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

[J. J. in Phila]

First, I think this would be life insurance. He didn't own a car and he wasn't driving it in the summer/fall of 2005. He had no property, so there would be nothing to insure. I think the county had medical. The county did have a master liability insurance policy, so it wouldn't be that.

RBBM

I wondered about that, but I figured you would have a better grasp on why and the mechanics than I would. Any theory or is it common?

Bluntly, for a guy in his 30's or 40's with a wife and daughter, I think it is common to have gotten life insurance, especially in the 1970's or 1980's.

The cost would depend on a number of factors:

1. RFG's ages when he bought it. There could have been multiple policies.

2. The type of insurance, limited premium, whole life, universal, term.

3. The amount of the policy, e.g. $100 k policy would cost more than a $50 k policy.

4. The company issuing it.

None of this would preclude single premium life insurance, i.e. pay one large premium and have the insurance forever.

 

[Trackergd]

First, I think this would be life insurance. He didn't own a car and he wasn't driving it in the summer/fall of 2005. He had no property, so there would be nothing to insure. I think the county had medical. The county did have a master liability insurance policy, so it wouldn't be that.



Bluntly, for a guy in his 30's or 40's with a wife and daughter, I think it is common to have gotten life insurance, especially in the 1970's or 1980's.

The cost would depend on a number of factors:

1. RFG's ages when he bought it. There could have been multiple policies.

2. The type of insurance, limited premium, whole life, universal, term.

3. The amount of the policy, e.g. $100 k policy would cost more than a $50 k policy.

4. The company issuing it.

None of this would preclude single premium life insurance, i.e. pay one large premium and have the insurance forever.

RBBM

Having to pay the term policy until a declaration of death was issued would make the most sense.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

RBBM

Having to pay the term policy until a declaration of death was issued would make the most sense.

Except for the single premium and limited premium possibility, which would have likely been purchased by RFG before he disappeared, in most cases all of those policies would have premiums.

There can be situations where dividends on the policy will cover premiums on whole life and some universal life polices, but generally after about 30 years.

Term lasts only for a specific period of time, e.g. 20 years or 30 years, but some companies permit automatic renew for the same amount at a higher rate.

At 25, hypothetically, a nonsmoking male of RFG's weight could have gotten $200 k in term insurance for a term of 30 years for $426 annually. Not bad.

At that expiration date, after he turned 55, he could renew for the same amount of insurance for 20 years for $1,186.00. If the same hypothetical guy disappeared at age 59 and wasn't declared dead for 6 years, his estate would be paying out $7,100 for premiums over those six years.

If he, hypothetically, decided to buy $200 k in whole life insurance in his early 30's, around the time he adopted Lara, the hypothetical premium would be $ 2,416 per year, or $14,490 over 6 years. That policy, however might have been worth more than $200 k, because of dividends on the policy. If he bought it at 40, the hypothetical cost would be $ 3,302 per year, or $19,812 over six years.

I think it is important to note that there would be little income coming in over those six years.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I would add that life insurance payouts are not subject to PA inheritance tax.

 

[Kimster]

I would add that life insurance payouts are not subject to PA inheritance tax.

Link?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Is life insurance subject to PA inheritance tax?

No. Life insurance on the life of the decedent is not taxable in the estate of the decedent. In addition, the proceeds are not taxable according the state income tax law.


https://revenue-pa.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1110

The value of certain assets, such as some jointly owned assets, is reduced for Pennsylvania purposes, and some assets such has life insurance are not taxed in Pennsylvania at all. Other transactions, such as gifts within one year of death are partly taxable in Pennsylvania and generally not at all federally.

http://www.centrelaw.com/page.php?id=46

I also went through this with my father's estate.

In LG's situation, by paying the premiums, which is permitted by statute specifically, she lowered the value of the estate, and therefore the tax burden on her, and made sure that there would be a tax exempt asset preserved. The action was both reasonable and wise.

 

[Saunterer]

This would imply that the is a suspicion that LG deliberately falsified one of the forms. Such action would be subject to the penalties of perjury, according to the form. Such action also imply that her attorney was in cahoots with her on this, filing two noticeably different forms.

Obviously it possible for anyone to commit perjury, but I have seen nothing that would indicate LG has done so. Same in regard to Goodall.

Now, there have been numerous comments over the course of this saga that have suggested that LG was not being honest, that she knew where her father was. Those comments have not been made by me, and I do not subscribe to that theory.

