PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #6

[J. J. in Phila]

For some of us, our professional actions, or as in this case, perhaps the lack of action, can have far-reaching consequences. Some of us are not merely commentators and spectators, but are charged with securing protection for any person in jeopardy who crosses our paths. Held to a higher standard. Ray Gricar, if he did not meet his obligation to protect one or more of these boys from the many charges of alleged sexual abuse, is morally responsible to his peers for his inaction. The possible failure to protect a child or children from rape is a current legal matter. If he is found and if he is judged to have been negligent, the opinions of his peers, neighbors, friends, etc will matter to him and will affext his life if he is a man with a conscience, which I believe he is.

Unless his motives were less than pure, there could be no criminal charges. A DA exercising his prerogatives of office, legitimately, could not be prosecuted. Even a civil suit would be next to impossible.

Assuming that RFG looked at the case and thought, wrongly, that he could not win, and decided not to prosecute, that would be at his discretion. It was exceedingly stupid decision, a gigantic mistake, but it would not be criminal.

LE had to report the action to him, which they did in 1998. It is his decision. It could have been so bad that he would have been disbarred, but he wasn't planning on staying in the bar.

Only it there was something else, for example, he accepted money not to prosecute would it be criminal. I think we are to the point where we have to ask if this was more than a colossal lack of judgment on his part. I don't have the answer.

We have also discussed the issue of " legally dead" and why it was done at the time of the court ruling. There is absolutely no need to be flippant about it now. IF Ray Gricar was murdered, I am sincerely sorry. I could be mistaken but I believe he most likely left of his own volition because of this issue and the allegations of continued abuse which he had failed to act upon early on.

I think, at this point, that question must be raised as well. You can't prosecute someone that is "legally dead." Sometimes reality is different than legality.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Yes, it is certainly one of the questions you ask over and over.
In the following sentences, where the word " you" is written, it is a collective " you" which includes all of us. None of us walked in Ray Gricar's footsteps or rode in his car!!

Even if you ( or I or anyone else on the planet) were Ray Gricar's personal assistant or his closest friend, you cannot KNOW who he KNEW. You cannot even begin to speculate who he knew in which towns/ areas and how closely he knew them. Or how loyal they were/ are to him.

I've been sort of working on a general list, at least of the characteristics of a person could have helped Mr. Gricar walk away.

 

[eriklatranyi]

Rather than thinking about someone who would murder RFG, let's turn it around.

As a prosecutor, RFG was in contact with many people of questionable character.

One can theorize that if RFG's intent was to walk-away and RFG needed to get out of Lewisburg, he could employ a person he encountered during his career that had no family, no friends and nobody to "miss" him/her.

RFG buys a car for this person. Let's call this person "Helper".

Now the Helper has a registered vehicle, drivers license, perhaps even some credit cards in his/her name.

In exchange for the car and ID, RFG buys Helper a large quantity of drugs. Helper lives out their life with no ID but a nice stash of drugs. Perhaps Helper dies of an overdose because they are a junkie. The body has no ID and it becomes one of hundreds of John Does who died from drugs.

If Helper is still alive, they may not even know RFG is missing or remember his name. All this person knows is that some good samaritan gave them lots of money for drugs.


RFG assumes the identity of Helper and is now free to do whatever he wants with no concern of being tracked.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Rather than thinking about someone who would murder RFG, let's turn it around.

As a prosecutor, RFG was in contact with many people of questionable character.

One can theorize that if RFG's intent was to walk-away and RFG needed to get out of Lewisburg, he could employ a person he encountered during his career that had no family, no friends and nobody to "miss" him/her.

RFG buys a car for this person. Let's call this person "Helper".

Now the Helper has a registered vehicle, drivers license, perhaps even some credit cards in his/her name.

In exchange for the car and ID, RFG buys Helper a large quantity of drugs. Helper lives out their life with no ID but a nice stash of drugs. Perhaps Helper dies of an overdose because they are a junkie. The body has no ID and it becomes one of hundreds of John Does who died from drugs.

