February 28, 2024

Wuerl's Decisive Factor in His Signatura Reversal over Cipolla: An Archbishop Zenon Grocholewski who, as policy, sided with a bishop over the bishop's subordinate priest.

The decisive factor in Wuerl's
"amazing" Vatican Signatura
reversal wasn't amazing.  No
new evidence was known to
have been in the brief case(s)
Wuerl was said to have taken
to Rome.  The only major fac-
tual inaccuracy was that the
founder of St Luke's Institute
had died, and that Saint Luke's
reformed its diagnosis policy.
For those of you unfamiliar, Donald Wuerl was tooted as a bishop who fought
the Vatican "to remove a molester priest."  Stop there.  There was NEVER any
evidence or credible witness accounts that the priest ever molested anyone.  The
woman who accused him of molesting her son one time decades ago was caught
lying about it, via fact checking.  After all, she claimed that the priest was arrest-
ed.  However, the priest was never arrested anywhere at any time for anything.

In addition, the Tim Bendig who claimed that the priest molested him for six con-
secutive years is a known liar who even lied to me and threatened to destroy my
life, followed by him begging me to interview him, even to the point of promis-
ing to let me see his lawsuit's deposition which was already located prior to him
turning into a begging coward.  Something that Bendig wrote to me was entirely
contrary to the modus operandi of a true molester.  Therefore, Bendig's own words
weakened his case completely.

The accused priest, an Anthony Cipolla, was found to have a  history contrary to
any molester and any homosexual.  Ironically, we found that the effeminate Don-
ald Wuerl had an extreme nexus to the Sodomite world.  In as much, Wuerl had
motive to use Cipolla as a smoke screen, being that District Attorney John Pettit
already accused Wuerl and his diocesan administrators as impeding the criminal
investigation of three priests Wuerl covered, none of whom was Anthony Cipolla.

Wuerl also had motive to cover the accusations leveled against his former boss,
John Cardinal Wright.  Now, Wright was directly accused by an individual who
claimed to have been paid $20 per Sodomy session, in regular intervals.  Wuerl
never reported Wright to any authority.  Thus, Wuerl was either complicit or
clueless.  If he were complicit, he was engaged in criminal conduct.  If he were
clueless, then it shows him to be a terrible leader who should never have been
ordained a bishop in the first place.  Ironically, the male present nicknamed
Wuerl the Girl only rose in power because of his nexus to John Wright, an
accused sex criminal.

The big mystery about the Vatican rehearing was claim of  "the major factual
inaccuracies."  The "inaccuracies" were never revealed to the public.  Well,
after three years of occasional research, the answer would be eventually be
found.  It's mentioned below.  None the less . . .

The reversal that Wuerl won didn't have anything to do with anything Wuerl
said at the hearing where Cipolla was absent.  That is to say that Wuerl was
NOT known to have performed any great oration at the hearing which ended
up changing the hearts of any Vatican officials.  If Wuerl did so, his speech
would have been published in all of the Pittsburgh newspapers and on a few
Pittsburgh walls, as well.  Instead, after Wuerl won his reversal, the front
cover of a major Pittsburgh newspaper had a full length photo of Cipolla.
This was because they had NO words with which to fill in the space.

In conclusion, there are was no indication that Wuerl used any evidence oth-
er than that which was used in the first round.  All that he was able to do was
state that the diagnose of Anthony Cipolla, by St. Luke's Institute, was not
done under the management of an out-of-the-closet homosexual who advo-
cated pansexualism.  That same diagnosis could now be applied to the new-
ly acquired definition of psychic defect.

Keep in mind that the Signatura ordered to be given the definition of that one
phrase.  Then, after Wuerl won his reversal, he presented the case in a very
false light.  All that Wuerl claimed at the Signatura was that Cipolla was sad
and might kill himself.  If you have evidence to the contrary, then send it now.
If you know the aforesaid to be true, then confirm so.

The deciding factor in Wuerl's reversal had nothing to do with the secret brief
cases mentioned by Pgh Post Gazette writer Ann Rodgers who would soon be
caught lying to the public in print.  The deciding factor of Wuerl's "rehearing"
was allegedly Polish.  It was human.  It was alive.  It was allegedly an arch-
bishop on the Signatura's panel who, as a matter of policy, believed in siding
with bishops over their subordinate priests.  The deciding factor in the Wuerl
reversal was named Zenon Grocholewski.

Concerning the only "major factual inaccuracy"
found in the Cipolla case, it goes as follows:

Firstly, Wuerl's only evidence against Cipolla was the diagnosis of a St Luke's
Institute in Maryland.  It's doctor(s) who assessed Cipolla simply stated that Ci-
polla suffered from Depressin & Suicidal Tendencies.  In as much, the Vatican
Signatura, in the first hearing, judged that the diagnosis given  to Cipolla was
invalid.  It's reasoning was that a place operated by an out-of-the-closet homo-
sexual who advocated pansexualism did not have valid diagnoses.

The Vatican Signatura's ruling was written in 1993.  Well, the founder of Saint
Luke's Institute died of AIDS in 1987.  Thus, in 1993, St. Luke's was no longer
being operated by an out-of-the-closet homosexual who advocated pansexual-
ism.  Therefore, the time line enabled a person to reconsideration if whether the
assessment of Saint Luke's was valid or not.

The aforementioned is the ONLY major factual inaccuracy found in four years
of co-research.  In as much, if media hog, Donald Wuerl, had any damning evi-
dence against Cipolla, you can be reasonably assured that Wuerl would have
had the evidence published in the newspapers & aired on Television,  All that
was published in the newspapers were a number of falsehoods and sleight of
hand deceptions which made Cipolla look like the monster that he was never
proven to be.  In fact, the newspaper testimony of the 1978 accuser was easy
to prove false.  The problem was that no one did any fact checking for years.

Plus, it had long since been concluded that 1988 accuser, Tim Bendig, was a
perpetual liar who might have plagiarized the 1978 accusation which has zero
evidence or witnesses to support it.  In fact, Bendig's lawsuit was so weak that
his attorney had to use the 1978 case in very exaggerated and fraudulent terms.

The 1978 case was presented in a false light.  Rather, in the early 1970s Cipol-
la was given plaques of appreciation for his services in two youth groups, and
no one in those groups ever accused him of any ill conduct.

Keep in mind that the media deceptively made it sound as if Cipolla were an
out-of-control monster in need of long-term psychiatric care, in that no one
from the Pittsburgh media stated that Cipolla's diagnosis was merely Depres-
sion and Suicidal Tendencies.  Well, the second psychiatric institute to assess
Anthony Cipolla's mental health said that he had no such Suicidal Tendencies
and that being sad on account of having your reputation destroyed is a normal
reaction.  St. Michael's of NY, the second institute, gave Cipolla a clean bill
of health.

