Proof that Wuerl ignored the Child Protective Services Act ... in his cover-up of Wolk, Zula, and Pucci, not to mention Zirwas, Hoehl, Paone, O'Malley, & Huff

Keep in mind that the Donald Wuerl who retaliated against the children of Risen Lord Parish, on account of their parents protesting against Wuerl on TV, was praised as a loving and caring man who only cared about the welfare of children.  Evidence proves that the picture of Wuerl-the-fatherly-protector was a complete lie.  In fact, below is a photocopy of the evidence that Wuerl only cared about himself.

A photocopy of a newspaper article reporting Phase I of Wuerl's uncovered Triple Cover-up at the time it was uncovered is posted several paragraphs below here.  Be patient and scroll down to it, so that you will learn how dishonest Wuerl's propaganda machine always was and is.

This, alone, proves that Wuerl was not the caring and protective bishop that his embedded propagandist, Ann Rodgers, (formerly of the Pgh Post Gazette) made him out to be.  Tiny Donald Wuerl ... the Elevator Shoes Kid ... is one big lie.  

I personally learned of Wuerl's ruthlessness and manipulative modus operandi during both phrases of the James Torquato Retaliations.  To this day, Wuerl was NEVER man enough to have apologized for those whistleblower

retaliations.

Plus, if Wuerl ... or his then-diocese ... would have been indicted & convicted for the offense of having concealed Frs. Wolk, Zula, and Pucci, it (or Wuerl) would have convicted of nothing more than a Summary Offense, in having violated the Child Services Protection Act.   

This means that he ... or his then-diocese ... would have been required to do no more than pay a fine.  However, this would have made Wuerl look bad on record, during Vatican paper-reviews. He probably wouldn't have become a cardinal,  if he or his then-diocese would have been found guilty of violating the Child's Protective Services Act.

Contradiction Time:  

Wuerl was made out to be a non-compromising disciplinarian, but after the Wolk indictment ... the opposite was illustrated.

"To say he will not be reassigned is a devastating thing," said Wuerl to the press shortly after he was caught performing his triple cover-up which was headlined with Father Robert Wolk's indictment.  

The same Donald Wuerl also said to the media, "It is NOT covering up to embrace a man who is suffering."  Yet, Ann Rodgers, (formerly known as Rodgers-Melnick) of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette had the audacity to deceive the public into believing Wuerl to be the bishop of zero tolerance that he never was.

Add to this the fact that Wuerl already reassigned the notorious John Hoehl months prior.  Wuerl had no intention of getting rid of Hoehl until the indictment of Wolk.  Yet, the pathologically bland Ann Rodgers had the audacity to make it look as if Wuerl were the instant disciplinarian from Day 1.  

You now see how far away from zero tolerance Wuerl was.  After all, he made a criminal sound like a victim.  You can now also see how much of a liar was Ann Rodgers of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette.  You need to keep in mind that a faction who praises Wuerl seeks to have him to get the 2,000 year old Roman Catholic Church to declare the repeatedly condemned Sin of Sodom a holy act of God.  Apparently, such people have strong stomachs.

Now, in the Year 2002, when Donald W. Wuerl was being made out to be the holiest male on Earth --- next to the molester Marcial Maciel who was also lauded as a saint --- would you have been praising Wuerl if you knew about his triple cover-up?  

Would writers have been calling that fraud "one of the good guys, if you they knew about DA John C. Pettit announcing to the press that Wuerl was uncooperative during the investigation which resulted in the indictments of Wolk, Richard "Sade" Zula, and Francis Pucci?

Would he have been made the Master of Ceremonies in a St. Patrick's Day parade, if Pittsburghers knew about Wuerl's public excuse for covering-up the crimes of three of his priests, followed by Wuerl publicly denying that it was the act of covering-up at all?   Or would you have categorized him with Bernard Law & Roger Mahoney?

Would you have been praising Wuerl that year, if Ann Rodgers and the Pgh Post Gazette were honest enough to report on the James Torquato case?  It's the case of a former personal secretary of Wuerl spending consecutive years not keeping his hands to himself and then retaliating the moment he was reported.  

You know, the Torquato case has dozens of pieces of evidence attached to it.  It is the single most evidence supported cover-up of Donald Wuerl.

Wuerl was headlined as the bishop who fought the Vatican to remove  "a molester priest," when the fact is that he only attempted to have the priest removed from ministry for what was later called a misdiagnosis of Depression and Suicidal Tendencies.  

The priest was never arrested, yet Wuerl let the papers claim that the priest was.  In fact, that priest, Anthony Cipolla, received a favorable Pennsylvania State Police background check security clearance in the Summer of 2014, where within it was stated that Cipolla has NO ARREST RECORD in the State of Pennsylvania.  For those of you who are brain dead, Cipolla's 2014 security clearance of a huge deal.

This triple cover-up also shows Wuerl's motive in letting Anthony Cipolla be the public scapegoat whose reputation was completely annihilated, despite the overwhelming evidence of Cipolla being the opposite of the media smear campaign launched against him.  

You see, DA John C. Pettit publicly stated, (and I am going by memory on this quote, meaning that it is to be regarded as paraphrased:  "I don't want to make this look like a witch hunt, but we would be sticking our heads in the sands to think that this is an isolated incident."  

This meant that there would be more investigating . . . there was to be more "snooping around," "looking around," "scrutinizing."  So, Wuerl needed a diversionary tactic, to persuade the law enforcement personnel in more than one sovereign state involved to be deceived into thinking that Wuerl was a staunch "zero tolerance" leader.  Wuerl was proven to be no such person.

Wuerl was in a law enforcement spotlight.  This meant that Wuerl needed a smokescreen, to deceive the public into thinking that he was a holy and all so caring saint.   Wuerl did nothing more than masquerade himself as an angel of light, at the expense of others such as an Anthony Cipolla who, unlike the effeminate Donald Wuerl, was found to have zero nexus with the homosexual subculture.  Wuerl, on the other hand, had a definitive nexus with the neo-Sodomite world.

