PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #8

[J. J. in Phila]

What are the odds of someone making a DA disappear without a trace? I have yet to see a theory as to who would do it, why they would do it, and how they would do it which is more plausible than a walkway. JMO

Right now, I can't pull the CDT site up, but there are two blogs with two different murder scenarios. One is titled "A meeting for Murder." The other is titled, "A short walk to murder."

The first one suggests that he might have been set up and lured to a meeting. One piece of evidence against it, the Wilkes-Barre sighting, has been ruled out.

The second one is that RFG was having some sort of encounter with a woman. While he was with her, something happened, possibly a lover's quarrel. This one considers a crime of passion.

Both of those a foul play scenarios, though the second one seems stronger.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Here is the URL for "A Short Walk to Murder."

http://www.centredaily.com/2009/04/24/2396798/murder-ii-a-short-walk-to-death.html

And "A Meeting for Murder."

http://www.centredaily.com/2009/04/21/2396785/murder-i-a-meeting-for-murder.html

 

[BigCat]

Here is the URL for "A Short Walk to Murder."

http://www.centredaily.com/2009/04/24/2396798/murder-ii-a-short-walk-to-death.html

And "A Meeting for Murder."

http://www.centredaily.com/2009/04/21/2396785/murder-i-a-meeting-for-murder.html

Thanks for the links to those blog entries.

Here's a problem I see with "A Short Walk to Murder": I believe women account for roughly 13 percentage of all murder arrests. Of those arrested, how many women hid the body, especially of an adult male? I think the percentage would be infinitesimal. For either physical or psychological reasons, or both, women just don't do that.

If foul play occurred, and a female lover was involved, it would seems likely a man must have been an accomplice. Perhaps a jealous husband or boyfriend? Or perhaps a femme fatale set RFG up? I just can't see a woman acting alone.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Thanks for the links to those blog entries.

Here's a problem I see with "A Short Walk to Murder": I believe women account for roughly 13 percentage of all murder arrests. Of those arrested, how many women hid the body, especially of an adult male? I think the percentage would be infinitesimal. For either physical or psychological reasons, or both, women just don't do that.

If foul play occurred, and a female lover was involved, it would seems likely a man must have been an accomplice. Perhaps a jealous husband or boyfriend? Or perhaps a femme fatale set RFG up? I just can't see a woman acting alone.

Maybe not.

One possibility is that RFG and the woman were planning to spend the weekend together. They left together in her car (which would explain what the bloodhound found). They might have been planning to spend the weekend at a vacation house, in a rural location. Something happened, and RFG ended up dead. The body was hidden at the vacation house. Working the weekend, even a small woman could bury a body in that circumstance.

Or, as you pointed out, it could be a femme fatale. One possibility I've been thinking about is someone tied to a defendant. The had a situation at the office in 2008 where one ADA was "sexting" the girlfriend of a guy he was prosecuting.

 

[cj327]

Maybe not.

One possibility is that RFG and the woman were planning to spend the weekend together. They left together in her car (which would explain what the bloodhound found). They might have been planning to spend the weekend at a vacation house, in a rural location. Something happened, and RFG ended up dead. The body was hidden at the vacation house. Working the weekend, even a small woman could bury a body in that circumstance.

Or, as you pointed out, it could be a femme fatale. One possibility I've been thinking about is someone tied to a defendant. The had a situation at the office in 2008 where one ADA was "sexting" the girlfriend of a guy he was prosecuting.

I like the second possibility better (second one mentioned above, not second blog link). If it was simply a romantic weekend away:
1. Why wouldn't he have given his girlfriend some excuse as to why he was going to vanish for the long weekend? Going to a game in Cleveland or something.
2. Would be really want to spend it with a smoker if he disliked smoking that much? Maybe.
3. After a romantic weekend away with a smoker, wouldn't he know he would smell of cigarette smoke upon his return? Unless he showered and had a change of clothes along. Maybe it was not unusual for him to hang out in smoking establishments.

Regarding the second blog link:
http://www.centredaily.com/2009/04/21/2396785/murder-i-a-meeting-for-murder.html

I keep thinking of the saying "You can't con an honest man"...I think there is a lot of truth to that. As mentioned in the blog entry, why would RG choose to handle anything business-related through a secret meeting like that? Seems very unlikely. Thus, any secret meeting would have to be for something either not work-related or something that was work-related but not totally legit. I don't know of any evidence that he was involved in anything dishonest. So I would have to probably rule that out in my mind. Also, I agree that it would not be easy to "lure" someone like RG. So given this somewhat jumbled logic of mine, I would have to say that such a meeting would be for some non-work related reason...

Was RFG an "honest man"?

Was he a free spirit that enjoyed the feeling that he could take off when he wanted to? (like the Indians game) The fact that the family (or at least PF) initially said "come home" leads me to think that he was a free spirit capable of taking off.

 

[cj327]

One thing that does point to RG's taking the laptop along, perhaps as a last-minute though "Hey I can get rid of this while I am in Lewisburg" is this:

RG probably knew, given the weather, that the river was at flood stage (or nearly so) that week. If he had decided to destroy it/get rid of it by water, what better time than when the river is really flowing high? That was the river's highest level all year. Yes, it had dropped a lot by Friday, but earlier in the week flow was still extremely high. I think it was high enough to even be mentioned in local news, as local news likes that kind of thing.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I like the second possibility better (second one mentioned above, not second blog link). If it was simply a romantic weekend away:
1. Why wouldn't he have given his girlfriend some excuse as to why he was going to vanish for the long weekend? Going to a game in Cleveland or something.

When he got back. He was gone overnight and didn't to bother to tell wife #2 where he was (or anyone on staff).

2. Would be really want to spend it with a smoker if he disliked smoking that much? Maybe.

Yes, possibly, and she could have been standing outside the car.

3. After a romantic weekend away with a smoker, wouldn't he know he would smell of cigarette smoke upon his return? Unless he showered and had a change of clothes along. Maybe it was not unusual for him to hang out in smoking establishments.

He did go sports bars.

Regarding the second blog link:
http://www.centredaily.com/2009/04/21/2396785/murder-i-a-meeting-for-murder.html

I keep thinking of the saying "You can't con an honest man"...I think there is a lot of truth to that. As mentioned in the blog entry, why would RG choose to handle anything business-related through a secret meeting like that? Seems very unlikely. Thus, any secret meeting would have to be for something either not work-related or something that was work-related but not totally legit. I don't know of any evidence that he was involved in anything dishonest. So I would have to probably rule that out in my mind. Also, I agree that it would not be easy to "lure" someone like RG. So given this somewhat jumbled logic of mine, I would have to say that such a meeting would be for some non-work related reason...

Well, when McQueary first talked to the investigators, he chose a parking lot someplace. He didn't want to be seen talking to investigators. Now a 6'4" guy with flaming red hair would have stuck out, but what if a similar case? Another high profile bad thing. It would have to be a good story.

Was RFG an "honest man"?

Was he a free spirit that enjoyed the feeling that he could take off when he wanted to? (like the Indians game) The fact that the family (or at least PF) initially said "come home" leads me to think that he was a free spirit capable of taking off.

I have yet to see anything that would point to dishonesty. He lived well below his means and the questions about money are not "why did he have so much," but "Why did he have so little?"

Even the Sandusky decision could have been:

1. An honest mistake because RFG was not familiar with the fairly new law.

2. RFG turned a blind eye to it, just like, well, everybody else at Penn State.

There are a noticeable lack of ties. No real estate, no car, no lease. In 8 1/2 no professional or political career. One girlfriend he's not legally committed to, who he has, effectively, compensated. One daughter, who was an adult, not part of his household for 10-12 years and had not lived in the state for 8 years. She was perhaps better compensated because of his vanishing (that is not her fault).

That, however, is highly circumstantial.

I'll agree with you about the laptop. If RFG's disappearance was not voluntary, I'd really expect that the laptop was just coincidental. I think it could be.

 

[Sharyne]

When he got back. He was gone overnight and didn't to bother to tell wife #2 where he was (or anyone on staff).



Yes, possibly, and she could have been standing outside the car.



He did go sports bars.



Well, when McQueary first talked to the investigators, he chose a parking lot someplace. He didn't want to be seen talking to investigators. Now a 6'4" guy with flaming red hair would have stuck out, but what if a similar case? Another high profile bad thing. It would have to be a good story.



I have yet to see anything that would point to dishonesty. He lived well below his means and the questions about money are not "why did he have so much," but "Why did he have so little?"

Even the Sandusky decision could have been:

1. An honest mistake because RFG was not familiar with the fairly new law.

2. RFG turned a blind eye to it, just like, well, everybody else at Penn State.

There are a noticeable lack of ties. No real estate, no car, no lease. In 8 1/2 no professional or political career. One girlfriend he's not legally committed to, who he has, effectively, compensated. One daughter, who was an adult, not part of his household for 10-12 years and had not lived in the state for 8 years. She was perhaps better compensated because of his vanishing (that is not her fault).

That, however, is highly circumstantial.