February 27, 2024

The 2016 Randy Engel Article: Fact-checked falsehoods w/ contradictions of previous testimony

Pittsburgh:  Where Wuerl severely abused his position.
NOTE:  The PA Grand Jury report on Anthony Cipolla is much different than
the hyper-exaggerated versions of 1995, 2015, and 2016.  The Randy Engel
version is a showcase in out-of-touch-with-reality conspiracy theories.  It
was beyond pathetic.  In as much, it's the tamed versions of a priest cover-
up which has credibility, being that the church was dealt in pernicious &
subtle pea-and-shell game approaches in sexual aggression cases.  She
should have simply waited for the 2018 PA Grand Jury Report to have
come, and if she thinks that her overly-sensationalistic version is like
the PA Grand Jury Report, then the aged women is psychotic.  Her
version is a pathetic embarrassment to any writer who seeks reality.

Thesis Statement:

The November 2016 article of Randy Engel proved how much of a liar is Di-
ane Thompson, because the allegations of Diane Thompson stated in Randy
Engel's article contradicts the October 13, 1995 article that quoted Thompson
on two pages of newspaper print.

Whether Cipolla committed molestation or not, Diane Thompson IS a liar, and
I concur with famed journalist Jason Berry, of Maciel Fame, on this case.  Mr.
Berry stated that the Cipolla Case was a "peculiar one from the start."  My ex-
act quote on the case was that:

If Cipolla did molest and then harass anyone, it was not the way Diane Thomp-
son narrated it.  I also said:  This is the one case where you can't believe any-
one who was there in 1978, with any degree of confidence.
I was alerted to the existence of a November 2016 article by Randy Engel
where within she claimed to have interviewed one of Diane Thompson's
two sons.  It would sound like a trustworthy article consisting of true alle-
gThompson's past accusations, and it contained new allegations which were
fact-checked and proven false.  The allegations of criminal procedure do
NOT correlate with the actual Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure.

In order to cut to the chase and give examples of the falsehoods which appear
in the November 2016 Engel article, it was alleged by Diane Thompson that
she had to pay a $45 admission fee, in order for her eldest son, Frank, to go
to the Michigan summer camp that was held on the seminary grounds of the
Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions.  She made herself out to be the har-
rowed and heavily burdened martyr who had to sacrifice greatly, to pay the
$45 admittance fee.

NEWSFLASH:  I am in contact with a family who has two sons who were 
in Cipolla's company very often.  One of the two gentlemen attended the 
exact same Michigan seminary summer camp as did Diane Thompson's
eldest son, though in a different year.  This particular youth traveled to
Michigan with the Tim Bendig who claimed to have been molested by Ci-
polla for consecutive years.   According to that gentlemen and his mom,  
they did NOT have to pay any $45 fee.  Diane Thompson lied yet again.

Furthermore, the gentleman said that NOTHING suspicious between
Cipolla and Bendig was ever observed by him.  However, he did say,
"Tim was weird.   Really weird."  Furthermore, he stated that Cipolla
never tried anything on him.  He is in the approximate, though general,
age range as is Frank Labieaux, the son whom Thompson claims was
molested by Cipolla in Michigan.

At this point, it is important for the reader to know of the existence of the long
Pittsburgh Post Gazette which quotes Diane Thompson's damning allegations
against Anthony Cipolla and then-Bishop Vincent Leonard, all the while keep-
ing Thompson's name anonymously held in confidence.  It appeared in the

Pages A-16 and A-17, as well as the front page.

As an example of how the Engel article contradicts the allegations of Diane
Thompson in the October 13, 1995 Pittsburgh Post Gazette article that at-
tacks Cipolla's character to the depths:

IN the October 1995 Pittsburgh Post Gazette article, Thompson stated that
she had TWO daughters in a "first marriage" and TWO sons in a "second
marriage."  IN the Nov 2016 Engel article, Thompson claimed to have three
sons and one daughter, and that Tucker Thompson and Frank Labieaux 
had different dads.  According to her in 1995, Frank and tucker had the 
same dad.

The fact is the she did have three sons, and one of the three's 2009 obituary 
can be readily found online.  Nothing about his death is mentioned.  In as much,
Thompson lied to the Pittsburgh Press on that allegation.

As another example, the Engel article alleged that Cipolla was taken into police
custody, thereby being officially arrested.  The Engel article then stated that the
same Anthony Cipolla was released on his own "cognizance," and was told to
reappear for his arraignment.  Stop there.  This is the writing of someone who
does not know the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Firstly, a person is only released on his own recognizance by a judge at the
person's arraignment.  The arraignment is simply the bail hearing where it's 
surmised if the defendant is 1} a flight risk, 2} a danger, 3} no physical
threat, etc.  The defendant is also checked if he/she has to automatically
be placed on "detainer."  For example, if the defendant was arrested 
while being on parole, that person gets an automatic detainer.  If that 
is the case, then the defendant is denied bail.

When you are officially arrested, you are held overnight, and then sent to 
your arraignment pronto.   You don't go home and wait for arraignment, 
BECAUSE the arraignment is the official assessment that sees if you get
to go home, in the first place.

The Engel article also stated that detectives from Police Station #9 were sent
to Cipolla's Northside residence.

Firstly, there are only SIX police zones in Pittsburgh.  The North Side of 
Pittsburgh is Zone #1 ... not #9. 

Now, in Pittsburgh Police history,  Police Station #9 was/is located on Mount
Washington, in the South Side of Pittsburgh, and NOT on the North Side of
Pittsburgh, as Randy Engel claimed.

PLUS, PLUS, PLUS:  Engel stated that there was one piece of evidence that re-
remained in tact, certain the Diane Thompson case that accused Cipolla of moles-
tation.  It was the Offense/Incidence Reportsigned by a couple detectives.

Uhhhhm,  ladies and gentlemen, that is NOT evidence.  That is the PRIVATE 
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FORM as was used in the 1970s.  I filled out a
couple of those Offense/Incidence Report, in order to have criminal charges
filed against certain persons.  I'm no stranger to it.  

All in all, there is a difference between the accusation and the evidence.  That 
sheet was the accusation.  It was NOT the police officer's or detective's affi-
davit.  Proof consists in the fact that, at the right hand side of the paper, 
there is a box where it is asked, "Do you want to prosecute."

Now, police NEVER prosecute.  Thus, no page of legal procedure will ask a
policeman if he/she wants to prosecute.  It is a question to civilians.  I already
explained how the Private Criminal Complaint works in Pennsylvania.  For
starters, the initial paperwork is filed at a magistrate's office.  Diane Thomp-
son neglected to tell any journalist that she was in need of filing at Baldy
Reagan's office.  Baldy Reagan was a Pittsburgh magistrate.

In as much, a detective might have filled it out for a citizen who had trouble
filling it out, or a detective might have dictated what the citizen needed to
write.  It was not his legally binding testimony.

None the less, a question should immediately pop into your mind.  Q: Why 
would a citizen go to a magistrate to fill out a private criminal complaint 
form if he/she doesn't want to prosecute?  

ANS:  For insurance claim purposes.  The last time we had a police officer at
the Pittsburgh office, in reporting yet another burglary, we were asked if we want-
ed an investigation or if we just wanted a police report (with official CCR number)
to give to the insurance adjustors.

