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

[J. J. in Phila]

Hi I think you need to go ask SPM on which beautifull blonde was with RG on friday morning

The woman was brunette. The police originally thought it was Barbara Petito, who was in NY at the time (according to LE).

 

[SuperSmith]

Snipped



Well, because the evidence is stronger that he walked away than any of the other possibilities.

After almost nine years, no remains from suicide or murder have been discovered.

There was no crime scene. There is zero physical or eyewitness evidence that RFG was a crime victim.

His heirs did receive his substantial pension, which they would had not received had RFG died after he retired.

Perhaps a better question might be, why do a few people insist it was murder with no concrete evidence.



It depends on the circumstances, and how many people saw him.



It is also a string of at least 8 witnesses, that were independent of each other that put him in Lewisburg on 4/15, including in the immediate area of where the bloodhound detected the scent.

I would trust a verified SAR person, especially when his experience jibes with what SAR websites indicate. In this case, it is also corroborated by witnesses.



Actually, that is false. There is evidence, from both the search pattern and the fact that the cell call bounced of "towers," that the call was very close to Centre Hall. There is then the question of why RFG didn't delay his departure by 30-40 minutes unless he wanted to be someplace at a specific time. That also supports something planned. The sightings indicate that he went straight through to Lewisburg. The call was made around 11:30 and he was seen in Lewisburg around lunch time.



He didn't tell anyone where he was going, other than the map, he left no notes.



He asked others how to get rid of the data on the drive and did searched on water damage to a laptop within the last 30 days prior to his disappearance.

He was seen within 75 yards of where the drive was found. A witness did see him with the laptop in Lewisburg.

Now, that is the solid stuff.


The other things, the tossing laptop itself, and something scheduled are both consistent with the evidence, but lack the direct evidence.




Things like what the bloodhound detected, the searches, RFG's call, and what the witnesses saw are not "opinion." That is evidence.

Simply put, I don't believe those folks whose arguments are, **All the witnesses are wrong, the dog is wrong, somebody else went into his office in the Courthouse and generated the map on his password protected computer.**

More of the same baseless opinion (which you are entitled to have) that law enforcement has never confirmed. As I said I think it would be the responsible thing for all posters to do their own research and draw their own conclusions. A good start would be to research what this poster states as fact and try to confirm it yourself. I think you will find that you cannot put most of it in the "fact" category.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

More of the same baseless opinion (which you are entitled to have) that law enforcement has never confirmed. As I said I think it would be the responsible thing for all posters to do their own research and draw their own conclusions. A good start would be to research what this poster states as fact and try to confirm it yourself. I think you will find that you cannot put most of it in the "fact" category.

It is not opinion that there were multiple witnesses that saw RFG in Lewisburg, that his car was in Lewisburg, and that his scent was detected in the parking lot in Lewisburg. That is what has been reported. Links have been provided.

Let's face it. If we were looking for "Sam," and Sam's car was in a parking lot, people saw Sam in his car in the parking lot, and a bloodhound detected Sam's scent in the parking lot, that is ample evidence that Sam was in the parking lot.

Now, if someone wants to create any doubt that Sam was in lot, he would need to present evidence that it wasn't Sam.

After almost 9 years, there is no actual evidence that it was not RFG. No one reported him someplace else at the same time. The police have said that he was in Lewisburg. Those links have been posted as well.

The police have said that RFG did the searches and people have come forward, including a defense attorney, who said that RFG asked how to get rid of the data. The police have said that RFG did the searches.

People are entitled to the own opinions, but not their own facts.

 

[SuperSmith]

It is not opinion that there were multiple witnesses that saw RFG in Lewisburg, that his car was in Lewisburg, and that his scent was detected in the parking lot in Lewisburg. That is what has been reported. Links have been provided.

People are entitled to the own opinions, but not their own facts.

I do not argue that people think they saw him that day, or that his scent was detected in the parking lot. I will argue that there is alternative explanations and that none of these have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

"Some aspects have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
A. RFG was in Lewisburg on 4/15/05.
B. RFG planned to be in Lewisburg that day.
C. RFG did not want anyone to know the purpose of the trip at the time.
D. RFG tossed the drive.
Some things are at high level of probability, clear and convincing, but below a reasonable doubt.
E. RFG tossed the laptop off the bridge (or caused it to be done).
F. RFG wanted to be in Lewisburg at a specific time."

