The Truth About Ruth - Part 2 - Merge

[Talitha Cumi]

I think we need to start a potluck so we can eat something besides popcorn while watching this.

I bring my texas tatertot casserole. It has home canned salsa, ground beef, onion, garlic, cheese, spices and tater tots. Sometimes, I include beans when I remember to throw them into the crackpot before work. No cream of crap soup in my casseroles.

:naughty: Pot BLESSING. It's all thanks to Jeesus!

[Carla Bruni]

Circumstantially, most likely yes.

Edited to make my answer a little less final. I don't think we are likely ever going to have 100% concrete proof, but we are comfortable saying that RR is a fictional persona.

With a significant degree of certainty, yes. Public records are a magical thing. Some jurisdictions put everything online, others just the basics, but many matters involving local government departments are accessible publicly, some in great detail. Circumstantial evidence linked RR to a particular individual who had been linked to other scams in years past. This was enough to link everything together. The crucial link was provided/confirmed by the mods. In brief, previous doxxers linked PM to this individual, and this individual was linked to RR by FJ mods, which brings everything full circle.

Law enforcement could become involved if it is brought to their attention that this individual has been misrepresenting their financial situation to public officials for financial gain.

[gardenvarietycitizen]

With a significant degree of certainty, yes. Public records are a magical thing. Some jurisdictions put everything online, others just the basics, but many matters involving local government departments are accessible publicly, some in great detail. Circumstantial evidence linked RR to a particular individual who had been linked to other scams in years past. This was enough to link everything together. The crucial link was provided/confirmed by the mods. In brief, previous doxxers linked PM to this individual, and this individual was linked to RR by FJ mods, which brings everything full circle.

Ah. Yeah, pretty much the level of what I was interested to know - thanks.

Crazy story, isn't it?

[Curious]

With a significant degree of certainty, yes. Public records are a magical thing. Some jurisdictions put everything online, others just the basics, but many matters involving local government departments are accessible publicly, some in great detail. Circumstantial evidence linked RR to a particular individual who had been linked to other scams in years past. This was enough to link everything together. The crucial link was provided/confirmed by the mods. In brief, previous doxxers linked PM to this individual, and this individual was linked to RR by FJ mods, which brings everything full circle.

Law enforcement could become involved if it is brought to their attention that this individual has been misrepresenting their financial situation to public officials for financial gain.

I'm not exactly sure how paypal works, but the IRS might be interested in a potentially undisclosed source of fairly significant money, too, now that I think about it.

[EmmieJ]

So was A Million Little Pieces. He lied about the whole thing- Oprah devoted an entire episode to calling him out.

Yes, she finally did -- as I recall, she needed some serious "encouragement" to do so. Before that, she devoted an entire episode to rhapsodising about the book, how incredible it was, how amazing the story. I had read the book by that time and thought it was poorly written, so I couldn't believe how ga ga she was for it.

Then it turned out he originally tried to get a publisher for a fiction story re addiction, was told it would have a better chance at being published and selling well if it were a "true" story, and thus a big fat lie was born.

I still admire Oprah for being able to become a huge success from such a tough beginning, but as far as her opinions on anything - let's just say I haven't watched her since.

[DarkAnts]

I'm not exactly sure how paypal works, but the IRS might be interested in a potentially undisclosed source of fairly significant money, too, now that I think about it.

In the US, the person who receives the money as a "gift" is not responsible for the tax. The person who sends the money is responsible for the taxes if they send over a specific amount.

[Curious]

In the US, the person who receives the money as a "gift" is not responsible for the tax. The person who sends the money is responsible for the taxes if they send over a specific amount.

I'm not 100% sure about that. One of the Gosselin's big gripes was having to pay taxes on things like love offerings, home renovations and other gifts they received. It has long been speculated the reason they asked for $20 (cash only) for the signed photos of the kids was because it was a nice source of under the table funds.

Of course, Kate is a lying liar that lies, so I'm not sure how reliable that source is. No one has ever said that particular thing is a bunch of hooey though. The rules on income are kind of tricky, IMO, but I am not an IRS agent nor do I play one on forums ;)

[BravaAmica]

Yes, she finally did -- as I recall, she needed some serious "encouragement" to do so. Before that, she devoted an entire episode to rhapsodising about the book, how incredible it was, how amazing the story. I had read the book by that time and thought it was poorly written, so I couldn't believe how ga ga she was for it.