If Helper is still alive, they may not even know RFG is missing or remember his name. All this person knows is that some good samaritan gave them lots of money for drugs.


RFG assumes the identity of Helper and is now free to do whatever he wants with no concern of being tracked.

It is very hard for Helper to live with no ID and remember the was $10-$15 k reward offered for any information, and, certainly in the area, the case had huge coverage.

 

[SeekingJana]

First-- I am tired of typing the word "alleged". It slows the flow of thoughts and becomes very redundant reading. I would like to state to any and all reading my posts- Please should understand that I believe in the tenets of the U.S. Constitution: That all are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, OK?

Secondly-My posts are never directed to any other poster specifically unless I ask a specific fellow WSer a question. J.J. has been my " go to" person many times, for I have read his blog posts on an external site many times, and know that he has invested a great deal of time and effort researching Mr. Gricar's disappearance... which may now, finally, be taking a new direction or multiple possible avenues..
My posts are my thoughts and possible theories posted to all who are aware of this developing case, and to all members of WS who, like me, would gladly castrate any man legally proven to be a pedophile with a rusty dull knife.

I am not sure that I have ever had a thought that Mr. Gricar merits any type of criminal or civil prosecution. Whether or not he would qualify legally is beyond my scope of knowledge. I have ALWAYS looked at crimes from a behavioral standpoint, because that is my specialty in " the real world".
My spouse, OTOH, is extremely analytical and would approach this discussion in an extremely different way. He would come across as cold and uncaring to the empathetic- minded.

I do think that however we * the collective WE of WS* have viewed and discussed the possible theories of Mr. Gricar's disappearance for years, it is now clear to me that Mr. Gricar has a new significance which we have been unaware of, but which segments of LE have always known since he disappeared.
He is an important witness in the ongoing case against Gerald Sandusky, perhaps for additional reasons not yet known, or not yet publicly stated.
I believe there will be a renewed focus on finding him so he can testify as to his FINDINGS and what happened with the boy's claims against Sandusky.

IF he went into hiding for some reason related to the Sandusky child molestations, then his reasons for being gone are not his private information any longer. Or, as some have speculated, if he was frightened into silence in or around 1998, and further frightened in or around 2005 to the point of voluntarily disappearing in 2005 because he felt that his life was in jeopardy and he lacked sufficient LE protection related to this high profile child sex abuse case which has been building for over a decade, I'd say that the GJ's written summation has now provided him with ammo for ample witness protection until the case goes to trial and verdicts are rendered. He has been called out specifically and named in the GJ Indictments. He is, therefore, an important part of the upcoming proceedings, IMO.

Upon his planning, the child victim's mother agreed to be used as bait, which means she put herself in some amount of potential harm when she confronted Sandusky in her home. I don't believe Mr. Gricar would have devised this plan without a genuine investigation and plan on his part.. So what happened? The GJ summation I have read and re-read seems to indicate that both she and LE agents stationed inside the home performed very well. Sandusky did not deny showering with the boy, whom he hardly knew, nor did he deny having sexual impulses towards the boy. While this confrontation between the mother and Sandusky would not produce a prosecutable case, of course, it should have given Mr. Gricar a lot more confidence to pursue the boy's charges of sexual abuse. What did Mr. Gricar know AND is he alive to provide testimony as a witness?


The more I read, and the more I outline what allegedly happened each year, the names and titles of persons who were told about each alleged offense, and look at the words of the children which are already recorded, the more I believe that the sexual abuse of young boys by Sandusky and a massive cover up may have existed early.. probably earlier than 1998, but which may not come into evidence, depending upon PA's statue of limitations on the reporting of child sexual abuse. I am NOT a conspiracy theorist about any crime that I can remember .. but I am led to wonder if my list of people who failed to act as documented by the GJ summation did so out of incredible neglect on a one by one basis over and over, or because Sandusky had means of " persuasion" which have not come to light yet.

