PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #9

[and nothing but]

IF, instead of being part of the coverup, Ray Gricar was purposely left out of the loop and misled by PSU.....then Gricar begins to get close to exposing the coverup and/or Sandusky, THEN what happens to your percentages?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

IF, instead of being part of the coverup, Ray Gricar was purposely left out of the loop and misled by PSU.....then Gricar begins to get close to exposing the coverup and/or Sandusky, THEN what happens to your percentages?

There was no suggestion that RFG was working on the case, so that is a problem with the theory.

If there would suddenly be evidence, it might lower walkaway a bit.

Walkaway would have had to have been very well planned. It wasn't something that could have been done, this way, in a month.

 

[BigCat]

According to an article written by Sara Ganim back in March, the possible reason for RFG not prosecuting Sandusky in 1998 was a psychological eval by John Seasock.

A source who reviewed the documents and has knowledge of the case said he believed Seasock’s report was the reason the investigation was closed.

However, the source said, Seasock was not the only psychologist to make an evaluation.

The day after Victim 6 came home from a tour of the football building with then-defensive coordinator and charity founder Jerry Sandusky and told his mom Sandusky had showered with him and a friend, the mother called police. She also called a psychologist.

“And that psychologist concluded that this incident, what the boy described, and I’m paraphrasing ... the psychologist concluded that what the boy described was a classic example of how a sexual abuser grooms his victim,” the source said.

But there is no explanation of why Seasock was brought in, or any indication if he interviewed Victim 6 himself or just reviewed the notes of the first psychologist, the source said.

“One could speculate there was an effort to find someone who could contradict the first one,” the source said.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/03/patriot-news_exclusive_psychol.html

But we know now that Seasock wasn't even a psychologist at the time.

But, almost 14 years later, the fact that Seasock wasn’t a psychologist at the time, according to state records, raises questions about how much weight his opinion should have carried.

“To take that person’s word over a psychologist who has been prepared and licensed by the state is, I would say, very surprising and a serious concern,” said Marolyn Morford, a State College psychologist.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/03/29/143482/man-who-evaluated-alleged-sandusky.html#storylink=cpy

So whose decision was it to bring Seasock in?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

According to an article written by Sara Ganim back in March, the possible reason for RFG not prosecuting Sandusky in 1998 was a psychological eval by John Seasock.

But we know now that Seasock wasn't even a psychologist at the time.

When SG wrote the article, nobody knew about the Chambers' Report. The released police report indicates that the Chambers' Report was submitted to the DA's Office on 5/8/98. That was prior to Seasock talking to Schreffler for the first time (5/9/98).

It is important to remember that neither report was admissible, in terms of the conclusions of either Seasock or Chambers. They were to verify what Victim 6 said, but no more (and you had Sandusky's admission). It could be used by DPW in making their decision.

So whose decision was it to bring Seasock in?

The police report indicates that it was an employee (identified) of C&YS in Centre County. The report identifies Seasock as a "psychologist," but that might have been Schreffler's misunderstanding. Seasock did not have Chamber's report.

Lauro (DPW) claims never to have seen the Chambers' Report and said that it would have made a difference.

A very good question is, why didn't the DA's Office never submit the Chambers' Report to DPW? Normally, they would coordinate the information release.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

A call for a special prosecutor to investigate both Corbett's conduct in the case and Gricar's 1998 involvement: http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2012/07/time_for_special_prosecutor_in.html

 

[quixote]

The poster on the football forum did eventually respond. Sort of. Basically said they know it (PSU nagging Gricar not to press charges) to be true, but cannot provide a link or anything factual to prove it. Also took a shot at me for "needing proof," which speaks of his maturity level. When someone drops something significant like that, something that has (to my knowledge) never been referenced, it is reasonable to find out if they can show credibility. It is no different than me going on there (or here) and claiming I know what happened to Ray Gricar. I'd expect people to have doubts, and want me to prove I knew what I was talking about. The poster has done nothing to advance the narrative in a meaningful way.

