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

[shadow of my mind]

On the subject of low assets

To bad we can't get a gander at his tax returns. That might give us some answers.

I also have to wonder, and I don't remember anything being reported one way or the other, but if he was paying for all of his daughters living and school expenses that could be another reason that assets are low. Might have been part of the divorce agreement.

You start adding up rent, food, car payments, clothing, tuition, books and medical ,plus spending money and occasional airfare back and forth from the west coast to the east coast and that could account for a goodly amount of $$.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

On the subject of low assets

To bad we can't get a gander at his tax returns. That might give us some answers.

I also have to wonder, and I don't remember anything being reported one way or the other, but if he was paying for all of his daughters living and school expenses that could be another reason that assets are low. Might have been part of the divorce agreement.

You start adding up rent, food, car payments, clothing, tuition, books and medical ,plus spending money and occasional airfare back and forth from the west coast to the east coast and that could account for a goodly amount of $$.

On the previous thread, I noted that LG's mother, BG, was a full professor and a department head. A full professor at Smeal was making, on average, about $10-$15 K more than the DA.

We don't know BG's salary, but she responsibilities beyond an average full professor, had been doing it a bit longer, consulted and wrote books. Even starting, in 1979, she was making enough that RFG didn't have to work; his a original plan was to be a stay at home dad.

I'm sure he did contribute to LG's expenses, but at that point, she was 26 years old, with a boyfriend (I think they were living together).

Even if he did contribute a "goodly amount," and there were tax questions with that, it does not explain why he wasn't saving. His pension would be good, but most people still want to save for retirement and have a cushion.

He could use estate planning tools, but no one with knowledge of his finances has suggested he did; Tony has never shied away suicide, and that would support it. Tying up a lot of money would be an indication that he planned not to live very much longer, either in reality or legally.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Blehar is now tweeting about how the 1998 investigation was "botched" by the DA. It was only a matter of time before he would turn as well.

 

[MissJ]

Why?

Here is the latest NYT story on Slovenia: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/22/travel/with-wind-calm-serenity-in-slovenia.html?_r=0

Unless you hate the currently good weather, good food, and good wine, it sounds like a good place.

The Bora?:twocents:

 

[J. J. in Phila]

The Bora?:twocents:

They get bad winds, but so does California at times.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Earlier, the amount of income RFG might of given to his daughter, LG, was discussed. Her mother, BG, was a full professor at Smeal Business College of PSU. While I do not have her salary (and wouldn't post it if I did), here is the PSU salary range for 2003: http://www.senate.psu.edu/agenda/apr27-04agn/salarytables042704.pdf

In 2003, RFG was earning $120,225 per year as DA. The average salary for a full professor at Smeal was $141,227. Women averaged less, due to longevity, was $134,631. BG had been there, in 2003, for 24 years, and I found a reference for her being a full professor in 1996; the average for a female 5 years, so she would have above average longevity. She also did consulting and she wrote at least one book.

I would expect that between the two of them, who would both contribute to LG, they would be ]easily above $250 K in 2003.

BG was RFG's ex-wife, so she would not be contributing to his upkeep. Even before they were divorced, she was making more.

 

[MissJ]

Blehar is now tweeting about how the 1998 investigation was "botched" by the DA. It was only a matter of time before he would turn as well.

Well I'm waiting for how he thinks it was botched. Any ideas anyone...what he will say?:twocents: JMO but it did seem odd how it was handled.

 

[SeekingJana]

Well I'm waiting for how he thinks it was botched. Any ideas anyone...what he will say?:twocents: JMO but it did seem odd how it was handled.

Miss J, the tweet attributed to Blehar was a RETWEET from someone else. I don't know why JJ chose to pick this up and not state it's a retwet.
Anyway, social media " chatter" aside, there's more.. maybe it will negate the wrong impressions being handed out about the Sandusky investiations.

What the report on the Sandusky investigations said was:
"The report notes prosecutors from the state Attorney General's Office felt strongly that testimony from the first boy to accuse Sandusky would likely not have been enough to convict the former assistant football coach at Pennsylvania State University."
http://articles.philly.com/2014-06-...moulton-jerry-sandusky-sandusky-investigation

Also, if there are fingers to be pointed, point them at the former AG, Tom Corbett. He has said for years that there was insufficient evidence to proceed.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Well I'm waiting for how he thinks it was botched. Any ideas anyone...what he will say?:twocents: JMO but it did seem odd how it was handled.

It was not handled well, but more importantly, it was handled unusually for that office.

Blehar likes to blame everyone and everything, except Paterno, and to a lesser extent, the PSU 3. It was only a matter of time for him to point to RFG.

I'll be on his list at some point.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

First, Kane has indicated that she "misspoke" regarding some of the that she said. Moulton actually did not say those things.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20140625_State_Police_chief_assails_Kane_over_Sandusky_claims.html

Miss J, the tweet attributed to Blehar was a RETWEET from someone else. I don't know why JJ chose to pick this up and not state it's a retwet.
Anyway, social media " chatter" aside, there's more.. maybe it will negate the wrong impressions being handed out about the Sandusky investiations.

