Mirabelle you hurt me

Mirabelle you hurt me, but  will always love you

First of all I am not accusing you Mirabelle nor did mamma. You had to accuse mamma of hitting you. We, and also mamma, were convinced you had to. I know for sure that it was not you who wanted to say so. You were/are not like that.

The night after the second conversation with school I couldn’t fall asleep. Two things preyed on my mind. First of all, I saw all the time that one sentence in mamma’s fare-well-letter “Mirabelle you hurt me”.

It was mamma’s pain, a mamma who felt so miserable after Mrs. Van H. told her Mirabelle went to her teacher to say her in tears that her mother hit her so much. Of course, mamma knew that it was not you Mirabelle, but it was the kidnapper who made you to do so. But it was terrible for mamma and also for you, Mirabelle, that you had to say so. I felt so miserable that I stopped the discussion with Mrs. Van H. the day before.

Yet I had to do something with it, I felt. Because it was obvious that the three of you were brainwashed, because also the second so-called American pediatrician who called mamma and said to mamma that you asserted mamma had abused you and that you never wanted to go back to mamma in Holland anymore.

And I also felt not at ease that the kidnapper would be informed before the correspondent of the International Social Services should do her work. He already manipulated Mrs. X. of Jeugdzorg, so that she immediately believed him without doing any search after mamma. I was convinced that the kidnapper would manipulate someone for a second time. I decided to call Mr. G. of Jeugdzorg the next day. Only very late I fell asleep.

Then I still trusted Mr. G., he seemed sympathizing. Later I would discover that it was all sham. He was not at all sympathizing. He acted sympathy and I was so naïve to believe him!!!!


The call with Mr. G.

It was not late that morning, that I called Jeugdzorg.

“Please can you give me Mr. G.”, I said to the receptionist of Jeugdzorg.

“You are speaking with Mr. G. “, Mr. G. said after some moments, when the receptionist connected him with me.

“Oh Mr. G., I could not sleep this night because I feel very concerned that the kidnapper must be informed before the ISS-correspondent would start her work”, I said. “I am sure that that will go wrong.”

“Yes, but it is the procedure. I can imagine you are very afraid after all you experienced.” Mr. G. said sympathizing. “But suppose we don’t inform him, in that case the correspondent would unexpectedly stand before his door. Then the kidnapper certainly won’t do his best to cooperate.”

“I can imagine that he must be informed beforehand”, I said, “but please let him not give the time to fix the show. I don’t trust the kidnapper at all. I warn you.”

“I will make a note of it for the report”, Mr. G. said reassuring to me.

“Ahum, I have still another subject which occupies me a lot”, I said quickly. “It concerns the complaint of Mirabelle about her mother. It’s very important to write that she was saying so, because she was brainwashed. I certainly know it wasn’t she who said so. She had to say. And in the same way the children had to say to the second so-called American pediatrician that Judith was hitting them and that they didn’t want to go back to her. I know for sure. It was that complaint which hurt Judith in such an extent that she wrote it in her fare-well-letter to Mirabelle. She was really upset by that. It was her trigger to commit suicide, because her children had to accuse her.”

“Did you talk about it with school?” Mr. G. asked.

“Yes, I talked about it with Mrs. Van H. But I noticed she was very nervous and upset by it. But I don’t want to blame her, because it was the kidnapper who behaved so badly. I could have said the same in her situation”, I said.

“Oh, you needn’t be concerned about Mrs. Van H. “, Mr. G. interrupted me, “it is her profession to deal with these matters. I think you have enough to your head to be still concerned about Mrs. Van H. too.”

“Okay”, I said like a little child. “These were my two points which I wanted to stress to you. Will you please give attention to these two points, because they are very important for the children and for us? I will send you a copy of Judith’s fare-well-letter to prove that it hurt her.”

“I will make a note of it and I ‘ll discuss it with Mrs. X.”, Mr. G. said. “You can write it to Mrs. X. too, while you send her a copy of Judith’s fare-well-letter.”

