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

[J. J. in Phila]

Snipped, but with no disagreement:

2) He could possibly/ potentially want to return to the USA at some point, but would have huge USA banking/IRS/ Treasury Dept. problems bringing money back, having been in one or several foreign accounts.

Hypothetically, what could someone do in this situation? Go to where the money is and live there?

After 9/11 it would become more difficult to bring the money back into the US.

 

[SeekingJana]

Snipped, but with no disagreement:




Hypothetically, what could someone do in this situation? Go to where the money is and live there?

After 9/11 it would become more difficult to bring the money back into the US.

YES, my friend, indeed- "Go to where the money is and live there". You broke my huge post down into one sentence. You're a top WSer. This is a WSer---->:websleuther:

 

[J. J. in Phila]

That would provide a potential motive for for a voluntary departure.

 

[BigCat]

That would provide a potential motive for for a voluntary departure.

I might be misunderstanding the discussion; I'm confused why you use "motive" here. Wouldn't that (any hidden money) be more like the means for voluntary departure and his subsequent survival?

His motive for walking way wouldn't be financial gain, would it? His pension would be worth more than any money he saved over the years.

Unless, of course, he acquired a substantial sum of money through illegal means, which there doesn't seem to be any evidence of.

 

[SeekingJana]

That would provide a potential motive for for a voluntary departure.

Absolutely! It's my Number One theory, actually.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I might be misunderstanding the discussion; I'm confused why you use "motive" here. Wouldn't that (any hidden money) be more like the means for voluntary departure and his subsequent survival?

His motive for walking way wouldn't be financial gain, would it? His pension would be worth more than any money he saved over the years.

Unless, of course, he acquired a substantial sum of money through illegal means, which there doesn't seem to be any evidence of.

It, in itself, would be a motive for voluntary departure. If RFG had money "sheltered" offshore, and could not bring it back into the country (without raising a lot of red flags), it would be A motive to leave and spend it.

There is another factor, his second divorce.

RFG asked for the divorce. He signed the forms in March of 2001, and his soon to be ex-wife received them in April. He sighed the final decree on 7/26/01; she signed it on 7/30/01.

There would be finacial movement at that point. I do have it confirmed that RFG did liquidate some assets, other than the house.

 

[SeekingJana]

It, in itself, would be a motive for voluntary departure. If RFG had money "sheltered" offshore, and could not bring it back into the country (without raising a lot of red flags), it would be A motive to leave and spend it.

There is another factor, his second divorce.

RFG asked for the divorce. He signed the forms in March of 2001, and his soon to be ex-wife received them in April. He sighed the final decree on 7/26/01; she signed it on 7/30/01.

There would be finacial movement at that point. I do have it confirmed that RFG did liquidate some assets, other than the house.

EXACTLY! In this theory, the money went out for years before the man did, IMO.. just a theory but I am liking it more and more.

It COULD be that he planned to go anyway, or it could be that he had so much financial assets elsewhere that he got caught up in the new banking regulations and decided to literally " follow his money".. wherever it went.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Okay, I rarely throw these, but here goes.

RFG shelters money offshore prior to 9/11/01, perhaps with the intent of slowly moving it back to the US. After 9/11, it becomes problematic.

He knows his estate situation. He spends money on his loved ones, buying PEF a car (that he drives), but saving no money for retirement, because he won't be spending retirement in the US. He saves some cash (less than $16 K), that he will use for travel.

He makes his financial/travel plans on his laptop.

RFG arranges with a Helper (H), possibly in Centre County, to buy or rent a car, a used car if a purchase (2nd car). It isn't expensive if bought, $4-$6 K. A rental might be the same. This is earlier in the second week of April, 2005. The 2nd car is in H's name.

4/15/05, RFG drives to Lewisburg in the Mini, arriving around 12:30 PM. He makes sure he is seen. He tosses the drive.

H arrives in the 2nd car. RFG leaves in the car, crosses the river and tosses the laptop. He then returns to H's residence under the cover of darkness.

4/16/15, RFG drives back to Lewisburg, parks 2nd car, and makes sure he is seen. He takes off at some point around noon.

Ultimately, he goes to the point where he can access the money.

Other than the Southfield sighting (which can be explained by this theory, if accurate), what are the holes in the theory? Is this consistent with the known evidence?

 

[SeekingJana]

:toastred:

My hat's off to you. I think this is what happened. I don't know sports enough to know what to do with a Hail Mary Pass... but touchdown?
The helper is most likely a person who smokes when stressed.. hence, the cigarette ash... secondary transfer.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Okay, let's pick it apart first.

Then I'll move to the unproven category.

The ask could be unrelated or a smoker/helper.

 

[Trackergd]

YES, my friend, indeed- "Go to where the money is and live there". You broke my huge post down into one sentence. You're a top WSer. This is a WSer---->:websleuther:

I do not disagree.

 

[SeekingJana]

Okay, let's pick it apart first.

Then I'll move to the unproven category.

The ask could be unrelated or a smoker/helper.

I agree that the ash doesn't have to be from the Helper.
It's likely secondary transfer though.

Nope, we have picked apart stuff for almost 10 years. Let's formulate the best theories possible, stick with it ( them) until or unless evidence proves otherwise, and just let things be. This is what we have to do in cases which are cold ( have no new evidence). JonBenet Ramsey's was the first, and once we had a solid theory, it became easier to fill in the missing pieces.
It's time to do the same with this case, IMO.

