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

[CJMAJORGIRL24]

A call for a special prosecutor to investigate both Corbett's conduct in the case and Gricar's 1998 involvement: http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2012/07/time_for_special_prosecutor_in.html

Better late than never!!

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Better late than never!!

The article noted that PA would need special legislation to appoint one; I should point out that both houses of the General Assembly are Republican, and the governor has a veto.

There were never any grounds to turn the case over to the Attorney General's Office. A local DA can, if:

1. They claim they don't have the resources to investigate/prosecute. They have even had help from NASA, so it can't be claimed.

2. They'd have to claim a conflict of interest. Until Sandusky, there was never a questionable decision on RFG's part. No money was missing from the office. There is zero evidence of bribery.

Now, after Sandusky, there is a questionable decision in how RFG's conducted himself in office, but no evidence of anything criminal. We don't know RFG's motivation for not prosecuting Sandusky. It just could have been a bad decision, but it, in theory, could have been something else.

I think, now, there is, at least, a potential conflict of interest. I think there are grounds for turning the case over to the AG's Office.

 

[BigCat]

SPORTSbyBROOKS is a bit of a sensationalist and not always reliabe. He does, however, have nearly 80,000 followers on Twitter. He sent out a series of tweets suggesting Corbett may have stop seaching for RFG for political reasons.

http://twitter.com/sportsbybrooks

I really don't understand Twitter as a form of communication, so I'm having a hard time following his argument. Hopefully others will have better luck.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

SPORTSbyBROOKS is a bit of a sensationalist and not always reliabe. He does, however, have nearly 80,000 followers on Twitter. He sent out a series of tweets suggesting Corbett may have stop seaching for RFG for political reasons.

http://twitter.com/sportsbybrooks

I really don't understand Twitter as a form of communication, so I'm having a hard time following his argument. Hopefully others will have better luck.

It doesn't make too much sense.

Corbett, as AG, was never was searching for RFG. The local DA couldn't turn the case over unless they claimed a conflict of interest or lack of resources. Until Victim 6, there was never anything even close to a conflict. The DA's Office has had huge resources.

The AG could only swoop in if the DA was seen to abuse his/her discretion. There have two DA's of different parties, and neither has turned the Gricar case over to the AG.

Corbett was a defense attorney in 1998, so he's not covering up Victim 6, the only case where RFG had any known involvement.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

If anyone doesn't believe me when I post that people are saying, "Ray is gay 'cause he drove a Mini Cooper," just read some of the comments on this article: http://www.centredaily.com/2005/05/...or-gricar.html#storylink=omni_popular#wgt=pop

I am not happy about that.

 

[BigCat]

It doesn't make too much sense.

Corbett, as AG, was never was searching for RFG. The local DA couldn't turn the case over unless they claimed a conflict of interest or lack of resources. Until Victim 6, there was never anything even close to a conflict. The DA's Office has had huge resources.

The AG could only swoop in if the DA was seen to abuse his/her discretion. There have two DA's of different parties, and neither has turned the Gricar case over to the AG.

Corbett was a defense attorney in 1998, so he's not covering up Victim 6, the only case where RFG had any known involvement.

Oh, OK. I take it Buehner must be a political enemy of Corbett's.

Somebody could have wanted to send a message; that would be a possibility.

Interesting choice of words. Wasn't it through Ganter that the BOT delivered Paterno his termination notice?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Oh, OK. I take it Buehner must be a political enemy of Corbett's.

The AG's Office called him "delusional," publicly, so that might be a reasonable characterization. As a matter of law, the AG's Office was correct that it could not take over the Gricar case.

Consider this. I've long been an advocate of a greater investigation. I was calling for a grand jury to investigate the Gricar disappearance in 2008 (though it is no longer on-line), several months prior to the start of the Sandusky grand jury. Until mid-November 2011, I never called for the Gricar case to be sent to the AG's Office. I feel that RFG's conduct in the case of Victim 6 might create a conflict of interest, and certainly creates the appearance of one.

Interesting choice of words. Wasn't it through Ganter that the BOT delivered Paterno his termination notice?

Yes, it was Ganter who delivered the phone number to Paterno.

 

[waltzingmatilda]

If anyone doesn't believe me when I post that people are saying, "Ray is gay 'cause he drove a Mini Cooper," just read some of the comments on this article: http://www.centredaily.com/2005/05/...or-gricar.html#storylink=omni_popular#wgt=pop

I am not happy about that.

I see what you mean J.J. I live in a beach town and Mini Coopers are common around here regardless of a person's sexual orientation.

I wonder why CDT re-ran a story from 2005? It's not like it's the anniversary of RG's disappearance and the man is already declared dead, so do you read anything into this? TIA

wm

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I see what you mean J.J. I live in a beach town and Mini Coopers are common around here regardless of a person's sexual orientation.

