PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #9

[SyraKelly]

There is one, it has about 500 entries. Here is the main index, but it doesn't cover the newer stuff.



Never met him; not a lawyer.

umm-where is the 500 entries!

 

[SyraKelly]

I just read SG's very long timeline story-GREAT BTW-The most important clue I found in it was -the book left on the desk to a pg about the new DA taking over-in case the current one goes missing or dies-It makes me think-RG walked away!


http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/04/ray_gricar_mystery.html

When Gricar’s deputies got to the office the Monday after he disappeared, the county code book was sitting on the desk of an assistant district attorney. It eerily opened to the page describing what to do if a sitting district attorney is missing or dies

 

[J. J. in Phila]

J.J...so you are saying he was RIGHT to take those contributions?

Yes. These were not contribution from Second Mile. They were contributions from people with a connection to Second Mile. They contributed money to it, they were volunteers at it, or they were on the board of it. Second Mile did not write him a check.

It's also possible that some contributed to his opponent as well.

That doesn't mean that if they give him money, he'll give them special treatment. In fact, if he'd win, he couldn't be AG anymore and couldn't do anything for Second Mile.

In 1994, I contributed to Tom Ridge for Governor. I was a state employee. Did I expect any special treatment? No, I happened to like Ridge and I didn't like his opponent.

Disclosure: I have contributed to every Republican nominee for Governor of Pennsylvania since 1994, except for Corbett. I had a lot of reasons not to like him too much. I didn't contribute to his opponents either.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

umm-where is the 500 entries!

http://www.centredaily.com/694

I write about all the aspects of the case, the investigation, the evidence, the media coverage, the theories, the code book that was just mentioned.

I actually don't give that too much weight:

http://www.centredaily.com/2009/04/01/2396725/the-code-book.html

I generally don't have a problem opening it with Firefox.

 

[SyraKelly]

I was just saying its important b/c-well-who opened it/why
could be it have been RG did & knew he was leaving
was it someone who made/knew RG was leaving

 

[CJMAJORGIRL24]

Yes. These were not contribution from Second Mile. They were contributions from people with a connection to Second Mile. They contributed money to it, they were volunteers at it, or they were on the board of it. Second Mile did not write him a check.

It's also possible that some contributed to his opponent as well.

That doesn't mean that if they give him money, he'll give them special treatment. In fact, if he'd win, he couldn't be AG anymore and couldn't do anything for Second Mile.

In 1994, I contributed to Tom Ridge for Governor. I was a state employee. Did I expect any special treatment? No, I happened to like Ridge and I didn't like his opponent.

Disclosure: I have contributed to every Republican nominee for Governor of Pennsylvania since 1994, except for Corbett. I had a lot of reasons not to like him too much. I didn't contribute to his opponents either.

You must have lots more money than I do!! LOL! I wouldn't give ANY politician i know a dollar of my hard earned money!!

Thanks for all you have done in keeping Mr.Gricar's case "alive"!!

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I was just saying its important b/c-well-who opened it/why
could be it have been RG did & knew he was leaving
was it someone who made/knew RG was leaving

The thought on that day was that RFG had committed suicide. The section was on how to replace a DA, including one that died.

If this were shown that it really was RFG who was looking at this section and put the book there, foul play would be at about 10%.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Strange. I can read your other entries, but not this one.

WOW-a wise decision? Is old "Jer" allowed a computer while he is on suicide watch?

That was a direct quote; I was actually wondering if it was Dottie.

A few folks out there can't seem to even say that it was a bad decision, even after conviction.

The same person complained that I was terrible for suggesting that RFG might have had sex with each wife while married to them, and that his relationship with other women, who came forward, was at least platonic.

One complained that we shouldn't listen to AG, the detective, under oath, and former governor (and two term DA in Phila) Ed Rendell, about 1998. He implied that Sandusky would be found innocent of those charges.

He did it Friday morning.

A rant, but an amusing one. Unfortunately, it doesn't solve the disappearance.

