The July 25, 1978 sheet of paper was NOT a police report NOR an arrest report

To start, the great lie of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's Ann Rodgers in 1993 and 1995, was the claim that the Vatican Apostolic Signatura case involving Anthony Cipolla involved only molestation accusations.  It did not.  It involved the question if whether or not Wuerl was justified in having removed Cipolla from priestly ministry solely on the Clinical Depression & Suicidal Tendencies diagnosis given to him by St Luke's Institute in Maryland.  

 

It also concerned the question if whether or not the clean bill of health Cipolla simultaneously received from St. Michael's of NYC was evidence which Wuerl had to honor in his final decision-making, on Cipolla.  

 

There was no trial at the Vatican which sought to judge if whether or not Cipolla molested Tim Bendig.  Yet, Ann Rodgers-Melnick made it sound as if it were only about molestation accusations.  In fact, Tim Bendig told a newspaper reporter that Cipolla was tried at the Vatican and found guilty of having molested Bendig.  This, of course, was yet another lie from the Tim Bendig whom I personally knew to be a serial liar.  

 

Today, however, the Post-Gazette in the post-Ann-Rodgers Era has a different answer to the mid-1990s Vatican high court hearings question:

 

Former Pittsburgh Post-Gazette writer, Ann Rodgers-Melnick, wrote that, when Wuerl walked off of a jetliner at Rome's international airport in 1995, he was carrying a newly obtained piece of evidence.  That newly obtained piece of evidence, according to Ann Rodgers-Melnick, was a "police report."  She lied.  That sheet of paper was NOT a police report.  It was something decisively different. 

The July 25, 1978 sheet of paper containing hand-printed basic info at the top of it & hand-printed damning accusations in the middle of it, followed by medical exam results and mention of the names of the detectives who were notified of the accusations, was ...

... an Offense/Incident Report, aka an O/I Report.  In the center of that sheet of paper was nothing more than Diane Thompson's statement, so stated in the name of the nine year old "Thomas Thompson,"  aka Tucker Thompson.  It was NOT the police conclusion.  It was NOT the "police findings."

That July 25th, 1978 O/I Report was only the beginning of the 1978 investigation.   It was not a statement approved by the police.  It was merely the starting point of the July 25th, 1978 investigation.  Yet, Diane Thompson and others acted as if it were the official final findings of the case, deceiving the public in the process.

That which is absolutely essential for any American journalist or historian to understand about an Offense/Incident Report is this:

 

An Offense/Incident Report contains NO CONCLUSIONS of law enforcement officials, being that it constitutes only the beginning of a case which may go nowhere or which may lead to the formal filing of criminal charges and a conviction.

 

The O/I Report, when a civilian accuser is involved, is only the accusations of one or more civilians, followed by a possible medical examination of those persons alleged to have been victimized in the crime reported.  And of course, the results of a medical exam can either confirm or dispel accusations set forth in an Offense/Incident Report.

 

In the July 25th, 1978 Offense/Incident Report, the medical exam section basically exonerated Cipolla, as far as went the nine year old, Thomas Thompson, also known as Tucker Thompson.  There was absolutely no indication that any type of physical crime had been committed on young Tucker's body, on July 25th, 1978. 

 

Now remember, I spoke at length with the man who signed that July 25, 1978 I/O Report.  He was one of the two uniformed police officers who went to the Thompson residence, to take Diane Thompson's statement.  And of course, he was the man whom I located through the Pittsburgh Steeler organization.

 

Well, he definitively said to me that all he did was jot down what Diane Thompson said.  Apparently, she spoke for young Tucker.  He only spoke of Diane Thompson, when explaining his July 25th visit to her domicile.  Tucker did not come up in the conversation.  It was understood that Diane Thompson was proverbially running the whole show.

 

All in all, Mark Ninehouser did NOT play Sherlock Holmes.  He did NOT play Dick Tracy.  He did NOT bring out a white glove or a magnifying glass.  He did NOT concur with the accusations leveled against Cipolla.  He simply took dictation notes.  Period.  

 

All in all, that which is in the  middle of the July 25th I/O Report is only Diane Thompson's allegations ... and that of Tucker, presumably.  NO insertion of any police assertions, conclusions, or "findings" are there.  It was only the beginning point of a case that lasted no longer than 35 days.

 

After that one visit to Diane Thompson's domicile, Mark Ninehouser had nothing further to do with the case.  He was finished with it, after he hand-printed his notes to an I/O form and signed it.  His signature appears in the middle of a bottom-area line there, followed by the number 46.  Forty-six was his badge number he told me. 

 

The Contradictions of Diane Thompson's ... and Tucker's ... Story 

 

As far as goes the damning accusations in the July 1978 O/I Report, the great asininity in it, in that it instantly loses credibility, goes as follows: 

 

  1] Anthony Cipolla was presumed to be fully clothed, while he was accused of having one finger playing proctologist in Tucker's back side, while simultaneously using the opposite hand on Tucker's private front section ... while Tucker was unclothed.   

 

2] Well, Diane Thompson told writer Randy Engel that, on July 25th, at the hospital, semen was found on Tucker, followed by DNA test results that proved the semen belonged to Cipolla.  And of course, there was no DNA involved in the 1978 Cipolla Case.

 

 

3a] The contradiction is that, if Cipolla still had his clothes on, while playing doctor in a very perverse way, then how did semen go through Cipolla's clothes onto Tucker's body?  And if Tucker was not touching Cipolla, then how did an excited emission of semen from Cipolla occur, in the first place?  

 

3b]  According to the Statement of the Thompson Household, Tucker did NOT allegedly have his hand on Cipolla's body, especially on his private sector.  Yet, Cipolla was somehow excited enough to leave a souvenir of male body fluid on Tucker's body, while Cipolla had his clothes on. 

 

That entire scenario was impossible.  Plus, the way described in July of 1978 was not the way child molesters molested children.  Usually, it was the child's hand and the adult's private anatomical section put to use.  

 

A repeated example of this was in the case of molester extraordinaire, Marcial Maciel Degollado.  He had his students put their hands in the service of Maciel's private anatomical sector, under the guise that it was medical therapy for Maciel.  Maciel even told the students that he received an indult ... a dispensation ... a permission slip ... from the pope to have it done to him as such.  

 

Thus, Diane Thompson got the story backwards.  Her fictional account should have had Tucker's hand on Cipolla's private anatomical part.  That's one reason why no judge was willing to issue a warrant for Cipolla's arrest, in 1978.  

 

So, in order to hide the fact that she fabricated an asinine tale, in my private citizen's personal opinion which is protected under NY Times v Sullivan, 376 us 254 (1964), Diane Thompson made up the story of postive DNA testing, followed by Cipolla getting arrested, and finally followed by Bob Colville sabotaging the prosecution of Cipolla, via duress.

However, Diane Thompson then thought up even more asinine tales, in order to make you feel sorry for her, while being outraged at Cipolla.  One example was the claim that there was a 1965 special forces near-death training accident undertaken by her husband which occurred at a Spartanburg military base which was closed down in 1947.