The newspaper jpegs above prove that the slightly built Donald Wuerl thrived on a propaganda machine filled with sleight of hand deceptions and direct falsehoods.

In addition, don't forget that he rode the coattails of John Cardinal Wright, and without the help of the allegedly homosexual John Wright, the Donald Wuerl who accommodated banned Dignity Masses for eight consecutive years would have been nothing.

It was the court system that prompted Wuerl to strike the pose of a strict disciplinarian.  It was all a fraud to have claimed that Wuerl would come to the rescue of the victims of predatory priests such as the Edward Huff whom he kept hiding out in mental institutions and the Father James Torquato whom he sent to Rome while federal court papers had Torquato's name mentioned throughout them.  

Wuerl's artificial pose did not occur until three simultaneous indictments of three Pittsburgh priests occurred under Wuerl's watch, coupled with a DA John Pettit's public accusation that Wuerl's diocese performed uncooperative conduct with police investigators.

Keep in mind that there was no criminal investigation of Wolk, Zula, and Pucci until an attorney friend-of-the-family of the two young play toys reported the matter to the police.  The attorney did not do so until after Wuerl visited the family. 

Despite visiting the family, Wuerl still refused to report Wolk, Zula, and Pucci to the police, as was required in the Child Protective Services Act.  Now you can see more clearly that everything about Wuerl is either an outright lie and or sleight of hand deception.

In addition, Wuerl only went to the home of the traumatized family after their parish pastor was told by them that they were going to report the three molester priests to law enforcement authorities.  The pastor then informed Wuerl.

Do not be deceived.  Ann Rodgers made it sound as if Wuerl were a strict disciplinarian who ousted Hoehl, as soon as he learned of him. No, Wuerl placed Hoehl into chaplaincy ministry, as he did with Huff.  Wuerl did NOT read Hoehl the riot act until Wolk, Zula, and Pucci were criminally indicted.  Then, Hoehl became a hot potato.

Wuerl got rid of Hoehl, so that Wuerl would not get into trouble.  There was no loving and caring bishop involved.  I tell you solemnly, Wuerl was absolutely vicious and heartless while in Pittsburgh.  He was the personification of lies and retaliation.

As a  review, so that it will be clearly understood:

Now, Pgh Post Gazette reporter Ann Rodgers claimed that Wuerl had an epiphany while visiting the traumatized family and then became the "model of zero tolerance" thereafter.  

This claim is easily proven false by the fact that District Attorney John Pettit publicly announced that Wuerl's then Diocese of Pittsburgh did NOT provide the cooperation that the district attorney sought during the criminal investigation.  It was a criminal investigation which didn't commence until someone other than Wuerl notified the police.

If Donald Wuerl were the model of zero tolerance, he would have been the one who reported Wolk, Zula, and Pucci.  Plus, Wuerl would NOT have allowed the 'foot dragging' that a Western Pennsylvanian DA said was being committed by Wuerl's diocese.  Neither would Wuerl have reinstated Hoehl and Huff.  That which was told to you by former Post Gazette writer, Ann Rodgers, and FoxNews are proven falsehoods.

Wuerl's change-the-subject letter, after a priest's criminal indictment

 Keep in mind that Cardinal Wuerl rose to power by riding John Cardinal Wright's coat tails.  If Wuerl weren't Wright's long-term secretary, then Wuerl would have been a nobody in terms of power and influence.

      If Wuerl didn't ride Cardinal Wright's coat tails, Pittsburgh would have many more Catholic parishes and priests than it has today.  Pittsburgh wouldn't have been the last city to end the heretical Dignity Masses which can be described as Sodom & Gomorrah Masses.

In addition, the deacon whistle blower (previously reported at Wuerlgate) would have been a priest at this hour, and chances are that James Torquato would never have been made a parish pastor.

    In addition, Catholic Church property would not have gotten into masonic hands.  Tim Bendig would be a no-name.  More importantly, sweatshop labor profiteering would not have been ignored in Pittsburgh, especially in light of the fact that it was a city famous for championing worker's rights.

=============================================================

     The change-the-subject letter below was the one that Donald Wuerl wrote shortly after he was caught performing his Triple Cover-up.  Actually, it was the result of the Wolk indictment.  Wolk was the first of the three diocesan priests to get indicted during the end of Wuerl's first year as local ordinary of the RC Diocese of Pittsburgh.  Another word for local ordinary is "bishop."

      Wuerl stated that there was so much to do that Pittsburgh didn't have time to think about his then-diocese having become one of the first dioceses to be scathed in what was to become a coast to coast Watergate of perversity.

      Wuerl was not clever in his evils.  He was a sophomoric writer, especially when comparing him to the laureates with whom I was published in a couple literary anthologies.  He simply had a propaganda machine and a few in-the-pocket politicians who cow-towed to him, on account of the fear that not doing so would offend Pittsburgh's Catholic voters.  They didn't accept the fact that the devout Catholics of Pittsburgh saw Donald Wuerl as the enemy.

      Proof that the devout Catholics of Pittsburgh saw Wuerl as the enemy consisted in the amount of lawsuits filed against Wuerl, as well as complaints sent to Rome against Wuerl ....... not to mention the complaints against Wuerl leveled to the U.S. Papal Nuncio's office in Washington DC, as recently as the Year 2015.  

The most common nickname for Wuerl, while he was in Pittsburgh, was Whirlybird.  This goes to show that Wuerl was widely disrespected by any layman and lay-woman who had any dealings with him.  He was a vicious brat.

      Know this:  While in Pittsburgh Wuerl was either 1) feared, because of his ability to abuse his power and retaliated against you, or 2) resented, because of his ability to abuse his power and retaliate against you.

