Introduction & Outline of Wuerl's Initial Cover-ups

Donald Wuerl Has His Share of Sex Abuse Cover-ups, too

The American media began the Year 2002 inside a Cambridge,
Massachusetts courtroom.  It then proceeded to untent a nation-
wide sex abuse circus.  Interviews were conducted with a handful
of those who had been violated under the big tops.  This enabled
the public to feel, ever so slightly, what it was like to have suffered
anguish and dread at the hands of a predatory priest and the net-
work who protected him.  This enabled the common citizen to feel
what it is to flat line from a noxious mixture of loathing & disen-
chantment, induced by the hypocrisy of 'modernized' churchmen
and 'stylish' church ladies who presented themselves as the new
enlightment.

Early in the Year 2002, those who had been made faceless and
voiceless by unconscionable bishops were finally given air time
and print space.  However, someone would quickly make a play
for the newspaper pages, thereby taking attention away from
the American church's most haunted and tormented members. 
Next would come the acquisition of television cameras.  It was
Donald Wuerl who was performing the hostile takeover, doing so
through the surrogate services of those who handled the media's
control panels.

A Hero's Status Gained by Fraudulent Misrepresentation

On account of the highly publicized yet insufficiently explained
Anthony Cipolla case, Donald Wuerl came to be called 'the model
of zero tolerance.'  Things had gotten to the point where the Pitts-
burgh Post Gazette asserted as a matter of uncontested fact that
Wuerl's diocese went 'unscathed' during the widespread sex abuse
crisis.  Yet, this was a contradiction for the Post Gazette, in light of
its past articles on the subject.  None the less, the public was lead
to believe that Donald Wuerl had an uncommonly clean sex abuse
record.  In fact, the public was lead to believe that he was a leader
among leaders.

During this time, Donald Wuerl was literally called "a holy holy
man" on local television.  He was regarded in printed text as one
of the 'good guys.'  Wuerl had achieved hero status.  As a result,
he was literally placed front and center at a Saint Patrick's Day
parade, as if he were the commander of an allied invasion force
who recently won a world war.  However, in the years to follow,
it would come to be a repeatedly documented fact that the hero
status given to the tiny statured Donald Wuerl was one huge lie. 
Wuerl had his share of sex abuse cover-ups, too, dating back to
Year 1 of his tenure in Pittsburgh.

Wuerl's Cover-up of a Destructive Former Personal Secretary

One cover-up began in 1998; ten years after Wuerl was placed in
charge of the Diocese of Pittsburgh.  This one was the cover-up of
a former personal secretary who wouldn't keep his hands to himself. 
The priest was reported in January 1998 for repeated occasions of
physical sexual harassment, done under the guise of spiritual direc-
tion sessions.  The scam sessions occurred between 1990 and 1997. 
They numbered somewhere in the vicinity of 54 sessions or so.  After
the priest was reported, retaliations ensued that went beyond the
sound barriers of viciousness.  The retaliatory conduct went to the
point of endangering others.

This particular priest was ordained by Wuerl in 1989.  Therefore,
he was a reflection of Donald Wuerl's judgment of character.  Now,
Wuerl was heavily involved in what used to be called the Training
for the Priesthood.  It is now called Priestly Formation.  This meant
that the former personal secretary is a sample of Wuerl's version of
priestly forming.  In light of this, there was motive for Wuerl to in-
tentionally proceed with a cover-up of the personal secretary who
even conducted one or more of his "spiritual direction sessions" in
Wuerl's own Warwick Terrace residence. 

The retaliation ratified by Donald Wuerl eventually resulted in the
filing of a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari and three supplemental
briefs at the U.S. Supreme Court in the Year 2002  Copies of such
documents can be obtained from the Library of Congress.  The pe-
tition's number is 01-10392.

Photocopy evidence concerning Wuerl's former personal secretary
has been posted at:

http://www.archbishopdonaldwuerl.blogspot.com/

The narration of Wuerl's former personal secretary, including the
retaliatory conduct that ensued after he was reported to Wuerl,
has been posted at:

http://www.donaldwuerl.blogspot.com/

A Dirty Sex Abuse Record from Year 1

Donald Wuerl was installed bishop of Pittsburgh on February 12,
1988.  Before the first anniversary of his installation would arrived,
his diocese would become one of the first to be 'scathed' in a nation-
wide Watergate of perversity.  Wuerl was caught performing a triple
cover-up, and sadomasochism was one of the habits transacted with-
in the trio of clergymen whom he concealed from law enforcement
authorities.  Moreover, a member of the criminal trio was an assis-
tant chancellor of the diocese, and that fact alone showed motive
for performing an intentional cover-up.  The sex abuse casualties
were two altar boys of the same family.  They were brothers.  The
years of molestation were from 1981 to 1987.

