February 17, 2017

Wuerl kept the notorious Father Hoehl in ministry, even after the "life-changing epiphany" dinner mentioned by Ann Rodgers.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where Cardinal Donald Wuerl's web of corruption was spun,
with the help the Ann Rodgers who was repeatedly caught lying in print, via fact checking.
Nor did he report Wolk, Zula, and Pucci to the police.  Attorney F. Peter
Dixon did.  He was a friend of the victimized family.

For those unaware, John Hoehl was put on administrative leave by then-
Bishop Anthony Bevilacqua.  Hoehl WAS removed from the priesthood
ministry.  Wuerl reinstated him.

Then there was Wellinger, not to mention Wuerl reinstating Huff.  All in
all, know that Ann Rodgers IS a liar.  She was a non-Catholic Pittsburgh
Post Gazette writer who was appointed Pittsburgh Roman Catholic Dio-
cesan director of communications.  She still is a Protestant.  Her appoint-
ment is a case study in cronyism and Vatican II corruption.  Read onward,
because you need to know what liars comprise the Wuerl propaganda
machine.  Incidentally, he did NOT write the Teachings of Christ.  He
was merely one of three editors of the catechism book which had a
multiplicity of authors.  Wuerl, himself, begane the lie which claimed
that he wrote that catechism book single-handedly, doing so in 1979,

Concerning the two lads corrupted by Wolk, Zula, and Pucci, know that
each priest performed his antics at different times, on different occasions.
It wasn't one of those "all-three-at-once" scenarios, to state it politely.

The Pittsburgh Post Gazette story which was easy to prove false was that
Wuerl had a life-changing enlightenment when he went to the home of the
two lads sodomized by Wolk, Zula, and Pucci, and then instantly became
the champion of zero tolerance.  That scenario did NOT happen.  Ann
Rodgers (formerly of the Pgh Post Gazette) was and is a liar, and she
never sued me for calling her a liar.

Proof that the Ann Rodgers story is a fairy tale exists in the fact that District
Attorney John C. Pettit issued a press release which stated that Donald Wuerl,
as well as staff members of his then-diocese of Pittsburgh, were uncooperative
with law enforcement officials throughout the investigation that resulted in the
indictments of Wolk, Zula, and Pucci.

In addition, if Wuerl were the heroic bishop of zero tolerance that Ann Rodgers
said he was, then Wuerl would have immediately suspended the notorious John
Hoehl whom Wuerl personally put back into ministry, shortly before that dinner
transpired.  For the record, it was Donald Wuerl's predecessor, the destined-to-be-
disgraced Anthony Bevilacqua, who ordered Hoehl on administrative leave.

Now, if the 5'4" Donald Wuerl whom Ann Rodgers falsely described in print as
an ascetic 5'11" were the model of zero tolerance, then Donald Wuerl would also
not have reinstated into ministry the Fr Edward Huff who would eventually be-
come criminally indicted and convicted.  Wuerl was covering-up Huff while he
was being lauded as a bishop of zero tolerance in the Anthony Cipolla Case.

And of course, after the fact-checking, and after Bendig multiply lied to me,
and after the spiritually grotesque Diane Thompson repeatedly lied about me
and changed her story about Anthony Cipolla, it was confirmed that Anthony
Cipolla was 95 to 98% innocent as accused.  After all, Cipolla never was in-
dicted, and a DA can file an indictment without Diane Thompson's permis-
sion to do so.  Of course, this refers to my future defendant, Diane Thomp-
son, who harassed me and repeatedly committed libel against me.  She is
quite arrogant, as well as erratic in her writings which were fact-checked
and found to be bullet-riddled with easily provable falsehoods, as is ex-
plained in a few Wuerlgate articles.

Wolk, Zula, & Pucci

The first of the three to be indicted was Wolk, and after Wolk was indicted,
Wuerl gave an excuse for his cover-up of him.  Only afterward did Wuerl
do the artificial grandstanding, with sleight of hand semantics involved.
Wuerl was no champion of Zero Tolerance.  Wuerl was caught and then
had to quickly construct a facade.