 

In Defining a Police Report 

 

As far as goes the legal instrument known as the police report, it's usually the written account of one of the police officers who responded to a crime in progress or a crime recently completed.  It's usually the writing of an officer who became a witness to the crime.  Many police reports were written by an officer who was there, at the scene of the crime, during or after the criminal actions.

 

On other occasions, a police report occasionally involved an officer who succeeded in obtaining evidence or corroborative witnesses which incriminated the accused mentioned in the report.  

 

Whereas the Offense/Incident Report only contains initial, starting point accusations which have not yet been tested as to their validity, a police report contains conclusions known as "findings."

 

Next comes the Police Affidavit which additionally involves a police officer submitting his findings under oath, claiming them to be true.

 

For all intentions & purposes of the Anthony Cipolla Case, the July 25th, 1978 Offense/Incident Report ... in the middle section of the filled-out form ... contained only Diane Thompson's & young Thomas Thompson's statement uninterrupted.  There was no cross-examination of the statement.  There was simply the statement jotted-down on a form, in hand-printing.  Plus, all the consonants in that statement were in capital letters.  The letter "i" was not, so as to not confuse "i" with #1.

 

The police did NOT concur to those damning accusations, because it was only Diane Thompson's side of the story printed on that one sheet of paper, along with Allegheny General's medical findings which did NOT substantiate a single accusation made by Diane and/or Tucker Thompson.  The statement was 12 lines long.  It's at the bottom of this post.

 

Allegheny General 

 

Now, the Allegheny General medical findings were pivotal, because, during the examination of nine year old "Thomas Thompson," Allegheny General found NOTHING which indicated that a crime was committed on young Tucker Thompson's body, on July 25th, 1978.   

 

This is pertinent, because young "Thomas Thompson" was alleged to have been molested a few hours prior.  Thus, evidence should have been fresh.  No physical evidence was reported by Allegheny General, at all.  There were no medical indications that Tucker had been molested by anyone or anything.  

 

More importantly, there was no medical report from Allegheny General that there was any kind of lubricant anywhere on or near the 9 year old child's private anatomical area.  That claim was only the claim of the woman formerly known as Diane Thompson, with no medical professional concurring that it occurred.  That accusation was unfounded.  The I/O Report is at the bottom of this post.

 

Now, even though the middle section of the July 25th O/I Report was very damning, it also was able to make a reasonable person roll his eyes at the ridiculousness of at least one of the accusations.

 

It involved an act of pedophile molestation which pedophiles don't do to nine year old males, because their hands are too big to have a certain effect on a child's private sector.  That makes an expert immediately see that Diane Thompson fabricated the 1978 molestation story which wasn't all that horrifying ... especially when Tucker told the police ... either directly or through his mother ... that he was only molested twice by Cipolla.  

 

That which was horrifying was Diane Thompson's description of the alleged corruption of D.A. Bob Colville, in her very false claim of having been forced, by Colville himself, to "drop the charges" which were not yet filed, in the first place ... and which could have never been dropped by the signature of any civilian on Planet Earth, in any American clerk of courts office or in any D.A.'s office.

 

So, the July 25th, 1978 O/I Report was NOT the police agreeing with Diane Thompson, and it certainly was NOT the police unilaterally announcing what happened on July 25th, 1978.  It was only Diane Thompson and/or young Tucker making accusations not yet tested for honesty & validity.  At that point, it was still needed to test and see if the accusations were substantial or unfounded.

 

Of course, in my conversation with one of the two police officers who actually visited the Thompson domicile on July 25th, it appears that she spoke for Tucker, in the name of Tucker, instead of letting Tucker speak for himself.  If he said anything, Tucker simply mentioned his claim of the date of the first time Cipolla allegedly molested him.  That was near the July 4th, 1978, holiday.  

 

In as much, keep in mind that, according to Tucker ... or according to Diane Thompson spoken in the name of Tucker ... Cipolla only allegedly molested him twice.  That's it.  That's all.  

 

This, alone, takes the proverbial air out of many online writers who insinuated that Cipolla allegedly molested Tucker for 4, 8, or 12 consecutive months, week after week or month after month.  

 

Due to the weakness of the Tucker accusations, Diane Thompson needed to bring 12 year old Frank Labiaux into the accusation scene.  At present, he needs to be cross-examined in the Court of Public Opinion, being that he was already was caught in the lie about the vandalism at the African Methodist Church.  

 

Diane Thompson and Frank Labiaux claimed that Frank vandalized the place in 1977, with an accomplice, due to the frustration of having been molested.  The reality is that the two acts of vandalism occurred in November 1978.   And of course, Diane Thompson claimed that she left Pittsburgh for Cleveland in September of 1978.

 

In fact, the slitting of the tires in the church parking lot occurred on November 17th.  This is much much later than the date very falsely alleged by Diane Thompson and Frank Labiaux.  The ones who actually committed the vandalism were hoodlums a couple years older than Frank.   The bottom line is that Frank Labiaux has proven to us that he can't be trusted.

 

Now remember.  I spoke with the actual July 25th officer at length.  The author of the outrageously non-factual and defamatory 2016 Renew America article did NOT speak with him.  Mrs Randy Engel didn't even know how to find him.  Basically, Randy Engel knew how to find unsubstantiated gossip & calumny.  But, she had severe difficulty in finding the truth.

  

Allegheny General's Official Medical Examination Finding 

 

Keep in mind that the medical exam that Allegheny General performed on the nine year old Thomas (Tucker) Thompson stated nothing more than the physical condition of young Thomas was "GOOD," in the July 1978 I/O Report.  

 

As far as goes the claim that "a spot" of lubricant was found on the clothing and/or the body of Tucker, this was solely Diane Thompson's allegation.  

 

Plus, concerning Diane Thompson's claim to Randy Engel that a late July 1978 DNA TEST at Allegheny General Hospital quickly identified semen as belonging to Anthony Cipolla:

 

I've previously stated six to eight to ten times that, in 1978, DNA test results had a waiting period of an average of 52 days ... and the testing was done at NIH labs, and NOT in hospitals.  

 

There was not the time for a DNA test result in the Cipolla Case.  Thus, claiming that there was DNA evidence in the case was an egregious lie.   

 

The Cipolla Case only lasted for 35 days.  Plus, as was admitted by former Detective Warren Bud Droz in his 2018 grand jury testimony, there was no semen in the 1978 Anthony Cipolla Case.  Detective Droz said that he had no physical evidence to present in the case, at all.  

 

They simply don't molest in that way 

 

Moreover, have you studied the accounts of molestation?  Uhhhm, there was usually much much more than just a spot of lubricant found on or near the child's private anatomical region.  You would find a lot more than a spot ... and and and, on occasion, noticeable blood.  

 

In addition, don't you think that a pedophile would insert something other than a mere finger into a child's backside, for a thrill, even though it would definitely cause the child to bleed?  

 

In my private citizen's personal opinion of Diane Thompson, as far as concerns July 1978, she stated that Cipolla inserted a finger, instead of a more private male anatomical part, because there was no blood on Tucker and no evidence that anything relatively large penetrated him.  So, she picked a much thinner body part, for her story.  And according to Allegheny General, it was just a story.

 

The bottom line ... the thesis statement ... is that Diane Thompson spent years deceiving people into believing that her July 25th, 1978 list of untested & unproven accusations which were not-yet-investigated were the official conclusions of the police.  

