Tonawanda police saying that Ruth Sippel Pace and my sisters Gert and Kathy were to stop calling Joan. yeah! Joan fucking called the cops on me and named two other people that had nothing to do with it!
When I told Gert, Gert called tonawanda police (long distance) and they told Gert “don’t worry, we know all about her.”
And in January 2011, in a facebook private message conversation I had with Joan’s ex husband, he told me that he has had to call the police LONG DISTANCE (he lived at the time in S. Carolina) to break up fights between Joan and her daughter. Who is being forced at the age of 24 to work two jobs to support herself and her mom. But in a myspace email to me the day after I called Joan about Aunt Doris, my niece is whining “don’t I have a right to a life of my own?” – yet, 3 years later, she’s still stuck with her mother – it reminds me of an old horror movie – sort of like “whatever happened to baby jane?” – but not quite. I fear that not only is Joan mentally ill, but if at the age of 24, you haven’t gotten away from your sick mother, you must be sick yourself. I feel sorry for mentally ill people, but to a point. – especially when you’ve been their target for harassment for years and can’t get it to stop!

2. gertmcqueenJuly 22, 2012

Gert here…

After what joan did to me, 1980-82, I left Buffalo and was not aware of many things until 1992 when I started talking again with Ruth. It was difficult to follow because I had lost contact with relatives who were children or not even born when I left and the stories, about Joan’s behavior has always been sick and wierd.

in 1998 I too received a letter from Joan, that she sent to Ruth, to which I answered and told her why is she still bothering me when I told her to get lost in 1982 and then again in 1992?

When Ruth told me about how Joan was harassing Gail I couldn’t believe it…Joan never stops…

And just before she published that lying book she was setting the ground work, on the internet, AGAINST US….and I have the evidence dating back to 2008!

And since the book was published we siblings have gone after Joan’s lying and she has enlisted all kinds of people to ‘get us’ and they have failed because TRUTH WINS OUT. We are NOT DONE with telling all the truths that we know about this very dangerous person.

In a way I feel sorry for the poor sucker Brian, who believes Joan and went out of his way to ATTACK WOMEN he doesn’t know! He has been silent since we exposed the evidence of Joan’s email 2009 attacks on Kathy…and there is MORE evidence…so be aware…if you hang out with Joan Wheeler you will get burnt.

Joan Wheeler is a very dangerous person…we have been telling the world for a long long time….listen up and get away from her.

My answer to Gert’s post ‘Champ has left the building, Joan Wheeler has taken over’ and lots more! June 29, 2012

Posted by Ruth in a. What is demanded from Joan Wheeler - the purpose of this blog., Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, mental illness, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

Ruth here
Good morning. I went to bed at 10pm. I was going to stay up and do some blogging, but was just too tired.

So here it is 3:30. I find a bunch of comments on Gert’s post “Champ has left the building…Joan Wheeler has taken over….”
I was going to comment myself, but find I have to much to say – so here is a new blog post.

Thank you Paula for having the courage to write your observations. We have long suspected that people reading our blog and Joan’s blog can tell for themselves that Joan is mentally ill. Joan knows herself that she is mentally ill. She readily admits that she’s been in therapy for over 30 years and describes herself as “damaged.” She finally got something right.

For the life of me, I cannot and have never understood WHY she has gone after me – all these years. Sure, she has hurt Gert and Kathy, and I’ve said it before to both of them – that book was NOT about adoption – it was to trash everyone in her life who ever angered her, and in particular ME. She calls me Brenda in the book. My god, every other page is Brenda this, Brenda that. Is the book a biography of Brenda or a biography of Joan. She writes about my first husband, my job, makes a mockery of my miscarriage, makes outlandish claims regarding a telephone annoyance incident – has a police detective talking nonsense about my pets – yes – my pets! A police officer would not do that. I had my phone listed under a different name – Brittany. She has the police officer asking her who is Brandy Sippel? Joan writes that she told him that was my cat – actually it was my dog – and the officer says the phone bill is under the cats name and Joan says my gas bill is under the other cat’s name. A letter written to Gert’s daughter has her admitting that she knows my phone is listed under Brittany. So why not tell the truth in the book?

And how did I get into court for annoyance calls? Because in June 1993 (at the same time she was making trouble for Kathy, via her pal Rene Hoksbergen), I get a letter in the mail. The envelope, in Joan’s handwritiing, was addressed to me. So I open it up. Inside was a sloppy note, supposedly written by her ten year old son, to my husband. It does not say Dear Uncle John, just Dear John, – and comparing it to Joan’s handwriting – it was her. So I called her up. She hung up on me. I thought we were disconnected. I called again. She hung up. I called again. She hung up. – Well, the sly one had already falsely reported to the Annoyance Call Bureau that she was getting calls. And made them install a trace trap. And calls WERE NOT recorded. She sent that note to bait me, and I fell for it. The following week, my electricity was shut off. I called her again – because she owed me money, – the money that she stole from me in the first place – now I needed it – same thing. She kept hanging up on me. Then she reported me to the police.
I got a call from the police officer and I told him my side of the story. He told me that he would recomend to Joan not to press charges, but she went ahead and did anyway. That’s how she got the Order of Protection against me – and it was for six months. Not for one year as she writes in the book.
by the way, you can see the actual letter in this post.”Did Joan’s 10 year old son write that letter I got in June 1993? Or did Joan herself?”

The following year, a completely innocent typing mistake mixed up her hospital bill and she swore up and down that I had done it. Never mind that I did not, never did, work in the billing office. For forty years, I’ve worked as a nurse’s aide. Joan calls my job and they investigate it. They found me innocent. But she wasn’t going to have it. She KNEW I was guilty and despite being assured by my employer that I DIDN’T do it, she was going to change the facts and set out to destroy me. She called my job for months trying to get me fired. She made that false child abuse call against herself to destroy my relationship with my fiance (now husband), she wrote letters to the mayor of Buffalo. – This took us into 1995. I filed harassment charges against her, but the stupid judge dismissed it, saying “sisters should get along.” – I was so angry. I was victimized by Joan, now I was victimized by the judge.

The harassment stopped after an assitant district attorney yelled at both me and Joan in 1995, but then in 1998, out of the blue, Joan started up again. The assistant DA who yelled at us was not there any more, so I had to start from scratch – and in 1999, Joan wrote me a letter using a friend’s return address – without her permission – and in the letter Joan tells me my infertile husband got the next door neighbor pregnant and they had a daughter in 1993. I go down to the district attorney and they didn’t want to do anything. A friend of mine, who works in the present city government suggested Family Court – and they took my case, slapping a one year order of protection for me against Joan. But she doesn’t write about that in the book – instead, she has all 3 court cases all mixed up and convoluted with a statement that we had a 3 month court battle in 1994. – What she was talking about was the case I brought against her in 1995 – First appearance, she is arraigned and a trial date was set. Second appearance, the case gets postponed. Third appearance, the judge dismissed it. Three short appearance, probably 15 minutes in length each time in front of the judge – gets reported in the book as “a three month court battle” with her kids on the stand testifying against me.

When I read that for the first time – I was like stunned! It was a total fabrication – I’m still amazed that Joan wrote that and actually BELIEVES that things happened that way. Because she really does BELIEVE that things happen the way she reports.

That is why she canNOT ever EVER explain even actual court documents that PROVE WITHOUT A DOUBT THAT WHAT SHE SAYS DIDN’T HAPPEN OR HOW SHE SAYS OR THAT SHE LIED. She turns a blind eye to her own handwritten letters to me and my fiance and my mother in law. She didn’t do that. That’s her story and she’s sticking to it.

She whines and says that nobody knew how to proceed with the reunion. I have already addressed that on my blog – I don’t know what she means by that – that the birth siblings were supposed to be some sort of all-knowing gods?

In 1974, I had just gotten my first real apartment. I had been on my own from 71-72, moved back in at my dad’s to help out watching the little ones. My first “apartment’ was just a room in a boarding house, now I had a full apartment, with my own fridge, etc. A new adult. lol. I was 23, starting late, but was finding my first adult steps. And we had our reunion. What deep psychiatric bullcrap was I supposed to know? All I did was f’ing welcome her into my life. I was working full time nights. When I had a free time – we went out. We got together. We were like new friends getting to know each other, but we were sisters. And we were re-connecting. What the hell did she want from me? Apparrently my life. Because when she started her interfering in 1980, and we started telling her, don’t do that, she would act like a five year old, (whiny) “I didn’t mean it. I don’t know how to act.). She says in her book she was a naive sheltered white girl from the suburbs.) Bull – she was an adult. But yeah, she acted like a brat. By 1980, it was clear to us that she, despite being raised by two parents, did not have the same morals and values that we did. We did not try to mold her to fit OUR pre-conceptions of what Doris might be, we simply put our foot down to someone who began interfering with our lives. Lying to us, and eventually stealing from us. These are things that are NOT tolerated by ANYone.

I recently broke off a freindship with someone who had the nerve to swear at me on my facebook page. At 1 in the morning she calls me up demanding to know why I took her off my facebook page. Then she starts swearing at me on the phone. This is a friend? Not in my book. So I said “goodby” – end of friendship. I don’t allow ANYbody to abuse me, not phyisically, verbally or otherwise. You disrespect ol’ Ruth – be prepared to be thrown out of her life. Boom. End of story.

Joan couldn’t accept that one by one, not only her birth siblings, but her birth father, and other members of both her adopted and birth family turned their backs on her – not because she was adopted, or is a militant adoptee – IT IS JOAN’S OWN BEHAVIOR – HER WORDS AND DEEDS THAT GOT HER KICKED OUT OF THE FAMILY.

Now she gets on the internet and wants people to feel sorry for HER. Because we birth sisters are telling the truth of what happened. We’re being admonished by her in her guise of Chimp to “understand” HER feelings of being adopted. NO way!

I did that back in the 70′s. I bent over backwards for her – all the way thru the 80′s and finally had enough when she stole from me. And from January 1991 to the present, I’ve been punished for simply saying I WON’T BE ABUSED BY JOAN WHEELER ANY MORE.

Joan Wheeler tried to destroy my life. She railroaded me in court. She tried to break me and John up. She tried to get me fired from my job. She wrote letters to the mayor and other elected officials in an attempt to ruin my reputation. She writes that book and trashes me left and right in that book. And worse of all – the worst of it – and she was there – during the years I was trying to get pregnant. And she even borrowed my books on pregnancy and child-raising, and was there when I miscarried in 1985, yet in the book states: “at one point she (me) claimed to want to have children.” then mocks my infertility by saying, “just as well she didn’t get pregnant.”

What does THAT have to do with Joan’s adoption, her reunion, or her adoption reform work? NOTHING -ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. It was a pure attack on me – a vicious, below-the-belt comment, written especially to slam me and hurt me, BECAUSE JOAN KNEW HOW MUCH I WANTED A CHILD.

No, I don’t feel sorry for Joan – I hate her. But no, my life does not revolve around her or my hate of her- or this blog. I have a life and a busy one at that. – I actually have not had much time to do a lot of blogging – it has been sporadic lately. Since the last week of January of this year, I’ve had some health issues. And because of being injured on my job last summer, we had fallen behind in some bills, so our finances were strained. So despite my health issues, I did what people with morals and values do – instead of stealing money from someone, sick as I was, I picked up extra shifts at work.

In the meantime, my husband John has been getting his documentation together. He never had his original birth certificate, and despite being a know-it-all about birth certificates and expert in those matters – Joan never helped John obtain his original birth certificate. Well, I did. And by god, I’m not even an adoption expert or birth certificate expert! We just went to Lackawanna and got it. And everything is A-OK.

When John turned 65 a few years ago, he was supposed to be automatically placed on Medicare Part B. We never heard from Social Security. And he is covered under my family plan thru my job, so we never paid any attention. Well of a sudden, our health insurance was denying his doctor bills. So – we had to get all that straightened out. Several weeks ago John went to social security and while there for one thing, made the decision to retire. He was going to retire in 2013, but why wait?

So while we were waiting for all that paperwork, the first week of June, my computer – a netbook, crashed. Gert in the meantime, bought a new computer and shipped me her old laptop, a bit outdated, but still works just fine. AND I went and ordered a new netbook. So now, I got two computers and have been busy transfering files from my external hard drive to Gert’s old laptop and personalizing it. I still haven’t even gotten my new netbook up and running. I turned it on the first day I got it – it works. I installed a game, played it – it works, and it’s been in my office ever since. I’ve been working on the larger laptop in the living room, which will be transfrered to the kitchen by next week for John to work on.

Sooo – John’s social security check came – for two months worth (May and June) and we’ve been busy catching up with our finances. Just yesterday, Thursday, I was downtown paying my county taxes and water bill. It feels good to have zero balance on all our property taxes. And we had to go to our health insurance and show them that now that he has Medicare part B – they need to straighten that out. They said that they will go back and take care of any claims that had been denied. whew!

NOW – today, is John’s last day at work. I have to work this weekend, and of course there’s the holiday coming up next week, which I have to work (hospitals never close ya know). Next weekend, we are going to Red Lobster to celebrate his retirement. Then next month, we have three things to celebrate – both our birthdays, and our tenth wedding anniversary. We have long wanted to check out a restaurant near downtown Buffalo – Chef’s – the official restaurant of the Buffalo Sabres. I’m not kidding – it is! Apparently the players go there for dinner a lot. It’s an Italian restaurant, and must be good – the parking lot is always packed!

I’m also busy with my other passion – Star Trek, and I am head of a local Star Trek group. And a newsletter is due. So I simply MUST get one of my computers hooked up to my printer and get to work. And we are having our July meeting downtown at the waterfront in a couple of weeks. AND I’m still busy with my archiving work. Scanning into my computer pictures, and papers, articles of topics that I’m interested in. I’m interested in many topics, Ancient Egypt, Ancient Meso-America, other historical eras, I love art – Art Deco and Art Neuveau (I can never spell that right).metaphysics, crystals and herbs, AND I’m digitizing my music collection. I have on my external hard drive almost 850 albums of music.With more to go. I love all forms of music – from head banging metal to Mozart.

So with all this stuff going on – I don’t always have to time to blog. And Joan also put me down in her book for me liking horror movies. And just recently slammed me because I have multiple blogs! So f’ing what? I am a multi-faceted person with passion for the things I like. If you ask me, Joan is simply jealous that my life is so rich! And that I get the hell out there and do things I love. And yeah, I do have multiple blogs – one is the main blog about refuting that book, one was set up just to have simple statements from us three sisters that we will not accept abuse from Joan Wheeler. Another blog is set up to share family stories. Another blog is my horror site Midnight and Mythos. John is itching to learn the computer and the internet and contribute to our blog. His screen name is The Cadaverman. That gives you a bit of hint of what you can expect he will write about. 

