PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #12

[J. J. in Phila]

Form REV-1547.

Redaction: The street address of Goodall's office.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

 

[Saunterer]

Not sure if this has been mentioned but, Lewisburg is such a small town, at least that's the feeling I got when I was there. The locals seem to notice those that don't live there, so I would think there would have been at least a few locals that noticed him and mentioned it.

I respectfully disagree with this. In thinking about all of the strangers who come into my view on any given day, with whom I had no personal interaction, how many of them could I pick out of a lineup days later, with reasonable certainty? None.

 

[Saunterer]

I thank Trackergd for obtaining, and J. J. in Phila (post #275) for posting page/side 1 of REV-1500, as filed with Centre County on 12/27/2012. I am curious as to what that same page/side looks like, as filed with the state. Since this document page is public information, it seems to me that the state cannot use the privacy criteria, or the exemption criteria under the PA right to know law, to withhold it from the public. Any takers here?

 

[SeekingJana]

Re: Post 283.

If you think you have the right to know, then go to the correct office in the capitol building and ask for it.

It doesn't further knowledge or understanding to keep asking posters to speculate on what forms show, how accurate the witnesses are, etc.

None of us are able to answer these questions and speculation is non-productive. Also, what if you had been one of the witnesses who came forward and someone was speculating about your credibility on an Internet board years later?

Treating other people like we want to be treated is a basic tenet of WS. Trackergd went out of his/ her way to get the forms we have. If you want more, then go try and get them.

Facts are facts and the forms speak for themselves. They are not speculation. The county info should match up with the state info, of course.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I thank Trackergd for obtaining, and J. J. in Phila (post #275) for posting page/side 1 of REV-1500, as filed with Centre County on 12/27/2012. I am curious as to what that same page/side looks like, as filed with the state. Since this document page is public information, it seems to me that the state cannot use the privacy criteria, or the exemption criteria under the PA right to know law, to withhold it from the public. Any takers here?

This would imply that the is a suspicion that LG deliberately falsified one of the forms. Such action would be subject to the penalties of perjury, according to the form. Such action also imply that her attorney was in cahoots with her on this, filing two noticeably different forms.

Obviously it possible for anyone to commit perjury, but I have seen nothing that would indicate LG has done so. Same in regard to Goodall.

Now, there have been numerous comments over the course of this saga that have suggested that LG was not being honest, that she knew where her father was. Those comments have not been made by me, and I do not subscribe to that theory.

The forms speak for themselves.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

There can be conspiracies; we have learned that from the PSU scandal. That would would be a minor one compared to this.

These are the people that would have to be involved:

1. LG
2. Goodall
3. MTM
4. SPM
5. Mark Smith
6. DZ
7. MR
8. Chief Weaver
9. Chief Dixon
10. People in the PSP.

Do all these people "hate" RFG? Would all of them want to cover up a murder?

 

[SeekingJana]

#287- you might have a different opinion, but I'd say Ms. Fornicola would also have to be involved in a conspiracy theory, if someone were so paranoid as to propagate one.
She is the last known with personal ties to him to see him alive, she is the last person known to have spoken with him regarding personal matters.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

#287- you might have a different opinion, but I'd say Ms. Fornicola would also have to be involved in a conspiracy theory, if someone were so paranoid as to propagate one.
She is the last known with personal ties to him to see him alive, she is the last person known to have spoken with him regarding personal matters.

Okay, we'll take it up to eleven.

She would not have had access to the financial information nor would she have been involved in the conduct of the investigation. Those were the two things I was looking for in this.

 

[SeekingJana]

Okay, we'll take it up to eleven.

She would not have had access to the financial information nor would she have been involved in the conduct of the investigation. Those were the two things I was looking for in this.

I agree about the legal forms to a great extent. However, if there should be wide-spread untruths, I'd think she would be " in the loop" so she could answer questions regarding saving patterns and so forth.. She did live with him.

I was addressing " conspiracy theories" in general.. which I think it's also time to do, as almost every post has been questioned and torn apart by a couple of posters recently. It's tearing me apart to keep " facing the firing squad".