The forms speak for themselves.

Not correct in my opinion and/or completely unresponsive to my post. I simply wondered if anyone was curious enough to determine whether an official document filed with the county matched up with the same official document required to be filed with the state. My observation was that the state filing, to the extent the county filing was made public, is (or should be) available to public disclosure under the PA RTK law.

I fully anticipate that, were they known, the full compliment of publicly accessible documents would put any question of missing money to bed once and for all.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Not correct in my opinion and/or completely unresponsive to my post. I simply wondered if anyone was curious enough to determine whether an official document filed with the county matched up with the same official document required to be filed with the state. My observation was that the state filing, to the extent the county filing was made public, is (or should be) available to public disclosure under the PA RTK law.

I fully anticipate that, were they known, the full compliment of publicly accessible documents would put any question of missing money to bed once and for all.

It would not put the issue to bed, if the forms are identical. Only if the copy filed with the state was different, would there be any question. However, if there was a difference between these forms, that would indicate that LG filed a deliberately inaccurate form, and that one of them is false; that would be a fairly serious violation of the law.

I do not believe that LG would so violate the law, nor that her attorney would participate in that.

Now, if someone wants to explore the possibility that LG did something illegal in the disposition of the estate, he is free to pursue it.

The forms filed by LG and her attorney. and bearing their signatures, and subject to a perjury prosecution if false, speak for themselves.

 

[Saunterer]

This case has almost always progressed here at WS with harmony and a synergy of ideas. Some think Mr. Gricar is certainly deceased, others are not so sure.
HOWEVER, which ever or if any or no conclusions are drawn, the known case facts have never been called into question by anyone until recently when 2 posters have basically called every known bit of evidence a lie, or called it into question as in " PROVE IT, BUDDY".

NO, we do not have to PROVE anything to you if the facts have been presented in the form of legal documentation OR by LE. If LE says a certain thing about evidence, then we are to believe that the legal burden is on their side and that they are being honest and forthright with us.

The paranoia and the suspicion which is present now is driving people away. It is unpleasant and it is totally unnecessary. I am an advocate for Ray Gricar, who definitely would advocate for me if circumstances were swapped and I went missing in his jurisdiction.
To do, say, or be anything less is to impugn the reputation of the local LE in Bellefonte, the reporters who have given us statements from LE, and from family members and friends of Ray Gricar who have made statements on and off the record.
Not everything in this world is a lie or a conspiracy! In fact, most things are true and clear if looked at with clear eyes and minds.

I know for a fact, having read your many posts here, you actually welcome the new input here. And even if it is only a "shooting star", by golly there is finally some discussion (here) to give everyone (reading here) pause.

Please forgive me for challenging accepted (Websleuths) "facts" and for helping to rock this little corner of the Internet. But a sitting district attorney is still missing...and there has been no official proclamation as to why!

 

[Saunterer]

To clarify, I did not have voluntary departure above 50% until 2011. When I started posting here, I had it at:

Walkaway: 45%
Murder: 44%
Suicide: 10%
Something Else: 1%

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #4

As for testimony, yes at the hearing to declare RFG dead. If they did find that someone lied under oath and had contact with RFG, I think we'd be talking about perjury and possibly fraud charges. I could understand why RFG, if he walked away, wouldn't tell them. It would be a matter of protection.

Just so others reading here might know...and I am not in any way disparaging your belief...when was the first time you put intentional walkaway at more than a 50% chance on any Internet forum? I already know the answer...but I think it a fair question here.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I know for a fact, having read your many posts here, you actually welcome the new input here. And even if it is only a "shooting star", by golly there is finally some discussion (here) to give everyone (reading here) pause.

Please forgive me for challenging accepted (Websleuths) "facts" and for helping to rock this little corner of the Internet. But a sitting district attorney is still missing...and there has been no official proclamation as to why!

The form is a fact, and it is signed by Lara Gricar.

It is an either/or situation.

Either:

1. Lara Gricar, as I believe, filled out the form to the best of her ability to be accurate.

Or:

2. Lara Gricar, as is being intimated, falsified the form.

If the latter case is true, which I doubt, that is a crime. I would question why LG would be so stupid as to falsify one form, while being accurate of the other. We could not tell, in that highly unlikely case, on which form she was endorsing false information or if she was falsifying both forms. We could only determine, if that improbability was discovered, that she did commit a crime.