Two things stand out as being possibly significant as it relates to child *advertiser censored* production and distribution by organized crime ( AKA " The Mafia"): One, Sandusky is said by the witnesses and victims to have had 3 specific locations where he usually took his victims for the sexual abuse. What are the chances that high quality video and audio equipment was installed in the 3 areas he repeatedly ( allegedly) chose for the child rapes?
The second thing that burns through my mind is how organized crime syndicates recognized that child *advertiser censored* was an INCREDIBLE money maker in the late 80's forward. The international market for child *advertiser censored* is NOT something I want to Google to retrieve estimated financial numbers on, but I have read, and you have probably also read, that it is a huge industry which obviously hurts and kills sweet innocent children. Child *advertiser censored* is apparently easy and cheap to make, reproduce in mass quantities, and distribute globally. DVDs are cheap to burn. Before this era of digital media, computer files were easy to encrypt and distribute.
Prior to the mass distribution of child *advertiser censored* via computer disk or other program type, there were VCR tapes. The storage methods have evolved, but the criminality remains the worst kind of human exploitation.


For the first time, I am wondering if organized crime did silence Ray Gricar twice. First, temporarily, when the first known boy to come forward with claims of abuse at G. Sandusky's hands. This would cause Mr. Gricar to be a " watched public figure" with regard to the ongoing child sexual abuse in this general area of PA area by Sandusky.
Sandusky lives in Centre County. What was his relationship to Ray Gricar personally? Had they ever been friends? Did a pattern of avoidance or threats develop after the 1998 incident? Did Sandusky ever come in for questioning? Was he even aware of Gricar's aborted investigation into what is becoming a large- scale list of allegations of child rape? I believe that another PA DA investigating one or more subsequent allegations of further abuse might easily have discussed their case with Mr. Gricar, since he was perhaps the first DA to run into Sandusky's alleged child rapes. IF I had less experience as a DA than Mr. Gricar, and/ or IF I knew of Mr. Gricar's fair but apparently tough stance in prosecuting criminals, I would want to know what happened.. Why he chose not to seek an indictment in the case in his jurisdiction. Was a group of killers involved or possibly only one sexual deviant with a substantial amount of personal wealth and power? How much wealth and power does it take to buy silence? Can a good DA be " bought"? Did another PA DA discuss or ask any questions of Mr. Gricar about the 1998 case?

And finally: Did Mr. Gricar, once he became aware of the ongoing abuses against children under the guise of a charity for disadvantaged young boys, say or do something which was threatening enough to possible crime figures to have him quickly killed?

Obviously, these are hypothetical questions which are unknowns at this time. I want answers!

The principle of Occam's Razor is my preferred method of looking at crime. It is also how I have approached Mr. Gricar's disappearance. I do not have enough experience with professional hit jobs to formulate a theory as to the likelihood of Mr. Gricar being killed in a professional hit, but the above questions have been relentless for the past day, and remain extremely troubling. Obviously we want this man to be found alive and well.

When I discussed the bare bones of Mr. Gricar's disappearance with my husband yesterday, he did something I have very rarely known him to do. He interrupted me and quickly said " Someone had him killed. Professional hit".
When I resumed the factual recounting of Mr. Gricar's disappearance as we, the public knows the facts, and included the first alleged Sandusky child rape victim that we know of at this time and which Mr. Gricar was investigating for a time, he didn't backtrack or waver. He said " Professional hit. I give it even more weight now".

Luckily, the two of us have almost a 50/50 split on whose opinion/plan/ theory eventually turns out to be the better one or more correct.
I'm hoping Ray Gricar is compelled to come forward now that the allegations are being made public for the first time and also because his name is in the documentation as having not pursued Sandusky. If he is alive, I hope he will talk to the proper people. And have extensive personal protection.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

The notion that RG would be somehow implicated in a cover-up of Sandusky's crimes and thus turn tail and run makes no sense. First of all, there was an investigation, conducted by University Police, in 1998, per the state AG's statement in yesterday's press conference. When she was asked about 1998, she referenced University Police, not RG. State Welfare had also been contacted. It is up to the DA to make the call on charges and taking a case to trial. I've said enough above about why what we see today in the presentment is not what RG had in 1998. There were no eyewitnesses to corroborate the story the child told the parent. Also we now have what Linda Kelly called a pattern of conduct, which is very important in prosecuting what can otherwise be "he said/he said" cases. And of course in 1998, the two victims we know about now were minors; RG may well have been reluctant to put them into a very heated public trial without other evidence (forensics, eyewitnesses to the assaults) to go on. Even now, about 30% of the comments I've seen are "innocent until proven guilty" and supportive of Sandusky. Even now this case is not a slam dunk if Sandusky continues to claim he is innocent. A plea bargain might have been the best possibility, which is why I think (my opinion only) that they tried to get Sandusky to admit to something to the mother; then they would have had a kind of confession and some leverage for a plea.

The timeline I am linking here demarcates the point in the case in which there were eyewitnesses, and the point where we are absolutely sure that PSU failed to report what is not just "molestation" but child rape. The nature of a cover-up is to keep a story quiet. If RG had been "in the bag" with PSU, a cover-up wasn't necessary. They had to cover it up because RG would have most certainly prosecuted a child rape, and one that was no he said/he said. There was an eye witness and someone who could testify to that eyewitnesses state of mind after the fact. There is nothing in RG's career to suggest he would have looked the other way in such a case; see, for example, that he had previously prosecuted football players. He has always been described as "by the book" and unless anyone here has actually evidence to the contrary (evidence that he took bribes, overlooked crimes, or favored the powerful) it makes zero sense to twist his character into a pretzel in order to argue that here is another motive for walkaway.

1998 -- First police involvement. Penn State police and the Penn. Department of Public Warfare are contacted by the mother of an 11-year-old boy, who says Sandusky showered with her son and may have had inappropriate contact with him.
June 1, 1998 -- In an interview with investigators, Sandusky admits showering naked with the pre-teen. He admits that it was wrong, and promises not to do it again. No charges are filed, and the university police chief instructs that the case be closed.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/244874/20111107/sandusky-penn-state-scandal-timeline-abuse-cover.htm

If this case is related to RG's disappearance in any way, it is more likely that he was in the way of a cover up and some person or persons wanted him to either get on board or disappear. Certainly, this scenario would explain why he was upset in the days before the disappearance ( a guy walking away has no worries, eh?) and why he might have wanted to get away to think or perhaps to meet with someone involved in the molestation or cover-up far away from the office. And perhaps why he needed the laptop, and why someone else decided to destroy it. But this, too, is just substituting narrative for the blank space we have. My hope is that the AG and investigators either know this case (RG) is connected to Sandusky or are willing to show that it isn't.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Remember, also, that the statute of limitations on child sexual assault in age 50 of the victim, so prosecutors have time to make their cases; many of these cases go nowhere until the victims are adults. So Linda Kelly, et. al., can take 3 years to build a case. RG did not need to be in a hurry. Because he didn't prosecute in 1998 didn't mean he would never prosecute.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Per the timeline linked above, accounts of the first eyewitnesses:

2000 -- First eyewitness report. Tim Calhoun, a janitor at the Lasch Football Building on Penn State's campus, tells another janitor and his supervisor that he saw Sandusky performing oral sex on a young boy. The incident goes unreported.

2000 -- Second eyewitness report. Another janitor sees Sandusky and a boy leave the shower room together and walk out of the building hand in hand, according to the grand jury report. No one reports the incident to university officials or law enforcement.

March 2, 2002 -- A graduate assistant allegedly tells Coach Joe Paterno that he saw Sandusky in the locker room shower on Mar. 1 with a young boy. The retired defense coordinator was engaging in anal sex with the boy, believed to be no more than 10 years old.

March 3, 2002 -- Paterno reports the incident to Athletic Director Tim Curley. Paterno tells Curley the grad student had seen Sandusky "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy." The graduate assistant is called to a meeting with Curley and Schultz.

 

[SeekingJana]

PittsburghGirl- I know we are all reeling from what is unfolding in PA.. and the mere mention of Ray Gricar's early involvement in one of the cases does pique' interest among those of us who have discussed his puzzling disappearance for years.

You make a point in which I cannot find the logic.
You say that perhaps Mr. Gricar was killed because of his honesty and because he wouldn't go along with a cover up. ( paraphrasing).
If this is your theory, then can you explain why Mr. Gricar and his office investigated the child sexual abuse case in 1998, but " hit men" waited 7 years to kill him?

Also, the wording as I have read it seems to suggest that Mr. Gricar closed or "dropped" the case. WHY would his inaction to begin prosecutory measures in 1998 or so result in his disappearance and your presumption of homicide 7 years after he has been said to have dropped the matter?
Wouldn't he be one of the safest DAs in PA for not pursuing Sandusky and perhaps organized crime figures?

Also, you do not tie Mr. Sandusky into any organized crime. Do you believe that Gerald Sandusky was the killer of Ray Gricar? If so, why?
If you believe that organized crime was in the picture, could you give us your ideas on how they entered a child rape case and what their enormous payoff would have to be to kill a DA?

Thanks!!

 

[SeekingJana]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/sports/documents/sandusky-grand-jury-report11052011.html

(Note- Previous paragraph indicates the nature of the shower encounter as related by an 11 year old boy known as Victim 6. The year the sexual abuse occurred is 1998).

Page 19
<snip> When Victim 6 was dropped off at home, his hair was wet and his mother immediately
questioned him about this and was upset to learn the boy had showered with Sandusky. She
reported the incident to University Police who investigated. After a investigation by
University Police Detective Ronald Shreffler, the investigation was closed after then-Centre
County District Attorney Ray Gricar decided there would be no criminal charges. Shreffler
testified that he was told to close the investigation by the director of the campus police, Thomas
Harmon. That investigation included a second child, B.K., also ll, who was subjected to nearly
identical treatment in the shower as Victim 6, according to Detective Schreffler.
<End copy>

JMO, but after re-reading who did what, it seems possible to me that Detective Schreffler included D.A. Gricar in the investigation into the alleged abuse of Victim B.K. also, as the two cases were close together and obviously very similar.

 

[eriklatranyi]

It is very hard for Helper to live with no ID and remember the was $10-$15 k reward offered for any information, and, certainly in the area, the case had huge coverage.

Then, that leaves two other alternatives.

1) Helper has relocated to Canada and started a new life (perhaps with no criminal record).

2) Helper is dead.

 

[SeekingJana]

From http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/sports/documents/sandusky-grand-jury-report11052011.html
<Snip> Detective Schreffler testified that he and State College Police Department Detective
Ralph Ralston, with the consent of the mother of Victim 6, eavesdropped on two conversations
the mother of Victim 6 had with Sandusky on May 13, 1998, and May 19, 1998. The mother of
Victim 6 confronted Sandusky about showering with her son, the effect it had on her son,
whether Sandusky had sexual feelings when he hugged her naked son in the shower and where
Victim 6's buttocks were when Sandusky hugged him. Sandusky said he had showered with
other boys and Victim 6's mother tried to make Sandusky promise never to shower with a boy again but he would not. She asked him if his "private parts" touched Victim 6 when he bear-
hugged him. Sandusky replied, don't think At the conclusion of the second
conversation, after Sandusky was told he could not see Victim 6 anymore, Sandusky said,
understand. I was wrong. I wish I could get forgiveness. I know I won't get it from you. I wish I
were dead." Detective Ralston and the mother of Victim 6 confirm these conversations.
Jerry Lauro, an investigator with the Department of Public Welfare,
testified that during the 1998 investigation, Sandusky was interviewed on June 1, 1998, by Lauro
and Detective Schreffler. Sandusky admitted showering naked with Victim 6, admitted to
hugging Victim 6 while in the shower and admitted that it was wrong. <END COPY>

 

[SeekingJana]

Source material:
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/jerry_sandusky_a_penn_state_un.html

<sinp>
Police investigated that report in May 1998, and then-District Attorney Ray Gricar never pursued charges.
A member of law enforcement who was in the room with Gricar said the DA was told about the report, and had two police officers hide in the mother’s home while Sandusky came to her house to talk about what happened.
The meeting, according to the source, was Sandusky’s idea.
“That mother said to the police, ‘He’s coming over to explain what happened to me,’¤” the source said. “Ray and the detectives decided that they would go to the house to find out what was going on — to hear what he had to say.”

