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

[Trackergd]

The location of the car would support the misdirection theory. According to TG, it was found in the middle row, and people saw him "moving the car in the parking lot." Most people park in the first row, the row closest to the SoS. By parking in the second row and at the far end of that row, it would be likely that the car would not be spotted from either street. Cars in the first row would tend to obscure it. There, of course, could be other reasons, and it could be a coincidence.

I would be interested in the "exit stage right" reasons.

It was 7 reported witnesses in Lewisburg on 4/15, and 3 reported witnesses in Lewisburg on 4/16. Those are minimums.

Since PEF passed a lie detector test, we can assume to about a 95% degree that she was not an enabler in RG's disappearance. We are left with two options a) He had no idea he was not coming back and b) Knew he was not coming back - Deception.

If we subscribe to a) this would support homicide.
Reasons: "there are only three reasons for murder" - Joe Kenda 1) Sex, 2) Money, 3) Revenge PSU would be the "money" option.

If we subscribe to b) this would support "exit stage right"
Reasons: 1) Money off shore 2) Another woman 3) Concern his legacy was at risk due to the Sandusky scandal and did not want to face it. (may also include taking money to not prosecute after first witness) 4) Suicide, 5) Being blackmailed, etc...


If we suspect b), it would be a horrible way to treat PEF. The Fenton sighting seems to support b).

 

[pittsburghgirl]

My understanding of the polygraphs of those close to RG is that the polygraphs focused on whether these people had heard from RG post-disappearance. The case was never treated as potential involuntary disappearance or murder, with the inner circle subject to the sort of investigative techniques used (say) when minor children disappear. Much of the case as we know it reflects the assumption that RG called PF from his cell phone the day he disappeared. LE has the cell phone records; we are not privy to other calls he might have made as the cell record is not public. We also do not know that RG was alone or made the call voluntarily. We know what we have been told by LE who declined to investigate the disappearance of a district attorney as a crime.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

My understanding of the polygraphs of those close to RG is that the polygraphs focused on whether these people had heard from RG post-disappearance. The case was never treated as potential involuntary disappearance or murder, with the inner circle subject to the sort of investigative techniques used (say) when minor children disappear. Much of the case as we know it reflects the assumption that RG called PF from his cell phone the day he disappeared. LE has the cell phone records; we are not privy to other calls he might have made as the cell record is not public. We also do not know that RG was alone or made the call voluntarily. We know what we have been told by LE who declined to investigate the disappearance of a district attorney as a crime.

According to TG, the telephone call was one of the main questions; from his description; they asked PEF repeatedly about the call.

I strongly disagree with the claim that it wasn't treated as a possible crime. Initially, the police thought it could have been an accident, until the Mini was found. Then they thought it might have been a "wild weekend." They were hoping he'd see the news story and phone. Then TG showed up with and said the scene reminded him of his father's (Roy's) suicide. They did aerial searches of the Susquehanna. However, they brought in the bloodhound, checked PEF's house, and discovered the laptop was missing. This was within the first 48 hours.

After that, they checked out everything, including people recently released from prison. Then they checked the people close to RFG.

Basically, they were trying to follow the evidence, they don't have a crime scene.

 

[SuperSmith]

Trackergd,

This is something for you to chew on. Listen to the whole thing and let me know what you think. I trust your objective opinion. Thanks

http://www.spreaker.com/user/oppermanreport/ray-blehar-second-mile-sandusky-scandal

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Respectfully snipped, to focus on point b).

If we subscribe to b) this would support "exit stage right"
Reasons: 1) Money off shore 2) Another woman 3) Concern his legacy was at risk due to the Sandusky scandal and did not want to face it. (may also include taking money to not prosecute after first witness) 4) Suicide, 5) Being blackmailed, etc...


If we suspect b), it would be a horrible way to treat PEF. The Fenton sighting seems to support b).

Some of these are highly unlikely.

2) Another woman: No other woman from the area or that RFG knew has also disappeared, contemporaneously. He didn't drive off with another woman.

3) Concern his legacy was at risk due to the Sandusky scandal and did not want to face it. (may also include taking money to not prosecute after first witness): RFG was not planning to practice law or run for some office; it would not have affected him, if it came out. There were two other cases, in the news where, prosecutors did not prosecute. Bruce Castor is one example; he didn't prosecute Bill Cosby and worked out some arrangement with the plaintiff.

Another example is Patrick Kiniry, a current judge in Cambria County, but a former ADA. He worked out an arrangement with the bishop to have a priest, accused of molestation, transferred, presumably where he didn't have contact with children. There were calls for Kiniry to explain or resign as judge, but he done neither. Castor lost a bid to move back into the Montco DA's Office.

RFG would not have to worry about losing office, or face professional discipline. He wasn't planning to hold office or practice law.

I'll call this 3a).

So far, there is no evidence of bribery (and I've looked as best as I can). I'll call this 3b).

Also, I have heard that PEF and LAG were heirs, and RFG had paid off PEF's mortgage, and had titled the Mini in her name. It could be a justification (even if partial) for the way PEF was treated.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

According to TG, the telephone call was one of the main questions; from his description; they asked PEF repeatedly about the call.

I strongly disagree with the claim that it wasn't treated as a possible crime. Initially, the police thought it could have been an accident, until the Mini was found. Then they thought it might have been a "wild weekend." They were hoping he'd see the news story and phone. Then TG showed up with and said the scene reminded him of his father's (Roy's) suicide. They did aerial searches of the Susquehanna. However, they brought in the bloodhound, checked PEF's house, and discovered the laptop was missing. This was within the first 48 hours.

After that, they checked out everything, including people recently released from prison. Then they checked the people close to RFG.

Basically, they were trying to follow the evidence, they don't have a crime scene.

A district attorney disappears. A man of conservative values, with a beloved daughter. He is supposedly on a day trip. And the house where he was supposedly last seen is not processed as a potential crime scene? LE may have more information regarding phone calls than they let on, but in a world where exactly zero district attorneys have disappeared voluntarily while a number have been murdered, it would seem reasonable to speculate on foul play and process the house and grounds thoroughly. If the timeline is not as it has been represented in the media, we have a completely different case.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

A district attorney disappears. A man of conservative values, with a beloved daughter. He is supposedly on a day trip. And the house where he was supposedly last seen is not processed as a potential crime scene? LE may have more information regarding phone calls than they let on, but in a world where exactly zero district attorneys have disappeared voluntarily while a number have been murdered, it would seem reasonable to speculate on foul play and process the house and grounds thoroughly. If the timeline is not as it has been represented in the media, we have a completely different case.

First, I would not say "conservative values." The term is inherently vague, unless you are talking about political values. I would not agree that RFG had conservative political values.

Second, the number of prosecutors murdered since 1910 is less than 20 and some of those were murdered were not killed because they were prosecutors. Yet there is an example of a judge leaving voluntary.

LE knew when the phone call was made, and the location.

 

[Fromthedeepestjungle]

Respectfully snipped, to focus on point b).



Some of these are highly unlikely.

2) Another woman: No other woman from the area or that RFG knew has also disappeared, contemporaneously. He didn't drive off with another woman.

3) Concern his legacy was at risk due to the Sandusky scandal and did not want to face it. (may also include taking money to not prosecute after first witness): RFG was not planning to practice law or run for some office; it would not have affected him, if it came out. There were two other cases, in the news where, prosecutors did not prosecute. Bruce Castor is one example; he didn't prosecute Bill Cosby and worked out some arrangement with the plaintiff.

Another example is Patrick Kiniry, a current judge in Cambria County, but a former ADA. He worked out an arrangement with the bishop to have a priest, accused of molestation, transferred, presumably where he didn't have contact with children. There were calls for Kiniry to explain or resign as judge, but he done neither. Castor lost a bid to move back into the Montco DA's Office.

RFG would not have to worry about losing office, or face professional discipline. He wasn't planning to hold office or practice law.

I'll call this 3a).

So far, there is no evidence of bribery (and I've looked as best as I can). I'll call this 3b).

Also, I have heard that PEF and LAG were heirs, and RFG had paid off PEF's mortgage, and had titled the Mini in her name. It could be a justification (even if partial) for the way PEF was treated.