 

The only conclusion of one detective assigned to the case was that no 12 year child would ever lie to a police officer, so you have to believe what Frank Labiaux stated to Broz, during the brief investigation.

 

And of course, court records throughout America prove this to be a lie.  A number of preteens, aged 11, 12, and 13 lied to the police and lied in a courtroom.   

 

And of course, a few of them were coached by police to lie on record and then to lie in a courtroom.  Yes, there were youths who lied for the police.  Thus, there were youths who lied to the police with the police knowing it. 

 

Anthony Cipolla's 1978 accuser LIED about being forced to "drop the charges."

At the outset of this tutorial, regarding the Case of the man formerly known as Father Anthony Cipolla, the block of information below needed to be posted.  The need of cutting to the chase and posting this specific information is due to decades of false & defamatory newspaper reporting against Cipolla.

The defamatory reporting is mostly due to the newspaper which recently had such a low number of subscribers that it couldn't economically survive the effects of a recent strike and a recent US Supreme Court decision.  

Concerning this defamatory newspaper, it was scheduled for closure, on May 3rd, 2026.  In the past 20 years of operation, it reportedly lost $350 million in operating costs.

So, take note of the information below and absorb it into your memory bank.

        THEREFORE, Warren Bud Droz's general conclusion about 12 year old children never lying to police has been repeatedly proven FALSE.  Thus, Droz had no valid foundation upon which to believe anything that came from the mouth of Frank Labiaux, especially after he was caught being part of a decisive lie told to Randy Engel and written into her 2016 defamatory account against Cipolla.

 

The DNA LIE asserted by Randy Engel, in Renew America's publications by which both entities deserve to be sued for millions, in a defamation case. 

 

The OHIO LIE of none other than Diane You-Know-Whom 

For the record, as was previously mentioned in another post, the most recent defamation against Cipolla was the claim that people in Ohio were coming out of the proverbial woodwork, accusing him of molestation and filing lawsuits against him ... four and five years AFTER his August 2016 death, in 2020, 2021 or 2022.  

Well, in the entire history of Ohio, from the first day when the first white man walked on its terrain, all the way to August 31, 2026, not a single person in Ohio or originally from Ohio ever accused Anthony Cipolla of molestation.  This was yet another Diane Thompson LIE. 

 

All in all ... as is supported by evidentiary support ... the fact-checking of the entire Anthony Cipolla Case, which was the result of extensive work, showed that the Cipolla Case, as it was presented to the public, was one continuous string of falsehoods.  It was an absolute insult to the intelligence of any reasonable person who is even slightly familiar with American legal procedure.  

The presentation of that case was one sick joke.  Those falsehoods are addressed in sufficient detail, at the Wuerl-of-Hurt site.  Go see for yourself, line-item by line-item ... in the August & September 2026 archives. 

The 1990s, when cover-up artist, Wuerl, artificially became a star 

The 1990s newspaper narration of Diane Thompson being coerced into signing a 1978 sheet of paper in Bob Colville's office that was needed to "drop the charges" against Anthony Cipolla ... which were never filed in the first place ... shows how much of a liar she was and how much of a bunch of liars were the editors of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette.  

This also showed how much of a team of liars Wuerl & his attorneys were, in not correcting the falsehoods being reported as fact.  After all, this is the lying newspaper whose people spent over a decade very falsely calling the blatantly manipulative and even vengeful Donald Wuerl the Bishop of Zero Tolerance ... as well as the Model of Zero Tolerance.  

And of course, Wuerl displayed much tolerance toward Wolk, Zula, Pucci, Zirwas, Hoehl, Burchianti, Huff, and other priests of a criminal nature.

None the less, this is also the newspaper whose subscriber numbers were so low ... in the newspaper's unpopularity ... that management decided to close down all operations of it, by May of 2026.  Then, a non-profit organization purchased it, designating it to release publications two days a week, on Thursdays and Saturdays.

The Bob Colville Coercion Tale proved that the Thompson Clan and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette editors were clueless as to basic procedural law in the United States 

In review, for those of you who are exceptionally stubborn, exceptionally bigoted, and/or exceptionally brainwashed by either the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette or writer Randy Engel or any Wuerl-influenced entity: 

The entire narration of the August 1978 Bob Colville Coercion Tale was was a harrowing one, where Diane Thompson claims that she was brought into Bob Colville's office and was then illegally detained there ... until she signed a sheet of paper that was needed "to drop the charges" filed against Anthony Cipolla.  

Yet, as of August 28th, 1978, Cipolla had neither been put in handcuffs nor put behind county jail bars, simply because no charges were filed against him.  The entire "filing of charges" tale was a deliberate lie.  Meanwhile, the "dropping the charges" tale was a much bigger lie.

In as much,  here is a re-Reality Check for you people out there who never studied law and who are still in denial that Randy Engel, Renew America, and others LIED about the 1978 Cipolla Case ... in your belief that Colville forced Diane Thompson to "drop the charges" ... which were never filed, in the first place:

 

Very simply, no civilian anywhere in the United States has the power to "drop the charges" in any criminal case.  This included the Diane Thompson of 1978, especially concerning an Anthony Cipolla who was NOT charged for any crime in the same year of 1978.

This is because the power to drop criminal charges is reserved solely to the sovereign-governing-authority which is referred to as "the State."  This includes the federal governing authority in federal jurisdiction cases, being that the federal government is also regarded as "the State."  After all, the United States has an administrative authority called the Secretary of STATE.

Every criminal case in America begins with "The State of Such-and-Such vs defendant-of-the-case."  Even federal criminal cases begin with "the United States vs defendant-of-the-case."  

Therefore, only the court officers of the prosecuting State or the United States have the power to dismiss charges that have already been filed in the name of a prosecuting State or in the name of the United States.  

And of course, this means "dismiss the charges," "withdraw the charges," "drop the charges," and "Nolle Prosequi."  Each phrase means the same thing.  

Doubly important is the fact that, in the 35-day-long Cipolla Case of 1978, there were NO CHARGES to be dismissed in the first place, being that no charges were ever filed.

If Diane Thompson did sign something under duress in Bob Colville's office on August 28th, 1978, it was pointless, because Bob Colville would have had nowhere to have taken that sheet of paper.  It would have been a very useless sheet of paper," especially in light of the fact that Cipolla was NOT arrested in 1978, in the first place.  

Moreover, any other procedural matter concerning Anthony Cipolla would have occurred at the CLERK OF COURTS OFFICE, and not in the office of DA Bob Colville.

 

So, what did she do on August 28th ... 1978? 

Well, ladies & gentlemen, the only procedural thing that Diane Thompson could have done on Monday, August 28th, 1978 was "withdraw her private criminal complaint."

Now, a private criminal complaint is a petition to the "court of jurisdiction" to file charges.  It is NOT the act of filing charges.  

Then, there is the matter of withdrawing a private criminal complaint.  Firstly, if the DA acts upon the private criminal complaint and does file charges, then the complainant cannot file a withdrawal.  A complainant can only withdraw her criminal complaint IF neither the DA nor a presiding judge filed charges against the accused.

This is because, as soon as criminal charges are filed anywhere in the United States, the case is put solely in the hands of the prosecutor and the judge.  