“I’ll do so. And thank you very much for your time”, I finished the call.


The mail to Mrs. X on the twelfth of June 2009

This I wrote to Mrs. X.

Dear Mrs. X.,


This morning I realized that the part of Judith’s fare-well-letter that was meant for Mirabelle, namely “Mirabelle you hurt me, but will always love you”, is immensely important, because Judith felt it as that Mirabelle was giving evidence against her.

Because you don’t work on Friday I spoke with Mr. G. about it and I arranged with him that you will make a note in the report how this took place at school and how Judith experienced the accusation. I send you a copy of Judith’s fare-well-letter.


Best wishes,

Heleen van der Stoep


When I read this mail now, I realize that Mrs. X. could go her own way with my mail. Of course, I wanted to stress that you were brainwashed, just as I did with other mails I sent to her and about which I will write later too. But she could use this mail for another purpose. Oh, how naïve I still was at that time. What did I say before? What will do an organization which made such a mistake that it made a person die?… Pay attention how Jeugdzorg is treating our case. Pay attention how they cover their terrible mistake.


The mail of Mrs. X. on the seventeenth of June 2009

Dear Mrs. Van der Stoep,


I cannot open Judith’s fare-well-letter.

Mr. G. and I are of the opinion that it isn’t good that Mirabelle would read this letter. I understood Judith reproaches Mirabelle having hurt her, because she told she was beaten by her. I fear Mirabelle will not understand anything of it. And it is of importance not to make Mirabelle responsible for everything which happened. Each of the adults have their own responsibility and Mirabelle is not to blame for it.

It appeared from the e-mail that Mirabelle is already involved in the conflict between you (mother’s family) and the father. That will be the exact purpose of investigation for Jeugdzorg. How much are the children involved in this conflict, how does this conflict damage them, how do they cope with this conflict with the decease of their mother and how she died. How to prevent that Mirabelle and the two other children will be caught in a cleft stick between the two families and feel themselves responsible for the situation which came into being.

Next week I will take a day to make a report for the Raad voor de Kinderbescherming. I will make use of the facts, when I write this report.

Best wishes,

Mrs. X.

This mail made tante Daphne and me for some reasons very, very angry. First, Mrs. X. first made the most terrible mistake by giving priority to blame mamma. Her task is to protect children. Well then, her first priority was to get you back to mamma, but she did nothing of the kind. She believed a kidnapper on his blue eyes, so that she decided it was not worth to see if he had spoken the truth with his allegations against mamma. Her second blunder, a second neglect of duty of this woman. And after these two blunders she dared to send me this terrible pedantic mail with suppositions about us which weren’t true at all. A third incredible action. And this stupid word conflict, which proved she was unable to judge a situation, a fourth defect. She misses any insight of her position and her behavior. We felt extremely offended by her. Therefore we sent her an answer, although we realized that a person like her without any sense of responsibility, not to speak about moral responsibility, would not understand our reaction.


The mail tante Daphne and I sent to Mrs. X. and Mr. G.

Dear Mrs. X and dear Mr. G.,


This is a reaction to the mail of June the seventeenth. We are considerably embarrassed by your bad description of our intentions and concerns considering the children. The report that you are going to make exists as a result of our concerns about the children. It is of great importance for the good fulfillment of this case and also for the wellbeing of the children that our concerns will be communicated correctly.

On the one hand we think exactly the same about the case as you do: of course Mirabelle is not to blame of what had happened. None of the children. Probably we won’t ever let her read this letter. Certainly not as a child!!!!!! We do want and wanted only to make clear to the children that Judith loved them, that she did her best for them and that we love them and terribly miss them. We don’t want to damage them still more.

On the other hand, we think your use of the word “conflict” very awkward and you are totally wide of the mark. This whole record is just so unpleasant that you can’t speak and couldn’t speak about a conflict. A conflict namely implies two parties which together started a quarrel. In this record it is only one man who is carrying out actions.

