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

[J. J. in Phila]

If RFG's disappearance was voluntary, i.e. walkaway or suicide, here are two key questions:

1. If this was walkaway, how did RFG get out of Lewisburg?

2. If this was suicide, where is the body?

 

[Trackergd]

If RFG's disappearance was voluntary, i.e. walkaway or suicide, here are two key questions:

1. If this was walkaway, how did RFG get out of Lewisburg?

2. If this was suicide, where is the body?

1. Since RFG did not smoke and did not like the smell in his car, I am going out on a limb here and say that the person he met drove him somewhere else, then returned the Mini to Lewisburg. That individual smoked and knew that RFG would not be driving the car again, so the smell would not matter. I do not think RFG left by bus.

The park area and bridge in Lewisburg was his second choice to dump the laptop and drive. His initial plans for disposal of the laptop were disrupted at the lake. I think this was somewhat rushed due to a compressed window of opportunity. I am rethinking that this works with your theory of the laptop being thrown off from the bridge. I think the drive was tossed from behind the SOS or from the park.

2. Suicide is low on my list.


An interesting twist. With my recent experiences with trusts, RFG could have left quite a nice nest egg for his daughter in a trust fund. She could hold the stock for quite a time before cashing them in during a market upswing. The taxes (correct me if I am wrong J.J.) would be paid out of the trust fund and his daughter would only have to pay taxes on the capital gains and what ever other state and federal taxes would apply, and would only show on her tax returns, not RFG's.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I'm snipping and dividing the question (you can tell I've been in meetings all week).

1. Since RFG did not smoke and did not like the smell in his car, I am going out on a limb here and say that the person he met drove him somewhere else, then returned the Mini to Lewisburg. That individual smoked and knew that RFG would not be driving the car again, so the smell would not matter. I do not think RFG left by bus.

The park area and bridge in Lewisburg was his second choice to dump the laptop and drive. His initial plans for disposal of the laptop were disrupted at the lake. I think this was somewhat rushed due to a compressed window of opportunity. I am rethinking that this works with your theory of the laptop being thrown off from the bridge. I think the drive was tossed from behind the SOS or from the park.

First, planning on tossing the laptop in Lake Raystown is a possibility.

As for driving, anyone not already in Lewisburg. e.g. a resident, would basically have to drive there. Why take RFG's car? Why wouldn't RFG get into the other person's car? There was no physical evidence of anyone else in the car.

2. Suicide is low on my list.

And on mine, but both walkaway and suicide are voluntary. A lot of this points to voluntary action.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

An interesting twist. With my recent experiences with trusts, RFG could have left quite a nice nest egg for his daughter in a trust fund. She could hold the stock for quite a time before cashing them in during a market upswing. The taxes (correct me if I am wrong J.J.) would be paid out of the trust fund and his daughter would only have to pay taxes on the capital gains and what ever other state and federal taxes would apply, and would only show on her tax returns, not RFG's.

I think the value that RFG could contribute to an irrevocable trust, which I think is not subject to PA estate taxes is $13,000/year, and that was raised in the early 2000's from $11 K.

Here is some general information: http://www.willandtrustcenter.com/irrevocable_trusts.asp

If I understand correctly, any money the trust earns is taxable as regular income or capital gains, as applicable. http://www.heritagewealthmgrs.com/wp/Income Taxation of Trusts & Estates.pdf

Using a irrevocable trust would yield a minor inheritance tax advantage.

For example, G leaves his daughter, L, $100 K in an irrevocable trust and $100 K in a bank account.

L would pay zero inheritance taxes on the money from the trust, and get $100 K. L would pay $4,500 on the money in the bank, and collect $95,500.

The problem is that, unless G knows that he's not going to be around, he can't get that $100 K from the trust.

http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/inheritance_tax/11414

To the actual case, RFG was planning, purportedly, to retire; he said he was. He would be getting a good pension, but he still might need additional funds. There was not a huge nest egg for him to retire on at the start of 2006. Any estate planning of this type would point to him not planning to be there to retire.