There are more ways to convince people who have no legal training that the report
to which Engel referred was NOT a police officer's report but only the private crim-
inal complaint

Once again, the thing which Randy Engel falsely called evidence was nothing
more than the private criminal complaint form.  In fact, it contains blocks
were the private citizen writes in the witnesses to the wrongs done, and their
contact information.

Cipolla was NEVER arrested or charged.  He was merely served a Summary 
Notice signed by Diane Thompson which instructed him to show up in City 
Court for a MOTIONS HEARING ... aka "Probable Cause Hearing" which
had the equal effect of a preliminary hearing.

It was part of a private citizen's private criminal complaint, where Thomp-
son was required to show due cause as to why the presiding judge was to 
"Issue Process" and have Anthony Cipolla indicted and arraigned.  But,
Diane Thompson withdrew her private criminal complaint shortly before 
the Motions Hearing, aka the hearing equivalent to a quasi-preliminary
lhearing.  Anthony Cipolla was NEVER in handcuffs.

The 2016 Engel article mentions that Diane Thompson remarried in 1984.
The 1995 Pittsburgh Post Gazette NEVER mentioned this.  Instead, it stat-
ed that the "second marriage" guy was coming in and out of her life even in
1995.  Now, if that was happening, it was a bizarre setting of two de facto
husbands at the same time in her life.

Even at that, there are a string of contradictions of Thompson's allegations.
Here is another example:

I have digital evidence that it was alleged directly to me by a confidant of Di-
ane Thompson that Tucker told Diane that Anthony Cipolla had sores all over
his body.  NOW . . .

In the Engel article of 2016, the damning allegation was that Cipolla played
proctologist and invaded Tucker's private regions with one hand, while doing
an invasive sexual act upon Tucker front side with the other hand.  This would
mean that Cipolla was clothed.  So, how could Tucker see the sores?

In the 2016 Engel article, Thompson alleged that Frank Labieaux went to live
in Florida after being arrested for vandalizing a neighboring church.  She then
said that Frank called her from Florida, to tell her what Cipolla allegedly did
to him.  Well . . .

In the 1995 Post Gazette article, Thompson alleged that she sat down BOTH
of her sons, telling them that they were going to have to put the Cipolla inci-
dent out of their minds.  In order to do that, Frank had to have been in Pitts-
burgh.  So, where was he?  In Florida of Pittsburgh?  

Take note that, in the 1995 article she said that she only had TWO sons.  She had
three, one of whom died in 2009.  There is no information in print as to how he
died.  None the less, she had three sons and told the Post Gazette that she
only had two.

The falsehoods and contradictions go on and on and on and on, in the November
2016 Engel article.  It severely contradicted the 1995 article that the Pittsburgh
Post Gazette published on the subject.  It was the article where Diane Thompson
was quoted as having alleged overly-theatrical things, while keeping Thompson's
name confidential.

The November 2016 article attributed to Randy Engel was at variance, in pertinent
part, with Diane Thompson's own 2015 & 2016 web log posts, as well.  It was also
different, in specific part, from the narration that Thompson gave to a certain per-
son who asked to be kept in anonymity.

The article was also at variance, in part, with the contents of the harassing, rude, and
derisive emails that Thompson sent to me in 2015.  I was compelled to block her in
short order, being that she was so podunk-trash-crass and intrusive.  The woman has
no temperance, to say the least.

When a Retraction is Needed

I learned from my lawyer conference that a person must first give a writer or editor
or published the opportunity to make retractions.  And the need must be stated in

As an example in the Year 2015, someone not related to the Cipolla case wrote to
me about another subject about which I wrote.  That person definitively stated what
needed to be changed the third time he wrote to me.  I then changed what needed
to be changed on his third communication, being that the first two were too vague.
So, if there is an error on this site that needs correction, simply state it specifically
and get to the point.  I will then change it, if what you state it true.  If it's plausible,,
but not proven true, I'll add 'alleged.'

All that Diane Thompson did was attack and ridicule me.  Her first sentence to me
contained "bull s**t."  She didn't state what was erroneously stated in as far as went
names, dates, locations, spelling, etc.  She simply attacked my character.  If she only
would have acted civilized on the first, second, or even third email, I would have had
a series of conversations with her.  However, she is a liar, whether Cipolla molested
her two sons or not.  Her account of the Cipolla transactions, as appeared in the Pitts-
burgh Post.

Now, every time Thompson speaks to someone new, she tells a new and amended
story about Cipolla and her family.  Cipolla, on the other hand, to ld the same story,
inserting the same names, over and over.  It had gotten to the point where Cipolla
would tell me the same story, and I would start reciting it word-for-word.  He re-
sponded once by saying, "I'm trying to talk here," upon which I realized that he
kept telling me the same set of stories for the sake of emotional release.


Thompson said to a Pittsburgh Post Gazette journalist in 1995 that then-Bishop
Vincent Leonard instilled a sense of guilt in Diane Thompson for filing what
the Post Gazette in 1978 stated was a Summary Notice and what the 1995 Post
Gazette stated was the "filing of criminal charges."  Thompson said that Vincent
Leonard said that the Church had just lost two popes and her suffering greatly.
Well, the second pope to die in 1978 wasn't even elected pope yet.  This proved
Diane Thompson to be a liar.

Well, in the 2016 Randy Engel article, it is alleged that Bishop Leonard only
pointed out the one death of Paul VI.  Thus, Thompson changed her story yet

In addition, it was proven that the Vatican Case against Cipolla only dealt
with his diagnosis of Depression & Suicidal Tendencies, given by a doctor
of St. Luke's in Maryland.  It was a Psychic Defect case and did NOT cover

Plus, Ann Rodgers of the Post Gazette stated that Wuerl went to Rome with
a Police Arrest Report in his brief case.  No such thing ever existed.  Cipolla was
never arrested, never charged, never arraigned, etc.  This was being mentioned
numerous times

February 26, 2024

Engel Severely Misrepresented Elements of Law ... to the point of lying ... to fit her story and make it sound like the truth.

All she had to do was wait for the PA Grand Jury Report.  Instead, she was ar-
rogant enough to have believed that her Cipolla story was anything other than
a hyper-exaggeration that proved that she knows nothing about American law.
She comes off as a know-it-all, but she knew ZERO about law.  After 70+ yrs
of living, you would think that she would have learned a little bit of American
law.  No.  Not at all.  Such a person is usually nothing more than a gossip, in                                being too lazy to learn law or basic economics or basic physics or even basic                            statistical analysis, etc.

Now, let's get to an element of law that Engel pathetically massacred, in Randy                         Engel's attempt to explain it:

She stated that Anthony Cipolla was arrested upon Diane Thompson "pressing                            charges" (which is 100% false.)  She then stated that a conspiracy started, with                                 the help of then-Bishop Vincent Leonard.  She furthermore claimed that District                                Attorney Bob Coville forced the same Diane Thompson to drop charges, by sign-                            ing signing a sheet or two of paper that enabled Anthony Cipolla's criminal record                             to be expunged.  