LG's actions, in relation to her handling of the estate settlement, do not come close explaining what happened to that sitting DA. They only show that according to his daughter, his estate was less than $25 k. That is consistent with what the police have said, and considering that she held about half the money in RFG's known accounts.

 

[Saunterer]

I emailed Saunterer a copy of the RG file.

Thanks Trackergd! But I will refrain from commenting on it with specificity unless and untill it is made fully available (in total) to the greater Websleuths community.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Just so others reading here might know...and I am not in any way disparaging your belief...when was the first time you put intentional walkaway at more than a 50% chance on any Internet forum? I already know the answer...but I think it a fair question here.

I checked. It was 2/2011, after the comment from TG about the cash; it "jumped" from 50 to 51 percent. I had said, probably, without giving the odds, a few weeks before that. It clicked up again about a month later, but so did foul play.

The first time voluntary departure passed foul play was before April 2008.

I would now say that it is more likely than not that RFG walked away. I would not call 52% highly probable.

 

[Saunterer]

It would not put the issue to bed, if the forms are identical. Only if the copy filed with the state was different, would there be any question. However, if there was a difference between these forms, that would indicate that LG filed a deliberately inaccurate form, and that one of them is false; that would be a fairly serious violation of the law.

I do not believe that LG would so violate the law, nor that her attorney would participate in that.

Now, if someone wants to explore the possibility that LG did something illegal in the disposition of the estate, he is free to pursue it.

The forms filed by LG and her attorney. and bearing their signatures, and subject to a perjury prosecution if false, speak for themselves.

I do not abscribe to any theory that LG or her attorney filed a false report. I am simply asking if the county filing matches up with the state filing. I do not really care, since I firmly believe (as LE has repeatedly said) there are no missing assets...but that is among the continuing unanswered questions some people use to bolster a years-in-the-making walkaway theory.

 

[Saunterer]

Respectfully snipped.

The first time voluntary departure passed foul play was before April 2008.

Close enough and 'nuff' said, IMHO! Others can judge for themselves.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I do not abscribe to any theory that LG or her attorney filed a false report. I am simply asking if the county filing matches up with the state filing. I do not really care, since I firmly believe (as LE has repeatedly said) there are no missing assets...but that is the continuing question some people use to bolster a years-in-the-making walkaway theory.

We have the last comment made by LE regarding his finances. The last comment was from SPM, from Disappeared, taped in October 2010, that "You know, we have one person working on the financial part of it to try to create a picture of what went on financially."

http://www.centredaily.com/2013/12/06/3928298/following-the-money-part-1.html#storylink=cpy

As far as I have seen, LE has never said that all money was accounted for, though they have said that there were no unusually large cash withdrawals in the prior 2 1/2 years.

Please post a link to their more recent statement, as I disbelieve any such statement exists at the current time (it may in the future).

Anyone who would suggest that the forms do not match is implicitly stating that they filed, under penalty of perjury, that they filed one form with inaccurate information and deliberately did not correct it, in violation of the law. I do not believe that LG or her attorney did so.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Respectfully snipped.Close enough and 'nuff' said, IMHO! Others can judge for themselves.

Those were the same odds that were posted here. Note, however, that 45% is not greater than 50%.

 

[Saunterer]

I know Websleuthers have never had the privilege (or the distraction, if you would so judge it) of having had the opportunity to address a member of Ray Gricar's family online...or, for that matter, any of the other principals involved in the investigation. I can only tell you, with certainty, that this forum has not yet begun to find its potential...if you would, individually, start/continue to question that which has been presented here, but never publicly confirmed.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I know Websleuthers have never had the privilege (or the distraction, if you would so judge it) of having had the opportunity to address a member of Ray Gricar's family online...or, for that matter, any of the other principals involved in the investigation. I can only tell you, with certainty, that this forum has not yet begun to find its potential.

I am not certain how much his family members know about many of the details of the case. The comments of TG regarding the "Mystery Woman" were quite surprising, especially since the information had been reported in the press prior to the DA's Office releasing it. There has not been a lot of contact between the family and LE, according to both.

 

[Saunterer]

Those were the same odds that were posted here. Note, however, that 45% is not greater than 50%.

When was the first time you posted a more than 50% chance that Ray Gricar intentionally disappeared himself, on any Internet forum? That is a simple question.

I already know the answer...but I think it might be of interest to others here.
I am not trying to embarrass you. You are entitled to your own opinion.