There were actually better ways to provide for his daughter if he wished to tie up a large sum of money, e.g. paid up life insurance. The value face value might be 45% to 55% higher of the cost, i.e. RFG might spend $105 K to get a policy that would have a face value of $200 K and might earn a few thousand in interest (or additional insurance).

 

[Trackergd]

First, planning on tossing the laptop in Lake Raystown is a possibility.

As for driving, anyone not already in Lewisburg. e.g. a resident, would basically have to drive there. Why take RFG's car? Why wouldn't RFG get into the other person's car? There was no physical evidence of anyone else in the car.
to voluntary action.

Snipped for space.

I am working on the theory it was not a resident of Lewisburg, rather a confidant who met RFG in Lewisburg, drove RFG elsewhere and returned to "plant" the car in Lewisburg. In this part of the case, the evidence is the cigarette ash and smell of smoke in the Mini. An error on the part of the confidant. RFG being seen in Lewisburg and the car being found in the lot (and later the laptop and drive) makes Lewisburg the PLS (place last seen) keeping attention focused on Lewisburg, rather than the possibility RFG rode to an area airport, bus depot or train station to exit stage right.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Snipped for space.

I am working on the theory it was not a resident of Lewisburg, rather a confidant who met RFG in Lewisburg, drove RFG elsewhere and returned to "plant" the car in Lewisburg. In this part of the case, the evidence is the cigarette ash and smell of smoke in the Mini. An error on the part of the confidant. RFG being seen in Lewisburg and the car being found in the lot (and later the laptop and drive) makes Lewisburg the PLS (place last seen) keeping attention focused on Lewisburg, rather than the possibility RFG rode to an area airport, bus depot or train station to exit stage right.

Here is a rough list: http://www.centredaily.com/2009/07/16/2396992/the-inner-circle.html

I will agree that if someone picked up RFG, that person, a "helper," H, would have these three characteristics:

1. Personally loyal to RFG.

2. Trustworthy.

3. Proximate to Lewisburg (in Central PA).

My question, however, is why would H have to drive the Mini. H would have a car, and RFG could get into it.

 

[MissJ]

Here is a rough list: http://www.centredaily.com/2009/07/16/2396992/the-inner-circle.html

I will agree that if someone picked up RFG, that person, a "helper," H, would have these three characteristics:

1. Personally loyal to RFG.

2. Trustworthy.

3. Proximate to Lewisburg (in Central PA).

My question, however, is why would H have to drive the Mini. H would have a car, and RFG could get into it.

That is the issue I have with voluntary missing. These odd things that don't seem to fit.:moo:

 

[J. J. in Phila]

[/B]

That is the issue I have with voluntary missing. These odd things that don't seem to fit.:moo:

We don't have any evidence that anyone, other than RFG, drove the car. We don't have any evidence that the smoker was actually sitting in the car.

 

[PPKik]

We don't have any evidence that anyone, other than RFG, drove the car. We don't have any evidence that the smoker was actually sitting in the car.

True. My memory of the smoker theory was that someone was leaning in RFG's car and dropped a small amount of ash on the passenger side floor. Still very odd if he was seriously anti-smoking.

Unless it was something done to mislead or distract by him, an accomplice, or the killer, or simply contamination of the scene, something that would not surprise me.

 

[shadow of my mind]

Here is a rough list: http://www.centredaily.com/2009/07/16/2396992/the-inner-circle.html

I will agree that if someone picked up RFG, that person, a "helper," H, would have these three characteristics:

1. Personally loyal to RFG.

2. Trustworthy.

3. Proximate to Lewisburg (in Central PA).

My question, however, is why would H have to drive the Mini. H would have a car, and RFG could get into it.

The "helper" could be someone who was in the exact same position; connected in the same way to whatever caused RG to become recently "distracted". This person could not, or did not want to leave his/her life behind. That in itself would create the three characteristics needed to be a good choice.