And two months ago, I set up another blog for my Star Trek group The USS Ari, and to share my vast Star Trek scrapbook. There is a website already -  My Star Trek Scrapbook  by my friend Fred. He has been doing this for a few years now. Last summer, he put up a magazine article from 1979, but was missing the last page. Well, I had that article in my collection, and put that page on my blog to share with him. He suggested I start my own webpage and post the pictures and articles that I have, and this way, he and I can share with each other, and the world, our Star Trek passion. My Ari site is not ready to be up and running – but it will be soon. And Joan, in her guise of Chimp, can put me down, and ridicule me all she wants, because what she is doing by ridiculing me for my passions, and my choice of a tv show or genre of movies, – she is showing the world that despite her being 56 years of physical age, her mental age is that of a 10 year old. Acting like a schoolyard bully – she is the same as those bullying brats on the school bus two weeks ago, that bullied bus aide Karen Klein. By the way, if you click on the link and go see Fred’s site – he also has multiple blogs and likes horror too. So whaddya gonna do now Joan/Chimp? slam Fred for liking Star Trek and horror and having multiple blogs? bitch – your bitchiness is showing. ha ha. That didn’t help your cause any. All you accomplished was to show the world just what an abuser to your sister Ruth you are. You failed to show that YOU do not harass or engage in abusive behavior to Ruth – because — you just did.

So yeah, I got a busy life. And when I have a few minutes to write, I will. But most times, I have very little tiime for losers like Joan and her imaginary playmate Chimp. Another thing people (read Joan/Chimp) fail to understand – that going through her book and blogging about it – it is therapuetic for us. Because we have never ever been able to get a word in edgewise with Joan. When you talk to her in person – she starts arguing, her voice raises, next thing you know she’s shouting at you – screaming – and her voice is so piercing it hurts your ears. And you can’t get your point across because SHE’S now controlling you – by screaming at you, not allowing your opinion to be heard. If you write to her – it’s harassment, if you’re on the phone with her – the second you disagree with her – she hangs up on you. WE HAVE BEEN BULLIED INTO SILENCE FOR MORE THAN 30 YEARS. And the blogs are now a way for us to get a chance to have our say. There is that well-known statement – “there’s two sides to every story.” And Joan as Chimp, has a lot of nerve to say that because WE are writing our blogs, WE are not listening to Joan’s side. ???? WTF??? JOAN’S BOOK WAS HER SIDE. OUR BLOGS ARE ANSWERING HER BOOK AND PUTTING OUT THE OTHER SIDE – THE TRUTHFUL SIDE.

Above, I said that Joan “believes” things happened this way or that way, but I’m not so sure that’s true. Because if it was, Joan wouldn’t have a problem with our blogs. No, the real thing going on is this: JOAN DESPERATELY WANTS US TO SHUT UP BECAUSE SHE DOENS’T WANT THE TRUTH TO COME OUT – THE TRUTH OF HER OWN DIRTY DEEDS. But sick and perverted as she is, she keeps talking to us, knowing we won’t shut up. It’s like the child who is misbehaving – acting out to get attention – ANY kind of attention, even getting knocked down again. And by gods, I will keep knocking her down. Until she publicly admits that she set out on a campaign of hate against me. And publicly admits she stole from me and lied about me. And publicly apologizes to me.

Get a life Joan/Chimp – my life is not yours. You tried to destroy my life in the past with all your stupid harassment – but it never worked. Now you get the tables turned on you. It’s called “reaping the seeds that you have sown.” I loved you once. as a sister. But you destroyed that love with your abuse. Now I hate you. Deal with it.

Gert McQueen’s review of Rene Hoksbergen’s review of Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler December 27, 2011

Posted by gertmcqueen in Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , ,
comments closed
 Gert here:
In view of the fact that recent attention has been placed on Rene Hoksbergen’s endorsement of the lying hateful book that Joan Wheeler wrote, which was pulled from publication, I thought that readers would like to see what I wrote and posted some time ago about his review. (Ruth’s note – I placed some additional material at the end of this post – please read – it is my answer to only 2 statements of Hoksbergen).
 
Rene Hoksbergen’s words are in normal text format.
Gert McQueen’s comments, on this review, are in bold itatic text format.
 
Review of Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family by Rene Hoksbergen in LAVAContact2  2010 English translation.
 
This autobiographical study of Joan Wheeler read with the necessary tension on the way things will go. Despite the extensive and detailed description of the many events and feelings over a period of almost fifty years.
 
This book is a detailed description of a tormented individual that has a great need to have the world fit her delusions. No one lives in a vacuum and by the very nature of writing about one’s own inner demons it becomes very subjective in nature and all peoples in it must fit that subjective mindset. The ‘necessary tension’ is the result of the author’s inabilities to accept life as life was given to her. The ‘extensive and detailed description’ is just over-kill and only points to a mentally unbalanced individual. Perhaps if the author actually lived a life instead of always writing ‘the book’ she and it would not be so full of torment!
 
It consists of two parts. The autobiography of Joan and then part two with lots of information about the American adoption history and its current situation. In this second part she makes her findings and suggestions for improvements.
 
Part 1, is full of sensationalized drama, with intent to sell the story, the book! The author uses, extensively, the techniques of exaggeration and hyperbole along with fabrications and outright lies. 38 chapters consisting of 569 pages are devoted to the study of the autobiography of Joan’s tormented views!
 
Part 2, which ought to be the more useful part of any written material intended for adoption reform, consists of only 6 chapters with a total of 62 pages! And there are no ‘suggestions’ from the author. She is a militant angry adoptee that is very hostile to anyone who adopts!
 
And how much does a person have to spend for this study of one person’s tormented life? Around $50.00! A person, spending a few hours on the Internet, could come up with the same source materials in this book and save themselves the money.
 
Joan was born in Buffalo. Her mother died shortly after her birth and her father decided to give her away to a distant relative without children. He has already four children, three daughters and one son, this fifth child can’t be taken care by him. In 1956, when this takes place, adoption in the US (and also in our country) is a taboo subject. Birth certificates are falsified, the child is sometimes very late or not informed about the adoption and many know the facts and family relationships, some don’t, as the case of Joan.
 
My father didn’t know about the adoptive parents being any sort of ‘distant relative’; he was in the middle of a tragedy! My father’s decisions do not have to be explained or justified. The adoptive parents also do not have to justify or explain their reasons for adopting. Throughout this book the author details, over and over again, how she had browbeaten, intimidated, condemned, and used all sorts of methods to get all parents to ‘apology’ to her for her being adopted! My god!
 
When she becomes 18 years old, she’s suddenly called by her eldest sister. Her three sisters were from when Joan suddenly disappeared from the family informed of the status of adoption and also of her destination. They had always wanted to know how she was doing and now she’s eighteen and formal adult, they can contact her. From this call Joan’s life has been put upside down. She describes her reactions, of the adoptive parents and how her birth family, her father and siblings deal with it.
 
Life, being as it is as it unfolds, is full of surprises; who would have guessed that the author would choose to condemn both families for wanting her and then go out of her way to make everyone’s life miserable with her dirty double dealings and lies! It makes me ill to read, the almost 600 pages, of pure mental garbage that the author describes herself and everyone related to her.
 
Against the background of all the facts around the reunion and the further development of contacts she tells clearly and gripping the progress of other aspects in her life, her school life, marriage, becomes mother of two children, the death of her adoptive father, dealing with friends, the care of her adoptive mother and only child, and many others. It is a moving description of the history of an American woman and her two families.
 
Gripping is not a word I’d use to describe how the author tells about aspects of her life. Soap opera dramatics is how the author details her life; every little thing is overblown so that when real troubles occur they are exaggerated to show how horrible a life she has, because she is adopted! “A moving description”, only if you are addicted to soap opera drama!
 
But gradually it becomes clear that the reunion in her life especially got a negative impact. There is sexual abuse of her by one of her sisters, intense feelings of jealously, aggression and ignorance towards Joan. The father tires desperately, sometimes successfully but often not, to compromise between his children. Joan herself also got a fierce nature. At the same time her adoptive mother initially responds very negative to her writings about adoption in various newspapers and increasingly in book form. Mother has a strong possessiveness towards her adopted child, Joan.
 
Negative impact, cause by the author herself! As I’ve stated in my letter to Doctor Hoksbergen, there was no sexual abuse from me to the author. That is purely a cover-up story to take away from a real incident that the author wanted and then retaliated, when things didn’t go her way, with a cover-up story. She makes her mistake, of letting out the truth, via her own lying; liars never remember the original lie. Page 220 contains a very important element to this lie of sexual abuse and points to the ‘cover up story’! But, you will have to read my own extensive comments on this once its posted on our web blog under the title ‘facts are stubborn things’. I suggest everyone check out and read our blog frequently to know the truth of all that the author details, for indeed, it will take a few more months for all our refuting of this book!
 
The ‘intense feelings of jealously, aggression and ignorance’ is not towards Joan but is what Joan feels herself and projects onto everyone else. If someone does not fit into her ‘inner world reality’ they are ‘out to get her’ and she has no limits to what she will do to get you! “Fierce nature” and “strong possessiveness” don’t begin to describe the sick relationship between adopted mother and adoptee.
 
 Precisely because of its negative experiences Joan has decided twenty years ago, to write down her life story. She is also an adoption activist. She vehemently rails against the practice adopted in the US. She fights against the fraudulent nature, against hypocrisy, market characteristics, the closed nature of many adoptions that still continues, even against anonymous sperm and egg donors. Many times you see her at conferences, and so I made her acquaintance, her story. In the adoption world in the USA she’s well known.
 
When was this review actually written? The Doctor wrote the foreword in 2006 and according to the author she began writing her book in 1970’s. So by 2006 it was already close to 40 years not 20. So why have an outdated ‘review’ published now, in 2010? Precisely because it is now about one year since the book was published. This ‘review’ is a staged occurrence, it happens in the publishing world to boost sales!
 
She is no activist but yes she ‘vehemently rails against adoption’ to the point of not only obsession but condemnation of anyone adopting any child for any reason. Sounds more like she ought get a job with the Inquisition! She is well known in the adoption world? Pity those people!
 
The book is a very informative story about how an adopted deals with secrecy, how decisions are made for her, the struggle with feelings of loyalty, the reunion and contacts with biological family of both mothers and father’s side. She describes her emotional reactions openly and honestly.
 
This sounds as if the author wrote it for the reviewer!
 
It is an exciting and very well written story about the weak position of an adopted child. English is relatively simple and remain legible.
 
It is not written well and moves around, in space and time, as to be almost intentional misleading the reader. It is pathetic in its subjective portrayal of a weak mentally ill person. I don’t buy into the idea that because a person is adopted they are weak! They are weak because they choose to be so!
 
For adoptees and adoptive parents, I would recommend this book highly.
 
I, having actually read the thing, would recommend you use this book in the bathroom, if you were not worry about contamination from the printed words. You would be better off reading the birth sisters web blog to get a better well-rounded view of this author.
 
Ruth here -
I would like to know just what Hoksbergen means when he writes this sentance: “The father tires (tries) desperately, sometimes successfully but often not, to compromise between his children.”

Again, as he did in 1993, Dr. Hoksbergen is sticking his nose into MY family’s business. CHILDREN?  excuse me, sir, we were all adults with careers. Joan was the only one who refused to grow up, take on ADULT responsibilites and get a job. Many times, throughout the years that we birth siblings and our father tried to get across to Joan to GROW UP – GET A JOB – BECOME A MEANINGFUL CONTRIBUTOR TO SOCIETY. But she always has some excuse.

As to my father trying to “compromise” between us – what the hell does this mean? Along with Hoksbergen’s statement that there were feelings of jealousy, aggression and ignorance from us towards Joan. I ask you Dr. Hoksbergen – WHO TOLD YOU THIS? JOAN? Did you EVER talk to any of us? What feelings of jealousy and ignorance have I ever showed to Joan. What is ignorant is this so-called college professor to say this about me, a stranger to him. I’m ignorant? About what? Oh yeah – Joan’s pathetic life. Dr. Hoksbergen – I was busy building my own life. I had (still do) a career. As did ALL my siblings. We were supposed to stop OUR lives and understand Joan’s petty problems? Of what? She made the choice to marry a man who kept getting fired from jobs. She made the choice to be a stay-at-home mother. She made the choice NOT to get off her ass and get a job like millions of other lower-middle class people. – who also had children to raise. Get your head out of the 1950′s television shows Joan – life is NOT like Leave it to Beaver where the wife/mother stays home  and does nothing. Throughout history and all over the globe, women have had to work in the fields, in the homes and after the Industrial Revolution, in factories. As the menfolk hunted, the women worked together to weave cloths, huts, blankets, cook.  Women have always worked outside the home – as seamstresses, cooks, servants. If you can afford to make it  on one income – the husband’s – that’s great! But if not – and you sit on your ass at home then write a book and bitch and moan about how “poor” you are – you dam right Hoksbergen – I DIDN’T and NEVER WILL show sympathy to Joan for her “financial problems.” I know about financial problems RIGHT NOW. So what do I do? I GOT OFF MY ASS AND WORKED ON CHRISTMAS 2011 to compensate for the fact that my post-open heart surgery husband (aged 68 years) canNOT work extra time and as hard as he used to 30 years ago.

Hoksbergen claims I showed ignorance, aggression and jealousy towards Joan.

Ignorant of what? Joan’s emotional feelings of being adopted? Did Joan EVER put forth ANY attempts of trying to understand OUR emotional feelings? NO – she never did.

Jealousy? Of what? What does Joan have that I should be jealous of? Oh yes – she throws it in MY face that because I lost my son through miscarriage that I am jealous of her because she had two children. And I hated her kids. What a crock of shit and she should be ashamed of herself. I had my miscarriage in 1985, yet she says in her book that in 1989 we had outings to the beach WITH HER TWO CHILDREN. Joan contradicts herself in her book when she is trying to psycho-analyze me. And why is she psycho-analyzing me in the first place? I thought the book was about HER life as an adoptee, not MY life as a woman who’s son died. And Hoksbergen believes every f’ing word this idiot Joan feeds him.

Aggression? WHAT AGGRESSION? Oh yeah – when I slammed the phone down on Joan AFTER SHE STOLE HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS FROM ME. WHEN I CALLED THE POLICE AND TOOK HER TO COURT FOR STALKING AND HARASSING ME WHEN SHE WAS FALSELY ACCUSING ME OF COMPUTER HACKING AND CALLED MY JOB REPEATEDLY FOR MONTHS TRYING TO GET ME FIRED. Oh yes, I admit it – I was aggressive to Joan all right – WHEN I PRESSED HARASSMENT CHARGES ON HER FOR A SECOND TIME IN 1999 WHEN SHE WROTE ME A LETTER TELLING ME THAT MY INFERTILE HUSBAND GOT THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR PREGNANT!

Hoksbergen – you are as delusional as Joan because you took that lying snake’s words as truth.

Getting back to my father’s trying to compromise between us? Again, WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Gert, the oldest sibling moved out of Buffalo in 1982, and actually knew NOTHING of the trouble that Joan was causing me. Kathy lived in England, and knew some of the things going on. My brother lived in Arizona, and knew NOTHING of what was going on. I NEVER TOLD MY FATHER ANYTHING. In 2004, when my father was in rehab following open heart surgery, I took my stepmother out to lunch and we were talking about Joan. THAT is when I told her of: Joan’s stealing money from me in 1990, Joan calling my job to get me fired, Joan writing me that letter about my husband getting a neighbor pregnant. My stepmother and my father KNEW NOTHING (FROM ME) ABOUT THE COURT PROCEEDINGS THAT I INSTITUTED AGAINST JOAN. When my stepmother found out – she cried. “We didn’t know this was all going on.”

