PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #13

[BigCat]

Second, the fact that Freeh never interviewed Sloane. Seeing how Sloane was both a professional and personal associate of RG and may have provided some insight. And on top of it all... Karen Arnold refused to speak to Freeh.

Something stinks about all this as it relates to victim 6 IMHO.

Freeh almost certainly spoke with Ganter, who was a Penn State employee at the time of the investigation. If Ganter told Freeh that Sandusky was discussed at the October 98 meeting and, more importantly, that information was passed on to Paterno, then Freeh didn't need to speak with Sloane.

Well, Freeh could have spoken with Sloane, I suppose, but that may have lead to the potential for mission creep. The focus of Freeh's investigation was the actions (and inactions) of Penn State employees.

As for his desire to speak with Allen, Freeh may have only wanted to speak with her since she dealt directly with the PSU police department.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Freeh almost certainly spoke with Ganter, who was a Penn State employee at the time of the investigation. If Ganter told Freeh that Sandusky was discussed at the October 98 meeting and, more importantly, that information was passed on to Paterno, then Freeh didn't need to speak with Sloane.

Well, Freeh could have spoken with Sloane, I suppose, but that may have lead to the potential for mission creep. The focus of Freeh's investigation was the actions (and inactions) of Penn State employees.

As for his desire to speak with Allen, Freeh may have only wanted to speak with her since she dealt directly with the PSU police department.

Arnold, not Allen.

Possibly, but it might have clarified who knew what when. However, Arnold (JKA) was off the case very early on; that is her statement, backed up by the police report and Schreffler's testimony. Sloane had some involvement after that, according to Ganim. Sloane also was part of that "investigation" in October. There is also an unnamed LE source in her article.

My guess is her source was Sloane.

If Ganter was a witness for the AG, Freeh may not have spoken to him. He did not speak to Harmon, for example, and he doesn't list everyone that was exempt, except saying "among others (p. 12)."

 

[shadow of my mind]

Looks to me like Sloane may have given something to get something.. I don't know for sure, but I can tell you that the first time I read his fine, I thought it was $200,000.00. As in- the price of a modest house. In keeping with what he did at a FREAKING LAW FIRM.
HE SOLD POT TO PEOPLE AT HIS LAW FIRM!!!

Now, I ask you- do you want a pothead lawyer representing you in either a civil or criminal case?
Sloane had something to give up. It's not just his law license on " suspension" either. I've thought from the beginning that he got off way too light and that he probably gave up something- some sort of info- on Gricar that we don't have. I which could be almost anything as we have almost nothing).
I don't mean dirt on Gricar, I mean- what happened when and where and how. If anyone knows, Sloane knows.
And please don't protect him to me, because I know he is or was an addict and a user and a man who had a lot and lost it due to his own stupidity. His back injury was 13-14 years ago or more. He would have either been at maximum rehab. potential or dead long before he started dealing drugs ( that we know the dates of his dealing).

BBM

Maybe this is what Sloane had to offer….


Sloane told The Patriot-News he had thrown the tape and Dictaphone into a desk with other stuff and forgotten about it until he began to clean for a move.
The hour-long recording is mostly inaudible. However, Sloane’s own voice says this on the tape:
“Oct. 13, 1998. Schreffler, Ralston, Sloane, Gricar. Investigation going to Penn State meeting. Ray. Fran Ganter. Ron Schreffler is taking us to the football building and I will finish this memo, Sue, and either Ray will type something, handwrite something or he’ll tell me to dictate this and I’ll give you the tape when we get back. Thanks.”

From Sara Gamin’s article in the Patriot-News on April 15, 2012
Source: http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/04/ray_gricar_mystery.html

So from this it appears as if Sloane was also at this meeting in October of 1998. Sloane also makes mention of finishing a memo. I don't remember anything being released about this memo or even Sloane being involved in the 1998 case? I have read a lot of the official reports that have come out about Sandusky, but I could have very easily missed it.

Did anyone else know that Sloane was part of this meeting?
and .... who is Sue?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Sue was the secretary, I think.

There was a reference to Sloane being involved in the case in in the P-N: http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/jerry_sandusky_sacbndal_answer.html

Quite oblique, but there.

