PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #5

[J. J. in Phila]

So, just to clarify, the order that LE talked to witnesses and got their similar accounts was police officer then bartender. Police officer on 4/22 and bartender (sometime after 4/22 but before 4/29)?

Don't mean to seem dense -- I'm just on "gricar overload". :yow:

Anyone have any links from published reports on the Lewisburg witnesses (not from SOS)? I'm having a really hard time finding official attribution. And, if I can't attribute it to a source, I can't put in in my eyewitness database.

And, am I correct that all eyewitness sightings after April 18, have been discounted/rejected/unsubstantiated by LE?

There was one in Michigan that is a "maybe." He was "seen" with an elderly woman. Witness was a retired police sketch artist and I think his wife. I'm not thrilled about the conditions.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Reports of Gricar sightings in Wilkes-Barre also have not panned out. Zaccagni said the most recent sighting of Gricar comes out of Michigan, and like other leads, officers are following up, even though there is a strong likelihood it will turn out to be yet another red herring.

"We'll check it out," Zaccagni said.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/6/prweb247770.php

Did it ever occur to you that "not panned out" could mean, "It doesn't tell us where he is currently?"

 

[Nowisthetime]

Gricar family, friends hold on to hope

By Pete Bosak
pbosak@centredaily.com

BELLEFONTE -- One year after former Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar disappeared, the man who replaced him said it will take a bit of good fortune to determine what became of the man.

"It would take that lucky stroke or fortuitous lead," District Attorney Michael Madeira said at a news conference Friday morning in Bellefonte. "We would take a stroke of luck."

Gricar took the day off on April 15, 2005. That day, he called his live-in girlfriend, Patty Fornicola, to tell her he was taking a drive on state Route 192 toward Lewisburg. He has been neither seen nor heard from since. His car was found a day later in a parking lot in Lewisburg.

"I've never given up hope," Fornicola, who still works in the district attorney's office, said at the news conference. "It helps me go on. I have to pull myself together because I have to go on."

Authorities say the investigation into the disappearance -- a probe that has involved Bellefonte police, State College police, state police, the state attorney general's office, the FBI, the Secret Service and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department -- is no closer to determining what happened to Gricar than it was a year ago.

"What is important for people to know," Madeira said, "is that over time, as the leads grow cold, the interest of law enforcement, my interest, as well as the public's interest in this case will not."

Darrel Zaccagni, the Bellefonte officer who has been leading the investigation, admits he is frustrated. "The leads are getting far and few between," he said. "So where do we go?"

Police have pursued a plethora of reported Gricar sightings, all discounted.

(snip)

 

[J. J. in Phila]

In "The River's Edge," Zaccagni said that the police can "definitely" put him Gricar in Lewisburg on Saturday, 4/16/05.

Sorry, but his statement puts it beyond that date.

 

[Nowisthetime]

The following article appeared in the CDT 2 years after RG's disappearance. To my knowledge, there was never a retraction for inaccuracies to this article.

Two years after Gricar vanished, police no closer to answers

Two years ago today, former Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar vanished without a trace from an antiques mall in Lewisburg, his red and white Mini Cooper found abandoned the next day by police.

Investigators, while hoping they will get the break they need to determine what happened to the career prosecutor, concede the case has officially gone cold.

"I would say this is a cold case," said Centre County District Attorney Michael Madeira, who inherited the investigation into his predecessor's disappearance when he took office in January 2006, almost nine months after Gricar vanished.

"The family continues to hope, although hope may be waning," Madeira said. "Everybody hopes that there is some opportunity for a resolution. But that hope becomes less and less as time goes by."

Tony Gricar, spokesman for the family, said he now thinks it may never be known what became of his uncle on April 15, 2005.

"Short of a stroke of luck at this point, I don't think so," Tony Gricar said.

The day he vanished, a Friday, Ray Gricar telephoned his live-in girlfriend, Patty Fornicola, to tell her he was taking the day off and going for a drive on state Route 192 toward Lewisburg.

There have been no credible sightings of him since that day.

(snip)
Still, Tony Gricar said, he and Lara are being realistic.

"Neither one of us believe he is still alive," Tony Gricar said.

Centre Daily News

Renner is an author, attempting to sell his books. His article "The River's Edge" was dissed as having numerous inaccuracies ref. the disappearance of Ray Gricar. He also wrote a book in 2006 ref. the killing of Amy Mehaljevic (unsolved murder in OH); the local LE was critical of the information contained in that book (Nov. 2006 Archived), "Bay Village Issued Press Release."

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Actually, BP had not read the Renner piece (at least in depth). He commented on it in his blog after the 2006 article. He was surprised how much Zaccagni told Renner.

 

[Nowisthetime]

Yep, that DZ was a "wealth" of information . . .

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Yep, that DZ was a "wealth" of information . . .