No civilian anywhere on Earth can "drop the charges" against any defendant anywhere in United States jurisdiction, in criminal law. NOT even Diane Thompson could have done this in Bob Colville's office, in 1978.

Procedural Review 

As a quick lesson, if the DA's office has not yet acted on the private criminal complaint, and if the judge did not yet "issue process" and have the accused person arrested, then a private citizen can withdraw his/her complaint.  IN order to do so, the COMPLAINANT had to ...

... appear AT THE CLERK OF COURTS OFFICE in person, to get the paperwork done, and NOT in any county District Attorney's office.  This included Bob Colville's office, in 1978.  

Therefore, if you go about, claiming that Diane Thompson made an honest mistake in her claim of signing a paper that dropped Cipolla's charges, and instead, she meant to say that she signed a withdrawal of her private criminal complaint against Cipolla in Bob Colville's office, the answer is that:

It is a lie to state this, because she needed to be AT THE CLERK OF COURTS OFFICE, doing the paperwork and signing her name.  Bob Colville is part of the executive branch of government.  Filing and withdrawing criminal complaints is done with the judicial branch only.

Furthermore, Diane Thompson gave Randy Engel a narration of post-arrest activities which never occurred, such as the post-arrest prelim hearing scheduled for "Police Station #9" and two detectives with fictional names driving her to yet another prelim hearing, telling her that they hoped that she would not succumb to diocesan pressure and "drop the charges," as if a civilian dropping charges is part of daily American judicial process.

As a reminder for the stubborn, there is a decisive difference between a citizen filing a private criminal complaint and a government authority filing criminal charges.  A private citizen's complaint is NOT the filing of charges  It's a request for the government to file charges.  

Thus, if charges have not yet been filed, then a private citizen may withdraw his/her private citizen's complaint.  If charges have already been filed, then the private citizen CANNOT withdraw his/her private citizen's complaint.  If he/she could do so, it would be pointless.  The charges would still stand."

 

 

In some jurisdictions, a judge requires a probable cause hearing to be concluded first, before accepting the complainant's private  citizen's complaint and then having it filed.  The act of a judge ordering the arrest of an accused person is known as "issuing process."

 

Therefore, in such cases where a judge finds "no fair probability that any crime was committed and that the accused was likely involved," the case is dismissed without the need of any complainant signature.

 

Therefore, it's possible that, on August 28th, 1978, Diane Thompson signed nothing.  In such a case, what she would have done, therefore, was ... "defaulted" and then proverbially disappeared.  

 

 

Diane Thompson's Lie at First Sight, in this harrowing 1978 tale

 

 In legal documentation & procedural law there is no such thing as "pressing charges."  That is a colloquial phrase used for those who have no legal educational background.  Moreover, there is a difference between 1] filing a private criminal complaint and 2] filing criminal charges.  

In review, being that Americans can be really stupid when it comes to understanding legal procedure, when you file a private criminal complaint, you are asking the court to file the charges for you.  The court you are asking is the one who has jurisdiction over your case.  

It is never a matter of you filing charges.  Thus, when you file a private criminal complaint, you are not filing charges.  When you file such a complaint, charges are only "pending" and charges in your personal case may never get filed, if the Burden of Proof standard is NOT satisfied.

In a Probable Cause Hearing the Burden of Proof Standard is lower than the standard for a "full hearing based on the merits."  None the less, one requirement for a judge to approve the issuing of an indictment is that the complainant has to "show reasonable grounds that a violation has probably occurred."  

Now, according to the July 25th, 1978, Offense/Incident Report signed by Officer Mark Ninehouser, there was no evidence that Tucker Thompson, aka Thomas Thompson, was violated.  After all, the Allegheny General Hospital finding of Tucker's condition was classified as "GOOD."

No mention of bruises, blood stains, cut marks, scratch marks, red marks, semen, or anything similar.  

And of course, being that the average amount of time it took for DNA test results to be produced in 1978 was 52 days, there wasn't the time for any DNA test result to be submitted into evidence, even if there were semen found on Tucker.  This is because the 1978 Cipolla Case lasted for only 35 days. 

The O/I Report was NOT the conclusion of the police officer.  It was literally quotes of what the Thompson Clan alleged.  There was no cross-examination done at that time.  Therefore, that which was printed by the officer on the O/I Report was NOT the officer agreeing with Diane Thompson and the young "Thomas Thompson."  It was simply Officer Ninehouser stating the accusations of the Thompson household against Cipolla.  

The fact that the July 25th medical exam report marked Tucker's medical condition was GOOD, when he was supposed to have been recently molested a few hours prior, would be the reason why no police officer submitted a Police Affidavit to any magistrate and why the Allegheny County DA declined to indict Cipolla.  

Very simply, there was no evidence against Cipolla, according to the O/I Report.  There were only unproven accusations.

The rapid time between the "alleged" molestation and the calling of police made the entire accusation look like a premeditated scheme 

Another important feature of the July 25th, 1978, O/I Report is that, according to Diane Thompson and "Thomas 'Tucker' Thompson," Cipolla molested Tucker between 3:10 PM and 4:30 PM.  

Well, Diane Thompson literally called the police at 5:15 PM.  This means that she was supposedly able to "pry out of Tucker" deeply troubling concealed information within 45 minutes to 2 hours after Tucker was molested ... and within one hour after Tucker got home.

The point here is that Diane Thompson claimed that she had to extract a secret from Tucker.  Well, in past cases throughout America, it would not be for weeks or months or even years that a molestation victim would finally reveal the incidents of his molestation to an adult.  Yet, Diane Thompson claimed to have "finally" extracted deeply hidden information within one to two hours after a molestation event.  

Such a thing would have broken some kind of speed record, indeed.  But, such a rapid time span makes the entire thing look like a premeditated con game, especially shortly after Diane Thompson was denied her request to have Cipolla's parish (or the St Vincent de Paul society, through the parish) pay her monthly apartment rent.  

As the past 35 years have illustrated, accusing a priest of molestation can be a very lucrative undertaking in the United States, especially for people who need apartment rent money.   

All in all, on Monday, August 28th, 1978, Diane Thompson was not able to even to show to Judge Laffey that a violation had probably occurred on her son.  Thus, her attendance at an August Probable Cause Hearing was a certain loss for Diane Thompson.  So, she had to make up a harrowing tale of corrupt government officials and church officials sabotaging her case and forcing her to drop the charges which no civilian can drop in any criminal case in the United States, anyway.

The general rule of the private citizen's criminal complaint 

When it comes a private citizen's criminal complaint, it is never a matter of you pressing charges.  If any person in America could file criminal charges, then there would be total chaos in the court system.  Con artists and vengeful people would be filing charges to the point of overloading the legal system and causing it to be unable to operate.

When neither judge nor prosecutor approved of a private citizen's criminal complaint 

If neither a DA nor a judge approved the private criminal complaint, it used to be that the "complainant" was left to do the prosecuting, himself/herself.  But, the civilian did the prosecuting under the watchful eye of an assistant DA.  Technically, such a thing is "an oversight prosecution," with the assistant DA doing the overseeing.