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I don't mind people asking questions and being skeptical; I think that is a good thing. It becomes a problem when it is done in the face of evidence to the contrary.

For example, we discussed the possibility of RFG doing some estate planning by establishing a trust or by putting money into non-interest generating investments, or where interest would not be credited, e.g. savings bonds or gold.

Well, there would be a report of a trust on the REV-1500, as there would be of savings bonds. Gold would be an asset. We can rule those things out.

It wouldn't make too much sense for LG/Goodall to file inaccurate forms with the county, and accurate ones with the state. It wouldn't make too much sense for them to falsify the information to make it look like RFG walked away or committed suicide, if he was actually the victim of foul play.

The evidence says something. Now, if that happens to sink some long held long held false belief, so be it. If the evidence does not fit the theory, get rid of the theory.

 

[SeekingJana]

Your second sentence is what I am concerned with. The case facts have always been the case facts, slim as they are.

While interpretation of what the sum total of case facts means, whether a person thinks Mr. Gricar is dead or alive is their choice. None of us knows what happened to him.
I have always approached case facts with the principle of Occam's Razor.

Therefore, the simplest and most logical reason for a 59 year old man to have gone missing over 8 years ago is that he is not alive, but his remains have not yet been found, or not yet ID'd, obviously.

I think that if he was leaving by choice, he would have told loved ones and friends good-bye, or at least mailed them a letter years later, explaining his choices , which would be hard to explain under the best of circumstances. I also don't find leaving to be characteristic of what is known about the man.

That only leaves death. My theory is that he is deceased and the remains are not yet recovered. Occam's Razor.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Your first sentence is what I am concerned with. The case facts have always been the case facts, slim as they are.

While interpretation of what the sum total of case facts means, whether a person thinks Mr. Gricar is dead or alive, is their choice. None of us knows what happened to him.

I have always approached case facts with the principle of Occam's Razor.

Therefore, the simplest and most logical reason for a 59 year old man to have gone missing over 8 years ago is that he is not alive, but his remains have not yet been found, or not yet ID'd ( obviously).

I think that if he was leaving, he would have told loved ones and friends good-bye, or at least mailed them a letter years later, explaining his choices ( which would be hard to explain). I also don't find leaving to be characteristic of what is known about the man.

That only leaves death. My theory is that he is deceased and the remains are not yet recovered, using Occam's Razor.

Or, he doesn't want to be found.

I could understand why RFG would not tell his daughter, or PEF, if he walked away. Both were polygraphed and both passed. Both had to testify. RFG would have known that by telling either of them, they would have have to testify (or be polygraphed) that they hadn't heard from him. He would have putting them in a position where they were committing perjury, if not fraud.

Someone used the term "family cad." RFG would be worse than a "cad" if he put either a position where they would have to perjure themselves. I could understand any father, or boyfriend, not wanting to put his daughter and girlfriend in jail for perjury.

 

[SeekingJana]

Re: post #293. I realize this is the way you believe things happened. That he may have walked away. You have been steadfast in always having this as a greater probability in your theories. You have a right to your theory and I respect your right to have it.

I don't agree with your conclusions, or odds, but that's OK. :truce:. I've been doing independent research into cases where mature adults with roots and no known mental illness or legal difficulties have "left". Sometimes, even one of the above qualifiers were present but I tried to eliminate those from my research.
Most of the responsible, non mentally ill ( including non- substance abusers) and non legally burdened who have been found, even decades later, have been found deceased. Sometimes remains have signs of foul play, sometimes they don't but because of the location, are still ruled foul play. Some are still indeterminate cause with remains present, of course.

The things I want to know are unknowns in the case unless perhaps the Vidocq Society takes this case on as a project. I think it's one they could do a great deal with.
I have a hard time believing that LE is ever going to give out any more case info to the public.

As for the hypothetical walkaway and 2 women in his life passing a polygraph, as soon as the results were in the public domain, if he were alive, wouldn't it make sense for him to get word to them that he is alive and that he is sorry, etc.?
The initial period of hypothetical leaving and the polygraphs were years and years ago. No one has to agree to be polygraphed in our country, and certainly not for a second time. If asked again, the person has grounds for refusal- a negative test for deceptive markers is already in the files.