And why did we send you Judith’s fare-well-letter? In our second conversation, Mr. G. wanted to make an inquiry into the fact why the children did have to give evidence against their mother with the so-called second pediatrician in America. That giving evidence against their mother would be mentioned as a point of concern to the Raad voor de Kinderbescherming.

“But”…….Daphne then said: “Mirabelle had to give evidence against her mother already at school”. And then it must have been far more difficult for her, because she still had all her persons of attachment around her in the Netherlands (what do you think of Judith?). How terrible must she have felt?

All this went as follows. The kidnapper wanted or required that school would come into operation with the so-called child abuse that he asserted to have taken place. School said she never received signals of abuse. The kidnapper was claiming school in that way that school was saying that she only would come into action if a complaint is coming from one of the children. And this happened: the complaints followed. From Mirabelle. So Mirabelle had to give evidence already against her mother in the Netherlands (Mrs. Van H. had wanted to talk about it with Judith alone, because she had her doubts. Because of the kidnapping all was accelerated in that unhappy conversation at school on that seventeenth of February).

We sent you the fare-well-letter with the concerned sentence “Mirabelle you hurt me, but will always love you” to show you how painful Judith experienced Mirabelle’s complaint in that conversation at school on the seventeenth of February (so actually the brainwashing of Mirabelle by the kidnapper). She clearly interpreted it as giving evidence against her. All the other complaints during that conversation at school  came from the kidnapper and were experienced less by her.

Both school and Boddaert declared to us to be totally surprised by the abduction, exactly because there was not any talk of a conflict between Judith and the kidnapper. Also Judith and we were totally confused and surprised by the abduction.

Once again, Judith was adopting an open attitude, let the kidnapper stay in her home, wanted so dearly that he and she should educate the children together in the Netherlands. In other words: she hadn’t anything to hide. If she would have abused she would not have had that open attitude (can be confirmed by school and Boddaert), then she wouldn’t have asked for assistance with assistance-organizations to support her with her education, then she hadn’t offered the kidnapper Mirabelle was allowed to live with him (can be confirmed with school and Boddaert). She trusted him and felt immensely deceived, because he stayed saying to her to come and live in the Netherlands to educate the children together (can be confirmed by school and Boddaert). All her actions were contrary to what he is claiming, namely that she is abusing the children. Nevertheless, she considered the kidnapper’s caprioles as a reaction to the fact that she was going to live with her new friend. Until she got that last poke by means of that telephone call of the second (so-called?) pediatrician in the late evening…


Not only Judith’s open attitude confirms the absence of a conflict, but also the kidnapper’s promises to Judith and to school that he was going to live in the Netherlands. The kidnapper all alone established a conflict by inventing a not existing treatment and a not existing abuse and spread this about at school, Boddaert and Jeugdzorg. School and Boddaert assured to the kidnapper they never had any suspicion of a threatening situation and stayed with this point of view.


Besides we state with much stress we don’t want to bring the children into a situation in which they would have the feeling to have to choose between their father and us. We do want to remind you another time, that our first wish is to speak to the children one time to say them that mamma loved them very very much and that we love them very much. Just this is what the kidnapper obstructed already from the very beginning of his criminal actions. After having said this to them we had the intention to leave them with their father to guard them for compulsive brainwashing. You convinced us that a constant contact with the social network in the Netherlands must be preserved for their well-being. We owe you thankfulness therefore and we want to do everything to bring that about.


Our opinions about the kidnapper can be seen separately from the love the children feel for their father. This love of the children for their father and our opinion about the father can exist beside each other without conflict. What is more: with all our heart we grant the children a good tie with their father.

It is a pity and it is hurtful that you entirely missed our opinion about this. Our great point of care in this case is clearly that there is a father who is confronting his children with a non-existing conflict and compelling them to make a choice between their father and mother (even now she has died); an awful choice which should never have had been a choice!