And of course, it has always been a rarity for a private citizen to prosecute a case in America.  Even at that, during such rare cases the civilian prosecutor still had no power to "drop the charges" during the transpiration of the case.  Only the judge had that power.

Concerning judges and/or DA's accepting a private citizen's criminal complaint and then filing charges against the accused, during 1978,  about 10% of the criminal cases in the USA were started by a private criminal complaint ... where the DA took-over and prosecuted the whole case without the help of the private citizen complainant. 

Today, if a private citizen is denied his/her request to have criminal charges filed against the accused, then that private citizen can file in United States District Court, asking for an injunction ordering the DA to file criminal charges.  

Moreover, if a police officer submits a POLICE AFFIDAVIT, then the presiding judge can declare due cause, pursuant solely to the police affidavit, and indict the accused person(s).  In that case, no private citizen's complaint is needed.    A police affidavit is sworn testimony.

Here is the pertinent question, concerning the 1978 Cipolla Case:

Q: Which actual persons caused criminal charges to be filed against Anthony Cipolla, according to Diane Thompson's fictional tale?

ANS: According to Diane Thompson and certain writers, the filing of charges against Cipolla in 1978 ... which were never filed in the first place ... was done by "Detectives" Nehouser and Fogle.  

In reality, the detectives were the late Warren Broz who died in 2020 or so, and the late Detective Leo Marchetti who died in 2012.  They did NOT arrest Cipolla.  In fact, Broz ended up becoming a desk sergeant for a long period of time, after having been a detective.

So, process this contradiction in your mind:  

According to Diane Thompson, two guys named Nehouser and Fogle arrested Cipolla, filing criminal charges against him, in late July 1978.  Then, Diane Thompson magically had the power to drop the charges, by signing a sheet of paper in Bob Colville's office, in late August of 1978.  

If she did not do the filing of charges, then how is it that she got the power to dismiss the charges?  The answer is that her whole Colville Signing Story is a wall-to-wall lie.  Cipolla was never charged, in the first place.  The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette was either too dishonest or too incompetent to fact-check this damning story which defamed Colville as much as it defamed Cipolla.

All in all, Diane Thompson LIED.  The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette repeated her LIE.  And Randy Engel LIED, while acting as if to be a law professor, when she was nothing more than a babbling buffoon who didn't know that first thing about legal procedure. 

Of course, Engel spent a third of her defamatory 2016 article mentioning how the detectives ... which were given the wrong names by Engel ... were telling Thompson how they hoped that she would stand strong and NOT succumb to being pressured into dropping charges by the Diocese of Pittsburgh and Cipolla's lawyer.  

Well, Diane Thompson had zero authority to drop any criminal charges anywhere in the USA at any time, in 1978.  Randy Engel wrote a series of LIES, in 2016.

 Now, as far as went Diane Thompson withdrawing her private criminal complaint ... or perhaps it was a matter of Judge Laffey not permitting it to have been filed in the first place ... it would only have been because she had not met the Burden of Proof Standard to prosecute Cipolla ... and because she had no idea how to prosecute a case herself ... 

... and allegedly because she didn't want to get in trouble for allegedly filing a false police report and for allegedly lying to the police.  After all, Allegheny General Hospital found zero evidence that any kind of crime had been committed upon "Thomas Thompson," on July 25th, 1978.

None the less, perceive what the Post-Gazette and Thompson ... in the Court of Public Opinion ... were accusing the 1978 DA's office of having done. 

 

This shows that Diane Thompson & the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette personnel ... in the 1990s & in the 2010s ... were nothing but a bunch of liars thinking that Pittsburghers are stupid enough to believe anything stated by the Post-Gazette, as if it were the Infallible Voice of God.  

Well, the Post-Gazette was only the Voice of Annoyance and it was been an Insult to the Intelligence of the Reasonable Pennsylvanian.  It's grand DECLINE in subscribers in the 2010s & 2020s proves this to be so.  

Plus, the Post Gazette management was not very kind to its employees.  Due to low subscriber numbers, the Gazette could NOT afford to be kind to its employees. 

It's no wonder why the Post Gazette underwent a decline in subscriber numbers so significant that its management planned to shut down operations by May of 2026.  Then, a certain non-profit organization purchased it.  Well, that non-profit organization purchased a severe liability.  If you're going to do that, you might as well hire a reckless driver to be your personal chauffeur.

Cipolla's 1978 accuser's account of "dropping" non-existent charges, continued

This is a supplement to a previous post addressing the fact that the woman formerly known as Diane Thompson BLATANTLY LIED when having claimed that D.A. Bob Colville pressured her into dropping criminal charges in 1978 ... concerning a Father Anthony Cipolla who never had any charges filed against him, in the first place.  

The scene she narrated ... which was the scene Randy Engel described in her 2016 anti-Cipolla article ... was contrary to standard procedural law, from A to Z.  This means that none of those things happened.

The accompanying outrage in the Cipolla Case was that Donald Wuerl and his lawyers ... as well as Wuerl's de facto minister of propaganda ... neglected to inform Americans that the media's report on the Cipolla Case was filled with falsehoods, thereby leaving Americans deceived for decades.  

I was one of those deceived Americans.  Years later, however, a box of Cipolla Case documents was literally placed in front of me, for me to take, and to view the contents within it.  As a result, I learned from experience ... as well as from detailed research ... to NOT trust anything produced by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.  Period.

Above:  The  newspaper whose subscriber base was so low that its management ... after a strike & an unfavorable US Supreme Court ruling ... designated it for end-of-operations, as of May 3rd, 2026.  Then, a non-profit group purchased it and its potentially huge liability, in terms of long-term defamation.

For people who think that they are reasonably familiar with the Anthony Cipolla Case, here is your Instant Reality Check:

                             

In the 2018 grand jury testimony of a former detective who actually was assigned to the 1978 Cipolla Case, he admitted that he had absolutely ZERO EVIDENCE against Anthony Cipolla

When he gave his inclusive assessment of pre-teens in general ... during the 2018 grand jury inquest ... Droz Lied to the Public.  Youths ... including those 12 years of age ... have been caught lying to the police ... and to juries ... and to whoever else was in authority.  

In fact, there was one case in the 21st Century where THREE 12 YEAR OLD GIRLS ended up being arrested for lying to the police.  They were convicted, spent a short time in juvenile detention, and then were additionally sentenced to NINE YEARS PROBATION ... for doing something that Warren Broz said that 12 year old children never do, namely lie to police.  Technically, they started their lie at the age of 11. 

https://www.deseret.com/2004/2/11/19811582/3-girls-are-handcuffed-after-story-proves-false/

 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/when-little-girls-tell-big-lies/

Moreover, there were youths who were found to have been coached by a parent or a guardian or even corrupt police officers in their false testimonies.  

In fact, close to the year 1978 was the year when the wrongful murder conviction of Ricky Jackson and his two co-defendants transpired, based solely on the testimony of one 13 year old who lied in police documentation and who then lied in court.  He was pushed by police into keep lying.  

Ricky was originally sentenced to death, along with his two co-defendants.  Like the Cipolla Case, there was no forensic evidence in his case.  There was only a pre-teen with a string of lies.