It's the same everywhere. Driving a Mini does not mean your gay. RFG, in the 20 years prior to his disappearance, had two wives, ask a third woman to marry him, and was living with a fourth. He also was known as being close to several other women, and flirting with some others. That does not scream, "RuPaul!"

I wonder why CDT re-ran a story from 2005? It's not like it's the anniversary of RG's disappearance and the man is already declared dead, so do you read anything into this? TIA

wm

SPORTSbyBROOKS linked to that story, one of Corbett's few public comments on the story. People clicked the link and that drove up the story's popularity.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I have often wondered just what happened to Gricar's Mini Cooper. I used to see an identical red/white Mini Cooper every morning on my way to work. The driver was an older guy, and usually we were getting onto the interstate at the same time. I have been retired almost 4 years now. I knew about the Gricar case and would always muse about what the family may have done with that Mini Cooper. Does anyone know what may have happened to it?

Red/white Mini Coopers must be way more plentiful than I would have thought. That style would not appeal to just everyone!

I have always wondered if Gricar was gay. IDK why, even in spite of the fact he lived with a girlfriend. He was eccentric at the very least.

I think he was either murdered or paid off and left the country with a fake passport. He strikes me as one who would have loved living in a foreign country.

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I have often wondered just what happened to Gricar's Mini Cooper. I used to see an identical red/white Mini Cooper every morning on my way to work. The driver was an older guy, and usually we were getting onto the interstate at the same time. I have been retired almost 4 years now. I knew about the Gricar case and would always muse about what the family may have done with that Mini Cooper. Does anyone know what may have happened to it?

It was in his girlfriend's name, though she rarely drove it. I don't know if she kept it or sold it.

Red/white Mini Coopers must be way more plentiful than I would have thought. That style would not appeal to just everyone!

I have always wondered if Gricar was gay. IDK why, even in spite of the fact he lived with a girlfriend. He was eccentric at the very least.

Everything I'm hearing, from people who knew him, he was straight. He liked women.

I think he was either murdered or paid off and left the country with a fake passport. He strikes me as one who would have loved living in a foreign country.

I would give foul play or voluntary departure, together, a 95% chance.

As for foreign travel, you might want to look at this: http://www.centredaily.com/2011/02/14/2518751/southfield-sighting.html

As of 4/15/12, this sighting has not been ruled out.

I have seen no evidence RFG was paid off, but, based on what he was making, his assets seem very low.

 

[LaLaw2000]

Thanks for the article, J.J.

I have followed this case from the beginning and have read all of the articles. Of course there is no evidence of Gricar having been paid off, but that really doesn't mean anything to me. Any payoff could have been very well hidden.

I will never believe Gricar killed himself. A 'hit' could have been put out on Gricar, but if there had been, IMO, it involved an official as well as the drug ring because he knew too much. After all, killing the D.A. would not mean an end to the drug case. It would have just been passed on to another prosecutor, IMO. The faction with the most to gain would have been the Sandusky one. OR, Gricar just did not want to prosecute Sandusky because of what it would have done to Penn State.

There was a h3ll of a lot of money floating around and to me the most logical thing would have been to pay the D.A. to make an official decision that there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute even though there was, IMO.

Yes, I tend to think that Gricar is in a foreign country and maybe even regretting his decision. Also; there are many, many gay people (both male and female) who continue to live in the proverbial 'closet' today. Being gay has nothing to do with anything, but I have always wondered about Gricar even from the beginning. Older people are more hesitant to 'come out' it seems.

If Gricar is alive, chances are we will eventually find out where he has been all of this time. He will pass away somewhere and an effort will be made to identify a 'mysterious' person. At least I hope so.

Given all of the circumstances, Ithink Gricar is still alive somewhere.

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I have followed this case from the beginning and have read all of the articles. Of course there is no evidence of Gricar having been paid off, but that really doesn't mean anything to me. Any payoff could have been very well hidden.

It is obviously possible, but there is no evidence.

I will never believe Gricar killed himself. A 'hit' could have been put out on Gricar, but if there had been, IMO, it involved an official as well as the drug ring because he knew too much.

I did, for the first six months. Considering his age, retirement, and family history, it would be possible. What is impossible is hiding his body after he did it. There were multiple searches of the river, that were massive.

After all, killing the D.A. would not mean an end to the drug case. It would have just been passed on to another prosecutor, IMO.

The AG was prosecuting the case; RFG or the DA's Office had nothing to do with it.

Given all of the circumstances, Ithink Gricar is still alive somewhere.

MOO

I give it a 51% chance at present, and foul play a 44% chance. That adds up to 95%.