 

[and nothing but]

what is more important here??
being "right" or finding Ray Gricar?
for those of us who STILL call Centre County home, it is chilling to see what has been revealed so far related to Sandusky/Spanier/Curley/PSU, etc.
the fact that the top law enforcement official of this county literally disappeared in the midst of all this is equally chilling.
in my mind, EVERYTHING is on the table regarding Mr.Gricar's disappearance.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

what is more important here??
being "right" or finding Ray Gricar?
for those of us who STILL call Centre County home, it is chilling to see what has been revealed so far related to Sandusky/Spanier/Curley/PSU, etc.
the fact that the top law enforcement official of this county literally disappeared in the midst of all this is equally chilling.
in my mind, EVERYTHING is on the table regarding Mr.Gricar's disappearance.

Finding him, but it might be related to either walkaway or foul play.

The 1998 decision was a colossal lapse of judgment, but it was something else:

Hugely uncharacteristic for RFG.

This seems like a straightforward case in 1998. There was enough of a case there that RFG could have prosecuted, and he prosecuted weaker cases, even within about 18 months of this. He never says why. So, maybe he made a mistake in not prosecuting. Okay, anybody can make a bad mistake; it can be a misjudgment (it should be admitted to as such).

It is uncharacteristic, but explainable as a mistake, a very bright guy not being very bright on that occasion.

Then we come up to the second part. In 1998, JKA was the person who generally did child abuses cases and worked with C & YS. http://arnoldforda.org/6.html

She initially handled this case, and then was removed. There was a characterization of "excessive disagreements" over the police investigation. RFG is the only person who could have removed her; he's the guy in charge.

It's possible there was some type of personality clash, but JKA retained her position there for another 8 years, still doing child abuse cases.

Okay, so now we have the "go to person" in the office off the case. We have a strong case not prosecuted.

Now, we have DPW brought in, which it has to be by law; I think the initial report was to them. Lauro shows up, does his thing. For some reason the Chambers Report is never given to him; RFG has that report and the police report. Lauro never sees them in 1998; Lauro surprisingly never gets the report from Chambers directly.

It's possible that, with JKA not there, nobody realizes Lauro doesn't have the report. RFG and Schreffler doesn't sent out; Lauro doesn't realize it exists.

Okay, now we have the reports not going to the investigator, the "go to person" in the office off the case and a strong case not prosecuted.

That's uncharacteristic. RFG was both a tough prosecutor and a good administrator.

Then we find out that, after the case is closed, RFG, another ADA, Schreffler and Ralston (from two different departments), meets with Fran Ganter in the football building. Are they talking about Sandusky. The world wonders.

Is RFG informing PSU privately and suggesting that Sandusky get help? If so, why no follow through? Was there something that prevented that follow through? That could be where foul play comes in.

 

[BigCat]

Finding him, but it might be related to either walkaway or foul play.

The 1998 decision was a colossal lapse of judgment, but it was something else:

Hugely uncharacteristic for RFG.

This seems like a straightforward case in 1998. There was enough of a case there that RFG could have prosecuted, and he prosecuted weaker cases, even within about 18 months of this. He never says why. So, maybe he made a mistake in not prosecuting. Okay, anybody can make a bad mistake; it can be a misjudgment (it should be admitted to as such).

It is uncharacteristic, but explainable as a mistake, a very bright guy not being very bright on that occasion.

Then we come up to the second part. In 1998, JKA was the person who generally did child abuses cases and worked with C & YS. http://arnoldforda.org/6.html

She initially handled this case, and then was removed. There was a characterization of "excessive disagreements" over the police investigation. RFG is the only person who could have removed her; he's the guy in charge.

It's possible there was some type of personality clash, but JKA retained her position there for another 8 years, still doing child abuse cases.

Okay, so now we have the "go to person" in the office off the case. We have a strong case not prosecuted.

Now, we have DPW brought in, which it has to be by law; I think the initial report was to them. Lauro shows up, does his thing. For some reason the Chambers Report is never given to him; RFG has that report and the police report. Lauro never sees them in 1998; Lauro surprisingly never gets the report from Chambers directly.

It's possible that, with JKA not there, nobody realizes Lauro doesn't have the report. RFG and Schreffler doesn't sent out; Lauro doesn't realize it exists.

Okay, now we have the reports not going to the investigator, the "go to person" in the office off the case and a strong case not prosecuted.