JJ why would you think a woman would have to disappear with RG? I could rewrite No 2 but hey I be dumb like that tree or rock that just sits there

 

[J. J. in Phila]

JJ why would you think a woman would have to disappear with RG? I could rewrite No 2 but hey I be dumb like that tree or rock that just sits there

I don't RFG is hiding in anyone's basement.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Of course LE knows when all the phone calls made from RG's cell phone were made. They may have ping data on calls that indicate where they were made. We don't know what they know.

I was not referring to the current use of "conservative" as representing a right-wing political ideology. By "conservative," I mean a man who had adhered to work and family all of his adult life. He was not a wild man, a drinker, an abuser of drugs. He was seen by coworkers as a serious and responsible steward of his office.

We don't know why Gricar disappeared, although foul play comes to mind. JJ, you and I won't agree about this, but nothing about the 1998 case tarnishes RG's legacy because the case was was not brought because the DPW's caseworker sent by Harrisburg said there was no evidence of abuse. Hence, the prosecutor's hands are tied. It's far more likely that he found out in 2005 that Sandusky was not only a molester but part of a larger ring that groomed and abused kids.

The notpsu blog discusses the 1998 case in this interview:

The evidence in the Sandusky case supports that former officials of the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General (OAG) - since at least 1998 - have been involved in protecting wealthy individuals with political/financial ties to Republican Party, The Second Mile (TSM) charity and to Penn State University (PSU).
PSU and Louis Freeh were complicit in ensuring these individuals were not touched by the scandal (pun intended).

Among the individuals who meet the description above are former Second Mile Board Members Bruce Heim, Robert Poole, Lance Shaner, and Richard (Ric) Struthers. These individual's ties to PSU and TSM were ignored by the Harrisburg Patriot News and by Louis Freeh.

http://notpsu.blogspot.com/2016/07/summary-of-my-opperman-interview.html

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Of course LE knows when all the phone calls made from RG's cell phone were made. They may have ping data on calls that indicate where they were made. We don't know what they know.

I was not referring to the current use of "conservative" as representing a right-wing political ideology. By "conservative," I mean a man who had adhered to work and family all of his adult life. He was not a wild man, a drinker, an abuser of drugs. He was seen by coworkers as a serious and responsible steward of his office.

No record of drug use, but was not a teetotaler. Divorced two wives. Referred to as a "ladies man."

We don't know why Gricar disappeared, although foul play comes to mind. JJ, you and I won't agree about this, but nothing about the 1998 case tarnishes RG's legacy because the case was was not brought because the DPW's caseworker sent by Harrisburg said there was no evidence of abuse. Hence, the prosecutor's hands are tied. It's far more likely that he found out in 2005 that Sandusky was not only a molester but part of a larger ring that groomed and abused kids.

The notpsu blog discusses the 1998 case in this interview:

There are three problems with statement.

First, RFG's handling of the case is unusual, in these details:

A. He removed JKA from the case.

B. He never interviewed Victim 6.

C. He made his decision before Sandusky was interviewed.

Second, the DPW investigation is not a criminal investigation, and a criminal case is not dependent on DPW's finding.

Third, RFG made his decision before Lauro and DPW made his. That is supported both by Lauro and the police report.

It is obvious, with the third point, that RFG could not have made his decision based on DPW's position.

There is a thread on 1998 on the Sandusky Board. The link is here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?181778-The-1998-Investigation

Now, at this pointdo I think 1998 is related to the disappearance? No.

 

[Fromthedeepestjungle]

I don't RFG is hiding in anyone's basement.

Hey he might be and I was watching that video of LE from BPD SW about the other mini that was driving around and said it was not RG well I would sure like to know what time that car came into town also what road the car came in on and what time in morning noon or night also what did they look like and what they were wearing but maybe they did not take that info which they should have that would be some very good info I would like to through that ongoing investigation out why keep it hidden

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Hey he might be and I was watching that video of LE from BPD SW about the other mini that was driving around and said it was not RG well I would sure like to know what time that car came into town also what road the car came in on and what time in morning noon or night also what did they look like and what they were wearing but maybe they did not take that info which they should have that would be some very good info I would like to through that ongoing investigation out why keep it hidden

LE does know and I think where they were that day.

 

[Fromthedeepestjungle]

Of course LE knows when all the phone calls made from RG's cell phone were made. They may have ping data on calls that indicate where they were made. We don't know what they know.