A Fourth Pittsburgh area molester got away, thanks to Donald Wuerl, ACCORDING to Cleveland Plain Dealer & Bryant Times

In re: Wuerl's Triple Cover-up which resulted in the indictments of Fathers Robert Wolk, Richard Zula, and Francis Pucci, accompanied by District Attorney John C Pettit calling Wuerl and his staff less-than-cooperative.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer mentioned the existence of an alleged fourth assailant in the case involving Frs. Wolk-Zula-&-Pucci.  The Plain Dealer mentioned four additional youths abused by either/or Frs Pucci, Wolk, Zula, the fourth suspect.  The Bryan Times, which served Ohioans on the Northwestern sector of the state reported the same things.

The fourth person was GEORGE ZIRWAS, someone who conveniently found his way to Cuba, only to meet his death in an unholy setting.

Incidentally, Robert Wolk was ordained the exact same year in which Wuerl was.  This would indicate that Wolk and Wuerl were classmates.  This would indicate cronyism in Wuerl's cover-up and in him publicly stating that telling a priest that he can no longer be in ministry "is a devastating thing to do."

    In 2015, Wuerl was hailed as a Poor Richard, living the ascetic life in a closed-down school.  He was then discovered to be living the Marie Antoinette lifestyle, in a $43 million complex, along Washington DC's posh Embassy Row.

Wuerl was being hailed as an ascetic even when he was living 
in this Pittsburgh mansion.  The lies about Wuerl were uncovered 
with documents, photos, and news archives.  He's a walking lie.  

As a humorous note, as soon as I took this photo, a "guard" dog came out of the mansion.   My remaining photos of the area were accompanied with the hostile sound of the dog.

Wuerl only had a zero tolerance track record when it came to having zero tolerance toward whistle-blowers who tried to clean-up the corruption in Wuerl's own diocese.  This included James Torquato's evidence-based accuser.  

You can add the Paul Dorsch who was a credible accuser of the notorious John Hoehl, not to mention the Chris Witkowski whose case was mentioned in the 2018 Pennsylvania Grand Jury Report.  Chris's perp was John Wellinger.  Also add the previously mentioned whistle-blower roll call the deacon whom Wuerl would never allow to be ordained a priest.

The press treatment of Wuerl has been a very unconscionable lie, regarding him being hailed as a heroic & caring zero tolerance bishop.  He was just another bishop who had his share of cover-ups and even retaliations, all the while having been an eight-year-long rebel against the Vatican ban on Dignity Masses.

All in all, Wuerl was one of the first bishops caught performing a cover-up.  My research shows that he was the second bishop, only preceded by the Lafayette Louisiana diocese's cover-up of Gilbert Gauthe.

The Bryan Times article:

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=tQYLAAAAIBAJ&sjid=jlEDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5427,4088961&dq=wolk+arrested+pittsburgh+zula+pucci&hl=en

The Cleveland Plain Dealer article:

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDu4R8O9ENFXyjtStajHIuexWVclCQrxB8IunsR3LFeghB7D237UXqhOm9QzuqUwvIo0n8CYO94VL6iqi3laBS8h1ycTeTyR1YxR_U3ziMhcM5hj-K8lxDEBArz62rA7JoCDAuxQ/s1600/Wuerl+Triple+Coverup+Cleveland+Plain+Dealer.jpg

Wuerl's 1993 to 2006 Cover-up of Fr. William P. O'Malley

Wuerl greenlighted William P. O'Malley into an open lane of sexual aggression

Location:  Butler County, the northern sector of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh.  Principle Borough:  Meridian, PA.  Keep in mind that Wuerl's Pittsburgh tenure started in February of 1988.  The Great Outrage throughout this time span was that ====> 

Ann Rodgers-Melnick kept defining Wuerl as the Bishop of Zero Tolerance.

~ ~ ~

Enter One Father William O'Malley.  1991:  O'Malley was reported in an alert sent to the diocese.  It stated that William P. O'Malley was bestowing under-aged youth with gifts and that he was having them do sleep-overs at the rectory.   A little too Chummy.

1993:  A 22 year old young adult accused O'Malley of having committed sexual assault on him, in a parish rectory.  No action was taken against O'Malley, except for "a warning."       

Note:  Wuerl would not protect any victim over the age of 17.

1997:  Another male accused O'Malley of having sexually assaulted him to a certain degree when he was the age of 12, while the 12 year old was drunk.

At the same time, according to the same accusation, William O'Malley photographed three other boys in their undergarments.  O'Malley did NOT deny the accusations.  However, he did not volunteer any play-by-play details, either.

Only at that point in time did Wuerl order O'Malley into psychiatric assessment and prognosis.  O'Malley was diagnosed as having an unnatural attraction toward high school aged males.

It was a matter of crucifying Christ anew.  Period.

1998:  Instead of practicing Zero Tolerance, Wuerl reinstated O'Malley into ministry and violated the Child Protection Services Act, by refraining from reporting O'Malley to the police.  Wuerl gave O'Malley a post in the diocesan administrative dept.

2002:  More male accusers against O'Malley continued to come forth. It was six in all.  The accusations went into the Year 2006, when Wuerl packed his bags for Washington, DC, all the while being regarded as the ultimate bishop of Zero Tolerance.

Of the additional youth who came forth, the most recent alleged act of sexual aggression was done by O'Malley in 1999.

2003:  O'Malley finally tendered his resignation from Pittsburgh diocesan ministry.

2006:  It was not until the year when Wuerl was to transfer to Washington did Wuerl report O'Malley to the police.

2008:  O'Malley died

On occasion, Wuerl would have an accused priest ride-out the statute of limitations before Wuerl would report the priest.  At other times, Wuerl waited until the priest was soon to approach death, before Wuerl would report the priest.  Wuerl did NOT report O'Malley until two years before O'Malley's death.

Fr Edward Huff: Wuerl Reinstated him. Yet, he would be indicted & convicted.