That's uncharacteristic. RFG was both a tough prosecutor and a good administrator.

Then we find out that, after the case is closed, RFG, another ADA, Schreffler and Ralston (from two different departments), meets with Fran Ganter in the football building. Are they talking about Sandusky. The world wonders.

Is RFG informing PSU privately and suggesting that Sandusky get help? If so, why no follow through? Was there something that prevented that follow through? That could be where foul play comes in.

Great summation. For the first time I'm starting to move foul play out of the category of highly unlikely.

Do you believe Schreffler, Ralston and/or Ganter will be asked about the meeting with RFG in the Curley/Schultz perjury trials? Or the civil trials?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Great summation. For the first time I'm starting to move foul play out of the category of highly unlikely.

Do you believe Schreffler, Ralston and/or Ganter will be asked about the meeting with RFG in the Curley/Schultz perjury trials? Or the civil trials?

I don't know, but we know that the grand jury is still meeting. Schreffler was called. I've heard Ganter was.

If I were with the Attorney General's Office, I would seriously consider talking to all the people at that meeting to see what they may know. Very seriously.

 

[BigCat]

Just a thought: six months after the meeting, Paterno told Sandusky he would not be the next head coach of PSU.

Who benefited from that decision?

Fran Ganter. Ganter, as PSU's offensive coordinator, was considered next-in-line behind Sandusky in the order of succession (Of course, Paterno may have wanted his son to be the next head coach, however, in 98, Jay Paterno was still considered too young to take over the job).

Ganter eventually took an administrative job. I found this bit of info about his move over at Penn Live: http://blog.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/2008/07/where_for_art_thou_fran.html

This story is starting to remind me of a novel I once read by Mario Puzo about the 15-century Borgias.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Just a thought: six months after the meeting, Paterno told Sandusky he would not be the next head coach of PSU.

Who benefited from that decision?

Fran Ganter. Ganter, as PSU's offensive coordinator, was considered next-in-line behind Sandusky in the order of succession (Of course, Paterno may have wanted his son to be the next head coach, however, in 98, Jay Paterno was still considered too young to take over the job).

Ganter eventually took an administrative job. I found this bit of info about his move over at Penn Live: http://blog.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/2008/07/where_for_art_thou_fran.html

This story is starting to remind me of a novel I once read by Mario Puzo about the 15-century Borgias.

A very good thought, that I didn't realize. A palace coup.

Hypothetically, you know Sandusky is bad, you want to get him out of a position of power, but you don't want to see him go through a public trial. You arrange to get him eased out in about 6 months, you see that he's not prosecute if he agrees to get help. A seemingly good decision, at the time.

A few years later, you realize how terrible your decision was.

 

[and nothing but]

.....the possibilities are endless.
-did DA Gricar participate in the coverup and was helped to "disappear" in 2005?
-did DA Gricar become aware of the coverup and was silenced?
-did DA Gricar slowly build an unbeatable case against Sandusky but was silenced before he filed charges?

Here at the Happy Valley Horror Show, everyting should be left on the table.
Ya just never know.

Why was there an "across the board stand down" (ADA Karen Arnold's words) by law enforcement to find Ray Gricar (including Pa.Attorney General Corbett), but a full court press/2 minute drill to convict and imprison Sandusky?

Until Ray Gricar is found, The Happy Valley Horror Show rolls on.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Why was there an "across the board stand down" (ADA Karen Arnold's words) by law enforcement to find Ray Gricar (including Pa.Attorney General Corbett), but a full court press/2 minute drill to convict and imprison Sandusky?

Two words, "legacy protection."

The had the first report that RFG was with a woman (accurate or not) prior to 11:45 PM on 4/16/05. Maybe you don't immediately send that out immediately. Maybe you hold that back until you canvass; maybe you ask who it might have been and contact her. Maybe you wait 3-4 days to see if RFG phones home, and was just out for a "wild weekend."

You don't wait 13 months to strongly publicize it, after it has leaked out, unless:

A. You are more worried that RFG's legacy will be tarnished if people think he was with a woman (that is the least of it now).

B. You are convinced that RFG was not murdered.

I'm not convinced of B. I'm wondering if LE is.

The AG, at least until Victim 6, had zero grounds for taking this case. You had two DA's, of different parties, that never were willing to send it out based on resources.

 

[Hardymum]

I'm new to this thread but not new to Websleuths. I lived in Lewisburg, PA for 7 years and followed the Gricar case when it first occurred, and more recently followed some of the Sandusky trial as I still have ties to State College.

I have a few questions, and those of you who are knowledgeable might be able to answer them. Please forgive any dumb questions or things that have been discussed in the past, as the title of this post says, these are random questions resulting from things I've been reading.

1. Has the origin of the "anonymous email" received by the ADA in 2008 regarding Sandusky's victim ever been identified? It's not that difficult to discover an IP address of internet postings. Or, are they keeping the source confidential? Wild thought -- what if it was anonymously sent by Ray Gricar, wherever he may be?

2. Would organized crime have any interest in Penn State football related to gambling and profiting from people betting on or favoring Penn State? What effect has the scandal had on that, and would it have affected it back in 1998, or 2005? I know how huge PSU football is, all over PA. The traffic jams for games, the tailgate parties, everything about that was over the top.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

1. Has the origin of the "anonymous email" received by the ADA in 2008 regarding Sandusky's victim ever been identified? It's not that difficult to discover an IP address of internet postings. Or, are they keeping the source confidential? Wild thought -- what if it was anonymously sent by Ray Gricar, wherever he may be?

That involved McQueary, and there is no suggestion that RFG ever knew about that incident. It is intriguing thought, I must admit.

In theory, it would be possible to use a public site, and leave after sending it. I have heard that someone in Europe does look at the Gricar sites.

2. Would organized crime have any interest in Penn State football related to gambling and profiting from people betting on or favoring Penn State? What effect has the scandal had on that, and would it have affected it back in 1998, or 2005? I know how huge PSU football is, all over PA. The traffic jams for games, the tailgate parties, everything about that was over the top.

Regarding Sandusky in 1998, possibly. I'm sure people bet on the games. After 1999, I'd doubt it. Sandusky was not part of the program anymore.

I went there, but I never was a football fan. When I saw the first headline about Sandusky and a grand jury, I couldn't figure out why the Centre Daily Times was covering a municipal scandal in a northern Ohio city.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I just checked the e-mail story; it cannot be accurate. It says Stacy Parks Miller (SPM) got the e-mail in December of 2008.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/06/14/jerry-sandusky-trial-5-things-to-know-from-day-4/

SPM was elected in November 2009; the first "December" she was in office was 2010.

Michael Madeira was DA in 12/2008; the grand jury didn't start meeting until 2/2009. It's doubly ironic. I started the Gricar blog the same month they started investigating Sandusky. Before that, I did a "guest blog," on the need for a grand jury in the Gricar case.

 

[BigCat]

I'm new to this thread but not new to Websleuths. I lived in Lewisburg, PA for 7 years and followed the Gricar case when it first occurred, and more recently followed some of the Sandusky trial as I still have ties to State College.

I have a few questions, and those of you who are knowledgeable might be able to answer them. Please forgive any dumb questions or things that have been discussed in the past, as the title of this post says, these are random questions resulting from things I've been reading.

1. Has the origin of the "anonymous email" received by the ADA in 2008 regarding Sandusky's victim ever been identified? It's not that difficult to discover an IP address of internet postings. Or, are they keeping the source confidential? Wild thought -- what if it was anonymously sent by Ray Gricar, wherever he may be?

2. Would organized crime have any interest in Penn State football related to gambling and profiting from people betting on or favoring Penn State? What effect has the scandal had on that, and would it have affected it back in 1998, or 2005? I know how huge PSU football is, all over PA. The traffic jams for games, the tailgate parties, everything about that was over the top.

Boxing is the sport we usually associate with gambling because it only takes one boxer to fix a fight. A college football team, by contrast, will play around 35 players during a game. Unless a star player is on the take, a fix is unreliable.

Plus, even if an organized crime syndicate had its hooks in a star player or coach at Penn State, Paterno would have pulled the player or overruled the coach if he was not performing well. Paterno wanted win (perhaps too much). So I think we can safely rule out gambling. JMO.