To start, the great lie of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's Ann Rodgers-Melnick in 1993 and 1995 was her claim that the Vatican's high court deliberated only on molestation accusations, in the Cipolla v. Wuerl Case.
The truth is that the 1995 Vatican rehearing of the Cipolla v. Wuerl Case did not involve molestation accusations at all. It involved the question if whether or not Wuerl was justified in having officially removed Cipolla from priestly ministry solely based on a Clinical Depression & Suicidal Tendencies diagnosis given to Cipolla by St Luke's Institute in Maryland.
Wuerl's official grounds for laicizing Anthony Cipolla was Psychic Defect ... NOT "sexual abuse." Ann Rodgers LIED. In fact, she lied more than once. Actually, she lied as a matter of habit when it came to rolling out the pro-Wuerl propaganda like a red carpet.
That case also involved the question if whether or not the clean bill of health Cipolla simultaneously received from the board-certified & licensed St. Michael's of NYC was evidence which Wuerl had to honor in his final decision-making on Cipolla.
The Post-Gazette deceived the Public for decades
There was no trial at the Vatican which sought to judge if whether or not Cipolla molested Tim Bendig. Yet, Ann Rodgers-Melnick made it sound as if the rehearing was only about molestation accusations.
In fact, Tim Bendig told a reporter that Cipolla was tried at the Vatican and found guilty of having molested Bendig. This, of course, was yet another lie from the Tim Bendig whom I personally knew to be a serial liar.
The reporter acted so surprised in writing, as if this was something new that he learned. It even got to the point in his article where the reporter rhetorically asked in writing, "How would I have known this?"
ANSWER to the intelligence-insulting reporter: It was only front-page news which got to the point where the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's front page had a full length photo of Cipolla, in an edition which committed multi-million dollar defamation against him. References to the Bendig Case was on radio talk shows, also. In fact, the only reason why that reporter and any other reporter interviewed Tim Bendig was because Bendig became famous for the 1988-1993 Cipolla Case. So, if that "surprised" reporter never heard of the Bendig accusations against Cipolla, then that interviewer was an incompetent reporter.
In order to illuminate you the corruption of the post-Vatican II church, a review of the influence given to this Ann Rodgers-Melnick would come in handy. Even though she was never a Catholic, she was hired to be the Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh communications director, from 2016 to New Year's Day 2023.
Then, the same Ann Rodgers who was caught lying in print multiple times was appointed to be the general manager of the Pittsburgh Catholic Newspaper. Welcome to Propagandaville, USA. Welcome to the post-Vatican II's Twilight Zone.
The Central Theme of the Lies spread by the Post-Gazette
The Post-Gazette claimed that Cipolla was arrested in 1978, followed by D.A. Bob Colville harassing Diane Thompson into "dropping the charges," even though Post-Gazette editors should have known that no civilian anywhere can drop criminal charges in any case in America.
The same editors should have known that, if charges ever came to be filed against the Anthony Cipolla who never did have charges filed against him in the first place, then Bob Colville, on his own discretion, could have unilaterally dismissed the charges without the consent of Diane Thompson. The Post-Gazette simply printed as truth Diane Thompson's PROVEN LIES.
Today in late 2026, however, the Post-Gazette in the post-Ann-Rodgers Era has a different answer to the mid-1990s Vatican high court transpiration. In fact, it's different than what was pushed into digital viewers' faces even in early 2026. Observe:
Former Pittsburgh Post-Gazette writer, Ann Rodgers-Melnick, wrote that, when Wuerl walked off of a jetliner at Rome's international airport in 1995, he was carrying a newly obtained piece of evidence. That newly obtained piece of evidence, according to Ann Rodgers-Melnick, was a "police report." She lied. That sheet of paper was NOT a police report. It was something decisively different.
The July 25, 1978 sheet of paper containing hand-printed basic info at the top of it & hand-printed damning accusations in the middle of it, followed by medical exam result section, and a section mentioning the names of the detectives who were notified of the accusations, was ...
... an Offense/Incident Report, aka an O/I Report. In the center of that sheet of paper was nothing more than Diane Thompson's untested, yet-to-be-investigated statement, so stated in the name of the nine year old "Thomas Thompson," aka Tucker Thompson. It was NOT the police conclusion. It was NOT the "police findings." Diane Thompson spent years deceiving people into believing that her entry-level, starting-point accusations were the official findings of the police.
That which is absolutely essential for any American journalist or historian to understand about an Offense/Incident Report is this:
An Offense/Incident Report contains NO CONCLUSIONS of law enforcement officials, being that it constitutes only the beginning of a case which may go nowhere or which may lead to the formal filing of criminal charges and a conviction.
The O/I Report, when a civilian accuser is involved, is only the accusations of one or more civilians, followed by a possible medical examination of those persons alleged to have been victimized in the crime reported. And of course, the results of a medical exam can either confirm or dispel accusations set forth in an Offense/Incident Report.
In the July 25th, 1978 Offense/Incident Report, the medical exam section basically exonerated Cipolla, as far as went the nine year old, Thomas Thompson, also known as Tucker Thompson. There was absolutely no indication that any type of physical crime had been committed on young Tucker's body, on July 25th, 1978.
Now remember, I spoke at length with the man who signed that July 25, 1978 I/O Report. He was one of the two uniformed police officers who went to the Thompson residence, to take Diane Thompson's statement. And of course, he was the man whom I located through the Pittsburgh Steeler organization. His name was and is Mark Ninehouser, a true gentleman, at least while speaking to me.
Well, he definitively said to me that all he did was jot down what Diane Thompson said. Apparently, she spoke for young Tucker. He only spoke of Diane Thompson, when explaining his July 25th visit to her domicile. Tucker did not come up in the conversation. It was understood by me that Diane Thompson was proverbially running the whole show, when it came to giving the police a statement on behalf of young Tucker.
All in all, Mark Ninehouser did NOT play Sherlock Holmes. He did NOT play Columbo, NOR Adrian Monk, NOR any other TV detective. Mark did NOT bring out a white glove or a magnifying glass. He did NOT concur with the accusations leveled against Cipolla. He simply took dictation notes. Period.
All in all, that which is in the middle of the July 25th I/O Report is only Diane Thompson's allegations ... and that of Tucker, presumably. NO insertion of any police assertion is there. No police conclusions and no police "findings" are there. It was only the beginning point of a case that lasted no longer than 35 days.
After that one visit to Diane Thompson's domicile, Mark Ninehouser had nothing further to do with the case. He was finished with it, after he hand-printed his notes to an I/O form and signed it. His signature appears in the middle of a bottom-area line, followed by the number 46. Forty-six was his badge number he told me.
The Contradictions of Diane Thompson's ... and Tucker's ... Story
As far as goes the damning accusations in the July 1978 O/I Report, the great asininity in it ... in that it instantly loses credibility ... goes as follows:
1] Anthony Cipolla was presumed fully clothed, while he was accused of having one finger playing proctologist in Tucker's back side, while simultaneously using the opposite hand on Tucker's private front section ... while Tucker was unclothed.
2] Well, Diane Thompson told writer Randy Engel that, on July 25th, at the hospital, semen was found on Tucker, followed by DNA test results that proved the semen belonged to Cipolla. And of course, there was no DNA involved in the 1978 Cipolla Case. This was yet another easily provable LIE of the woman whose name was Diane Thompson in 1978.
3a] The contradiction is that, if Cipolla still had his clothes on, while olesting Tucker, then how did semen go through Cipolla's clothes onto Tucker's body? And if Tucker was not touching Cipolla, then how did an excited emission of semen from Cipolla occur, in the first place?
3b] According to the Statement of the Thompson Household, Tucker did NOT allegedly have his hand on Cipolla's body, especially on his private sector. Yet, Cipolla was somehow excited enough to leave a souvenir of male body fluid on Tucker's body, while Cipolla had his clothes on.
That entire scenario was impossible. Plus, the way described in July of 1978 was not the way child molesters molested children. Usually, it was the child's hand and the adult's private anatomical section put to use.
A repeated example of this was in the case of molester extraordinaire, the Marcial Maciel Degollado who refused to receive the last rites of the Catholic Church on his deathbed. In years prior, he had his students put their hands in the service of Maciel's private anatomical sector, under the guise that it was medical therapy for Maciel. Maciel even told the students that he received an indult ... a dispensation ... a permission slip ... from the pope to have it done to him as such.
Thus, Diane Thompson got the story backwards. Her fictional account should have had Tucker's hand on Cipolla's private anatomical part. That's one reason why no judge was willing to issue a warrant for Cipolla's arrest, in 1978.
So, in order to hide the fact that Diane Thompson fabricated an asinine tale, in my private citizen's personal opinion which is protected under NY Times v Sullivan, 376 us 254 (1964), she made up the story of DNA testing, followed by Cipolla getting arrested, and finally followed by Bob Colville sabotaging the prosecution of Cipolla, by committing duress on Diane Thompson.
However, Diane Thompson then thought up even more asinine tales, in order to make you feel sorry for her, while being outraged at Cipolla. One example was the claim that there was a 1965 special forces near-death training accident experienced by her husband which occurred at a Spartanburg military base, in South Carolina. Well, that Spartanburg military base was closed down eighteen years prior, in 1947. Thus, there was no way in which her then-husband was there, doing Vietnam Prep Training.
In Defining a Police Report
As far as goes the legal instrument known as the police report, it's usually the written account of one of the police officers who responded to a crime in progress or a crime recently completed. It's usually the writing of an officer who became a witness to the crime. Many police reports were written by an officer who was there, at the scene of the crime, making the arrest.
On other occasions, a police report occasionally involved an officer successfully obtaining evidence or corroborative witnesses which incriminated the accused person mentioned in the report.
Whereas the Offense/Incident Report only contains initial, starting point accusations which have not yet been tested as to their validity, a police report contains conclusions known as "findings."
Next comes the Police Affidavit which additionally involves a police officer submitting his findings under oath, claiming them to be true.
For all intentions & purposes of the Anthony Cipolla Case, the July 25th, 1978 Offense/Incident Report ... in the middle section of the filled-out form ... contained only Diane Thompson's & young Thomas Thompson's statement uninterrupted. There was no cross-examination of the statement. There was simply the statement jotted-down on a form, in hand-printing. Plus, all the consonants and vowels in that statement were in capital letters, except for the letter "i," so as to not confuse the letter "i" with the number 1.
The police did NOT concur to those damning accusations, because it was only Diane Thompson's side of the story printed on that one sheet of paper, along with Allegheny General's medical findings which did NOT substantiate a single accusation made by Diane and/or Tucker Thompson. The statement was 12 lines long. It's at the bottom of this post.
Allegheny General
Now, the Allegheny General medical findings were pivotal, because, during the examination of nine year old "Thomas Thompson," Allegheny General found NOTHING which indicated that a crime was committed on young Tucker Thompson's body, on July 25th, 1978.
This is pertinent, because young "Thomas Thompson" was alleged to have been molested a few hours prior. Thus, evidence should have been fresh. No physical evidence was reported by Allegheny General, at all. There were no medical indications that Tucker had been molested by anyone or anything. The only indication there was not Diane Thompson allegedly filed a false police report, aka "lied to the police."
More importantly, there was no report from Allegheny General that there was any kind of lubricant anywhere on or near the 9 year old child's private anatomical area. That claim was only came from the Thompson Household, with no medical professional concurring that it occurred. That accusation was unfounded. Period. And of course, the I/O Report is at the bottom of this post.
In Review:
for those in stubborn & prejudicial denial of the extensively researched findings
Now, even though the middle section of the July 25th O/I Report was very damning, it also was able to make a reasonable person roll his eyes at the ridiculousness of at least one of the accusations.
It involved an act of pedophile molestation which pedophiles don't do to nine year old males, because their hands are too big to have a certain effect on a child's private sector. That makes an expert immediately & allegedly see that Diane Thompson actually did fabricate the 1978 molestation story which wasn't all that horrifying ... especially when Tucker told the police ... either directly or through his mother ... that he was only molested twice by Cipolla.
That which was horrifying was Diane Thompson's description of the alleged corruption of D.A. Bob Colville, in her very false claim of having been forced, by Colville himself, to "drop the charges" which were not yet filed, in the first place ... and which could have never been dropped by the signature of any civilian on Planet Earth, in any American clerk of courts office or in any D.A.'s office.
So, the July 25th, 1978 O/I Report was NOT the police agreeing with Diane Thompson, and it certainly was NOT the police unilaterally announcing what happened on July 25th, 1978. It was only Diane Thompson and/or young Tucker making accusations not yet tested for honesty & validity. At that point, it was still needed to be tested, to see if the accusations were substantial or unfounded.
Of course, in my conversation with one of the two police officers who actually visited the Thompson domicile on July 25th, it appears that she spoke for Tucker, in the name of Tucker, instead of letting Tucker speak for himself. If he said anything, Tucker simply mentioned his claim of the date of the first time Cipolla allegedly molested him. That was near the July 4th, 1978, holiday.
In as much, keep in mind that, according to Tucker ... or according to Diane Thompson spoken in the name of Tucker ... Cipolla only allegedly molested him twice. That's it. That's all.
This, alone, takes the proverbial air out of many online writers who insinuated that Cipolla allegedly molested Tucker for 4, 8, or 12 consecutive months, week after week or month after month.
Due to the weakness of the Tucker accusations, Diane Thompson needed to bring 12 year old Frank Labiaux into the accusation scene. She needed him to spice things up. At present, he needs to be cross-examined in the Court of Public Opinion, being that he was already was caught in the lie about the vandalism at the African Methodist Church.
Diane Thompson and Frank Labiaux claimed that Frank vandalized the place in 1977, with an accomplice, due to the frustration of having been molested. The reality is that the two acts of vandalism occurred in November 1978. Yet, Diane Thompson claimed that she left Pittsburgh for Cleveland in September of 1978. So, how did she know of the November 1978 news when there was no internet and no smart phones?
In fact, the slitting of the tires in the church parking lot occurred on November 17th. This is much much later than the date very falsely alleged by Diane Thompson and Frank Labiaux as having been the date of the church's vandalism.
For the record, The two individuals who actually committed the vandalism were hoodlums a couple years older than Frank. The bottom line is that Frank Labiaux has proven to us that he can't be trusted.
Now remember. I spoke with the actual July 25th officer at length. In contrast, the author of the outrageously non-factual and defamatory 2016 Renew America article did NOT speak with him. Mrs Randy Engel didn't even know how to find him. Basically, Randy Engel knew how to find unsubstantiated gossip & calumny. But, she had severe difficulty in finding the truth.
Allegheny General's Official Medical Examination Finding
Keep in mind that the medical exam that Allegheny General performed on the nine year old Thomas (Tucker) Thompson stated nothing more than the physical condition of young Thomas was "GOOD," in the July 1978 I/O Report.
As far as goes the claim that "a spot" of lubricant was found on the clothing and/or the body of Tucker, this was solely Diane Thompson's allegation.
Plus, concerning Diane Thompson's claim to Randy Engel that a late July 1978 DNA TEST at Allegheny General Hospital quickly identified semen as belonging to Anthony Cipolla:
I've previously stated six to eight to ten times that, in 1978, DNA test results had a waiting period of an average of 52 days ... and the testing was done at NIH labs, and NOT in hospitals.
Meanwhile, the 1978 Cipolla Case only lasted 35 days. There was not the time for a DNA test result in the Cipolla Case. Thus, claiming that there was DNA evidence in the case was an egregious lie.
Plus, as was admitted by former Detective Warren Bud Droz in his 2018 grand jury testimony, there was no physical evidence in the 1978 Cipolla Case to present to any judge or D.A., at all.
They simply don't molest in that way
Moreover, have you studied the accounts of molestation? Uhhhm, there was usually much much more than just a spot of lubricant found on or near the child's private anatomical region. You would find a lot more than a spot ... and and and, on occasion, noticeable blood.
In addition, don't you think that a pedophile would insert something other than a mere finger into a child's backside, for a thrill, even though it would definitely cause the child to bleed?
In my private citizen's personal opinion of Diane Thompson, as far as concerns July 1978, she stated that Cipolla inserted a finger, instead of a more private male anatomical part, because there was no blood on Tucker and no evidence that anything relatively large penetrated him. So, she picked a much thinner body part, for her story. And according to Allegheny General, it was just a story.
The bottom line ... the thesis statement ... is that Diane Thompson spent years deceiving people into believing that her July 25th, 1978 list of untested & unproven accusations which were not-yet-investigated were the official conclusions of the police.
The only conclusion of one detectives assigned to the case was that no 12 year child anywhere would ever lie to a police officer, so you have to believe what Frank Labiaux stated to Broz, during the brief investigation.
And of course, court records throughout America prove this general assertion to be a lie. A number of preteens, aged 11, 12, and 13 lied to the police and lied in a courtroom.
And of course, a few of them were coached by police to lie on record and then to lie in a courtroom. Yes, there were youths who lied for the police. Thus, there were youths who lied to the police with the police knowing it.