Here still some questions:

  1. The ISS will do an investigation after the well-being of the children and also the ISS will intermediate so that they will bring about a good contact between us and the children. Do we also receive information during the procedure and are we allowed to participate in it? By the way, we think it very important that on the one hand there is a constant assistance for the education of the kidnapper and that on the other hand we think it important that the children are protected.
  2. Speaking about information: we should appreciate that we are seen as a fully-fledged partner, who has a right to get all information. Why don’t you give us the address? It gives us the idea you are covering a kidnapper while we are duped as victim from the actions of the offender. Three organizations need this address. The Central Authority to propose an arrangement concerning grandparental access, the Centre for International Child Abduction to look at the relevant legislation of the state concerned, and the pension scheme of Pension Fund “Zorg en Welzijn” to pay out an orphan grant to the children.
  3. We give information now. What about the privacy of our family?
  4. A question belonging to question 3, namely the request to don’t put Judith’s fare-well-letter into your dossier. Mr. G. promised me already.
  5. If you thought the Raad voor de Kinderbescherming is thinking about a return in this complicated case, why didn’t you act quicker then? In the opinion of the Centre of International Child Abductions this procedure will cost a year at least. We think it shocking that if a return is necessary (in the case that the situation of the children is alarming), it may be that the time necessary to work around something will be too short.

The Centre International Child Abduction supposes that the kidnapper by conducting a smearing campaign against Judith could cover himself totally by article 13b of the Hague Convention of International Child Abduction.


Best wishes,

Daphne and Heleen van der Stoep


I have translated this mail entirely, because we could have succeeded doing something for you if Jeugdzorg had done what we asked in the mail.  

It was Anne van den Berg who was very critical of the actions of Jeugdzorg. She already realized that the kidnapper figured out his kidnapping far before by falsely accusing mamma of abusing you. As a matter of fact, in Article 13b of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, ratified and signed by the US and the Netherlands was written: ‘Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding Article, the judicial or administrative authority of the requested State is not bound to order the return of the child if the person, institution or other body which opposes its return establishes that 13b there is a grave risk that his or her return would expose the child to physical and psychological harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation.”

The kidnapper had two trump cards, you know: mamma’s wrong borderline diagnosis and her work in the prostitution. So such a mother could abuse her children, like before the borderline mother of Savannah did with her new partner (I told you Savannah’s story before). This article 13b would cover him if Jeugdzorg would help him. And Jeugdzorg did!

Anne van den Berg was the first one who said to us that Jeugdzorg was manipulated by the kidnapper. It was she who from the very beginning was not very positive about the assistance-actions of Jeugdzorg. Later more and more people were convinced Jeugdzorg was manipulated by the kidnapper and that Jeugdzorg tried to save her imago by covering up her mistakes by the protocol.

In this mail tante Daphne and I refer to the typical Kafka-effect: “Why don’t we get the address? Isn’t the offender covered up while we are duped as victim from the actions of the offender?”

Many times, we were confronted by this Kafka-effect. The first time was at school on the day mamma was called by the kidnapper that he took you with him and that she wouldn’t see you anymore. She and later tante Daphne, opa and I were treated like abusers, while there was one person who was really abusing you by kidnapping you. One of the most serious ill-treatments in the world.

In this mail we were only very irritated by the acts of Jeugdzorg. At that moment we didn’t understand yet that Jeugdzorg didn’t want at all listen to us and didn’t want to help you at all.  Bit by bit we would learn that hard lesson.


How did Mrs. X react to the above mail on the 24th of June 2009:


Dear Mrs. Van der Stoep,


I only used the information with the aim of restoring the contact with you for the report.


Might you still have formal questions then you can take contact with Mr. G. after the 24th of July.


Best wishes,

Mrs. X.


This answer again is entirely meaningless and doesn’t refer to any of our concerns expressed in our mail. Up to this day it makes me so angry that Mrs. X. didn’t anything for the three of you and how she treated us. Up till now I think it unbelievable that such a person is allowed to act in these responsible cases. The next time I will tell you about our observation that you were brainwashed by the kidnapper more and more. More and more the (grand) parental alienation took place and we stood there, made totally powerless.







This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *