. . .AND ABUSING HIS EASY ACCESS TO THE PRESS:
THE WAY OF DONALD WUERL.
Observe how Cardinal Wuerl started his habit of deception through sleight
of hand semantics.It began in Year 1 of his tenure in Pittsburgh.Shortly
after Wolk was indicted, Donald Wuerl publicly stated:"I know now, and
have said to priests, that they cannot be reassigned."
Now, a morning commuter on a Pittsburgh metro line would have construed
the newspaper quotation as Wuerl telling the three molester priests that they
couldn't be reassigned to ministry.This is wrong.Look closer.The opera-
tive word here is "now," while the operative phrase is "said to priests."He
didn't speak the sentence to Wolk, Zula, and Pucci.He spoke it to other
priests, deceiving the public into thinking that he had no intention to put
back into ministry any of the three priests.Wuerl's quote made him look
like a zero tolerance bishop.However, his quote was only a semantic trick.
After all, he already put John Hoehl back into chaplaincy ministry, despite
the fact that Anthony Bevilacqua removed him shortly before Bevilacqua
became archbishop of Philadelphia.
Wuerl didn't disclose the time when he said to unnamed priests that Wolk,
Zula, and Pucci couldn't be reassigned.It could have been spoken the day
after Wolk was indicted.In fact, the evidence shows this to be the case.
To start, Wuerl assigned the notorious John Hoehl to the Shadyside Hospi-
tal chaplaincy three months before Wolk was first indicted.Thus, Hoehl's
reassignment went into effect four months before three Washington County
indictments were issued.This shows that Donald Wuerl was very open to
the idea of reassigning molester priests even in the autumn of 1988.There-
fore, Wuerl didn't tell any priests that Wolk, Zula, and Pucci couldn't be re-
assigned until after the indictment of Wolk ........ except for Zula, of course.
Zula was a reputed sadist.Wuerl drew the line with that type of behavior
at the time.None the less, observe:
(1) John Hoehl was assigned to Shadyside Hospital in July.(2) The first
indictment of Wuerl's molester trio was in October.(3) On the day Wolk
was indicted, Hoehl was stationed at Shadyside Hospital.(4) Despite the
Allegheny County indictment of Wolk, John Hoehl remained assigned to
the Shadyside hospital post.(5) Approximately one month later came the
Washington County indictments.For those unfamiliar, Washington County
is the one located below Allegheny County.None the less, when Wolk, Zu-
la, and Pucci were simultaneously indicted, John Hoehl was still stationed
at Shadyside Hospital.This means that Wuerl was engaged in molester re-
assignments even the day before his public statement.That statement was a
deception.Logic shows that it was spoken after the October 11 Allegheny
County indictment of Wolk.
Incidentally, Shadyside Hospital is located near Carnegie Mellon University
and the University of Pittsburgh.Such universities are frequented by numer-
ous male youth, not unlike the ones John Hoehl was multiply accused of hav-
ing molested during his long tenure at Quigley High School, in Baden, PA.
According to courtroom testimony, the sadist Richard Zula was told that he
was not going to return to ministry, on April 4, 1988.No such thing was ev-
er known to have been said to Wolk and Pucci.Therefore, Donald Wuerl's
original way of handling molester priests is evident.If an accused priest
were to receive a favorable prognosis from a psychiatric facility, then he
would be good to go into non-parish ministry.If not, then the priest would
be ousted.In light of this pattern, one can assume that any priest who used
whips and chains on an altar boy or two, as did Richard Zula, wouldn't get
a favorable prognosis from any psychiatric clinic.Such a priest would not
have the sheet of paper which would serve the function of excuse for Wuerl;
as an excuse for reassigning a molester priest.
Wuerl's own Speech Gave Him Away
Observe this comment of Wuerl, spoken shortly after Wolk was indicted:
"That was his whole life.Everything he was trained and called to
do.To say he will not be reassigned is a devastating thing to do."
This sounds like an excuse for not notifying a molester priest that he will
not be returning to ministry.In as much, if a bishop would have said the
previous statement during 2002, he would have been soundly condemned
as a cover-up artist.The link posted at the end of this section shows the
news report on this.
The Other Diocesan Excuse and the Contradiction in it
The official Pittsburgh diocesan spokesman made the following statement
shortly after Robert Wolk's October indictment:
"We followed the lead of the alleged victims and the family.
We had no desire to cause undue pain or anxiety to them,
if they are not disposed to take public action themselves."
This sounds like a very caringthat of Father Edward Huff.In that case, Wuerl reassigned Fr. Huff to
ministry the same year Wuerl received accusations against him.He did so,
after Huff had a stay in a St. Louis psychiatric facility.
The Specifics of the Huff Case
In February 1992, two families, days apart, reported Huff.Donald Wuerl
responded by doing the type of thing that Bernard Cardinal Law repeatedly
did in Boston.Wuerl sent Huff to a psychiatric facility; to one in St Louis,
named Saint Michael's.The prognosis was that Huff had sufficient residu-
al functional capacity to perform some type of ministry.So, in November
1992, Wuerl assigned Huff to a chaplaincy post and provided him with liv-
ing quarters in downtown Pittsburgh.