Newsflash:  All that Colville needed to do, in any case already filed, was to dismiss                          the charges himself.  No signature of any civilian has any legal bearing thereof.  Now,                        another question should arise.  Q:  What is done to a corrupt DA who dismisses the                            case of someone actually guilty of a crime?  ANS:  The corrupt DA is brought before                          a "review board."  The review board could possibly have his power taken away from                          him, for starters.

Now, one of two the retired officers who were said to have arrested Cipolla as detect-                       ives was located.  I found him through the Pittsburgh Steeler Corporation, and MARK NINEHOUSER expressly told me that he never did such a thing.  He never arrested                 Cipolla.  Neither did his work partner.  Moreover, he and his work partner were NOT              detectives.  They were uniformed police officers, clad in blue.

Secondly ::::::: Engel wrote that "an expungement is a civil action."  Uhhhhhm no,                           it's not.  A civil action is a lawsuit.  An expungement is a court order, arising from                              a motion to the court, at the end of a criminal action where the defendant prevailed.                     More specifically, an expungement is the final process of a criminal action which has                    been dismissed in favor of the defendant.

Engel also said that the expungement process is STARTED by the accuser of the
person whose criminal record is sought to be expunged.  Woooo doggie!  Some-
one has checked-in to the Non-Reality Motel.  Why would anyone who accused
a person of a crime want to have that person's record disappear and then to have
that person walk free???

The following is what an expungement  actually is, and it's very simple to explain:

An expungement consists in destroying all vestiges of the defendant's arrest and due
processing thereof.  It destroys more than the paperwork.  I am not getting into detail
what is actually destroyed and how, because Diane Thompson will use my detailed
explanation in her next set of lies, in order to make her story look authentic, if I pub-                     licly post it.

Now, Engel said that expunged records are sealed and placed in a secret archive.
FALSE.  They are entirely destroyed, a la paper shredder.  Even evidence gets
a visit to a trash can.  None the less, concerning Engel's false definition of an

If an expungement were a civil action, it would denote an entirely new case that
starts from Stage 1, and an entirely new docket number.  An expungement is the
final stage of an existing case, and not a new case in itself.
More importantly, expungements have a FEE attached to them.  Depending on the
city and state, the price (before Biden Inflation) was $200, $250, $300, $400 or so.  
Now, let me show you how much Engel knows NOTHING about law.  You will
see her asininity in the following comment that she made in her three-part article.
Let's go to it:

Engel made reference to the 1989 Beaver County DA's formal findings on the in-
vestigation started by Tim Bendig's private criminal complaint against Anthony
Cipolla.  The findings were that there were no grounds upon which to file crimi-
nal charges against Cipolla.

Concerning the official DA letter,  Engel went on to state to the effect, "What about
all the molesting that Cipolla did" (if any at all) "in 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985,
& 1986?"  Engel stated that the Beaver County DA should have filed criminal charges
against Cipolla for Bendig's accusations of 1981 to 1986.

Now, what is completely asinine about  that statement by which it proves that Engel
knows nothing about law and doesn't think rationally?

ANS:  Bendig's accusations of 1981 to 1986 involved acts that he alleged to have been                committed upon him IN AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT JURISDICTION.  They involved
Allegheny County, and the Beaver DA cannot file criminal charges against anyone for
allegations said to have been committed in another county jurisdiction.  Bendig tried in                     that "other jurisdiction" and failed to obtain an indictment.

Why didn't Engel mention the Allegheny County DA's office denying Tim Bendig
his petition to have Cipolla indicted, along with the Beaver County DA?  And why                          did she never mentioned the Oakland NJ Police Dept giving Cipolla a plaque of ap-             preciation, thereby showing that those policemen never had reason to suspect him                            of being a molester?

More Notes:

Oh, by the way, concerning the damning allegation of a 70 year old convenience
store owner hitting young Tucker in the face, for accusing Cipolla of molestation,
do you really believe that that overly theatrical story ever happened?  Now think.
Diane Thompson's name was NEVER in the newspapers, never on television, and
never on the radio.  Tucker's name was never in the papers, never mentioned on TV,                          and NEVER mentioned on the radio.  So, how would that store owner have known                         that Tucker made the accusation, in the first place?

Did such a store owner exist?  The story is too theatrical to be taken seriously.

In addition, we are talking about a major American metropolis here.  How many
70 yr old seniors work at a store that is corporately owned, (or corporately leased)?
When was the last time you saw a 70+ yr old gentleman working in a metropolitan
convenience store?  Keep in mind that, in 1978, the retirement age was 65 years old.                    Plus, in 1978, Pittsburgh was the King of Steel, and those steelworker pensions were              plentiful.


And then there was mention of a Bernie Thompson suddenly dying in the State
of Florida where I went to college.  Engel stated that he was hit by a car while
crossing the road/street/highway, trying to get a homeless man a "decent meal."

Uhm, if he were crossing the street, trying to get a homeless man a decent meal,
then the man was walking next to him.  So, why didn't the homeless man get hit
by the car and killed, too?  I have a subscription to the archives of thousands of
American newspapers, and I could NOT find any article of any man getting hit
by a car while trying to get a homeless man a decent meal.  None the less . . .

Being that one of my alma maters was a Florida university that borders the Hills-
boro River and West Kennedy Blvd, I am very familiar with the homeless.  What
a person usually did, if he didn't ignore the homeless person, was give him money
and let him get the meal himself.  Plus, some of those guys were super harassing
people.  A person would cross a street / road / or highway, just to get away from
the overly obnoxious homeless person.  When fleeing someone pushy, we some-
times don't look both ways before crossing the street.  None the less . . .

I could neither find any article about a "Tommy Thompson" taking his own life at
the hands of sleeping pills or pills similar, despite my subscriber's access to over
a thousand American newspapers.

By the way, the most common form of suicide for a woman, and NOT a man,
is death by barbiturate overdose.  The most common form of suicide for a man
is death by gun shot.

Did go there.  It was a waste of time.

For Future Article Writing:

Then comes the Mexico Street allegations in the Engel article.  Nothing in those                     damning allegations fit.  Now, I am all for reporting Anthony Cipolla as a crimi-                             nal, but all of the articles that damn him to the pits of Hell are bullet riddled with                          fact-checked lies..

Oh, and then there is a "medical report thing," about traces of a lubricant coming
from a hospital.  Very simply, if it did exist ... and if it were sent to "detectives,"
it would have come from THE FORENSICS LAB.  Thus, if Engel would have
stated that the "report" came from the Forensics lab, her paragraph on the sub-
ject would have carried a bit of plausibility.

You know, magistrates are known to order forensics testing.  Was there any ma-
gistrate ordering any testing in this case?  That's another reason why the Engel
article and Thompson web log posts are easily recognizable as frauds.  There is
no mention of a magistrate being involved.

One more thing, concerning Tim Bendig's alleged ability to con people:

Keep in mind that Bendig almost had me conned, until he stated something I knew
to be a lie, and then Bendig changed his story three more times, making him even
more of a liar in my eyes.  If I weren't a document hunter, Bendig would have suc-
ceeded in conning me as much as he succeeded in conning Engel.   Randy Engel                             had gotten lazy.