A few days later, Gricar got a report back from police.

“Ray said ‘I’ll be in touch,’ and he called the chief or supervisors for those detectives. I don’t know what he said, but I know that no investigation or charges were pursued from that point on,” the source said.

By June 2, the report was labeled “unfounded” by Penn State police, and the case was closed.

The Penn State police officer who led that investigation, Ron Schreffler, is now retired. When approached in March, Schreffler said he couldn’t comment and asked a reporter, “How did you see that report?”

<end copy>

Surely do wish I knew who the " L.E. source" was and how closely he communicated with D.A. Gricar after this.. I keep wondering if Gricar knew about more of the cases. I find it almost impossible to believe that he didn't know anything other than what I have posted about Victim 6, 1998 molwstation
..

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Okay, everybody sit back and take a very deep breath.

This is obviously a stressful point. I'm feeling it to, believe me.

The rhetorical question of who is the helper is one I've been looking at for several years. I unfortunately know how to ask question that I don't have the for. My ideas on it are here: http://www.centredaily.com/2009/07/16/2396992/the-inner-circle.html#storylink=misearch

Note that ABC has been talking about a Gricar link: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/sandusky-investigator-center-mystery/story?id=14905668

I've heard that a major newspaper will be as well.

I'll be doing a blog relating to it, if I can just posting on message boards and answering e-mails long enough to write it.

 

[SeekingJana]

Rather than thinking about someone who would murder RFG, let's turn it around.

As a prosecutor, RFG was in contact with many people of questionable character.

One can theorize that if RFG's intent was to walk-away and RFG needed to get out of Lewisburg, he could employ a person he encountered during his career that had no family, no friends and nobody to "miss" him/her.

RFG buys a car for this person. Let's call this person "Helper".

Now the Helper has a registered vehicle, drivers license, perhaps even some credit cards in his/her name.

In exchange for the car and ID, RFG buys Helper a large quantity of drugs. Helper lives out their life with no ID but a nice stash of drugs. Perhaps Helper dies of an overdose because they are a junkie. The body has no ID and it becomes one of hundreds of John Does who died from drugs.

If Helper is still alive, they may not even know RFG is missing or remember his name. All this person knows is that some good samaritan gave them lots of money for drugs.


RFG assumes the identity of Helper and is now free to do whatever he wants with no concern of being tracked.

Some things which don't gel with a fringe element " helper" , IMO, and especially not with Ray Gricar assuming the person's ID.

You state: "RFG buys a car for this person. Let's call this person "Helper".

Now the Helper has a registered vehicle, drivers license, perhaps even some credit cards in his/her name."
1) To obtain a US DL when a person does not have a current DL, or when obtaining a DL in another state, a person needs approx. 4 forms of legally recognized ID now. I was born in the USA to USA born parents, so what I had to dig up in 2011 is not a special case.
When we moved to another state not too long ago, I called ahead to the local DMV office, thank goodness. I did have a valid DL in the state I had previously resided in but they wouldn't even look at it as I handed it in, LOL. I had to take my birth certificate ( must be a certified copy), marriage certificate signed by the proper legal authority, current US passport, and my SS card. There is one more ID which is accepted but I don't remember now what it is.
Point being-- it is TOUGH to get a DL now in the USA if you are a highly documented person in the professional world. A transient type person would likely be turned away for lack of proper legal documentation.
Also, most states do an index fingerprint scan or iris scan. I know Canada does fingerprint scanning at the border.
I don't know what their requirements are for obtaining a Canadian DL, registering a US car in Canada, but I can't imagine that it's easier than in the USA..

2) Getting a credit card- Unless the helper person has a current documentable salary and happens to have a good credit score with one of the big 3 agencies, they are not going to get a regular ( unsecured) credit card. Regulations have changed, and banks have had so many defaults that good credit is required to get a credit card. LOL, I know, right?