In December 1992, additional parishioners from Huff's parish sent Wuerl
a letter that accused Huff of molestation.This was the third time Edward
Huff was reported, and this was when Wuerl realized that the cat was out
of the bag.There were enough people who knew of Huff's transgressions
that at least one of them would inform the police should Wuerl's diocese
decline to do so.Thus, this was when Wuerl's Get Out of Jail Free Card
Wuerl did not immediately report Huff to law enforcement authorities, de-
spite the fact that a third set of parishioners sent a complaint against him.
Rather, Huff was sent back to Saint Michael's, despite the positive bill of
health that was already given to him by the St. Louis facility.This shows
that sending Huff back to Saint Louis was a strategic move, and not a med-
It wasn't until March 1993 when the Pittsburgh diocese finally reported Fr.
Edward Huff to law enforcement authorities.This means that he was not
reported until thirteen months after Wuerl learned of his misconduct.By
that time, Edward Huff had already submitted his resignation.
As a subtotal, Fr. Edward Huff wasn't arrested until fifteen months after he
was reported by the Diocese of Pittsburgh to the required law enforcement
entities.Take note that Edward Huff was not arrested until 28 months after
Wuerl learned of his predatory acts.In addition, March 1993 had addition-
al significance to it.It was the month when the Vatican's version of the U.S.
Supreme Court ruled on the Cipolla case for the first time.March 1993 was
when Donald Wuerl appealed to the Vatican Signatura, asking it to vacate its
judgment of the Cipolla case and to review the case anew.In light of this,
Huff was too much of a hot potato for Wuerl to keep concealing.
The time delay in the Fr. Edward Huff case provided a smoke screen to the
fact that Wuerl found himself cornered and checkmated during yet another
botched cover-up attempt.So, take note on how Wuerl sought to manipulate
time lines, in order to look diligent and trust-worthy --- in order to distance
his tracks from his original handling of the Fr. Huff case.In addition, keep
in mind that Wuerl and company had already been accused of stonewalling
(foot dragging) in a previous case.This means that giving Wuerl credit for
having reported Edward Huff was equivalent to giving a bank robber credit
for stopping a bank robbery the moment he finds himself surrounded by a
circle of police cars and then drops the sacks of money he was holding.
A Revisionist Article which Even Changed the Time Lines
In 2005, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review provided a very false statement, in
saying that Wolk and Zula were convicted in 1987.This made it look as if
Wuerl had nothing to do with the cover-up of them, being that he didn't start
his Pittsburgh tenure until 1988.Therefore, that article made it look as if he
had a crystal clean sex abuse record.Perhaps the author of the misleading
article was deceived into thinking that Wuerl couldn't have possibly been
part of any cover-up, so the author assumed that the convictions occurred
before Wuerl's arrival.Or maybe he was an intentional liar.
One thing about Wuerl is certain.He wasn't the lionhearted protector of the
Southwestern Pennsylvania's most vulnerable.Nor was he motivated by a
visit to the family of two molested altar boys.This is evidenced by the fact
that he reassigned Fr. Edward Huff to ministry years after the visit and later
made Fr. Torquato a parish pastor long after the evening Wuerl spent with
the two altar boys molested by Wolk, Zula, and Pucci.Wuerl was motivat-
ed by nothing other than law enforcement authorities and bad press, if not
by insurance premiums, being that molester priests can be very expensive
to have around.This brings us to the reason why Donald Wuerl pursued
the Anthony Cipolla case so vehemently.
The Reason Why Wuerl Pursued the Cipolla Case to the End
Wuerl originally declared the accusations of Tim Bendig to be not credible.
This was because Bendig accused more priests than Cipolla of sexual per-
versity.Then, Bendig's attorney, Douglas Yauger, presented to Wuerl doc-
umentation concerning a 1978 arrest of Cipolla.Cipolla was accused of
molesting a nine year boy under the guise of a medical exam.
The 1978 criminal case ended when the mother of the young man dropped
the charges.She would later claim that she only dropped the charges out
of a sense of duress, dropping them within a month after having filed them.
Diane Thompson (the mother) alleged that she kept receiving direct pres-
sure from former Pittsburgh bishop, Vincent Leonard.This means that she
alleged that the Diocese of Pittsburgh committed witness tampering.Yet,
she filed no criminal complaint against former Bishop Leonard, as far as
Concerning the Thompson case, Anthony Cipolla stated the following:
"1. There was no BOY'S ROOM where a thermometer was found.
That was a lie."
"2. There was no medical equipment found in my room and office
as reported.That was a lie."
"3. The police found nothing in my room.Instead I gave them a
BLOOD PRESSURE DEVICE THAT WAS GIVEN TO ME BY DOCTOR LAWRENCE
DUNNIGAN (NOW DECEASED).AT THE TIME, I WAS COLLECTING MEDICAL
SUPPLIES FOR THE MISSIONS."