 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/exonerated-man-meets-the-liar-who-put-him-away-for-39-years/

★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆ 

 https://exonerationregistry.org/cases/11687

★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★ 

Furthermore, Diane Thompson doubly lied, when she claimed that Cipolla was released on his own recognizance, after she falsely claimed that he was charged with a felony of indecent assault on a minor.  This is because, in addition to Cipolla never having been arrested, a defendant of indecent assault charges was usually assigned a $10,000 bail amount, in the 1970s.  There was no release on one's own recognizance for that type of charge.  

If Cipolla would have been charged with indecent assault, he would NOT have been given anything less than a $10,000 bail amount.  Thus, Diane Thompson lied yet again.

None the less, this usual bail amount shows that an indecent assault charge was taken very seriously in the 1970s, meaning that accusing someone of such a serious crime was not something to be taken lightly.  

Yet, Warren Bud Droz wanted the accusation against Cipolla to be taken very lightly, to the point of it becoming a reckless endeavor where Cipolla would be arrested, even though former Detective Warren Droz admitted, during the 2018 Pennsylvania Grand Jury Inquest, that he had NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE AGAINST CIPOLLA in 1978.    

Broz didn't have the evidence needed to file a police affidavit and get  issued a warrant for Cipolla's arrest.  Droz needed Judge Laffey to sign a warrant immediately after the scheduled August 28th Probable Cause Hearing which never transpired, because Diane Thompson walked away from the case on August 28th, 1978.  

Diane Thompson walked away from the case without ever signing anything in Bob Colville's office that would dismiss the case, being that signing anything in a D.A.'s office has zero effect on any criminal case on-any-docket, anywhere in the USA.  The Clerk of Courts Office is the place were legal filings are done.  

But, as far as goes dismissing criminal charges, that's within the power of a judge or prosecutor, and never a civilian such as Diane Thompson.  Such a thing is solely within the Power of the State and its delegated officers.  

It's a Balance-of-Power stipulation, where the DA is part of the executive branch of government, and the Clerk of Courts is part of the judicial branch of government.   

This lying-to-police thing has been done by pre-teens and has been documented as such, showing that Droz was 100% wrong in his audacious declarative statement made in 2018.  This means that, just because a pre-teen says something, it doesn't automatically make it the truth.  This definitely remains the circumstance even when the 12 year old becomes 50 years old and says the same unproven accusations before a grand jury. 

The reality is that the Pittsburgh-Post Gazette forever sticks to its 1995 lies, while Diane Thompson forever lies.  She had 250,000 motives in her defamatory story telling.  Yes, she cashed-in significantly on her very non-factual story telling, showing us how low in intelligence or how low in honesty were those at the decision-making offices of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, in the 2010s & 2020s

Wuerl's Motive

Meanwhile, Wuerl had the motive of making Cipolla his scapegoat as far back as 1988, by which the Cipolla Tale was a smokescreen & diversionary tactic behind which Wuerl hid from public view the undisputed abusive priests of his diocese.  

The more the Post-Gazette demonized Anthony Cipolla, the more the real molester priests got comfortably away from the spotlight, with the vast majority of the Public being left in the dark.  This technique even made those priests who were indicted & convicted forgotten by the public.  

It got to the point where the Post-Gazette was acting as if there were no appreciable number of sexually abusive priests under Wuerl's watch, at all.  The diocese operated by Wuerl was regarded as being relatively unscathed during the priest corruption scandal.  Then came 2018, where the Post-Gazette was found to be the liar.  Wuerl turned out to be the Model of Corruption and Cover-up.

The Public was finally taken out of the dark, in 2018.   The bishop whom the Post-Gazette called the Model of Zero Tolerance was extending a lot of tolerance to Wolk, Zula, Pucci, Zirwas, Huff, Burchianti, and Hoehl, as well as to Paone, Wellinger, and the Brother Bernard Hartman who taught at North Catholic, from 1986 to 1997, and also from 1961 to 1979. 

In addition, Wuerl was very tolerant toward Father Krawczyk after he was found guilty of manslaughter.

 

 O'Malley can be regarded as a partial cover-up, and the grievance about Wuerl letting Castelucci take a personal leave out of State was that Wuerl warned no one in Ohio about Castelucci.  In as much, Castelucci was arrested for molestation in Ohio, while on personal leave.  After his arrest, he was formally placed on administrative leave, which is much like being put in the proverbial dog house.

 

 

Being that it has been established ... since 2018 ... that Wuerl was no Model of Zero Tolerance that the Post-Gazette claimed him to be, let us review the case he used as a smokescreen to accommodate the cover-up of his actual abusive priests.  Cipolla was the one made out to be the monster, while the real monsters were nicely accommodated & concealed by Wuerl: 

 

The Post-Gazette's 31 year long lie 

 

We begin here with the claim of the woman formerly known as Diane Thompson, in her claim that the Allegheny County DA forced her to sign a sheet of paper which automatically dropped the charges against Anthony Cipolla, in August of 1978 ... which were never filed, in the first place. 

A quote from the original post  ★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★

"Very simply, no civilian anywhere in the United States has the power to "drop the charges" in any criminal case.  This included the Diane Thompson of 1978, especially concerning an Anthony Cipolla who was NOT charged for any crime in the same year of 1978.

This is because the power to drop criminal charges is reserved solely to the sovereign-governing-authority which is referred to as "the State."

Every criminal case in America begins with "The State of Such-and-Such vs defendant-of-the-case."  Even federal criminal cases begin with "the United States vs defendant-of-the-case."  

As far as goes Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Massachusetts, their criminal complaints begin with "the Commonwealth of ... vs defendant-of-the-case." 

All in all, only the court officers of the prosecuting State or the United States have the power to dismiss charges that have already been filed in the name of a prosecuting State or in the name of the United States.  Diane Thompson did NOT have this power, in 1978."  

If Diane Thompson did sign something under duress in Bob Colville's office on August 28th, 1978, then it was pointless, because Bob Colville would have had nowhere to have taken that sheet of paper.  It would have been a very useless sheet of paper.

Moreover, any other procedural matter concerning the rules of criminal procedure and Anthony Cipolla would have occurred at the CLERK OF COURTS OFFICE, and not in the office of DA Bob Colville."  Any Civil Court matter involving Cipolla would have involved paperwork done at the Prothonotary Office.

Another Important Excerpt  ★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★

Moreover, there is a decisive difference between a citizen filing a private criminal complaint and a government authority filing criminal charges.  

A private citizen's complaint is NOT the filing of charges  It's a request for the government to file charges.  Thus, if charges have not yet been filed, then a private citizen may withdraw his/her private citizen's complaint.  If charges have already been filed, then the private citizen CANNOT withdraw his/her private citizen's complaint."

"HOWEVER, in order for a "complainant" to withdraw her Private Citizen's Criminal Complaint in the 1970s, the "COMPLAINANT" had to ...

... appear AT THE CLERK OF COURTS OFFICE in person, to get the paperwork done, and NOT in any county District Attorney's office.  This included Bob Colville's office, in 1978.  

This shows that no one can say, without lying, that Diane Thompson was actually signing a withdrawal of her July 1978 Private Citizen's Criminal Complaint in Bob Colville's office, and was forced to do that.  This is because a person did NOT sign withdrawal papers in a DA's office in 1978.  A person went to the Clerk of Court's Office and did all the withdrawal paperwork there.

Let us continue: 

As far back as the 1990s, the Post-Gazette joined forces with the woman formerly known as Diane Thompson and reported that Anthony Cipolla was as guilty as sin through 1978 DNA testing.  It also reported that Cipolla was then arrested, and was then rescued by the county D.A. who forced this Diane Thompson to drop the charges.

There was no DNA evidence of any kind involved with the Anthony Cipolla Case which only lasted for 35 days.  This is because it took an average of 52 days for DNA testing to produce results, in 1978.  

The Cipolla Case only lasted from July 25 to August 28th, 1978.  Meanwhile, 52 days after July 25th is/was September 15th.  Thus, even if there had been DNA testing started on the first day of the Cipolla Case, it was not enough time for there to have been DNA test results presented to Judge Laffey, on August 28th ... or even to the DA's office prior to August 28th.

Plus, there was no mention of any presence of semen anywhere on Tucker Thompson, in the July 25th, 1978 Offense/Incident Report signed by the Officer Mark Ninehouser with whom I personally spoke at length.  

That report's medical section reported zero harm done to the young nine-year-old Tucker whose name appears on the report as "Thomas Thompson."  It was therefore officially reported that there existed no medical evidence that any crime had been committed against Tucker, on July 25th, 1978.  Period.

The supportive facts of a flagrantly misrepresented case

Always remember that the Cipolla case is what rocketed Donald Wuerl to his undeserved stardom.  It was a case presented by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette as nothing more than an outlay of falsehoods that Donald Wuerl let go uncorrected.  Thus, Wuerl rose to power & influence through LIES that he let stay intact.

The problem is that this entire story is an easily provable lie.  Firstly, in 1978, there were no "Detectives Nehouser & Fogle."  Now, there was a Mark NINEHOUSER who was an uniformed officer, and I did speak with him at length.  He was the one who went to the Thompson domicile and jotted down Diane Thompson's and Tucker Thompson's "allegations."  Mark jotted-down their side of the story, without judging it, without challenging, without agreeing to it, without cross-examining Tucker and/or his mom.

 

Moreover, I located Mark through the Pittsburgh Steeler organization.  None the less, Mark Ninehouser clearly made it known to me that neither he nor his patrol partner ever arrested Anthony Cipolla, at any time, in any way, and in any how.    

 

Unlike the many other internet voices who wrote on this case, I got my info from the DIRECT SOURCE; a living human being who was there, on July 25th, 1978.  In fact, I was surprised as to how polite, clear, articulate, and well-mannered Mark was, in his conversation with me.

                        As a reminder for those short of memory: 

 

Moreover, as is proven by referring to the July 25th, 1978 O/I Report, Allegheny General Hospital did NOT mention the presence of semen on Tucker Thompson or on his clothing or on his property.  All that was mentioned was that Tucker's medical condition was "GOOD."  That professional medical assessment, alone, exonerates Cipolla, at least in the case of the nine-year-old Tucker.  

1] Concerning Diane Thompson's DNA claim of Allegheny General Hospital's lab identifying incriminating evidence against Cipolla in a very short period of time:

2a] Below is posted more confirmation that there actually was NO MENTION of semen being found on Tucker in the July 25th, 1978 Offense/Incidence Report.  Now, on the O/I Report, Tucker is referred to as Thomas Thompson, and the only statement from Allegheny General Hospital which was recorded in the July 25th O/I Report was that "Thomas Thompson's" medical condition was GOOD.  This exonerates Cipolla.  Period.

2b] There were two blank spaces after the word, GOOD.  If an injury or abnormality or evidence of criminal conduct had been found, then it would have been stated sufficiently enough in that blank space.

Above is the top part ... about a third of ... the one-page July 25th, 1978 Offense/Incident Report, signed by Officer Mark Ninehouser with whom I personally spoke at length.

Look at the bottom line, right-hand side of the photo above.  The 9 year old Thomas Thompson's medical condition was GOOD.  Below that line are two lines reserved for medical exam comments.  There were no medical exam notes made on those two lines, meaning that it was a very unremarkable exam with no injuries or abnormalities found.  This means that there was found by the licensed & board-certified examiner:

1] NO BLEEDING,  2] NO BRUISES,  3] NO SCRAPES,  4] NO LACERATIONS,  5] NO SEMEN,  6] NO RECTAL OR GENITAL ABNORMALITIES,  7] NO TORN LIGAMENTS,   8] BROKEN BONES,   9] NO VASELINE or other lubricant on or near the rectal area ... and as time proceeded,  10] NO EVIDENCE OF ANY STD.  

This means that there was NO EVIDENCE that any crime had been committed on July 25th, 1978 against Tucker Thompson, in the first place.  

Tucker said it happened only twice, in all the time narrated by Randy Engel in her defamatory 2016 article which suggested that Cipolla sexually imposed himself on the young Tucker for four, seven, or fourteen consecutive months. 

Even at that, Tucker claimed that he was molested only TWICE by Cipolla ... ever; once near the July 4th holiday season in 1978 and once on September 25, 1978, shortly after Diane Thompson's request for apartment rent money from & through Anthony Cipolla's parish was denied.

More specifically, Diane Thompson first asked Cipolla if he could get the ST VINCENT DE PAUL SOCIETY to donate the rent money on a monthly basis.  Then came the speech from Cipolla's superior mentioning how the parish was not a charity organization.  

Now, the St Vincent de Paul Society was a charity organization.  But, its currency came from "current donations" in the 1970s, as opposed to endowment accounts and retained dollars.  

In the 1970s, there was a decline in the Faith, and people were not as charity-minded to religion as much as to sociological justice groups and political organizations, as well as fundraising drives for specific terminally ill neighbors and youth sports organizations.  

Also in the late 1970s, there was a priest shortage.  In fact, the common American assumption was that interest in Catholicism would dwindle down to virtually nothing by the Year 2000 or maybe 2010.

Moreover, in the general history of the Catholic Church, its predominant wealth comprised =====> real estate ... land holdings ... more than currency.  Simultaneously came invaluable art, such as that which the Byzantine Empire produced.  Its art was literally made of gold, from time to time.  

Plus, castle interiors were lined with artistic tapestries.  They were basically a layer of insulation, literally.  And let us not forget about the Italian Renaissance's contribution to the world of art.  European museums surely haven't.  Include mosaic art in the Catholic World, also.

2c] Concerning the July 1978 timeline, why didn't Diane Thompson have the wisdom "to drag out of Tucker" the deep, dark secret of the alleged July 4th holiday season molestation, as quickly as she did on July 25th?  

ANS:  The only answer would be that she ALLEGEDLY lied to police on July 25th, ALLEGEDLY desperate over the fact that Cipolla told her that his parish ... or the St Vincent de Paul Society ... could not afford to pay her apartment rent. 

Randy Engel came up with a backward conclusion; a conclusion in reverse 

Concerning Randy Engel's claim that Cipolla hunted down the two lads, for a time of "grooming," Diane Thompson ALLEGEDLY approached Cipolla and his pastor first.  It was NOT visa-versa.  

