Below, toward the end of this post, is a letter Anthony Cipolla sent to me.
After I read it, I called him and asked him if I could post it for public view.
And of course, public view for my sites span from Asia to Russia to the
Ukraine to the United Arab Emirates to Western Europe to English speak-
ing America to Canada to Australia. The bottom line here is that, when
Cipolla sent me that letter, he assumed that I would be the only one to
ever read it.
For the record, if I pledge my confidentiality you to, it's a law to me. Proof
is simple: Name one of my sources. If you can do so, then you hacked into
my life. None the less, a lot of writers keep confidentiality. It isn't hard to
NOW ... In light of the 2018 Pennsylvania Grand Jury Report, it was found
that there were TWO DIFFERENT STORIES attached to the Cipolla Case.
One story was the one promoted by the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, conspiracy
theory writer Randy Engel, and the 1978 accusing mother herself.
The other story was that which sat in the Pittsburgh diocesan files and which
was regarded as the credible story by the grand jury.
The grand story was far more tame and credible that the overly ridiculous
Post Gazette & Randy Engel story of an ARREST which NEVER happened,
followed by a harrowing post-arrest retaliation which never happened, either.
The fictional version of the Cipolla Case mentioned tires getting slit and win-
dows being smashed. Then came Randy Engel's play-by-play account of the
arrest and prosecution which never happened. Everything that Engel claimed
happened is 100% contrary to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure.
She even wrote of DA Bob Colville strong-arming the 1978 accusing mom
into signing a sheet of paper which "drops charges." Of course, once charges
are filed in American, no civilian can dismiss them. And and and, when you
are indicted, you are NOT sent to Police Station #1, 2,3, or 4 for any kind of
bail hearing and/or arraignment. You are sent to COUNTY JAIL, and then to
a county magistrate's office. The Engel Article was a fiction that hid from the
true Cipolla Case. The true Cipolla Case was only one determining question
attached to it.
All in all, the public account of the Cipolla Case was hyper-exaggerated and
hysterically sensationalized to the point of it being libel to DA Bob Colvile
and any friend Cipolla had in 1978. Donald Wuerl had the moral obligation
to notify the Pittsburgh Post Gazette that the Cipolla Case was being present-
ed in a ridiculously gluttonous form of Tabloid Journalism. But of course,
that excessively dramatic story made Wuerl look like a holy holy hero who
speared a diabolical camp of monsters. So, Wuerl let you be deceived into
thinking that he was the most heroic man on the planet, when he was being
a hypocritical snake.
All in all, the version of the Cipolla Case, as was told from 1995 to 2016,
was a hyper-sensationalistic fiction. In 2018 version is the more sane and
credible version, coming from the diocesan secret archives. Concerning
the archives, there was the inclusion of a report mentioning the existence
of a lubricant on a young lad's undergarment.
Well, the 1995 to 2016 version of the Cipolla Case claimed that the 1978
accusing mother was strong-armed into signing a sheet of paper that was
going to expunge the Cipolla Case. Well, the 2018 PA grand jury finding
was that the 1978 Cipolla Case was NOT expunged. This is another in-
stance where the narration given by the accusing mother of 1978 was a
complete lie, as such a narration was given to the public. This involves
only Version I of the Cipolla Case narration which ran from 195 to 2016.
In re: The 2018 PA grand jury version of the case.
It described the predictable and stereotypical way a diocese at the time
handled sexual aggression accusations. No slit tires. No smashed win-
dows, etc. Rather, it described the typical snakejob, headlined by the
prsence of lawyers. The real Cipolla Case was a dime-a-dozen lawyer
intervention case. Such a thing, absent of ridiculous Bruce Willis mo-
vie plots, and absent of Tom Cruz adventure movie plots, is what gives
a narration its credibility.
What you must understand about abuse victims is this:
As was confided to me but a certain clergy sexual aggression victim is
that that which tears into & torments a victim's mind is the Subtle &
Pernicious Invisibility of the sexual aggression, so deceptively handled
that the case is made to look as if the sexual aggression never happened.