~*~*~*~*~What I have stated on 8/18 is my theory, no matter what, excluding new evidence. ~*~*~*~*~

 

[BigCat]

Okay, I rarely throw these, but here goes.

RFG shelters money offshore prior to 9/11/01, perhaps with the intent of slowly moving it back to the US. After 9/11, it becomes problematic.

He knows his estate situation. He spends money on his loved ones, buying PEF a car (that he drives), but saving no money for retirement, because he won't be spending retirement in the US. He saves some cash (less than $16 K), that he will use for travel.

He makes his financial/travel plans on his laptop.

RFG arranges with a Helper (H), possibly in Centre County, to buy or rent a car, a used car if a purchase (2nd car). It isn't expensive if bought, $4-$6 K. A rental might be the same. This is earlier in the second week of April, 2005. The 2nd car is in H's name.

4/15/05, RFG drives to Lewisburg in the Mini, arriving around 12:30 PM. He makes sure he is seen. He tosses the drive.

H arrives in the 2nd car. RFG leaves in the car, crosses the river and tosses the laptop. He then returns to H's residence under the cover of darkness.

4/16/15, RFG drives back to Lewisburg, parks 2nd car, and makes sure he is seen. He takes off at some point around noon.

Ultimately, he goes to the point where he can access the money.

Other than the Southfield sighting (which can be explained by this theory, if accurate), what are the holes in the theory? Is this consistent with the known evidence?

Could you begin your theory with the reason he's storing money offshore before 09/11/01?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Could you begin your theory with the reason he's storing money offshore before 09/11/01?

There could be several possibilities, but, for the sake of argument, hiding it from wife #2. RFG filed for divorce, so he was the one that set the timing of it. We do know that the marriage was deteriorating no later than the summer/early fall of 2000 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/schedule.php?y=2000&t=CLE), because of the Cleveland trip. He had also been through a divorce before, so he knew what to expect.

There are some several other possibilities.

A lot of the theory is not refuted by the evidence, but not supported by it either.

What I'm looking for before that is evidence that doesn't fit with the theory. Anyone?


Edited to add:

Let's also look at the evidence that might broadly support the theory, but is weak.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I'll start:

1. Cigarette ash, why is H leaning in on the passenger side, or in the car?

2. The Mystery Woman doesn't meet the description of anyone close to RFG and in the area at the time. Who is she? Was she seen with RFG on 4/16/05?

 

[BigCat]

There could be several possibilities, but, for the sake of argument, hiding it from wife #2. RFG filed for divorce, so he was the one that set the timing of it. We do know that the marriage was deteriorating no later than the summer/early fall of 2000 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/schedule.php?y=2000&t=CLE), because of the Cleveland trip. He had also been through a divorce before, so he knew what to expect.

There are some several other possibilities.

A lot of the theory is not refuted by the evidence, but not supported by it either.

What I'm looking for before that is evidence that doesn't fit with the theory. Anyone?


Edited to add:

Let's also look at the evidence that might broadly support the theory, but is weak.

If he was so greedy that he would hide money from his second wife, then why wouldn't he try to hold on to his pension and collect the hidden money? It might be problematic to get money back into the country, but not impossible. It can't be anymore challenging than completely vanishing off the face of the planet. And how much money could he realistically hide from his second wife? Would it be enough to forsake relationships with his girlfriend and his daughter (not to mention his pension) for?

There needs to more, like the money is "dirty" and there is a significant amount hidden. That would make the theory more plausible, IMO.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

If he was so greedy that he would hide money from his second wife, then why wouldn't he try to hold on to his pension and collect the hidden money? It might be problematic to get money back into the country, but not impossible. It can't be anymore challenging than completely vanishing off the face of the planet. And how much money could he realistically hide from his second wife? Would it be enough to forsake relationships with his girlfriend and his daughter (not to mention his pension) for?

There needs to more, like the money is "dirty" and there is a significant amount hidden. That would make the theory more plausible, IMO.

I would not use the word "greedy," but he did have hard feelings toward #2.

The pension is a matter of providing for his heirs. The hypothetical money is out there, which he can now access, and his heirs will get more than if he retires and lives for 5-10 years. From a purely financial standpoint, if RFG has sufficient funds, it is beneficial to them for him not to be there to retire.

The money would not be dirty, as such, but in theory, there could be tax problems. Also, there may be civil questions relating to not disclosing it to #2.

RFG told PEF that the reason he put the Mini Cooper in PEF's name was in case he was sued. Now, he had liability insurance from the county and it is very difficult to successfully sue a DA for an official action (including not prosecuting Sandusky). He owned no real estate, had car insurance (required in PA). The only civil act that I am aware of in the 7 years prior to his disappearance was the 2001 divorce.

How much is unknown. It could be substantial, and would have to be for the scenario to work.

 

[Trackergd]

Did RFG ever make other references to not owning property "in case he gets sued"?

I agree that is an odd statement to make about the Mini when he was all but immune from being sued for performing his duties as DA. He was not however immune from Civil Suit for matters not related to his duties.

 

[Trackergd]

Someone who could keep a secret of this magnitude for this many years and stay far away from anyone who might recognize her.

 

[Trackergd]

I'll start:

1. Cigarette ash, why is H leaning in on the passenger side, or in the car?

2. The Mystery Woman doesn't meet the description of anyone close to RFG and in the area at the time. Who is she? Was she seen with RFG on 4/16/05?

Someone who could keep a secret of this magnitude for this many years and stay far away from anyone who might recognize her.