 

[nittanylioness234]

This is my first post on websleuths. As a PSU alumnus and fan of the football team, I have following the Sandusky case since 3/31/11, when it was first disclosed that a grand jury was investigating him. As the months have gone by, and especially since 11/11, my sadness and horror have been mounting, and I have been struggling to understand how these things could have happened at the school I love. I cannot comprehend how this cover-up has been permitted to occur, and how anyone could continue to allow innocent children to be harmed...for years.

I can't help thinking there must be a very big reason. It has to be bigger than football - football at PSU would continue to be popular no matter what. Sandusky was already "retired" - so why cover it up? I read about the business dealings between PSU people - including Schultz and Paterno - and prominent Second Mile people. Maybe someone wanted to protect those deals? I read about the rumors about Sandusky "pimping out boys to donors," and dismissed them as ridiculous. I read the rumors that someone connected to Sandusky, or Sandusky himself, had Gricar murdered, and thought that was farfetched as well.

It was while looking at an article about Gricar that I discovered that he had met with the others who had investigated the Sandusky 1998 situation...months after the investigation was closed, and that then offensive coordinator Ganter was present as well...at the "football building"...why? To hoist a few beers and reminisce about ole Jer??? I googled dates around that time to see if someone on the team had been arrested - nothing. Then I googled the names present and found...all of you, and these threads.

Now I'm wondering if there is more to the Gricar/Sandusky connection. Why did Gricar call off the investigation when there seemed to be sufficient evidence in 1998? I'm wondering if someone higher up convinced him, or even threatened him, not to file charges. I'm wondering if the reason might be more people involved with pedophilia that someone wanted covered up...or child ...or something else big...bigger than football.

So many questions...will any of the various investigations give us the answers?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

This is my first post on websleuths. As a PSU alumnus and fan of the football team, I have following the Sandusky case since 3/31/11, when it was first disclosed that a grand jury was investigating him. As the months have gone by, and especially since 11/11, my sadness and horror have been mounting, and I have been struggling to understand how these things could have happened at the school I love. I cannot comprehend how this cover-up has been permitted to occur, and how anyone could continue to allow innocent children to be harmed...for years.

First, welcome from a fellow alum. I wish it was under better circumstances. I've been referring to it as Central Pennsylvania Gothic for about 7 months. The humor in the title, such as it is, is dark.

I can't help thinking there must be a very big reason. It has to be bigger than football - football at PSU would continue to be popular no matter what. Sandusky was already "retired" - so why cover it up? I read about the business dealings between PSU people - including Schultz and Paterno - and prominent Second Mile people. Maybe someone wanted to protect those deals? I read about the rumors about Sandusky "pimping out boys to donors," and dismissed them as ridiculous. I read the rumors that someone connected to Sandusky, or Sandusky himself, had Gricar murdered, and thought that was farfetched as well.

The alleged "coverup" occurred in 2001; Gricar disappeared in 2005. I think we can rule that out.

It was while looking at an article about Gricar that I discovered that he had met with the others who had investigated the Sandusky 1998 situation...months after the investigation was closed, and that then offensive coordinator Ganter was present as well...at the "football building"...why? To hoist a few beers and reminisce about ole Jer??? I googled dates around that time to see if someone on the team had been arrested - nothing. Then I googled the names present and found...all of you, and these threads.

I wish I could say for sure. Sandusky was still the assistant coach, and would not announce his retirement until about 8 months late.

Now I'm wondering if there is more to the Gricar/Sandusky connection. Why did Gricar call off the investigation when there seemed to be sufficient evidence in 1998?

JKA just suggested, "However, there were obvious risks, both in terms of whether there would be conviction and in terms of greater difficulty in any future case were there to be a giant public debaucle and an acquittal."

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/07/08/3255159/legacy-protection.html#storylink=cpy

It was clear that there was enough evidence to take the case to trial (JKA has never suggested otherwise, to my knowledge). Was it that he didn't think he could get a conviction against the "Great Sandusky?"

Possibly, but that doesn't explain other aspects of it. Why didn't RFG call a grand jury? If we found out he did, that would not explain everything. Why didn't some of the reports go to DPW.? Was there a legal requirement to hold back that information? Why wasn't JKA, who handled child abuse cases at the time, and who initially handled this one, kept in by RFG?

And then, there is that October 13, 1998 meeting.

 

[CJMAJORGIRL24]

Now I'm wondering if there is more to the Gricar/Sandusky connection. Why did Gricar call off the investigation when there seemed to be sufficient evidence in 1998? I'm wondering if someone higher up convinced him, or even threatened him, not to file charges. I'm wondering if the reason might be more people involved with pedophilia that someone wanted covered up...or child ...or something else big...bigger than football.