When you post these things you really should state that this is your opinion and not put them forth as fact. Until LE confirms any of these it is your opinion for which you are entitled but certainly not fact beyond a reasonable doubt especially when you have no credentials to back up your findings.

 

[SuperSmith]

It is not opinion that there were multiple witnesses that saw RFG in Lewisburg, that his car was in Lewisburg, and that his scent was detected in the parking lot in Lewisburg. That is what has been reported. Links have been provided.

Let's face it. If we were looking for "Sam," and Sam's car was in a parking lot, people saw Sam in his car in the parking lot, and a bloodhound detected Sam's scent in the parking lot, that is ample evidence that Sam was in the parking lot.

Now, if someone wants to create any doubt that Sam was in lot, he would need to present evidence that it wasn't Sam.

After almost 9 years, there is no actual evidence that it was not RFG. No one reported him someplace else at the same time. The police have said that he was in Lewisburg. Those links have been posted as well.

The police have said that RFG did the searches and people have come forward, including a defense attorney, who said that RFG asked how to get rid of the data. The police have said that RFG did the searches.

People are entitled to the own opinions, but not their own facts.

After 9 years there is no concrete evidence that RG walked away from his life. Seems a futile to be on the run for 9 years. He would've been found by now in my opinion if really did walk away.

 

[MysteryMaven]

I did read a lot prior to commenting here because I know this thread has been going a long time. I am always interested in what others think. I did spend some time reading the previous thread from the time the Sandusky thing hit. I had a lot of theories that many others expounded upon. There is hardly more to say unless LE releases more info and we get to see some more of the "iceberg".

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I do not argue that people think they saw him that day, or that his scent was detected in the parking lot. I will argue that there is alternative explanations and that none of these have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

"Some aspects have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
A. RFG was in Lewisburg on 4/15/05.
B. RFG planned to be in Lewisburg that day.
C. RFG did not want anyone to know the purpose of the trip at the time.
D. RFG tossed the drive.
Some things are at high level of probability, clear and convincing, but below a reasonable doubt.
E. RFG tossed the laptop off the bridge (or caused it to be done).
F. RFG wanted to be in Lewisburg at a specific time."

When you post these things you really should state that this is your opinion and not put them forth as fact. Until LE confirms any of these it is your opinion for which you are entitled but certainly not fact beyond a reasonable doubt especially when you have no credentials to back up your findings.

A. There is no other reasonable explanation for witnesses to see RFG in the parking lot in his Mini, and for his scent to be in the parking lot, except for RFG to have been there.

B. There is no other reasonable explanation for RFG to have generated a map to Lewisburg, call indicating he was heading in the direction of Lewisburg around 11:30 AM and be spotted in Lewisburg around lunchtime (stopping there), except that is where he was planning to go.

C. RFG did not tell anyone where he was going, nor did he leave any notes as to where he was going. He obviously did not tell anyone. known, the purpose of the trip.

D. RFG wanted to get rid of the data on the drive, searched regarding water damage to the drive, took the laptop with him, and was seen 75 yards (or less) from where the drive was tossed. Now, if this was "Sam," again, there would be no question that he tossed the drive.

Points E and F are not, currently, to that level of proof, but the evidence certainly points to them being correct.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

After 9 years there is no concrete evidence that RG walked away from his life. Seems a futile to be on the run for 9 years. He would've been found by now in my opinion if really did walk away.

But there is evidence. It is not compelling, not overwhelming, but it does exist.

It is no evidence exclusively pointing to foul play, versus evidence that does exclusively point to voluntary departure.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I did read a lot prior to commenting here because I know this thread has been going a long time. I am always interested in what others think. I did spend some time reading the previous thread from the time the Sandusky thing hit. I had a lot of theories that many others expounded upon. There is hardly more to say unless LE releases more info and we get to see some more of the "iceberg".

Thank you.

There were basically two questions. What is likely and what really has strong evidence.

Some of these things have really strong evidence. Others are just more likely than not.

The first four things on my list are strong enough for me to say they are beyond a reasonable doubt. The second two are close, but not quite there.