WHO WAS YAKKING TO MY FATHER MAKING UP STORIES OF FIGHTING BETWEEN JOAN AND HER SIBLINGS? – JOAN – THAT’S WHO! And we were NOT fighting – it was Joan and her bullshit stalking and harrassments that I was TRYING TO GET STOPPED BY CALLING THE POLICE, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, THE COURTS.

It was and always has been Joan who was the trouble-maker, not just with me, but others. In my post of December 22, 2011, “some examples of Joan Wheeler’s bad behavior – why nobody wants to hang out with her”   I outline what Joan did to my cousin Gail. WHILE GAIL WAS BATTLING CANCER – she had to put up with Joan’s harassments. And Gail, who was like a sister to me, knowing what Joan did to me, wanted to prove to the family that it was NOT me, but JOAN doing all the trouble. She kept me out of the mess between her and Joan and it was GAIL who called my father to tell him what Joan was doing.

So Dr. Hoksbergen – you know NOTHING of what happened/happens in my family – and you need to publicly withdraw your support of Joan, and make a public apology to us – for your contribution to the slander and libel about me, and my sisters Kathy and Gert. Gert did NOT repeatedly sexually abuse Joan. I heard all about the little thing that happened  right after it happened – I heard it from both Gert and Joan – and it was ONE experiment that JOAN initiated – and what I heard from both of them, (separately) was the same thing. Joan told me that SHE initated it. Joan is no angel when it comes to these matters. In 1984, being married only one year, with an infant son at home, JOan was at Lulu’s – a roadhouse bar in Kitchener Ontario and had a party – I know about it because she called me up the next day and was crying about it that she didn’t want her husband to find out she cheated on him. And in 1991, she did it again and showed up at my house at 5am, drunk and crying that she cheated on her husband again.

IGNORANCE? Gee thanks Dr. Hoksbergen for calling me ignorant. Well, I never went to college. So I don’t have a college degree. But you, Dr. Hoksbergen, AND Joan, can take your college degrees and shove them where the sun don’t shine – because it is JOAN WHEELER and RENE HOKSBERGEN who are the ignorant ones.

reposting from Gert McQueen’s blog: Was Rene Hoksbergen ever really a friend to Joan Wheeler, or did she just use him like she does everyone? (originally published on December 23, 2011) December 26, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed
Ruth here. –
for the past several days, this blog has had some interesting guests. From Holland, where Professor Rene Hoksbergen, retired from Utrecht University lives. Prof. Hoksbergen is an “adoption expert.” I’m not interested in that. I AM interested in Prof. Hoksbergen’s interference with my family – from way back in 1993, when Joan enlisted his help. At that time,my sister Kathy was trying to get some belongings of her shipped from Buffalo, NY to her home in England. Joan had them in her attic for “safekeeping” and Kathy sent her some monies for the shipping. Joan kept stalling and somehow got the good professor involved in a family matter. The professor sends Kathy a condencsending letter and dared to lecture Kathy – a grown woman! – on her attitude towards adoptees! AND in the letter, he tells Kathy that it will cost about $500 to ship her things to her. – Kathy had no intention of Joan paying for everything – but when she got this letter – she complained to the university,  and enlisted the help of our father to get her things shipped. My father called up Joan and told her to bring the things to his house, which she did. My father, who did not have a car, managed to ship the things to Kathy in three shipments, each costing around $50.00, for a total of $150.00. Far less than what the professor was led to believe. (Joan had stolen several hundred dollars from me in 1990 and was moving on to Kathy to scam money out of – and in the end did NOT return all of Kathy’s belongings, keeping valuable Beatle memorabilia, thereby STEALING  these items). — Professor Hoksbergen also wrote the foreward to Joan’s lying book Forbidden Family in 2006. The book was published in 2009, Since several topics and events covered in the book happened (and were dated in the book by Joan) in the years 2007, 2008, and 2009, it is our belief that Joan did not show the professor a complete manuscript for him to read. She had several different versions of manuscripts. My father even said that he was given over the course of many years, different versions and excerpts to read – and it was constantly changing!
 
Joan wrote in the book that in the year 1989, Professor Hoksbergen came to my house with Joan and she described me yelling and screaming at him – an event that  NEVER happened. It is my belief that  Professor Hoksbergen wrote a foreward to this book, without seeing a manuscript that included this fictious event. Or if he did see this event chronicled in the book and still gave his approval of it – I question either his faulty memory OR his apparent APPROVAL of slander and libel of both me and him.
 
Whatever is going on with the good professor, – it don’t smell right and honest to me! So here is Gert’s original post from her blog. I was going to just publish a link to it, but I think whatever guests I have coming Holland should see this without too much bother of going to another website.  Of course they, and everyone else has an open invitation to see our sister site by Gert McQueen, Reclaiming the Sippel-Herr Family Honor.   
 
But for now, here is Gert’s post, along with a comment of mine, at the end. Enjoy!
 
Joan Wheeler has always stated that her mentor Doctor Rene Hoksbergen was a very dear friend and very helpful to her. I have always had my doubts about that. With Joan’s consistency in making up stories, to make herself and her ’life’ believeable, I really wonder about how Hoksbergen really viewed her. I will never know of course but I can speculate; hey if Joan can speculate about things so can I!
 
The following comes, again, from the public forum of Adult Adoptees Advocating for Change.
 
The date of this post is old…September 6,  2010. But, this time period is very significant for many reasons. September 2010 was just about a year AFTER the lying hateful book Forbidden Family was published in November2009 and when we, the birth siblings, started to refute it in December 2009. September 2010 was also one year BEFORE Joan had one of several melt-downs on the public forum and JUST BEFORE she created the cyberbullying page against us because we would not stop refuting her book.
 
September 6, 2010 was also just BEFORE we made public, on Ruth’s blog, that I had been in touch with Joe Soell in May of 2010 and that I had written to Hoksbergen and his boss in October 2010! This is very important for Joe Soell had communications with me in May of 2010 and it is almost certain that he spoke with Hoksbergen about my complaint about Joan Wheeler.
 
So a question is placed on the forum and Joan emails her mentor, showing that she has ‘friends in high places’ and then posts his response. What I find interesting is that Joan doesn’t remove her OWN email address when she posts on a public forum, is she brain dead! Also, Hoksbergen doesn’t give any HINT of warmth towards her, he seems very COLD and to the point! Remember, that he has probably been told that I had communicated with Joe Soell.
 
Title: Birth Certificates
Post by: J on September 06, 2010, 02:33:45 AM
Hi everyone
An adoptive parent on a Dutch forum wrote that if his adopted child asks for his birthcertificate only the names of his adoptive parents are on there. Apparently, they changed the law. It was never like this. To him it feels like fraud. Is there a website about the OBC’s in the US which he can read and gives information about why adoptees are against this? He is very active, and I would like others to read it as well. 
 
Title: Re: Birth Certificates
Post by: He September 06, 2010, 07:19:31 AM
American Adoption Congress and Bastard Nation Websites make it quite clear 
 
Title: Re: Birth Certificates
Post by: C on September 06, 2010, 12:56:17 PM
I had my b-mother’s permission to get my original birth certificate.  It just said “Baby Girl ” and the b-mom’s last name. And the word, “Illegitimate” on the bottom.  The revised birth certificate had my a-parent’s names on it, erased the name of the hospital, and changed my birth date. 
The idea is that the privacy of the birth mom and the formation of the “new family” demanded that we issue birth certificates like this one.  Since that is how we are going to play, I had my full name legally changed and had a new birth certificate issued. It still has my adoptive parent’s names on it, but makes it clear that we are not related since my last name is not the same as either of theirs.  Take that! :gottabat2:   
 
Title: Re: Birth Certificates
Post by: 1adoptee on September 06, 2010, 06:21:44 PM
I emailed Dr. Rene Hoksbergen of The Adoption Center, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands about this and this is his reply:Van: Joan M Wheeler [mailto:wheejm@yahoo.com]
Verzonden: maandag 6 september 2010 16:10
Aan: r.a.c.hoksbergen@uu.nl
Onderwerp: Dutch birth certificate for adoptee – question
RE: Dutch birth certificate for adoptee – question
You have your birthcert. And adoptioncert. Nothing changed in holland.
 
Gert here again:
Don’t you think that this great ‘mentor’ should have given Joan a bit more information about the question at hand? All he does is state the obvious to Joan about Joan…namely that SHE has her birth and adoptive certificate and nothing has changed?
 
And now it appears that SOMEONE from Holland has been reading our blogs!! Could it be Rene Hoksbergen himself?
 
For further reading on the topic of informing people about Joan’s lies and activities see the following posts on Ruth’s blog. A liar can NEVER cover all their tracks…the truth always comes out!
 
 
 
 
 
 

What I find interesting and amusing is that several months ago I sent Hoksbergen a private message via facebook upbraiding him for his support of Joan Wheeler – and I told him in no uncertain terms that he needs to drop support of Joan because of the lies she told about him and me in her book. She says that he came to my house – he was NEVER in my house. She describes me as yelling and screaming at him – no, I never did. I met him once – AT JOAN’S HOUSE. And I barely spoke to the man as I am shy around new people – besides, unlike Joan, I HAVE MANNERS.

I challenged Hoksbergen to come forward and TELL THE TRUTH about his meeting me, his never being in my house, my never yelling at him. – He hasn’t had the courage to come forward. WHY?

Another amusing point – I sent Hoksbergen a friend request on facebook – AND HE ACCEPTED IT! What an ass! I don’t want to be his friend – I wanted to see what he was going to do!

So – he is one my facebook friend list AND on Joan’s facebook friends list. What is he trying to prove? Is he spying on me? Well fine – because when a real juicy blog post here on Gert’s blog – or my blog – gets publicized on my facebook page, it automatically shows up on the newsfeeds of ALL my friends – Hoksbergen included. So he can see right away what we write on our blogs about HIM (when we do) and his little “friend” Joni Wheeler. — wonder just how “friendly” they were! ha ha ha. – I don’t know about the professor – but I sure know about Joan.

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.”

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

 
 
 

 

 

emails from Willem Koops, former colleague of (retired) Professor Rene Hoksbergen (palsie-walsie of Joan Wheeler) May 16, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Announcements and updates.
Tags: , , , , ,
comments closed
from Gert McQueen to Ruth Pace, via email:
 
for some reason the prof sent me another email…maybe he didn’t remember he sent me an answer on Saturday…doesn’t matter…put this on the blog
—– Forwarded Message —-
From: “Koops, W. (Willem)” <W.Koops@uu.nl>
To: Gert McQueen
Sent: Mon, May 16, 2011 9:04:42 AM
Subject: Re: about the book Forbidden Family
Dear Gert, congratulations! Indeed I agree with you that this was not Dr Hoksbergen as I would like to see him: a careful scientist. Be sure that I will have conversations with dr Hoksbergen on this issue. But again, since he has been retired, he is not strictly obliged to follow my suggestions. 
Again thank you for informing me. All the best to you and your family, Willem KoopsSent from my iPhone

from Ruth:

I thank Professor Koops for his kind email here. To see his email from Saturday, May 14, click on this link:  Our Second Success in recovering our lives from the many lies told by Joan M. Wheeler in her trashy book Forbidden Family – college professors are now agreeing with us!

a note to any international readers of this blog, who may not understand American slang – the term PALSIE-WALSIE, is a sarcastic rendering of “good friend.” the word “pal” is slang for friend, as in buddy, chum, bro.

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

 

Ruth Pace and Gert McQueen continue the battle to regain their good names after having their names dragged through the mud in Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family May 14, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Announcements and updates, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed
 In the interest of full disclosure I, Gert McQueen, want to share my original email I sent to Doc Hoksbergen to which I never received a response. At that I had also written to the University of Utrecht of the Netherlands where Doc R. Hoksbergen worked and received an written answer from  Prof Willem Koops and that is why I emailed him.   

From: Gert Mcqueen
To: r.a.c.hoksbergen@uu.nl
Sent: Mon, January 10, 2011 1:20:39 PM
Subject: your review
Doctor
 Are you aware that your review of Forbidden Family, by Joan Wheeler has been placed on Amazon.com
 It appears as if it was placed there by Joan Wheeler herself. Did she receive permission to place it there, from you, as I thought the only ones that can place reviews to a book is someone who purchased the book.
 
I have received a letter from the University that you are retired from and as they said to me that I ought to accuse the author of the book, Joan Wheeler, and not you who wrote a review. But my position is still the same…you never checked your facts…and now Joan has place YOUR words on a internet book seller’s site, and the words that you said in your review are WRONG and SLANDERISH and now are all over the Internet.
 
Mark my words, Doctor, Joan has lied and if you have any influence with her perhaps you ought to get her to remove the book from the selling market, for our family will NEVER cease telling the truth about that book of lies.
 Gert McQueen
 
****
 When. some months ago, I saw a review on Amazon by Nicole Urdang I did response to her, via a web site and never received an answer. (Ruth’s note: I also contacted her, via snail mail, and she never had the guts to respond). We did report this on this blog some months ago. Then, when we recently noticed that her review was no longer on Amazon I wrote the following at this address:
 
Nicole Urdang, M.S, NCC, DHM, is listed in GoodTherapy.org as a therapist in Buffalo Nicole Urdang, M.S, NCC, DHM. Verified Credentials. Profession(s): Marriage, Couples, or Relationship Counseling; Family Therapy; Group Therapy

 

 12 may 2011

It has been brought to my attention that your review of Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler is no longer on Amazon. I can only guess that you pulled that yourself and wisely so. That book has been pulled from the selling market by the publisher Trafford because, we, the birth sisters have given enough proof to the publisher that the author grossly lied about us and other situations.
If you have any influence with Joan Wheeler, professionally or personally, I would urge you to get her the help she needs and to encourage her to stop in any further attempts to rewrite any further stories about the birth family, for we shall continue with refuting her.
thank you…Gert McQueen

Our Second Success in recovering our lives from the many lies told by Joan M. Wheeler in her trashy book Forbidden Family – college professors are now agreeing with us! May 14, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Announcements and updates, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

With many more successes to come!

by Ruth Pace via Gert McQueen - Ruth’s note – Gert tells Dr. Rene Hoksbergen how unprofessional he is to have not done research into Joan’s allegations of the actions of her birth family. Apparently, he never read the book before he endorsed it – because Joan has three pages where in 1989, Dr. Hoksbergen come to my house with Joan, and Joan has me screaming at her and him, jumping up and down, flapping my arms around, and Dr. Hoks lecturing me as though I were child. This scene NEVER took place.  DR. RENE HOKSBERGEN NEVER STEPPED FOOT IN MY HOUSE AND HE KNOWS IT! So much for Joan assertations on her website and other places that what is in her book is the absolute truth! And for shame, Dr. Hoksbergen for endorsing such a lying book. You owe me a PUBLIC apology – and you owe Gert a PUBLIC apology for your assistance in damaging her reputation, along with mine, and the rest of our family. I demand it!  — I DEMAND it!