3) The car registration. Whose name is it in? Where is proof of ownership and proof of insurance? ( Both required at the border and if a person is stopped for a traffic violation in most states). How is this transferred to RG in Canada? ( Hopefully he has not given Helper any drugs yet, LOL).

4) Assuming that a questionable type person like " Helper" manages to get all the things you state, how exactly is this any easier than Ray Gricar going to a good forger and coming up with his own documents that pass his scrutiny?
Also, I've always believed that Ray Gricar knew enough people to secure one way transportation to almost anywhere he chose to go. It's so easy-- and remember, at least one public sighting was deemed credible. Witness was a police sketch artist. Meaning he could have been socializing with the locals in Wilkes- Barre or wherever up there in PA for the purpose of casually asking for a ride to some other town nearby.. Like stepping stones but in a car and the stones are towns which lead to state lines.. He repeats the process until he is smack dab in nowhere-ville USA and lives a life of quiet obscurity. I'm sure he did a lot of thinking about where to go and the pros and cons and so forth. I think he would need ID for utilities and a few other things. I don't think owning a car is necessary. Bike or small motorized Vespa type transportation is safer. Last thing he wants is to be involved in a car accident and be sued..

My favorite theory though, is one I've never discussed. My favorite theory is that he left PA via a small FBO airstrip with an IFR rated pilot friend, perhaps someone from as far back as college. They fly in the pilot's small-ish plane like a Cessna, flying simply, no flight plan required, no unnecessary radio contact. Stops at pre-selected FBOs which are usually unstaffed for refueling and head to Costa Rica. He has somewhere warm and tropical and naturally beautiful to live. Either buys a small house or rents from a local. I'd probably rent until I knew more about the area residents..

If I had a great deal of cash squirreled away for a new life somewhere, I would go where the weather was great and the living was cheap. I'd head to Costa Rica above all other places.
That was a whole lot more fun to think about than this horrid PSU stuff. LOL.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Remember, also, that the statute of limitations on child sexual assault in age 50 of the victim, so prosecutors have time to make their cases; many of these cases go nowhere until the victims are adults. So Linda Kelly, et. al., can take 3 years to build a case. RG did not need to be in a hurry. Because he didn't prosecute in 1998 didn't mean he would never prosecute.

He was going to be in office in 8 1/2 months; he could could not prosecute then.

 

[SeekingJana]

Okay, everybody sit back and take a very deep breath.

This is obviously a stressful point. I'm feeling it to, believe me.

The rhetorical question of who is the helper is one I've been looking at for several years. I unfortunately know how to ask question that I don't have the for. My ideas on it are here: http://www.centredaily.com/2009/07/16/2396992/the-inner-circle.html#storylink=misearch

Note that ABC has been talking about a Gricar link: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/sandusky-investigator-center-mystery/story?id=14905668

I've heard that a major newspaper will be as well.

I'll be doing a blog relating to it, if I can just posting on message boards and answering e-mails long enough to write it.

The ABC piece didn't tell us anything we didn't already know, did it? . I posted the relevant short snippets which showed that Sandusky admitted to inappropriate sexual conduct with Victim 6. He stated this while in the presence of the victim's mother, 2 hidden police officers, and possibly a hidden Ray Gricar.
Gricar KNEW. He heard what Sandusky said. Sandusky even refused to stop his practices of showering with boys, etc in front of the victim's mother. It's been documented since 1998.

I've read your blog post before now, and like all your Gricar blog posts, it was interesting. I'v always ALWAYS thought that someone close to him but NOT widely known to other people helped him get to where he wanted to live.
I don't think someone close to him, as in a dear close personal friend, murdered him. He had to have been very adept at " reading" people. Apparently, he was wary about trusting many people.. So, I think he chose his friends very carefully, and most likely had a few friends which never met any other people in his life. A SMART person who plans to leave 7 years before they actually do leave will cultivate mutually trustworthy friendships. I believe it would be in his nature, and also beneficial to his plan to have some " slightly out of town" friends who had ample free time ( like an early retiree who is quiet and reserved like Gricar) and he spent short day trips visiting various people, without ever connecting any to the other or to Bellefont.