I was not referring to the current use of "conservative" as representing a right-wing political ideology. By "conservative," I mean a man who had adhered to work and family all of his adult life. He was not a wild man, a drinker, an abuser of drugs. He was seen by coworkers as a serious and responsible steward of his office.

We don't know why Gricar disappeared, although foul play comes to mind. JJ, you and I won't agree about this, but nothing about the 1998 case tarnishes RG's legacy because the case was was not brought because the DPW's caseworker sent by Harrisburg said there was no evidence of abuse. Hence, the prosecutor's hands are tied. It's far more likely that he found out in 2005 that Sandusky was not only a molester but part of a larger ring that groomed and abused kids.

The notpsu blog discusses the 1998 case in this interview:

I think the phone call's are fake for that time 11:30 am I think it was someone else making it look that way if the calls were earlier in the morning I would say ok

 

[Fromthedeepestjungle]

I think the phone call's are fake for that time 11:30 am I think it was someone else making it look that way if the calls were earlier in the morning I would say ok

RG cant be in 2 places at once unless he was on his way back to bellefonte at that time at 11:30 am

 

[Fromthedeepestjungle]

I also think that the so called wit's that seen him get onto 192 are nut's in the head

 

[pittsburghgirl]

According to Ray Blehar, and to the documents I've seen, Jerry Lauro determined there was no sex abuse in the 1998 case. In the Opperman interview on the notpsu blogspot, Blehar lays out a timeline that makes it clear RG had no opportunity to do the kind of review that was his habitual way of doing business. He sees RG as a scapegoat for the case that emerged after RG disappeared. That makes more sense to me than the idea that RG wouldn't prosecute an established child molester.

On another point, RG could have been the victim of foul play for a number of reasons: 1) some sort of private issue (friend, significant other, financial gain); 2) random act of violence on his day trip; 3) revenge, either political or personal; 4) political assassination to remove him from office in favor of someone else; 5) political assassination to silence him and/or cover up something illegal. Lots of possibilities there as opposed to walking away without a pension or Social Security (the act of a total fool) and thereby abandoning his only child or suicide in which no body turns up and for which there is no motive.

Thus I have no idea how 1998 may or may not be relevant, as there evidently been no investigation into that question.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

RG cant be in 2 places at once unless he was on his way back to bellefonte at that time at 11:30 am

I dunno about that. It's fairly common in homicide cases for the phone to be one place and the body in another.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

RG cant be in 2 places at once unless he was on his way back to bellefonte at that time at 11:30 am

The call came from Route 192, and there was a witness that saw RFG turning onto 192 around that time. The sightings in Lewisburg are consistent with RFG being in the Centre Hall area around 11:30 AM.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Snipped to separate the subject matter:

According to Ray Blehar, and to the documents I've seen, Jerry Lauro determined there was no sex abuse in the 1998 case. In the Opperman interview on the notpsu blogspot, Blehar lays out a timeline that makes it clear RG had no opportunity to do the kind of review that was his habitual way of doing business. He sees RG as a scapegoat for the case that emerged after RG disappeared. That makes more sense to me than the idea that RG wouldn't prosecute an established child molester.

I would like to see the links. We do have the partial police report: http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/redactedpolicereport.pdf
See p. 15.

Lauro made his decision after interviewing Sandusky on or after 6/1/98. Gricar made his decision sometime before the interview on 6/1/98. These links should be informative:

For Lauro: http://www.pennlive.com/politics/in...n_kane_prosecutors_ask.html#incart_river_home Lauro is quoted as saying:

“I remember my last conversation with [Schreffler] concerning him hiding in that room,. “He didn’t tell me details. All he said was, ‘There’s nothing to it — we’re going to close our case.’ And I said, ‘That’s fine, I’m going to close my case, too.’ “

For Schreffler: http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/sandusky_061412_ JT.pdf Testimony of Schreffler on pp. 61-68, though reading the full testimony is suggested.

Now, RFG did not, and could not, close the criminal case because of Lauro closing the DPW case.

RFG could not close the criminal case because of Lauro closing the DPW case, since Lauro had not closed the DPW case when RFG closed the criminal case.

This should prove beyond a reasonable that RFG decision to close the case had nothing to do with DPW.

It should also prove that, at least on this subject, the blog cite was poor choice.

I think that RFG's role in 1998 will be a key point in the PSU 3 trial.