The other proof is that Wuerl reinstated the suspended Father John Hoehl.
After that dinner, Wuerl kept Hoehl in ministry, thereby very much tolerat-
ing a priest who caused a lot of lingering psychological damage to a num-
ber of individuals.  Wuerl stubbornly kept Hoehl in ministry until Father
Robert Wolk was indicted.  Then Wuerl treated Hoehl as a hot potato and
showed him the exit door.

Now, do you see what a liar Ann Rodgers and the other Wuerl People are?
Concerning Rodgers, she meddled in influencing the Catholic mind.  Yet,
she refuses to be a Catholic.

An added scandal  is in the fact that David Zubik, a secretary of John Hoehl,
never reported Hoehl for his well-noted sex crimes.  However, my opinion is
that David Zubik had no idea of what Hoehl was doing in his private life.  I
personally knew Fr. Dave.  Dave didn't buddy around with the athletes whom
Hoehl targeted.  Dave wasn't in the inner circle.  In my opinion David Zubik
isn't an accomplice.  The problem is that he wasn't alert to his surroundings.
He needed to reach-out more.  If he did, he could have spared someone of
the grief that comes with being a high school headmaster's prey.

As was previously stated and ignored by the Vatican . . .

Added proof that Wuerl was NO hero of zero tolerance exists in the fact that
Wuerl  also reinstated the Edward Huff who ended up being indicted and con-
victed.  Thus, as you can see, the story of Wuerl being a crystal clear saint of
zero tolerance is a complete falsehood.  Wuerl IS as corrupt as they come, and
the stories were a part of that criminal corruption.

Concerning Hoehl and the time of the Wolk indictment, if Wuerl were found
to have a criminal in ministry, law enforcement would have scoured the Pitts-
burgh diocese and Wuerl in investigative detail.  Wuerl's private life, even
when he was the long-term secretary under John Cardinal Wright, would
have been revealed to law enforcement authorities.  Wuerl stubbornly kept
John Hoehl in  diocesan ministry for as long as he could do so, without hav-
ing the Diocese of Pittsburgh become a magnetized target of a detialed law
enforcement investigation.

Added proof that Wuerl had NO change of heart after the dinner evening
with the family victimized by Wolk, Zula, and Pucci was that he did NOT
report those three priests.  An attorney who was a friend of the victimized
family did the reporting thereof.  So, as you can see, Ann Rodgers, former-
ly of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, is a liar.  Rocco Palmo and Christopher
Dickey were fools to have used her as a source in their articles about Don-
ald Wuerl which were basically two plagiarisms of Rodgers; falsehoods.
They lost credibility with anyone familiar with the Wuerlgate Jpegs, news
archives, and witness accounts.  They lost credible with anyone who was
there in Pittsburgh during the 1990s.

IN AS MUCH,  contrary to what Christopher Dickey wrote, the truth is that
the only reason why Wuerl and his former Diocese of Pittsburgh had one of
the first no-tolerance sex abuse policies in America was because:

Wuerl was one of the very first bishops in the United States who got 
caught concealing criminal priests from law enforcement authorities.

So, he had to strike the disciplinarian pose while the law enforcement
spotlight was on him.  Wuerl was caught being uncooperative with
DA John C. Pettit.  So, Wuerl fabricated a new image of himself.
It included him announcing a zero tolerance sex abuse policy.

HOWEVER ...

Wuerl's sex abuse policy did NOT apply to 1} the case of  Edward Huff
who would eventually be criminally indicted, 2} the credible seminarian
Wuerl prevented from being ordained, 3} the  case of Fr. James Torquato,
4} the case of Fr. John Wellinger,  Plus, the policy was NOT implement-
ed until after Wuerl put the notorious John S. Hoehl back into ministry.
Even more hypocritical was the fact that Wuerl put back into ministry
the previously mentioned Edward Huff who was reported to Wuerl
three different times, by the differing sets of concerned Catholics.
The Zero-Tolerance label placed on Wuerl was a fraudulent claim.
_____________________________________________________________

For those unfamiliar, Ann Rodgers was a writer for the Pittsburgh Post Gazette.
Even though she was never any type of Catholic, she was assigned to be head
of the Communications Dept of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh.
On multiple fact-checking occasions, Ann Rodgers was caught lying in print.