Pittsburgh's Point State Park, bordering the famous Three River's Confluence,
and within walking distance of the Pgh RC Diocesan Administrative Building.

.

Let us review, the life of Cardinal Donald Wuerl is one contiguous lie, always and in every way.  For example, Donald Wuerl did NOT single-handedly or collectively write the Teachings of Christ.  Wuerl

lied to the media about having done so in 1979.  Wuerl was merely one of three editors.  A multiplicity of writers wrote that catechism book, and Wuerl was NOT one of them.

Let us adjourn to the Edward Huff case.  This is one of Wuerl's bigger frauds, simply because, while Wuerl was being praised as a great noble fighter against the evil evil Vatican in the Anthony Cipolla Case, Wuerl was actually covering-up the sexual crimes of Fr. Edward Huff, as well as Frs. Ernest Paone, William O'Malley, John Hoehl, & George Zirwas, not to mention John Wellinger.

Concerning Huff, Wuerl literally reinstated him, as much as Wuerl reinstated John Hoehl the first year Wuerl was RC bishop of Pittsburgh.  So, imagine the following:

     Wuerl was covering-up Fr. Edward Huff, while being paraded around the media outlets as the overly heroic bishop of zero tolerance.  EWTN, decades later would claim that Wuerl removed 18 of 19 priests.  Of course, EWTN has to count the Huff case, for them claim to be true.

Well, their claim is a big lie.  Incidentally, Wuerl reinstated John Hoehl, too.  Then he got rid of Hoehl as soon as Bob Wolk was indicted.  Thus, t is an outrage for EWTN to claim that Wuerl removed Hoehl as if to be a responsible and caring zero tolerance bishop.  EWTN needs to go off the air as much as Wuerl needs to do.

The added irony to this is that Wuerl worked in Rome, as a cardinal's personal secretary for ten consecutive years.  So, if the Vatican is as evil as the media made it out to be in Wuerl's pursuit of the Cipolla Case, then Wuerl is equally as evil, with ten years of said evil under his proverbial belt.

For those who do not read well, let's repeat this thought:

     1)  Wuerl was made out to be a heroic champion, fighting an evil & wicked Vatican.

     2)  Wuerl worked in Rome, under John Cardinal Wright, for ten years.  Wuerl could not have seen the Vatican as so torturously evil as the 1990s press released on the Cipolla Case made it out to be ... or or or Wuerl was a ten year accomplice of Vatican corruption.  Let's continue.

Yes, the sun went down on Wuerl's stretch of power, dating
back to February 1988.  Churches were being closed left and right, by Wuerl.
Vocations decreased left and right during Wuerl's time of high power.
Dollars to sex abuse victims evaporated away,
and the Faith of Peter was replaced by the Sin of Cowardice.

For those unaware, Huff was Wuerl's "ping-pong cover-up."  Like a ping-pong ball, Huff was sent between Pittsburgh and Saint Louis. 

Christopher Dickey once wrote that Donald Wuerl was on record declaring zero tolerance for priests accused of sexual abuse 14 years before it became public policy.  Well, Wuerl did NOT observe, did NOT practice, and did NOT fulfill what he declared.

This is proven in the Wolk, Zula, and Pucci cover-up, as well as in the Edward "three-times-reported" Huff case, along with the cases involving Frs. Hoehl, Paone, Zirwas, Wellinger, & O'Malley.  

Add Torquato to the mix.  The cover-up of him continues, because his target of sexual aggression was over the age of 18.  In Wuerl's Pittsburgh diocese, if a person were over the age of 18, he was fair game, and a priest could wreak havoc on his life without Wuerl objecting, at all.

The Krawczyk Case: 7 years probation in death; the death of another.

After Wuerl was unofficially deemed the model of zero tolerance,  there was the 2003 arrest and arraignment of a Fr. Henry Krawczyk who was previously reported to Pittsburgh diocesan authorities for unbecoming conduct.  Donald Wuerl knew of the prior allegations against Father Krawczyk before that priest set the scenario for the sudden death of former Pitt football player, Billy Gaines.

If Wuerl were not negligent in that matter, chances are that the young Billy Gaines would not have died an alcohol-related death, twenty hours after having fallen from a Pittsburgh diocesan catwalk onto one of its church pews.  Plus, the parish wouldn't have been receiving the Playboy Station, during that time.

In addition, the August 2018 PA Grand Jury Report attributed a suicide to the same Fr. Krawczyk.  It involved the youngest brother of a family who, according to a memorandum, would indulge in alcohol with Krawczyk and whatever it was that got them high.  

The same youth was woke up after an alcohol binge and found Krawczyk performing an unnatural act upon him.  Of course, in my ancestors' Renaissance Italy, such priests literally got the death penalty for such conduct.  None the less, the suicide occurred in 2006, after Krawczyk was put into the criminal court system, only to receive probation.  None the less, being a molester priest can be quite deadly.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=jO8NAAAAIBAJ&sjid=hnADAAAAIBAJ&pg=6128,3246225&dq=henry+krawczyk+minors+diocese+knew&hl=en

http://www.leagle.com/decision/2004927354FSupp2d573_1872

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news3/2003_10_02_AP_WitnessPriest_Henry_Krawczyk_7.htm

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2519&dat=20050223&id=ik9aAAAAIBAJ&sjid=-CgMAAAAIBAJ&pg=423,17714232&hl=en

The thesis statement is this:

Wuerl was made out to be a deeply caring bishop who would risk his life for humanity.  Meanwhile, Wuerl was living in Marie-Antoinette-Luxury and had gotten away with the Torquato Retaliations that he de facto ratified.

Wuerl was made out to be deeply caring, but he completely ignored the plight of hundreds of million sweatshop workers throughout the world whose products flooded the American market and typical American home.

Wuerl's cover-up of Wolk, Zula, and Pucci was given a rewrite, where he was made out to be the wise overseer, instead of an aggravation to law enforcement personnel and the family stung by three Pittsburgh diocesan priests.