What the report on the Sandusky investigations said was:
"The report notes prosecutors from the state Attorney General's Office felt strongly that testimony from the first boy to accuse Sandusky would likely not have been enough to convict the former assistant football coach at Pennsylvania State University."
http://articles.philly.com/2014-06-...moulton-jerry-sandusky-sandusky-investigation

Also, if there are fingers to be pointed, point them at the former AG, Tom Corbett. He has said for years that there was insufficient evidence to proceed.

The reason these things are quoted is the reaction of public opinion to RFG. As noted, these threads have been around from the week of the case, and they are an excellent place to note contemporary public opinion.

Second, this has to do with Blehar's opinion, not the merits of if RFG "blew it" in 1998 or not. Blehar was a bit favorable to RFG in 1998 and has suggested that the DA's Office continued to investigate in 1998. Now Blehar, or his following at least, are pointing the blame at RFG.

We saw something similar with Keisling. For years is drug dealers and then something vaguely related to Corbett and always murder. Now it is, RFG "ran away" so he wouldn't face bad press from Sandusky. I don't agree with any of his murdered by drug dealers/PSU conspiracy stuff, and I don't agree with his "bad press" argument, either. I do, however, note the change.

 

[shadow of my mind]

I still need to read the report in full before I comment, but in the news article at http://articles.philly.com/2014-06-2...-investigation there is no mention of Ray at all.

I did find this statement, from the same article, interesting though: "State investigators also did not visit local and university police to search for Sandusky-related records until January 2011, a step that turned up four more victims."

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I still need to read the report in full before I comment, but in the news article at http://articles.philly.com/2014-06-2...-investigation there is no mention of Ray at all.

I did find this statement, from the same article, interesting though: "State investigators also did not visit local and university police to search for Sandusky-related records until January 2011, a step that turned up four more victims."

It didn't come up.

The report specifically excluded RFG's role in 1998. It was beyond the scope of the report. They AG's Office did, according to report, subpoena PSU records (2010?), but the incident report was "reclassified" so it wouldn't an actual police report. They also had Sandusky's personnel file at the same time, which didn't show anything.

The AG's Office didn't know about the 1998 incident, until November-December, 2010.

 

[EdinburghLass]

I've been reading RG's threads for years and have tried to keep up. His Disappeared episode showed again last week in Australia and it's been on my mind ever since. I know this has been done before, but could any case experts post their theories on what happened? Has your theory changed over the years?

I am going to go back and start at thread one to refresh my memory.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Here is a link to most of the theories:

http://www.centredaily.com/2011/02/25/2544143/index-of-the-theories-february.html

 

[J. J. in Phila]

In general, the three theories are, in no order:

1. Foul play, usually homicide.

2. Suicide.

3. Walkaway.

 

[Galbin]

Here is a link to most of the theories:

http://www.centredaily.com/2011/02/25/2544143/index-of-the-theories-february.html

Wow. Thanks for this link!

 

[J. J. in Phila]

One where some things could be ruled out is here: http://www.centredaily.com/2013/02/05/3491540/what-didnt-happen.html

 

[BigCat]

It didn't come up.

The report specifically excluded RFG's role in 1998. It was beyond the scope of the report. They AG's Office did, according to report, subpoena PSU records (2010?), but the incident report was "reclassified" so it wouldn't an actual police report. They also had Sandusky's personnel file at the same time, which didn't show anything.

The AG's Office didn't know about the 1998 incident, until November-December, 2010.

Do we know when and how the AG's office learned about the 98 allegations? And when did the AG's Office eventually get a copy of the police report?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Do we know when and how the AG's office learned about the 98 allegations? And when did the AG's Office eventually get a copy of the police report?

Yes, 1/3/11. They did a full check at PSU, and that is when they discovered it. Though Moulton has raised some questions about who knew what about 1998 in the Centre County DA's Office, he is clear that they did not mention the 1998 incident when they forwarded the case.

Interestingly, Victim 6's mother gave them leads on Victims 5 and 7, along with B. K.

 

[BigCat]

Yes, 1/3/11. They did a full check at PSU, and that is when they discovered it. Though Moulton has raised some questions about who knew what about 1998 in the Centre County DA's Office, he is clear that they did not mention the 1998 incident when they forwarded the case.

Interestingly, Victim 6's mother gave them leads on Victims 5 and 7, along with B. K.

So the AG's office never received the police report, even after they subpoenaed all PSU srelated to Sandusky.

The DPW investigator, Lauro, claims to never have seen the police report either.

I wonder if Schultz saw the police report when he reviewed the 98 investigation in 2001. I know there is an email in the Freeh report in which Schultz asks Harmon if there is a police file on the investigation. There is no evidence, however, Schultz ever read the police report. In his testimony, Harmon never said he gave Schultz the report.

Considering that Schultz stated under oath that he had no knowledge of a PSU police investigation in 98, then I assume he denies ever seeing the police report.

Why didn't the PSU police department go to such lengths to bury the 98 police report? If RFG "blew it" in 98, then the police report would have provided the PSU police cover. They could say, "we did a thorough investigation, even recommended pressing charges, but the DA declined to prosecute." Doesn't make sense, IMO.