Actually, he didn't say a lot, which is what makes the comment so telling.

 

[Nowisthetime]

The Missing Person flyer, dated 2007, from BPD:

There have been “sightings" of Ray over the past two years (unconfirmed).

The Missing Person flyer from the FBI does not list sightings at all.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

The Missing Person flyer, dated 2007, from BPD:

There have been “sightings" of Ray over the past two years (unconfirmed).

The Missing Person flyer from the FBI does not list sightings at all.

Yet the officer investigating the case states that he was "definitely" in Lewisburg on 4/16/05, quoted here: http://www.freetimes.com/stories/13/...he-rivers-edge

I believe the officer over a flyer.

 

[Nowisthetime]

One would think most people would believe the information contained on an official FBI flyer. The same goes for an official flyer from any law enforcement agency. As noted above, the official Gricar FBI Missing Person flyer does not mention any sightings; the official Gricar BPD Missing Person flyer, taken from the FBI flyer, lists sightings (unconfirmed).

I'm not sure the words of any particular officer during an interview with a writer/author could be believed as much as an official FBI or LE flyer; one couldn't be certain whether they were the officer's words or those of the writer/author.

As of 2007, the official Gricar BPD Missing Person flyers lists "sightings" (unconfirmed), which far surpasses the writing of Renner.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

One would think most people would believe the information contained on an official FBI flyer. The same goes for an official flyer from any law enforcement agency. As noted above, the official Gricar FBI Missing Person flyer does not mention any sightings; the official Gricar BPD Missing Person flyer, taken from the FBI flyer, lists sightings (unconfirmed).

I'm not sure the words of any particular officer during an interview with a writer/author could be believed as much as an official FBI or LE flyer; one couldn't be certain whether they were the officer's words or those of the writer/author.

As of 2007, the official Gricar BPD Missing Person flyers lists "sightings" (unconfirmed), which far surpasses the writing of Renner.

But not the the person doing the actual investigation, who was quoted. The FBI, while providing technical support, wasn't the agency interviewing the witnesses. Sorry, try again.

You can try to spin it, but there were at least eight witnesses that saw Mr. Gricar in and around Lewisburg on 4/15/05, alone. Six of those, at least, saw him with the Mini.

 

[nittany90]

Actually, I've noticed a couple of curious things from the FBI and BPD official "missing" flyers. The date and location. For arguments sake, it could be argued that "Bellefonte PA" could either be his hometown, or his last known location. I'm taking the position that a "reasonable person" would assume it means his last known location, as is evidenced by the wording on other flyers listed on the FBI Missing website (take a look at Lori Ann Boffman's --very similar. Lists her missing from the county her car was found, not her county of residence). Why didn't they follow the same protocol for Ray?

Can we all agree that, none of those witnesses, or anyone it seems for that matter, saw Ray Gricar in his car at the SOS parking lot, right? And none of the sightings were corroborated by videotape evidence, right?

So, it could be argued that the last true, corroborated, hard piece of evidence we have of Ray Gricar definitely being alive, is him leaving the Courthhouse on Thursday night. After that, it's purely speculative, circumstantial evidence (PF's assertions of seeing and talking to him the morning of April 15, 2005 and her subsequent passage of a LD test, cellphone record confirmation that a call was made on his cellphone on 192 at 11:12 am to the DA's office, several eyewitness reports putting him in Lewisburg on April 15-16, 2005.)

And, IF the above assumption is true, why do LE and FBI both take the huge leap (or make a huge blunder) of listing his date of disappearance as April 15, 2005 from Bellefonte, PA?

My guess: #1 - LE knows more than they're telling (hard evidence) or, #2 -they're putting more stock in the circumstantial evidence of him being alive and well on April 15, 2005 and less stock on him going missing from State College. Otherwise, I would think then the date of disappearance on LE's official flyers would be a day earlier AND it would say from Lewisburg, or #3 - Both, or #4 - they didn't put much thought behind the facts when they created the missing flyer.

My guess is #3. But, after reading all of the LE missteps in this case, I could vote for #5 - ALL OF THE ABOVE.

 

[nittany90]

Can someone provide me an official link that states the date the home desktop computer was purchased???

TIA

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Can we all agree that, none of those witnesses, or anyone it seems for that matter, saw Ray Gricar in his car at the SOS parking lot, right? And none of the sightings were corroborated by videotape evidence, right?

At least two witnesses saw Mr. Gricar moving the car back and forth in the SoS parking lot between 5:30 PM and 6:30 PM on 4/15/05.

Mr. Gricar's scent was detected in that parking lot.

I do not have a specific date on the computer purchase, only around January 1.

 

[nittany90]

Just came across this today. Don't know that the date of the computer searches has hit the general public yet.