So many questions...will any of the various investigations give us the answers?

I am happy you found us!! I also wonder WHY he didn't press charges. IMO there was more than enough evidence to press the charges then. I have said it before and I still believe that Mr. Gricar was convinced by others that ol' Jer would retire and it would never happen again. But it did. And I still believe Mr. Gricar knew it.

I hope that they continue investigating until they get to the bottom of this!

 

[CJMAJORGIRL24]

If anyone doesn't believe me when I post that people are saying, "Ray is gay 'cause he drove a Mini Cooper," just read some of the comments on this article: http://www.centredaily.com/2005/05/...or-gricar.html#storylink=omni_popular#wgt=pop

I am not happy about that.

This is the craziest thing I have ever read..thanks for the smile JJ.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I am happy you found us!! I also wonder WHY he didn't press charges. IMO there was more than enough evidence to press the charges then. I have said it before and I still believe that Mr. Gricar was convinced by others that ol' Jer would retire and it would never happen again. But it did. And I still believe Mr. Gricar knew it.

I hope that they continue investigating until they get to the bottom of this!

Well, now we're moving from the "he didn't have a enough evidence to try Sandusky," to "Oh, he couldn't get a conviction against popular Ole Jer." There may be an element of truth in that, but this would be the only case that I'm familiar with where he didn't prosecute a popular client.
It certainly doesn't make RFG look like the "hard hitting prosecutor," that we've all heard about.

There are some other problems. RFG had the ability to petition for a grand jury; as far as we know, he never did. Had he been worried about resources, he could have turned the case over to the AG. Ditto.

Then there is the Chambers' Report never getting to DPW (according to Lauro). They can make a determination if he had abused children, but it is a civil determination; Sandusky wouldn't have to be charged with anything for the determination, much less convicted. It might have been just an administrative problem, or there might have been a legal requirement that they couldn't share it. I still have the annoying feeling that, had JKA been involved, it might have. She was removed from the case.

 

[CJMAJORGIRL24]

Well, now we're moving from the "he didn't have a enough evidence to try Sandusky," to "Oh, he couldn't get a conviction against popular Ole Jer." There may be an element of truth in that, but this would be the only case that I'm familiar with where he didn't prosecute a popular client.
It certainly doesn't make RFG look like the "hard hitting prosecutor," that we've all heard about.

There are some other problems. RFG had the ability to petition for a grand jury; as far as we know, he never did. Had he been worried about resources, he could have turned the case over to the AG. Ditto.

Then there is the Chambers' Report never getting to DPW (according to Lauro). They can make a determination if he had abused children, but it is a civil determination; Sandusky wouldn't have to be charged with anything for the determination, much less convicted. It might have been just an administrative problem, or there might have been a legal requirement that they couldn't share it. I still have the annoying feeling that, had JKA been involved, it might have. She was removed from the case.

Im on the side of the fence that believes that he might have had enough for a conviction back then. And i believe that JKA would have been on my side of the fence. I also believe that MANY things we have been told about Mr. Gricar might have been "stretched" to make him appear just a little nicer and a little better than he really was. After all, he was human.

I read that his nephew claims Mr. Gricar was not a "football fan"-but didn't they attend every OSU-Penn St. game? --:banghead:

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Im on the side of the fence that believes that he might have had enough for a conviction back then. And i believe that JKA would have been on my side of the fence.

Her most recent comments are interesting. After criticizing me for calling it exceptionally bad judgment, she said: "Would others, myself included had Ray not decided to handle the case personally, perhaps have decided to forge ahead with what was known at that time? While its impossible to say with 100% certainty without knowing what else transpired after Ray took over the case, that's quite possible."

http://www.centredaily.com/2012/07/08/3255159/legacy-protection.html#storylink=cpy

I think the Sandusky case might have had a different, and better, outcome had JKA not been removed from it.

I also believe that MANY things we have been told about Mr. Gricar might have been "stretched" to make him appear just a little nicer and a little better than he really was. After all, he was human.

I read that his nephew claims Mr. Gricar was not a "football fan"-but didn't they attend every OSU-Penn St. game? --:banghead:

Here is what he said: "a bitter taste in his mouth for the program, and it's coach, and that was not much of a secret." I don't think he said RFG wasn't a football fan. He did attend games, and Sloane indicated RFG took one female friend to a tailgate party.

I've really been surprised at Sloane. He was RFG's closest friend, but he's often brutally honest, like about the various women in RFG's life. He gave a whole bunch of new information.

It's like at least some of the others really don't understand how bad this ends up making RFG look. Fine, RFG made a mistake, a misjudgment, but there is no indication that it was criminal or unethical. Just say that, especially since a coverup on campus is alleged.