I'll agree with you about the laptop. If RFG's disappearance was not voluntary, I'd really expect that the laptop was just coincidental. I think it could be.

Bold and color by me:
I'm confused here. If he lived below his means, then shouldn't he have more money, not little money?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Bold and color by me:
I'm confused here. If he lived below his means, then shouldn't he have more money, not little money?

Yes.

Since his divorce (and actually before) RFG was grossing $100 K and $130 K a year in the 5 years prior to vanishing. He did not have huge expenses. He didn't have a mortgage, car payments, alimony, any major business overhead. He was not paying child support, because his daughter was an adult; he might have contributed to he expenses, but his ex-wife was probably making more than he was.

He was probably grossing between $75 K and $85 K a year. Even assuming he put $20 K a year away, he would have had to be spending $55 K and $65 K per year on something that we don't know about or putting money someplace else. Sure some of that are food and clothing, and he did help pay off PEF's mortgage (that was partially paid off), but it still doesn't add up.

 

[Waupalani St.]

What part of W. PA, JJ? I'm from Beaver Falls...PSU'91...

Happy New Year All...

 

[J. J. in Phila]

What part of W. PA, JJ? I'm from Beaver Falls...PSU'91...

Happy New Year All...

Me? I grew up around the Johnstown area.

I would have thought you were from Altoona.

 

[Bellaneph]

Yes but you make your point in a slightly different way each time. And I am starting to agree. This particular post says it pretty well.

I also learned about that cost-benefit stuff in the only psychology course I ever took. I think about that concept often, in normal day-to-day activity.

In addition to what you said, the things that work against walkaway for me are:
1. Timing. Other than the date coincides with that book, why choose to do this only months before a planned retirement? As noted above, why not just leave his girlfriend if that is what he wants to do.
2. The well-discussed leaving of his daughter. I'll say no more.
3. His apparent stress level prior to leaving. Wouldn't walking away be exciting and thrilling? To see if you could pull it off? Outsmart the system? To start a new life? A normal person would have to be giddy with excitement over that prospect.
4. What are the odds? I still haven't looked for stats, but the percent of disappearances that can be explained by walkaway has to be far, far less than those explained by foul play. Usually walkaway seems (to me anyway) an explanation concocted by those who don't want to face the reality that a loved one is probably dead.

I have only been following this for a month or two, so I am allowed to change my mind. Right now I am leaning more toward foul play.

Sometimes, when you're thinking about leaving and have a semi plan in mind, it doesn't always go the way you think it will. I was working once at a job I hated and I always wanted to walk out, but couldn't bring myself to do it. I knew I would be leaving there hopefully sooner than later, but I needed the job. Then one day, a few little things happened and it made me need to take a break. I went and asked management for a few min off to collect myself - which they denied. I needed the job, couldn't pay anything without it, had no savings, nothing, but the emotional cloud over my head was far more consuming regardless.

Long story short, even though it made more financial and other sense to stay, a song came on the radio - "Give Me One Reason" by Tracy Chapman. Seconds after hearing it I couldn't help but just walk out. I think I was even packing my stuff as the song played on and by the time it ended, I was gone. So much for my plan.

I'm just saying that even though it might make more sense to outsiders or onlookers thinking if he was going to leave he would have done this or that, you have NO IDEA what makes a person tick and sometimes it could just be a song or something overheard that acts as a catalyst and sets things in motion you never planned on doing.

IIRC Ray had even said he wouldn't be around at that time period, but idt he planned to leave that particular day - something triggered the event. So maybe what JJ was talking about the pension would be why he didn't wait for retirement, but I think that Friday was spontaneous.

I believe Ray didn't plan to leave that day, but something triggered him to do so on that day. Whatever it was was more powerful than all our logical thinking combined.

 

[Unscripted]

Even if someone was netting 75-85k there might have been private pension contributions and tuition (undergrad or grad school?). Even modest tuition and board can be $25k. If there had been funds diverted for a "getaway fund" there would probably been some chatter by now.

I believe he was lured away by someone who he thought was harmless... someone who told him they could only trust him (no other LE) and who purported to have new information on an older case or something else dear to RG's heart. If it was a current case I don't think he would have been roped in.

If indeed we ever find out it will probably be a case of Occam's razor.

 

[cj327]

Regarding the gift of a car to PAF, did she ever drive it much?
I recall reading before on here that RG was the one who drove it most often.

Now, if RG was planning to walk away in a few months, then the gift does make sense as sort of a buyout or apology or whatever. It also makes sense that he would like to drive a fun little car like that if he had the chance, those last few months.

If he was NOT planning on leaving, it seems like a strange gift, particularly with the personalized license plates...give her a car and then drive it himself most of the time?.. I know this has been discussed before, but it still seems odd. And if he was not planning on leaving, then I assume he would have kept on driving it.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Even if someone was netting 75-85k there might have been private pension contributions and tuition (undergrad or grad school?). Even modest tuition and board can be $25k. If there had been funds diverted for a "getaway fund" there would probably been some chatter by now.

You have to remember that his daughter's mother, BG, was making more than he was, perhaps 50% more. The base salary of a professor in Smeal at PSU was I think $142 k in the early 2000's, when RFG was making about $120 K. BG also does outside consulting and wrote a few books

I believe he was lured away by someone who he thought was harmless... someone who told him they could only trust him (no other LE) and who purported to have new information on an older case or something else dear to RG's heart. If it was a current case I don't think he would have been roped in.

If indeed we ever find out it will probably be a case of Occam's razor.

I certainly think that it could have been a luring.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Regarding the gift of a car to PAF, did she ever drive it much?
I recall reading before on here that RG was the one who drove it most often.

TG once said that, but for the plate, no one would ever know it was PEF's. She had her own car, that she usually drove.

 

[SeekingJana]

IMO, you negated Occam's Razor with the statement " I believe he was lured away by someone who he thought was harmless".

Personal safety 101- NEVER give anyone you are not absolutely confident with the upper hand by becoming a passenger in their car.

Next:

The bolded part of what you posted is the main reason I have resisted the " foul play" theory.
A DA would know that NO ONE is " harmless".
I firmly believe he was too experienced to fall for a " ruse" involving getting into a situation involving physical coercion. If someone had info about a crime, they should be directed to the police to file a report, period. Not to secretly whisper to the DA!

I'm sorry but this is a man who has seen too much and learned from it( via osmosis if nothing else) to do something reckless regarding his personal safety.

Even if someone was netting 75-85k there might have been private pension contributions and tuition (undergrad or grad school?). Even modest tuition and board can be $25k. If there had been funds diverted for a "getaway fund" there would probably been some chatter by now.

I believe he was lured away by someone who he thought was harmless... someone who told him they could only trust him (no other LE) and who purported to have new information on an older case or something else dear to RG's heart. If it was a current case I don't think he would have been roped in.

If indeed we ever find out it will probably be a case of Occam's razor.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

If a person or group is determined to murder or assassinate someone, it is hard to stop them--witness the heads of state, including American presidents, who have been shot while under full security protection. At the other end of the spectrum, ordinary people have been murdered who were stalking victims, and whose murderers were well known to them and LE as people who meant them harm.

RFG might have been unaware that he had been targeted; certainly LE has not indicated that he was talking about a threat or taking precautions.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

If a person or group is determined to murder or assassinate someone, it is hard to stop them--witness the heads of state, including American presidents, who have been shot while under full security protection.

And the leave a lot of evidence. Nobody questions that Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy were shot and killed.

At the other end of the spectrum, ordinary people have been murdered who were stalking victims, and whose murderers were well known to them and LE as people who meant them harm.

RFG might have been unaware that he had been targeted; certainly LE has not indicated that he was talking about a threat or taking precautions.

Okay, we are talking about someone not only exceptionally bright, but experienced with criminals, not only in "little" Centre County, but in a major city. For him to be a "stalking victim" he had to be followed for an hour down remote country roads, where he could see a car following him. He would then have to be followed around Lewisburg for about 4-6 hours, both in his car and on foot.

Look at the photos of the bridge area, along Water Street. Unless a car pulled in in one of those parallel parking spot, it would be difficult to follow him after he pulled out. If it did, RFG would have spotted it.

Sorry, but I don't buy the stalker, unless the stalker was driving a car equipped with a Romulan cloaking device.

 

[Unscripted]

By "Occam's razor" I was only implying that the simplest explanation might prevail. There was no sign of a struggle at PF's house. Some say RG was uncharacteristically broody before he disappeared. If someone (a woman) contacted him about information on a former case where he was second-guessing himself he might go and hear the story. That would suggest that a woman and other abductor(s) were involved.

If you are going to walk away and are truly organized (as RG seemed to be) you would probably appear to be blithe and nonchalant before you ran away to Canada or the Baltic Coast.

Unless... RG went for a drive to clear his head... someone "saw red" or noticed the license plate and decided to steal the car and killed RG -- maybe road rage gone wrong? When they discovered by reading the laptop or on the news that he was a DA they returned the car to the parking lot across from SoS on Saturday.