 

[BigCat]

A very good question is, why didn't the DA's Office never submit the Chambers' Report to DPW? Normally, they would coordinate the information release.

Lauro also felt like Shreffler didn't fully share other potentially incriminating information with him.

Mr. Lauro also was invited by the university police to eavesdrop on a conversation between the boy's mother and Mr. Sandusky. He declined and asked Detective Shreffler to get back to him with what he learned. He recalled that Detective Shreffler told him they extracted nothing new from the conversation. So University Police closed their case and Mr. Lauro followed suit.

But Mr. Lauro said he was not privy to the entire conversation that police listened in on. He did not know that the mother had asked Mr. Sandusky if his private parts touched the boy and that he had responded "I don't think so ... maybe."

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories...98-sandusky-shower-case-223751/#ixzz1zVNMUe7l

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Lauro also felt like Shreffler didn't fully share other potentially incriminating information with him.

Lauro was invited to be there, in hiding. He declined.

I'm seeing a lot of problems there, but not limited to the DA's Office.

 

[Tripmap]

His office computer. It was password protected.



They have the e-mails from his office computer. Those are on his hard drive, and there would be a record with the ISP.

I think it was Bellefonte to Lewisburg.

So, if the search was done on Ray's office computer, then who had access to Ray's office, had the password, was unfamiliar with the area AND smoked? That person should be looked for.

O.K., that sounds crazy, even to me, but I think something happened to Ray. He wouldn't have run off on his daughter and I don't think he would do to her what his brother did to his nephews (committing suicide). Something happened to him, someone (smoker) took his car and got rid of his laptop in the river. Or Ray went with someone in his car, maybe even getting rid of the laptop himself in the river, THEN, after something happening to Ray, the smoker smoked in his car and/or drove it a bit. Ray didn't let people smoke in his car, so this would have happened AFTER the incident.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

So, if the search was done on Ray's office computer, then who had access to Ray's office, had the password, was unfamiliar with the area AND smoked? That person should be looked for.

No one. Literally. Everyone there was a long term resident and could have easily gotten to Lewisburg. I don't know of anyone else having the password, except for the system administrator having general access. He/she wouldn't have access to the home computer.

O.K., that sounds crazy, even to me, but I think something happened to Ray. He wouldn't have run off on his daughter and I don't think he would do to her what his brother did to his nephews (committing suicide).

If he left voluntarily, he left his daughter a very large pension benefit.

He also indicated that he was putting the Mini into his girlfriend's name in case he was sued. Now I'm wondering if there was something involving Sandusky that could have led him to be sued, and not covered under the county liability insurance.

Something happened to him, someone (smoker) took his car and got rid of his laptop in the river. Or Ray went with someone in his car, maybe even getting rid of the laptop himself in the river, THEN, after something happening to Ray, the smoker smoked in his car and/or drove it a bit. Ray didn't let people smoke in his car, so this would have happened AFTER the incident.

There was no physical evidence of anyone else actually in his car. The ash was tiny. Witnesses saw him driving the car alone.

RFG generated the map, but he could have checking the time it would take to drive there, if he wanted to be there at a certain time.

 

[twinkiesmom]

Finding him, but it might be related to either walkaway or foul play.

The 1998 decision was a colossal lapse of judgment, but it was something else:

Hugely uncharacteristic for RFG.

This seems like a straightforward case in 1998. There was enough of a case there that RFG could have prosecuted, and he prosecuted weaker cases, even within about 18 months of this. He never says why. So, maybe he made a mistake in not prosecuting. Okay, anybody can make a bad mistake; it can be a misjudgment (it should be admitted to as such).

It is uncharacteristic, but explainable as a mistake, a very bright guy not being very bright on that occasion.

I think we tend to paint Ray in black and white when he was very much grey, particularly in his personal life. He is not Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.