Those who worked with former Centre Country D.A. Ray Gricar in the 1998 investigation of allegations against Sandusky include assistant prosecutor Steve Sloane (one of Gricar's closest confidants) and now-retired Penn State police Officer Ron Schreffler ... ."

Emphasis added.

Interestingly, Sloane has never said that the was not enough evidence to prosecute Sandusky in 1998.

 

[BigCat]

Arnold, not Allen.

Possibly, but it might have clarified who knew what when. However, Arnold (JKA) was off the case very early on; that is her statement, backed up by the police report and Schreffler's testimony. Sloane had some involvement after that, according to Ganim. Sloane also was part of that "investigation" in October. There is also an unnamed LE source in her article.

My guess is her source was Sloane.

If Ganter was a witness for the AG, Freeh may not have spoken to him. He did not speak to Harmon, for example, and he doesn't list everyone that was exempt, except saying "among others (p. 12)."

Oh yeah, Arnold. Karen Allen is the actress in Raiders of the Lost Ark. She hasn't been in a movie in 25 years; not sure how I managed to confuse anyone with her.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Oh yeah, Arnold. Karen Allen is the actress in Raiders of the Lost Ark. She hasn't been in a movie in 25 years; not sure how I managed to confuse anyone with her.

She was in the last sequel, IIRC.

It is woefully easy to miss things. I can assure you that I do it all the time.

 

[SeekingJana]

BBM

Maybe this is what Sloane had to offer….


Sloane told The Patriot-News he had thrown the tape and Dictaphone into a desk with other stuff and forgotten about it until he began to clean for a move.
The hour-long recording is mostly inaudible. However, Sloane’s own voice says this on the tape:
“Oct. 13, 1998. Schreffler, Ralston, Sloane, Gricar. Investigation going to Penn State meeting. Ray. Fran Ganter. Ron Schreffler is taking us to the football building and I will finish this memo, Sue, and either Ray will type something, handwrite something or he’ll tell me to dictate this and I’ll give you the tape when we get back. Thanks.”

From Sara Gamin’s article in the Patriot-News on April 15, 2012
Source: http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/04/ray_gricar_mystery.html

So from this it appears as if Sloane was also at this meeting in October of 1998. Sloane also makes mention of finishing a memo. I don't remember anything being released about this memo or even Sloane being involved in the 1998 case? I have read a lot of the official reports that have come out about Sandusky, but I could have very easily missed it.

Did anyone else know that Sloane was part of this meeting?
and .... who is Sue?

I knew Sloane made a big deal about keeping the Dictaphone and I had already decided that he either recorded something later or that he had something in Gricar's voice on tape.
I didn't know he had taped a message at some point related to Sandusky.

Am I wrong to want to keep the Sandusky crimes separate from the Gricar disappearance? I cannot assimilate them as being cojoined at any point in my mind.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Snipped.

Am I wrong to want to keep the Sandusky crimes separate from the Gricar disappearance? I cannot assimilate them as being cojoined at any point in my mind.

To quote Jerry Sandusky, "maybe."

IDK.

 

[BigCat]

I knew Sloane made a big deal about keeping the Dictaphone and I had already decided that he either recorded something later or that he had something in Gricar's voice on tape.
I didn't know he had taped a message at some point related to Sandusky.

Am I wrong to want to keep the Sandusky crimes separate from the Gricar disappearance? I cannot assimilate them as being cojoined at any point in my mind.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, especially since we're dealing with a mystery, and your opinion is more informed than most, so I definitely don't think you're "wrong" at all. However, if you believe that RFG was a victim of foul play, which I believe you do, then the Sandusky Scandal is a point in your favor, IMO.

Otherwise, what's the motive for anyone wanting to murder RFG? Even the Sandusky Scandal doesn't provide a motive, based on what we know now, but the scandal is large enough that the possibility is there.

Personally speaking, if all I had seen RFG's Disappeared episode prior to the Sandusky Scandal, I would have assumed he committed suicide or walked away and not thought about his disappearance ever again. There is really nothing that points to foul play: no crime scene, no motive, no suspect. Zilch.

But, after the revelations of the Sandusky Scandal, my mind is open. I'm still doubtful he is a victim of foul play; yet, I can't rule it out.

JMO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, especially since we're dealing with a mystery, and your opinion is more informed than most, so I definitely don't think you're "wrong" at all. However, if you believe that RFG was a victim of foul play, which I believe you do, then the Sandusky Scandal is a point in your favor, IMO.