Forwarded Message —-
From: “Koops, W. (Willem)” <W.Koops@uu.nl>
To: Gert McQueen
Sent: Sat, May 14, 2011 6:48:17 AM
Subject: Re: about the book Forbidden Family

Dear Gert, thank you for informing me. I congratulate you with your apparently succesfull actions with respect to this book. I agree of course with your recommendations. Any scientist of my Department will agree with you. Again: a retired professor is beyond my control. Conversations with such a person take place, of course, but are personal and therefore confidential. 

I trust that you will eventually be happy with your own wisdom. 
Kind regards, Willem Koops  
Sent from my iPhone
On 13 mei 2011, at 19:46, “Gert McQueen” <> wrote:Prof dr W Koops
I had written to you several months ago regarding Doctor Hoksbergen. I received a return letter from you in Nov 2010 informing me that Doctor Hoksbergen retired and that you could not help me in my complaint to him about his support and reviews of the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler.
 
While I accept that you are not responsible for his writings, since he retired, I still feel it worthwhile to inform you of recent developments regarding that book and it’s author, since you ‘invited’ me to ‘concentrate’ on the author and not on ‘others who may be convinced the book is about reality’. I had indeed been concentrating on the author at the same time I was concentrating on Doctor Hoksbergen! I thought you would like to know that indeed that book is NOT based on reality. And Doctor Hoksbergen should have, at the very least, contacted family members to verify the many outrageous claims that the author, whom he supported, was writing about.
 
In recent months, I and other family members, subjects of the book, provided enough documented proof to the publisher, Trafford Publications, and after their investigations they have pulled the book from their selling market. They will not print any more copies of it, in its present form, and any further rewrites submitted to them, will be looked at very carefully.
 
May I suggest that in the future you and those that you are responsible for, use more ‘fact finding’ means when assuming the truthfulness of any written theory, as Joan Wheeler presented in her book. The damage that has been caused to my family and I dare say the author could have been avoided if Doctor Hoksbergen had use just a little professionalism before he endorsed a manuscript that was full of lies, gross misrepresentations and hate.
 
I am enclosing a copy of my email to Doctor Hoksbergen for your information.
Thank you,
 
Gert McQueen
 
copy of what was email to:
Doctor Hoksbergen
 
I want to inform you about the recent development regarding the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler. 
 
In recent months I, and another sister, have informed the publisher, Trafford Publications, of the many errors, outright lies, slanderous and libelous statements and other various forms of hate speech in the book. We provided documented proof of those assertions. We asked them to review it and pull it from publication.
 
That is what has recently happen. Trafford Publications pulled the book, will not print any more copies of the book, as it is, and any rewrite that Joan Wheeler submits, will be very very carefully looked at.
 
It is unfortunate that such a book, as written by Joan, was used to promote adoption reform. I’m sure that she will continue with the belief that it is an accurate account and valuable for her causes and agendas; that  view is strictly untrue and it and that book will not help the true cause of adoption reform.
 
This note is just to inform you of the dispension of birth family’s quest to have a book of lies and hate, that Joan wrote, was indeed removed from publication.
 
I have informed you in the past that Joan has placed your review of the book on Amazon. You may want to contact her and have her remove it and distance yourself from it and her. Over time there will no longer be any physical books available to be sold on Amazon but it certainly doesn’t appear seemly for a Doctor of your reputation to have a book review on the internet for a book that has been pulled by the publisher!
 
Furthermore, I seriously wonder how you could have allowed yourself to be conned and dupped by Joan Wheeler for years! Believing all that crap that she told you about our family and you never laid eyes on us! You really ought to be ashamed of yourself for the harm you have contributed to my family and the many many adoptees who have read your review and endorsement of such a fifthy lying hateful book. But hey, that’s your business…my family took care of our business…we had the book of lies pulled from publication.
 
Gert McQueen

Why I don’t give a DAMN about Joan Wheeler’s adoption trauma or any other “trauma” she’s going through April 15, 2011

Posted by Ruth in a. What is demanded from Joan Wheeler - the purpose of this blog., Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

by Ruth Sippel Pace

clarification, I copied and pasted a post that Joan had placed on the adoptee forum, and I answered here, on my blog. In the past, Joan has accused me of stalking her on the internet to see what she writes – call it stalking if you want, I call it “monitoring” what Joan says about me and my family. Because I have the right to know what is written about me. And if it’s a lie, I will mostly definitely straighten that lie out. Don’t like what I’m doing Joan? – too bad. THEN STOP WRITING ABOUT ME AND MY FAMILY ON THE INTERNET – AND MOST IMPORTANT – STOP LYING ABOUT ME.  A month ago, we sent this same message – after Joan got on the Huffington Post to smear our reputations and my grandfather’s reputation. – Whenever I see that Joan has writted stuff about me – I will be right there – because that it is my right. — Ruth Sippel Pace, April17, 2011, 11:17pm.

  The other day I wrote an answer to this post that Joan placed on the adoptee forum:

 “Realize that whatever trauma they have lived through, real or imagined, is what is driving them to hurt you.”

 I answered:  “Yeah, I get that Joan – whatever CRAP you went through as a child you are now taking out on your birth sisters. .. Well, I don’t give a DAMN what you went through. I don’t give a DAMN that your adoptive parents lied to you – you don’t get to write a book and tell lies about Ruth Sippel Pace and her kin, without Ruth refuting your lying shit. You don’t get to get on the internet and tel lies about Ruth Sippel Pace and her kin, without Ruth refuting your lying shit. AND THAT’S THE TRUTH!”

 I see that’s a bit harsh and wish to explain. When I was first reunited with Joan, and was getting to know her – I most certainly DID have sympathy for her for her “adoption trauma.” Of all her birth family, I believe I was the most supportive of her. It was ME who told her to “go for it,” when she first had the idea to write a book. It was ME who accompanied her to WGRZ-TV studio for a taping of human interest story on adoption reunion. This was in 1980 or 1981. – (addendum – April 18, 2011,) – addition, April 27, 2011: Anyone wishing to verify this story, contact reporter Rich Kellman at WGRZ-TV studios, 259 Delaware Ave, Buffalo, NY 14202. I’m not sure if they would still have records of this taping, but I don’t think it would hurt to ask. This verifies that I, one of Joan’s birth sisters, did indeed SUPPORT her in her adoption interests and causes, and did indeed have a relationship with her 30 years ago, despite her LYING and saying that we did not. I, Ruth Sippel Pace, provide documentation of everything that I say on this blog, contrary to Joan Wheeler, who gives NO proof, NO documentation, to prove her LIES.

 and why didn’t these 2 instances of me supporting her and her adoption cause make it into her book on adoption? She writes about herself going to all these adoption reform meetings and conferences, her letters to the editorial pages of newspapers, but she doesn’t mention going to WGRZ-TV to be interviewed by reporter Rich Kellman? She was on TV, talking about adoption reunion, and she doesn’t write about it in her book about adoption? – She writes about how even a couple of people in the adoption reform field discouraged her to write her book – yet fails to write how I, her “horrible” birth sister actually encouraged her to write the book AND appeared on TV with her to discuss our reunion. – NO, she can’t write about that, see, because it would put into questiion her continual lying statements that “she had to be silenced” about her adoption interests. The only time we try to “silence” her is when she bores us to death on the subject or when she LIES – which is just about 99% of the time.

Although I did not agree to her tactics regarding my oldest sister’s Gert’s children – in fact I was appalled at Joan’s interference and bullying Gert over the adoption of Gert’s son by her and her new husband. And when she called child abuse on Gert over daughter, I was very angry with Joan.

 In 1983, I was a bridesmaid in Joan’s wedding. She had borrowed my mother’s wedding gown 4 years earlier, volunteering to have it restored. She and her seamstress used the gown as a model to make a copy of. But then Joan removed bead trim off the original dress and put it on her own. She promised to replace the trim. She never did. When I got the gown back several months later, she had never restored or cleaned the gown. I waited until she asked me to babysit for her, and when that day came, I brought a pair of scissors with me and removed the bead trim from Joan’s gown – because the trim belonged to me – on my mother’s wedding gown – that my father had given me. – This was the first theft that Joan committed against me.

 As the 80′s progressed – so did Joan’s bad behavior. Yet I continued to have a relationship with her. (despite her saying on the Huffington Post that we did not). I had been trying to conceive and had several books on pregnancy and child rearing. Joan even borrowed some of them – and I had a hell of a time getting them back. (so much for her saying in her book that I had merely “claimed” to want to have children). It was Joan who drove me home from the hospital in June 1985 after my miscarriage, and it was ME who drove her and her new daughter home from the hospital in October 1986.

 In June 1987, Joan and I were on the phone. I was still grieving the loss of my son, (indeed, to this day, I still grieve), and I told Joan that I did not want to discuss infertility. But did Joan respect my wishes? No., she kept on talking about it. I told her 3 more times I did not want to talk about it. She kept on talking. I finally yelled at her to shut up and hung up on her. What kind of idiot keeps talking about a painful subject when the person asks, then finally demands that they don’t? I did not speak to Joan for a full year. I did not write to her. I did not call her.

 But in 1988, I did call, and we reconciled. This was the time that we spent many days at the beach with her children – the summer of 1988, I was on disability for a back injury at work. I was going for physical therapy in the mornings, and enjoyed afternoons at the beach with my sister and her kids. These outings continued through the summers of 1989 and 1990, when my work schedule permitted it.

 But Joan continued her bullying of me. And stealing from me. In 1990, we decided to buy an apartment building together. I borrowed money from the bank for a down payment. The money was in a joint checking account to be used for lawyer fees, real estate broker fees, etc. By September 1990, we didn’t find an apartment building that would suit us, and we dissolved the partnership. When the back account was closed, there was a lot of money missing. Joan confessed to me that she had been using the money for her day to day living expenses. I was livid. I borrowed this money from the bank to buy real estate, not to support Joan, who had a husband – who had a job. Our lawyer was to return part of his fee – and he sent us a letter that I would receive half, and Joan would receive half. Joan and I agreed that when she cashed her check, I would get the cash, because the lawyer’s fee was paid for out of the money that I had borrowed and placed in the account.

 Then Joan called me on the phone and stated that she was keeping the money. I had finally had it with her bullshit bullying me and told her to keep the fucking money, but she was not my sister, and to stay away from me.

 We did have a couple more interactions during the following year, mostly she kept calling and giving me excuses why she couldn’t repay me the money that she STOLE from me. Each time I just kept my distance.

 Then by 1993 the out and out fighting began. For more details on the meddling, Joan’s stalking me, her pranks, her trying to get me fired from my job, her writing bullshit letters to elected officials about me – see my post of November 2, 2010, What is demanded from Joan Wheeler – the purpose of this blog.

 I remember shopping with my cousin Gail once, around 1991, and I were talking about Joan and the shit she had done to me. I told Gail, “I don’t know who I’m more angry at – Joan for doing this shit, or myself for allowing her to do it.”

 Gail said, “You do it because you love her. You are trying to be a sister to her. I had some issues with my sister Ida, but this is different. Ida didn’t steal from me or tell lies. You need to put your foot down.”

 And I did. In 1991, I refused to be Joan’s doormat any longer. And that’s when the real shit began and continues to this day. THAT is why throughout her book, the one person in Joan’s birth family that is the most written about in her filthy book is ME. Almost every page is Brenda this, Brenda that. (she calls me Brenda in her book). Because I had turned the cheek so many times to her shit and continued to take her shit – then when I stood up for myself – Joan set out to punish me along with other people in her book.

 And I state here and now: I am a human being and do not deserve to be treated the way Joan has treated me. She had a wonderful person (me) who loved her. Who accepted her – as she was. I never judged her. I supported her. I loved her. BUT NO MORE. SHE PUSHED ME AWAY FROM HER – SHE TURNED MY LOVE FOR HER TO HATE. My hate for her has NOTHING to do with Joan’s imaginings that I blame her for our mother’s death, or her stupid lying shit that my grandfather molested me and I am jealous that Joan was adopted out and escaped that abuse. What a crock of shit – my grandfather never molested me or my sisters. But Joan will stop at nothing – she loves to tell lies about me and my sisters.

 The reason I hate Joan is because of her own actions to me. Joan needs to take responsiblity for her own choices in life. At the age of 16, she made the conscious decision to search for her birth family. She didn’t have to look for us – we found her. (our bad). But we had no idea that our younger sister was a such a BITCH. We took her to our hearts, and she betrayed and hurt each and every one of us. And one by one, we all turned our backs on her -even our father threw her out of his house several times, the last incident being in 2009, where he called his lawyer and REMOVED Joan from even his pre-planned funeral arrangements and his self-written obituary.

 It is all on Joan. She did this. She treated her birth family like shit and we Sippels are not shit.

And that is why I reiterate what I wrote to Joan the other day and I don’t give a DAMN that it is harsh:

 I don’t give a DAMN what you went through. I don’t give a DAMN that your adoptive parents lied to you – you don’t get to write a book and tell lies about Ruth Sippel Pace and her kin, without Ruth refuting your lying shit. You don’t get to get on the internet and tel lies about Ruth Sippel Pace and her kin, without Ruth refuting your lying shit. AND THAT’S THE TRUTH! 

Here is the gist of my post of November 2, 2010 – a concise listing of the shit that Joan has done to her birth family.

The purpose of this blog is to refute and debunk Ms. Wheeler’s statements that she puts forth in her book and on the internet. We also will discuss Ms. Wheeler’s behavior in real life, because it is detrimental to us and our family.

The Three Sippel Sisters demand the following:

1. Public apology and retraction from Joan Wheeler for the following:

  1. Falsely accusing Gert of repeatedly sexually molesting Ms. Wheeler.
  2. Falsely accusing Ruth of having a criminal record and being placed on probation.
  3. Falsely accusing Ruth of calling child abuse on Ms. Wheeler in December 1994. In the book, she lists it as happening in 1993, on the internet in May and September 2010, she lists it as 1996. – (only a liar can’t keep dates straight – I have scanned and posted an actual letter sent by Joan dated December 1994 to New York State Child Abuse authorities and in it she states the call was made Dec. 1994. Why are there 3 different years listed by Joan in this letter, in her book, and on the internet?
  4. Falsely asserting that there was a 3 month court battle in the spring of 1994 over this child abuse call. (which according to her letter didn’t occur until months later, and on the internet, years later). There was never a 3 month court battle between Joan and Ruth. and again, why does she keep mixing up the date of the call? Perhaps because she keeps lying about it.
  5. Falsely accusing Ruth of hacking into computers where Ruth works and tampering with Ms. Wheeler’s medical bill in late 1994.
  6. For six months of almost daily phone calls placed to Ruth’s place of employment for the purpose of Ruth losing her job. This was AFTER Ruth’s employer’s investigated Joan’s complaint in the fall of 1994, determined that Ruth was innocent, informed Joan of this, yet Joan continued into the spring of 1995 with calling various departments in the hospital and falsely informing them that Ruth did tamper with her bill.
  7. Falsely asserting that Ms. Wheeler has had “multiple orders of protection” against the 3 Sippel Sisters.
  8. Falsely asserting that the one and only Order of Protection Ms. Wheeler ever received (against Ruth) was for one year, when in reality it was for 6 months.
  9. Falsely asserting that the 3 Sippel Sisters repeatedly interfere with Ms. Wheeler’s life and harass her.
  10. For using our picture on the back cover of her book without our permission. The book is used for monetary gain, therefore, Ms. Wheeler is making money from our likeness.
  11. For writing letters to Anthony J. Masiello, when he was mayor of the city of Buffalo and other elected officials, giving them personal and private details of Ruth’s life, thereby invading Ruth’s privacy.
  12. For stealing Kathy’s money and belongings in 1993.
  13. For stealing Ruth’s money in 1990 and the bead trim off the wedding dress of our mother, which was Ruth’s property.
  14. An apology and explanation that Ms. Wheeler lied to Professor Rene Hoksbergen, and asked him to interfere with Kathy’s life in 1993, thereby invading Kathy’s privacy.
  15. For all lies and misrepresentations that are contained in the book and on her website.