Thanks for reading. The number of missing adults in the US is very high. (Not counting UID from 9/11) Those who do walk away and are found,are usually found to be in legal, financial or personal dire straits and there is usually substance abuse.
None of those factors were present with Mr. Gricar.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Respectfully snipped:

Re: post #293. I realize this is the way you believe things happened. That he may have walked away. You have been steadfast in always having this as a greater probability in your theories. You have a right to your theory and I respect your right to have it.

On that point, I disagree. I thought for the 3-6 months it was suicide, and for another 3-6 months, it was foul play. I wouldn't even call voluntary departure probable until 2011.

As for the hypothetical walkaway and 2 women in his life passing a polygraph, as soon as the results were in the public domain, if he were alive, wouldn't it make sense for him to get word to them that he is alive and that he is sorry, etc.?
The initial period of hypothetical leaving and the polygraphs were years and years ago. No one has to agree to be polygraphed in our country, and certainly not for a second time. If asked again, the person has grounds for refusal- a negative test for deceptive markers is already in the files.

They did have to testify and if RFG contacted LG directly, that might be a fraud. An average person may not realize that, but a lawyer would.

 

[SeekingJana]

Respectfully snipped:



On that point, I disagree. I thought for the 3-6 months it was suicide, and for another 3-6 months, it was foul play. I wouldn't even call voluntary departure probable until 2011.



They did have to testify and if RFG contacted LG directly, that might be a fraud. An average person may not realize that, but a lawyer would.

I'm sorry I mis-remembered your timeline. I thought that you believed walkaway by the time you started posting here.

Who had to testify? Do you mean the regulation questions asked for a legal declaration of death to be issued?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I'm sorry I mis-remembered your timeline. I thought that you believed walkaway by the time you started posting here.

Who had to testify? Do you mean the regulation questions asked for a legal declaration of death to be issued?

To clarify, I did not have voluntary departure above 50% until 2011. When I started posting here, I had it at:

Walkaway: 45%
Murder: 44%
Suicide: 10%
Something Else: 1%

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #4

As for testimony, yes at the hearing to declare RFG dead. If they did find that someone lied under oath and had contact with RFG, I think we'd be talking about perjury and possibly fraud charges. I could understand why RFG, if he walked away, wouldn't tell them. It would be a matter of protection.

 

[Trackergd]

I emailed Saunterer a copy of the RG file.

 

[Trackergd]

http://www.wgal.com/news/susquehann...23145840/-/4j8i95z/-/index.html#ixzz2lnzKqD8S

Re-posted from Kortne Stouffer thread.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I emailed Saunterer a copy of the RG file.

Good. I didn't see anything else, except one of the court documents indicated that LG had to make insurance payments for RFG.

If he bought it later in life, say at 40, the cost could have been beyond $3,500 for $100 k. https://life.statefarm.com/LifeQuot...flowId=4a2fcedb-3651-48c2-8166-71e11c47ba90#2

You can play around with the benefit/type/age purchased: http://www.statefarm.com/insurance/life_annuity/life/whole/whole.asp

I could understand where much of his estate would be exhausted after 6 years, especially since half of it was LG's. I don't find the low estate inconsistent with the report he had a bit over $100 k in joint accounts.

 

[Trackergd]

Good. I didn't see anything else, except one of the court documents indicated that LG had to make insurance payments for RFG.

If he bought it later in life, say at 40, the cost could have been beyond $3,500 for $100 k. https://life.statefarm.com/LifeQuot...flowId=4a2fcedb-3651-48c2-8166-71e11c47ba90#2

You can play around with the benefit/type/age purchased: http://www.statefarm.com/insurance/life_annuity/life/whole/whole.asp

I could understand where much of his estate would be exhausted after 6 years, especially since half of it was LG's. I don't find the low estate inconsistent with the report he had a bit over $100 k in joint accounts.

RBBM

I wondered about that, but I figured you would have a better grasp on why and the mechanics than I would. Any theory or is it common?