It's the feeling a absence --- the Whitewashed Wall --- the removal of
all of the stage scenery --- and the complete silence which tortures the
sexual aggression victim. It's not slit tires and smashed windows which
does it. It's the Alfred Hitchcock movie feeling that does. The proverbial
room get emptied-out and whitewashed, as if nothing ever happened in
that proverbial room that tortures a person. It's the No-Accountability
aspect that tortures the victim. THEREFORE, the silent, smooth-talk-
ing and silently intimidating presence of the lawyers which is far far
far more of a nightmare scenario than slit tires and smashed windows.
One more quick point: I have enumerated this 2018 version of the Ci-
polla Case in an August 2018 post. For now, simply understand that the
entire case pivots on one piece of evidence:
a medical report mentioning the existence of a lubricant
found on the nine year old child's undergarment. It was
a report that the writer, Randy Engle, stated no longer
existed. The bottom line is this:
If you can prove that the 1978 accusing mother did NOT plant
that lubricant in her son's shorts, in order to fame Cipolla, then
the case is closed. Remember, it's the subtle things that make
or break a case. For example:
If the accusing mother of 1978 had been honest from the beginning, and if
she said that, in 1978, properly attired lawyers sat her down and convinced
her into withdrawing her 1978 private criminal complaint, then the alarms
and rotating lights would have been ringing in my mind, with me thinking
to myself, "Those (censored)!" That was undue influence.
The subtle & plain things give credibility, NOT a ridiculously harrowing
scene from Starwars, Bruce Willis movies, or Tom Cruz movies. Simpli-
city brings clarity and at least a significant measure of credibility, if it can
not bring a closed case. The Cipolla Case of 2018 is entirely different than
the pathetically ridiculous Cipolla Case Narration of 1995 to 2016.
Back to the original part of the September 2015 post on the Cipolla Letter.
We start with the editor's preliminary statement,
and then move to Anthony Cipolla's statement:
Take note of the fact that I have called Tim Bendig a liar, yet he never sued me.
This is pertinent to note, being that Bendig is known to yell "I'll sue" and "I'll
ruin you," as a reflex action. For example, a writer for a northeastern metro
newspaper recently contacted me and conveyed the following:
I just had a bizarre interaction with Tim Bendig and found your
For those unfamiliar, Tim Bendig is the seminary dropout who accused a man
once known as Father Anthony Cipolla of having engaged in long-term sex
abuse that Bendig could never corroborate or even plausibly substantiate.
He made the accusations only after Cipolla told members of the Padre Pio Pray-
er Group to stop sending Bendig donation money, on account of his withdrawal
from the seminary. Donald Wuerl originally declared Bendig "not credible."
Bendig was found to be a chronic liar, due to the number of people who kept
contacting me and telling me how he lied to them and threatened to 'ruin them.'
The allegations of Bendig's con artist conduct came from as far away as Holly-
wood. Then, Bendig was given my phone number and he contacted me, only
to lie to me about something that pertained to documentation that I had in pos-
session. Everything he said was contrary to the documentary evidence that
I possessed. It involved the following piece of evidence which was a notice
given by the Beaver County PA district attorney's office that there were NO
GROUNDS upon which to file any kind of criminal charge against Cipolla.
One more thing: Tim Bendig proved that he was more than willing to de-
stroy a human life, concerning someone who turned out to be completely
innocent as accused --- with Jpeg evidence and fact-checking results to
prove said innocence. That is to say, if Cipolla did molest anyone, then
it was NOT the way described by Bendig or Diane Thompson or certain
Pittsburgh Post Gazette writers. If you have evidence of Cipolla having
been a molester, I'll post it for you. Thus far, there was only one source
who made me wary of Cipolla until further fact-checking was done.