 

2. Joan WILL comply with the following:

  1. The complete pulling of the book Forbidden Family off the market.
  2.  Full return of Kathy’s money and belongings that was stolen by Ms. Wheeler in 1993.
  3. Full return of Ruth’s money that was stolen by Ms. Wheeler in 1990
  4. The cessation of posting any more about her sisters ANYwhere on the internet, except when discussing her adoption and she is to limit her discussion of her sisters to say that she has 3 older birth sisters, one who first made the contact with her, and due to personality conflicts, any reunion between Joan and her 3 birth sisters has been terminated.

 

3. Ms. Wheeler will cease her public statements that:

  1. Our father was coerced into relinquishing her for adoption. It has always been his assertion that he was NOT coerced.
  2.  The 3 Sippel Sisters are “trashing” her on the internet via “multiple” adoption reform sites.

 

4. We Three Sippel Sisters further demand a public apology from Professor Rene Hoksbergen for his interference with Kathy in 1993, and his recent “professional” review of the book Forbidden Family, wherein, he is guilty of spreading a false allegation of sexual abuse by the person of Gertrude McQueen. Professor Hoksbergen did not check any “facts” that Joan Wheeler alleges, and therefore he is guilty also of damaging the reputation of Mrs. McQueen, and the other two Sippel Sisters.

Unless and until ALL these listed items are complied with by Joan Wheeler, (and Professor Hoksbergen), this blog will remain an active blog with every printed lie, misrepresentation, or misdeed of Joan Wheeler’s, either in the book, or on the internet, or real life, WILL be refuted and the truth WILL be documented.  Further, any future lies, falsehoods, misrepresentations, and further invasion of the privacy of The Three Sippel Sisters, their families and friends, will result in the continuation of this blog.

ALSO: Ruth hereby demands that Joan Wheeler’s ex-husband Colby Allen Bell repay every penny of the money he stole from her in 1990. – $490.00. He withdrew $500.00 from the joint checking account that Ruth had with them to purchase real estate (with her permission) to purchase a case of fireworks. Colby was supposed to replace that money when the fireworks were sold. He did not. He repaid Ruth only $10.00.

Further, in 1991, 3 ATM withdrawals were made totalling $400.00 from Joan and Colby’s checking account, causing their rent check to bounce. Joan and Colby accused Ruth of doing it. The following year, Colby was caught on a student video, admitting that it was HE who withdrew the money to support his  habit of frequenting strip joints.

Ruth demands a formal and public apology from Colby from his theft of her money and a formal and public apology  from both Joan and Colby concerning the accusation that she illegally made ATM withdrawals, which could have resulted with a criminal investigation of her by the bank and law enforcement. This could have damaged her reputation irreparably.

Again, until ALL demands here listed are FULLY met, this blog will remain active and the public shall know just what kind of persons Joan Wheeler and her ex-husband are.

Now ask me if I care about any “trauma” Joan is going through. – I don’t.

Additional comment by Gert McQueen, Saturday, April 16, 2010:

Ruth’s newest post called…Why I don’t give a DAMN about Joan Wheeler’s adoption trauma or any other “trauma” she’s going through is very well said! Excellent! Concise! Accurate!

 And yes the purpose of this blog is to refute and expose every dirty thing that Joan Wheeler has done to our entire family and we shall NEVER stop exposing the TRAUMA that Joan has done to us!

 I would like to add something more to this item:

 1. Public apology and retraction from Joan Wheeler for the following:

 1.       Falsely accusing Gert of repeatedly sexually molesting Ms. Wheeler.

 1(a) Falsely accusing Gert and husband of child abuse to her daughter. Those charges were PROVEN to be totally FALSE and were EXPUGED by the State and never were to be EXPOSED by anyone including Joan.

1 (b) Joan and Doctor Hoksbergen’s statements about me sexually abusing Joan are based purely on some kind of adoption pyschobable nonsense…there is no truth to such nonsense…these false accusations (sexual abuse and child abuse) are Joan’s attempts to ‘hit below the belt’ at me for NOT continuing a sexual three-way that Joan wanted to have and continue.

 I stand by my decision in 1981…I divorced her from my family…I renounced her then and I maintain that denouncement…Her conception and birth to my parents was an ACCIDENT OF THE FATES. She is NO SISTER and I shall continue to refute her lies to my dying day!

Who writes Joan Wheeler’s reviews on Amazon.com? February 15, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , ,
comments closed
by Gert McQueen, February 15, 2011
 - with additional commentary by Ruth Pace
 
I find the following ‘review’, on Amazon, interesting in that it does not actually go into much detail as to what actually is in the book. Moreover I find it a bit interesting because of the words that are used. It reads more like Joan has written this review, as she recycles her own words and story-line, with a few of Rene Hoksbergen’s words thrown in for good measure. (Ruth’s note: Does she have his permission to do this? Why doesn’t he write his own review for Amazon.com? Why is Joan plagiarizing him?)
 
 **** 
A Compelling Account of Adoption & Reunion, February 5, 2011
By 
 
This review is from: Forbidden Family (Paperback)

Joan Wheeler has written a compelling, moving, and often harrowing account detailing her life experiences as an adoptee who at age 18 was contacted by a sister whose existence was unknown to Joan. The subsequent reunion with her birth family was emotion-charged and turbulent with profound effects on Joan and her adoptive family, as well as Joan’s children later on. The book also recounts Joan Wheeler’s activism for adoptees’ rights and her efforts and suggestions to reform the adoption system in order to spare others the frustration and suffering she has endured.

**** 
 
Here are recycled words that have been seen in other places written by Joan Wheeler and/or Rene Hoksbergen:
 
“compelling, moving, harrowing account, age 18 contacted by sister, unknown to Joan, reunion, was emotion-charged and turbulent with profound effects on Joan and her adoptive family, as well as Joan’s children later on, activism for adoptee’s rights, efforts and suggestions to reform, in order to spare others the frustration and suffering she has endured”
 
Gosh, that’s pretty much the entire review!
 
The name of the reviewer is a reference to what the Cheshire Cat said to Alice ‘We’re all mad here’.
 
Now everyone that knows Joan knows that she frequently is “all mad here” meaning she is all (always) angry here. Joan wants the whole damn world to know that she is ‘all mad here’. She is proud of her anger. She has referred to herself as an angry adoptee.
 Now, All Mad Here doesn’t have a profile nor any other reviews, so why is it necessary for this reviewer to have such a hidden name and city? Why the need to hid? If you like the book then you really shouldn’t have any problem with letting the world know that you like and support the book and the author. But, if you are a coward and just want to be sneaky and cute, fine, hide behind something but you are not doing the book nor author any real favors. People see behind that mask! Anyone who can not put their real name behind a review and stand for what they have to say, have just shown us that they NEVER read the book or just did Joan a favor, or is Joan herself.
 
Now, Queen City is a reference to Buffalo NY. This is another clue that points to some friend of Joan’s or Joan herself. Does she really think she is pulling the wool over her blood sisters’ eyes? Doesn’t she know that we know what ‘Queen City’ means!
 
Queen City came about because in its heyday, Buffalo was the second largest city in New York State. The largest being The Big Apple – New York City of course. Buffalo New York has several ‘nicknames’: The City of Good Neighbors, The Queen City, The City of No Illusions, The Nickel City, Queen City of the Lakes, City of Light.
 
So why the need to be cute and clever here? Why not just come out and say Buffalo and be done with it? Not, Joan, she likes to play games and twist things around. Its just a reflection of her twisted mind.
 
 So, will the real All Mad Here stand up? Better still, is there any person out there that has DEEPLY READ the book and will stand up and  give a review for it? Hey, there’s lots of material on this blog that you can reference in your review…go for it…will someone write a REAL review of this lousy book!
 
Ruth’s note: Actually, there were 2 real book reviews. One was written by another adoptee who fairly gushed over the book, which is to be expected from another Angry Adoptee. These people are so full of anger over their rotten adoptions they can’t see beyond their anger and just blindly condemn any act of adoption. Therefore, Joan is a heroine to them, because Joan’s book is nothing but an over-dramatization of Joan’s tortured life. The Angry Adoptee who wrote the review, Heather, is another person who didn’t Deep Read the book. Since Heather is against adoption, to her, Joan’s book is the best thing since sliced bread in thechronicles of anti-adoption. There is no need to Deep Read the book. Because to the Angry Adoptees, anything written against adoption is held to be Gospel Truth. If they were to approach the book with an open mind and Deep Read the book, they would catch the contradictions and inconsistencies contained in this book.  I think that at this point, they don’t want to admit that they were duped by Joan, for fear of appearing foolish. Again, they can’t see past their Anger to realize that if they admit to themselves that they have been led around like sheep, real growth would occur. But they, like Joan, are afraid of growth. They have their Anger, and don’t want to let go of it. 
 
The other true book review was written by myself. I used my own name. I didn’t put down my city. I had put down “inside a letter box.” Which is a reference to John Lennon’s line in “Across the Universe.” I can’t remember why I did that, it was done over a year ago. And I don’t remember exactly what I wrote, outside of the truthful following: that this book is nothing but a vehicle for Joan to exact her revenge on anyone in her life who ever angered her. Most of the book is just one putdown after another of people who had nothing to do with her adoption.
 
And I reiterated my father’s words to me about the book: IT BELONGS IN THE TRASH!
AND THAT’S THE TRUTH!

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!

The new and (not so necessarily) improved blog of Joan Wheeler. part one. November 30, 2010

Posted by Ruth in 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 Gert McQueen

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!
 
And 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, without the music, that we sisters are after her and that we are harming her etc etc.
 
Joan Wheeler is never satisfied with her work, she must continually work on it and improve it and make it more stupendous than before, even adding more and more adjectives and inflammatory statements hoping to get someone to listen to her.
 
The NEW and not-so-necessarily-improved web blog of Joan Wheeler, is in response to our continued complaints about the statements that Joan has said about us that she placed on her web page. It is also in response to some efforts of others Joan’s friends, to get the comments, about her blood sisters, off the site for Forbidden Family. The web site for Forbidden Family is supposed to be for adoption reform, after all, and not condemning her sisters which Joan has done already within the pages of the book. Joan still has crap on that site and I have addressed that issue and have asked to have that shit removed. Friends of Joan’s need to work on her to get her to remove those references to her sisters OFF the page for Forbidden Family.
 
I had already addressed many issues, in a blog entry Sept 23, 2010, right here on our refuting blog, about what Joan had placed on her site. I suggest folks recheck that entry to see what I had already said. reposting: bullying untruths – and we can see thru your little games Joan Wheeler – why are you lying about dates when you post on your own website?  (Ruth’s note: this is a repost of it, from November 24, 2010).

Since the beginning of November 2010, Joan has decided that she needed a new and improved site. She added more NEW stuff too. I shall now address them. I am omitting the paragraphs that I have already addressed in my Sept 23, post.
 
What is new, either wholly or in part, will be have (***) in front of it, these are Joan’s words. My comments will have (Gert answers) in front of it. (Ruth’s note: and of course, my notes will be in parathensis and italics).
 
 ****  I, Joan Wheeler, and my book, Forbidden Family, are Victims of Cyber Bullies & Stalkers My 3 older sisters stalked and bullied me for most of my 54 yrs (2010). Adoption Reunions are not to blame. My sisters who found me in 1974 perpetrated sexual assault upon me, made false allegations of sexual Child Abuse, spread filthy rumors about me. They accuse me of lying in my book. I do not want them in my life. They say I am doing things to them: I am not. I am not involved in their lives. They are delusional psychopaths. NYS doesn’t have a Cyber Bullies Law to protect me.

(Gert answers) The first question/comment is about Joan’s identification as a victim. She is and has been a professional victim all her life, by her own words. Too bad that she can’t be a ‘survivor’ or at the very least, just a plain ordinary person that has a life! The second question that strikes me is; how can a book be a victim of anything? A book is a book, it is an object, it can’t be bullied or stalked. A book can be read and as such is subjected to pro and con opinions and analysis by those that read it and by those whose lives are portrayed in them. So the argument that the book is a victim holds no water. As far as Joan herself is concern, she is not a victim of bullying of any sort nor is she being stalked, at least not by her blood sisters. Everything that we have to say is said and done in the OPEN and on our BLOG for the whole world to read! We are exercising our rights of Freedom of Speech and Expression.

(Gert answers) If Joan is 54 years old in 2010 and we didn’t know her until she was 18, this statement of hers, … ‘My 3 older sisters stalked and bullied me for most of my 54 yrs’…is patently FALSE. Reunions may or may not be to blame, but certainly, Joan’s interference, lying and other forms of duplicity in our lives certainly are to blame! Joan is constantly spreading falsehoods around, be it about her sisters or others. By the very fact that she can’t help herself in stating the same old lies, here, again, proves that she has NOTHING NEW to add to the long list of grievances she has against us. So what’s the point? Joan likes to accuse others and she never answers when directly confronted with and about her lies.

(Gert answers) Why doesn’t Joan just copy the book, put it on her web site, this way the whole world can read all the horrible deeds that we, and others, have done to her. No, that won’t work, you see, cause she wrote the book for the money! And if she put the pages of the book on a web page, she can’t get any money, so she has to keep telling the world, how horrible we are and about what we did to her…but she never answers when asked directly to prove her assertions. Does she think that by saying here, on a web page called cyber bullies and stalkers, that we did this or that, that people are going to BELIEVE her? Has Joan ever heard the tale of the boy who cried wolf too many times!

(Gert answers) Joan says, ‘They accuse me of lying in my book.’ Okay, if that is so, than why doesn’t Joan answer our accusations? Is she above reproach? Why are you hiding Joan? Come out, come out, where ever you are and tell us what is a lie that WE are telling!

(Gert answers) Joan says, ‘I do not want them in my life.’ Then why did she write all about us in her book? Why did she publish a book of lies about people she doesn’t want in her life? Did she think we would be happy? Joan says, ‘They say I am doing things to them: I am not. I am not involved in their lives.’ Oh yes, Joan you are IN OUR LIVES and you HAVE BEEN DOING THINGS TO US, you wrote a book about us, remember!. Joan says, ‘They are delusional psychopaths.’ And her proof is where? What is her definition of delusional and psychopathic? In my dictionary, under those words, are pictures of Joan Wheeler! Most delusional psychopaths are incapable of holding down long-terms jobs. The three Sippel Sisters, as Joan calls her blood sisters, each have held jobs, in health and educational fields for well over 30 years each! Where and how long has Joan held any kind of a job? Just because she holds a degree or two makes not a career. Answer that, Joan…have you held a job for 30 plus years? Joan says, ‘NYS doesn’t have a Cyber Bullies Law to protect me.’ Joan doesn’t need protection, we sisters and others that she wrote about in that book need protection, from her.

  **** Anything posted on the Internet and represented by Ruth Sippel Pace, Katherine (Kathy) Jean Sippel Inglis, and Gertrude (Gert) Mary Sippel McQueen which purports to be factual is both fraudulent and presented without Joan Wheeler’s authority or approval.

 (Gert answers) Gee I didn’t know I HAD to get Joan’s permission and approval to write about and answer issues about my own life! Where does Joan’s authority come from? My my have we hit a nerve? How can Joan dismiss documents that we have placed on our site? Did we make those up? Is this a new accusation against us? Joan, get real!(Ruth’s note: I totally agree. I don’t NEED Joan’s permission to write about MY own life. And if Joan can write about me in her book, then I can write about her on my blog. But see, this is Joan the Dictator’s double standard – JOAN can write any dam thing she want, but no one else can. Joan the Dictator can write any dam thing she wants to about other people – her sister included, but they don’t have the right to answer her?  And if they want to, by this very statement, they need JOAN’S authority or approval. Who the hell died and left you the boss of other people Joan?).
 
****It is unfair to be the subject of vile, misleading, deceptive and untrue commentaries that are maliciously intended to undermine a person’s professional and personal reputation. Adoption author and activist Joan Wheeler is intent on putting a stop to the lies and falsehoods being spread about her and her book “Forbidden Family”. Other adoption reformers and adoption professionals are also targets of the perpetrators Ruth Sippel Pace, Katherine Sippel Inglis and Gert Sippel McQueen.
 
(Gert answers) Life isn’t fair, get real! Joan’s professional and personal reputation has been undermined by her own words and deeds as she has presented them in the book. My sisters and I did not have a thing to do with that book! Is there a double standard that Joan lives by? One for her and another for us sisters? Apparently, because she can say whatever she wants about us and it’s okay, but we can’t defend ourselves. Yep, that’s Joan alright! So let me get this straight…myself and my sisters’ professional and personal reputation mean nothing to Joan and it is perfectly right and fair for her to write ‘vile, misleading, deceptive and untrue commentaries that are maliciously intended to undermine a person’s professional and personal reputation’! Okay, just as long as I have that straight…there is one standard for Joan…anything goes…and another for us sisters…we can’t do anything unless Joan gives us permission! Okay, got ya! (Ruth’s note: Yep! That’s what I just said!)
 
(Gert answers) Joan Wheeler is NOT a adoption author and activist…she only uses that as a cover-up for the opportunity to tell the world about her inner life of torment. She uses her pathetic life as a reason to oppose adoption. Joan uses adoption has a means to justify her sad existence.
 
(Gert answers) Oh dear me!! She ‘is intent on putting a stop to the lies and falsehoods being spread about her and her book’! I’m shaking in fear! And just how does she propose to do that…has the 1st amendment been repealed? Has Joan been elected to public office where she has authority to stop me and my sisters from speaking! Get Real!
 
(Gert answers) Other adoption reformers and professionals are not being ‘targeted’ but are being informed about the true nature of Joan Wheeler’s motives within the book and about her lies within that book. They were being informed about the nature of the contents of the book and Joan’s lies and deeds, just as I wrote one letter to Joan’s adoptive mother, in 1982 or so, about the deeds that Joan did to my family. A professional, such as Doc Rene Hoksbergen, who wrote a forward in a book and a review of a book, needs to be EXPOSED for his unprofessional behavior in regards to the book Forbidden Family for that book and his approval have done great harm to many innocent people who are in the adoption world. Professionals make mistakes too and they can be conned too. Perhaps Doc Hoksbergen would tell me himself, if he thought he was being ‘targeted’, but alas, I have not heard from him…no matter. I have a right to write a letter to any professional that is associated with a untruthful book, about my life, written by Joan Wheeler. You would think that any reform movement would be interested in knowing whether or not they have a nut case promoting their cause and what possible repercussions there may be with continued association with said nut case. If these professionals and reformers want to be associated with the likes of Joan Wheeler it isn’t because we, sisters, didn’t warn them.
 
****Joan Wheeler fears not only for her personal and professional reputation, but for her life. Police and Court action, which was tried in the past, will not help in matters of Cyber Bullying and Cyber Stalking as there are no such laws in New York State to protect victims from this type of abuse. (Ruth’s note: I actually agree with Joan here – [gasp!’ “Police and Court action, which was tried in the past will not help.” Yeah, Joan, I had a restraining order against you in 1999, and so did our cousin Gail. And it seemed to work for 5 short years. But in 2004, you had to start your shit again. Your shit died down, but in September 2008, on your defunct blogspot blog (which we had nothing to do with getting shut down), YOU mentioned the Three Sippel Sisters! Warning us, and putting us down for our Pagan values. And this out of the clear blue sky! I have been on the internet since the year 2000, with no mention of Joan at all. But as soon as Joan gets introduced to the internet – BAM! She uses it as a new vehicle to bash her sisters. And she has the nerve to scream “cyber-bullying?” Who the hell started it Joan? WHO brought our feud onto the internet? YOU did – in September 2008. And then again in October 2009. And I only started this blog in November 2009. So, there you go – Joan’s own actions show us who the TRUE cyber-bully and stalker is – Joan Mary Wheeler!)
 
(Gert answers) Oh dear me, Joan fears for her life! Stop with the dramatics already will ya! Joan you have been saying that all your adult life when the pressures of living are too great for you. Don’t worry dear, we sisters have no desire to be in any space where you are. Yep, you have tried police and court action…where do you get the money for lawyers? How do you work the system? I’ve noticed, in your book, when you tried to go after that last boyfriend you had, that you spoke with four different lawyers! Does being on disability give you free legal advice? Why don’t you go and use them and sue us already and be done with it! No Joan will never do that because number one, she doesn’t have a case and two, she WANTS to be a VICTIM and she likes talking about being abused. (Ruth’s note: oh yes, we certainly don’t want to be in any space she is at – in fact NOBODY does. – In August 2003, at a cousin’s funeral, in walks Joan – and then everybody walked out! We all wanted to go out back for a cigarette or some fresh air.- true story! And at another funeral in December 2009, a relative of the deceased was relieved that Joan was not coming.)                                    end Part One

What is demanded from Joan Wheeler – the purpose of this blog. November 2, 2010

Posted by Ruth in a. What is demanded from Joan Wheeler - the purpose of this blog., 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

The Three Sippel Sisters, having read the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler, have discovered many many falsehoods, lies, misrepresentations, and false accusations of us, our family members, our family situation, and even some of our friends. Ms. Wheeler has also been on her website and various places on the internet spreading these same lies and accusations.

The purpose of this blog is to refute and debunk Ms. Wheeler’s statements that she puts forth in her book and on the internet. We also will discuss Ms. Wheeler’s behavior in real life, because it is detrimental to us and our family.

The Three Sippel Sisters demand the following:

1. Public apology and retraction from Joan Wheeler for the following:

  1. Falsely accusing Gert of repeatedly sexually molesting Ms. Wheeler.
  2. Falsely accusing Ruth of having a criminal record and being placed on probation.
  3. Falsely accusing Ruth of calling child abuse on Ms. Wheeler in December 1994. In the book, she lists it as happening in 1993, on the internet in May and September 2010, she lists it as 1996. – (only a liar can’t keep dates straight – I have scanned and posted an actual letter sent by Joan dated December 1994 to New York State Child Abuse authorities and in it she states the call was made Dec. 1994. Why are there 3 different years listed by Joan in this letter, in her book, and on the internet?
  4. Falsely asserting that there was a 3 month court battle in the spring of 1994 over this child abuse call. (which according to her letter didn’t occur until months later, and on the internet, years later). There was never a 3 month court battle between Joan and Ruth. and again, why does she keep mixing up the date of the call? Perhaps because she keeps lying about it.
  5. Falsely accusing Ruth of hacking into computers where Ruth works and tampering with Ms. Wheeler’s medical bill in late 1994.
  6. For six months of almost daily phone calls placed to Ruth’s place of employment for the purpose of Ruth losing her job. This was AFTER Ruth’s employer’s investigated Joan’s complaint in the fall of 1994, determined that Ruth was innocent, informed Joan of this, yet Joan continued into the spring of 1995 with calling various departments in the hospital and falsely informing them that Ruth did tamper with her bill.
  7. Falsely asserting that Ms. Wheeler has had “multiple orders of protection” against the 3 Sippel Sisters.
  8. Falsely asserting that the one and only Order of Protection Ms. Wheeler ever received (against Ruth) was for one year, when in reality it was for 6 months.
  9. Falsely asserting that the 3 Sippel Sisters repeatedly interfere with Ms. Wheeler’s life and harass her.
  10. For using our picture on the back cover of her book without our permission. The book is used for monetary gain, therefore, Ms. Wheeler is making money from our likeness.
  11. For writing letters to Anthony J. Masiello, when he was mayor of the city of Buffalo and other elected officials, giving them personal and private details of Ruth’s life, thereby invading Ruth’s privacy.
  12. For stealing Kathy’s money and belongings in 1993.
  13. For stealing Ruth’s money in 1990 and the bead trim off the wedding dress of our mother, which was Ruth’s property.
  14. An apology and explanation that Ms. Wheeler lied to Professor Rene Hoksbergen, and asked him to interfere with Kathy’s life in 1993, thereby invading Kathy’s privacy.
  15. For all lies and misrepresentations that are contained in the book and on her website.

2. Joan WILL comply with the following:

  1. The complete pulling of the book Forbidden Family off the market.
  2.  Full return of Kathy’s money and belongings that was stolen by Ms. Wheeler in 1993.
  3. Full return of Ruth’s money that was stolen by Ms. Wheeler in 1990
  4. The cessation of posting any more about her sisters ANYwhere on the internet, except when discussing her adoption and she is to limit her discussion of her sisters to say that she has 3 older birth sisters, one who first made the contact with her, and due to personality conflicts, any reunion between Joan and her 3 birth sisters has been terminated.

3. Ms. Wheeler will cease her public statements that:

  1. Our father was coerced into relinquishing her for adoption. It has always been his assertion that he was NOT coerced.
  2.  The 3 Sippel Sisters are “trashing” her on the internet via “multiple” adoption reform sites.

4. We Three Sippel Sisters further demand a public apology from Professor Rene Hoksbergen for his interference with Kathy in 1993, and his recent “professional” review of the book Forbidden Family, wherein, he is guilty of spreading a false allegation of sexual abuse by the person of Gertrude McQueen. Professor Hoksbergen did not check any “facts” that Joan Wheeler alleges, and therefore he is guilty also of damaging the reputation of Mrs. McQueen, and the other two Sippel Sisters.

Unless and until ALL these listed items are complied with by Joan Wheeler, (and Professor Hoksbergen), this blog will remain an active blog with every printed lie, misrepresentation, or misdeed of Joan Wheeler’s, either in the book, or on the internet, or real life, WILL be refuted and the truth WILL be documented.  Further, any future lies, falsehoods, misrepresentations, and further invasion of the privacy of The Three Sippel Sisters, their families and friends, will result in the continuation of this blog.

ALSO: Ruth hereby demands that Joan Wheeler’s ex-husband Colby Allen Bell repay every penny of the money he stole from her in 1990. – $490.00. He withdrew $500.00 from the joint checking account that Ruth had with them to purchase real estate (with her permission) to purchase a case of fireworks. Colby was supposed to replace that money when the fireworks were sold. He did not. He repaid Ruth only $10.00.

Further, in 1991, 3 ATM withdrawals were made totalling $400.00 from Joan and Colby’s checking account, causing their rent check to bounce. Joan and Colby accused Ruth of doing it. The following year, Colby was caught on a student video, admitting that it was HE who withdrew the money to support his  habit of frequenting strip joints.

Ruth demands a formal and public apology from Colby from his theft of her money and a formal and public apology  from both Joan and Colby concerning the accusation that she illegally made ATM withdrawals, which could have resulted with a criminal investigation of her by the bank and law enforcement. This could have damaged her reputation irreparably.

Again, until ALL demands here listed are FULLY met, this blog will remain active and the public shall know just what kind of persons Joan Wheeler and her ex-husband are.

Open letter to Professor Rene Hoksbergen and rebuttal of his “professional” review of Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler October 14, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Statements from The Three Sippel Sisters.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

The following was emailed to Professor Rene Hoksbergen on 14 October 2010. Dr. Hoksbergen is professor of adoption studies at Utrecht University in Utrecht, Holland and wrote the foreward to the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler. In 1993, at Joan Wheeler’s behest, Dr. Hoksbergen involved himself  in our family  in an unprofessional manner, by writing a letter to Kathy Inglis in England. Joan lied to Dr. Hoksbergen and manipulated him into writing to Kathy. Apparently Dr. Hoksbergen, despite a formal complaint having been made to Utrecht University in 1993 over his invasion of Kathy’s privacy, continues his unprofessional behavior. We Three Sippel Sisters protest this man, a stranger to us, and his continual prying into our personal lives.

Doctor R. Hoksbergen                                       

I am Gert McQueen, birth sister of Joan Wheeler, author of the book Forbidden Family, of which you wrote the Foreword in August 2006 and a Review in 2010, month not indicated.

I have had the book since February 2010 and have been reading and writing about this book of lies since then. The first time I saw, in English translation, your review of this book was the first week of October 2010 and Doctor I must say that I am appalled!

Myself and two other birth sisters have a web blog wherein we are refuting this book of lies. The blog is called refuting a book of lies and may be reached at http://ruthsippelpace.wordpress.com I urge you to really read our blog very carefully to understand how we, the birth family, have been used and abused by Joan, not the other way around.

One reason, for writing to you, is to call your professionalism into question. Doctor, you have never met me, never spoke with me, never wrote to me, never checked facts about me or my family, and yet, you have the audacity to assume and then assert that what Joan Wheeler told you was truth! Doctor you are wrong! Joan is wrong!

Another reason for my writing is to address the various character assassinations, to which you give credence to, via the lies of Joan’s, in particular that of sexual abuse by of one Joan’s sisters, me, to her. The truth, Doctor, was that it never happened! Joan made up the story to cover up the fact that she herself initiated a three-way sexual encounter with my husband and myself! That story, of course, is NOT in the book because she lies and blames everyone else for her own misdeeds!