In addition to the three indicted priests, there was a fourth alleged
assailant reported to one of the three prosecuting district attorneys. 
He was a layman.  Even at that, there actually was a fourth diocesan
priest implicated, but only in his capacity as a probable accomplice;
as a silent accomplice who reported nothing to anyone.  Concerning
this priest, he either allowed criminal conduct to continue in a ski
lodge suite where he was staying or else he was clueless as to what
was transpiring there.  Nothing was established other than he was at
the scene of the crime, going into his room while the criminal priest
took his sex abuse prey into another one.

This fourth diocesan priest was strangled to death in Havana Cuba,
in 2001, after having been placed on administrative leave in 1996. 
While in Cuba, he was openly homosexual, and was said to have
"helped his visiting friends find sexual partners while they stayed
in Havana."  This priest was George Zirwas, and at this point in
the narration you should be at the first stage of realizing that Lord
Byron was more correct than he was mistaken in having stated that
the truth is always strange; stranger than fiction.

The Principle Players of the 1988 Molestation Clique

The three indicted priests were Robert Wolk, Francis Pucci, and
Richard "Sade" Zula.  Wolk was the assistant chancellor and Zula
was nicknamed after the Marquis de Sade.  All three priests were
charged and arraigned in Washington County, PA.  It is a county
that touches the southwestern border of the Allegheny County
where within is Pittsburgh.  Furthermore, Richard Zula was also
arraigned east of Pittsburgh, in Somerset County.  Robert Wolk
was indicted in Allegheny County, as well as in Washington
County.  He was the first one to surrender to police.

The front page of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette's November 11 edition
outlines how involved the investigation was in such a short space of
time.  Within that front page is stated the following:  "Moreover,
authorities said their investigation had uncovered evidence
of similar offenses involving one of the priests that occurred
elsewhere in southwestern Pennsylvania and Florida, Ohio,
Virginia, and Canada.  Authorities in the jurisdictions have
been contacted."  This shows that the matter was not taken lightly
by law enforcement officials.  In fact, the district attorney of Washing-
ton County prophetically said, "We would be sticking our heads in the
sand to believe these are the only three cases."

Richard Zula had 138 criminal counts filed against him in Washington
County, alone.  A plea bargain reduced the counts to only two.  Zula
also pleaded guilty in Somerset County.  As far as went Robert Wolk,
he pleaded guilty in Allegheny and Washington counties.  Pucci's case,
on the other hand, was dismissed due to the 2 year statute limit expir-
ing on two types of charges.  It expired approximately four months
prior to his indictment.  He was indicted under the premise that the
time keeping for the two year limit had frozen during the length of
time Pucci was out of state, in a Maryland psychiatric facility.  Also,
conspiracy charges remained open for Pucci, and that crime had a
five year limitation.  The bottom line is that Pucci's case was event-
ually dismissed.

Uncooperative During the 1988 Investigation

During the first part of November, the Washington County district
attorney publicly announced that Wuerl's diocese engaged in "foot
dragging" throughout the investigation.  He was either irked or
incensed by the diocese's lack of cooperation, calling it "minimal
at best."  He was quoted as having said, "It was not the spirit
of cooperation we would like to see."  Now, "foot dragging"
is a polite way of saying "stonewalling" which, in turn, is a polite
way of saying "one step away from obstruction of justice charges." 
See:

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news3/1988_11_11_AP_ThreePriests_Francis_Pucci_etc_2.htm

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4118/1032/1600/Wuerl%20San%20Antonio%20Express.jpg

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/11/13/us/3-pennsylvania-priests-accused-of-molesting.html

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

News of Wuerl's Triple Cover-up
Made its Way Coast to Coast

News of Donald Wuerl's three arrested priests made its way from
coast to coast, via:

(1) the New York Times, (2) the Philadelphia Inquirer, (3) the Phila-
delphia Daily News, (4) the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, (5) the Saint
Petersburg Times, (6) Northeastern Ohio's Cleveland Plain Dealer,
7) Northwestern Ohio's Bryan Times, (8) the San Antonio Times,
(9) the San Jose Mercury News, and (10) the Eugene Register-Guard
[of Oregon.]

From as far west as California's San Andreas Fault line, to as far east
as Long Island, Donald Wuerl became an early chapter in the church's
sex abuse history.  From as far south as the Florida Gulf Coast, to as
far north as the Great Lakes region of America, Wuerl's diocese was
shown to be what Malachi Martin would one day say it was; " ... one
of the most pathetic dioceses in the United States."