As to why H would drive the Mini is still a good question. Maybe simply they had always wanted to and now they could.

As far as how RG got out of Lewisburg unseen --- Could it have been that H met RG in Lewisburg, gave RG their vehicle and he drove himself out. H then rented a vehicle in his/her own name, used the public bus or a hired a car service to return back home; later retrieving their vehicle from a pre-set location.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

First, I will note that there is no evidence anyone else drove the Mini on 4/15-4/16/05, other than RFG.

The "helper" could be someone who was in the exact same position; connected in the same way to whatever caused RG to become recently "distracted". This person could not, or did not want to leave his/her life behind. That in itself would create the three characteristics needed to be a good choice.

As to why H would drive the Mini is still a good question. Maybe simply they had always wanted to and now they could.

Possible, clearly.

As far as how RG got out of Lewisburg unseen --- Could it have been that H met RG in Lewisburg, gave RG their vehicle and he drove himself out. H then rented a vehicle in his/her own name, used the public bus or a hired a car service to return back home; later retrieving their vehicle from a pre-set location.

Yes, but there would likely be a record.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

True. My memory of the smoker theory was that someone was leaning in RFG's car and dropped a small amount of ash on the passenger side floor. Still very odd if he was seriously anti-smoking.

Unless it was something done to mislead or distract by him, an accomplice, or the killer, or simply contamination of the scene, something that would not surprise me.

Or, just a random person that leaned in to ask RFG a question, and he didn't care because he was not planning to be there.

Your memory is correct regarding the theory.

RFG was seriously anti-smoking in the Mini, but he did associate with smokers (Petito), and he did occasionally smoke a cigar.

I use to smoke, primarily cigars. I almost never smoked one in a car, especially while driving.

 

[MissJ]

We don't have any evidence that anyone, other than RFG, drove the car. We don't have any evidence that the smoker was actually sitting in the car.

Well that was my point, sort of. Where did the smell and ashes come from and knowing RFG didn't like smoking, how did it get there? Who did it belong to and what does it have to do with RFG? Did anyone come forward and say "I saw RFG ......talked to him that day and I'm the smoker"? If not, why not? Someone knows something about it but isn't reporting it, why not?:moo: Was it his Helper or someone else?:moo::twocents:

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Well that was my point, sort of. Where did the smell and ashes come from and knowing RFG didn't like smoking, how did it get there? Who did it belong to and what does it have to do with RFG? Did anyone come forward and say "I saw RFG ......talked to him that day and I'm the smoker"? If not, why not? Someone knows something about it but isn't reporting it, why not?:moo: Was it his Helper or someone else?:moo::twocents:

I could not completely rule out someone, a smoker, just asking RFG a question. I think it is unlikely, but not impossible.

It is like the Mystery Woman. It just could have someone who struck up a conversation with RFG, or asked his opinion on a product. It is unlikely, but not impossible.

I think it is highly likely, at this point, that RFG was planning to travel to Lewisburg. It is also likely that RFG was planning to meet someone in Lewisburg, though perhaps not as likely as the first statement.

 

[MissJ]

JMO but I think the smoker is involved in whatever happened to RFG. My opinion fluctuates. No body to me means no suicide. I just don't see him leaving behind a pension to live the rest of his life on some savings with the hope that it would last. Unless, whatever he was leaving for was lucrative in and of itself. Was he paid to leave? Or did he leave for a wealthy woman?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

JMO but I think the smoker is involved in whatever happened to RFG. My opinion fluctuates. No body to me means no suicide. I just don't see him leaving behind a pension to live the rest of his life on some savings with the hope that it would last. Unless, whatever he was leaving for was lucrative in and of itself. Was he paid to leave? Or did he leave for a wealthy woman?

I want to first preface this with this statement: At this point in time, either publicly or privately, I know of nothing criminal that RFG did in his official capacity.