Even at that, that which is needed is for the two sons of Diane Thompson
to come forth and make formal statements, stating if whether or not they
accuse Anthony Cipolla of molestation or did their mom fabricate the en-
It is very bizarre that "the mommy" was the only one ever to speak on the
1978 accusations against Cipolla. Usually, a chief of police or detective or
prosecutor makes a public statement in outlining the crimes alleged to have
occurred. Decades after the fact, someone writes memories on the case.
In fact, in all this time, Bendig's replacement attorney, Douglas Yauger, never
chastised me or came forth to defend Diane Thompson. Donald Wuerl did not
do so, either. Neither did one of Wuerl's two principle pit-bull attack dogs. No
one involved in the Bendig Case or 1978 accusations ever came forth to defend
Diane Thompson and corroborate her damning accusations against the deceased
Anthony Cipolla who was tortured by Diane Thompson during the final year of
his life. How would you like it if you never got a moment of peace from a brawl-
ing hag who was fact-checked and found to be a pathological liar.
Again, if Cipolla ever molested anyone, it was not according to the accusations
of Diane Thompson who contradicted herself repeatedly and the Tim Bendig
who was declared NOT credible by Donald Wuerl.
|Above are very important words that Ann Rodgers left out of her news articles about Cipolla.|
after the memory of what Wuerl did to him rocketed though his mind like a
late night movie. I asked his permission to publicly post it, incidentally, and
received the permission. So, don't think that I'm betraying any confidentiality.
In regards to my case, Wuerl persecuted me to the ultimate degree. He went
to the Office of the Clergy; the very office where he worked as secretary to the
late John Cardinal Wright who was the Prefect of the Office of the Clergy.
Wuerl was covering up for Wright who was a homosexual and an ephebophile.
10 years was an embarrassment to him. So, he was determined to use me as
an example that, if any priest would try to go to the Office of the Clergy and
accuse Wuerl of anything, the priest wouldn't get too far.
As a matter of fact, the Office of the Clergy went in favor of Wuerl. So, I lost
vice of my canon lawyer, I reported Wuerl to the Signatura and won the case.
But, Wuerl publicly said that he had factual information about me (not yet
revealed) and that he would have the decision of the Signatura reversed.
I had already sent everything to the Signatura, including Diane Thompson’s
Therefore, no one knew what new facts he could possibly have had. If he
had anything, he certainly had enough time to submit it to the Signatura,
while the case was being investigated. In fact, Count Neri Capponi who
worked for the Signatura said that Wuerl had nothing, but 'old wives tales.'
To the shock of everyone involved, Wuerl did have the decision reversed.
So, I was in Limbo.
It is strongly believed that Wuerl has his protectors in the Vatican and can
St. John Vianney, home for retired priests, and then withdrew my salary
and later my health insurance.
I had no money to live on, to pay medical bills with, and to afford various
my income tax returns from 1991 to 1996, so he could set up a task force to
decide on how much money I should receive. I phoned my CPA who was
shocked at Wuerl's behavior, in the way he was treating me, because I was
never arrested, never arraigned, never tried or convicted, as the other priests.
So why was Wuerl going after me so viciously?
One lawyer phoned me from another state, telling me that he left the Church
though I tried to convince him (the attorney) that Wuerl is not the Church and
that I strongly believed that Wuerl was highly influenced by the Devil.
I had to find another canon lawyer to at least get my money back, so that I
could live and at least sustain myself. So, I phoned the Canon Law Society
exorcist from Madison, Wisconsin. Father Kunz told me that what Wuerl
was doing to me was against Canon Law and to not worry; that he would
get my money back. This was 1996. On March 4, 1993, Father Kunz was
murdered in cold blood, in his rectory.
I talked with Father two days before he was murdered. A priest friend
phoned me on my answering machine that I remotely accessed, saying:
"Father Cipolla, I have some very bad news, your canon lawyer,
Father Kunz was murdered last night in his rectory. I am very
sorry to tell you this and I feel very bad and I hope to God that
they catch the person or persons who did this and that they will
I just burst into tears and couldn't stop crying or attempt to drive my car.