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

[nevereverever]

That of course is assuming RG actually did those searches. I have to wonder why ditching the laptop and hard drive in the river was necessary since hard drive wiping software was purchased. Also it seems to me if it was Gricar who destroyed the equipment then why he didn't do it more discreetly. Smashing it with a hammer and scattering the pieces in different locations seems more effective. Dumping it near his car where searches were obviously going to be conducted is not near as discreet.

Occam's Razor. Also, if his plan was to walk away, why would he care about the discreetness of it when he was going to be gone? The only thing he cared about was getting rid of whatever it was on there he didn't want people to see, whether that be embarrassing or incriminating information, clues as to where he was planning to go, or something else entirely.

 

[SuperSmith]

Occam's Razor. Also, if his plan was to walk away, why would he care about the discreetness of it when he was going to be gone? The only thing he cared about was getting rid of whatever it was on there he didn't want people to see, whether that be embarrassing or incriminating information, clues as to where he was planning to go, or something else entirely.

Using your same logic why would he care about anything on the laptop if he was going to be gone?

Besides his girlfriend indicated the laptop was being stored in the closet and not being used. She by the way passed a lie detector test.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

My apologies but I am not aware of your qualifications to say say with certainty what LE does, did, or would do in this case or any other. I thinks it likely they went back in the browser history as far as they could but at least a year. That is just my opinion though. Regardless LE has never said WHEN the map was generated.

LE did indicate that they had that information almost immediately, which would preclude a search of months or years of history.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Tossing his laptop and hard drive in the river is not consistent with his character

Wanting to safegard private data isn't consistent with his "character?" How so?

Has anyone suggested that RFG expressed so aversion to tossing the laptop? Didn't he, in fact, ask others about how to get rid of that data?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

That of course is assuming RG actually did those searches. I have to wonder why ditching the laptop and hard drive in the river was necessary since hard drive wiping software was purchased. Also it seems to me if it was Gricar who destroyed the equipment then why he didn't do it more discreetly. Smashing it with a hammer and scattering the pieces in different locations seems more effective. Dumping it near his car where searches were obviously going to be conducted is not near as discreet.

Smashing it with a hammer is both loud and can be ineffective.

A description is here: http://www.centredaily.com/2010/10/26/2406806/destroying-a-hard-drive.html

It was at least 100 yards from the car (if not more), and no searcher knew that it had been removed.

 

[SuperSmith]

Wanting to safegard private data isn't consistent with his "character?" How so?

Has anyone suggested that RFG expressed so aversion to tossing the laptop? Didn't he, in fact, ask others about how to get rid of that data?

Is that an attempt to be coy? No, destroying a piece County equipment is out of character

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Using your same logic why would he care about anything on the laptop if he was going to be gone?

Besides his girlfriend indicated the laptop was being stored in the closet and not being used. She by the way passed a lie detector test.

Simple answers are that he did it to cover his tracks or to protect others.

Logically you have to assume that the box that contained the erasure program was somehow planted and that the several people RFG talked to about destroying the data are lying.

That included one defense attorney, with no ties to the DA's Office. http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/04/ray_gricar_mystery.html

<modsnip>

Nevereverever nailed it. However, it took LE more than a year to determine that RFG did those searches.

I think a number of people are seeing the implications of the financial data.

 

[MissJ]

If he were leaving anyway..why not take the drive with him? Just curious.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

If he were leaving anyway..why not take the drive with him? Just curious.

If he used it, it possibly could be traced.

 

[SuperSmith]

Reimbursing the County for it would not be. It is logical for a guy, concerned about private data getting out, it makes perfect sense..

Ahhh yes but if it was his intention to reimburse the County for the laptop then how would he do that if he walked away as you believe???

Karen Arnold noted that RG was the type to stop office activities to find a dust cover for a piece of office equipment. Since she worked with him for 18 years I will go with what is said in that it would be foreign and out of character for RG to destroy a piece of County equipment.....in broad daylight no less.

He also could have just kept the drive and replaced it for the County which seems more likely.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Ahhh yes but if it was his intention to reimburse the County for the laptop then how would he do that if he walked away as you believe???

We don't know his intention, and I have indicated that the destruction of the laptop might not be related to his disappearance.

Karen Arnold noted that RG was the type to stop office activities to find a dust cover for a piece of office equipment. Since she worked with him for 18 years I will go with what is said in that it would be foreign and out of character for RG to destroy a piece of County equipment.....in broad daylight no less.

Yet he used his official cell phone for a call regarding the dog.

He also could have just kept the drive and replaced it for the County which seems more likely.

Is there any evidence that he attempted to do that? Like doing searches for a replacement drive or ordering one?

 

[SuperSmith]

We don't know his intention, and I have indicated that the destruction of the laptop might not be related to his disappearance.



Yet he used his official cell phone for a call regarding the dog.



Is there any evidence that he attempted to do that? Like doing searches for a replacement drive or ordering one?

Using his work cell to call about the dog is not in the same ballpark as drowning a work laptop.

Is there any evidence that he planned to reimburse the County as you stated?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Using his work cell to call about the dog is not in the same ballpark as drowning a work laptop.

Is there any evidence that he planned to reimburse the County as you stated?

I said that he could have. He could report that he had an accident and dropped it is the river, where it was unrecoverable. He wouldn't have to pay for it until after reporting it destroyed.