Otherwise, what's the motive for anyone wanting to murder RFG? Even the Sandusky Scandal doesn't provide a motive, based on what we know now, but the scandal is large enough that the possibility is there.

Personally speaking, if all I had seen RFG's Disappeared episode prior to the Sandusky Scandal, I would have assumed he committed suicide or walked away and not thought about his disappearance ever again. There is really nothing that points to foul play: no crime scene, no motive, no suspect. Zilch.

But, after the revelations of the Sandusky Scandal, my mind is open. I'm still doubtful he is a victim of foul play; yet, I can't rule it out.

JMO

I've posted this before.

Assume that RFG did talk to someone at PSU (inclusive of Sandusky) in 1998. He tells whomever he talks to that he won't prosecute if Sandusky "receives help with the problem." He also says that he will prosecute unless Sandusky is controlled or there is another incident. None of that is criminal or unethical.

He finds out that there was another incident. Maybe he has the clandestine meeting in Lewisburg with whomever he talked to and something happened. RFG could still prosecute on 1998.

The problems are, no notes, and he doesn't tell anyone about the clandestine meeting.

Second possibility. He did something in 1998 that crossed the criminal/ethical line and was trying to correct it with the person(s) he talked to in 1998. They met in Lewisburg and something happened.

 

[SeekingJana]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, especially since we're dealing with a mystery, and your opinion is more informed than most, so I definitely don't think you're "wrong" at all. However, if you believe that RFG was a victim of foul play, which I believe you do, then the Sandusky Scandal is a point in your favor, IMO.

Otherwise, what's the motive for anyone wanting to murder RFG? Even the Sandusky Scandal doesn't provide a motive, based on what we know now, but the scandal is large enough that the possibility is there.

Personally speaking, if all I had seen RFG's Disappeared episode prior to the Sandusky Scandal, I would have assumed he committed suicide or walked away and not thought about his disappearance ever again. There is really nothing that points to foul play: no crime scene, no motive, no suspect. Zilch.

But, after the revelations of the Sandusky Scandal, my mind is open. I'm still doubtful he is a victim of foul play; yet, I can't rule it out.

JMO

IDK if Mr. Gricar is alive or dead.
However, some things have happened very close to where I live ( are in my media outlets) which have given me pause. It's NOT always the high- profile perps. like Sandusky who murder.

Let me be more specific. In Kaufman County, Texas, a few counties from me, an ADA became concerned because he was receiving anonymous threats. This Assistant District Attorney started doing things to try to be safe. He varied his route to work. He started carrying a gun. He left his office through a guarded entrance/exit. He took precautions because no one knew where the threat was coming from or if it was serious.
Still, he was gunned down.

2-3 weeks later, the District Attorney and his wife were murdered, shot, whiole entering their home. Again, for a while, no one knew why or who was doing the killing. It turned out to be a total whacko who had been a minor court judge appointed, then stripped of his title years later for mis-conduct. He was NOT known to be a killer. He had been a person who lived on the right side of the law, he just made a mistake or two in his judgments on the bench.
He was pulled by the ADA and the DA.

So, he killed them. And an innocent woman. For week upon week, the Sheriff of Kaufman Co. had gone on TV proclaiming that they would get their man. That justice would be done. And they did find out because apparently the man gave them enough evidence to charge him. ( Has still not gone to trial but no more killings and the man apparently admitted guilt during questioning under Miranda)..

This is the wikipedia link. It is not tht great but it tells you what happened and basically why.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaufman_County_murders

My point is that it is usually the silent types no one suspects who are the most deadly. I think Sandusky is a horrific pedophile but I don't think he works " with a team" nor do I think he is homicidal.
The lone nut jubs with a grievance are the dangerous ones. Not gangs. not infamous drug dealers, not Sandusky, but the little man Ray might have had to fire 4 years before he disappeared for mis- conduct or for not performing his job duties satisfactorily. He or she, this could be a woman, not a man. I think I'd like to know if anyone was ticked off about Patty's job at the CCCH.
If I had not lived through the media blitz of these 3 horrible murders, I wouldn't be thinking in terms of a small job grievance being cause for harm, but I know that anger and hatred festers in the hearts of some men and women who feel like victims and they do want revenge. It's sick.

 

[Fromthedeepestjungle]

IDK if Mr. Gricar is alive or dead.
However, some things have happened very close to where I live ( are in my media outlets) which have given me pause. It's NOT always the high- profile perps. like Sandusky who murder.

Let me be more specific. In Kaufman County, Texas, a few counties from me, an ADA became concerned because he was receiving anonymous threats. This Assistant District Attorney started doing things to try to be safe. He varied his route to work. He started carrying a gun. He left his office through a guarded entrance/exit. He took precautions because no one knew where the threat was coming from or if it was serious.
Still, he was gunned down.

2-3 weeks later, the District Attorney and his wife were murdered, shot, whiole entering their home. Again, for a while, no one knew why or who was doing the killing. It turned out to be a total whacko who had been a minor court judge appointed, then stripped of his title years later for mis-conduct. He was NOT known to be a killer. He had been a person who lived on the right side of the law, he just made a mistake or two in his judgments on the bench.
He was pulled by the ADA and the DA.

So, he killed them. And an innocent woman. For week upon week, the Sheriff of Kaufman Co. had gone on TV proclaiming that they would get their man. That justice would be done. And they did find out because apparently the man gave them enough evidence to charge him. ( Has still not gone to trial but no more killings and the man apparently admitted guilt during questioning under Miranda)..

This is the wikipedia link. It is not tht great but it tells you what happened and basically why.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaufman_County_murders

My point is that it is usually the silent types no one suspects who are the most deadly. I think Sandusky is a horrific pedophile but I don't think he works " with a team" nor do I think he is homicidal.
The lone nut jubs with a grievance are the dangerous ones. Not gangs. not infamous drug dealers, not Sandusky, but the little man Ray might have had to fire 4 years before he disappeared for mis- conduct or for not performing his job duties satisfactorily. He or she, this could be a woman, not a man. I think I'd like to know if anyone was ticked off about Patty's job at the CCCH.
If I had not lived through the media blitz of these 3 horrible murders, I wouldn't be thinking in terms of a small job grievance being cause for harm, but I know that anger and hatred festers in the hearts of some men and women who feel like victims and they do want revenge. It's sick.

Good point, so now with RG case how would a female fit in which I would think she would be local-- to me it could be only a few ways she would fit as for being with him

 

[Trackergd]

I've posted this before.

Assume that RFG did talk to someone at PSU (inclusive of Sandusky) in 1998. He tells whomever he talks to that he won't prosecute if Sandusky "receives help with the problem." He also says that he will prosecute unless Sandusky is controlled or there is another incident. None of that is criminal or unethical.

He finds out that there was another incident. Maybe he has the clandestine meeting in Lewisburg with whomever he talked to and something happened. RFG could still prosecute on 1998.

The problems are, no notes, and he doesn't tell anyone about the clandestine meeting.

Second possibility. He did something in 1998 that crossed the criminal/ethical line and was trying to correct it with the person(s) he talked to in 1998. They met in Lewisburg and something happened.

Hmmm....

Ray has the laptop with data he was determined to destroy.

Sloan had the Dictaphone and tape, and possibly more tapes we don't know about.

Wonder what others in the DA office had? Different parts of the same puzzle?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Hmmm....

Ray has the laptop with data he was determined to destroy.

Sloan had the Dictaphone and tape, and possibly more tapes we don't know about.

Wonder what others in the DA office had? Different parts of the same puzzle?

RFG did not have the laptop in 1998, so if there was something Sandusky related on it, he would have had to transfer it from another source, e.g. scanned from a hard copy.

Now, there was no file at all in the Centre County DA's Office regarding the 1998 incident (or any other one involving Sandusky). That should preclude any suggestion that RFG was trying to **build a case.**

MTM, who was the elected DA from 2006-2009, said that he did not think it was unusual for there not to be any file, because there were no charges.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Snipped a bit.

Let me be more specific. In Kaufman County, Texas, a few counties from me, an ADA became concerned because he was receiving anonymous threats. This Assistant District Attorney started doing things to try to be safe. He varied his route to work. He started carrying a gun. He left his office through a guarded entrance/exit. He took precautions because no one knew where the threat was coming from or if it was serious.
Still, he was gunned down.



This is the wikipedia link. It is not tht great but it tells you what happened and basically why.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaufman_County_murders

I have looked at this case and attacks on public officials.

In the last 100+ years, a prosecutor/former prosecutor has been murdered on 14 occasions. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/01/14-prosecutors-have-been-killed_n_2995102.html I am aware of two or three not listed, that may be case related, so let's say 17 maximum.

Out of those, one was killed in a courthouse shooting (in 1912), three were killed in robberies where there were in the wrong place at the wrong time. I will not include those in the rest of the discussion.

One is unsolved. One is of a guy shot shot a long retired prosecutor in 1986 for a 1955 conviction; a second one was the wife of a man convicted the year before. All others involved active cases. Several were murder suicides.

Of the other two or three, one may or may not be murder (it happened in PA, but he was out of state); that was Luna, and he wasn't listed. One, Wales, was an antigun activist in his private life, as is thought to have been targeted because of that. One was a hit and run (also PA, and it might have been an accident).

There are approximately 6,000 federal prosecutors, and I would guess at least an equal, if not greater number, of state and county prosecutors. There are probably close to that number of former prosecutors. I would guess that the murder rate is less than 1 in 60,000. In 2005, the general homicide rate in the US was about 1 in 17,700.

Except for Luna, all were killed either at home, their office, or on the way to and from their office. None, including Luna, were cases where the body was hidden. Targeting a prosecutor is meant to send a message to other prosecutors or to prevent a prosecutor from prosecuting a current case.

If this was a murder, because of a prosecution, it was unique in the annals of modern American crime. It has never happened before, or since.

 

[Trackergd]

RFG did not have the laptop in 1998, so if there was something Sandusky related on it, he would have had to transfer it from another source, e.g. scanned from a hard copy.

I don't disagree with this assessment. I do have to wonder why he kept the laptop at home in a closet, more so when it went from the closet to the river.

Now, there was no file at all in the Centre County DA's Office regarding the 1998 incident (or any other one involving Sandusky). That should preclude any suggestion that RFG was trying to **build a case.**

MTM, who was the elected DA from 2006-2009, said that he did not think it was unusual for there not to be any file, because there were no charges.

So if child abuse is suggested, but no case is built from the information, the file is disposed of? Sound a bit odd with the emphasis on protecting children since the 80's. I would have held the information in case the "POI" re-offended.

 

[Trackergd]

Just because I like to do this once in a while....

What if the computer had nothing on it (either never had anything on it or had been already wiped) and was only a prop for the meeting in Lewisburg?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Just because I like to do this once in a while....

What if the computer had nothing on it (either never had anything on it or had been already wiped) and was only a prop for the meeting in Lewisburg?

Possible. I have speculated that it was unrelated.

However, there is still the problem, if someone else wanted to destroy the computer because it contained something incriminating, how would that person know that RFG didn't back up the files someplace? A disk, a flash drive, an on-line source, another computer, or hard copies. Even if RFG said, **This is the only copy in the world,** how would a perpetrator know that RFG was telling the truth?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I don't disagree with this assessment. I do have to wonder why he kept the laptop at home in a closet, more so when it went from the closet to the river.

Until about four months prior, that was his home computer.

It is clear that he wanted something on it to never see the light of day, which may not have been case related.

So if child abuse is suggested, but no case is built from the information, the file is disposed of? Sound a bit odd with the emphasis on protecting children since the 80's. I would have held the information in case the "POI" re-offended.

It would make sense, but MTM did not think the lack of a case file was not unusual. Moulton didn't comment on it, beyond noting it wasn't there. I'm going by what MTM said.

 

[shadow of my mind]

Sue was the secretary, I think.

There was a reference to Sloane being involved in the case in in the P-N: http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/jerry_sandusky_sacbndal_answer.html

Quite oblique, but there.

Those who worked with former Centre Country D.A. Ray Gricar in the 1998 investigation of allegations against Sandusky include assistant prosecutor Steve Sloane (one of Gricar's closest confidants) and now-retired Penn State police Officer Ron Schreffler ... ."

Emphasis added.

Interestingly, Sloane has never said that the was not enough evidence to prosecute Sandusky in 1998.

I'm was not aware of Sloane ever saying anything at all about Sandusky. With regards to the DA's office, other than Arnold, it was like RFG was the only other one that knew anything about the information from 1998. That was why I was so surprised to read about Sloane and the Dictaphone recording.