A Review of Wuerl's Triple Cover-up

To start, Wuerl had a Father Arnott go to the violated family, to see if they
would be willing to meet with Wuerl.  But, this only occurred when Wuerl
learned that the family was going to report the priests to law enforcement
authorities.  The Donald Wuerl who was sued many times by Pittsburgh
area residents sought to get his foot into the door.  Wuerl basically invited
himself.

Do NOT ever be deceived into thinking that Wuerl was a revered presence
in Pittsburgh.  The number of lawsuits filed against him proves  otherwise.
Wuerl had contrived press and media coverage, as well as the pit bull Ron
Lengwin who actually is very tall and who allegedly sought to intimidate
people in the mode of a big bully.  Me seeing how tall Lengwin is was as
shocking to me as having seen how tiny Wuerl is.  All that Lengwin ever
did to me was smile at me with gritted teeth and a snarl.  He kept moving
and I never saw him again.  This was at the diocesan building.

If Wuerl's meeting with the family were similar to other people's encounters
with Wuerl, then I can assure you that he left the family feeling violated and
outraged.  I can assure you that he triggered a sense of insult so intense that
they went forth and gave the greenlight to Attorney F. Peter Dixon who end-
ed up reporting the three priests to law enforcement officials.

As soon as the indictment was filed, Wuerl got rid of Hoehl like a sand bag in
a hot air balloon losing altitude.  But, not until then.  This is extremely interest-
ing, in that it indicates that Wuerl seemingly assumed that the violated family
would not report the three molester priests to the police.  If Wuerl anticipated
the reporting thereof, he would have gotten rid of John Hoehl immediately.
Wuerl let Hoehl remain in ministry, as if Wuerl arrogantly assumed that he
controlled the violated family on a set of puppet strings.

Wuerl keeping Fr. John Hoehl in ministry after the meeting with
the family of two molested altar boys proves that  Wuerl had no
change of heart or policy that resulted from the meeting/dinner.
The claim that the meeting changed Wuerl is lying propaganda.

During the journalists' 2013 papal conjecture phrase, shortly before Francis I
ascended to the Chair of Saint Peter, the Daily Beast's Paris bureau chief con-
jectured that Cardinal Wuerl was America's candidate for pope, in light of the
newspaper articles that glorified Wuerl, especially in the heavily misrepresent-
ed Anthony Cipolla case that starred a seminary flunk-out who was described
as a perpetual and pathological liar by multiple persons who knew him.  In fact,
the Cipolla case starred an individual who was even declared NOT credible by
Donald Wuerl, at one time.  His name is Tim Bendig and he lied to me four
times in a row in the Year 2014, during a telephone conversation that he
initiated with me during work hours.  I conducted that conversation in a
construction trailer office, next to a drawing board.

The Paris bureau chief then stated that Wuerl apparently became too tired to
fight the good fight that the media described Wuerl as having fought.  Dickey
then referred to one of Ann Rodgers' Pgh Post Gazette articles, stating:

     But a few weeks after that decision Wuerl met with the devout, deeply
     disillusioned, and increasingly litigious family of one victim.  They in-
     vited Wuerl to dinner and, according to a lengthy and laudatory report
     in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 2003, when Wuerl left that table his
     views of the issue had changed.  Before, his actions had been closely
     aligned church policies, which were basically a CYA masquerading
     as piety.

     Now Wuerl told his staff it had to get its priorities straight: the first
    concern was the injured party, the second was for the person’s family,
    the third—and only the third—was the potential harm to the church
    and its reputation.   He’s on the record declaring zero tolerance for
    priests accused of sexual abuse 14 years before that became official
   policy.
__________________________________________________________
The decision to which Dickey referred was Wuerl's decision to put back
into ministry the notorious John S. Hoehl, former headmaster of Quigley
H.S., in Baden Pennsylvania.  I attended that school for four years.  And
yes, I heard the rumors while in school.

Furthermore, Wuerl did NOT observe the policy he announced in the case
of Edward Huff.  Plus, his policy did NOT apply to Torquato's prey or to
the credible deacon whistle blower Wuerl trapped and refused to ordain
into the priesthood.  Yet, Wuerl ordained the homosexual predator, James
Torquato, and covered up Torquato's wrongs, thereby approving of them
in deed.





The source of this letter is self-evident.