The base question, what happened to Ray Gricar, is not one has a lot of strong evidence. The evidence that exists point to walk away, but it doesn't prove it beyond at least my reasonable doubt.

I do not recall a single piece of evidence that could point exclusively to foul play (though many could point to both to multiple options).

 

[SeekingJana]

I thought Nancy Grace's pieces ( bits and pieces thrown together) substantiated what has been postulated by J.J. all along.

In fact, J.J. could have written the segment. We don't KNOW what happened to Mr. Gricar, but it appears he did walk away.

The end of the segment, Nancy says- Interpol is looking for him in Eastern Europe because of his family ties to Slovenia. If they are still looking, 9 years after he left, then wow.

It was hard to put any type of timeline to the things she cobbled together. Gave a new meaning to " a piece of work" because it was so disjointed, but the things she brought out seemed very much in keeping with what J.J. has said. That Mr. Gricar was a ladies' man and was with a woman in Lewisburg.

Some things are just not worth arguing over for 9 years, and to me, his presence in Lewisburg is one of those things which has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether or not he made it out of Lewisburg is more debatable. I still think he may have traveled it to his last USA destination point as the passenger in an RV with kitchen and toilet facilities, thus, no need for him to disembark or otherwise be seen.

When you hear hoof beats, think horses, not zebras. Time to put the zebras back in the zoo .

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Snipped

In fact, J.J. could have written the segment. We don't KNOW what happened to Mr. Gricar, but it appears he did walk away.

BBM

Well, there is no reason to be insulting. (I AM joking.)

The "reputed ladies man," has been known, and reported since the summer of 2005. I disagree with NG that he met the woman there (though it is possible). It is possible she was another shopper; it is possible that it was just a woman flirting with him and that there was no romantic connection. It is possible that she was his murderer or a helper.

LE does believe she exists.

The end of the segment, Nancy says- Interpol is looking for him in Eastern Europe because of his family ties to Slovenia. If they are still looking, 9 years after he left, then wow.

That was reported on 4/15/12, and included Ukraine.

It was hard to put any type of timeline to the things she cobbled together. Gave a new meaning to " a piece of work" because it was so disjointed, but the things she brought out seemed very much in keeping with what J.J. has said. That Mr. Gricar was a ladies' man and was with a woman in Lewisburg.

I'm not a fan of hers, and thought it was more of a clip show, but it was not nearly as biased as her previous show. He could have been with a woman, but NG was sure that he was. I am not sure that he was.

One of the bigger PR problems is that many (if not most) of the locals think he did walk away. I thought this quote is telling:

We stopped by the Diamond Deli, a favorite lunch spot for Gricar, right across the street from the courthouse. Arlene Milton (ph) says some of her customers are convinced Gricar had a mystery life.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE [Milton]: We just think he just walked away. And everybody thinks he`s still alive. They might have found his computer and stuff in that river, but I really feel he threw it himself in there. I don`t think anybody took them because the dogs took them to the car, and there`s where the dogs stopped.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1401/17/ng.01.html

From my experience, that is widespread. The problem is, it might be wrong. While there is more evidence that RFG left voluntarily, it is not conclusive.

 

[SuperSmith]

If LE truly believe this Mystery Woman exists then why wasn't a sketch artist brought in for the eye witnesses to give them a composite rendering? They could've then released the drawing to the press.

Even Tony Gricar questioned Sara Ganim about why all the sudden she reported the mystery woman as fact vs. maybe.

 

[SuperSmith]

I thought Nancy Grace's pieces ( bits and pieces thrown together) substantiated what has been postulated by J.J. all along.

In fact, J.J. could have written the segment. We don't KNOW what happened to Mr. Gricar, but it appears he did walk away.

The end of the segment, Nancy says- Interpol is looking for him in Eastern Europe because of his family ties to Slovenia. If they are still looking, 9 years after he left, then wow.

It was hard to put any type of timeline to the things she cobbled together. Gave a new meaning to " a piece of work" because it was so disjointed, but the things she brought out seemed very much in keeping with what J.J. has said. That Mr. Gricar was a ladies' man and was with a woman in Lewisburg.

Some things are just not worth arguing over for 9 years, and to me, his presence in Lewisburg is one of those things which has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether or not he made it out of Lewisburg is more debatable. I still think he may have traveled it to his last USA destination point as the passenger in an RV with kitchen and toilet facilities, thus, no need for him to disembark or otherwise be seen.