This was a time when Wuerl operated in the mode of conduct that
would become synonymous with the Boston Archdiocese.  The origi-
nal handling of lone wolf molester, John S. Hoehl, proved this to be
true.  The 1992 to 1994 saga involving Pittsburgh diocesan priest,
Edward Huff, also proved this to be the case.  Wuerl's original mode
of conduct was that of positioning a molester priest back into non-
parish ministry, if and only if a psychiatric facility gave the priest
a favorable prognosis.

The Diocese Denied Any Wrongdoing and History Was Revised Years Later

In 1988, Wuerl publicly denied having stonewalled during the inves-
tigation of the diocese's molestation clique.  However, Wuerl did not
deny having materially concealed a trio of abusive priests from law
enforcement authorities.  He denied that those actions constituted a
cover-up.  The official diocesan spokeman, as well as the Allegheny
County district attorney, claimed that the diocese had no obligation
to notify Child Youth Services about the priests, as was prescribed in
the Child Protective Services Act.  In contrast, James A. Esler, head
of the human service section of the county's Law Department, said
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, sole-
ly to assure the safety of otherwise future sex abuse casualties.

At this point, keep in mind that it was the Washington County district
attorney who accused Wuerl's diocese of foot dragging, while the Alle-
gheny County district attorney, stationed in Pittsburgh, defended the
inaction of Donald Wuerl.  Despite the defending of Wuerl, the Alle-
gheny County D.A. still processed the arrest of Robert Wolk. 

Also know that, two weeks after Wolk was indicted, Wuerl completed
a four page letter addressed to all diocesan members.  While taking
zero blame, he tried to pursuade each individual to ignore the indict-
ment and to concern oneself with other things.  Then, on Thursday,
November 11, seventeen days after the release date of Wuerl's four
page letter, Wolk, Zula and Pucci were all indicted in Washington
County.  See:

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4118/1032/1600/wuerl3.0.jpg

Revisionist History Made Wuerl Look
Like a Hero in his Own Triple Cover-up

A number of the 2002 and beyond reports that mentioned Wuerl's
triple cover-up explained the cover-up poorly.  Sometimes it was ex-
plained with slight of hand deception, while at other times it was
explained with blatant falsehoods.  Some articles went to the point
of claiming that Wuerl was a stern yet discrete hero in the handling
of the three molester priests. 

Of all the news outlets who alluded to Wuerl's triple cover-up in
revisionist terms, CBS lied the most.  CBS made it look as if Wuerl
suspended the priests immediately after having learned of their per-
versity, and then swiftly went to the home of the two molested altar
boys, as a gesture of compassionate concern.  Other 21st Century
reports made it look as if Wuerl first went to dine at the home of
the two altar boys, then gained the realization that he had to oust
Wolk, Zula, and Pucci immediately thereafter.  Yet other articles
said that Wuerl discretely suspended three priests, as if he had re-
viewed diocesan files and cut three unrelated players from a team. 

Furthermore, in 1988, Wuerl deceived the public by stating that he
visited the victims' family after he became bishop in February.  The
wording of Wuerl's claim made the rational mind assume that he
visited the family in February, the first month of his tenure in Pitts-
burgh.  He did not.  The following is what really happened:

Bevilacqua suspended the priests during the Autumn of 1987.  Wuerl
replaced Bevilacqua in February 1988.  He let the family of the two
sex abuse casualties be, all the while keeping his distance, yet seeing
to it that the two boy's would continue to have their psychiatric visits
free of charge.  The criminal priests would stay on sick leave, spend-
ing some time in a psychiatric facility, all the while living under the
radar of law enforcement.

From the view of the logical mind, the venues of the abusive priests
were more liken to resorts and hideouts than detention centers and
penitential sojourns.  It were as if they would get away with what
they did and later be able to snag other sexual prey down the road. 
This triggered within the family the resolve to go to the police and
sue the diocese.  This resolve occurred in the vicinity of September.
In the words of the October 13, 1988 Post Gazette, "...they were
worried that the priests might try to molest someone else."  In the
October 21st edition, at the City/Area Section, Page A-4, the family
decided to go to the authorities when they discovered that one or
perhaps more of the molester trio "were not in an institution on a
daily basis."

The pastor of the family's parish, John Arnott, informed Wuerl what
the family decided to do.  Wuerl then asked Arnott to see if a meet-
ing with the family could be arranged.  It was only then when Wuerl
closed the distance and went to the family's home.  The logical mind
would deduce that this was the act of a self seeking Donald Wuerl,
attempting to charm a family into changing its mind.  This meeting
would be consistent with a bishop wanting to perpetuate an ongoing
cover-up.

Wuerl's Own Speech:  His Indictment in the Court of Public Opinion

The one piece of evidence which indicts Wuerl in the court of public
opinion is his own words, spoken imprudently after Robert Wolk was
charged by Allegheny County authorities.  "We can't condemn him
and throw him out and away," spoke Wuerl.  "It is not cover-
ing up to embrace a man who is suffering, just as we will not
walk away from the family," spoke Wuerl again.  That is to say,
Wuerl claimed that it is not covering-up to hide a priest in a psychiat-
ric facility and/or at home, all the while telling no one how dangerous
he is, and letting the statute of limitations expire in the process.  It is
not covering up, according to Wuerl, to also treat the harmful criminal
as the victim.

After Wolk's indictment, Wuerl also said:  "I know now, and have said
to priests, that they cannot be reassigned."  The operative word here is
"now," while the operative phrase is "said to priests."  This would mean
that he did not know before the autumn arrests.  This would indicate
an intentional cover-up committed by a bishop who didn't realize the ramifications of it.  Needless to say, Wuerl's "not knowing till now" is
evidenced by the fact that he reassigned the molester, John Hoehl, to
the Shadyside Hospital chaplain post in July of 1988.

As far as concerns the phrase, "said to priests," take not that he did not
say which priests were the ones to whom he spoke.  He certainly didn't
say when. It could have been priests present at the diocesan building the
day after the first of three priests was indicted.  In as much, take note on
how Wuerl started his habit of deception through slight of hand seman-
tics during Year 1 of his tenure in Pittsburgh.  Any commuter browsing
through the Post Gazette that morning would have thought that Wuerl
had long since told the three molester priests that they could never be
reassigned, again.  That semantic trick could easily erase from the pub-
lic's mind the suspicion that Wuerl was planning to return the priests to
either ministry or administrative posts.

According to courtroom testimony, the sadist Richard Sade was told that
he would not return to ministry, on April 4, 1988.  No such thing is known
to have been said to Wolk and Pucci, until after the autumn indictments. 
Thus, we again have Wuerl's 1988 modus operandi.  If a molester priest
could get a favorable prognosis from a psychiatric facility, then he was
good to go into non-parish ministry.  If not, then the priest was ousted.
One can assume that a priest who used whips and chains on an altar boy
or two, as did Richard Zula, would not get a favorable prognosis from
any psychiatric clinic, and would therefore not have the sheet of paper
which would serve the function of an excuse for Wuerl to reassign him.

Observe this comment 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."  Wuerl
was alluding to not having told Wolk in any of the previous months that
he will not be reassigned, thereby keeping at hand the possibility that
Wolk might be reassigned in the future.  If a bishop said the previous
statement in the Year 2002, he would have been condemned as a cover-
up artist.  Wuerl certainly was performing a contingent cover-up, at the
very least, especially in light of the Hoehl reassignment of July 2008.

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

Concerning that which Wuerl publicly stated about finally knowing that
molester priests cannot be reassigned, he disregarded it entirely when
Father Edward Huff was reported to him in 1992.  He reassigned Huff
to ministry that year, after a psychiatric facility in St. Louis gave Huff
a favorable prognosis.

A Revisionist Article which Even Changed the Timelines

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.  This made it look as if he
had a crystal clean sex abuse record.  It even made it look as if Wuerl
cleaned up the diocese after Zula and Pucci were convicted.  Perhaps
the author of the misleading article was deceived into thinking that
Wuerl couldn't possibly have been part of any cover-up, so he assumed
that the convictions occurred before Wuerl's arrival.  Or maybe he was
an intentional liar.

In conclusion, Donald Wuerl was not the lionhearted protector of West-
ern Pennsylvania's most vulnerable.  He was not motivated by a visit to
the family of two molested altar boys, thereby realizing that molesters
could not be reassigned.  This is evidenced by the fact that he reassigned
Edward Huff to ministry and even made his former personal secretary a
parish pastor.  Donald Wuerl was motivated by law enforcement authori-
ties.  This brings us to the reason why Wuerl pursued the Anthony Cipolla
case so vehemently.

The Reason Why Wuerl Pursued the Cipolla Case to the End

Keep in mind that Donald Wuerl originally declared the accusations of
Tim Bendig to be non-credible.  This was because Bendig accused several
more priests and seminarians of sexual perversity than Anthony Cipolla. 
Then, Bendig's attorney, Douglas Yauger, presented Wuerl with the doc-
umentation of a 1978 arrest of Cipolla.  He was accused of molesting a
nine year boy under the guise of a medical exam.  It was only then when
Wuerl got into action and removed Cipolla.  Now, the press made it sound
as if Wuerl were a dedicated and caring man who got into action for the
sake of the youth of the Pittsburgh area.  This is his actual motivation:

Wuerl had been caught performing a triple cover-up during late 1988. 
He was called uncooperative by a prosecuting D.A, and the same Wash-
ington County district attorney stated that the Wolk-Zula-Pucci case
was probably not an isolated incident.  When Wuerl made his 1993 ap-
peal to the Vatican's highest court, the Edward Huff affair was still in
progress.  Add to that the fact that Anthony Cipolla was a priest attached
to publicly known molestation accusations.  Now, if Wuerl were to have reinstated a priest attached to such accusations, subpoenas and warrants
would have rained down on Wuerl's diocese.  Everything that Wuerl had
been keeping secret up to that time would have been uncovered.

To say that the safety of Pittsburgh's youth was dependent upon Wuerl,
regarding Anthony Cipolla, was an exaggeration.  This is because every-
one already knew of the accusations against Cipolla.  If he were reinstated, children would have been told to avoid him, whether he be guilty or not,
simply as a precautionary safeguard.  Children would have been taken
out of schools, choirs, prayer groups, ski trips, etc.  Plus, Cipolla knew
that he was in a spotlight.  More importantly, if Donald Wuerl did no-
thing about Anthony Cipolla, law enforcement authorities would have
done so.  Again, we return to the scenario of subpoenas and warrants
raining down upon the Diocese of Pittsburgh.

Concerning the assertion that Donald Wuerl was not motivated by con-
science but by law enforcement, consider the following statement of
author and expert witness, Richard Sipe, 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."

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

"It's the reformation all over again."
__________________

Cooberative Reading

Below are a few newspaper articles published at the time of the arrests. 
That is to say, no revisionist history articles are posted herein --- only
originals from 1988.  Not all existing articles of that time period involv-
ing Wolk, Zula, and/or Pucci are posted below, being that over two dozen
were discovered.

http://news.google.com
/newspapers?id=FwUOAAAAIBAJ&sjid=3W0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=1919,3932976&dq=3+priests+investigated+wolk


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

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=q7cMAAAAIBAJ&sjid=IWEDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6693,8454411&dq=pucci+wolk+zula

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=5d0NAAAAIBAJ&sjid=920DAAAAIBAJ&pg=6584,6341228&dq=george+zirwas+pittsburgh+zula

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=XwQOAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2G0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=4322,2946408&dq=francis+pucci+conspiracy

First Post Gazette Article, Part 1

This is a supplement to Wuerlgate, Part 1.   In review,
Wuerl was in power for 8 months when the Pittsburgh
Post Gazette reported that which he kept concealed for
243 days.  One month later, two additional arrests and
arraignments transpired.  The prosecuting district attor-
ney then accused Wuerl's diocese of having stonewalled
the investigation.  "Foot dragging" was the expression
that D.A. John C. Pettit used.  That is a euphemistic way
of saying 'obstruction of justice.'

When it came time to process the arrest warrant of Father
Richard Zula, nobody on the law enforcement side of the
case knew where he was.  Yet, Zula was the one nicknamed
Sade, as in the Marquis de Sade.  There were 140 counts of
criminal conduct attached to him.  A plea bargain resulted
in 138 of the counts being dropped.  Father Zula was also
convicted in a county east of the one where Pittsburgh is
located.  Within its boundaries is a popular ski resort that
was visited by Zula.

As far as Southwestern Pennsylvania law enforcement au-
thorities were concerned, Donald Wuerl had already worn
out his welcome.  Wuerl and his diocesan personnel would
have become candidates for either Obstruction of Justice
charges or multiple subpoenas and warrants should another
cover-up ensue.  Well, another cover-up did get under way in
early 1992, concerning a Fr. Edward Huff who was accused
of abusing six male youths.

The Specifics of the Huff Case

In February 1992, two families, days apart, reported Edward
Huff to Donald Wuerl.  Wuerl responded by doing the exact
thing that Cardinal Law repeatedly did in Boston.  Huff was
sent to a psychiatric facility (Saint Michael's, in St. Louis.)
The prognosis was that Huff had enough 'residual functional
capacity' to perform some type of ministry.  So, Wuerl as-
signed him to a chaplaincy post, while providing Huff with
living quarters in downtown Pittsburgh.  This occurred in
November 1992.

In December 1992, parishioners from Huff's parish sent
Wuerl a letter, informing him that Huff was a molester. 
This was the third time Huff was reported.  At this point,
Wuerl knew 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.  This is when Wuerl's Get Out
of Jail Free Card expired. 

Wuerl did not immediately report Edward Huff.  He sent
Huff back to St. Michael's, despite the positive bill of health
that was already given to Huff by the same St. Louis facility. 
The Diocese of Pittsburgh finally reported Huff to law en-
forcement authorities in March of 1993, thirteen months
after Wuerl learned of his misconduct.  By that time, Huff
had already submitted his resignation.  In fact, Huff wasn't
arrested until fifteen months after he was reported by the
diocese to the required law enforcement entities.  That is
to say, Huff was not arrested until 28 months after Wuerl
learned of his predatory acts. 

The time delay in the Huff case provided a smoke screen to
the fact that Wuerl found himself cornered and checkmated
during yet another cover-up attempt.  So, take note on how
Wuerl sought to manipulate time lines, in order to look dili-
gent and trustworthy --- in order to distance his tracks from
his original handling of the Huff case.  In addition, keep in
mind that Wuerl and company had already been accused of
stonewalling (foot dragging), concerning a previous case. 

Giving Donald Wuerl credit for reporting Huff is equivalent
to giving a bank robber credit for stopping a bank robbery
as soon as he finds himself surrounded by police cars and
then drops the sacks of money he was holding.

In Review of the Wolk, Zula, & Pucci Case

It was Bishop Anthony Bevilacqua who removed the three
priests from ministry, and not Donald Wuerl.  Wuerl
simply kept them on Sick Leave.  That was equivalent to
having kept problem pitchers in the bullpen, instead of 
cutting them from the team.  They were simply waiting
in the wings while a fourth molester was reinstated by
Wuerl and given a chaplaincy post.  His name was John
Hoehl.

In addition, it was an attorney (who was a friend of the
two altar boys' family) who reported the priests to law
enforcement authorities.  Due to this action, Wuerl was
not able to reassign those priests in the future, even if
he wanted to do so.

Concerning this, Wuerl has a track record of causing
people to feel so much outrage that they end up call-
ing the police or filing a lawsuit or planning a protest
or something similar.  More specifically, Donald Wuerl
has a way of making you feel raped.  In as much, three
priests were reported to law enforcement authorities
because it was apparent that Wuerl was going to 'let
them get off easy' --- to let them get away with what
they did.

Four Previous Arrests is Why Wuerl Pursued the Cipolla Case

The recent arrests of three Pittsburgh diocesan priests
(and the pending arrest of a forth one) is the reason why
Donald Wuerl appealed the Cipolla verdict to the Catholic
Church's version of the Supreme Court --- to the Apostolic
Signatura.  With Wuerl's track record being what it was,
if he were to have reinstated a priest known to have sex
abuse accusations publicly attached to him, then warrants
and subpoenas would have rained down upon the Diocese
of Pittsburgh.  This would have resulted in the unveiling
of every secret that Wuerl and his personnel were keeping. 

Donald Wuerl originally declared the accusations made
against Father Anthony Cipolla (by seminary fail-out Tim
Bendig) to be not credible.  In fact, Bendig accused more
people than Cipolla of wrong doing.  The pertinence of the
Cipolla case, therefore, didn't exist in Tim Bendig's accu-
sations.  It existed in a 1978 allegation of sexual abuse,
involving a nine year old.  Wuerl learned of those alle-
gations from Tim Bendig's attorney. 

Concerning the 1978 allegations, Anthony Cipolla was
giving catechism lessons to a nine year old boy in prep-
aration of his first communion.  On one occasion, Cipolla
told the young gentleman that he was going to be given
an exam by Cipolla.  According to Anthony Cipolla, he was
referring to a catechism exam.  According to the young
man's mother, Cipolla was referring to a medical exam. 
Molestation under the guise of a medical exam was the
allegation.  The police report stated that a thermometer,
stethoscope, and blood pressure gauge were found in the
young boy's room.

Interestingly enough, Tim Bendig's accusations against
Cipolla began with the same story line as the 1978 case. 
He claimed that he was taken ill and that Cipolla claimed
to be doctor who proceeded to take care of Bendig.  This
apparent plagiarism is one of the several reasons why
Bendig is generally understood as severely lacking in
credibility, even though the 1978 case has credibility
attached to it.  Keep in mind that Bendig's allegations
were judged to be not credible by Donald Wuerl.
After all, he made accusations against more persons that
Cipolla, and the lawsuit he filed actually named nine
defendants.


For the Tim Bendig civil lawsuit, Cipolla's defense attorney
literally lined up 70 character witnesses for Cipolla.  None
the less, it was the 1978 incident which carried all the weight
in Cipolla's future.  The 1978 case was scheduled for trial,
but it was never tried in a court of law.  This is because the
mother of the young boy dropped the charges, solely out of
a sense of intimidation.  The Cipolla shows we trials are
necessary, in order to end grave doubts.

The bottomline is that the 21st Century media presented
Wuerl as the protective reformer who selflessly cared for
the welfare of Pittsburgh's youths.  He was no such thing. 
Wuerl simply ended up being motivated by criminal and
civil court.  That is to say, Wuerl was looking out for him-
self.  Therefore, the repeated publicizing of the Anthony
Cipolla case served the function of a diversion tactic that
covered over Wuerl's triple cover-up, as well as the case
concerning his former personal secretary.

Clicking on each photocopied newspaper article on this web
page will enable you to read each one at an enlarged size.

First Post Gazette Article, Part 2

The evidence below shows that the 21st Century media
was concealing something pivotal about Donald Wuerl,
in addition to the retaliatory conduct & coverup that
involved Wuerl's former personal secretary.

The News Even Made its Way to San Antonio

The news of  Wuerl's first year as bishop of  Pittsburgh
even reached San Antonio, Texas, as well as Cleveland
and New York City.




The Associated Press and the United Press International
articles that outlined Donald Wuerl's triple cover-up are
posted directly below:

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

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news3/1988_10_14_UnitedPressInternational_ARoman_Francis_Pucci_etc_1.htm

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news3/1988_11_11_AP_ThreePriests_Francis_Pucci_etc_2.htm

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news3/1988_11_14_AP_ExPastor_Richard_Zulu_1.htm

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news3/1990_04_03_UnitedPressInternational_ExPriest_Richard_Zula_etc.htm

Second Post Gazette Article on Wuerl's Triple Coverup

After he was caught performing a triple coverup, Wuerl
was faced with the task of troweling over his track record. 
This was done by having the Father Anthony Cipolla case
made known from coast to coast.  The narration of the
case was over dramatized, while explanation of the Vati-
can's procedural law was omitted.  The case was made to
look like a Dan Brown novel, where Wuerl was the novel's
hero, engaged in a fight against the "Irrational Vatican."

The only thing unique about the case was that there were
two appeals made to the same Signatura, concerning the
same one case.  Cipolla appealed first, and Wuerl appealed
second.  No Vatican doors were barricaded.  No blind monk
chased Donald Wuerl around Rome with a dagger.  No se-
cret society member burned Wuerl's court papers.  Cipolla
had a 1978 accusation of molestation against him, with a
police report attached to that allegation, and that was the
reason for the reversal of the Vatican's prior decision.  The
only evidence submitted to the Vatican up to that point was
the opinion of St. Luke's Institute, in Maryland.

The Signatura originally ruled that Father Anthony Cipolla
was "denied a fair judgment," being that St. Luke's was op-
erated by an out-of-the-closet homosexual whose judgment
"was based on a mixed doctrine of Freudian pan-sexualism
and behaviorism."  The Signatura specifically stated that
St. Luke's was "surely not a suitable institution to judge
rightly about the beliefs and lifestyle of a Catholic priest." 
The question is why Wuerl didn't pile on and include all the
available evidence against Cipolla in one shot.

By the way, from the ordinary teaching authority of the
church came the condemnation of "Behaviorial modifica-
tion by means of psychotropic drugs."  So, when a church
document mentions Behaviorism, it is referring to some-
thing recognized as Orwellian, if not Draconian.

Wuerl's motive for appealing to the Signatura was to pre-
vent supoenas and warrants from raining down upon the
Diocese of Pittsburgh.  If Wuerl were to reinstate a priest
who had publicly known sex abuse allegations against him,
local law enforcement would have converged upon the Dio-
cese of Pittsburgh, being that Wuerl was already caught
performing cover-ups.

Meanwhile, news of  Wuerl's former personal secretary
was published nowhere, even in 2002, despite the fact
that the matter was presented to the United States Su-
preme Court in 2002, and despite the additional fact
that accounts of predatory priests filled the airwaves
and newspapers during the same time span.  The 21st
Century news articles only made it look as if, during
any given election, Donald Wuerl should run for God. 

Incidentally, concerning the Father John S. Hoehl case,
Wuerl did not immediately remove Hoehl from ministry. 
Rather, he reinstated Hoehl (after Anthony Bevilacqua
removed him), assigning him to a chaplaincy post at a
hospital located near the University of  Pittsburgh and
Carnegie-Mellon University.  Such a place is where one
can easily encounter many young males, not unlike the
ones that Hoehl was multiply accused of  having abused. 

A Pittsburgh Post Gazette article of May 2004 made it
look as if Wuerl were a lionlike disciplinarian who told
Hoehl in November 1988 that he would no longer be per-
mitted to have a ministry assignment in the diocese. 

The article stated that this happened as a result of a
September meeting between Wuerl and two victims
of Wolk, Zula, and Pucci.  It was claimed that Wuerl
was so moved by the encounter that he vehemently re-
solved to make sure that no abusive priest would ever
be granted a ministry in Wuerl's diocese, again.  If
that is the truth, then why did Wuerl wait until Novem-
ber to act, and only after the arrests of three diocesan
priests?

The truth of John Hoehl's ousting was this:

November 1988 was the month when Wuerl was caught
performing a triple cover-up.  In fact, Father Wolk sur-
rendered to law enforcement authories in October.  In
as much, Wuerl told Hoehl that he would be assigned
no further ministry, because Wuerl had just been caught
performing a cover-up, and one of the D.A.s ordered fur-
ther investigations in 1988.  Furthermore, Hoehl was not
even laicized until the Year 2004.

The truth of the Cipolla ousting was this:

Tim Bendig filed a lawsuit against the diocese on
November 23, 1988. 

Bendig's original public claim was that he was only
suing so that the diocese would pay for mental health
services, due to his alleged emotional trauma.  Then
it was published that Bendig was seeking $20,000.
The amount of money that he received in the settle-
ment exceeded that which the media claimed he was
seeking, according to a local radio personality (spoken
to me in private, thereby transferring the burden of
proof on me.)  In addition, Bendig said that he left the
seminary, because he was disgusted with the alleged
rampant homosexuality of the place.  He failed to men-
tion that he failed his courses.

Now, there are other things to report, however, it can't
be stated until photo-copies of certain evidence are in
Atlantic America's possession. 

For now, it suffices to say that there is a huge void in
the Bendig allegations, consisting in the absence of all
the accusations he made against persons other than
Anthony Cipolla.  If there would only have been a trial
or a confrontational television interview or a website
posting Bendig's evidence vs Cipolla's evidence, the
contradictions and disturbing features of this case
would have been resolved.  A Bendig v. Cipolla trial
was important to have, even if Cipolla did commit
molestation in 1978.

Keep in mind that author of this article has neither
intention nor cause to defend the character of An-
thony Cipolla.  It is simply that large segments of
truth on the Bendig matter have been withheld
from the public.

Conclusion

As you can now see, the Wuerl propaganda machine
was rewriting history and deceiving America in the
process.  Concerning the deliberate deceiving of
America, observe the following lie put into print by
the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, in the March 24, 1996
edition, in the Local Section, at Page A1.  The article
makes Wuerl look like an intimidating Greek god
who descended from Mount Olympus:

               "At 55, Wuerl is 5 feet 11 inches
                tall and ascetically thin from
                exercise and abstemious living."

The truth is the Wuerl is 5 feet 4 inches tall at best. 
A Pittsburgh diocesan eucharist minster and lecteur
who was formally introduced to Donald Wuerl said
that Wuerl had the second softest hand shake he ever
encountered.  A parish council woman who encount-
ered Wuerl in a church basement said that he acted
"girly."  The Donald Wuerl whom I met reminded
me of a 14 year old teenager.

The Post Gazette religion writer who claimed that
the 5'4 inch Wuerl was an ascetic 5'11 also claimed
that Wuerl was just finishing his 50th pool lap, doing
every lap under water, at the age of 55, only coming
up for air at the end of each lap, in order to see if he
did his personal best time.  (Page A1, Local Section,
March 24, 1996, Pittsburgh Post Gazette.) 

After rewriting history, the Donald Wuerl propaganda
machine began to mention that there needs to be one
voice of the Catholic Church in America and the voice
should be that of Donald Wuerl.  In fact, during the
celebration of Wuerl's tenth year as bishop of Pitts-
burgh, the Pittsburgh Catholic titled him, the Pontiff
of Pittsburgh.  An email that Richard Sipe sent to me
earlier this year surprised me, because he described
the Donald Wuerl power play in the following way: 

               "It's the reformation all over again."