PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #7

[Lord_Chatterly]

He can still be questioned about it.

I hope you are right on this one. That point had raised my eyebrows a tad.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I hope you are right on this one. That point had raised my eyebrows a tad.

Sandusky will be incarcerated, where they can get his DNA. The records of Second Mile seem to be intact from 1998, and possibly 2005. There is probably a schedule of where Sandusky was.

 

[minazoe]

I find the continuous referral to Patty F as "the paramour" of Ray Gricar odd and kind of disturbing...

is that the traditional legal term?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I find the continuous referral to Patty F as "the paramour" of Ray Gricar odd and kind of disturbing...

is that the traditional legal term?

Paramour is a lover, especially one in an adulterous relationship. In other words an illicit lover.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/paramour/

(There I go using Google again. )

My 6th edition of Black's, p. 1112, says:

In general, a lover; but the term is used commonly in connection with a person of either sex in an adulterous alliance.

 

[minazoe]

Paramour is a lover, especially one in an adulterous relationship. In other words an illicit lover.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/paramour/

(There I go using Google again. )

My 6th edition of Black's, p. 1112, says:

In general, a lover; but the term is used commonly in connection with a person of either sex in an adulterous alliance.

Thank you, I know what it means. which is precisely why I find it disturbing.
I was wondering if maybe it was commonly used in legal speak to refer to a live in partner.

if this is not the case then I sense great hostility regarding Patty on the part of Karen...capeesh?:seeya:

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Thank you, I know what it means. which is precisely why I find it disturbing.
I was wondering if maybe it was commonly used in legal speak to refer to a live in partner.

if this is not the case then I sense great hostility regarding Patty on the part of Karen...capeesh?:seeya:

I did find an example of it possibly being used that way. http://www.superior.court.state.pa.us/opinions/S43009_11.pdf

(More of me Googling )

In general, it corresponds to the stated definition.

 

[minazoe]

what??? guys...????

I was just clarifying.. (

seriously thank you for the link...I still find it kind of unusual and unecessary to continuously, (throughout Karen's site) and repeatedley in every instance refer to Patty as a paramour.

not a fiance
not as Patty F
not as girlfriend
not as partner
not as common law wife

but as paramour, which takes on a certain connotation that I find suspect.

I find it inflamatoryif you will. I also find a lot of what Karen writes to be rambly and effectivley incomprehensible.

don't you?

 

[minazoe]

And how must it make Patty F and Ray's daughter feel to see this website where a collegue of 18 years is refering to Patty as Ray's paramour...

or Ray's w----e...if you will.

perhaps she doesn't fully understand the meaning of this word? somehow I doubt that.

it brings to mind several questions I would wish to ask of Karen.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

what??? guys...????

I was just clarifying.. (

seriously thank you for the link...I still find it kind of unusual and unecessary to continuously, (throughout Karen's site) and repeatedley in every instance refer to Patty as a paramour.

not a fiance
not as Patty F
not as girlfriend
not as partner
not as common law wife

but as paramour, which takes on a certain connotation that I find suspect.

I find it inflamatoryif you will. I also find a lot of what Karen writes to be rambly and effectivley incomprehensible.

don't you?

I don't think either "fiancee" or "common law wife" would necessarily be appropriate. Under the broadest sense of the word, "lover," it might be within the dictionary definition. In all fairness, I didn't spend 2003-05 peeping through their bedroom window, so that is an assumption on my part.

Personally, I did not find the word "paramour" appropriate, any more than I would find the word "mouthpiece" appropriate for an attorney. http://thesaurus.com/browse/attorney
(I was, however, referred to as a "hired mouthpiece" in a news story once.)

As for her writing, I'm not thrilled with her style, but I think she is comprehensible.

 

[minazoe]

the usage of that word is hostile and indicates hostility towards Patty F.

unless she doesn't fully understand the meaning. I also think that Ray himself would take umbrage at this choice of wording.

makes me wonder if Karen has some particular reason to dislike Patty F, or to suspect her, or to be jealous of her.

as though she has no respect for this particular relationship.

so weird.

 

[Lord_Chatterly]

I find the continuous referral to Patty F as "the paramour" of Ray Gricar odd and kind of disturbing...

is that the traditional legal term?

I agree with you, Minazoe...the first time I came upon that term, i found it odd, as well ! A dressed up word to reference a woman of 'ill repute', almost, eh ? Thanks for making comment on it. LoL...JJ did a rather good job with the definition side of it...(googling again)

 

[SeekingJana]

Paramour-Definition of PARAMOUR
An illicit lover

Karen Arnold has major problems. I would not say this if I had not seen the weird slants she puts into " her" website.
She uses hateful and bitter words and descriptions, and most of all, SHE wants attention.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I agree with you, Minazoe...the first time I came upon that term, i found it odd, as well ! A dressed up word to reference a woman of 'ill repute', almost, eh ? Thanks for making comment on it. LoL...JJ did a rather good job with the definition side of it...(googling again)

Well, not really.

The usual definition is the lover (male or female) of a married individual but not the spouse of the married individual, i.e. the "other woman" or the "other man." Katherine Hepburn could be properly called "Spenser Tracy's paramour," and there is no suggestion she was a "woman of ill repute."

Of course, RFG was not married, so that definition wouldn't apply. PEF wasn't married, so RFG wasn't the paramour either, by that definition. In some states, it is used for the "other man," in a divorce proceedings, as well as the "other woman."

That does leave to wonder about the propriety of calling RFG, "Patty's paramour." I think a number of people would have found that objectionable, including me, though technically accurate.

Like I said, I would not have used the term.

 

[imamaze]

Dealing with your fellow posters

Here's the deal - You must follow TOS - You may not attack another poster! You may not respond to another attack - you must hit the alert button.

We all have a right to our opinion and not be attacked for it. Please remember its ok to disagree its not ok to attack another member for their opinion. Thanks.

Ima

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Paramour-Definition of PARAMOUR
An illicit lover

Karen Arnold has major problems. I would not say this if I had not seen the weird slants she puts into " her" website.
She uses hateful and bitter words and descriptions, and most of all, SHE wants attention.

She might have thought she was helping. She generally does not talk to the press, so she might not have wanted too much attention.

Personally, I would have used those words and I would have attempted to check out some of the facts slightly better. That's just me.

 

[Lord_Chatterly]

Paramour-Definition of PARAMOUR
An illicit lover

Karen Arnold has major problems. I would not say this if I had not seen the weird slants she puts into " her" website.
She uses hateful and bitter words and descriptions, and most of all, SHE wants attention.

Thanks for your input. I wondered where KA had all that time to write all that. She has the history of the Posters, as well, which I found humorous. That blog is awfully long. I've come across it from time to time, and just take pieces of it...i have come away from it with much the same feeling. Again, thanks.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Thanks for your input. I wondered where KA had all that time to write all that. She has the history of the Posters, as well, which I found humorous. That blog is awfully long. I've come across it from time to time, and just take pieces of it...i have come away from it with much the same feeling. Again, thanks.

It did confirm a few other previously reported things, and it was the first reference to the possibility of RFG being familiar with the Mel Wiley disappearance. It was developed by the reporter (with a bit of prodding) about 6 months later.

http://s10.invisionfree.com/usedtobedoe/index.php?showtopic=2226

As for the length, well, I think I have her beat on that.

 

[Lord_Chatterly]

It did confirm a few other previously reported things, and it was the first reference to the possibility of RFG being familiar with the Mel Wiley disappearance. It was developed by the reporter (with a bit of prodding) about 6 months later.

http://s10.invisionfree.com/usedtobedoe/index.php?showtopic=2226

As for the length, well, I think I have her beat on that.

Ouch...(squinting)...what a read ! Good info, JJ. It is so strange RFG's case and Mel Wiley are so similar, like the script had been written for RFG. I hope we are not here 25 plus years from now still wondering. Thanks.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Ouch...(squinting)...what a read ! Good info, JJ. It is so strange RFG's case and Mel Wiley are so similar, like the script had been written for RFG. I hope we are not here 25 plus years from now still wondering. Thanks.

Not that close.

This is from my recollection.

Wiley had told people that he was going to buy swim trunks on sale at K-Mart (there was no sale). He'd borrowed a few thousand from a friend before that.

He drove to the lake, apparently with a second set of clothing and a towel. He folded them on the seat, with the towel, put his wallet and his gun under the seat, and then took off.

RFG didn't do any overt staging like that. If he walked away, he didn't make it look like suicide, and he could have just be leaving a note. He even moved the car away from the river.

 

[Lord_Chatterly]

Question for JJ: Some time ago, you had given the Wilkes-Barre sighting a rather high rating of about 75%, IIRC. Since that time, where do you rate that now...significantly lower, or the same ?

Add: Ooops, sorry, our posts hit at same time. I follow you about Wiley...also the typewriter ribbon 'message' that was discovered in the Wiley investigation. Sorry for the jump in topic...lol.