If something would surface, RFG would know that not only could he charged with a crime, and maybe go to jail, but that he would lose that pension. In that case, voluntary departure or suicide would be ways of avoiding those possibilities. His heirs would collect the pension, and he could not be charged. The problems the state is having with removing Sandusky's pension would not exist in regard to RFG's pension.

Just because I do not know of any criminally, does not mean that no criminality exists. At least two separate possibilities have been mentioned.

As to noncriminal reasons, there would be two factors:

1. If he had substantial funds outside of the country in 2005, he might decide to live off of those. It may have been difficult to get that money back into the country.

2. He would realize that if he died or was declared dead without getting a pension, his heirs would get substantially more.

So, both of those could be a factor in a voluntary act.

Not directly related, a new blog is up: http://www.centredaily.com/2014/05/...-gricars-perspective.html?sp=/99/236/704/694/

 

[MissJ]

I don't think he was the kind of man who would be involved in criminal activity either. But at his age he can't go somewhere and start over without money. A lot of money. He could live 25 years (at the point of his departure) and I can't see how he could have that kind of money saved to make it worthwhile to leave the pension behind. AKAIK he had no reason to leave. Some one has a piece to this puzzle. He also doesn't seem like the kind of man to break his daughter's heart. No woman would rather have money than her father. JMO.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I don't think he was the kind of man who would be involved in criminal activity either. But at his age he can't go somewhere and start over without money. A lot of money. He could live 25 years (at the point of his departure) and I can't see how he could have that kind of money saved to make it worthwhile to leave the pension behind. AKAIK he had no reason to leave. Some one has a piece to this puzzle. He also doesn't seem like the kind of man to break his daughter's heart. No woman would rather have money than her father. JMO.

There may have been a lot of money out there. That estate was worth less than $25 K.

The pension, that was not of the estate, was high. I could understand any parent thinking that their prime duty was to provide for their child, financially. RFG did do that, and did it in such a way that he handed her a tax break.

 

[MissJ]

There may have been a lot of money out there. That estate was worth less than $25 K.

The pension, that was not of the estate, was high. I could understand any parent thinking that their prime duty was to provide for their child, financially. RFG did do that, and did it in such a way that he handed her a tax break.

Well if that was the kind of person he was I would not put anything past him, illegal or otherwise. You never get over the loss of a parent and in no way does money matter. I can't imagine he had that kind of savings unless he HAD done something illegal. Try to live for 25 years on 250,000. you can't do it without being impoverished. I can't see anyone opting for that. Its not like he was 25 and could get a job as a laborer or something else. Why would he? I don' t
believe he was a criminal nor a man who was so callous to break his daughter's heart and think money would matter. She could make her own money and I'm sure she has. There is no simple answer to this.JMO.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Well if that was the kind of person he was I would not put anything past him, illegal or otherwise. You never get over the loss of a parent and in no way does money matter. I can't imagine he had that kind of savings unless he HAD done something illegal. Try to live for 25 years on 250,000. you can't do it without being impoverished. I can't see anyone opting for that. Its not like he was 25 and could get a job as a laborer or something else. Why would he? I don' t
believe he was a criminal nor a man who was so callous to break his daughter's heart and think money would matter. She could make her own money and I'm sure she has. There is no simple answer to this.JMO.

We can ask the same about his divorce or his brother's suicide, in regard to an absence. For me, it was quite surprising that RFG's daughter "appearance" at the hearing to declare him dead was via telephone. I was shocked, but for some people, and I would assume for her, it was not something she wanted to do. Would I have done that? No. Was I RFG's child who was living 2000 miles away? No. She did things differently that I would, but that doesn't make her a bad person.

Money did matter to him; maybe as a way of keeping score. He had for years tried to get the DA's Office declared full time, even when the Commissioners offered him additional staff so he wouldn't have to work as much. He did that within the first six weeks of taking office. At the time, he was married to Barbara Gray, and she was making about twice as much as he was. He didn't need the money. His arguments with Emma were over her spending, even though he was full time at that point and she was working at least part time.