None the less, there is a way to tell if Bendig is lying, if you can see him speaking.
I declined to interview him in person, because he is a liar, and I couldn't risk him
claiming that I said something that I never said.  So, I avoided him.  HOWEVER,
if I could interview ... interrogate ... Bendig in a public setting with a camera pre-
sent (to prove that I didn't threaten him) I will be able to tell if he is lying, line
item by line item.  I will then be able to follow the cues and find out, once and
for all, if he were ever physically invaded by Cipolla.

All in all, Randy Engel is NOT the guardian of truth.  It was written that Engel's                            book, the Rite of Sodomy ... or whatever it's called ... is not for the faint of heart.                             Actually, Randy Engel's writings are NOT for the high class ... or the discreet ...                               or those who have a sense of decency ... or those who cringe at vulgarity.

February 24, 2024

The Body Sore Allegation that adds to the farcical nature of the Cipolla Case: Sores are too painful for any priest to molest anyone.

Opening Note:  It was vehemently concluded that the Donald Wuerl who, in 2018, was finally caught engaging in cover-ups as a matter of habit, placed the Cipolla Case in neon lights, in order to use it as a diversionary tactic, to hide Wuerl's multiple cover-ups of abusive priests.  Moreover, Wuerl let that case be presented in a false light, allowing for it to be hyper-exaggerated, for greater diversionary-tactic-effect.

This is the case whether Cipolla were fully guilty, only partially guilty, or not guilty at all.  The Cipolla Case was presented to the public here, to show Wuerl's egregious degree of premeditated deception.  

November 2023 Update:

Concerning the claim that Cipolla had BODY SORES

I was contacted recently ... by an individual whose name I'm not going to mention, for the sake of privacy ... and was informed that no one claimed that Cipolla had sores all over his body.  He merely had rashes.  

I was also told that no assistant lawyer of Attorney John Conte told anyone to testify at a deposition that Cipolla received a sore (or rash) on one of his forearms from a spider bite.  I'm going to be polite and leave "it" at this, without adding a commentary ... or a smart aleck response.  

Once again, Cipolla was now said to have had rashes, and not Biblical sores on his body.  The pertinent point is that Bendig's attorney ... during deposition time ... was so hard-up to find anything against Cipolla that he brought into the conversation a red mark-blotch-rash on one of Cipolla's forearms, as if that could prove that Cipolla were a grand molester of the ages.  

End of November 2023 Update

That which appears below was written BEFORE someone came forth to amend the story of Cipolla, as was told to him by the 1978 accusing mother who endlessly exaggerated the things she did not outright lie-about.  And remember, this was the woman who, in 2014, thought that you were such a gullible & airheaded dupe that you would instantly believe her claim that I didn't exist ... but was only Anthony Cipolla in disguise with a fake name ... operating a child molestation ring.   And of course, if you are rich ... or if you manage a wealthy corporation ... and you claim anything near to what she claimed in 2014 and at other times, you and I will end up in the same civil courtroom.  I will not settle out of court with you.  And I believe that it has already been proven that I keep my promises.

The original beginning of this post/discourse starts here:

The 1978 accuser of Anthony Cipolla told a certain individual that her son, the young Tucker (aka Tommy), alleged the following ====> that Cipolla had sores all over his body, while he was allegedly consummating unnatural lust with Tucker.   Got it?  Cipolla was made out to be a grotesque monster in physical appearance, thereby adding to the theatrical sensationalism of the story which I previously covered in detail, years ago.  

At this point, Ladies & Gentlemen of the jury, what is ridiculously wrong with this picture?

ANS:  Find me one person who has sores all over his body and who does NOT
cringe and seethe in pain while making contact with another person's body.  In
addition, Cipolla was a young man at the time, only in his thirties; and he wasn't
living in the sewers.  Neither was he bedridden to the point of getting bed sores. 

Do you really believe that Cipolla had sores all over his body in the 1970s?  They                                 would have been on his face, arms, and hands, too.  This means that there would                                      have been numerous witnesses to this allegation.  This destroyed the credibility of                               the 1978 accuser of Cipolla.

However, her credibility can assuredly be regarded as additionally destroyed, in her                              having claimed in print that I was Anthony Cipolla in disguise, operating a child mo-                     lestation ring.  For the record, Cipolla died SIX years ago, and his ghost is NOT typ-                            ing this text.   Liars always get found-out.  Their believers become proven fools.

BTW,  I NEVER Stated Such an Assertion as Follows

At this point, I need to remind you that I NEVER confidently claimed that Cipolla                                 was "not guilty" of committing molestation in 1978.  I NEVER assuredly stated                                  that he was guilty, either.  I simply stated in detail that the horror story of a DA                            bullying the 1978 accuser/mother into dropping criminal charges that were NOT                               even filed in the first place was a complete lie that contradicted all the processes                                    of Pennsylvania Criminal Procedure, as well as forensic investigation protocol.          

Very simply, reasonable doubt exists squared & cubed in this 1978 case which                                  never resulted in an arrest, and which never resulted in a trial.

My point was to show that Donald Wuerl was using the hyper-exagerrated Cipolla                                   Case to hide Wuerl's many molester priest cover-ups ... and to deceive the public                            into thinking that Wuerl was a man of untold Bravery & Holiness.  Well, the 2018                        Pennsylvania grand jury findings proved that I was correct in warning the public                                that Wuerl was a deceitful Con Artist & Cover-up Artist ::: The Picasso of Deceit.

Furthermore, if Cipolla's friends smashed her apartment windows as she theatrical-                                ly claimed, her landlord would have bellowed at high volume.  The police would                               have intervened, and the whole thing would have been front page news.  It would                                 be an archived newspaper article easy to locate on the Internet.  This is especially                               true, because, earlier in 1978, the Pittsburgh police already arrested a  defrocked                             priest, for immoral actions with minor males.                                                                                        

News of a second priest being indicted for molestation would have made the front                           pages in 1978.  Smashed windows resulting from a priest's friends retaliating would                           have been the story of the week.  So, go and search for a 1978 news article reporting                           the smashing of windows shortly after a priest's arrest which never occurred in the                             first place.

And remember ===>  I DIDN'T trust Cipolla.   I simply could not catch him con-                      tradicting himself.   Then, I would discover that the post-arrest allegations were                                    completely false, being that there was no arrest.   I previously heard Tim Bendig                                    lie to me four times in a matter of minutes over the telephone, making me con-                                 clude that Bendig was a con artist.   So, when it comes to the actual molestation                                allegations themselves, I don't know whom to believe.  I simply know that Wuerl                                  made the Cipolla Case sound iconic, so that Wuerl would be rocketed into very                               undeserved stardom.

 None the less, I remained suspicious of Anthony Cipolla.  Yet,  I couldn't find the                               evidence to assure his guilt.  There was reasonable doubt in the 1978 case.  And                                  there was a lot of doubt in the Bendig case, being that Bendig was a proven liar.                               Even at that, you don't know for sure.  It's just that there was no evidence to war-                                  rant a noose around Cipolla's neck at high noon, especially in light of the fact that                                 his accusers were caught lying about him, repeatedly.

The Number 1 reason why I still entertained the possibility of his guilt was in                                     the fact that he once tried to get a home-schooling job.  But, this dwindled, when it                           was discovered that he never tried to get any kind of home schooling job again.

In addition, the Number 1 reason why I entertained the possibility of Cipolla's                               innocence was in the description of how he "allegedly" molested a nine year old                                   child who naturally carries - shall we politely say --- certain body parts too too                                   small to be molested by an adult-sized hand.  Nine year olds were molested in                               other ways, concerning such molestation cases.  It sounded like someone was                             making up a story that didn't match past cases or the biological sciences.

All in all, Wuerl needed to shut down and declare closed the Cipolla Case, lest more                       investigators and detectives prod through the Diocese of Pittsburgh and uncover                               the cover-ups that Wuerl still had in tact.  Wuerl used the Cipolla Case as a diversion,                            so that the Pittsburgh Post Gazette would state, "Nothing more to see here, folks.                                   Move on."

The Vatican Case Was a Jurisdictional Matter                                                                                which did NOT judge if Cipolla molested anyone.                                                                             

The Wuerl/Cipolla Case found its way to the highest court in the Holy See, and it                                  asked only one question, giving one answer to that question.  The question was                                        this ===>  Does a bishop have the authority to dismiss a priest from ministry, if                                     the priest was diagnosed as having mental illness?  Got it?   This is what really                                      happened at the Vatican:

Tim Bendig was an absolute failure at the Pittsburgh seminary, and he had the                                     lack of civility, as well.  So, he was asked to leave in 1987 or so.  He then asked                                the diocese for money.  The diocese refused to give Bendig money.  Bendig then                                proceeded to accuse a number of priests of sodomy and the such.

Concerning Cipolla, Bendig accused Cipolla of having molested him for years,                                   while Cipolla was stationed in New Brighton PA.   New Brighton is 25 miles                                northwest of Pittsburgh, along the Ohio River.

This photo is the one closest to New Brighton that I possess.

Wuerl understood the accusations to be that of a con artist.  So, Wuerl ignored                                Bendig.   Then, in October of 1988,  Frs Wolk, Zula, and Pucci were indicted                                         at a neighboring county where the Diocese of Pittsburgh operates.  Immediate-                                      ly thereafter, Bendig went to the media and claimed that he was molested, too.                                      Only then did Wuerl order Cipolla to go to a psychiatric treatment center.

At the center, Cipolla said to an analyst that a man's life isn't worth living if he                                  can't do the vocation work he was ordained to do (to the effect thereof.)  So, the                            analyst diagnosed Cipolla as being suicidal & suffering from Clinical Depression.                           Wuerl then used that diagnosis to remove Cipolla.

Cipolla then filed against Wuerl in Catholic Church court.  Cipolla went to an-                                   other treatment center (in NYC) and got a clean bill of health, at his financial                              expense.  Wuerl refused to accept the diagnosis.   The Vatican then ordered                                     Wuerl to reinstate Cipolla.  Wuerl then got a rehearing, under the guise of                                           "the possibility that the facts of the case were erroneous."

So, there was a second hearing at the highest court of the Vatican, with Cipolla                                     not being present.  It was simply declared that Wuerl had the right to remove a                                       priest declared mentally ill, even if the priest gets a second opinion which is                                  contrary to the original diagnosis.

That which actually happened in the Bendig Civil Lawsuit, filed in the                              Pennsylvania Court of Commons Pleas and NOT at the Vatican, was this:

Tim Bendig's lawyer, (who was the attorney for the local masons), didn't have
anything on Cipolla that could stick.  Thus, Attorney Douglas Yauger was so                                desperate for evidence against Anthony Cipolla that he motioned the court for                                         a continuance, so that he could find more witnesses.  Yauger found none more                                   than the 1978 mom who accused Cipolla of molestation.

Interestingly, concerning the out of court settlement and the lack of a trial, Yauger                             simply told someone in the media that the 1978 accuser was located by him (with-                              out him mentioning her name.)   About her, he merely said that he "would like to                               have used her" (as a trial witness) for whatever it was worth.  So, Yauger had no                             option other than to make a big deal out of one sore on Cipolla's arm.

Yauger made such a big deal of it that John Conte's assistant lawyer coached                                       one of the Cipolla witnesses to say at his deposition (in the Bendig lawsuit)                                           that the one sore on Cipolla's arm came from a spider bite.  That was deceitful.

Now, how would the witness have known how Cipolla got that one sore?  This                          particular witness was NOT a medical professional who treated Cipolla.  Plus,                                 because of that lawyer coaching that one witness, the witness being coached
assumed that Cipolla was as guilty as sin. 

That one witness then decided to do some investigating on his own, he said.
Well, all that he did was talk to Diane Thompson.  He did NOT seek to fact-
check anything she said, and he was so gullible that he believed her tale of
Cipolla having sores all over his body.  To this day,  he didn't sit back and
take note of the failure of plausibility in anything that Thompson claimed.
He didn't catch all of Thompson's contradictions.  This is why the circus
master, P.T. Barnum once said, "There's one born every minute."

Concerning that one sore, what was Yauger trying to do in mentioning it?
ANS:  He, in my opinion, wanted the jury to think that Cipolla might have
had AIDS.  That one sore might portray an infected sexual maniac, and
cause the jury to be suspicious of Cipolla, in the trial of the civil lawsuit                                                 filed by Bendig.   Well, it has been 30 years since the discovery phase of                                               the Bendig lawsuit, and neither Bendig nor Cipolla manifested any signs                                                of AIDS.  Any insinuation of Cipolla giving Bendig AIDS was nihil.

This obsession with one mere sore on an arm showed how desperate Ben-                                          dig's attorney was, in the quest to find any evidence in support of his client.                                        And remember, Bendig lied to me four times in a row in a row in a matter of                                  minutes.


Also remember that Thompson did NOT accuse Cipolla of any wrongdoing                                         until Cipolla told her that the Saint Vincent de Paul Society did NOT have the                                money to pay Diane Thompson's rent.

Concerning the Tim Bendig who lied to me four times in a row:  Proof that he                                     was a con artist consists in the fact that he took his lawsuit settlement dollars                                       and purchased a bar & grill with it, never spending it on psychiatric services                                          as he claimed he would do.

Concerning that which Cippolla said to me, I never believed nor disbelieved                                      him, being that I need someone to do some cross examining.  It's just that I                                          did NOT catch Cipolla contradicting himself.  Yet, that is NOT enough for                                           me to publicly state, "not guilty" in the 1978 molestation allegations.  None                                          the less, the falsehoods told by the accusing party were beyond ridiculous. 

Now watch . . .

Then came another witness who spent time in Michigan with Cipolla and Tim                                       Bendig simultaeously.  He said that nothing suspicious between the two ever                               happened, as well as having stated that Anthony Cipolla never tried to molest                                   him.   Well, that particular witness said that he was NEVER coached by any                                   lawyer on John Conte's staff.  He was to be one of the trial witnesses, of course.