Chief Weaver told a reporter from WTAJ on April 15, 2009 that "a month before his disappearance" Gricar searched "how to fry a hard drive" and "water damage to computer" on his personal computer. Weaver also stated that a hard drive-erasing box was found opened, and he thinks Gricar used it to erase data on his laptop.

Besides the bombshell info pinpointing the actual date of the internet searches to "one month before his disappearance" -- this one interview with BPD has raised a few very important questions in my mind:

- If Weaver's right, and Gricar purchased and used the data-erasing software on his laptop, why would he need to do searches for the same info only a month before his disappearance?
- Is it possible that someone (other than Gricar) performed the searches on the home computer? Can LE prove that it was Gricar that performed the searches? How?
- Why does it, at least on the surface, appear that LE wants the public to believe that Gricar did the searches??
- Is the timing of these “new revelations” politically motivated? Does someone have an interest in making Gricar’s disappearance look planned and voluntary? To what end?
- Why did LE/DA’s office sit on this information for over 2 ½ years?
- Is there a receipt for "the box"?
- What is the proof that "the box" belonged to or was purchased by RG?
- -If LE didn't recover "the box" at the time the laptop was supposedly discovered missing, when did they find it? Where?
- right now there seems to be a concerted effort to link the software and the searches in the minds of the public (even though, they are truly two separate issues). And that just makes the reporter in me, go hmmmm....:waitasec:

http://wearecentralpa.com/content/fulltext/news/?cid=81841

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Besides the bombshell info pinpointing the actual date of the internet searches to "one month before his disappearance" -- this one interview with BPD has raised a few very important questions in my mind:

- If Weaver's right, and Gricar purchased and used the data-erasing software on his laptop, why would he need to do searches for the same info only a month before his disappearance?

Even looking at what was on the Internet at the time, most people say to destroy the drive. It would be possible to recover information from the drive even if data-erasing software is used; it would usually take a forensics recovery firm (like Kroll).

- Is it possible that someone (other than Gricar) performed the searches on the home computer? Can LE prove that it was Gricar that performed the searches? How?
- Why does it, at least on the surface, appear that LE wants the public to believe that Gricar did the searches??

From what MR said, no. I'd guess they have determined it was RFG.

- Is the timing of these “new revelations” politically motivated? Does someone have an interest in making Gricar’s disappearance look planned and voluntary? To what end?
- Why did LE/DA’s office sit on this information for over 2 ½ years?

If RFG was determined to have acted voluntarily, it is not a matter for LE or the DA's Office. The DA solving a high profile mystery doesn't hurt. I just that they will get a solution and not a "solution."

- Is there a receipt for "the box"?
- What is the proof that "the box" belonged to or was purchased by RG?
- -If LE didn't recover "the box" at the time the laptop was supposedly discovered missing, when did they find it? Where?
- right now there seems to be a concerted effort to link the software and the searches in the minds of the public (even though, they are truly two separate issues). And that just makes the reporter in me, go hmmmm....:waitasec:

http://wearecentralpa.com/content/fulltext/news/?cid=81841

That RFG was interested in erasing a drive was actually reported in the late summer of 2008. This is being hyped a bit.

 

[nittany90]

Even looking at what was on the Internet at the time, most people say to destroy the drive. It would be possible to recover information from the drive even if data-erasing software is used; it would usually take a forensics recovery firm (like Kroll).



From what MR said, no. I'd guess they have determined it was RFG.



If RFG was determined to have acted voluntarily, it is not a matter for LE or the DA's Office. The DA solving a high profile mystery doesn't hurt. I just that they will get a solution and not a "solution."



That RFG was interested in erasing a drive was actually reported in the late summer of 2008. This is being hyped a bit.

I'd really like to hear from a computer forensics investigator. I, in no way, consider myself an expert in computer forensics, but I am a pretty good observer. In recent cases involving computer evidence, I have never heard an expert witness say that "PERSON A" did the computer search -- they only go so far as to say that the search originated from "PERSON A's computer/user ID". This doesn't help much if its a shared computer.

I'll have to research PA case statute, but I'm pretty sure that if the disappearance was "staged" and local/state/federal funds wasted in a fradulent investigation, the individual can be charged (if found). He's had plenty of time in the last four years to contact BPD and tell them, "hey, I'm safe, I just wanted a new life" -- I can guess since the investigation is ongoing, he hasn't done that. I don't think anyone can argue with the facts of the case (and that no resolution has been reached) that if indeed Gricar walked away, he staged his disappearance to at least look like a suicide.

LE releasing the facts that Gricar was interested in erasing a drive and then releasing that they have proof he actually erased it, is 2 completely different facts! Regardless of how long ago the information was reported, have the questions been answered? Are they relevant to the investigation? Not to mention that I have a problem with LE and the officials from the DA's office releasing conflicting information to the public (fingerprint evidence, eyewitness credibility, box, no box, etc. Sometimes I wonder if they even WANT this case solved. And if they don't, who benefits from that failure???