In general, he was tough on crime and went after unpopular prosecutions, but
it is a simpler situation to prosecute a football player for rape than take down Penn State football by prosecuting Sandusky at the pinnacle of his career.

Whether we believe the message boards, there would have been a lot of pressure on Ray to squelch this...we don't know how bad that was or what threats might have been made. We would like to believe he would have been immune to pressure or threats, but what if he was not? He certainly wasn't close to retirement in 98.

What if he made a bad call in 98 with one victim and info got back to him later about more victims? It seems as though Sandusky's pattern of crimes against children was a very badly kept secret. Ray (or whoever took him) made sure that laptop was erased....We don't know if he was carrying out a clandestine investigation or merely plotting his own escape. We don't know how deep the rabbit hole goes; therefore, we cannot assign a reason why Ray is gone.

 

[waltzingmatilda]

I think we tend to paint Ray in black and white when he was very much grey, particularly in his personal life. He is not Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.

In general, he was tough on crime and went after unpopular prosecutions, but
it is a simpler situation to prosecute a football player for rape than take down Penn State football by prosecuting Sandusky at the pinnacle of his career.

Whether we believe the message boards, there would have been a lot of pressure on Ray to squelch this...we don't know how bad that was or what threats might have been made. We would like to believe he would have been immune to pressure or threats, but what if he was not? He certainly wasn't close to retirement in 98.

What if he made a bad call in 98 with one victim and info got back to him later about more victims? It seems as though Sandusky's pattern of crimes against children was a very badly kept secret. Ray (or whoever took him) made sure that laptop was erased....We don't know if he was carrying out a clandestine investigation or merely plotting his own escape. We don't know how deep the rabbit hole goes; therefore, we cannot assign a reason why Ray is gone.

It is not out the realm of possibility (in my simple mind ) that Mr. Gricar could have been investigating JS independently. He was not a native of Centre Co and may have had a different perspective as an 'outsider'. He surely was smart enough to know what/who he was dealing with as far as powerful people/institutions.

I've been pondering, "Why would I search on 'how to fry a hard drive' on my home computer when my work laptop is the one found in a river after I disappeared?"

IMO, there was something on the laptop that he desperately didn't wish to be found and he didn't wish to risk the search itself being found on that laptop so his intentions to fry the HD would not be found out.

Then I asked myself, "What type of information would be so crucial for me to destroy that HD?"

1) There was something inappropriate on there that I didn't want discovered for fear of losing my job. (But RG was planning on retiring anyway)

2) Something so inappropriate about my private life on a work laptop that I didn't wish to be found out. But that would have to be something pretty bad for me to feel I should fry the HD. (I had a county issued laptop and received a few racy/flirtatious e-mails and visited a NSFW site before I knew what NSFW meant but I didn't FRY the thing on my way out the door)

3) Something was on there that had been discovered by someone that made me fear for my life or was a threat to my family's lives.

4) An internet dating/chat site that I didn't want my partner to find, but why do that on a work laptop?

This is a bit OT but there is a cold case that I've followed since 1999 the next county over which has been reopened after a new DA was voted in last election. The new DA is not from around here...not one of the good ole boys but interested in serving justice. He is investigating independently of the Sheriffs Dept or SBI. (which is a statement in itself considering the proven corruption in those agencies in the past)

The 'old' DA had been in power for years and ruled Officer Jones death a suicide and refused to reopen it, she was shot point blank in the back of the head. It's alleged that powerful people were involved. There is a thread in cold cases>Davina Buff Jones.

Sorry for the OT but the above mentioned case is why I've been thinking about RG's case and dissecting the few clues that he left behind.
(J. J., It's SE NC ISLAND GOTHIC!)

As new information continues to be revealed in the JS case, I worry more and more that RG met with foul play.

MOO and all that jazz!

wm

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I think we tend to paint Ray in black and white when he was very much grey, particularly in his personal life. He is not Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.

In general, he was tough on crime and went after unpopular prosecutions, but
it is a simpler situation to prosecute a football player for rape than take down Penn State football by prosecuting Sandusky at the pinnacle of his career.

Whether we believe the message boards, there would have been a lot of pressure on Ray to squelch this...we don't know how bad that was or what threats might have been made. We would like to believe he would have been immune to pressure or threats, but what if he was not? He certainly wasn't close to retirement in 98.

This, to an extend. The problem that I have is that this is the only case most people know about.

One problem I do have is that, in 18 months, RFG would not be taking down the heir apparent to Paterno; he'd be taking down the head coach Paterno got rid of, effectively. In less than 3 1/2 years, RFG would neither have to worry about re-election or his post DA legal career.

I have, so far, found no evidence of RFG being blackmailed, or was blackmailing anyone.

What if he made a bad call in 98 with one victim and info got back to him later about more victims? It seems as though Sandusky's pattern of crimes against children was a very badly kept secret. Ray (or whoever took him) made sure that laptop was erased....We don't know if he was carrying out a clandestine investigation or merely plotting his own escape. We don't know how deep the rabbit hole goes; therefore, we cannot assign a reason why Ray is gone.

There would have had to been source files for anything related to Sandusky, if there was anything related to Sandusky on the laptop. And, RFG wanted to get rid of whatever was on the laptop about a year prior to vanishing. It could just be financial data that didn't want an ID thief to get.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

It is not out the realm of possibility (in my simple mind ) that Mr. Gricar could have been investigating JS independently. He was not a native of Centre Co and may have had a different perspective as an 'outsider'. He surely was smart enough to know what/who he was dealing with as far as powerful people/institutions.

He could have called in the AG; it was Fisher at the time, not Corbett.

Okay, I want to take these one by one

Then I asked myself, "What type of information would be so crucial for me to destroy that HD?"

1) There was something inappropriate on there that I didn't want discovered for fear of losing my job. (But RG was planning on retiring anyway)

The only ways to remove RFG from office were:

1. Ordered removed by a judge after being convicted of an "infamous crime." Even something like shoplifting may not cause him to be removed.

2. Impeached by the State House and tried by the State Senate (2/3 vote to convict). It has happened once in my adult lifetime.

3. Ordered removed by the State Senate (2/3 vote) upon a request of the Governor.

He didn't have to worry about losing his job after 2001.

3) Something was on there that had been discovered by someone that made me fear for my life or was a threat to my family's lives.

Maybe, but his daughter was 2,500 miles away and his girlfriend was a former probation officer. Plus, he knew every cop in the county.

Also, why not keep a backup, for insurance.

2) Something so inappropriate about my private life on a work laptop that I didn't wish to be found out. But that would have to be something pretty bad for me to feel I should fry the HD. (I had a county issued laptop and received a few racy/flirtatious e-mails and visited a NSFW site before I knew what NSFW meant but I didn't FRY the thing on my way out the door)


4) An internet dating/chat site that I didn't want my partner to find, but why do that on a work laptop?

The e-mails would be on a server, and the recipient would have copies. Sexually, the worst thing I've found out about RFG was that he liked adult women. So do I! Being straight with adult women isn't exactly damaging in Centre County.

Maybe there was some deep dark secret, but nothing that I've heard of. Oh, I've heard that anyone that drives a Mini Cooper is gay, but that isn't exactly accurate.

For me, 1 and 3 is next to impossible. 2 and 4 are unlikely. He could have been worried about ID theft.

I had to google NSFW.

This is a bit OT but there is a cold case that I've followed since 1999 the next county over which has been reopened after a new DA was voted in last election. The new DA is not from around here...not one of the good ole boys but interested in serving justice. He is investigating independently of the Sheriffs Dept or SBI. (which is a statement in itself considering the proven corruption in those agencies in the past)

The 'old' DA had been in power for years and ruled Officer Jones death a suicide and refused to reopen it, she was shot point blank in the back of the head. It's alleged that powerful people were involved. There is a thread in cold cases>Davina Buff Jones.