In review, Diane Thompson stated that she dropped the 1978 charges out of
a sense of duress.Then, a second source conjectured that she dropped the
charges, in order to prevent something incriminating about her from surfac-
ing during the trial.In addition, anidentifying herself as Diane Thompson
on an online comment board alleged that her son continues to suffer from the
lingering effects of emotional trauma, allegedly on account of Cipolla.This
means that, both individuals apparently stand by their pleadings/averments.
Cipolla does.He still pleads his innocence and Dianne Thompson never
Bendig Did Not File Until After Wolk, Zula, and Pucci Were Indicted
November 1988 was when Tim Bendig filed his notice of intent to sue in the
Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas.It was only at that point in time
when Wuerl removed Anthony Cipolla from ministry.In fact, Wuerl didn't
deep-six John Hoehl until the same month.Very simply, if Wolk, Zula, and
Pucci were not indicted in the Autumn of 1988, Donald Wuerl wouldn't have
removed Hoehl in November of that same year.Plus, if Bendig hadn't made
his second move, in filing a civil action, then Cipolla would have stayed in
ministry.Keep in mind that Bendig was not believed in his original allega-
tions against Cipolla and several other priests
The important point to make at this point is that the Bendig/Cipolla case was
NEVER tried in any court of law on Earth.The Vatican case only sought to
discern if Wuerl had grounds to remove Cipolla, based on Psychic Defect.
St. Michael's Institute in NYC gave Cipolla an entirely clean bill of mental
health, while Saint Luke's Clinic in Maryland marked Cipolla as being De-
pressed and Suicidal.He was NEITHER evaluated as being psychopathic, NOR
sexually perverted, NOR a pathological liar.
Wuerl refused to accept the assessment of St. Michael's Institute, calling it
scantily.The Vatican Signatura rejected the St. Luke's evaluation as entire-
ly invalid.Thus came the assessment of the John Vianney's Center, Philadel-
phia.Incidentally, it's pronounced Vee-awe-nay, with no syllable accented.
Wuerl's Actual Motivation
Concerning the Cipolla case, the 21st Century media made it sound as if
Wuerl were a dedicated and caring bishop who got into action for the sake
of the youth of the Pittsburgh area.Of course, nothing could be further from
the truth.This was Wuerl's actual motivation:
TO STAVE OFF THE SAME TYPE OF GRAND JURY INQUEST WHICH VISITED
THE ARCHDIOCESE OF PHILADELPHIA, AND WHICH RESULTED IN CARDINAL
ANTHONY BEVILACQUA DYING IN DISGRACE.
Donald Wuerl had been caught performing a triple cover-up during late 1988.
It was a time when he was called uncooperative by a prosecuting district at-
torney.Furthermore, the same district attorney stated that the case involving
Wolk, Zula, and Pucci was probably not an isolated incident.Therefore, the
law enforcement radar was still directed toward the Diocese of Pittsburgh.
This means that a grand jury inquest was within reach.
When Wuerl made his 1993 appeal to the Vatican's highest court, (concern-
ing the Cipolla case) the Fr. Edward Huff affair was still in progress.Add
to that the fact that Anthony Cipolla was a priest attached to publicly known
molestation accusations.In as much, if Wuerl would have reinstated a priest
attached to publicly known molestation accusations, then either investigators,
subpoenas, or warrants would have rained down upon the Pittsburgh diocese,
especially in light of the fact that the thrice accused Edward Huff was in the
diocesan background.Thus, there was a real possibility that a grand jury in-
quest could have been triggered, if Anthony Cipolla were to be reassigned to
diocesan ministry.Everything that Wuerl had been keeping secret up to that
time would have been uncovered.
There were at least two more things to consider.If Cipolla were reinstat-
ed, the Diocese of Pittsburgh would have become vulnerable to those false
accusations which lead to lawsuits.There was also the matter of insurance
premium rates to consider.
To say that the safety of Pittsburgh's youth was dependent upon Wuerl, con-
cerning Anthony Cipolla, was a propagandist's lie.The public already knew
of the accusations against Cipolla.Therefore, if he were reinstated, children
would have been told to avoid him, whether he were guilty or not, simply as
a precaution.Diocesan students would have been taken out of schools, pray-
er groups, field trips, summer camps, choirs, etc.Therefore, priests accused
of molestation are bad for business.
In addition, Cipolla knew that he was in a gigantic spotlight and couldn't do
anything ill without it being amplified.In fact, if Donald Wuerl did nothing
about Cipolla, then law enforcement authorities would have placed investi-
gators in close contact with the diocese.A grand jury inquest was a logical
possibility at the time, if and only if Wuerl outraged anyone in authority.In
light of the aforementioned, it is easy to understand that Wuerl was doing no-
thing more than looking out for himself, in pursuing the Cipolla/Bendig case
to its conclusion.At this point, keep in mind that Bendig's accusations were
never tried in any court of law on earth.Cipolla was removed from priest-
hood duties on account of "psychic defect," and the paperwork I obtained on-
ly stated that the defect was "depression" and "suicidal tendencies."If there
is paperwork on the topic I haven't obtained, let me know about it, if and only
if you've the evidence to support your claim.More on this topic is found at: