Why did it take 32 years to charge Jimmy 'Superfly' Snuka?

The police and district attorney said they couldn't prosecute Jimmy "Superfly" Snuka, but Nancy Argentino's family refused to let it go.

In 1983, they hired Richard Cushing, a New York attorney who had spent most of his career defending criminals, to examine the evidence and persuade then-District Attorney William Platt to change his mind.

Cushing spent three weeks in Allentown shortly after Argentino's death May 11, 1983, poring over records, visiting scenes and interviewing witnesses. Armed with what he believed was compelling evidence that a murder had been committed, he visited Platt and tried to present his report.

"I was stonewalled at every turn." Cushing said. "It became clear pretty soon that he had no intention of presenting the evidence that I amassed."

Cushing, now a partner in the New York City firm Phillips Nizer LLP, said he never forgot the Argentino family and how distraught they were over the 23-year-old Brooklyn woman's death. So when he saw a newspaper story about Snuka's arrest last week following a grand jury probe, his heart swelled.

"Justice lives," he said. "I'm just so thankful that people did not forget Nancy."

Platt, now a senior Pennsylvania Superior Court judge, declined to answer questions for this story, saying "I am prohibited by the Code of Judicial Ethics from discussing cases publicly."

Lehigh County District Attorney Jim Martin has defended Platt's handling of the case, and the prominent forensic pathologist who conducted Argentino's autopsy in 1983 has said it was beset by weak forensics.

Cushing was the first lawyer hired by the Argentino family and was not the attorney who handled their wrongful death suit against Snuka, which resulted in a judge's order for the wrestler to pay $500,000 to the Argentinos — an award Snuka never paid.

Cushing's role was to take a second look at the case, he said, to prove what the family believed — that Snuka had killed Argentino.

"[Cushing] was the real deal," said Lorraine Salome, Argentino's older sister. "But he was a one-man show and couldn't get anywhere."

Cushing, who began his career as a public defender and now handles mostly corporate and white-collar cases, recalled feeling hopeful as he dug deeper into the case.

"All the pieces were there. There was enough to take it before a grand jury in 1983. I could not understand why the district attorney could not see it," he said.

On Tuesday, Snuka, 72, was charged with third-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter. The county's investigative grand jury found that Snuka assaulted Argentino on May 10, 1983, then left her in a Whitehall Township motel room to die.

The charges came two years after a Morning Call story about Argentino's death revealed a never-before-seen autopsy report that labeled the case a homicide.

In the 2013 Morning Call story, forensic pathologist Isidore Mihalakis provided some insight into what troubled officials at the time.

"The clear-cut forensics weren't there, but the suspicion was there," said Mihalakis, who examined Argentino. "I did not have a clear-cut case. It was a very worrisome case. Obviously, there was enough there to arouse my suspicion but not enough to take it to trial. ... Just because she was beaten doesn't mean she was beaten to death."

Mihalakis wrote the case should be investigated as a homicide until proved otherwise. Lehigh County Coroner Scott Grim reviewed the autopsy findings for the grand jury and agreed the case should be ruled a homicide.

Martin said the Lehigh County grand jury didn't exist in 1983. When it was called to review Argentino's death more than 30 years later, it wasn't asked to look into what may have derailed an investigation, he said.

"The grand jury did not look at anything that occurred in 1983 other than the evidence in Nancy Argentino's death," Martin said. "They did not look at or consider why there was a delay and why it took 32 years to file charges. That wasn't their function."

Martin credited the work of the grand jury and county Detective Gerald Procanyn as difference-makers in filing charges this time around.

"I wasn't involved in this case 32 years ago, but based on what I know of this case now and the investigative file, the fact that we were able to use the resources of the grand jury played a pivotal role," Martin said. "I would have to say the grand jury and the evidence we were able to produce before the grand jury made the difference in what has happened today compared to what happened 32 years ago."

Cushing said Platt told him that he didn't have enough evidence to prosecute Snuka, at that time a marquee wrestler in the World Wrestling Federation, now known as World Wrestling Entertainment. Cushing said he got the impression that the district attorney may have been intimidated.

"When Snuka walked into a room, there was an eclipse of the sun," Cushing said.

Martin dismissed that opinion Tuesday, defending Platt as a man of integrity and insisting Snuka's star status in 1983 didn't protect him.

According to police records, Snuka and WWF President Vince McMahon met with Platt and other investigators June 1, 1983. There is no record of what was said at that meeting, but Judge Robert Steinberg, who was an assistant district attorney at the time, was there.

In 2013, he told The Morning Call that he did not recall what was discussed, but that McMahon did all the talking. McMahon was cooperative, according to police accounts.

"I remember Vince McMahon being what Vince McMahon has always been — very effusive. He was very protective, a showman," Steinberg said. "He was the mouthpiece, trying to direct the conversation.

After the one-hour conference in the district attorney's law library, there's no record of police ever interviewing Snuka again. The case then went cold for 30 years.

Through a spokeswoman, McMahon declined an interview request from The Morning Call last week. Days after Snuka's arrest, the WWE erased his Hall of Fame profile and all images and videos from its media sites.

The story of Argentino's death and a meeting involving Lehigh County authorities and McMahon, the barrel-chested billionaire who not only owns the wrestling empire but has also fought in many of its main events, has led to a number of stories and discussions on underground wrestling newsletters and Internet forums.

Snuka's own words in his autobiography also fueled the rumor mill, and as Martin said at a news conference Tuesday, helped lead to charges. In the 2012 book, "Superfly: The Jimmy Snuka Story," the famed wrestler talks about abusing alcohol, steroids and cocaine and provides an account of Argentino's death that differed with what he told detectives in 1983.

Snuka also mentions the Lehigh County meeting attended by his wrestling boss.

"All I remember is [McMahon] had a briefcase with him," Snuka wrote. "I don't know what happened. ... The only thing I know for sure is I didn't hurt Nancy."

Martin brushed aside any implication Snuka may have been trying to make. It was 1983, he said, and it wouldn't be a surprise to see a businessman with a briefcase.

"Whatever implication he's trying to draw is nonsense," he said.

The WWE also addressed the implication with a statement last week.

"The insinuation that a group of medical examiners, detectives and prosecutors — including two who became judges — could have their integrity compromised and participate in improper activity during the course of a meeting is absurd, categorically false and insulting to all parties. We are hopeful that justice will prevail," the statement reads.

In a 2013 podcast, Snuka discusses the book and gives a few details into the death of Argentino. Sam Roberts, the host, tells Snuka he's heard up to eight different versions of what happened to Argentino.

Snuka's exchange with Roberts was included in the grand jury presentment.

"Superfly's got a book," Roberts says. "Why don't you take his word for it? He's not in jail for it, so he's probably telling the truth, right?"

"Right, brother," Snuka responds.

In 1983, Cushing said he felt bad going back to the Argentino family empty-handed and turned down their request to represent them in the wrongful death suit

"They were extremely disappointed, but I could not in good conscience continue to take their money," he said.

He said he got a call from a detective working the case about a year ago, but did not truly believe that Snuka would be charged until he read the stories last week.

"Of course, there is still a prosecution to get through, but it's gratifying and restores one's faith in the criminal justice system."