There is no way to explain to you in a short letter the amount of lies, fabrications and harm that Joan has done, in real life and in this book, to others as she covers up her own dirty deeds. The very reason that she ‘insists’ that I sexually abused her and her assertion that I abused my daughter was to ‘get back’ at my husband and me because we didn’t want to continue the sexual experiment that Joan wanted.

We had been forced to take many steps to remove Joan from interfering with my minor children! Beginning when Joan interfered with my and my husband’s ADOPTION of my own birth child! Joan was very militant and angry that we were ADOPTING, accusing me of being unfit! When she was told we didn’t want her opinions she then interfered with our parental authority, going behind my back to instill in my minor children that they did not need to obey the family’s core values that we set for our family. Joan went so far as to lie to police and family about the whereabouts of my minor child during a runaway episode. She then charged me with child abuse and filed for custody of my children. I was forced to put my child into foster care, for her own safety and to keep her away from Joan, while we fought the charges that Joan filed against us. My husband and I were proved innocent of all charges that were asserted by Joan. I have court documents to prove that statement. I moved my family far away from Joan. All this was in 1981/82! But you Doctor did not check the facts but instead gave credibility to Joan’s lies…stating so in your review!

Joan manipulated you into writing to my sister Kathy, who lives in England, in the 1990s. That episode of Joan’s was over money that was already paid to Joan for services she never did for Kathy. Joan blames everything and everyone for her own inabilities and in this case Joan was also guilty of stealing! But, you Doctor, on behalf of Joan, wrote a very intimidating and condescending letter to my sister, who was blameless and the victim of Joan’s and then was victimized again by you!  You did not check the facts!  (Ruth’s note: please see the post Joan Wheeler LIES about Dr. Rene Hoksbergen in her book Forbidden Family  to see actual scanned and posted documents: Dr. Hoksbergen’s letter to Kathy, where he says it would cost around $500.00 for Joan to ship things to her in the UK; a letter from Joan acknowledging that she had already recieved monies to do the shipping; AND the actual invoices from my father totaling around $150.00 that my father paid out of HIS pocket to ship the items, this AFTER Joan received the money from Kathy, then never repaid. This was clearly an extortion attempt by Joan Wheeler, and she used her “dear” friend to try to extort money from Kathy).

In Joan’s book, she has a total fabrication of lies about your meeting my sister Ruth, her husband and other members of my family in the 1990s. You, Doctor, were never in Ruth’s home, never met her husband and never had the conversations that Joan’s asserts that you did have! Did you really meet my father as Joan states? Did you check your facts before you wrote the review of this book? You really ought to read chapter 25, very enlightening! Joan portrays you as being ‘a very dear friend’, how dear Doctor?

Joan also lies and fabricates in the book about Joe Soll, whom I have already contacted about those lies. Mr. Soll says that what is in the book, about him, is ‘patently false’. (Ruth’s note: see the post: HIGH ALERT EVIDENCE of Joan Wheeler’s lies FROM A PERSON IN AN ADOPTION REFORM ORGANIZATION   to see the email exchange between Gert McQueen and Mr. Soll).  My sisters and I have already written about these episodes of lies and fabrications on our web blog; we encourage you to read them. To narrow down the search for you, in the following dates you are mentioned on our blog, Jan 7, March 27, June 28 and Sept 23. We are of course not completed with our review, refuting and rebuttals of this book of lies!

When did you, Doctor, last read the manuscript? Did you read it before or after the 2006 date of the foreword? Joan had updated and revised much in the manuscript since then, even noting so on page 410 dated March 2008. And on page 416 she states she was 53. She was 53 in 2009 the year the book was published! For you to assume the correction of facts in the book, without interviewing family members, is a gross misuse of your position in the world of Adoption Reform!

Our father saw a revision about 2008 and said that it was a ‘piece of garbage and she will never finish it’. Joan is still revising it, on her web site! Shortly after seeing the 2008 revision, my father was forced, again, to remove Joan from his presence because of her intense manipulation and confrontations towards him. 

What Joan has done, and with your approval Doctor, is to have taken a very tragic family situation, the death of a mother and the adoption out of an infant and has used it to exploit that tragedy for the pursuit of fame, fortune and personal gratification with total disregard for the reputations of members of birth and adoptive families. For this Joan ought to be utterly ashamed. For your part in this Doctor you ought to ashamed. Do you have any idea of the pain that your lack of professionalism, by not checking out the facts, has done to members of the two families of Joan? You have no right to insinuate yourself into any position of knowing what happened to my family! We did not give you permission!

Since 1982, I have had two contacts, one physical in 1992 and one phone call in 2005 or 06, with Joan, both times were attempts, on my part to reconcile with her, but at both times, after she smiled to my face, as soon as my back was turned, she betrayed me. For her to have truly welcomed my love as a sister, who wanted to reconcile with her, would have meant that Joan could not publish her ‘life’s work’, the book and that is unthinkable to Joan. So instead of reconciling she continued to betray myself and others, by publishing a book of lies and garbage! It is only since the publication of this book of lies that I have spoken out. I shall continue to do so until Joan pulls the book from all sales. That book and Joan’s activities are a disgrace to the honor of two families.

I, and my sisters, ask that you print a retraction of your foreword and review of this book. We also ask that you stop promoting this book as factual, for it is a product of a Joan’s diseased mind.

This letter, along with a copy of my paragraph-by-paragraph review of your review, will be posted on our blog and is being sent to a select list of adoption reform agencies or persons. In the past Joan has accused me of sending letters to many adoption agencies. I never did that, but now I MUST to demand that my and my family’s, good name be restored to us.