Then it turned out he originally tried to get a publisher for a fiction story re addiction, was told it would have a better chance at being published and selling well if it were a "true" story, and thus a big fat lie was born.

I still admire Oprah for being able to become a huge success from such a tough beginning, but as far as her opinions on anything - let's just say I haven't watched her since.

Yeah, me, neither. Good for her for admitting she was wrong and using her platform to try and get the truth out of him.

Also, what was the editor thinking? They were going to publish a book. Books are subject to review by standards and pratcices. Granted, some houses do this better than others, but it's still done. Did this editor think they wouldn't get caught?! Idiot.

[BravaAmica]

I'm not 100% sure about that. One of the Gosselin's big gripes was having to pay taxes on things like love offerings, home renovations and other gifts they received. It has long been speculated the reason they asked for $20 (cash only) for the signed photos of the kids was because it was a nice source of under the table funds.

Of course, Kate is a lying liar that lies, so I'm not sure how reliable that source is. No one has ever said that particular thing is a bunch of hooey though. The rules on income are kind of tricky, IMO, but I am not an IRS agent nor do I play one on forums ;)

It's true that you don't have to pay taxes on monetary gifts up to a certain point. I don't know the limits for giving to non-immediate family. The limits for immediate family is US#13,000.00/year. Like if Curious were my mother, she could give me, my husband, and all twelve of my kids $13K/each and we wouldn't have to pay taxes on any of it. I can ask my accountant the limits for taxes on monetary gifts from non-family, just out of interest and with no intention of informing the IRS. It might be fun to know the exact limits and how it works. 8-)

[Clementine]

From possummomma's blog:

In the last four years, I've had; a serious car accident, three surgeries, a parent and beloved grandparent's death, cancer (I'm ok now!), a divorce, and struggled with depression on a level I never thought possible. I've had my children be allowed to move away because I couldn't afford to fight it legally.

possummomma.blogspot.se/2013/04/where-in-hell-have-you-been.html

Sounds like the story of "Ruth". One emergency after the other.

[nolongerIFBx]

Lo these many pages ago someone (Thoughtful?) asked why those of us with ATI backgrounds felt like she was legit to some small extent. It would take a lot more re-reading of her blog than I am able to do right now to put a finger on it one way or the other, and with everything else that has come out at this point, I am willing to say that I read her wrongly. Again, the combination of her infrequent posting and my infrequent and non-suspicious reading contributed to my naivete.

ATI IS a membership-only* organization, but I failed to take into account that there are probably enough survivor blogs out there now that someone who really wanted to could acquire enough lingo to pass herself off within the community to some extent. Nothing she said ever raised ATI-related red flags for me until just recently when I started thinking about the likelihood that such a highly-placed (pilot?) family would be able to go unidentified by everyone for so long.

So I'm sorry if I said anything to vouch for her generally as an ex-ATI-er that led anyone astray. I'm an infrequent poster but I read here all the time so I probably feel like I'm more involved in the discussion than I really am. :-)

*and fairly secretive on some levels -- you weren't supposed to share materials with people unless they went to all the seminars first. When my mom left fundamentalism she sold our Wisdom Booklets on Ebay or something, which as a HUGE no-no but at that point she obviously didn't care any more! Actually she wanted to burn them but she needed the money.

I wondered if anyone on Recovering Grace had ever mentioend her. I just did a very simple search-- I am not tech savy like so many here!-- and did not come up with a mention of her on the website. I did find two mentions of her on a facebook group. One discussed a post of hers. All commenters were agreeing with the feelings that she had expressed there. No one said, "Oh, I remember her", but no one mentioned any doubts. The second mention was soemone asking about who in the group was part of the original families and someone mentioned Ruth's blog. Again, no one mentioned any doubts as to her veracity BUT did mention that she was on another RG Facebook group. If she was trying to get fodder for her blog, it would be an excellent resource.

[bbfreethinker]

-Snip-

I'm only just now catching up on the Ruth threads (holy cow!) but I have to say she was good at first. Over at No Longer Quvering, she did sound believable.

-Snip-

Jumping into this discussion to say that her story is still on No Longer Quivering:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nolongerqu ... azingruth/

[Lainey]

Jumping into this discussion to say that her story is still on No Longer Quivering:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nolongerqu ... azingruth/

I was just thinking about that...I suppose we should let Vyckie know. :?

