September 17, 2016

Blatant Proof that Thompson Was Lying about the Arrest, Detectives, Harassment, DA etc.

Nwq Update:  Magistrate Stephen P. Laffey was the ultimate evidence that
Diane Thompson lyed about their having been charges filed, an arrest made,
and severe harassment to endure.  Thompson is a proven liar.  See:

http://www.donaldwuerl.com/2016/08/the-1978-news-articles.html

******************************************************

This article assumes that you know of a Diane Thompson (aka Mangum) who
claimed that the man formerly known as Father Anthony Cipolla was arrested
in 1978 on account of her "filing charges" against him.  This article equally
assumes that you also know of the same Diane Thompson claiming that she
was hideously harassed into "dropping the charges" against Cipolla (which
were never filed in the first place.)   She claimed that she did so in less than
one month after having filed them.

Of course, no charges were ever filed, no indictment of Cipolla ever occurred,
no arrest of him occurred, and therefore there was no harassment, vandalism,
or mysterious "attorney for the diocese" that she claimed approached her and
talked to her.  In as much, proof that she was lying about having been con-
fronted by a "lawyer for the diocese" is that dioceses DON'T GET INDICT-
ED ... arrested ... etc.  Only actual people do.  If Cipolla actually were arrest-
ed .. which he was NOT ... an attorney would have showed up on the seen and
said to Thompson, "I'm the attorney for Anthony Cipolla."  Being that Cipolla
was never indicted or arrested in 1978, he had no need of an attorney.  Diane
Thompson is merely a fact-checked liar who lied about the arrest which never
occurred.

Incidentally, when the Pgh Post Gazette stated that Wuerl went to Rome with
a copy of the "Police Arrest Report," it was referring to Diane Thomspon, aka
Mangum, reporting that police arrested Cipolla in 1978.  If Cipolla were really
arrested, there would have been .... not a police arrest report ... but rather, "an
indictment, followed by an arraignment and the setting of bail.  Wuerl had no
such document in Rome, because Cipolla was NEVER indicted, never arrested,
never arraigned, never finger-printed, etc.


Of course, this article also assumes that you already know that, in 2014, the
same Anthony Cipolla received a favorable Pennsylvania State Police Crimi-
nal Background Check Report which stated that he has NO CRIMINAL re-
cord in Pennsylvania.   This article equally assumes that you know that no
civilian can file criminal charges, and that civilians merely file "private crim-
inal complaints" which do no more than trigger an investigation, to see if the
complainant's accusations contain "evidence" or "corroborating witnesses."
In the end, it's the DA ... or a judge signing a detective's affidavit ... or the
Attorney General's office ... or a grand jury who file criminal charges.

This articles equally assumes that you know that I posted the line itemized
results of the fact-checking done on Diane Thompson's damning accusations
against Anthony Cipolla, then-Bishop Vincent Leonard, and Cipolla's friends/.
The repeated result was that she was caught lying and/or contradicting her
past statements, time after time after time.

This article seeks to do no more than to show you that Thompson was com-
pletely lying about having been harassed into dropping criminal charges that
were never filed in the first place.

In review, Thompson publicly stated, via the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, that
"the detectives" kept encouraging her to "file charges" against Anthony Ci-
polla, saying that she was the only person on Earth who could do so, and
that the same Anthony Cipolla would get away with evil done, if she did
not do so.  Therefore, Thompson claimed that only the victim of a crime
(or else his parents) has the power to file criminal charges against a crimi-
nal ..., and if the victim or parent doesn't file the charges, then  the criminal
goes free.  FALSE.

What about murder victims.  That can't file "charges" aka a private criminal
complaint.  And what about children molested by their parents.  According to
Diane Thompson, if the parents don't file on themselves, then the molested
child has no recourse to the law.

Proof that a crime's victim does not have to file anything, in order for a crim-
inal to be indicted, is in Donald Wuerl's Triple Cover-up of Frs. Wolk, Zula,
& Pucci.  The two sexually abused lads did NOT file a private criminal com-
plaint.  Neither did their parents do so.  All that happened was that Attorney
F. Peter Dixon contacted law enforcement officials and told them about Wolk,
Zula, and Pucci.  The DA's office took it from there.

Diane Thompson lied when she claimed that "detectives" told her that, if she
didn't file charges against Anthony Cipolla, that he would get away with what
she claimed he did.  Remember that no one filed a private criminal complaint
against Richard Ginder in 1978, and he ended up getting arrested and charged
with criminal conduct.  Ginder was a priest ousted from ministry by the late
Bishop Vincent Leonard, the same bishop whom Diane Thompson defamed.

Diane Thompson said that her windows were broken and her tires were slit,
as an act of retaliation and intimidation, on account of her filing her imaginary
charges against Cipolla.  She also said that the imaginary vandalism committed
against her was the reason why she moved out of Pittsburgh.  Ladies and gentle-
men, Diane Thompson, (aka Mangum) left Pittsburgh, because she couldn't pay
her bills there.  She did not have a sugar daddy in Pittsburgh.

PLUS, she was renting at the time.  If windows of her dwelling were broken,
it would NOT have been the mere matter of her packing up and leaving.  The
landlord would have gotten involved and called the police, demanding prosecu-
tion and restitution.  The police would have questioned Thompson, as well as
Cipolla and Cipolla's known friends.  Then, Diane Thompson would have been
summoned to court, to testify against whoever ended up being charged.

Furthermore, if Cipolla really had been "arrested," he would have been out on
bail, and his bail would have been revoked if he manipulated his friends into
breaking apartment windows and slitting automobile.  In all of Thompson's
2015 web log posts and Pittsburgh Post Gazette interviews, she never men-
tion Cipolla being out on bail.  If he really were arrested, she would have
been invited to the arraignment and speak to the judge, concerning the
amount of bail to be set.  Of course, she lied about her tires being slit,
her windows being broken, and her being harassed.

All in all, in proving Diane Thompson to be nothing but a liar, keep in mind
the intervention of Attorney F. Peter Dixon, F. Peter Dixion, F. Peter Dixon
in the Wolk, Zula, and Pucci indictments.  Plus, know that Diane Thompson
filing a private criminal complaint was NOT the only way that Cipolla would
have been arrested, if he actually would have committed sexual abuse against
the sons of the fact-checked liar, Diane Thompson.  If Cipolla would have
committed a crime, an indictment against him could have occurred via:

1} a DA,  2} an attorney general,  3} a detective' affidavit "signed-off" by a
judge,  4} any police officer, if and only if Cipolla were caught in the act,
and 5} a grand jury indictment.

You have to keep in mind that those 1960s and 1970s "private investigator"
shows were nonfactual as to criminal procedure, etc.   It appears that Diane
Thonpson's law education was limited to watching Magnum PI,  Mannix,
Cannon,  Barnaby Jones, and the Rockford Files.  When she described
the events around the "arrest" of an Anthony Cipolla who has NO CRIM-
INAL RECORD in Pennsylvania, Thompson was describing a fantasy
world, deliberately lying in the process.  Her accounts her off the mark
as to the way criminal procedure really works, and she was equally off
the mark when she described "the two popes dying in 1978" thing, prov-
ing that she was lying about then-Bishop Vincent Leonard.

There's more.  Till the next time.