The Wellinger case was a persona non-grata of its own, and Wuerl's reinstatement of former high school headmaster John Hoehl was denied so much so that writer Ann Rodgers made it look as if Wuerl immediately read Hoehl the Riot Act and ran him out of town.

Curiously enough, however, the Huff indictment and conviction was mentioned in the papers during 2002, when the Wuerl-for-God campaign was working overtime.

If Wuerl really cared, he would have been sure that human life would not have been in jeopardy, as was the case in the first wave of the Torquato Retaliations.  Wuerl proved his unsuitability to rule,  when he would look the other way and perform dereliction of duty.

Concerning the realization that Donald Wuerl was not motivated by conscience, but by law enforcement authorities, take note of the following statement made by author and expert witness, Richard Sipe.  It was published in the March 11, 2002 edition of USA Today:

   "It is only the court system and the media that have forced the Church to take more reasonable action.  There is a very significant lack of moral leadership within the Church to face up to this problem, because they're afraid of what it will uncover of higher-ups in the Church."

It was the court system which compelled Wuerl to announce a zero tolerance policy.  It took the indictment of the Father Robert Wolk.  The 2002 media then forced Wuerl to remove several priests attached to credible sex abuse accusations whom Donald Wuerl had been keeping in ministry.

At the start of 2002,  Wuerl was incapable of claiming that his diocese was free of priests accused of molesting youth.  Only after the media exploded with report after report of sex abuse cover-ups did Wuerl finally remove those priests.  He removed the priests out of political pressure.

Wuerl's zero tolerance image was nothing more than unconscionable propaganda, especially in light of the fact that court briefs were filed against his diocese in 2002, at the US Supreme Court's Clerk of Court's Office.

Furthermore, Wuerl's former secretary was still in ministry during that year, showing Wuerl to not be the model of zero tolerance that he was made out to be.  In fact, he would soon assign his former secretary to a parish pastor's post, effective New Year's Day 2004.

The 21st Century praise given to Donald Wuerl by the media was an act of cowardice, as if telling the truth about a corrupt bishop would have resulted in the ultimate destruction of all mankind.  This era of mankind has been one in which the media deceived the public in a number of topics.  Concerning the topics, Donald Wuerl is merely one of many.  Concerning corrupt bishops, Wuerl is merely one of many.

A courtesy email that Richard Sipe sent me in 2009 surprised me, because he described the Donald Wuerl power play in the following way:

"It's the reformation all over again."

 _______________________________

For further reading on other topics, see:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=nfl&id=2287982

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/south/2005/02/23/Priest-pleads-guilty-in-death-of-Pitt-football-player/stories/200502230301

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news3/1988_10_11_Mullan_EditorsNote_Robert_Wolk_1.htm

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=mYMcAAAAIBAJ&sjid=+b2MEAAAAIBAJ&pg=2329,10275422&hl=en

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news3/1989_05_23_UnitedPressInternational_Richard_Zula_3.htm

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=4ARlAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2XcNAAAAIBAJ&pg=4517,3545671&dq=zula+diocese+wuerl&hl=en
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/11/13/us/3-pennsylvania-priests-accused-of-molesting.html

Concerning the Late Father George Zirwas:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=FFAxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=d3ADAAAAIBAJ&pg=5379,202749&dq=george+zirwas+pittsburgh+cuba&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=FNBIAAAAIBAJ&sjid=XYIMAAAAIBAJ&pg=1312,127061&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=77AaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=fjAEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5477,1539593&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=bc00AAAAIBAJ&sjid=KSEGAAAAIBAJ&pg=3062,4367236&hl=en

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/2003-04-17/news/murdered-in-havana/
  
-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

A second accuser of Father LeDoux long since came forth

Fallen Angels,  Fallen Flowers.
Keep in mind that below is the conveyance of sex abuse allegations,
without the submission of evidentiary support to those accusations.
That which is certain is that Fr. LeDoux was part of the Dignity Mass scandal.

The pertinent note about recently accused Fr. Michael LeDoux is that he was stationed at one of the two Dignity Mass sites, namely St Pamphilus, in Beechview.  The group, Dignity, claims that it isn't a sin to engage in the sin of Sodom.  LeDoux was stationed at the Dignity Mass parish between 1993 and 1995.

He was then stationed at Serra Catholic High School, between 1995 and the Year 2000.  Thus, he was in Pittsburgh during the Wuerl years.  This is further evidence that it was a lie for the media to have stated that the Diocese of Pittsburgh, under Wuerl, went relatively unscathed during the Sex Abuse Crisis.

The truth is that, under Wuerl, the Pittsburgh diocese became one of the very first diocese 'scathed,' in the form of the triple indictment of Frs. Wolk, Zula, & Pucci, as well as the indictment of Fr. Edward Huff, not to mention the cases involving Frs. Wellinger and Torquato, individually.

Below are two introductory emails that an alleged victim of Fr Michael LeDoux sent to an ally/investigator on March 12, 2013.   The name and email address of the accuser has been redacted.

The receiver of the emails asked why the Pittsburgh Diocese failed to let people know that another alleged victim of Father Michael LeDoux has stepped forward -- "that another scandal involving Serra Catholic High School in McKeesport, PA, is brewing."

He also asked where's notification from District Attorney Stephen Zappala Jr. that others may have been in harm’s way.  He additionally asked if Rita Flaherty notified law enforcement authorities about the relatively new accuser.

Concerning the recipient of the emails, you need to know that he was raised in the midst of mobster corruption, where he often "played pinball in the gambling joints where the bets were made and where the wise guys would make their weekly deliveries of cartons of cigarettes missing the required Pennsylvania tax stamp."  He was attuned to corruption and followed its trail like a blood hound

____________________________________________________________

----Original Message-----
From: Name redacted Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 1:32 AM
To: mike@ferencemarketing.com
Subject: Fr. Mike Ledeux

I've read your articles and maybe we can help each other.  I was a stu-
dent at Serra from 96-2000.  I just recently heard about the allegations
from the 80's involving Fr. Mike.  I was kind of revealed from years and
years of personal torment because I know I wasn't the only one he'd done
this to and this guy had the balls to come forward and say something.  I
still don't know what to do.  I mean the last thing I want is people, fami-
ly and friends especially to know about this.  What should I do, or who
should I tell?  Would it even be worth it?  You seem to know how these
things are handled.  I look forward to your response and this letter re-
mains confidential, thank you.

Sent from my iPhone
__________________________________________________________

A few email messages later, the alleged victim writes that he has contact-
ed Rita Flaherty of the Pittsburgh Diocese.

-----Original Message-----
> From:Name and email address redacted]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 12:03 PM
> To: Mike Ference
> Subject: Re: Fr. Mike Ledeux
>
> What's up mike. I've been busy and just taking my time before I come
> forward with this. I have been in contact by email with Rita Flaherty
> from the Pittsburgh Diocese. I just wanted to keep in touch.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
___________________________________________________________

Here’s the response from Rita Flaherty. As you can see, the alleged victim
received a reply from Rita Flaherty on March 18, 2013

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 18, 2013, at 4:45 PM, "Flaherty, Rita E"
<rflaherty@diopitt.org> wrote:

Name redacted,

I wanted to check back with you following your email of last week regard-
ing abuse by Father Michael LeDoux.   I did not hear from you after I re-
sponded to your email last week.  I want to make sure you did in fact re-
ceive my email.  If there is anything I can do to assist you with regard to
this allegation, please do not hesitate to be in touch with me.  You can
reach me by email or by phone.  My office number is 412-456-3060.
You can also call in on the Diocesan Abuse Hotline which I check
throughout the day.  The number for the hotline is 1-888-808-1235.
I want to hear what you have to share, Name redacted so please be
in contact.

Have a good evening!

Mrs. Rita E. Flaherty, M.S.W., L.S.W.
Diocesan Assistance Coordinator
____________________________

http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/3348862-74/ledoux-diocese-catholic

http://www.delconewsnetwork.com/newsofdelawarecounty/news/ex-widener-dean-accused-of-sexual-abuse-in-s/article_2f51d499-6fa5-5a68-a9df-98f3aa59a323.html

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2013/01/23/downtown-protest-to-be-held-over-alleged-predator-priest/

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

Pittsburgh, where Cardinal Donald Wuerl's web of corruption was spun, with the help the Ann Rodgers who was repeatedly caught lying in print, via fact checking.

Nor did he report Wolk, Zula, and Pucci to the police.  Attorney F. Peter Dixon did.  Attorney Dixon was a friend of the victimized family.

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

THEREFORE, if Wuerl had the life-changing epiphany that the deceptive, non-Catholic, and pathologically bland Ann Rodgers claimed, then Donald Wuerl would have reported Wolk, Zula, Pucci, Huff, and Hoehl to the law enforcement authorities.  He did not do so.  Thus, Ann Rodgers is once again found to be a liar, predictably enough.  

Then there was Wellinger, not to mention Wuerl reinstating Huff.  All in all, know that Ann Rodgers IS a liar.  She was a non-Catholic Pittsburgh Post Gazette writer who was appointed Pittsburgh Roman Catholic Diocesan director of communications.  She still is a Protestant.  Her appointment is a case study in cronyism and Vatican II corruption.  

Read onward, because you need to know what liars comprise the Wuerl propaganda machine.  Incidentally, Wuerl did NOT write the Teachings of Christ.  He was merely one of three editors of the catechism book which had multiple authors.  Wuerl, himself, began the lie which claimed that he wrote that catechism book single-handedly.

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

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

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

In addition, if Wuerl were the heroic bishop of zero tolerance that Ann Rodgers said he was, then Wuerl would have immediately suspended the notorious John Hoehl whom Wuerl personally put back into ministry, shortly before that dinner transpired.

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

Wolk, Zula, & Pucci

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

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

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

An added scandal  is in the fact that David Zubik, a secretary of John Hoehl, never reported Hoehl for his well-noted sex crimes.  However, my opinion is that David Zubik had no idea of what Hoehl was doing in his private life.  I personally knew Fr. Dave.  Dave didn't buddy around with the athletes whom Hoehl targeted.  Dave wasn't in the inner circle.  

In my opinion David Zubik isn't an accomplice.  The problem is that he wasn't alert to his surroundings.  He needed to reach-out more.  If he did, he could have spared someone of the grief that comes with being a high school headmaster's prey.

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

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

Concerning Hoehl and the time of the Wolk indictment, if Wuerl were found to have a criminal in ministry, law enforcement would have scoured the Pittsburgh diocese and Wuerl in investigative detail.  Wuerl's private life, even when he was the long-term secretary under John Cardinal Wright, would have been revealed to law enforcement authorities.

Wuerl stubbornly kept John Hoehl in  diocesan ministry for as long as he could do so, without having the Diocese of Pittsburgh become a magnetized target of a detailed law enforcement investigation.

Added proof that Wuerl had NO change of heart after the dinner evening with the family victimized by Wolk, Zula, and Pucci was that he did NOT report those three priests.  An attorney who was a friend of the victimized family did the reporting thereof.  So, as you can see, Ann Rodgers, formerly of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, is a liar.

Rocco Palmo and Christopher Dickey were fools to have used her as a source in their articles about Donald Wuerl which were basically two plagiarisms of Rodgers; falsehoods.  They lost credibility with anyone familiar with the Wuerlgate Jpegs, news archives, and witness accounts.  They lost credible with anyone who was there in Pittsburgh during the 1990s.

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

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

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

HOWEVER ...

Wuerl's sex abuse policy did NOT apply to 1} the case of  Edward Huff who would eventually be criminally indicted, 2} the credible seminarian Wuerl prevented from being ordained, 3} the  case of Fr. James Torquato, 4} the case of Fr. John Wellinger,  Plus, the policy was NOT implemented until after Wuerl put the notorious John S. Hoehl back into ministry.

Even more hypocritical was the fact that Wuerl put back into ministry the previously mentioned Edward Huff who was reported to Wuerl three different times, by three different sets of concerned Catholics.  The Zero-Tolerance label placed on Wuerl was a fraudulent claim.

__________________________________________________

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

A Review of Wuerl's Triple Cover-up

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

Do NOT ever be deceived into thinking that Wuerl was a revered presence in Pittsburgh.  The number of lawsuits filed against him proves  otherwise.  Wuerl had contrived press and media coverage, as well as the pit bull Ron Lengwin who actually is very tall and who allegedly sought to intimidate people in the mode of a big bully.

Me seeing how tall Lengwin is was as shocking to me as having seen how tiny Wuerl is.  All that Lengwin ever did to me was smile at me with gritted teeth and a snarl.  He kept moving and I never saw him again.  This was at the diocesan building.

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

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

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

During the journalists' 2013 papal conjecture phrase, shortly before Bergoglio ascended to the Chair of Saint Peter, the Daily Beast's Paris bureau chief conjectured that Cardinal Wuerl was America's candidate for pope, in light of the newspaper articles that glorified Wuerl, especially in the heavily misrepresented Anthony Cipolla case that starred a seminary flunk-out who was described as a perpetual liar by multiple persons who knew him.

In fact, the Cipolla case starred an individual who was even declared NOT credible by Donald Wuerl, at one time.  His name is Tim Bendig and he lied to me four times in a row in the Year 2014, during a telephone conversation that he initiated with me during work hours.  I conducted that conversation in a construction trailer office, next to a drawing board.

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

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

Now Wuerl told his staff it had to get its priorities straight: the first concern was the injured party, the second was for the person’s family, the third—and only the third—was the potential harm to the church and its reputation.   He’s on the record declaring zero tolerance for priests accused of sexual abuse 14 years before that became official policy.

_________________________________________________

The decision to which Dickey referred was Wuerl's decision to put back into ministry the notorious John S. Hoehl, former headmaster of Quigley H.S., in Baden Pennsylvania.  I attended that school for four years.  And yes, I heard the rumors while in school.

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

The source of this letter is self-evident.

Fr. John Wellinger: Wuerl's ALLEGED fifth coverup in his first year ...

... in his first year as bishop of Pittsburgh which was 1988-1989.

                    http://www.donaldwuerl.com/2013/06/wellinger-was-reported-beforehand.html

The thesis statement is that the Diocese of Pittsburgh was ALLEGEDLY notified about Wellinger long before diocesan spokesman Ron Lengwin claimed that it was.  The allegation goes on to state that the diocese did nothing when John Wellinger was first accused.  Therefore, the recent mainstream media reports give my sources on the issue much more credibility in my eyes.  This includes the credibility of Mike Ference.

Now, concerning Mike, I am well aware of his comment board statements throughout the internet.  Keep in mind that he was the dad of the high school student shot in the back of the head while sitting on a bus, about to disembark for another day of school.  Then came the truncating of the investigation, in as far as concerned who and what was the cause of a fellow student firing a round from a 32 caliber hand gun into the head of young Adam Ference.  There is also the matter of how Mike was badgered out of his regional management job with a company who had Pittsburgh diocesan entities as customers.

Add to this the intimidating theatrics played by a Pittsburgh Diocesan attorney, during a deposition which pertained to the Ference lawsuit.  Keep in mind that the Ference attorney simply asked a law enforcement man what he knew about a John Wellinger molesting youth of the McKeesport area (a Pittsburgh, suburb located near the Clairton PA which was made famous by the Deniro & Streep movie called, the Deer Hunter.)  

Mike was told that customers complained about him, but only after the shooting and Mike's desire to get to the root cause of the shooting.  In defense of Mike, I posted a number of letters of recommendation from clients of his who had no complaints against Mike.  Thus, it caused to wonder if the Diocese of Pittsburgh, when under Donald Wuerl, performed a few bully tactics, in order to get Mike Ference dislodged from his employment position.

http://www.donaldwuerl.com/2012/05/dismissal.html

You must keep in mind that Donald Wuerl brings out the worst in everyone, even in those regarded as his friends.  In those who are regarded as being in Wuerl's circle, Wuerl brings out arrogance and conceit, as well as ruthlessness.  In as much, you can see why Mike would write what he did on some internet comment boards.  He was actually trying to trigger the re-opening of Adam's case.

Now, concerning Mike, he sent me a few pages of Jpeg evidence which I did NOT post.  None the less, that evidence gave plausibility to Mike's allegations.  Plus, two accused men of the cloth, namely Br. Kenneth Ghastin and Fr. Michael Ledoux, ever so coincidentally were stationed at the same Serra Catholic High School that hosted the attempted murder and successful suicide involving Mike Ference's son.  Think!  What if it happened to you?  Would you have sat back and said, "Ho hum, twindly dee.  Who cares?"  

ANS:  Not if you're human and still have blood circulating within you.  You would have ended doing what Mike Ference did.

The aforementioned pieces of evidence, both circumstantial and material, are more than enough to give a degree of plausibility to Mike, in as so far as goes the:

1} truncated investigation of the attempted murder of his son,

2} the loss of a job that paid a bit more than that of a night watchman,

3} the intimidation tactic of a Pgh diocesan attorney during a deposition.

Mike has suffered greatly for years.   I don't abandon those who suffer intensely.  Of course, I only posted a small fraction of what he submitted to me and heavily edited it, as well.  Plus, I only posted that which pertains to the shooting of Mike's son.  None the less, that which is posted here about the shooting of Adam Ference is worth the read.  In fact, the recent news about Father John Wellinger gives Mike much more credibility.  At the very least, give Mike your emotional support, in at least wishing him well.  After all, how you would like it if all the things that happened to Mike happened to you?  So, extend charity to him.

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2013/04/08/late-wilkinsburg-priest-accused-of-abuse/

http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/3797604-74/diocese-letter-wellinger#axzz2dtbsVFMM

The operation moved from downtown ... near the Monongahela River ...
to the Northside, near the very well-built baseball stadium facing the Ohio River.

The second person to report Wellinger alleges that Donald Wuerl treated  him with indifference, upon the reporting.  The second accuser became party to a class action suit and received an out of court settlement in the process.

When he was bishop of Pittsburgh, Donald Wuerl was caught performing the simultaneous cover-up of four diocesan priests, three of whom were criminally indicted.  Wuerl disregarded of the Child Protective Services Act which required all "mandated reporters" to report molesters to Child Youth Services.  

The Diocese of Pittsburgh's claim that it had no obligation to report molester priests contradicts itself in that it operates grade schools and high schools, as well as employs the services of youth, in the capacity of altar servers & choir members.  If it's not a mandated reporter, then no institution is.

The official diocesan spokesman, as well as the Allegheny County district attorney, claimed that the Diocese of Pittsburgh had no obligation to notify Child Youth Services about the pri ests, as  was prescribed in the Child Protective Services Act.    

In direct  contrast was James A. Esler, head of the human service section of Allegheny County's Law Department.   He stated that there  was no question in his mind that the Diocese of Pittsburgh had the obligation to report those priests.   Today, it is understood that anyone aware of a molester has the obligation to report him, for the sake of those who would otherwise become future sex abuse casualties.  

See:  http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4118/1032/1600/Wuerl1halved.0.jpg

The four documented priests not reported by Wuerl to the CYS were Wolk, Zula, Pucci, and Hoehl.  Pursuant to recent evidence ... and pursuant to evidence which already existed ... Donald Wuerl's former diocese was allegedly engaged in a fifth cover-up in the same one year ... in Wuerl's first year as bishop of Pittsburgh.  

The existence of a fifth priest being held in Wuerl's shadow was confirmed via recent electronic communication.  It was a communication of the alleged first victim of the alleged fifth abusive priest.  

The evidence of this fifth priest was also supported by the actions of a diocesan attorney during a lawsuit's deposition, by which he acted as if the diocese had something serious to hide about the priest.  The priest was Fr. John Wellinger.  The electronic communication was NOT intercepted.  It was freely given by the communication's recipient.  It was perfectly legal.

John Wellinger was accused of having spiked a youth's drink, rendering the young man unconscious.  When the youth awakened, he managed to call 911 and get taken to a nearby hospital, allegedly.    He then notified the attending nurse that the priest who made his way into the hospital was the one who "did this" to him.

In addition, the individual claimed that no doctor treated him and that the police were never called.  However, the accuser's dad allegedly received written notice from the diocese, informing him that he was banned from the grounds where the accused priest lived.

This is because the dad of the spiked-drink victim allegedly went to confront the priest during a parish council meeting.  The same priest would later be accused of harming yet another youth, only more graphically.

This allegation, on it's own, is weak and needs some type of corroboration.  Well, a plausible form of corroboration occurred during a lawsuit's deposition.  You see, there was a Serra Catholic High School student who was shot in the back of the head shortly after the bus rolled onto Catholic Church grounds.  A lawsuit ensued, and during a deposition, the witness being questioned was asked the following, to the effect thereof:

"What do you know about a Catholic priest by the name of John Wellinger sexually abusing any students at Serra Catholic High School?"

The question was inspired by the local law enforcement head who proposed that the Serra Catholic student who was shot in the head was shot by a fellow student who might have been molested and/or psychologically influenced by Fr. John Wellinger.  

If no accusations against John Wellinger existed, then the witness under oath could have simply said that he knew of no such thing.  However, the diocese's defense attorney immediately pounded his first on the table and loudly objected, as if the diocesan had something to hide.

In addition, during this time was Wuerl's long distance musical chairs cover-up of Edward Huff, between Pittsburgh and St. Louis.  In his fit of rage, the diocesan attorney mentioned that he would file certain motions, should the question be pursued.  

This indicates that Wuerl and his diocese had something to hide.  Well, ever so coincidentally, the same Fr. John Wellinger would come to be accused of molestation by an entirely different person in the years to come. 

Concerning any valid objection at the deposition, it would have been the common "assumes facts not in evidence," upon which the plaintiff's attorney could have easily rephrased the question.  He didn't rephrase it.  That was suspicious.  In the end, the attorney for the shooting victim's family did more for Donald Wuerl than the victimized family.  Why?

The theatrical display of the diocesan attorney frightened the father of the young man who was shot in the head.  Therefore, the family resolved to walk away from the case.  But a few weeks after the fist pounding incident, the victim family's attorney contacted the dad, to let him know that an out of court settlement had been reached with Wuerl's diocese.

The father and son both agreed to refuse the offer, so that it could never be said that they were only in it for the money.  However, the family's attorney urged the settlement to be signed, so that the law firm could be paid through a percentage thereof.  If there would be no settlement, then the law firm's share would come out of the escrow account that was created to cover the costs of the case.

Sadly, the father and son agreed to the settlement, under a sense of compulsion and duress.  The settlement was for only $5,000 ... a very small sum for an attempted murder civil action.

None the less, it was the result of fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation, in that the lawyer never told the father that the deposition question could have easily been rephrased and that the dad was within his rights to pursue the case.  The dad was made to live in fear, due to a mistaken notion.  That constitutes fraud.

The dad of the young man shot in the head realized later that the theatrical display of the diocese's attorney was exactly that ... a show.  What disturbed the dad was that his attorney had the fiduciary obligation to tell him that the diocese's attorney was playing games, and that fist-pounding-the-table-routine was merely an intimidation tactic.