When you hear hoof beats, think horses, not zebras. Time to put the zebras back in the zoo .

So you now have decided that RG is alive after watching NG? The whole show was riddled with mistakes or inaccuracies.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

If LE truly believe this Mystery Woman exists then why wasn't a sketch artist brought in for the eye witnesses to give them a composite rendering? They could've then released the drawing to the press.

Even Tony Gricar questioned Sara Ganim about why all the sudden she reported the mystery woman as fact vs. maybe.

Well, LE has said that they were looking for her. http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/04/ray_gricar_mystery.html

I don't, as indicated, think that she is necessarily involved in the disappearance. It may have been a random shopper who doesn't realize that she is the "Mystery Woman." It may have been someone involved in RFG's disappearance.

I do assume that witnesses saw someone. I just don't know who or if she is involved in this.

 

[SeekingJana]

So you now have decided that RG is alive after watching NG? The whole show was riddled with mistakes or inaccuracies.

I think he was in Lewisburg on 4/15 and part of 4/16. After that, not sure if he was murdered or left of his own accord.
No, not influenced by Nancy Grace's segment. IF she had a photo of him with the MW, then yes. Anything beyond the same old rumors, them possibly but she didn't, and we don't have either.

I can choose to believe he left Lewisburg alive if I want to, and I can choose to believe he never left Lewisburg, having died, if I want to. Big deal, just like Nancy's theories. :facepalm:

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I am not convinced that those were actual sightings of RFG on 4/16/05, the Saturday. The police have said he was there, however, and BB believes he was there.

 

[SuperSmith]

I think it's very possible that he was in Lewisburg but with no photos, receipts, phone calls, or scent other than around the Mini it's impossible to say with 100% certainty.

I'd still like to know where the water bottle came from.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Well, by using that standard, it could never be proven that Jerry Sandusky was ever in a shower on the Penn State campus. Yet, he was convicted of crimes happening in one.

The standard is, at most, beyond a a reasonable doubt. On 4/15/05, at the earliest, there is both physical and eyewitness evidence that RFG was in that parking lot.

The question for me is 4/16/05. I only know of three witnesses, two workers (11:30 AM) in the SoS and Bennett, the owner (Noon). There was woman who saw RFG at 1:30 PM, but she was ruled out.

 

[JoePaFan]

Reports by law enforcement indicate Gricar was involved in a big drug sting just prior to his disappearance. Most reports felt that information was directly relevant to his disappearance. Note also that the Sandusky investigation which was, for all intents and purposes, halted by Gov Corbett when he was Atty General was discovered after Ryan was named Atty General following Corbett's gubernatorial win. The investigator who discovered the Sandusky investigation was a narcotics investigator. YES, SANDUSKY SHOULD BE INTERVIEWED AND QUESTIONED.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Welcome.

Reports by law enforcement indicate Gricar was involved in a big drug sting just prior to his disappearance. Most reports felt that information was directly relevant to his disappearance. Note also that the Sandusky investigation which was, for all intents and purposes, halted by Gov Corbett when he was Atty General was discovered after Ryan was named Atty General following Corbett's gubernatorial win. The investigator who discovered the Sandusky investigation was a narcotics investigator. YES, SANDUSKY SHOULD BE INTERVIEWED AND QUESTIONED.

Corbett was not Attorney General (AG) in May of 1998, and did not know about Victim 6 or B. K. until October 2010, twelve years later. Mike Fisher was, being elected in 1996 and sworn in as AG in January 1997.

Here is the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Attorney_General

Corbett was the AG from 1995-1/97, because the prior AG, Ernie Preate, plead guilty to bribery. I actually knew a staff member whom the Feds were considering charging. Ridge had appointed Corbett to serve the remainder of the term; in his state senate conformation hearing, he had to promise, under oath, not to seek election in 1996.

Corbett was elected in own right as AG in 2004 and sworn in January 2005. He was re-elected in 2008. He was then elected Governor in 2010 and sworn in in January 2011; he resigned as AG just before being sworn in as Governor.

The 2005 drug bust was not prosecuted by the Centre County DA's Office. It was handled by the AG's Office and the prosecutor was initially Michael Madeira.