[kaetrin]

I wondered if anyone on Recovering Grace had ever mentioend her. I just did a very simple search-- I am not tech savy like so many here!-- and did not come up with a mention of her on the website. I did find two mentions of her on a facebook group. One discussed a post of hers. All commenters were agreeing with the feelings that she had expressed there. No one said, "Oh, I remember her", but no one mentioned any doubts. The second mention was soemone asking about who in the group was part of the original families and someone mentioned Ruth's blog. Again, no one mentioned any doubts as to her veracity BUT did mention that she was on another RG Facebook group. If she was trying to get fodder for her blog, it would be an excellent resource.

I did the same thing (the RG site, not FB). But RR predates RG by a couple of years, I think, so it wouldn't have been a research source for her initially. The NLQ connection is probably more relevant in terms of how she got started.

I think the emergence and popularity of ATI/fundie survivor blogs, just in the last few years, ended up being a double-edged sword for her. On the one hand, that was the niche/trend that she jumped on early to attract the audience that she did, and yet when the circle got bigger, her lack of connections became more obvious.

hindsight, man...

[Mustang Sally]

I think she is still a member here - or someone else with almost her exact username is - and it looks like she's visited recently, so hopefully she's aware. I'd be interested in hearing what she has to say...or better yet, I'd be interested in her telling Oddeverything her whole story for when the entire thing is published on the site.

(Oh, and to jojo who messaged me - no, I wasn't referring to you. Your PM option is turned off so I'm replying here.)

[apple1]

I was just thinking about that...I suppose we should let Vyckie know. :?

Well, seeing that Vyckie sent PrincessJo to start the questioning thread long ago on the Yuku board...

I'm guessing that Vyckie has known for quite some time...

[Clementine]

This is so ironic. Was wokchop on to something in 2010?

http://freejinger.yuku.com/reply/28429/ ... eBiPm34tP4

[Curious]

I was just thinking about that...I suppose we should let Vyckie know. :?

I emailed the folks at NLQ

[Arete]

This is so ironic. Was wokchop on to something in 2010?

http://freejinger.yuku.com/reply/28429/ ... eBiPm34tP4

wokchop was definitely on to something in 2010. She said her piece at the time people who went against the prevailing thinking could really get their metaphoric asses kicked, so it looks like she did not insist after she floated that first trail balloon. wokchop herself was treated pretty shamefully by one of the ex mods/admins on the "Festivus" thread last year and left soon after.

Issues on this forum get debated with a lot more sanity these days.

Slinking back to the amen corner........

[Mustang Sally]

I emailed the folks at NLQ

I wonder if you'll even get a response.

[Lainey]

wokchop was definitely on to something in 2010. She said her piece at the time people who went against the prevailing thinking could really get their metaphoric asses kicked, so it looks like she did not insist after she floated that first trail balloon. wokchop herself was treated pretty shamefully by one of the ex mods/admins on the "Festivus" thread last year and left soon after.

Issues on this forum get debated with a lot more sanity these days.

Slinking back to the amen corner........

Yes...Wok Chop is where I got it from. Well, Samantha (WokChop's daughter). I'm pretty sure I posted that link somewhere earlier on this thread... :?

I am slightly in awe of Wok Chop's mind, to be honest. :shock: She's really smart!

[jojo]

(Oh, and to jojo who messaged me - no, I wasn't referring to you. Your PM option is turned off so I'm replying here.)

Thanks. All this RR reading had me paranoid ... thinking that someone was thinking that I am someone whom I am not. If that makes any sense. (Didn't even know I had PM turned off.)

[Mama Mia]

Well now that I have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, one thing really jumps out at me.

So much of her story is based on fear of her family, in particular her father, being outed. He will go ballistic, possibly she will be hounded by goons or her siblings will starve after her dad is fired and so on.

But if he was such a staunch believer that he was raising his family the right way and that he was living his religion, WHY would he care about being identified? ?? Wouldn't he actually be proud, not ashamed?

I haven't read all of her posts, so maybe i missed something obviously criminal, but from what I have read it isn't like the father would be arrested for anything. The Pearls and others advocate extremely harsh punishments, but they aren't in hiding--they are on talk shows promoting their views.

Her father might be ashamed of having kids who ran off, or a wife who is sometimes depressed, but really-- why the huge drama and secrecy from his side if he believes he is living the right way?

[gardenvarietycitizen]

In hindsight, surely she was just projecting HER OWN fears of being outed, yeah...

[Sobeknofret]

:naughty: Pot BLESSING. It's all thanks to Jeesus!

Pot Providence meal if you're Vision Forum! None of that heathen "luck" stuff here! :naughty:

Edited for riffles