As for the fact that some conspiracy theorists have placed you in the Inner Circle of friends, I have to ask-- Is this some kind of Internet board phenomenon or did you have a close association with Ray Gricar?
I've never thought you were a close person in his life because of the blog post you wrote about going to Lewisburg.. Unless you " fudged" , it seemed clear to me that you had never been there before.
IF Ray Gricar had planned his disappearance very carefully, the dropping off place ( Lewisburg) and the ending up place ( ? unknown but I'm still rooting for Costa Rica) would be carefully selected and minute details planned. The IC person who helped him get away from Bellefont would obviously need to know the layout of Lewisburg and the SoS and the parking lot, etc. The in-between places are simply for sleep, food and possibly checking the news. I think Ray would always be a follower of newsworthy current events. Most intelligent people have this in common.

There is one characteristic you left out of the list which members of the IC should possess, IMO, unless you consider it to be an inherent part of trustworthiness. Most people would not consider this to be essential in this day and age..Abstinence from all mood- altering substances.. NO drinking alcoholic beverages or drug use, including no Rx pain pills..
Rationale--Drugs or alcohol use, even on a very moderate level, can lower inhibitions. Lowered inhibitions lead to telling a bit of a secret, perhaps..

 

[J. J. in Phila]

The notion that RG would be somehow implicated in a cover-up of Sandusky's crimes and thus turn tail and run makes no sense. First of all, there was an investigation, conducted by University Police, in 1998, per the state AG's statement in yesterday's press conference. When she was asked about 1998, she referenced University Police, not RG. State Welfare had also been contacted. It is up to the DA to make the call on charges and taking a case to trial. I've said enough above about why what we see today in the presentment is not what RG had in 1998. There were no eyewitnesses to corroborate the story the child told the parent. Also we now have what Linda Kelly called a pattern of conduct, which is very important in prosecuting what can otherwise be "he said/he said" cases. And of course in 1998, the two victims we know about now were minors; RG may well have been reluctant to put them into a very heated public trial without other evidence (forensics, eyewitnesses to the assaults) to go on.

I think any claim that Sandusky's statement, before the the boy's mother, two hiding police officers, and later to a child services worker that he showered with a 8-9 year old boy, in private, gave him a bear hug from behind, and said that he "maybe" touched the boy's genitals is not evidence of molestation sounds like something that could only be issued by Sandusky's lawyer or NAMBLA!

It only makes matters worse when he said in from of three of those witness that he showered with other boys!

It is also makes matters worse when you realize that there was a second victim that RFG dealt with that had a similar experience!

At best, this was a colossal mistake in judgment by RFG. Do you think he ever would have been elected again if there was even a suggestion that he did not prosecute the case!

My hope is that the AG and investigators either know this case (RG) is connected to Sandusky or are willing to show that it isn't.

And that might indicate the at worst possibility.

 

[minazoe]

Makes a perfect scenario for having Ray eliminated.

Ray may have known he was in danger and left to protect his family.

who was the woman Ray was with before he disappeared?

he may have gone into witness protection, he may have been under great threat.

this will blow up huge....and I believe that he met someone who put him into hiding or killed him in a second car in another spot.

For all we know, Ray's body is in the trunk of an abandoned car somewhere.

it never showed up in the water so I believe he was hidden away so as not to determine cause of death....hence his murder occurred elsewhere, he may have been set up and was taken when he returned to his car at gunpoint.

all they would have to do is park next to the mini...come over to the passenger side..with the ciggarette...point a gun and ask Ray to get in the car.

they probably immediately dispatched the laptop...

I say murder.

 

[eriklatranyi]

JJ:

Your analysis of the "helper" is excellent. I would ask this: If Ray Gricar was in private practice prior to being elected DA, he may have long-term client relationships as well.

If so, he may have represented multiple people who now "owe him one" and would fit the profile of the "helper".

I think this is more likely than the Amos Goodall theory.



Oh, as a point of disclosure: I know Robert Buehner, Montour County DA as I grew up in Danville until I left for college in 1984.