She was undoubtedly "hard-up for money" and she gravitated toward the parish where Cipolla was stationed.  She was looking for charity dollars.  Moreover, she ALLEGEDLY sought to be spared of the destiny of being a single white mom living in the projects, under a HUD voucher.

Concerning Diane Thompson asking Cipolla to get his pastor to have the St Vincent de Paul Society pay her monthly apartment rent, below is a very important note:

Keep in mind that Cipolla did confer Diane Thompson's request for rent money with his parish pastor.  Cipolla would have instantly known that Diane Thompson was soon to be evicted from her apartment, after a 60 to 90 day eviction process.  

This meant that, IF Cipolla wanted to molest Frank Labiaux and Tucker Thompson on a long-term basis ...  with "free rein" ... then Cipolla would have gone out of his way to make sure that Diane Thompson's rent would have gotten paid monthly.

Cipolla did NOT do that.  Cipolla showed that he was more than willing to let Diane Thompson, Tucker Thompson, and Frank Labiaux go far far away from him, to another domicile.

In as much, the fact that Cipolla did NOT go out of his way to make sure that Labiaux and Tucker would continue living nearby him shows that Cipolla WAS NOT grooming the two youths for long-term sexual abuse, as Randy Engel claimed.  

Concerning the 2018 PA Grand Jury Inquest

Keep in mind that, during the 2018 Pennsylvania Grand Jury Inquest ...

... when archive files could easily be accessed by a PA constable with a search warrant ... and when previously hidden accusers could come forth and be heard on record ... 

... there were ZERO hidden files on Cipolla found and/or presented, and there were ZERO new faces who came forth to accuse Cipolla as having molested them in the past.

Plus, it's equally important to keep in mind that a detective of the 1978 Cipolla Case testified in 2018 that the only reason why he believed everything Frank Labiaux told him in 1978 was because he believed that no 12-year-old youth would ever lie to a police officer.  In as much:

Next comes a response to Warren Bud Broz commenting on the moment four men in suits showed-up near the August 28th, 1978, courtroom of Judge Laffey.  Broz said, "I knew the fix was in."

 

If Broz were so sure that 12-yr-old Frank Labiaux was telling the truth about Cipolla, then why was Broz incapable of producing evidence and then composing a Police Affidavit that would have gotten Cipolla indicted with a judge's warrant long before an August 28th Probable Cause Hearing arrived on the calendar?

 

Was it because Broz was lazy?  Was it because Broz was incompetent?  Was Broz already burnt-out in his police work?  Or is it that there wasn't any evidence to support Labiaux's claims, in the first place?

 

One more thing:  The fact the Broz did NOT recognize those four suited men in the August 28th hallway shows that none of them were from the D.A.'s department.  Thus, the concept of the DA bullying Diane Thompson into submission was a liar's theatrics.  

 

Those four unidentified men had to have come from the Diocese of Pittsburgh, and you can be assured that at least one of them was empowered to handover $10,000 worth of bail money ASAP, as well as being there to plead for a night court arraignment, if circumstances got to that point.  You can think of them as the Just-in-case Men, and you can regard the bail money manager as the Extractor.

 

There's a difference 

 

Also keep in mind that the July 25th Offense/Incident Report was NOT a Police Report and it was NOT a Police Affidavit.  It's center contents simply contained Diane Thompson's & young Thomas Thompson's accusations with no commentary from police.

 

These were accusations which still needed to be proven as true in a court of law.  The accusations in the July 25th O/I Report did NOT involve any police acceptance of the accusations.  It did NOT involve police concurring with the accusations.  It did NOT involve the police acknowledging the accusations as being true.  It was simply Diane Thompson's accusations, and therefore, it was merely the starting point of the case ... and NOT the conclusion of any police investigation. 

 

That particular O/I Report showed that the Thompson Household's accusations did NOT concur with the Allegheny Hospital medical exam of young Tucker, aka the nine-year-old Thomas.  The medical exam showed that there was no evidence of any physical crime or any physical intrusion upon the young nine-year-old Thompson child who was claimed to have been molested only a few hours previously.

 

The O/I Report additionally stated that Tucker, aka Thomas, claimed that he was only molested twice by Cipolla.  Meanwhile, a number of "journalists" or "propagandists" insinuated that Cipolla was molesting Tucker for consecutive months.

 

Also concerning the Anthony Cipolla Case of 1978

 

In addition, the burden of proof requirement was not met in Frank Labiaux's accusations, to ensue a warrant for Cipolla's arrest.  So, Detective Droz compensated, talking about the "fix being in," as an excuse as to why he failed to obtain a warrant of Cipolla's arrest ... or an indictment of Cipolla from the D.A.'s office ... or the convocation of a grand jury.

 

Bendig was not credible, as two county DA offices declined to indict Cipolla 

 

As far as goes Tim Bendig, he is a repeatedly ALLEGED LIAR.  I personally witnessed his lying, myself.  Even his baseline accusation against Cipolla erased his credibility.  This is because Cipolla was not stationed at St Canice after December 1983, meaning that he wasn't there, in Knoxville, to molest Bendig, in 1984, 1985, or 1986.  

 

Plus, my former neighbor, John Conte, along with his law firm, lined-up dozens of character witnesses for Cipolla, concerning the 1993 Bendig lawsuit trial which never happened, due to an out-of-court settlement that Bendig quickly squandered.  

 

Plus, Bendig was NOT given $800,000.  That $800,000 settlement was for brothers victimized by Wolk, Zula, and Pucci.  The report on Bendig was that it was somewhere between 200,000 and $250,000. 

 

For the sake of comparison, the sexual abuse victim known as Victim #1 in the 2018 Pennsylvania Grand Jury Report received an out-of-court-settlement of $60,000.  His aggressor was allegedly Fr Castelucci, a priest who got arrested for molestation in Ohio, while on a personal leave from Wuerl's Diocese of Pittsburgh.

  

The $45 entrance fee lie of none other than Diane Thompson

 

By the way, Diane Thompson LIED YET AGAIN, when she claimed that she had to pay a $45 entrance fee, for Frank to go to Michigan and visit the P.I.M.E grounds there.  She also mentioned a Henry Ford museum visit type of a thing.  

 

In reality, it was all for free, because the purpose of P.I.M.E. holding those weekend visits was to inspire youths to pursue a priesthood vocation.  Those were literally Priest Recruiting Youth Camps. 

 

  

BTW, some of the character witnesses of the Bendig lawsuit trial were witnesses only because they were taken to Michigan too, and each one of them said that Cipolla did nothing to them there ... or anywhere.  They also said that they saw no monkey business being performed by Cipolla on anyone there, including Tim Bendig, the reputed liar who lied to me personally four times in a row.  

 

Of course, Frank Labiaux claimed that Cipolla molested him in Michigan.  A cross-examination of Labiaux's accusations, done in the Court of Public Opinion, is necessary, for the sake of Truth & Justice.

 

This post is basically an introductory tutorial, being that Americans know very little about American law.  This includes people out there, such as Randy Engel, who present themselves as experts in legal procedure, when they are babbling buffoons who don't know the first thing about it.  The original article which inspired this tutorial can be found by clicking here:

 

https://www.donaldwuerl.com/2026/09/clerk-of-courts-at-your-service.html