Just to be clear, I don't personally have a stake in whether or not the case is solved. Nor do I have to be proven right on whatever scenario I'm leaning toward. I'm just here evaluating the known evidence, asking the unasked questions, thinking of possible angles that might have been missed, so that those who do have a stake, can finally have some comfort in closure.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I'd really like to hear from a computer forensics investigator. I, in no way, consider myself an expert in computer forensics, but I am a pretty good observer. In recent cases involving computer evidence, I have never heard an expert witness say that "PERSON A" did the computer search -- they only go so far as to say that the search originated from "PERSON A's computer/user ID". This doesn't help much if its a shared computer.

What if the laptop was erased first. completely so the operating system would have to be reloaded.

I'll have to research PA case statute, but I'm pretty sure that if the disappearance was "staged" and local/state/federal funds wasted in a fradulent investigation, the individual can be charged (if found). He's had plenty of time in the last four years to contact BPD and tell them, "hey, I'm safe, I just wanted a new life" -- I can guess since the investigation is ongoing, he hasn't done that. I don't think anyone can argue with the facts of the case (and that no resolution has been reached) that if indeed Gricar walked away, he staged his disappearance to at least look like a suicide.

This has been discussed in Bosak's old blog. It is not criminal, though a civil suit could be filed, until the statute of limitation expires. I'm not sure that RFG, if he walked, made it look like suicide. We all, including me, just jumped to that conclusion.

LE releasing the facts that Gricar was interested in erasing a drive and then releasing that they have proof he actually erased it, is 2 completely different facts! Regardless of how long ago the information was reported, have the questions been answered? Are they relevant to the investigation? Not to mention that I have a problem with LE and the officials from the DA's office releasing conflicting information to the public (fingerprint evidence, eyewitness credibility, box, no box, etc. Sometimes I wonder if they even WANT this case solved. And if they don't, who benefits from that failure???

Just to be clear, I don't personally have a stake in whether or not the case is solved. Nor do I have to be proven right on whatever scenario I'm leaning toward. I'm just here evaluating the known evidence, asking the unasked questions, thinking of possible angles that might have been missed, so that those who do have a stake, can finally have some comfort in closure.

Well, they say they have it, and MR is noted for being meticulous, unlike his predecessor. I'll reserve judgment before I pronounce it impossible.

I don't have a stake in proving one or another scenario either. I don't have any scenario above 50%.

 

[Nowisthetime]

Just came across this today. Don't know that the date of the computer searches has hit the general public yet.

Chief Weaver told a reporter from WTAJ on April 15, 2009 that "a month before his disappearance" Gricar searched "how to fry a hard drive" and "water damage to computer" on his personal computer. Weaver also stated that a hard drive-erasing box was found opened, and he thinks Gricar used it to erase data on his laptop.

Besides the bombshell info pinpointing the actual date of the internet searches to "one month before his disappearance" -- this one interview with BPD has raised a few very important questions in my mind:

- If Weaver's right, and Gricar purchased and used the data-erasing software on his laptop, why would he need to do searches for the same info only a month before his disappearance?
Exactly. That's the question on the minds of a lot of people.

-Is it possible that someone (other than Gricar) performed the searches on the home computer? Can LE prove that it was Gricar that performed the searches? How?
I don't know who anyone can prove it was Gricar to performed the searches. I'm not a computer expert by any means, but I don't see how it's possible, & neither do other people believe it's possible.

-Why does it, at least on the surface, appear that LE wants the public to believe that Gricar did the searches??
It's easier? The inv. appears to have been screwed up since the beginning: neighbors, best friends, & co-workers not interviewed; info. on the tan car/MW not released for an entire year; no sketch artist for the "witness" who supposedly "saw" the MW; removing the Mini before the dogs arrived on the SOS lot; seeing no holes in walls or blood as the reason for not searching the house; not fingerprinting the laptop case, etc.

-Is the timing of these “new revelations” politically motivated? Does someone have an interest in making Gricar’s disappearance look planned and voluntary? To what end?
Who know, but it's awfully strange that the "computer search" info. just hit the press when it "supposedly" was known 2 yrs. ago.

-Why did LE/DA’s office sit on this information for over 2 ½ years?
-Is there a receipt for "the box"?
-What is the proof that "the box" belonged to or was purchased by RG?
-If LE didn't recover "the box" at the time the laptop was supposedly discovered missing, when did they find it? Where?
-right now there seems to be a concerted effort to link the software and the searches in the minds of the public (even though, they are truly two separate issues). And that just makes the reporter in me, go hmmmm....:waitasec:
I don't know the answers to your questions. I am/never have been a reporter, but I have the same reaction, and so do others! Something smells bad!
http://wearecentralpa.com/content/fulltext/news/?cid=81841

Your questions are the same questions being asked by others.