Is there any evidence that he even looked at replacing the hard drive?

I would say that using an official cell phone for personal reasons does show that would treat equipment as though it was his personal properties.

 

[nevereverever]

Originally Posted by nevereverever View Post
Occam's Razor. Also, if his plan was to walk away, why would he care about the discreetness of it when he was going to be gone? The only thing he cared about was getting rid of whatever it was on there he didn't want people to see, whether that be embarrassing or incriminating information, clues as to where he was planning to go, or something else entirely.

Using your same logic why would he care about anything on the laptop if he was going to be gone?

Besides his girlfriend indicated the laptop was being stored in the closet and not being used. She by the way passed a lie detector test.

It's right there in my post... that you quoted.

 

[SuperSmith]

I do not know what happened to Ray Gricar and will not pretend I do but I do believe it is the most likely scenario that Mr. Gricar fell victim to foul play.

LE does not know what happen to Ray so how can we? They are privy to way more information than we are.

What I can tell you with certainty is that water damage to a hard drive is the LEAST effective method of destroying a hard drive. As meticulous a man as Ray was said to be I am sure (if he did those computer searches) that he would have found in his research that I am saying is true.

Again, destroying a piece of County equipment, using the least effective method, and staging a disappearance are very far out of the realm of his said character. This is illustrated through Karen Arnold's page, Barbara Petito, and Patty Fornicola.

http://www.wikihow.com/Destroy-a-Hard-Drive

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I do not know what happened to Ray Gricar and will not pretend I do but I do believe it is the most likely scenario that Mr. Gricar fell victim to foul play.

LE does not know what happen to Ray so how can we? They are privy to way more information than we are.

What I can tell you with certainty is that water damage to a hard drive is the LEAST effective method of destroying a hard drive. As meticulous a man as Ray was said to be I am sure (if he did those computer searches) that he would have found in his research that I am saying is true.

Again, destroying a piece of County equipment, using the least effective method, and staging a disappearance are very far out of the realm of his said character. This is illustrated through Karen Arnold's page, Barbara Petito, and Patty Fornicola.

http://www.wikihow.com/Destroy-a-Hard-Drive

You will note that special tools are needed to open the casing for the drive.

There is also the possibility that RFG wiped the drive first. Chief Weaver expressed the opinion that this is what he did.

 

[SuperSmith]

"This is the man that I knew professionally for 19 years. The Ray Gricar who would choose not to appear for a hearing where he was an essential witness, walk away from a daughter he worshipped, expose his family to a replication of his brother&#8217;s suicide, lay to waste a reputation built over 20 years, allowing himself to be remembered as a &#8216;head case&#8217; who simply decided one day to &#8216;blow off&#8217; his family, his responsibilities, the citizens who had elected him, his staff and his future as an attorney, is someone I do not recognize. And I am absolutely confident that I am not alone."

https://sites.google.com/site/gricardisappearance/gricardisappearance

&#8220;Ray is a good, fair man. One of the best prosecutors I&#8217;ve ever met,&#8221; she said. &#8220;I don&#8217;t know that I&#8217;ll ever accept it. Everyone runs theories around. I have no idea. I would put my life on the line that he didn&#8217;t just leave to go have another life. Without question, the two people who held the keys to his heart were Lara and Patty. Mention either and his face would just light up.

Dumping his laptop in the river would have been completely out of character as well, she said.

&#8220;Ray was a follow-the-evidence-where-it-leads kind of prosecutor. So disposing the computer into the river was completely foreign,&#8221; Petito said."

&#8220;He had an honest-to-God soul,&#8221; Petito said. &#8220;He would talk for hours to victims. He actually cared, which is a little bit surprising in this business.&#8221;

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/04/ray_gricar_mystery.html

Since none of us have met Ray Gricar, in my opinion you have to rely on some of those people who worked with him or were close to him.

 

[SuperSmith]

You will note that special tools are needed to open the casing for the drive.

There is also the possibility that RFG wiped the drive first. Chief Weaver expressed the opinion that this is what he did.

"Special Tool" = Hammer not included

I agree J.J. I think it is very possible he wiped the drive or intended to as evidenced by the software purchase but that further makes my point that it would be pointless then to separate the drive and toss both in the river.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

"Special Tool" = Hammer not included

I agree J.J. I think it is very possible he wiped the drive or intended to as evidenced by the software purchase but that further makes my point that it would be pointless then to separate the drive and toss both in the river.

There is a difference between a screwdriver to remove the screws and a hammer. Most people understand that, and I'm sure RFG did. A Phillips won't do it. I'm sorry if that is not clear.

To use a second method would be to make sure the drive was totally unreadable.

Petito had minimal contact with RFG in the 8-10 years prior to his disappearance. She was not even living in the area.

JKA says nothing about a desire to destroy the data on the laptop.

 

[SuperSmith]

There is a difference between a screwdriver to remove the screws and a hammer. Most people understand that, and I'm sure RFG did. A Phillips won't do it. I'm sorry if that is not clear.

To use a second method would be to make sure the drive was totally unreadable.

Petito had minimal contact with RFG in the 8-10 years prior to his disappearance. She was not even living in the area.

JKA says nothing about a desire to destroy the data on the laptop.

<modsnip> I was agreeing with you about wiping the drive. As evidenced in the link I provided a hammer is the most useful tool in destroying a hard drive (no screwdriver required)