For those unaware, John Conte was Cipolla's defense attorney in the Bendig                                        lawsuit.  He charged Cipolla  $25,000 for his law firm's services.  That lawyer                                    was my neighbor for years.  I even went to Canada, on vacation, with John's
son.  I went to the same schools as did his children.  I knew the Conte family                                        for years ... for decades.


One more thing:  Why would Attorney John Conte's assistant act as if Cipolla were
guilty?  ANS:  It was because the Pittsburgh Post Gazette stated that Cipolla was ar-
rested for molestation back in 1978, and because Americans did NOT have ready
access to newspaper archives at that time.  If you go to the Post Gazette archives,
you will find that, in 1978, Cipolla was NEVER arrested.  He was merely served
a SUMMARY NOTICE which instructed him to show-up for a hearing 28 days
hence.  The hearing was to see if filing charges against Cipolla was warranted.

The actual detective assigned to the Cipolla case told Josh Shapiro's PA grand jury                                that Cipolla was NEVER charged/indicted/arrested.  He simply said that he told the                              accuser mother of 1978 that, if Cipolla would do any kind of molesting from that                                 point onward, then he would be arrested pronto.  That was a stupid thing to say, be-                              ing that, from July 1978 onward, there was no way in which Cipolla would be able                                to get near those two youths.

None the less, my intent, in addressing the Cipolla case, was to show the public                                   that Donald Wuerl is a con artist of great deceit who covered up molester priests,                                  all the while pretending to be the great disciplinarian of them.  Cipolla was                                       Wuerl's diversionary tactic.                               

Also keep in mind that Cipolla tried to get a job teaching home-schooled children                             after he was suspended from ministry by Wuerl ... and that Cipolla only did that                                   one time, making someone ask, "Hey wait.  If he's a molester, then why wouldn't                                  he keep trying to get a job teaching home-schooled kids?"

Incidentally, this home-schooling incident is why I continued to have my doubts                              about Cipolla.  None the less, there were too many lies told about the Cipolla Case,                            especially the lie about a DA forcing a woman to "drop charges" that were never                                 filed in the place, and when the DA could have instantly drop them on his own.                           Incidentally, before I learned of the details of the case, I believed that Cipolla                                      was as guilty as sin.                                        

                                                     In review:

The Summary Notice was only signed by the 1978 accuser-mother.  This meant
that neither the police nor the DA nor the State Attorneys General office had evi-
dence against Cipolla to warrant prosecution of him.  The DA's office needed to                               sign it.                            

Thompson was taking it upon herself to be the prosecutor of the case, but needed                                 the City Court judge's approval for her to proceed, in her private criminal com-                               plaint.  Thompson withdrew her private criminal complaint before the hearing.

According to Cipolla, after the judge told him that Thompson dropped the case, the
same judge said, "Watch who you try to help."  And of course, simply from what
Thompson wrote about me ... a person who simultaneously carried three security clear-                       ances and who lived 900 miles away from her ... she is a pathological liar.  John Conte                        called her an "adroit liar."  Even at that, I cannot declare Cipolla assuredly not guilty.

She alleged that Tucker (aka Tommy, now in his 40s) is dysfunctional and that the
loss of functionality was caused by Cipolla.  She also stated that she is raising two                         teenagers, both of whom are Tucker's children.  

Concerning any out of court settlement in these cases, it simply means that neither                                  culpability nor innocence is declared.  A person paying a settlement does NOT ad-                              mit to guilt.  It's simply a payment to end contentious proceedings.  That is to say,                            truth is NOT ascertained in an out of court settlement.

And keep this in mind ====>  If a diocese refuses to give an accuser an out of court                  settlement, that diocese could be the target of investigators.  So, settlements get paid,                            to keep the authorities and private investigators, as well as journalists, from digging                        deeper.  Plus, if the price of the settlement is less than the cost of defending the de-                        fendant, expect a settlement to come as a result of mathematics.

February 23, 2024

Yes, I Spoke with Mark Ninehouser and he said that he never arrested Cipolla and never filled-out any police report in cursive handwriting.

However, he did say that his badge number was 46, as Randy Engel
claimed, and that his partner's badge number was 37.  However, he
was NOT a detective, as the same Randy Engel claimed.  Therefore,
Engel got everything wrong except for the two badge numbers, in
her nightmarish narration of an arrest which has now been 100%
proven to never have existed.

Quick March 2017 note:  More information of the Edward Huff case is
forthcoming.  The Huff Coverup, alone, proved former Pittsburgh Post
Gazette writer, Ann Rodgers (formerly Ann Rodgers-Melnick), to have
been nothing but Wuerl's propagandist.   That was an abuse of the press.

It is now Liberation Day for all of those who believed in the good character
of the man formerly known as Father Anthony Cipolla.  In late February of
2017, I finally made contact with ... and conversed at will with ... one of the
two police officers who responded to Diane Thompson's phone call to the po-
lice, in 1978.  Randy Engel stated that they arrested Cipolla.  In fact, Engel
stated that they were detectives.  No, there weren't.  None the less, one of
the two police officers who Engel claimed to have arrested Anthony Cipol-
la categorically stated that he did NOT do so.  Engel is now dangling at
the edge of a business-destroying lawsuit which has a statute of limitations
a lot longer than the average American attention span.

Randy Engel's didn't merely accuse Anthony Cipolla of molestation.  She
accused him of harassment and terrorism, all the while stating that the Bish-
op of Pittsburgh at the time and the Allegheny County DA at the time were
accomplices to such criminal conduct.

It has now been proven to be a lie that a young Frank Labiaux ... eldest son
of a Diane Thompson whose timeline identifies her as a teenage pregnancy
queen .... vandalized a church out of sheer frustration for having been mo-
lested.  Being that this Frank Labiaux is a proven liar, one can plausibly
conclude that he also lied about being molested.

Whatever be the case, Frank Labiaux made his debut instantly destroying his
credibility.  This will especially be the case in the eyes of an entire jury who is
given the time to assess a case that now qualifies as actionable libel.  Then comes
the Eggshell Skull Rule, where Anthony Cipolla was forced to endure the stress
heaped upon him by libel and defamation.

As I stated perhaps twenty times previously ... and which never sunk into Randy
Engel's mind, Donald Wuerl used the Cipolla Case to finally get out of the spot-
light placed on him by Washington County DA John C Pettit.  This case also
made the Edward Huff indictment largely unknown by the Pittsburgh people,
even though it did make the mainstream media newspaper, at the time.

For those unaware, Diane Thompson and Randy Engel made elaborate and
damning accusations against Anthony Cipolla, former DA Bob Colville, and
the late Bishop Vincent Leonard, concerning the assertion that Cipolla mo-
lested her son, Tucker, in 1978.  The added assertion, never prefixed with
the lawsuit-prevention word, ALLEGED, was that massive and violent re-
taliation occurred after Thompson "filed charges."  No civilian has the
power to "file charges."

You see, Engel asserted that an M.N. Nehouser, Badge #46, and an R. Fogle,
Badge #37 arrested Cipolla for molestation, filled out an Incidence Report,
and hung by Diane Thompson's side, telling her to not "drop charges, de-
spite all of the harassment she was going to get.   The narration all turned
out to be a fraudulent misrepresentation, except for the officer's badge

In fact, in 1995, Thompson narrated a harrowing tale to a Pittsburgh Post
Gazette writer on how disappointed the two detectives looked when she
"dropped charges," with tears in her eyes, in the DA's office, signing a
paper that she couldn't read, due to the tears in the eyes.  That story
... and the story of her youngest son vandalizing a church out of the
frustration of having been molested ... have all now been proven to
be libel.  Provable lies.  Orchestrated falsehoods conjured by one of
the my incompetent liars you can encounter.

Let us proceed:

Mark Ninehouser was one of the two police officers who responded to Di-
ane Thompson's call in 1978, concerning her claim that her son, Tucker,
was molested by the man formerly known as Anthony Cipolla.

In her three-part article, Randy Engel referred to him as M.N. Nehouser.
None the less, he remembers the case and said the following:

      All that he did was take a report from Thompson, and then filled
      out a form by means of hand-printing it, and NOT handwriting it
      with cursive hand writing.  He said that he simply handed the re-
      port to the detectives, and that was it.  Nothing more was done
      by him.  Thus:::::

      1} He did NOT arrest Cipolla.  2} He was not called back to Diane
      Thompson's home, to respond to a call that she made, reporting that
      Cipolla was at her kitchen door.  3}  Plus, Mark was not called to
       the scene of any face-slapping of nine year old Tucker by a 70 year
       old man, and therefore, that account also turned-out to be a lie told
       by Diane Thompson. 4} Mark was also NOT called to respond to
       Diane Thompson's home, on account of any rock throwing incident
       which broke one of her windows,

All in all:

That which happened was NOT the way described by Randy Engel or by
the media in their 1990s reports about Cipolla.

Let's Review:   Concerning police officer, Mark Ninehouser, who respond
to Diane Thompson's original phone call to the police:

1}  He categorically stated that he NEVER put any Catholic priest in hand
cuffs in 1978, including Anthony Cipolla.  Neither he nor his partner Robert
W. Fogle arrested Cipolla.

1b}  Ninehouser was NOT a detective.  He said that he took the report of
Diane Thompson's accusations and handed it to the detectives.

1c}  At this point, the following must absolutely be remembered:

Randy Engel wrote that Diane Thompson started getting harassed by Cipolla
on July 30, 1978, upon which she called Ninehouser (misspelled as Nehouser
by Engel) and Officer Fogle.  Former Officer Ninehouser categorically stated
to me that, after he handed his hand-printed report to the detectives, he walked
away from the Diane Thompson case.  Thus, she did NOT call him, saying that
Cipolla was in the house.  He did NOT say to her, "Diane, they are going to try
to harass you into dropping charges.  So, be strong and stand your ground." Etc.

And and and he most certainly did NOT go to her home after "she was forced to
drop charges" and give her a copy of the Incidence Report which apparently was
a counterfeited one filled out by a non-police officer under the guise that it was
done by a police officer.  He did not walk up to her and say, "You're going to
need this one day."

The whole account about the detectives was a complete fraudulent misrepresen-
tation, and the detectives mentioned by Engel weren't even detectives.

2}  Keep in mind that I stated that the Incidence Report mentioned by Randy
Engel, part of which was photographed and put online, looked like a forgery.
For those unaware, the online photo which was purported to be the Incidence
Report of 1978 was handwritten with crowded handwriting and the letter "l"
always being looped widely.   The reason why that photograph was the photo
of a forgery ... of a fraud ... is very simple:

         Honorably retired Mark Ninehouser said that he and his fellow
         police officers were required to print (hand-print) all police re-
         ports.  No cursive handwriting was permitted.  The fact that the
         photo purported to be the actual Incidence Report of 1978 is
         handwritten with cursive writing, and not hand-printed, proves
         that the sheet of paper called "the one remaining piece of evi-
         dence" by Randy Engel is a very counterfeited fraud.  No po-
         lice officer of the 1970s would have filled-out the report in
         that fashion.

3}  Randy Engel stated that Cipolla was arraigned "at City Court" in a
      Pittsburgh Police Station.  This is a complete lie, because no arraign-
      ment ever took place in a police station.  ALL arraignments took
      place in one of two places:

              1} At the Public Safety Building which was located at First and
                   Grant Street, at one time.


               2} At City NIGHT COURT.

Cipolla was never arraigned, because he was NEVER arrested.  He was
accused in a private criminal complaint and served with a SUMMARY
NOTICE only signed by Diane Thompson.  She was to appear in city
court ... at the Public Safety Building ... and state due cause as to why
Cipolla should be arrested.  It was a hearing equal to a preliminary
hearing, but without the accuser having been first arrested.  It was
a hearing that would judge if Cipolla were to be arrested or not.

4}  There is NOT any mistaken identity of police officers in this case,
being that Mark Ninehouser remembers the case in outline form, and
being that Randy Engel did get his badge number and Robert Fogle's
number completely correct.  Mark's badge number actually was 46,
and Robert's actually was 37, as Engel stated.  BUT, they were NOT

In addition, there was ... at the time ... a #9 Police Station in the Northside,
located on Federal Street.  So, that part was gotten correct by Engel.  But,
there were NEVER arraignments taking place at any police station.

In addition, Engel stated that the incidence report was signed M.N.
Nehouser.  So, I asked Mark what the N stood for.  He said that he
did NOT have a middle name.

Once again, for those who are incredibly prejudiced against Cipolla:

5}  Rest assured that there was NO CALL to the police that a 70 year old
man working at any kind of a store slapped Tucker in the face, for having
accused Anthony Cipolla of wrong-doing.

6} Rest assured that no one called the police and reported a rock smashing
through any window at the residence of Diane Thompson and her children.

Take note that Mark was very articulate, talkative, and easy-going in his
conversation with me.  He did not stop to think of what he was going to
say.  He did not have time lapses of  momentary silence.  He simply spoke
spontaneously, hiding nothing.  He and I were literally shooting the breeze,
it was that easy-going of a conversation.

There is more to convey to you.  The bottom line is that two parts of the
three-part Randy Engel article that damns Anthony Cipolla and the late
Bishop Vincent Leonard to the Depths of Hell is complete libel.  If you
are a fan or friend of Randy, tell her that she better start talking to an
attorney.  There still is ample time before the statute of limitations ex-

I'll eventually have to notify Stephen Stone of Renew America that many
editor retractions and corrections need be made.  Moreover, if you pasted
that Engel article on your own website and you refuse to remove it once
notified, expect a summons to appear in court as a defendant, somewhere
down the road.

There WILL be other defendants, too.  I'll continue this at a later time.
For now, you have enough substantive information that it should easily
break the hypnotic trance that Engel has on the weak-minded & gullible.
She is NOT a guardian of Truth, Justice, and the American Way.  She's
a gossipy and libelous hag who actually thinks that the historic red
Shoes of the Fisherman are homosexual shoes.

I give you your freedom from Randy Engel's influence and her pretense
of being the deliverer of truth and her hatred of the Shoes of the Fisher-
man.  Be free.

Till the next time,

Patrick Anthony Pontillo

In America, Truth ends up prevailing.