Sorry for the OT but the above mentioned case is why I've been thinking about RG's case and dissecting the few clues that he left behind.
(J. J., It's SE NC ISLAND GOTHIC!)

It's good to know that Central Pennsylvania is not alone.

 

[waltzingmatilda]

Thanks for the response J. J. I don't feel qualified to comment here very often because I don't know the 'local color' like you and others.

I have a few questions....

Is Fisher a stand up guy? trustworthy?

Do the Centre Co. locals 'take kindly' to outsiders who become a part of the community or are they clandestine? (not counting PSU students) I ask because I moved to the NC mtns and briefly worked at a university. A trustree voted against me being permanently hired because of bad blood between he and my ex. The whole community was very clandestine (deliverance was filmed there) and the wealthy powerful people ran the show. It took about a year and a half before folks warmed up to me. Is the culture in Centre Co. similar?

'Anyone who drives a mini cooper is gay' is laughable. That's like saying that I must be a lesbian because I like muscle cars with stick shifts, LOL! (Arthritis no longer allows me such nonsense)

However, I am thinking back to trends in 2005.

I'll have to google when the mini cooper came on the market but IIRC it was around that time. I specifically remember because Mr. wm worked on a tv show at that time and he told me the production co. leased mini coopers for the stars on the show. They were the new hottest thing here at the east coast. Not gay, just cool....I still want one!

Identity theft is certainly a possibility. I recall a couple of friends were victims of identity theft around that time.

Was online gambling a trend in 2005? Thinking back, a friend of mine discontinued internet service around this time because her hubby racked up a hefty debt playing poker. Wonder if RG played poker?

Sorry to ramble but am just typing out loud. Gosh! Alot has changed in social media trends since 2005.

My thoughts and opinions.

wm

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Thanks for the response J. J. I don't feel qualified to comment here very often because I don't know the 'local color' like you and others.

I have a few questions....

Is Fisher a stand up guy? trustworthy?

Fisher, now a federal judge, vocally opposed letting gay people march in the NYC St. Patrick's Day parade in 2002. He was a, by the book, arch conservative, Republican, Catholic. I could not believe he'd give Sandusky a pass, especially with boys.

He was a former ADA in Allegheny County and GOP Whip in the Senate, prior to becoming AG.

Do the Centre Co. locals 'take kindly' to outsiders who become a part of the community or are they clandestine? (not counting PSU students) I ask because I moved to the NC mtns and briefly worked at a university. A trustree voted against me being permanently hired because of bad blood between he and my ex. The whole community was very clandestine (deliverance was filmed there) and the wealthy powerful people ran the show. It took about a year and a half before folks warmed up to me. Is the culture in Centre Co. similar?

A sizable portion of the county wasn't born there. In 2009, none of the four candidates for DA actually grew up in Centre County; two were born and grew up out of state. Neither Paterno nor Spanier grew up there. In some of the smaller towns, yes, can be cliquish, but they are small.

Literally 2/3 of the population lives in either State College Borough or the two bordering townships. Even factoring out the students, it is still about half the county, in terms of population.

'Anyone who drives a mini cooper is gay' is laughable.

I know, but I've read it, in regard to RFG. Everything indicates that he was heterosexual, very much so.

Identity theft is certainly a possibility. I recall a couple of friends were victims of identity theft around that time.

Was online gambling a trend in 2005? Thinking back, a friend of mine discontinued internet service around this time because her hubby racked up a hefty debt playing poker. Wonder if RG played poker?

I've never heard of him gambling heavily, or any trips to the track. He was the kind of guy who'd go to Vermont on vacation, not Vegas or AC. It was something I kind of looked at when I was looking at assets, or lack thereof.

