Is there anything solid on this (obviously, at least now disgruntled) former employee having been actually fired? Or is that just gossip circulating in the RC blogo-sphere?

If this person were fired, what were the circumstances? Any statement by the now disgruntled at that time, to anyone? Any credible statements from others, either then or now?

Will any vouch for the accuser's side of things?

If it came down to it, who should be trusted? What if one or more of these "other" women either refuse to make a statement, or even on the other hand, deny such goings-on took place? Should they be believed EITHER WAY, unreservedly? Who knows?
A woman would have to be admitting to her own guilt, her own culpability, if she were to say, "yes, me too". How many human beings are that forthcoming? What are the odds? Granting of promises of a sort of 'immunity of prosecution in exchange for testimony' would be tenuous in this sort of case...for there is no legal charge to prosecute. Only accusation of impropriety, and sin, which is far different than civil charges. Not everyone is willing or ready to publicly admit their "sins". Particularly those who's identity and standing amongst a community could be terribly hurt by divulging such secrets. Such things are complicated, because humans make it so. Even those whom would sort-of like to confess, many times will tell lies when pressed. Cover it all up, if possible, particularly when such admissions could be so easily seen as being devastating for another, if they be the sort willing to sacrifice themselves "for the truth", but at the same time, not quite as eager to sacrifice others.

Not that any of this is, at this point, anyone's real "biz-ness" save for those church officials whom are tasked to inquiry of the matter. I do not envy them their task.

Even with all this, you still may well be correct, Dr. It could be much about "money".

Yet how would this accuser now get their hands on any of that settlement? It looks doubtful that could happen at this juncture. The church wouldn't be on the hook for a single dime either in a case such as this, one would think. How could hidden sin be the church's fault?
Still, jealousy (of another's money, and/or fame) can be plainly enough seen to be among human motivations...which would appear to leave it right where it started, if it is all "about the money".

Since any rational hope of "cash" coming from Corapi now is gone, if it ever was there in the first place (it could have been, at the time, if there had been an affair between them), the only that remains which could be reaped by the accuser would, at the time of the letter of accusation be; either the bitterness of tearing another down, destroying his peaceful enjoyment of the windfall, his fame and the adoration he enjoyed ---OR--- the peace that may be brought, even at cost of their own admission of "sin" by the act of warning the proper authorities, of there being the presence of a secret party-animal, wild 'N cra-azy guy among them, if the warning be brought for the safety and sanctity of others, and/or for hopes of the wider, and longer-term interests of the church.

So far, little is known of actual details of the accusation themselves, beyond what has been divulged by Corapi himself.

Here's a little more background (but not from an unbiased source):

Statement of Santa Cruz Media, Inc. Relative to Fr. Corapi’s Suspension

Santa Cruz Media, Inc. is the owner of all of Fr. John Corapi’s intellectual property and the DVDs, CDs, and books that flow from it. We are a secular corporation and not affiliated with the Catholic Church in any way. As such, we are not under the jurisdiction of any bishop or other official in the Catholic Church, although we have the utmost respect for Church authority.

We fully support Rev. John Corapi in this terrible trial, not surprisingly having begun on Ash Wednesday. Through the sacrifice and struggle of the desert and all of the dark moments that this entails, we are confident that the glory of the risen Lord will shine forth from the power of the Resurrection and Easter.

We have consulted with a number of canon lawyers. They have assured us that the actions of the Bishop of Corpus Christi, Texas are, on several points of canon law, illicit. It is our fervent hope that The Dallas Charter will be changed because of false accusations like this. There is no evidence at this time that Fr. Corapi did anything wrong, only the unsubstantiated rant of a former employee, who, after losing her job with this office, physically assaulted me and another employee and promised to "destroy" Father Corapi. We all continue to pray for this person, and we ask you to do the same.

We sincerely believe that the work Fr. Corapi has done is of greatest value to the Church, hence hated by the devil. We fully intend to make Fr. Corapi’s material available as a service to the Church and the world for as long as we possibly can.

The Church provides no financial support to Fr. Corapi. He has to pay for his own legal representation, medical costs, food, housing, etc. We have never accepted donations or charitable contributions of any kind. We are supporting Father’s efforts to defend himself. Your purchase of products from Santa Cruz Media helps provide the funding for Father's continued work as well as the legal expenses he continues to incur as a result of these malicious allegations.

Father Corapi and all of us here at Santa Cruz Media, Inc. greatly appreciate your kindness, support, and prayers. Please continue to pray for Father Corapi and his accuser, as well as all priests who find themselves in this unfortunate situation.

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Bobbi Ruffatto
Vice President of Operations
Santa Cruz Media, Inc.