If you are low on brain cells, let me help. The 2018 Pennsylvania Grand Jury report ... on Cipolla ... was much different than the 2016 report of Randy Engel. That 2018 report proved the 2016 Engel article to be a lie. After all, the detective in charge expressly spoke of how Cipolla was not arrested and how the "magistrate went along with" not having him indicted.
In the 2018 report, there was no mention of the evidence Engel claimed to have existed. I already illustrated that it did NOT exist, and the Diane Thompson is a mere liar. For example, the 1978 case began with a phone call on July 25th, 1978. It ended 35 days later, with Diane Thompson withdrawing her private criminal complaint. Well, in 1978, it took 52 days for a forensics lab to produce DNA test results.
That which Randy Engel claimed to exist as damning evidence in her 2016 article did not exist in the 2018 Pennsylvania Grand Jury Report.
The Cipolla Case had zero physical evidence to present to a magistrate. Diane Thompson's eldest son had no corroborating witnesses to confirm any of his damning allegations. And the sole detective of that 1978 case testified to the PA Grand Jury that he only believed that Cipolla was guilty, because the detective believed that no 12 year child would ever lie to a police officer.
That one 12 year child's words which had NO CORROBORATING witness attached to it and no physical "evidentiary support" to confirm anything spoken by the 12 year old child was the detective's sole case. The detective could have asked a judge to order a grand jury for investigating Cipolla, but you need evidence for that to be done.
Allegation Easy to IMPEACH
|
Before all else, you need to learn the following things through concurrence and confirmation. The blue blocks of information below are my way of saying, "I told you so." Those blocks of 2026 confirm as TRUE that which I stated back in 2016, 2017, etc.
More
specifically, Cipolla was served with a Summary Notice to appear at a
Probable Cause Hearing, on August 28, 1978. Yet the 1978 journalist
described the Summary Notice as an indictment. The incompetent
journalist of 1978 described it as an arrest.
The
reason why a Probable Caused Hearing was scheduled was because the
police had no evidence against Cipolla, and therefore, the police could
not file a police criminal complaint, otherwise known as a Police
Affidavit.
If there existed the evidence that Diane Thompson and her
then-twelve old son claimed that there was, Cipolla would have been
placed in handcuffs without being summoned to an August 28th, 1978
hearing. Therefore ====>
The
truth is that the scheduled August 28th hearing was to see if there
were due cause to file an indictment against Cipolla, in the first
place. The hearing was to see if he was going to be arrested. No
arrest transpired.
Below is a timeline consensus, from AI
In
review, in order to prevent air-headed misunderstanding: The 1978
Cipolla Case lasted 34 days, and there was NO ARREST. There was only a
scheduled PROBABLE CAUSE HEARING, and such hearings were designed to
discern if whether or not there were cause to file charges in the first
place.
Moreover, the Grand Jury Act of 1974 abolished what is known as Indicting Grand Juries and replaced them with Probable Cause Hearings. The phrase "preliminary hearing" became synonymous with Probable Cause Hearing.
The August 1978 hearing was cancelled an hour or so before it started, by Diane Thompson, herself.
The
34 day time span is pivotal to note, because, in 1978, it took
approximately 52 days for the results of a seminal fluid test to be
issued by any lab. There was NO POSITIVE seminal fluid evidence
involved in 1978 Cipolla case, at all.
Concerning Diane Thompson's false claim about semen in 1978, even if there were such a thing found on Tucker, the test results would not have come before the August 28th Probable Cause. And if there were evidence found, then there would have no probable cause hearing needed in August of 1978:
 |
| In
as much, Diane Thompson lied ... yet again. Randy Engel was stupid
enough to have believed her ... yet again. There was no seminal fluid
report in the 1978 Cipolla Case, and there was none in the 1989 Tim
Bendig Case, concerning a Tim Bendig who was repeatedly accused of being
a lying con artist throughout the years. |