I would not rule out the possibility that RFG's desire to get rid of the data was unrelated to his disappearance.

 

[BigCat]

There was a thread on one of the PSU football boards discussing why Fran Ganter was left the football team for an administrative position with the university. Here are some quotes from a couple of posters:

The loss of his wife.

The playing calling with Jay.

The fact that he knew he would not get the HC job as Joe insisted on staying on.

I think when he had the MSU opportunity he stayed knowing in part that he would have had a 50% chance as Joe's successor. Then when the first JS rumors were quiently making their rounds (as far back as 1998, at least known internally not public) then he knew it was almost 100% his.

When I was a graduate student here from 1976-81, I played a lot of "crunch time pick up basketball" and Fran was often on my team or on my opponents team. He was genuine, friendly, a great team player who knstinctively found the right chemistry for the temporary pick up team of players ranging from almost no talent but having fun to players who had played in high school and college or in the military. Fran was great at making kit fun and trying to make something good happen for the lesser talents thaat many fellow players would either ignore or deride. That impressed me.

I do not know all of the ins and outs regarding the personal breach between Fran and the Paterno family and I fkind the whole affair tragic. The death of Fran's wife was tragic and unexpected. He was a single father who still had (I think 4 boys), several were still in middle school or high school. His son's have turned lout to be fine young men and I'm sure that they make Fran proud.

How or why his name is seldom mentioned in the current scandal given his overlapping years coaching and playing for JS is a mystery to me, especially with the facgt that the hard drives of administrative assistants were subpoened by the AG and that managers, equkipment personnel and others in the periphery of the Football program were interviewed by the AG and Freeh Commision 3 and 4 times.

Where is Fran's current office and is he still in hand picked position that was created for him?

Another posters stated Ganter turned downed the job as head coach at Michigan State. The MSU head coaching position was open in January of 95. I would say that's a top 40 coaching job in college football. Definitely better than the two jobs (Temple, Maryland) that Sandusky was a candidate for. He passed on an excellent opportunity for the chance to succeed Paterno.

Another note on Ganter. Victim 4 mentioned Ganter as one of the assistant coaches who often saw him (victim 4) and Sandusky in the shower together. I believe victim 4 was the boy was Sandusky abused the longest, so we're talking over an extended period of time.

So I have several questions. Why was RFG going to meet with Ganter and the two investigating officers in the Sandusky case, months after the case was closed , at the football building? I would think it would be difficult for an assistant football coach to get an audience with a DA, and even more difficult to get the DA to come to see him.

Of course, the biggest question of all, what did they discuss in that meeting?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

So I have several questions. Why was RFG going to meet with Ganter and the two investigating officers in the Sandusky case, months after the case was closed , at the football building? I would think it would be difficult for an assistant football coach to get an audience with a DA, and even more difficult to get the DA to come to see him.

Of course, the biggest question of all, what did they discuss in that meeting?

There have been some suggestions that I have heard that RFG's decision was basically, that he would not prosecute if Sandusky "received help." If that was the decision, I would call it a tremendously bad one, but not illegal or unethical.

I have to say, that with the people at that 10/13(?)/98 meeting, I would be completely unsurprised if that was about Sandusky.

 

[BigCat]

There have been some suggestions that I have heard that RFG's decision was basically, that he would not prosecute if Sandusky "received help." If that was the decision, I would call it a tremendously bad one, but not illegal or unethical.

I have to say, that with the people at that 10/13(?)/98 meeting, I would be completely unsurprised if that was about Sandusky.

But Ganter was not Sandusky's superior. He was a co-worker, more like a subordinate if we take into consideration years spent on the staff.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

But Ganter was not Sandusky's superior. He was a co-worker, more like a subordinate if we take into consideration years spent on the staff.

Somebody could have wanted to send a message; that would be a possibility.

I think it was you that was suggesting that there could have been some maneuvering to take Sandusky out of the line of succession. That would be another possibility.