Thank you, Gert McQueen

 ~~~~~~~Gert McQueen’s comments on this review are in bold itatic.

Review of Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family by Rene Hoksbergen in LAVAContact2  2010 English translation.

This autobiographical study of Joan Wheeler read with the necessary tension on the way things will go. Despite the extensive and detailed description of the many events and feelings over a period of almost fifty years.

This book is a detailed description of a tormented individual that has a great need to have the world fit her delusions. No one lives in a vacuum and by the very nature of writing about one’s own inner demons it becomes very subjective in nature and all peoples in it must fit that subjective mindset. The ‘necessary tension’ is the result of the author’s inabilities to accept life as life was given to her. The ‘extensive and detailed description’ is just over-kill and only points to a mentally unbalanced individual. Perhaps if the author actually lived a life instead of always writing ‘the book’ she and it would not be so full of torment!

It consists of two parts. The autobiography of Joan and then part two with lots of information about the American adoption history and its current situation. In this second part she makes her findings and suggestions for improvements.

Part 1, is full of sensationalized drama, with intent to sell the story, the book! The author uses, extensively, the techniques of exaggeration and hyperbole along with fabrications and outright lies. 38 chapters consisting of 569 pages are devoted to the study of the autobiography of Joan’s tormented views!

Part 2, which ought to be the more useful part of any written material intended for adoption reform, consists of only 6 chapters with a total of 62 pages! And there are no ‘suggestions’ from the author. She is a militant angry adoptee that is very hostile to anyone who adopts!

And how much does a person have to spend for this study of one person’s tormented life? Around $50.00! A person, spending a few hours on the Internet, could come up with the same source materials in this book and save themselves the money.

Joan was born in Buffalo . Her mother died shortly after her birth and her father decided to give her away to a distant relative without children. He has already four children, three daughters and one son, this fifth child can’t be taken care by him. In 1956, when this takes place, adoption in the US (and also in our country) is a taboo subject. Birth certificates are falsified, the child is sometimes very late or not informed about the adoption and many know the facts and family relationships, some don’t, as the case of Joan.

My father didn’t know about the adoptive parents being any sort of ‘distant relative’; he was in the middle of a tragedy! My father’s decisions do not have to be explained or justified. The adoptive parents also do not have to justify or explain their reasons for adopting. Throughout this book the author details, over and over again, how she had browbeaten, intimidated, condemned, and used all sorts of methods to get all parents to ‘apology’ to her for her being adopted! My god!

When she becomes 18 years old, she’s suddenly called by her eldest sister. Her three sisters were from when Joan suddenly disappeared from the family informed of the status of adoption and also of her destination. They had always wanted to know how she was doing and now she’s eighteen and formal adult, they can contact her. From this call Joan’s life has been put upside down. She describes her reactions, of the adoptive parents and how her birth family, her father and siblings deal with it.

Life, being as it is as it unfolds, is full of surprises; who would have guessed that the author would choose to condemn both families for wanting her and then go out of her way to make everyone’s life miserable with her dirty double dealings and lies! It makes me ill to read, the almost 600 pages, of pure mental garbage that the author describes herself and everyone related to her.

Against the background of all the facts around the reunion and the further development of contacts she tells clearly and gripping the progress of other aspects in her life, her school life, marriage, becomes mother of two children, the death of her adoptive father, dealing with friends, the care of her adoptive mother and only child, and many others. It is a moving description of the history of an American woman and her two families.

Gripping is not a word I’d use to describe how the author tells about aspects of her life. Soap opera dramatics is how the author details her life; every little thing is overblown so that when real troubles occur they are exaggerated to show how horrible a life she has, because she is adopted! “A moving description”, only if you are addicted to soap opera drama!

But gradually it becomes clear that the reunion in her life especially got a negative impact. There is sexual abuse of her by one of her sisters, intense feelings of jealously, aggression and ignorance towards Joan. The father tires desperately, sometimes successfully but often not, to compromise between his children. Joan herself also got a fierce nature. At the same time her adoptive mother initially responds very negative to her writings about adoption in various newspapers and increasingly in book form. Mother has a strong possessiveness towards her adopted child, Joan.

Negative impact, cause by the author herself! As I’ve stated in my letter to Doctor Hoksbergen, there was no sexual abuse from me to the author. That is purely a cover-up story to take away from a real incident that the author wanted and then retaliated, when things didn’t go her way, with a cover-up story. She makes her mistake, of letting out the truth, via her own lying; liars never remember the original lie. Page 220 contains a very important element to this lie of sexual abuse and points to the ‘cover up story’! But, you will have to read my own extensive comments on this once its posted on our web blog under the title ‘facts are stubborn things’. I suggest everyone check out and read our blog frequently to know the truth of all that the author details, for indeed, it will take a few more months for all our refuting of this book!

The ‘intense feelings of jealously, aggression and ignorance’ is not towards Joan but is what Joan feels herself and projects onto everyone else. If someone does not fit into her ‘inner world reality’ they are ‘out to get her’ and she has no limits to what she will do to get you! “Fierce nature” and “strong possessiveness” don’t begin to describe the sick relationship between adopted mother and adoptee.

 Precisely because of its negative experiences Joan has decided twenty years ago, to write down her life story. She is also an adoption activist. She vehemently rails against the practice adopted in the US. She fights against the fraudulent nature, against hypocrisy, market characteristics, the closed nature of many adoptions that still continues, even against anonymous sperm and egg donors. Many times you see her at conferences, and so I made her acquaintance, her story. In the adoption world in the USA she’s well known.

When was this review actually written? The Doctor wrote the foreword in 2006 and according to the author she began writing her book in 1970’s. So by 2006 it was already close to 40 years not 20. So why have an outdated ‘review’ published now, in 2010? Precisely because it is now about one year since the book was published. This ‘review’ is a staged occurrence, it happens in the publishing world to boost sales!

She is no activist but yes she ‘vehemently rails against adoption’ to the point of not only obsession but condemnation of anyone adopting any child for any reason. Sounds more like she ought get a job with the Inquisition! She is well known in the adoption world? Pity those people!

The book is a very informative story about how an adopted deals with secrecy, how decisions are made for her, the struggle with feelings of loyalty, the reunion and contacts with biological family of both mothers and father’s side. She describes her emotional reactions openly and honestly.

This sounds as if the author wrote it for the reviewer!

It is an exciting and very well written story about the weak position of an adopted child. English is relatively simple and remain legible.

It is not written well and moves around, in space and time, as to be almost intentional misleading the reader. It is pathetic in its subjective portrayal of a weak mentally ill person. I don’t buy into the idea that because a person is adopted they are weak! They are weak because they choose to be so!

For adoptees and adoptive parents, I would recommend this book highly.

I, having actually read the thing, would recommend you use this book in the bathroom, if you were not worry about contamination from the printed words. You would be better off reading the birth sisters web blog to get a better well-rounded view of this author.

1. chayeletOctober 14, 2010

I fully endorse Gert’s statements here. Kathy Inglis.

2. RuthOctober 15, 2010

I also fully endorse Gert’s statements. – Ruth Sippel Pace

Schedule for appearances of Joe Soll and Rene Hoksbergen at the Shedding Light on the Adoption Experience VI Sept. 24 + 25, 2010 September 23, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Announcements and updates, Lessons in Life.
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

Mr. Joe Soll will be lecturing for the 200 series on Friday afternoon, Sept. 24, from 3:10 – 4:30pm. And for the 300 series on Saturday morning, Sept.25, from 10:30am – 11:45am.

Dr. Rene Hoksbergen will be a panel member at a panel discussion on Saturday afternoon, 12:45 – 2:15 pm.

I suggest all interested parties please ask these two gentlemen pointblank about their side of the story of how they were portrayed falsely in Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family. But let me make this statement: I am aware that the adoptees run hot and cold with Mr. Soll. Some like him, some don’t like him, some out and out can’t stand him – that is not the issue here. Whether you like Mr. Soll or not – it doesn’t matter – what does matter and this is my point – JOAN WHEELER LIED ABOUT HIM IN HER BOOK FORBIDDEN FAMILY THAT SHE KEEPS SAYING IS THE TRUTH!

Ask Joe about Joan’s saying on page 310 of the book Forbidden Family that he received in the mail a copy of a 40 page letter that was supposedly written by the Three Sippel Sisters, and about a phone call between Joe and Joan discussing this letter. We received an email from Joe on May 14, 2010 that confirms what we knew all along – this was a falsehood – because we never wrote such a letter. We posted both Gert’s email to Joe, and his quick response (a half hour after receiving Gert’s email) – here at this post, HIGH ALERT EVIDENCE of Joan Wheeler’s lies FROM A PERSON IN AN ADOPTION REFORM ORGANIZATION . 

Ask Dr. Hoksbergen about an event that was described on pages 275-278- a visit by Rene to the home of Ruth and John Pace and how I, Ruth Pace jumped up and down and was screaming and yelling at Joan and Rene. We have not been in contact with Dr. Hoksbergen to hear what he has to say about this visit, but I know what he will say: that the chronicling of this visit is FALSE, because no such visit took place, he was never at my home, and the one and only time I did meet him – at Joan’s house, I barely spoke to him, much less jumped up and down and screamed at him. Also he never met my husband.

Big mouths Rus and Mara, little mouths Heather and Myst – now’s your chance to either shut up or put up. Even if you are not going to be in attendance, I’m sure you will know someone who is going there – you are all so fired up about my blog – and keep defending Joan – so don’t take MY word – go to two of your own adoption experts – Joe and Rene. Then see how “truthful” Joan’s  book is.

Then ask yourselves: if Joan could lie about Joe and Rene, who or what else has she lied about? You will find those answers right here on this blog. This is not about The Three Sippel Sisters bullying Joan Wheeler, either in the cyberworld, or the real world – this blog is for Shedding Light on the Lies of Joan Wheeler – for not only has she lied about and misrepresented us and our family, she has lied about and misrepresented two adoption reform experts.

We Three Sippel Sisters have experienced lies, misrepsentations, out and out deeds by Joan that were engineered to destroy our lives. Like falsely calling child abuse authorities, calling the place of employment of one sister, trying to get her fired with lies, writing letters to the mayor of a major city trying to discredit her sister, trying to get another deported from the country she emigrated to, tried to break up the marriage of one sister, interfered with the minor child’s upbringing of another sister, harassed a birth-cousin while she was dying of cancer. Oh yes, Joan has been one busy lady – busy being a liar, a pest, a stalker, a troublemaker, a harrasser, an abuser, a thief, a manipulator, a con artist, and a bully.

So to those adult adoptees who have come here and have thought that the words of this blog are terrible – because they are against Joan – do yourself a favor – don’t believe me or my sisters – go right to two experts in your own field – Joe Soll and Rene Hoksbergen -

Because if you don’t take the time to get to the truth of the matter, then you deserve all you get from the Master Manipulator – Joan Wheeler. And you will show the world that you are nothing but sheep, willing to be just led around by the nose and used and abused by Joan Wheeler.

I know – I’ve been there – I was used and manipulated by Joan Wheeler for 15 years – 1975-1990. Then when I stood up for myself and refused to be her doormat any longer, came the lies, harassment, emotional abuse that lasted for 10 years. In 1999, I was granted a one-year order of protection against her. We had 4 years of peace,but then in 2004 she started up again – and it continues to this day.

I am only trying to warn you people – that she will make your life a living hell – so it’s YOUR choice, — find out about her NOW – do your homework – or lie down and be her slave.

baa baaa baaa baa baaaa

1. Gert – September 23, 2010

Right on!!

Perfect, Shedding Light on the Lies of Joan Wheeler! That is what this blog is about. It isn’t a popularity contest or who the biggest baddest, it’s all about the truth.

Lies can not live when there are spot-lights on them. Joan may be able to lie to herself and to those that think like her, but she can not lie to the entire world, when Light is Placed on the lies.

And the term bullying is misused by Joan when she whines that we are doing so. She has no real understanding of what bullying is. She likes to throw out terms that are catch-words, hot-button terms, terms that the fringes of society may use. No, this is no bullying, this is shedding the light where the lies lives, it is truth-telling.

Joan started all of this by publishing a book of lies. We sisters are throwing light on those lies.

And as Ruth as stated:
“for not only has she lied about and misrepresented us and our family, she has lied about and misrepresented two adoption reform experts.”

This is also correct. We sisters have no interest in gaining fame or fortune, we have no contracts with the professionals named here, our ONLY motive is for the truth to be out…that Joan Wheeler lies and lies and lies.

2. RuthSeptember 24, 2010

I posted this article yesterday morning September 23, 2010. In the body of this post, I  named 4 people who had come here in the past and left comments. The only way anybody could see their names would be if they came and READ the post.
In past weeks Joan Wheeler kept insisting that she does NOT read our blog – but then how come yesterday, she starts another whine entitled “More crap from my sisters – Mara, Heather, Myst – you are being summoned.”

Sooo, what does this mean? It means that JOAN WHEELER IS READING OUR BLOG!!!
I told you people – If Joan can lie to + about Mr. Soll and Dr. Hoksbergen – she will lie to and about YOU. And it looks like she just did.
“I’m not reading their blog.” Oh Baloney! She IS reading it.

3. gert – September 24, 2010

It’s okay, Joan she really ought to READ THIS BLOG because it is ALL ABOUT HER and HER LIES

We are not going anywhere, we are staying right here, forever, telling our truths…

Reply
4. Gert – September 24, 2010

Having given this more thought…

This statement of Joan’s:

“More crap from my sisters – Mara, Heather, Myst – you are being summoned.”

not only does it indicte that Joan reads this blog, but she has and is using her friends to do her dirty work as her henchmen, that is the typical work of a true bully someone who stands BEHIND others who will and do the dirty work!

Stand up for yourself Joan!

you may have the wool pulled over these sheep, but the world is watching you and judging you.

Reply
5. RuthSeptember 24, 2010 

oh without a doubt Gert – this is Joan’s Modus Operendi – Method of Operation – I sugges those who doubt this – go to the post about Joan lying to Prof. Hoksbergen and please read the letter that Kathy wrote to the good professor back in 1993 –
where Kathy says to the Prof – “Joan knows I won’t open or read her letters, so she gets her friends to do her dirty work.”
1993 folks – 17 years ago, and Joan is still manipulating and using people to do her dirty work!

You adoptees don’t know Joan as long as we have or dealt with her shit as long as we have – but you will – ‘cos once you get on her shit list – you can’t get rid of her. We’ve been trying for decades to get rid of her -SHE WON’T GO AWAY – SHE WON’T STOP!  So we do the next best thing – cut her off. We expose her to the world for what she is – a bully – a 54 year old woman acting like a 10 year old –

My “summoning’ of Heather, Mara, Myst was for them to wake the hell up, I didn’t tell them to take this blog at carte blanch – didn’t I tell them to do their homework? I didn’t tell them to go “talk” to Joan – I told them to figure things out – they have brains – can’t they tell when they are being used? And not by me – I think those who are following this blog (and I know I have regular readers – they come over here via various blogspot blogs (financial services, loan consolidation) almost everyday – or is that YOU Joan? lol. anyway, those who are reading my blog can tell the Three Sippel Sisters style of writing – that we shoot from the hip – no fooling around – we tell it like it is – straight-forward TRUTH telling. NO friggin beating around the bush whines like “oh, my sisters are bothering me- get them away from me – get them away from me…ooh ohh, I’m falling apart ooh oohh – I can’t take it—ohh boo hoo, sob”  oh puh-leeze!

And we back up our words with cold hard evidence – scans of actual letters and court documents. If we were in a court of law, with the body of evidence we have provided, there would be no doubt – Joan would be hauled off to the psych center – where she belongs. She “claims” she doesn’t have the paper documents to back up her fish-stories, because she burned them all! Baloney! She never had them in the first place. She’s full of shit and she knows it. And we know it. And the whole world is beginning to know it.

Joan Wheeler LIES about Dr. Rene Hoksbergen in her book Forbidden Family September 20, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Lies in the book Forbidden Family.
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

This post is about Dr. Rene Hoksbergen, who wrote the forward to Joan Wheeler’s book Fobidden Family. He wrote the forward in 2006, but the book wasn’t published until November 2009, with additions to it that included events that took place in the summer of 2009. I am assuming he READ a manuscript of the book before he wrote the forward. But I guarantee that the manuscript he read is NOT the same that was finally published, for it contains a huge lie – ABOUT HIM!

First - a bit of history – because Dr. Hoksbergen is involved here – when my sister Kathy moved to England in 1974, she left behind two large trunks of belongings, intending to send for them – my brother had possession of them until 1978 when he moved to Arizona. JOAN then took them in, and when she did, she took on the responsibility of caring for them. In 1990-91, Kathy started sending Joan money orders to be used for shipping costs. We have the actual letters that Joan in her handwriting, acknowledges receipt of the money, but SHE NEVER SHIPPED THE BELONGINGS. (therefore, she STOLE the money that Kathy sent her). Finally, Kathy called my father, he yelled at Joan, who’s excuse was that she and her husband only had one car, she had little kids, she didn’t have the time to ship them, blah, blah, blah. My father, WHO DOESN’T EVEN KNOW HOW TO DRIVE – managed to collect Kathy’s belongings, and ship them onto her for a total of about $150.00. (when I first posted about this, I didn’t see the second reciept and put down it was around $52.00). BUT – not all of Kathy’s possessions were there – Joan KEPT some of the stuff – STEALING IT. – oh yes, the letters that Joan and Kathy were writing back and forth here were quite friendly – so much for Joan’s assertions that she has not had contact with Kathy since the late 80′s – another LIE!

Kathy was angry that not all of her possessions were returned, and rightfully so — so what does Joan do? She enlisted the help of Dr. Rene Hoksbergen to send a letter to Kathy, on Utrecht University letterhead stationary telling Kathy that she should feel sorry for Joan, she doesn’t have the money to ship her goods to her – that it was going to cost $500.00 to ship the stuff – (obviously Joan LIED to him about receiving the money from Kathy in the first place).

I will have to scan and post my father’s receipts and the letter from Dr. Hoksbergen – and how dare Joan drag a STRANGER  into our family business, and how dare he write to Kathy advising her on how deal with Joan. The result? – a formal complaint was made to Utrecht University in 1993 and a letter of apology from the university was sent to Kathy. Do you see how Joan drags even PROFESSIONAL people into her personal life and cons them into actually interfering with our family’s personal, private lives? This letter will also be posted.

The following are excerpts from previous posts that I have written months ago on this blog, and am reprinting them here:

On page 275, Joan Wheeler recounts a completely fabricated story where she and her husband brought adoption expert from Utrecht, Holland, Dr. Rene Hoksbergen for a visit to my house to meet me and my husband. THIS NEVER HAPPENED! I met Dr. Hoksbergen at Joan’s house on Swinburne St. Buffalo, BUT DR. HOKSBERGEN NEVER CAME TO MY HOUSE AND HE NEVER MET MY HUSBAND, AT OUR HOUSE OR JOAN’S HOUSE.

When I did meet Dr. Hoksbergen, I thought he was a rather nice man. I barely spoke to him, as I am shy around new people.

Joan then recounts a totally ficticious account of Dr. Hoksbergen’s fictitious visit, including a description of me jumping up and down, waving my arms around, yelling at Dr. Hoksbergen and calling Joan names. She says that my husband and I exchanged disgusted looks at each other.

She says that her mentor Dr. Rene Hoksbergen, adoption expert from Utrecht, Holland came to my house to meet me and my husband. LIE! He never came to my house. Joan describes a scene where I jump up and am pumping my arms around calling her obsessed and POSSESSED. This is a lie!

I met Dr. Hoksbergen once, AT JOAN’S HOUSE, AND I BARELY SPOKE TO THE MAN.

Dr. Rene Hoksbergen, I was going to write another post about the time Joan conned YOU into that nonsense about my sister in England’s belongings. I wasn’t going to use your real name, but since you wrote the forward to this book of lies, I hold you partially responsible for this crazy woman’s book of lies.

In your letter to my sister April 19, 1993, you tell K. that the cost of shipping her belongings to her would cost $500.00, and Joan did not have a car at that time to drive the stuff to a post office.
What Joan did NOT tell you, Dr. Hoksbergen, is that K. had sent a money order to Joan to cover the shipping costs. And she wrote and told Joan if she needed to take a cab, to call her and K. would send more money for cabfare. It was my father, who sent some of K.’s belongings to her for $52.50 OUT OF HIS OWN MONEY! -

back to the present – Dr. Rene Hoksbergen is going to be at “Shedding Light on the Adoption Experience, VI” in New York City, at the Park Central Hotel, this weekend, September 24 – 25, 2010. I suggest you go see him and ask him pointblank about the lies Joan Wheeler has told about him in her book.

Don’t take the Three Sippel Sisters word that Joan Wheeler is a liar – go ask TWO of your own – Mr. Joe Soll and Dr. Rene Hoksbergen!

 Gert – September 21, 2010

Ruth is correct. I have already written about this appalling episode and it shall be seen here in due time. My entries are following the page/chapter sequence in the book and will be posted in sequence. I have a copy of this letter by Doctor Rene and I have commented line by line about the letter. But, readers will have to wait for it to appear here, in due time.

Joan has so much to answer for…we have only touched the surface.

I request that everyone of those people whom have doubted us birth sisters to contact both Mr. Joe Soll and Dr. Rene Hoksbergen and ask them for yourselves about what we here are asserting.

We have given you proof…now go out there and check it out…don’t believe us…don’t believe Joan…find out for yourselves…unless of course…you WANT be taken for a ride by Joan.

Ruth here again – ok this is a lot to go thru – but here is the correspondence regarding Joan and Rene about Kathy’s belongings. First up – Joan’s acknowledgement that she got the money order. Then Dad’s recipts where he only spent about $150.00, then the letter from Rene lecturing Kathy, and saying it would cost $500. Then Kathy’s letter to Rene. Happy reading! but first here are 2 additional comment from Gert and myself. Please keep them in mind while you reading them. btw when you click on the image, it may shrink back – wait a second, a small orange box will appear on the lower right hand side of the image – click on the box and the image will enlarge again – and you will be able to read it.

Gert – September 24, 2010

yes, there is alot to read here, but Joan has always given LOTS of trouble to her sisters. –So it’s good that people get to see the behind the scenes that Joan NEVER put in her book or wants the public to know about. —It’s good that people get to see what we birth sisters have had to put up with with Joan, the Liar.

 RuthSeptember 24, 2010 —-and if you see – this letter by Kathy was written in 1993 – 17 years ago – and what does it say?
“Prof. Hoksbergen — why should we feel sorry for a 36 year old woman — she’s not the only one who suffers in life — I want my things back (that Joan stole) — Joan LIED to you — Joan, leave me alone — Joan, stop getting people to do your dirty work — Joan is violating my privacy — Joan won’t take no for an answer — Joan whines and complains she is poor”
Sound familiar? Because it is 17 years later and Joan is STILL DOING THE SAME DAM THING! AND STILL WHINING ABOUT THE SAME DAM THING! — the first image is the letter written by Joan to Kathy where she says she got the money order from Kathy – then whines about why she can’t get Kathy’s belongings to her – her kids were in school all day – the youngest was 10 – her attic wasn’t that big – give me a break – she couldn’t find them. But she sure found them when our Dad yelled at her and he came over in a cab and collected them – and he used the cab to take the stuff to the post office and sent the stuff over to England. WITH HIS OWN MONEY! Joan never gave him anything from the money that Kathy sent to her – nor did Joan return that money to Kathy. She saysin her letter that she put the money into a special account – where? What bank? And if she had the time to go to the bank to set up a special account – then she had time to find the stuff in the attic. And I know the neighborhood she lived in – ain’t no bank there. Closest one was down by Broadway Market – where she would have taken a bus to get to if she didn’t have a car – why all this running around?  But no running up the stairs to find the stuff? This makes no sense – she didn’t open a special account at a bank – the “special” account was her own dam pocket! And that’s the dam truth! So Prof. Rene, how does it feel, 17 years later to find out that you were taken for a ride by Joan? Not very good, I would guess. But we know how you feel, believe me, we do – we’ve been there – bullied, manipulated, used, abused, lied to -by the one and only – JOAN WHEELER, BITCH SUPREME!

 Gert – September 25, 2010
And we have not finished with this issue! Once my own blog entries get posted there will be more details coming out….I have written about this book of lies since January 2010 and I’m still not done! There is a mountain of evidence just waiting to be place on this blog.

So the challedge is and will continue to be…for Joan…to ANSWER for her actions…

Why does Joan NOT answer for what she does? Because she is not only a liar but a coward! 

 

  

~~

%d bloggers like this: