Do You Feel That PF Was Fully Investigated?

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by gstickley


Well, "TG" has never asked me for any information. And if "TG" asked me other than in person, I would not give him the information because I don't know who "TG" might be. And I still can see no reason why "TG" would want or need any information on me. As I've stated what seems like a gazillion times, if LE wants my information, LE can contact me directly. Why would any person with any brain give personal information to a total stranger on the computer? After all the speculation about which poster may be who, along with the insinuations about me already, "TG" may not be "TG" . . . maybe "TG" is . . . whoever you want it to be.



Ah, anyone getting a referral. Anyone buying something online :rolleyes: He has a website, which has been confirmed in the media. You can contact him though that, and a few people here called him.

Again: PEF never said, "obtain a search warrant." GStickley did.


Now, this is my last post about giving my information to "TG" or anyone else, including LE. Make of it what you want. I think 2 days of this garbage is enough. If you want to tag me as a "suspect" in the disappearance of Ray Gricar, you're barking up the wrong tree. In fact, I believe there are several posters on here who know who I am, and I hope they can see through all your smoke & mirrors---with such ridiculous accusations being made against me, how can anything be believed in the future posts you make?

I don't tag you with anything, except hypocrisy. I do suggest that some prior posters may have had a motive of misdirection and those posters may have been very close to RFG. You have to ask why? I do hope LE is asking why?

[Politigal]

8 No's

7 Yes's

2 It's too lates

So far -- the majority feel that Patty Fornicola was not fully investigated in this case.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Politigal
8 No's

7 Yes's

2 It's too lates

So far -- the majority feel that Patty Fornicola was not fully investigated in this case. [/*]

A majority of 17 is 9; no choice has a majority as of yet.

[UndertheRadar]

JJ, 7+2=9.

"It's too late"="Sure woulda been nice to have her fully investigated, she hasn't been, but that door is closed."

Meanwhile, I have to say that I have posted on umpteen different true crime boards for more than eleven years now.

NEVER, NEVER, NEVER has anyone EVER suggested that I should "turn over" or "provide" my contact information to anyone involved in the case, not to law enforcement, not to a family member of victim or missing person.

That this has been raised and has occupied pages of discussion is the most ludicrous act of subterfuge. It is thoroughly irrelevant to anything and acts only to take the focus off the fact that JJ made a post in which he stated that a given username on the forum was a specific identity in real life, violating CTV privacy policy in so doing.

Worse, he says this is not a guess, meaning he has confirmation, or so he is claiming.

Now he wants people to "turn information over" to TG and he harasses them for not explaining why they haven't done so.

Given his claim that he has *confirmation* of a username's real identity, it sure makes one wonder why he wants other usernames to turn over their information to someone. If this doesn't make posters suspicious, it surely ought to. What kind of files is JJ trying to collect on people that he wants personal information on posters "turned over"?

EVERY online safety site has suggestions like the following:


Keep your full name, Social Security number, address, phone number, and bank or credit card account numbers to yourself.



Make sure your screen name doesn't say too much about you. Even if you think it makes you anonymous, it doesn't take a genius to combine clues to figure out who you are and where you can be found.

http://www.onguardonline.gov/socialnetworking_youth.html

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, half of 17 is 8.5; a majority means, by definition, "more than half." Take of your shoes and figure out that 8 is is not more than half of 8.5. I'm afraid that the bulk you posts don't add up either. "It's too late" is basically saying that we can't gather any new information or, at this point PEF can't be investigated. I love how you twist.

No, UTR, I've asked if you would be willing to do it, to spare LE the time and effort of getting a warrant; GStickley raised the warrant issue.

Here is what I said specifically.

No, posters don't and you have a right not to disclose.

I look at the case of PEF, who voluntarily gave information to LE, and permitted a warrantless search. No evasion, no suggestion of a court order, no Santa. It seems like she has nothing to hide.

Oh, and then there is me. One poster suggest LE is interested in "J. J.," so I tell Tony, openly, give them my information if they want it, and I proceed to post how LE can find it. No court order, no fuss. Nothing to hide (at least in the RFG case).

SJ volunteered that LE has her contact information; nothing to hide.

As I said, it is interesting how people respond.

I see a lot of defensiveness in your posts, which is interesting, to say the least.

It is interesting, we have multiple posters that volunteered to give them contact information, i.e., where they lived, how to contact them. Not their Social Security Number, credit card records, bank records (and if they'd want to see if I got a large payment in the first half of 2005, I'd let them look), merely those things that they could get from the phone book. Not on the board here, but to the family spokesman to forward up request (and if there is no LE request, there is no forwarding).

Again the reason is to help LE, to save them time and effort, to cooperate with LE, should the need arise. We have the answer from GStickley, who raised the warrant issue. We have no direct answer from UTR. I'll ask again, would you be willing to send your information to TG in order to have your identity verified by LE, if they requested it (through the website, not by PM)? I would, so would a few other posters. I NEVER, NEVER, NEVER thought you'd say no, frankly, or be this evasive.

And no UTR, I have not identified any poster, I've mentioned two names, and they are not posters. I must really be getting close to something. Now, I might have PM'ed either one and asked, "Are you her," if they were members. That option is no longer there.

Is there misdirection on the part of JKA?

[UndertheRadar]

Still not a mensch.

JJ, I'll bet you were the kind of kid who when your mother said, "JJ, did you spill Coke on the living room rug?" had no problem with your conscience in answering "No" when you had spilled Pepsi.

[J. J. in Phila]

Still evasion from UTR. :rolleyes:

You could ask her who spilled the mike on the carpet and she;'s say, the carpet was old. Evasion, Evasion, Evasion. Reminds me a couple of fromer posters, and a former ADA.

You ask her it she'd voluntarily give her family information to forward to to LE, if LE requested it, she says that she was "NEVER, NEVER, NEVER," asked that before. But she still doesn't address the question

You note a similarities between frormer posters and published works, and she screams terms of service.

Interestingly, the Terms of Service apply to people who Register, while registered.


You agree that Court TV, in its sole discretion, may terminate your Account, password, and User Name and/or use of the Web sites, and may remove and discard any content within the Court TV Web sites, for any reason, including, without limitation, if Court TV believes that you have violated or acted inconsistently with the letter or spirit of these Terms. You agree that any termination of your access to the Web sites under any provision of this Terms may be effected without prior notice, and acknowledge and agree that Court TV may immediately deactivate or delete your Account, password, and User Name and all related information and files associated with it and/or bar any further access to such files or the Web sites. Further, you agree that Court TV shall not be liable to you or any third-party for any termination of your access to the Web sites. The provisions of Sections 5, 6, 9(C), 9(D), 11 and 12 and this Section 10, shall survive termination of these Terms.



Here are some other tidbits.

You agree not to post or transmit through Court TV any material that violates or infringes in any way upon the rights of others, including any statements which may defame, abuse, harass or threaten others;

I doubt that saying JKA acted in a "noncriminal and possibly honorable" manner might not qualify as defamation.

It could be argued that trying to concoct a scenario that names PEF as a murderess is, especially without proof, and when LE has ruled her out as a suspect, might be.

You agree not to impersonate any person or entity, including, but not limited to, any Court TV employee, or falsely state or otherwise misrepresent your affiliation with any person or entity;

Arguably, JKA didn't actually say she was someone else.

You agree not to interfere with any other user's right to privacy, including by harvesting or collecting personally-identifiable information about Court TV users

No data from here, I had no idea or opinion on who Lustor or PE was, when they were members, though I assumed Lustor was grossly unfamiliar with roads in Central Pennsylvania.

Oh, I must of missed it, so you can cite it, but where exactly is this TOS that says you cannot identify a current or former poster. I didn't see it.

Or did you just make it up.

[UndertheRadar]

JJ, I have seen multiple posts from Coldwater explicitly stating that it is against CTV rules to post any personal identification information about **anyone** on CTV. It's common knowledge on this board for anybody with half a brain cell that this is wrong. I've been harping about it since phone numbers and addresses first started appearing on the Gricar board. I've never been on a single message board anywhere on the web where this wasn't a sacred rule.

The only evasion is from **you.** Your posts on this subject are so Clintonian, I'd suggest you were Bill Clinton, but gee, I wouldn't want to break the rules.

[gstickley]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila


<snip>

[/i]You agree not to interfere with any other user's right to privacy, including by harvesting or collecting personally-identifiable information about Court TV users[/i]

<snip>

[/*]


Could this be what you're talking about????????????????????? You know, the violation of TOS??????????????????????

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, you've made a claim that it's a violation the Terms of Service to identify a current member (which I have no intention of doing). When asked where it is, you evade. :rolleyes:

You have made a claim that it's a violation the Terms of Service to identify someone who is not a current member, but was one. When asked where it is, you evade. :rolleyes:

Now you claim "personal identification information." What "personal identification information?" We can quote from the this site. JKA publicly posted her Googlepages. :rolleyes:

I have JKA's phone number, from her campaign website, but I have not posted it (and don't intend to).

I asked you:

Oh, I must of missed it, so you can cite it, but where exactly is this TOS that says you cannot identify a current or former poster. I didn't see it.

Or did you just make it up

It seems clear, you just made it up.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by gstickley



Could this be what you're talking about????????????????????? You know, the violation of TOS?????????????????????? [/*]

Ah, what personal identification?

We are permitted to quote. I would also add that neither Lustor or PE are "Court TV users."

[gstickley]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila


No, UTR, I've asked if you would be willing to do it, to spare LE the time and effort of getting a warrant; GStickley raised the warrant issue.

Here is what I said specifically.

No, posters don't and you have a right not to disclose.

(snip)

Oh, and then there is me. One poster suggest LE is interested in "J. J.," so I tell Tony, openly, give them my information if they want it, and I proceed to post how LE can find it. No court order, no fuss. Nothing to hide (at least in the RFG case).
(snip)

I see a lot of defensiveness in your posts, which is interesting, to say the least.

It is interesting, we have multiple posters that volunteered to give them [i]contact information, i.e., where they lived, how to contact them. Not their Social Security Number, credit card records, bank records (and if they'd want to see if I got a large payment in the first half of 2005, I'd let them look), merely those things that they could get from the phone book. Not on the board here, but to the family spokesman to forward up request (and if there is no LE request, there is no forwarding).

Again the reason is to help LE, to save them time and effort, to cooperate with LE, should the need arise. We have the answer from GStickley, who raised the warrant issue. We have no direct answer from UTR.

I'll ask again, would you be willing to send your information to TG in order to have your identity verified by LE, if they requested it (through the website, not by PM)? I would, so would a few other posters. I NEVER, NEVER, NEVER thought you'd say no, frankly, or be this evasive.

(snip)
[/*]

Seems to me that ***someone*** is trying to get private information on posters; private information includes a telephone number.

[UndertheRadar]

JJ, giving personal information about anyone is against the rules. Period.

Since you continue in your Clintonian attempts to wiggle out of your crossing this line, and since you obviously don't feel that what you did was **wrong,** you must feel it's perfectly fine for the rest of us to start posting our own insider information about other posters:

Based on insider information, it's time to reveal that Billywahoo was really Patty Fornicola. She came here and told other posters she was "close to the case," that she had information about press conferences before they happened, and that she knew inside information about the Gricar family and the investigation into Ray's disappearance. She even told a poster, "You would choke on your mouse if you knew who you were talking to." While here, she tried to elicit sympathy for herself by describing how grueling the polygraph process was and how it demonstrated PF's innocence. She tried to prop up the suicide theory by emphasizing the statistics on men who commit suicide *after* retirement, even though Ray had not yet retired.

Eventually, she discarded the Billywahoo username and enlisted the aid of a man living in Philadelphia, who set up an account under the name of J.J. in Philadelphia. Using this account, she has passed information to this man to be posted on the board. In his first week of posting, J.J. told the board that there was ample evidence Ray Gricar had been in Lewisburg and that any discussion of PF should be off the table, all in an effort to quell any discussion of PF. Many times in his 14-month tenure on the board, posters have wondered openly how poster J.J. would have so much "inside" knowledge of things happening in the Gricar household and in and around Centre County at a time he did not live there. He was even able to tell the board, for instance, specifically what question PF asked her brother during the phone call on the night of Friday, 4/15/05, though ostensibly no one would have been present other than PF (and on the line, her brother). All this can be explained by the tandem relationship between PF and poster J.J., who for 14 months has been posting exactly what PF has been telling him to post. This relationship explains J.J.'s constant obsession with PF and why he brings her into discussions that otherwise have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with her, another fact that has puzzled many a poster on the Ray Gricar forum.

All the foregoing is "more than a guess."

Now, it is not evidence that PF is guilty of anything. But it does raise the question "Why?"

[Chump#7]

Oh Snap!

[Tree_of_Life]

Well, you forced me to do it.....


I am Santa Claus.

And I'm putting a few of you on the naughty list.

I will be leaving the boards soon to begin my rounds.

:santa:

Remember kids, Christmas is only a few weeks away! But I am a forgiving soul, and I'll give you time to make up for it.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Tree_of_Life
Well, you forced me to do it.....


I am Santa Claus.

And I'm putting a few of you on the naughty list.

I will be leaving the boards soon to begin my rounds.

:santa:

Remember kids, Christmas is only a few weeks away! But I am a forgiving soul, and I'll give you time to make up for it. [/*]

Thank heavens Santa is always wise and fair.

He knows if a kid in the sandbox is breaking a rule, and breaking that rule could have bad consequences, it's perfectly natural for the other kids to be upset about it. :D

[day2day]

Originally posted by Tree_of_Life
Well, you forced me to do it.....


I am Santa Claus.

And I'm putting a few of you on the naughty list.

I will be leaving the boards soon to begin my rounds.

:santa:

Remember kids, Christmas is only a few weeks away! But I am a forgiving soul, and I'll give you time to make up for it. [/*]


Oh great...are YOU trying to trick us into giving YOU our personal info? :santa:

**Polishes my halo** waiting for ya...

[day2day]

Originally posted by gstickley


Seems to me that ***someone*** is trying to get private information on posters; private information includes a telephone number. [/*]

Yep..thats what it seems like to me. I have NEVER heard of LE approaching a victims family to have them offer up info about posters on a missing persons forum. ...

Next....:chicken:

[Cinderella]

Originally posted by Tree_of_Life
Well, you forced me to do it.....


I am Santa Claus.

And I'm putting a few of you on the naughty list.

I will be leaving the boards soon to begin my rounds.

:santa:

Remember kids, Christmas is only a few weeks away! But I am a forgiving soul, and I'll give you time to make up for it. [/*]


Yeah, you are Santa like I am the Easter Bunny. :lol:
In case you really are Santa, you broke the TOS rules.
:lol:

[Cinderella]

Chump you really have to admit that it gets interesting around here. And to think that I missed 2 months of the live posting. I love it when posters really get into a good debate.

I used to be the one that got into all the trouble. Just ask Pgal.
Since that time I have been content watching, SherriJean and Pgal, and UTR and J. J. go at it.

I am really thankful this Thanksgiving for all of my poster friends. Notice that I didn't say enemies.

Chump you have to post more to get into the spirit. Don't forget Santa is watching. Oh no, now I broke the TOS rules. :santa:

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by gstickley


Seems to me that ***someone*** is trying to get private information on posters; private information includes a telephone number. [/*]

Yes, according to P'gal, The Bellefonte Police Department. (I actually think they were pulling her leg.)That is what prompted me to tell TG to give it to them, if they wanted. I'm glad to know who would be will

It sounds to me that several posters have gotten very worried to the point of making up TOS violations.

And here we see UTR evading all the questions once again. All her claims, the dogs circled the car, MSNBC doesn't know what there doing, PEF gave "conflicting" information, anybody could drive the car for an hour and not leave a trace, that isn't JKA, it's a violation of TOS. :rolleyes:

And when asked to explain, no answers from her.

Once again wrong, in her recent post. I've said, from the start, nobody other than RFG could have driven the car to Lewisburg. I know you can't comprehend the difference (or don't want to), but there is a difference.

Sorry, the only principle I've ever spoken to is, drum roll, JKA. I've unfortunately had more contact with her than Tony Gricar did.

[Politigal]

It seems like this thread has been railroaded into the autobiography of JJ.




:eek:

[slaphappy]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila


Yes, according to P'gal, The Bellefonte Police Department. (I actually think they were pulling her leg.)That is what prompted me to tell TG to give it to them, if they wanted. I'm glad to know who would be will

It sounds to me that several posters have gotten very worried to the point of making up TOS violations.

And here we see UTR evading all the questions once again. All her claims, the dogs circled the car, MSNBC doesn't know what there doing, PEF gave "conflicting" information, anybody could drive the car for an hour and not leave a trace, that isn't JKA, it's a violation of TOS. :rolleyes:

And when asked to explain, no answers from her.

Once again wrong, in her recent post. I've said, from the start, nobody other than RFG could have driven the car to Lewisburg. I know you can't comprehend the difference (or don't want to), but there is a difference.

Sorry, the only principle I've ever spoken to is, drum roll, JKA. I've unfortunately had more contact with her than Tony Gricar did. [/*]



J.J. I didn't want to quote your whole post ( I dont know how to quote part of a post yet....still learning) Anyway, I was interested in the comment about how the dogs circled Ray's car. I thought that was true. Wasn't it reported that the dogs didn't follow any scents from the perimeter of the car?

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by slaphappy




J.J. I didn't want to quote your whole post ( I dont know how to quote part of a post yet....still learning) Anyway, I was interested in the comment about how the dogs circled Ray's car. I thought that was true. Wasn't it reported that the dogs didn't follow any scents from the perimeter of the car? [/*]

Hi SlapHappy,

Yes, it was reported, or rather misreported, in a variety of sources including the Centre Daily Times, that the dogs circled the perimeter of the car and didn't follow a trail away from the car. The "misreporting" came in the sense that the car was actually removed Saturday night, and the dogs were brought in on Sunday. Many posters assumed the car was there when the dogs were brought in since this was the way it was reported locally. Later, the timeline was pieced together and it became clear the reporting was inaccurate.

It's actually immaterial, since the car itself didn't need to be there for the dogs to follow the scent that remained in the area. I won't go into the reasons JJ is raising this right now, but that's essentially the scoop.

[slaphappy]

:) Thanks UndertheRadar!


One of the things so frustrating about this case is that most of the questions from when this first happened haven't been answered. Which leads to more theories and confusion.

Infact, anything I contribute will just raise more questions (even in my own mind) I'm sure you people know exactly what I mean.


several on the endless list of questions:

1. Was it ever confirmed that there were 5 prints found in the mini cooper, or was it 5 'sets' of prints?

2. The exercise tape found outside the mini cooper passenger side. Finger prints on it?

3. Why was the laptop case left at home.....while the laptop itself was found in the river?

4. Smell of cigarette smoke/ashes in Ray's car. An avid non smoker.

5. Why was his cell phone found inside the mini cooper turned off?

6. All of those 'sightings' of Ray that were ignored because it didn't 'fit' the time frame? ( Eye witness accounts aren't very reliable, but still.....)

7. Was there really a gold/metallic car spotted on I80 behind a red mini cooper? And the Mini cooper was pulled over to the side and then hurried off?

8. Was Ray alone when he made the 11;30 call to Patty?

9. Was Ray alone when he left that day?

10. the number '10' stands for the one hundred other questions that remain in this case.


So sorry. I feel like I am here just rehashing old questions that you guys have asked repeatedly. I'm not sure how you have stuck with it for so long. It has to be so frustrating!!!

[J. J. in Phila]

No P'gal, just an example of the evasiveness of a few posters.

We have people here complaining that PEF didn't do enough, even when she left her house be searched. The same people are the ones who say, when asked if they would volunteer to aide the police, if asked, and forward their contact information through the family representative, say, "LE can obtain a search warrant...."

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by slaphappy




J.J. I didn't want to quote your whole post ( I dont know how to quote part of a post yet....still learning) Anyway, I was interested in the comment about how the dogs circled Ray's car. I thought that was true. Wasn't it reported that the dogs didn't follow any scents from the perimeter of the car? [/*]

The article was from the Altoona Mirror on Barons initial probe, by Greg Bock.

It said in part, "

Zaccagni said other details, such as the cigarette ash on the floor and the search dogs circling as if Gricar got into a vehicle, ...

This was miscopied on a website to say "the dogs cirled the car,"which had been moved the night before, but was similarly reported on MSNBC, as being a trail of about 20 yards, but within the parking lot, and it looking to the handler that RFG got into a car.

You can search for UTR's morphing of the story on this sight, if its still up.

Interestingly, there was a witness report that RFG got into a car.

[slaphappy]

J.J., thanks for responding.


Forgive me (again) for rehashing old stuff ( but that is pretty much all we've got), but weren't several of the 'sightings' of Ray connected to a 'metallic' colored car? I hope I'm asking that right...what I mean is , 1. the sighting by Carolyn Fenton. 2. The car at the Street of Shops. 3. The reported car on I80 behind the mini cooper (way back in the beginning of the case IIRC)

Weren't they all described as ' metallic', 'gold', or "gray/silver'?
Sometimes sunlight can reflect on a car and it is hard to distinguish the actual color.


Just some more ramblings.:seeya:

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by slaphappy
several on the endless list of questions:

1. Was it ever confirmed that there were 5 prints found in the mini cooper, or was it 5 'sets' of prints?




2. The exercise tape found outside the mini cooper passenger side. Finger prints on it?


It's been listed as "5 sets," all RFG's.


3. Why was the laptop case left at home.....while the laptop itself was found in the river?


I can give you to main theories.


4. Smell of cigarette smoke/ashes in Ray's car. An avid non smoker.


At least two possibilities.


5. Why was his cell phone found inside the mini cooper turned off?


He may have done that himself. It was his day off and he had voice mail that he could check. Nobody commented that it was odd that his phone was off.


6. All of those 'sightings' of Ray that were ignored because it didn't 'fit' the time frame? ( Eye witness accounts aren't very reliable, but still.....)


A sighting but behind the Courthouse who knew RFG; a second wasn't sure to the day. The witness, a court clerk named Fenton, was seen on video tape at the time, 3:00 PM and as far as I know, RFG could have been in Lewisburg and been back to Bellefonte in that time frame. Fenton said he was driving a different car.

A second witness, Judge David Grine, remembers the car, Fenton, RFG, and the time, but isn't sure if it was 4/14 or 4/15.

It was a metallic colored car as well.


7. Was there really a gold/metallic car spotted on I80 behind a red mini cooper? And the Mini cooper was pulled over to the side and then hurried off?



8. Was Ray alone when he made the 11;30 call to Patty?


Probably. He didn't sound different to PEF.


9. Was Ray alone when he left that day?


Possibly, but we can't account for any of his activities from about 8:15 AM to 11:12 AM.


10. the number '10' stands for the one hundred other questions that remain in this case.


So sorry. I feel like I am here just rehashing old questions that you guys have asked repeatedly. I'm not sure how you have stuck with it for so long. It has to be so frustrating!!!

When I first heard about it (4/18/05), I though they'd find the body in the river in the week as possibly:

1. Suicide.
2. Murder.
3. Accident/illness (he fell into the river).

I also thought RFG was having a midlife crisis. (He wasn't.)

When I started posting, I had not excluded PEF. She left work about 4:30 PM began calling around 8-8:30 PM, a three and a half hour gap; it takes about an hour to drive to Lewisburg and back. It would have been possible that the cell phone call was to suggest that after work, PEF would travel to Lewisburg to meet him. She got there, had a fight, she pushed him, he fell hit his head, died and dumped the body.

Great idea, until I found out here, from either Lustor or UTR, that PEF went to the gym after work. That three hour gap suddenly became one of less than two hours, possibly less than 1 hour.

But, looking at the evidence, by the summer of 2005, I was convinced that RFG drove the Mini to Lewisburg and was there.

[UndertheRadar]

As usual, you are wrong, JJ. This Centre Daily Times story from May 13, 2005 is the story which led to the natural assumption that the car had been in place when the dogs were brought to the lot:

His car, a red-and-white Mini Cooper, was seen parked in a small, unpaved parking lot across the street from a Lewisburg antiques mall next to the Susquehanna River between 5 and 6 p.m. that day, according to mall owner Craig Bennett. Police investigating Gricar's disappearance recovered the car there the next day.

His cell phone was in the car, but his laptop computer has not been recovered.

**Police dogs traced Gricar's scent around the car** but not beyond the parking lot or anywhere along the nearby river or riverbanks, leading to speculation he may have gotten into another vehicle, an investigator said.

http://www.centredaily.com/news/ray_gricar/story/3777.html

So there you have it. An investigator is paraphrased, or misparaphrased, as saying that the dogs traced Gricar's scent around the car in the CDT. Nothing to do with Greg Bock, the Altoona Mirror, or any other website.

As I pointed out, it's irrelevant to the dogs whether the car is in place or not. Perhaps the investigator actually said "traced Gricar's scent around where the car had been parked." Either which way, it's the same difference to the dog.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by slaphappy
J.J., thanks for responding.


Forgive me (again) for rehashing old stuff ( but that is pretty much all we've got), but weren't several of the 'sightings' of Ray connected to a 'metallic' colored car? I hope I'm asking that right...what I mean is , 1. the sighting by Carolyn Fenton. 2. The car at the Street of Shops. 3. The reported car on I80 behind the mini cooper (way back in the beginning of the case IIRC)

Weren't they all described as ' metallic', 'gold', or "gray/silver'?
Sometimes sunlight can reflect on a car and it is hard to distinguish the actual color.


Just some more ramblings.:seeya: [/*]

I have not heard of a "metallic colored car," associated with Lewisburg. There was some report about the Mini on I-80, but not solid.

[slaphappy]

I know this thread is about whether Patty was investigated enough.....I dont mean to take it off topic (but where Ray's case is concerned it all seems to go round in circles = one thread leads to another!) I don't think there was enough investigation period! Not just Patty, but everyone, everything involved!

Thanks UndertheRadar for responding.

I know that dog tracking isn't scientific at all, but I would hold their abilities higher than a person's eyewitness account anyday.

I seriously doubt that Ray Gricar was in Lewisburg that day, and if he was he didn't get much further than his car. IMO

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, "Police dogs traced Gricar's scent around the car but not beyond the parking lot... " does not say that the dogs "circled" the car, or "circled" in the spot where the car had been parked (it was towed to the PSP Barracks in Milton the night before).

Tell me, when you say that you are "around the house" do you walk in circles in the house?
(I bet we'll get more evasion.)

Here is what the MSNBC story said:

They also used a bloodhound—but the dog lost Gricar’s scent 20 yards from the car.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12756052/

You seem to to be trying to to lead us in circles.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by slaphappy


Thanks UndertheRadar for responding.

I know that dog tracking isn't scientific at all, but I would hold their abilities higher than a person's eyewitness account anyday.

I seriously doubt that Ray Gricar was in Lewisburg that day, and if he was he didn't get much further than his car. IMO

Actually, SH, you'd be surprised how big a body of scientific work there is on scent theory. And Bloodhounds' accuracy in trailing humans through typical urban settings was tested scientifically in 2004 with FBI backing. The 96% accuracy rate for experienced dogs under experienced handlers is one of the reasons Bloodhound testimony is accepted in most courts today, unlike polygraphs. Witness testimony has all sorts of caveats that go along with it, and courts are working toward incorporating some of those caveats as part of the process.

Like you, I don't think there's evidence showing that RG was in Lewisburg that day.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by slaphappy
I know this thread is about whether Patty was investigated enough.....I dont mean to take it off topic (but where Ray's case is concerned it all seems to go round in circles = one thread leads to another!) I don't think there was enough investigation period! Not just Patty, but everyone, everything involved!

Thanks UndertheRadar for responding.

I know that dog tracking isn't scientific at all, but I would hold their abilities higher than a person's eyewitness account anyday.


Well, I'll agree in part, but I'm seriously perplexed about what more LE could have done to to investigate PEF. They searched the house to look for signs of anything unusual or anyplace where the could have used Luminol; they didn't find anything. About the only things that hasn't been reported was her car, but people road in it the next day, and the laptop case.


I seriously doubt that Ray Gricar was in Lewisburg that day, and if he was he didn't get much further than his car. IMO [/*]

I don't doubt that he was there, but for how long is an open question.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila


Well, I'll agree in part, but I'm seriously perplexed about what more LE could have done to to investigate PEF. They searched the house to look for signs of anything unusual or anyplace where the could have used Luminol; they didn't find anything. About the only things that hasn't been reported was her car, but people road in it the next day, and the laptop case.



I don't doubt that he was there, but for how long is an open question. [/*]

how do you know that people rode in Patty Fornicola's car the next day? and exactly who rode in it?

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Politigal


how do you know that people rode in Patty Fornicola's car the next day? and exactly who rode in it? [/*]

Because she was in Lewisburg, twice over the weekend. I cannot see her borrowing a neighbors car, or being driven. I'm pretty sure she didn't walk.

It's also possible she drove to the police station.

There is another problem, LE was in and around the house and presumably, her car.

[slaphappy]

:(


Just saw that tonyGricar posted in another thread (timelines). He seemed very upset and said he was done with this message board.


I hope Ray's family finds some closure and knows that there are people out there who truly care.

[Cloudbuster]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila


I have not heard of a "metallic colored car," associated with Lewisburg. There was some report about the Mini on I-80, but not solid. [/*]

If RG was seen pulling over then for me it's solid. I keep saying he pulled over and tossed it. I think what he tossed was the laptop. That way he could get them off his tail. Did it work is the real question? Ray has a fast car right? Im sure he knew how to accelerate it. It could also be true that he was seen pulling out of a quarry. What if he hurried and pulled in to turn around but backed in to see if the brown car was still coming? Im sure he didn't want to meet someone with a tailing car behind him, would you?

Now a got a real question and its important. If I was to take a laptop and remove the drive ect. Could that laptop then hold something else instead? Something someone knew he had. Example could I fill it with lots of money? Or a dossier? Or drugs? You get the picture by now. Then I screw the outer parts back on.

This leads me to my next question? I wonder if even TG saw the video of Ray exiting the courthouse at 9pm thursday night? I know they didn't release it and my question is why? Im wondering if Ray had the laptop on him when he left that night or did he have something they can't figure out what it is like a bag or duffle bag or even briefcase? Why no viewing of that video?

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Cloudbuster


If RG was seen pulling over then for me it's solid. I keep saying he pulled over and tossed it. I think what he tossed was the laptop. That way he could get them off his tail. Did it work is the real question? Ray has a fast car right? Im sure he knew how to accelerate it. It could also be true that he was seen pulling out of a quarry. What if he hurried and pulled in to turn around but backed in to see if the brown car was still coming? Im sure he didn't want to meet someone with a tailing car behind him, would you?



He'd have to remove it while speeding away, and I-80 was 5-6 miles away.

The siting had him heading toward Bellefonte, and nobody reported RFG as the driver.


Now a got a real question and its important. If I was to take a laptop and remove the drive ect. Could that laptop then hold something else instead? Something someone knew he had. Example could I fill it with lots of money? Or a dossier? Or drugs? You get the picture by now. Then I screw the outer parts back on.


No, from the photo.


Im wondering if Ray had the laptop on him when he left that night or did he have something they can't figure out what it is like a bag or duffle bag or even briefcase? Why no viewing of that video? [/*]

It was reported that he did NOT have the laptop, and I've never heard of a "strange bag" or anything.

[Cloudbuster]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila


He'd have to remove it while speeding away, and I-80 was 5-6 miles away.

The siting had him heading toward Bellefonte, and nobody reported RFG as the driver.

(jj he wouldn't have to remove anything all he had to do was toss the whole laptop). I know he pulled over and tossed something and it would be most logical that it was the laptop IMO. You can eliminate the I-80 cause location is not something I know but he did do the pulling over at whatever point and tossed something.)

No, from the photo.
JJ how do you know the inside couldn't have had anything in it by a photo? If Ray tossed it that means they got what they wanted out of it before they decided to go back with it in two parts One laptop and 2 the drive. Any forsenics done on the inside of the laptop inward guts? Or maybe the water would have taken care of that.



It was reported that he did NOT have the laptop, and I've never heard of a "strange bag" or anything. [/*]

Okay but how do we know? Has TG seen that video? Lets for argument sake say okay he never left with the laptop BUT why withhold the video? Was there something in RG's hands at all?

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Cloudbuster


Okay but how do we know? Has TG seen that video? Lets for argument sake say okay he never left with the laptop BUT why withhold the video? Was there something in RG's hands at all? [/*]

Did anyone leave the court house with him? Was anyone in the parking lot at the same time?

I wonder if the security at the court house will get better security camera's to cover the complete parking lot, the steps to the Sheriff's office? Maybe angled from the opposite side of the parking lot, facing the courthouse doors, too.

[Cloudbuster]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


Did anyone leave the court house with him? Was anyone in the parking lot at the same time?

I wonder if the security at the court house will get better security camera's to cover the complete parking lot, the steps to the Sheriff's office? Maybe angled from the opposite side of the parking lot, facing the courthouse doors, too. [/*]

Good questions SJ!!! I wonder if he might have went to the sheriffs office? Or I wonder if he had a key to there?

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Cloudbuster


Good questions SJ!!! I wonder if he might have went to the sheriffs office? Or I wonder if he had a key to there? [/*]

I don't think the Sheriff's office was behind the court house in 2005. I believe it was just the jail then. Don't know where the Sheriff was located.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by Cloudbuster


Okay but how do we know? Has TG seen that video? Lets for argument sake say okay he never left with the laptop BUT why withhold the video? Was there something in RG's hands at all? [/*]

or was someone with him?

[J. J. in Phila]

CB:
JJ how do you know the inside couldn't have had anything in it by a photo? If Ray tossed it that means they got what they wanted out of it before they decided to go back with it in two parts One laptop and 2 the drive. Any forsenics done on the inside of the laptop inward guts? Or maybe the water would have taken care of that.


No, if the insides had been removed, that would have been apparent.

Further, it doesn't make too much sense. He could either:

Download a digital photograph to the hard drive, or put the photo in an envelope and put it in a pocket.


Originally posted by Cloudbuster


Okay but how do we know? Has TG seen that video? Lets for argument sake say okay he never left with the laptop BUT why withhold the video? Was there something in RG's hands at all? [/*]

Let's say for the sake of argument that RFG distributed $20,000 in $100 bills in various pockets and walked out of the office. Problem is, there is no evidence that RFG had $20,000 in $100 bills when he walked out of the office. That is slightly more probable than the photo, but still highly improbable.

Now, he obviously could have taken something out of the office, but there is no container that is missing. LE would have undoubtedly been asking, publicly, where the container was, and if found, to turn it over to LE.

[Cloudbuster]

Originally posted by Politigal


or was someone with him? [/*]
good question Pgal! Why not release the video? What would be the reason why not release it? If its as they said then why is it not available?

[Cloudbuster]

JJ by not releasing it makes it look like they are holding something back and I want them to go ahead and prove me wrong.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Cloudbuster

good question Pgal! Why not release the video? What would be the reason why not release it? If its as they said then why is it not available? [/*]

IIRC, they tape showed him leaving alone.

And, CB, you cannot prove a negative.

[day2day]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


Did anyone leave the court house with him? Was anyone in the parking lot at the same time?

I wonder if the security at the court house will get better security camera's to cover the complete parking lot, the steps to the Sheriff's office? Maybe angled from the opposite side of the parking lot, facing the courthouse doors, too. [/*]

I would love to know the answer to your questions. I think they are VERY good ones.

Someone knows the answers.

jmo

[Cinderella]

Did they interview everyone that was at the courthouse that night? Did they review the whole film to see who went in before Ray did and if anyone left after Ray.

Also did they check the records to the jail to see who was in and out of there that evening?

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Cinderella
Did they interview everyone that was at the courthouse that night?



No.


Did they review the whole film to see who went in before Ray did and if anyone left after Ray.


Possibly, to see if he went back.



Also did they check the records to the jail to see who was in and out of there that evening?

Relevance?

[Chump#7]

Relevance?

Not to speak for Cindi, but: The possibility that someone may have been present to witness with their own eyeballs something/someone that was not caught on limited view of the camera. The jail and rear of the courthouse share the same view, no?

"Well if somebody did see anything, they would have reported it to LE, right?"

Sure. :rolleyes:

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila


No.



Possibly, to see if he went back.



Relevance? [/*]

What are visiting hours at the prison? Someone who might have visited a prisoner and blamed RG for that person being there? one of the people in the drug busts? A warden or deputy warden?

I feel the video's should have been checked for a couple days to see if anyone was hanging around the parking lot, to see what RG's schedule might be. Didn't KA say she was also working that night? or nights with RG? Where was she that night, leave with him, before or after? How many employees were in the courthouse at the time RG was in there, who left just before or immediately after? did someone stop him at his car, as he left the parking lot, or followed his car out of the parking lot? Someone who could have been sitting in the lot waiting for him to leave?

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981
Didn't KA say she was also working that night? or nights with RG? Where was she that night, leave with him, before or after?

From KA's website:

Ray is reported to have been last seen in surveillance footage of the VIP parking lot at the rear of the courthouse on Thursday night, entering around 6 PM and leaving shortly after 9 PM. This would not have been unusual. Ray commonly left the office to go out or home for supper and returned to the office in the evening to work several hours. It usually happened at least several times a week, sometimes more often if he had an appellate brief due or a major trial upcoming. I know that because I was generally also there. However, on that particular Thursday I was not, as I'd left work early to go home to work on a personal project.

Thanks to those who asked where I've been. Answer: 1) sick, 2) without internet access. Not sure about Logic since I've been without internet.

[Cinderella]

Nice to see you UTR. Here we go again with problems. It seems like everyone here has had their share of troubles. Get better. I didn't want to call LE to look for you.

[sherrijean981]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by UndertheRadar


From KA's website:

Ray is reported to have been last seen in surveillance footage of the VIP parking lot at the rear of the courthouse on Thursday night, entering around 6 PM and leaving shortly after 9 PM. This would not have been unusual. Ray commonly left the office to go out or home for supper and returned to the office in the evening to work several hours. It usually happened at least several times a week, sometimes more often if he had an appellate brief due or a major trial upcoming. I know that because I was generally also there. However, on that particular Thursday I was not, as I'd left work early to go home to work on a personal project.

Thanks to those who asked where I've been. Answer: 1) sick, 2) without internet access. Not sure about Logic since I've been without internet. [/*][/QUOTE


Hope you are feeling better. Always hated to get sick this early in the season. Get well.

I hate when my computer acts up and can't get my provider to give consistent feed. Usually happens when so many are posting and I miss a lot.

[Politigal]

I was on the Centre County Webia (gov't access to prothonotary site, deeds, property tax, etc)

From records there, Patty was married to Thomas Backenstoe for about 10 yrs. when Backenstoe filed for divorce.

I've heard from a couple of people that Patty went thru a really rough time with this breakup, as he had found someone else before he even filed for divorce. (no link to back this up - just hearsay from other posters)

IMO, it's possible that Patty felt pretty insecure after that, and may actually have been as Parlor Elephant wrote - having "dependent tendencies."

I think it's also possible that she may have been jealous or "smothering" RG because of her past situation.

Also, IMO, I still think that her change in positions, signaled something a little deeper than just a change in positions.

RG putting the Mini in her name IMO also shows that maybe he was trying to convince her that he was "invested" in her.

And I still think she possibly wanted more -- marriage....

Considering how private they kept their relationship at the office, I also still think it's possible that they certainly could have been having some personal issues, without others at the office (or in OH) knowing about it.

Sometimes that's all it takes - jealousy/mistrust/1 heated argument/a situation that escalates into something much worse.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Politigal
I was on the Centre County Webia (gov't access to prothonotary site, deeds, property tax, etc)

From records there, Patty was married to Thomas Backenstoe for about 10 yrs. when Backenstoe filed for divorce.

I've heard from a couple of people that Patty went thru a really rough time with this breakup, as he had found someone else before he even filed for divorce. (no link to back this up - just hearsay from other posters)

IMO, it's possible that Patty felt pretty insecure after that, and may actually have been as Parlor Elephant wrote - having "dependent tendencies."

I think it's also possible that she may have been jealous or "smothering" RG because of her past situation.

Also, IMO, I still think that her change in positions, signaled something a little deeper than just a change in positions.

RG putting the Mini in her name IMO also shows that maybe he was trying to convince her that he was "invested" in her.

And I still think she possibly wanted more -- marriage....

Considering how private they kept their relationship at the office, I also still think it's possible that they certainly could have been having some personal issues, without others at the office (or in OH) knowing about it.

Sometimes that's all it takes - jealousy/mistrust/1 heated argument/a situation that escalates into something much worse. [/*]

Having heard it from a reputable source I can not name, Beckenstoe was having an affair right in the court house and flaunted it in PF's face. How is a person to respond to being humiliated in her work place when her husband acts like that? It would cause you to be leary of trusting another man. As to there being problems in RG and PF's relationship, that wasn't the case either.

Now from what has been insinuated on the forum previously, is PE someone to be partial in this case? Don't think so.

No one can understand what goes on in another person's marriage and the real reason behind a breakout. I am quite sure court house employees are well aware of what the Mr. was doing and who.

Having been in a marriage and knowing what happened to break it up, an outsider could have seen it differently, not know the facts and what was going on in the home and behind the scenes. Rumours ran rampant and were hurtful but still only I and the other knew what was going on. Which is my reason to believe there was more to PF and Beckenstoe breakup than her.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


No one can understand what goes on in another person's marriage snipped. [/*]

this was my point --

It's quite possible that Patty and Gricar *were* having some problems.....

You just don't know.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


It would cause you to be leary of trusting another man. snipped[/*]

this was another of my points....

that Patty was possibly insecure after her relationship with Backenstoe and it could have carried over into her relationship with RG.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Politigal


this was another of my points....

that Patty was possibly insecure after her relationship with Backenstoe and it could have carried over into her relationship with RG. [/*]

Can't be that, if she didn't even question where he was going and when he was coming home. She was giving him his space, not being someone who is being dependant or insecure.

From what I was told, it wasn't PF pushing for more. Just remember not all things that happened were PF making the decisions.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


Can't be that, if she didn't even question where he was going and when he was coming home. snipped. [/*]

We have only her word for those circumstances....

Nothing to corroborate.

[Politigal]

I wanted to add --

Jealousy is an embarrassing emotion. I've been there years ago - I was so jealous of who my husband was friends with or spoke to - jealous of him going places without me - mistrustful, etc. But jealousy is not usually something you share with others because you're ashamed you feel that way -- it's like you know it's stupid - because you can't control what others feel or do -- but it's hard to get rid of that feeling none the less.

If Patty couldn't trust her husband of 10 yrs, don't you think it might be possible she would be even more wary with the next guy?

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981

As to there being problems in RG and PF's relationship, that wasn't the case either.

[snip]

. . . an outsider could have seen it differently, not know the facts and what was going on in the home and behind the scenes.

I agree with your second observation here, SJ. No one **outside** ever really knows what's going on **inside** a relationship, behind closed doors.

That's what makes your first statement obviously contradict what you're saying in the second. Unless you are actually PF (or RG), you can't know whether there were problems in the relationship.

I don't know whether there were problems between PF and RG or not, but I do think that if there had been any, PF would have been likely to keep them quiet as long as possible, since she had already suffered some degree of public discomfort when her marriage crumbled. Given the high profile nature of her relationship with RG and the fact that she was working in the office with him, it would be natural to want to keep any difficulties in the relationship quiet. I also think this would be doubly true since RG himself has been described as being so private.

Just saying that I doubt either one of them would have aired any difficulties in public. In many situations, even family members aren't aware that problems exist. Remember that Laci Peterson's own mother hadn't been aware of Scott's infidelities early in his marriage to Laci, and Laci and her mother were very close. Laci kept that hidden from her mom, and IIRC, even from her close girlfriends. I'd certainly call spousal infidelity a problem, but nobody knew about it.

[J. J. in Phila]

First of all, I agree that we cannot know the minds of PEF or RFG.

We can however, look for evidence that would support a conclusion. JKA has noted that she told the police that she knew very little about it (and proved it by

One problem I have is the idea of a quick fight (and yes, initially I thought of it). The preparations needed to pull off PEF's involvement in a presumed murder are complex, to say the least. We've been trying to figure out the details, but the methods have eluded us for more than a year. Every time the question how comes up, it is unanswered, and seems not to be unanswerable but impossible.

The problem with a long term plan is lack of motive, and PEF actually having a motive to keep around. To be crass, money; RFG paid some of the bills. PEF was planning to retire in 2006 and travel with RFG; she could not do that. Had he arrived home at 5:00 PM, 4/15/05, he life would have been much better from a financial standpoint.

Did PEF want to end the relationship? She simply has to say "Get out." It's a lot cleaner, quicker and easier, than the convoluted plans.

Did RFG want out and PEF was angry. In terms of a long term plan, why is RFG still in the household? Why don't we have someone coming forward to explain how RFG had just rented an apartment, or a motel reservation, or that his stuff was all boxed up, read to leave. Why are they walking in the park? Do you, or anyone, believe that a few weeks before RFG disappeared he turned to PEF and said, "I'm leaving you, let's go to bed?"

The problem that I have is that to do all of this would require a long term plan and there is no long term problem to go with it.

[UndertheRadar]

You've left off your list jealousy and/or fear of abandonment issues, JJ, and I think that's precisely what Pgal is referencing.

The female mind dealing with those kinds of issues can be very complex.

[J. J. in Phila]

No, I didn't, UTR:

Did RFG want out and PEF was angry. In terms of a long term plan, why is RFG still in the household? Why don't we have someone coming forward to explain how RFG had just rented an apartment, or a motel reservation, or that his stuff was all boxed up, read to leave. Why are they walking in the park? Do you, or anyone, believe that a few weeks before RFG disappeared he turned to PEF and said, "I'm leaving you, let's go to bed?"

[Politigal]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
No, I didn't, UTR:

Did RFG want out and PEF was angry. In terms of a long term plan, why is RFG still in the household? Why don't we have someone coming forward to explain how RFG had just rented an apartment, or a motel reservation, or that his stuff was all boxed up, read to leave. Why are they walking in the park? Do you, or anyone, believe that a few weeks before RFG disappeared he turned to PEF and said, "I'm leaving you, let's go to bed?"
[/*]

How do you know that he *didn't* box up all his stuff on Thursday 4/14, and then Patty simply unpacked it....???

[J. J. in Phila]

P'gal, I'll take you off ignore for a second and answer your rather silly question.

You now have PEF committing murder, cleaning up after a murder, magically getting a car to Lewisburg, coming back, running out to by a cell phone, hiding a body, excessively googling where the cell phone towers are, looking at forensic sites to figure out how not to leave DNA, then removing the drive from the laptop and tossing it, all in a space of about 10 hours. Now you want he to unpack too! :rolleyes:

[UndertheRadar]

Actually, you did leave it out, JJ, because RG wouldn't have to want out or wouldn't have to tell PF he was leaving or wouldn't have to be involved with someone else for jealousy and fear of abandonment to raise its ugly head in a relationship.

People who have abandonment issues and jealousy issues, who aren't secure within themselves or within their relationships, can create problems in their own minds without any overt evidence of packed boxes or statements that the other party actually wanted to leave.

One telling thing for me was what was reportedly said in the 15-minute meeting with SJ and Cind, something to the effect that PF told RG early in the relationship that he should tell her flat out if he wanted to end the relationship. I can't remember now exactly how this was worded, but it was something to that effect. That said a lot, to be in the thrill and blush of the beginning of a new relationship and be contemplating how it might end. JMO.

[gstickley]

Originally posted by Politigal


How do you know that he *didn't* box up all his stuff on Thursday 4/14, and then Patty simply unpacked it....??? [/*]

And, do we actually know what of RG's personal property is still in the house? Could he not have packed it up & removed it on 04/14 or even on 04/15? Could he not have taken some of his clothing, property, etc., & left the rest to get at another time? Seems this is another thing on which we have only one person's word.

I'd also like to add that I believe jealousy to be an uncontrollable monster; even the slightest hint of something might trigger terrible anger, hurt, disappointment, especially if someone has undergone it previously. Jealousy, coupled with embarrassment at having it happening again, IMO, would be pretty hard to bear.

I believe the end took place in the park on 04/14.

JMO

[J. J. in Phila]

So far as I recall, PEF made a statement like that to the press. It was something along the line of **I told Ray that if he wanted to end the relationship, I'd understand.** That is not a direct quote.

First, I would question if there is any evidence of an abandonment issue, except in the mind of a few posters. PEF has completed college, owned her own home, and held a job, all without benefit of "a man." She also was previously married and her ex was still alive. There also seems to have been a gap (perhaps someone could supply the time) between PEF's divorce and her relationship with RFG.


NONE of those things point to a woman who is dependent of an SO or who has, "abandonment issues and jealousy issues." Sorry, but she sounds pretty independent.

Second, as SJ pointed out, PEF did not seem bothered by his absence when she came home. More notably, on 4/14/05, PEF didn't seem frantic or "distraught" about RFG "playing hooky."

So suddenly, we have PEF having these "abandonment issues and jealousy issues," yet we have no cause for these issues. They just suddenly appear. RFG doesn't change his activities so far as we know. He still lives there, and still involved with her.

You seem to suggesting that PEF, suddenly had delusions that RFG was planing to abandon her. Granted he didn't by her a new car (which he'd drive) in the prior six months.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by gstickley


And, do we actually know what of RG's personal property is still in the house? Could he not have packed it up & removed it on 04/14 or even on 04/15? Could he not have taken some of his clothing, property, etc., & left the rest to get at another time? Seems this is another thing on which we have only one person's word.



Packed it and unpacked it in one day? No.

We'd also have some idea where it was, e.g. storage, an apartment.


I'd also like to add that I believe jealousy to be an uncontrollable monster; even the slightest hint of something might trigger terrible anger, hurt, disappointment, especially if someone has undergone it previously. Jealousy, coupled with embarrassment at having it happening again, IMO, would be pretty hard to bear.

I believe the end took place in the park on 04/14.

JMO [/*]

All that could have happende on 4/14/05. The evidence found could not have all be set up by 4/15/05. That is what long term means.

[UndertheRadar]

I don't remember anything in the press where PF made a statement with regard to the possible ending of the relationship with RG and how she wanted him to handle it. If it's there, I'd like to see the link. I **do** remember it being mentioned in the context of the meeting with SJ and Cind, because I remember thinking at the time it was something very personal to be telling two strangers when one has held oneself out to be so private as to not respond to a mere compliment in the park from a known person. Didn't add up in my mind, and that's one reason I remember the context in which it was raised.

As for PF being independent because there was a gap between her marriage and RG in which she had a job and her own house, again, JJ, you're confusing financial issues with emotional issues. Someone can be taking care of himself/herself financially and still have **emotional** dependence issues. I've read enough true crime books about wealthy people to know that having all the money in the world doesn't make someone emotionally secure.

And it's interesting that you raise the car. That may well have been part of making PF feel as if he was "invested" in the relationship, even though he wasn't marrying her.

You've got to think about it from the perspective of a woman who's been burned before and who is now 3+ years into a new relationship, approximately 18 months into "living with" this man. If she has unresolved issues left over from the unhappy way in which her marriage ended, a person in that situation could easily start wondering just how committed the man really is to her.

This particular discussion has nothing to do with financial independence or ability to take care of oneself financially. It has to do with those whose sense of self-worth needs the validation of complete commitment and the security that comes with knowing that "the other" isn't going to abandon the person, and with the possibility that something like that may have been a feature in this situation.

[J. J. in Phila]

No, I'm referring to the pattern.

Some women have said that the went to college to get an "Mrs." degree, or did in the 50's and 60's. Completing a degree is an independent act; sure, a SO can be great support, but it's an individual act (and her ex wasn't her high school sweetheart and graduated in a different year).

Having your own, as opposed to living with a relative, is also a sign. You can double that with owning; you can't call your landlord to fix things. You have to be the responsible party. IIRC, PEF did that for 3-4 years, at least.

Same with the job. PEF is not married, and not working with the family. They might have been close, but not that close.

[UndertheRadar]

You're talking about something else entirely, JJ.

Pgal, GS, and I are all talking about what happens to someone emotionally when they fear abandonment. Sometimes it even begins in childhood with a father who doesn't provide the necessary emotional validation for and closeness with a daughter. Sometimes it happens when a relationship ends badly because the "other" cheats or leaves without sufficient explanation. Sometimes it's a combination of factors.

This has **nothing** to do with the kind of woman who goes to college looking for an "Mrs. Degree" or the kind of woman who simply wants to be "taken care of." I don't think you're really getting it.

[gstickley]

I doubt if a man could understand the inner feelings of a woman when it comes to jealousy. You know the old saying, "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned!" Thank God, I've not had the misfortune to have been there; however, I do have a large family with many female relatives & lots of women friends & have had the unenjoyable task of meeting loads of women who have had "the fury". (Plus, I watch a lot of movies & read a lot of books!)

Try this on for size.

Woman gets married for life.
Woman works in same building with husband.
Woman thinks life is good.
Woman finds out that husband is unfaithful.
Woman is devastated.
Woman realizes everyone in workplace knows about unfaithfulness.
Woman is embarrassed beyond repair because everyone knows, everyone is possibly gossiping, everyone is looking, everyone is smirking.
Woman & husband divorce.

Woman finds the "man of all men".
Woman finally has chance at "man of all men".
Man is prominent, good lookin', quite a catch.
Woman & man work in same building.
Woman is maybe now smirking at other employees.
Woman has man living with her & buying her expensive gifts.
Woman is on top of the world.
Woman is planning on the good life when man retires.
Woman changes work position to be nearer man.

But wait:

Man takes drives by himself whenever he wants.
Man often works nights.
Maybe a hint of gossip about man.
Woman starts watching for little indications of something wrong.
Man supposedly sleeping more.
Maybe man has changed his mind.
Maybe man has a MW.
Maybe a little more than a bit of gossip about the man.
Maybe man tells the woman he wants out.
Man takes off work one day.
Man comes back & woman & man go for walk in park.
Man wants out. Woman wants to talk him into staying.
Woman goes home; man goes back to work.
Woman has now checked everything, including unused laptop; maybe finds something to add to her suspicions.

When & if man comes home, woman confronts man.
Man is going!
Woman is left with the loss again, the gossip, the smirks, the looks. Left again!
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."

(At no time have finances entered the picture.)

[Politigal]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar
I don't remember anything in the press where PF made a statement with regard to the possible ending of the relationship with RG and how she wanted him to handle it. If it's there, I'd like to see the link. I **do** remember it being mentioned in the context of the meeting with SJ and Cind, because I remember thinking at the time it was something very personal to be telling two strangers when one has held oneself out to be so private as to not respond to a mere compliment in the park from a known person. Didn't add up in my mind, and that's one reason I remember the context in which it was raised.

As for PF being independent because there was a gap between her marriage and RG in which she had a job and her own house, again, JJ, you're confusing financial issues with emotional issues. Someone can be taking care of himself/herself financially and still have **emotional** dependence issues. I've read enough true crime books about wealthy people to know that having all the money in the world doesn't make someone emotionally secure.

And it's interesting that you raise the car. That may well have been part of making PF feel as if he was "invested" in the relationship, even though he wasn't marrying her.

You've got to think about it from the perspective of a woman who's been burned before and who is now 3+ years into a new relationship, approximately 18 months into "living with" this man. If she has unresolved issues left over from the unhappy way in which her marriage ended, a person in that situation could easily start wondering just how committed the man really is to her.

This particular discussion has nothing to do with financial independence or ability to take care of oneself financially. It has to do with those whose sense of self-worth needs the validation of complete commitment and the security that comes with knowing that "the other" isn't going to abandon the person, and with the possibility that something like that may have been a feature in this situation. [/*]

I think you are correct -- it was not in the press. Sherrijean did post about it and you posted about it here (found on boardreader.com)

RE: Puzzling
5 months, 3 weeks ago (2007-06-11 16:31:00) by UndertheRadar
quote: Originally posted by sherrijean981 Are you referring to Cindi and my encounter with PF? She did not give any personal information to us. I'm ... met before stop her, and she tells them, among other things, that when she first met RG, she "she discussed to him that if he ever wanted to leave that she wanted him to be upfront with her"?
Source: Courttv.com Message Boards Forum: RAY GRICAR, Missing PA Prosecutor Thread: Show this thread (747 posts) Size: 1,163 bytes Links: Domain info Customize:

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by gstickley
Woman gets married for life.


Huh?

Woman works in same building with husband.


As far as I know, no.


Woman thinks life is good.
Woman finds out that husband is unfaithful.
Woman is devastated.
Woman realizes everyone in workplace knows about unfaithfulness.


Ah GS, I'm not too sure ANY of these things apply.


Woman is embarrassed beyond repair because everyone knows, everyone is possibly gossiping, everyone is looking, everyone is smirking.


As far as I know, this does not apply.


Woman & husband divorce.


Well that one is true.


Woman finds the "man of all men".
Woman finally has chance at "man of all men".
Man is prominent, good lookin', quite a catch.


No one actually close to the family has ever said there was a chance for marriage; posters have. At least two women didn't think RFG was the "man of all men".


Woman is maybe now smirking at other employees.


Or maybe other employees or employee is jealous.


Woman has man living with her & buying her expensive gifts.



Man uses expensive gift, almost exclusively. Woman owns house.

Woman is planning on the good life when man retires.
Woman changes work position to be nearer man.



Man takes drives by himself whenever he wants.
Man often works nights.


Man has apparently been doing this for a while.


Maybe a hint of gossip about man.
Woman starts watching for little indications of something wrong.


Woman notes man is "distraught." Not the woman attached to the man.


Man supposedly sleeping more.
[quote]

Many men and women note man behaving differently.

[quote]
Man takes off work one day.
Man comes back & woman & man go for walk in park.
Man wants out. Woman wants to talk him into staying.



Other woman watching them describes them as looking for months like a "perfect couple."



Woman has now checked everything, including unused laptop; maybe finds something to add to her suspicions.


What suspicions, you just claimed they talked?


When & if man comes home, woman confronts man.
Man is going!
Woman is left with the loss again, the gossip, the smirks, the looks. Left again!
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."


Women kills man, uses magic spell to teleport car fifty miles away. Tiny gnomes clean home of blood stains. Woman uses magic ring to heal the injuries done in fight with man. Summons genie from magic lamp to fly out of town to impersonate man, and his scent.

Since "GStickley" is writing a fairy tale, the underline portion is my contribution.



:santa:

[gstickley]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

\***snip***
Women kills man, uses magic spell to teleport car fifty miles away. Tiny gnomes clean home of blood stains. Woman uses magic ring to heal the injuries done in fight with man. Summons genie from magic lamp to fly out of town to impersonate man, and his scent.

Since "GStickley" is writing a fairy tale, the underline portion is my contribution.

santa: [/*]

Hey, Man, take a poll of women & see how many know exactly what I'm talking about in my "fairy tale"!

(By the way, Man, I surely knew YOU wouldn't have any idea!)

:biggrin:

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by gstickley


Hey, Man, take a poll of women & see how many know exactly what I'm talking about in my "fairy tale"!

(By the way, Man, I surely knew YOU wouldn't have any idea!)

:biggrin: [/*]

Well, you whole fairy tale has a problem. Not with all the twisted gyrations and "maybes."

The problem is with the evidence. I'll rapidly concede that any two people in a relationship, even without all the nonsense, a crime of passion might happen.

What I don't concede is that the crime of passion would leave a huge about of evidence, so you have to add on the genie, gnomes and magic spells, to make it work.:rolleyes:

[Cinderella]

I have to add my 2 cents to this. I am trying to be as fair as possible for everyone. I don't have a feeling that PF did it or didn't do it. I must add to that, that when she talked to SJ and me about her first husband, I could tell that it really hurt her badly and she NEVER wanted something like that to happen again. That was the reason that she told that to Ray up front. She had more emotion in telling us that than she had when she went on TV and made statements.

To me the PF that we talked to showed emotions. The PF that I heard on newscasts was someone that seemed to speak in one monotone. Like she was a robot, the way that she spoke. I don't know if PF was bothered by public speaking in front of the camera or I don't know if PF was taking medication right after RG disappeared. That is a possibility that made her sound that she talked without emotion. I am not talking about the crying spells. The one that I saw only lasted maybe 5 seconds.

I don't know if anyone else thought the same about her talking or not. I guess that I have something to compare it to. Meeting her and seeing emotion.

I have stated what was true in my eyes and if it bothers someone else, I can't help what my feeling were over this.

If I had the same thing happen to me as PF did with her first marriage, it would make me furious. :flamemad:

If I was in the situation of walking in a park and someone that I love tells me that they want out after living with me for a while, then I run into someone who makes a statement that we make a good couple or something to that effect, that would also make me furious. JMO

[Cinderella]

Another thing that I thought about is if I wanted children and got married and the other person didn't want children. So I love the other person so much and I decide that I would rather be with the other person the rest of my life than with someone else. So after years of marriage, it ends in divorce. Now I regret that I didn't have children and didn't have him anymore.

So I let this other guy move in with me with the expectations that this will be different. Then if he decides he doesn't want to be tied down anymore, I would be furious.

Spending all my time with people that didn't care what I wanted.
Now its too late to have children. I have wasted a lot of my life on what?

That doesn't necessarily mean that she is guilty of anything pertaining to Ray.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by Cinderella
I must add to that, that when she talked to SJ and me about her first husband, I could tell that it really hurt her badly and she NEVER wanted something like that to happen again. That was the reason that she told that to Ray up front. She had more emotion in telling us that than she had when she went on TV and made statements.

snipped [/*]

Interesting....

[Cinderella]

I also have to say that I don't think that PF was investigated the right way. In certain cases, like the case of Ray being the DA, he stepped down from a case because it involved a relative. I really feel that PF was so well know in the area that they didn't fully investigate her like they would someone else. When LE keep some information that may prove valuable back because it might hurt a potential suspects feelings, how can that be fair. That is being partial to the person.

There have been inconsistencies of PF's statements about the day of the 15th that don't make any sense. What was the real story of the morning. If he was dressed like she said that he was, why couldn't she ask him if he went anywhere to let her know instead of writing him a note. She said that he fell back asleep. Yet she gave him orange juice and talked with him. Also the whole talk about putting the dog out doesn't make any sense.
First he is taking 1/2 day then he is taking the whole day. I wonder what the e-mail to the office stated, and when did PF send it.

I am not insinuating that PF or LG are involved in his disappearance.

I noticed the discrepancies right away, but I thought that the CDT was doing that on purpose to throw people off track. Something like the killer would only know.

Then her statement, "We will wait as long as it takes." PF and Lara were basically saying, we will wait. What did they know?

Also I don't think that Lara was treated right. Does LE constantly monitor all the accounts of Ray. Did they look at bank statements before he disappeared? Why did MM insinuate that they could collect the money sooner than the time authorized without a body. So I don't think this was a very thorough investigation.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Politigal


Interesting.... [/*]

I agree. This resonated with me the first time it came up on the board. I've been with the same man so long that I have to reach way back to remember what the "start" of a relationship feels like, but I honestly can't remember anything other than the pleasant excitement of discovering somebody that I shared chemistry and common interests with. I can't remember ever thinking about, much less discussing, how the relationship might **end** in a new relationship (and even by the time RG disappeared, PF and RG were still in a relatively new relationship).

That this topic would be discussed in the bloom of a new relationship seems relevant to me; that this subject would be raised to two strangers someone has just encountered on the street seems relevant to me.

[Cinderella]

I must make this statement. We were discussing what might have happened. PF made the statement that due to her conversation with Ray at the beginning of their relationship that if he wanted to leave, she would rather have him leave than to stay in the relationship when he didn't want to. So she was saying that she didn't think that it was a walk-away because he had no reason to walk-away without telling her. And also they were not married.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by Cinderella
I must make this statement. We were discussing what might have happened. PF made the statement that due to her conversation with Ray at the beginning of their relationship that if he wanted to leave, she would rather have him leave than to stay in the relationship when he didn't want to. So she was saying that she didn't think that it was a walk-away because he had no reason to walk-away without telling her. And also they were not married. [/*]

Thx for the clarification.

But that makes her statements in the media even more puzzling IMO, as the majority of her comments have been that she thinks he's still out there.

[Cinderella]

She did sort of indicate that at the new conference. There might have been another reason for him to leave. Maybe he didn't want to tell her for her own safety or maybe he had another woman and didn't have the nerve to tell her.

[Cinderella]

I know that this is off the subject, but why did PF arrange a birthday party for Ray if she knew that he would be on vacation?

[Politigal]

Originally posted by Cinderella
I know that this is off the subject, but why did PF arrange a birthday party for Ray if she knew that he would be on vacation? [/*]

I think she was planning a retirement party - not a birthday party, but I'm not sure it was reported about when the party was to occur.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


I agree. This resonated with me the first time it came up on the board. I've been with the same man so long that I have to reach way back to remember what the "start" of a relationship feels like, but I honestly can't remember anything other than the pleasant excitement of discovering somebody that I shared chemistry and common interests with. I can't remember ever thinking about, much less discussing, how the relationship might **end** in a new relationship (and even by the time RG disappeared, PF and RG were still in a relatively new relationship).

That this topic would be discussed in the bloom of a new relationship seems relevant to me; that this subject would be raised to two strangers someone has just encountered on the street seems relevant to me. [/*]

I'm just curious if the emotion she displayed was more about the ex-husband, or about Gricar.

:shrug:

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Politigal


I think she was planning a retirement party - not a birthday party, but I'm not sure it was reported about when the party was to occur. [/*]

I remember wondering **when** the retirement party was going to take place because planning for it had already begun before his disappearance. Seemed like a long time before December to be making plans if it wasn't going to happen till then.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


I remember wondering **when** the retirement party was going to take place because planning for it had already begun before his disappearance. Seemed like a long time before December to be making plans if it wasn't going to happen till then. [/*]

IIRC, I think Tony posted a snippet about this - that it would involve a lot of invitees, and some would be attending from out of state, etc. so that's why it was being planned in advance.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Politigal


I'm just curious if the emotion she displayed was more about the ex-husband, or about Gricar.

:shrug: [/*]

My own arm chair psychology here, but I think when you're dealing with those kind of unresolved issues, the old issues become intertwined with the new ones--hard to separate.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Politigal


IIRC, I think Tony posted a snippet about this - that it would involve a lot of invitees, and some would be attending from out of state, etc. so that's why it was being planned in advance. [/*]

Thanks. That could make sense, trying to coordinate schedules if a lot of people were coming in from out of town.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


My own arm chair psychology here, but I think when you're dealing with those kind of unresolved issues, the old issues become intertwined with the new ones--hard to separate. [/*]

According to the court docs, Backenstoe divorced Patty in August 1999.

And according to news articles, Patty began dating Gricar in August 2001.

Not a lot of time to regroup there, IMO, especially if the divorce was as difficult for Patty as some have said.

And, I'm not sure what Serendipitous1 meant, but in one of his posts about Patty, I think he was intimating that there was someone else in between Backenstoe & Gricar. I could have misunderstood though.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
So far as I recall, PEF made a statement like that to the press. It was something along the line of **I told Ray that if he wanted to end the relationship, I'd understand.** That is not a direct quote.

First, I would question if there is any evidence of an abandonment issue, except in the mind of a few posters. PEF has completed college, owned her own home, and held a job, all without benefit of "a man." She also was previously married and her ex was still alive. There also seems to have been a gap (perhaps someone could supply the time) between PEF's divorce and her relationship with RFG.


NONE of those things point to a woman who is dependent of an SO or who has, "abandonment issues and jealousy issues." Sorry, but she sounds pretty independent.

Second, as SJ pointed out, PEF did not seem bothered by his absence when she came home. More notably, on 4/14/05, PEF didn't seem frantic or "distraught" about RFG "playing hooky."

So suddenly, we have PEF having these "abandonment issues and jealousy issues," yet we have no cause for these issues. They just suddenly appear. RFG doesn't change his activities so far as we know. He still lives there, and still involved with her.

You seem to suggesting that PEF, suddenly had delusions that RFG was planing to abandon her. Granted he didn't by her a new car (which he'd drive) in the prior six months. [/*]

Exactly, JJ. She wasn't concerned that he took the day off, she said he needed the break, he was working so hard lately. She wasn't questioning him on where he was going or coming home. But it was mentioned many times they went to the Gamble Mill in the evening so she might have thought he would be back around 5 - 6pm. but she still wasn't worried since she went to her gym to work out.

TG, SS and the Barb at the Gamble Mill all mention RG and PF going to the Gamble Mill, with Barb saying on Friday's.

In all the paper's with comments from DZ, TG, SS, BG, LG and even JKA, there has never been a mention of discord between RG and PF.

Also TG, LG and LE were in Pf and RG's home after he disappeared and at no time has it ever been mentioned that his things were not in the home. And if he did take anything out, RG had a conversation with LG on Thursday and she never mentioned that he told her he moved some things out. Maybe LG received RG's things when she went back home or months later.

There also was an article that PF was meeting with someone from the Gamble Mill to plan a retirement for RG, but they didn't want to talk about it because it would ruin the surprise when he showed up. So PF was still expecting him back.

As to PF's first marriage, 10 years is a good amount of time to put in a relationship, and even not being a jealous person it could cause distress when the spouse has an affair, let alone flaunting it in the work place. It still doesn't mean she was dependant on him, she had a job. There used to be a man running that department years ago that would not tolerate affairs, guess he wasn't there at the time or the Mr * would have been gone, not PF.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar

And it's interesting that you raise the car. That may well have been part of making PF feel as if he was "invested" in the relationship, even though he wasn't marrying her.

[/*]

I would like to know why you feel so positive that RG was not going to marry PF? It was said "not in the NEAR future". It doesn't mean he wasn't going to marry her later.

It is so easy to sit here and make statements about PF and RG and what their relationship was, and was going to be, but at the time of his disappearance they were still in a relationship. And in his phone call to LG on Thursday he must not have given her any idea of discord between them or that he was moving out.
TG said they talked about their retirement and were excited about it. SS said they counted the days to retirement.

Something might have bothered RG but I don't think it was PF and I don't think he could tell her about it. PF and LG both thought something bothered him enough to go away but both thought their plea would bring him home.

JMO

[Cinderella]

Everyone puts on a happy face for others. Take my upstairs neighbors. They look like a loving couple. If you could only hear the fighting that goes on. It is getting worse and worse. I am sure that no one else knows anything about it.

I think that if Ray loved PF enough, he would have married her.

I wonder right before he told Barbara that he wanted a divorce, was he acting depressed, sleeping more than usual?

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


In all the paper's with comments from DZ, TG, SS, BG, LG and even JKA, there has never been a mention of discord between RG and PF.



But SJ, you have also said on this thread

an outsider could have seen it differently, not know the facts and what was going on in the home and behind the scenes.

You can't make both arguments simultaneously. Either it is true that outsiders don't always know what's going on in the home, behind the scenes (which I certainly think is an observable truth, proven over and over again) OR it is true that what others observe is a complete and accurate picture of what happens in the home, behind the scenes.

Both cannot be true.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


I would like to know why you feel so positive that RG was not going to marry PF? It was said "not in the NEAR future". It doesn't mean he wasn't going to marry her later.

It is so easy to sit here and make statements about PF and RG and what their relationship was, and was going to be, but at the time of his disappearance they were still in a relationship. And in his phone call to LG on Thursday he must not have given her any idea of discord between them or that he was moving out.
TG said they talked about their retirement and were excited about it. SS said they counted the days to retirement.

Something might have bothered RG but I don't think it was PF and I don't think he could tell her about it. PF and LG both thought something bothered him enough to go away but both thought their plea would bring him home.

JMO [/*]

What I said, SJ, was That may well have been part of making PF feel as if he was "invested" in the relationship, even though he wasn't marrying her.

I did not say, "I am positive RG was not going to marry PF," or "I am positive RG was never going to marry PF."

I said "even though he wasn't marrying her." And he wasn't. There was no ring, and no date. They were not engaged.

Now, if someone is secure in themselves and secure in their relationship, that may not be any kind of issue at all.

If someone has abandonment issues unresolved from a previous relationship, no ring and no date 18 months into living together could start to loom large.

You keep talking about discord. That's not what I'm talking about at all.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Cinderella
I have to add my 2 cents to this. I am trying to be as fair as possible for everyone. I don't have a feeling that PF did it or didn't do it. I must add to that, that when she talked to SJ and me about her first husband, I could tell that it really hurt her badly and she NEVER wanted something like that to happen again. That was the reason that she told that to Ray up front. She had more emotion in telling us that than she had when she went on TV and made statements.

To me the PF that we talked to showed emotions. The PF that I heard on newscasts was someone that seemed to speak in one monotone. Like she was a robot, the way that she spoke. I don't know if PF was bothered by public speaking in front of the camera or I don't know if PF was taking medication right after RG disappeared. That is a possibility that made her sound that she talked without emotion. I am not talking about the crying spells. The one that I saw only lasted maybe 5 seconds.

I don't know if anyone else thought the same about her talking or not. I guess that I have something to compare it to. Meeting her and seeing emotion.

I have stated what was true in my eyes and if it bothers someone else, I can't help what my feeling were over this.

If I had the same thing happen to me as PF did with her first marriage, it would make me furious. :flamemad:

If I was in the situation of walking in a park and someone that I love tells me that they want out after living with me for a while, then I run into someone who makes a statement that we make a good couple or something to that effect, that would also make me furious. JMO [/*]

Cindi I don't remember PF talking about her first husband. I just know she said when she and RG were getting together she told him upfront that if he ever wanted to leave the relationship to tell her.

I should have written the conversation ALL down because it is slowly fading from my mind. But then I am glad because I never wanted to put it on here anyways.

[Cinderella]

SherriJean,

Are you related to or have you ever talked to or have been friends with PF. I am wondering why she was so open. Is it because you know each other?

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


I agree. This resonated with me the first time it came up on the board. I've been with the same man so long that I have to reach way back to remember what the "start" of a relationship feels like, but I honestly can't remember anything other than the pleasant excitement of discovering somebody that I shared chemistry and common interests with. I can't remember ever thinking about, much less discussing, how the relationship might **end** in a new relationship (and even by the time RG disappeared, PF and RG were still in a relatively new relationship).

That this topic would be discussed in the bloom of a new relationship seems relevant to me; that this subject would be raised to two strangers someone has just encountered on the street seems relevant to me. [/*]

My first marriage was not good. I had more bad times than good, 3 children right away and a husband that wanted to be a little boy and play all the time. He drank, he was abusive and he cheated. I was hurt, demeaned, beat, and sorrowful because what I pictured a marriage to be was no where near my dreams. Final straw was the poker playing and putting his paychecks in the pot and refusing to pick up medicine for our sick little girl.

I was scared to death, afraid of men, and never wanted to get married again. My present husband and I got married 2 1/2 years later and but before we married I constantly told him I would not put up with this or that. Surprised it didn't scare him away. He understood what I went through because he knew my ex. Needless to say the ex never took care of the 3 children, my present husband raised them. I had other issues but still issues but my marriage has lasted.

I could understand what PF said about him telling her if he wanted out of the relationship, to tell her. I would want that too.
But at no time did I ever think about killing or disappearing my spouse and I did get mad, furious one time, but got beat for my trouble.

I didn't get that feeling about PF either. She seemed sincere and no she wasn't putting on an act.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


I remember wondering **when** the retirement party was going to take place because planning for it had already begun before his disappearance. Seemed like a long time before December to be making plans if it wasn't going to happen till then. [/*]

I think she was having it at the Gamble Mill and had to reserve it. I know when my previous boss had a secretary day over there, reservations had to be made, and for a larger party, definetly.

[Cinderella]

Originally posted by Cinderella
SherriJean,

Are you related to or have you ever talked to or have been friends with PF. I am wondering why she was so open. Is it because you know each other? [/*]

[Cinderella]

Since you are avoiding my question, I am taking it as a yes. I know that you don't lie. Why won't you admit to it though. If I knew someone or was related, I would not want to hide it. To me it is like Peter denying Jesus. Or me denying that I know you.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Cinderella
SherriJean,

Are you related to or have you ever talked to or have been friends with PF. I am wondering why she was so open. Is it because you know each other? [/*]

No to all the above. Maybe there was a mystical connection there. That deja vue thing of having known each other in another time.

I did feel very confortable talking with her and as I said before I would have liked to have known her. She just had a gentleness about her. You know that too because we discussed it after leaving there.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Cinderella
Since you are avoiding my question, I am taking it as a yes. I know that you don't lie. Why won't you admit to it though. If I knew someone or was related, I would not want to hide it. To me it is like Peter denying Jesus. Or me denying that I know you. [/*]

Cindi, give me time to read the damn posts! NO! NO! NO! to all the above questions.

I would not deny knowing PF or being related to her. I would not hide the fact I know anyone!

Where are you coming off with this stuff?

[Cinderella]

SherriJean,

You think that you know the kind of person that she is, but would you expect her personality to be one of being friendly with us and answering our questions and shaking our hands, then complain that WE stalked her?

That picture didn't fit with the person that I thought that PF was.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


My first marriage was not good. I had more bad times than good, 3 children right away and a husband that wanted to be a little boy and play all the time. He drank, he was abusive and he cheated. I was hurt, demeaned, beat, and sorrowful because what I pictured a marriage to be was no where near my dreams. Final straw was the poker playing and putting his paychecks in the pot and refusing to pick up medicine for our sick little girl.

I was scared to death, afraid of men, and never wanted to get married again. My present husband and I got married 2 1/2 years later and but before we married I constantly told him I would not put up with this or that. Surprised it didn't scare him away. He understood what I went through because he knew my ex. Needless to say the ex never took care of the 3 children, my present husband raised them. I had other issues but still issues but my marriage has lasted.

I could understand what PF said about him telling her if he wanted out of the relationship, to tell her. I would want that too.
But at no time did I ever think about killing or disappearing my spouse and I did get mad, furious one time, but got beat for my trouble.

I didn't get that feeling about PF either. She seemed sincere and no she wasn't putting on an act. [/*]

I'm sorry you had such a bad first marriage, SJ.

But what you're saying here is that you made a judgment about your first husband which allowed you to think he'd be good husband material and to think he'd give you a marriage that you'd dreamed about. I assume you knew him longer than a brief meeting. And you were completely wrong about him.

How could a brief meeting with someone else allow you to judge whether someone was sincere and not putting on an act?

We all know it's possible to misjudge people we've known for quite some time under many different circumstances. Why would it be possible to judge someone's sincerity based on a brief meeting?

Leaving murder aside for a moment, relationships (even friendships) break up all the time because people jumped into them without giving enough time to really get to know the other person under a variety of different conditions that show all sides of him/her. And you know that all too well from your own experiences. Just speaking in general terms here, people can also put on amazingly good fronts in public that fool people very well, even smart, savvy people.

I know you seemed to like PF from that one brief meeting you had with her, but that's hardly a basis to make any kind of judgment about sincerity, character, what she's capable of or not capable of, etc. JMO.

[sherrijean981]

Cindi, just because I don't answer a question it does not mean yes or no. I did not read all the posts as I was posting. I was going back and reading each one.

Don't put words in my mouth about anything. You don't have that right. If I don't answer a question it could be because you know the truth and it was no. You know I never met PF before. You know I wasn't related to her and you know I never talked to her until that day.

And I don't have to answer every post on here. Sometimes I avoid them because they make me mad. Sometimes it makes me laugh. Sometimes I don't understand what the heck the purpose of the question is for. Somethings I won't talk about.

But if I knew PF I would be very pleased to say I knew her but I would be angry about a lot of the stuff posted about her on this forum. I feel she is getting a raw deal from some on here.

Especially by you. You have met her, you sat over there questioning her and asking very personal questions, told me when I said I would not talk about her on the forum that you weren't going to either, later changed your mine and did post. Then you wanted me to come on and back you up. I told you I wasn't going to talk about her. You weren't fair to her with what you did and you were not fair to me. I should have not answered you. All you are doing is flip floppy all over the place with her. And that isn't right!

Oh yea! JMO

[Cinderella]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


Cut

I did feel very confortable talking with her and as I said before I would have liked to have known her. She just had a gentleness about her. You know that too because we discussed it after leaving there. [/*]



I also questioned you on whether you thought that her starting to cry was fake.

[Cloudbuster]

Can someone check this out and tell me what this is? The more you click on links on it --it goes to people and non peoples names in this case???
http://www.textmap.com/person/michael-madeira.htm:confused:

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


I'm sorry you had such a bad first marriage, SJ.

But what you're saying here is that you made a judgment about your first husband which allowed you to think he'd be good husband material and to think he'd give you a marriage that you'd dreamed about. I assume you knew him longer than a brief meeting. And you were completely wrong about him.

How could a brief meeting with someone else allow you to judge whether someone was sincere and not putting on an act?

We all know it's possible to misjudge people we've known for quite some time under many different circumstances. Why would it be possible to judge someone's sincerity based on a brief meeting?

Leaving murder aside for a moment, relationships (even friendships) break up all the time because people jumped into them without giving enough time to really get to know the other person under a variety of different conditions that show all sides of him/her. And you know that all too well from your own experiences. Just speaking in general terms here, people can also put on amazingly good fronts in public that fool people very well, even smart, savvy people.

I know you seemed to like PF from that one brief meeting you had with her, but that's hardly a basis to make any kind of judgment about sincerity, character, what she's capable of or not capable of, etc. JMO. [/*]

I don't know why I felt that she was being sincere or why I liked her and felt a gentleness about her. It was a feeling inside, that one of the elder women in the church told me was a "sensitive". She told me I was one years and years ago. I won't go in to it, but it has done me right many many times.

Oh and I knew my husband through school. Call it lust! that had me overlook some of the same qualities that caused the marriage to fail. In the late 60's it was to my family a shame to get a divorce. You were supposed to suffer what you entered into. I broke it up to protect my children.

[Cinderella]

Originally posted by sherrijean981
Cindi, just because I don't answer a question it does not mean yes or no. I did not read all the posts as I was posting. I was going back and reading each one.

Don't put words in my mouth about anything. You don't have that right. If I don't answer a question it could be because you know the truth and it was no. You know I never met PF before. You know I wasn't related to her and you know I never talked to her until that day.

And I don't have to answer every post on here. Sometimes I avoid them because they make me mad. Sometimes it makes me laugh. Sometimes I don't understand what the heck the purpose of the question is for. Somethings I won't talk about.

But if I knew PF I would be very pleased to say I knew her but I would be angry about a lot of the stuff posted about her on this forum. I feel she is getting a raw deal from some on here.

Especially by you. You have met her, you sat over there questioning her and asking very personal questions, told me when I said I would not talk about her on the forum that you weren't going to either, later changed your mine and did post. Then you wanted me to come on and back you up. I told you I wasn't going to talk about her. You weren't fair to her with what you did and you were not fair to me. I should have not answered you. All you are doing is flip floppy all over the place with her. And that isn't right!

Oh yea! JMO [/*]


SherriJean, I never asked you once to come on anything and back me up. I can take care of myself. You are the one that felt obligated to do that. So now don't make up stories.

I can feel and say what I feel. I never said that PF was guilty. I don't tell you that you couldn't post what you want to so don't tell me what I can or can't post. In the beginning I stated that I wasn't going to post the conversation, I posted what I thought were the good points. Some things I left out. Remember "SNAPPED"

[Cinderella]

Originally posted by Cloudbuster
Can someone check this out and tell me what this is? The more you click on links on it --it goes to people and non peoples names in this case???
http://www.textmap.com/person/michael-madeira.htm:confused: [/*]


I looked at it, but I don't understand it.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Cloudbuster
Can someone check this out and tell me what this is? The more you click on links on it --it goes to people and non peoples names in this case???
http://www.textmap.com/person/michael-madeira.htm:confused: [/*]

It is odd isn't it. Why are RG's, KA and DZ's linked with MM?

And RG and another one are in darker blue?

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Cinderella



SherriJean, I never asked you once to come on anything and back me up. I can take care of myself. You are the one that felt obligated to do that. So now don't make up stories.

I can feel and say what I feel. I never said that PF was guilty. I don't tell you that you couldn't post what you want to so don't tell me what I can or can't post. In the beginning I stated that I wasn't going to post the conversation, I posted what I thought were the good points. Some things I left out. Remember "SNAPPED" [/*]

We both know you appealed to me to come on here and tell that we spoke to PF. I don't lie, I have no need to lie.

I wasn't accused of stalking her.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Cloudbuster
Can someone check this out and tell me what this is? The more you click on links on it --it goes to people and non peoples names in this case???
http://www.textmap.com/person/michael-madeira.htm:confused: [/*]

It shows a connection between the times the names appear in indexed articles, I believe.

If if there was article that said, "Jack and Jill," it would show that usage. If there was an article that "Jack and the Goose," it would show Jack in the center and a link to Jill and on to Goose." Bennett, I think, is exclusively linked to RFG, meaning that in indexed articles, his name only appears in articles about RFG.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Cloudbuster
Can someone check this out and tell me what this is? The more you click on links on it --it goes to people and non peoples names in this case???
http://www.textmap.com/person/michael-madeira.htm:confused: [/*]

CB, I've run into these textmaps any number of times when googling. As far as I can tell, they represent people or things that have been linked in other references elsewhere on the web. Makes sense that MM, DZ, RG, KA, etc. would all show up on one as linked.

[Cinderella]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


We both know you appealed to me to come on here and tell that we spoke to PF. I don't lie, I have no need to lie.

I wasn't accused of stalking her. [/*]


SherriJean, you must be losing some of your memory. I didn't ask you to come on and say that we spoke to PF. As far as I can think, when I first started posting about it, I didn't even indicate that anyone was with me.

Also, I wished that you would have spoken up and stated that I was not going to go by PF until you said to me, lets go talk to her. I was traveling a different way. I wish that you would have come out and said, I am the one that asked Cind to turn around and go by PF so we could talk. Instead you left me take all the heat of being a stalker when it was you that wanted to stop and talk to her. I didn't ask you to say anything, but I was hoping that you would own up to the one that wanted to stalk her if that is what she wants to call it. It would have been the right thing to do. That was after you had posted about talking to her.

I was on CTV before you and doing fine. I don't need you to take my part or tell me what I can or can't say.

BTW, I think that you take great pleasure in not being referred to as a stalker in this case, but if there is a stalker it is you. You wanted to talk to her. So if I got accused of stalking, I drove over so you could talk to PF. CASE CLOSED

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, basically I agree with you on the point that none of us can judge PEF's sincerity.

I had considered several things regarding PEF.

I. On the night of 4/14/05, she and RFG had a fight. PEF in a fit of anger kills him. Possibly PEF acts in self defense.

Problems:

1. That's messy, and there wasn't a mess. Trying to clean it, hide the body by 11:00 PM the night after, possibly replace the rug, clean and/or repaint, is impossible, especially with her being at work and the gym.

In the Tom Capano case, two men had 24-48 hours to clean up the crime scene and couldn't; they had more time and an ocean in which to hide the body. The carpet wasn't replaced, there were signs of cleaning, and some blood.

2. How does she get the Mini to Lewisburg? You've tried for more than a year to explain it and failed.

II. RFG called at about 11:12 PM., and suggested that PEF meet him in Lewisburg for dinner. Maybe they meet, argue by the river, and she pushes him. RFG falls, hits his head on a rock. PEF panics, drags the body to the river and runs.

Problems:

1. She doesn't seem to have enough time to get to Lewisburg and back to make the calls. She's at the gym in some part of that time. You'd need a window of 2.25 hours to do it, as a almost unrealistically short time. Realistically, it would be between 2.5 and 3.0 hours.

2. Does PEF brink the laptop to dinner? Why would RFG take it that morning?

My problem is no opportunity and no means, not motive, even though the only ones posted have far too many "maybes" in them.

[Chump#7]

1. That's messy, and there wasn't a mess. Trying to clean it, hide the body by 11:00 PM the night after, possibly replace the rug, clean and/or repaint, is impossible, especially with her being at work and the gym.

Why would it necessarily have to be 'messy'? Seriously.

And *if* this were foul play, regardless of the killer (pick one - there's no 'evidence' 'reported' for anyone), I've got the impression this wasn't a one man show as far as 'clean up' goes.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Chump#7


Why would it necessarily have to be 'messy'? Seriously.

And *if* this were foul play, regardless of the killer (pick one - there's no 'evidence' 'reported' for anyone), I've got the impression this wasn't a one man show as far as 'clean up' goes. [/*]

It *has* to be "messy" because JJ always *has* to create a strawman he can easily knock down. He ignores scenarios that would leave no blood and no evidence of a struggle so that he can say "Problem: no evidence that anything took place."

Same thing with his claim that PF could not have driven the Mini to Lewisburg. For more than a year, the *only* "evidence" he's offered for that is JJ's assertion that it couldn't be done. Meanwhile, GS and I and others have offered up scientific evidence and evidence from authorities on the subject showing that it *could* be done, and the best he can do is continue to claim that it couldn't happen, as if his mere assertion trumps evidence from FBI forensic folks, extensive data collection studies, police officers with many years of experience, evidence from scientists, etc.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, we are talking a crime of passion, basically unplanned. Could you please explain realistically how it would not be messy?

There are a few cases that I recall of a crime of passion.

1. The Capano murder of Anne Marie Fahey (where the body was hidden).

2. The recent Penn Professor case.

Both left physical evidence of either the victim or of cleaning.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Cinderella



SherriJean, you must be losing some of your memory. I didn't ask you to come on and say that we spoke to PF. As far as I can think, when I first started posting about it, I didn't even indicate that anyone was with me.

Also, I wished that you would have spoken up and stated that I was not going to go by PF until you said to me, lets go talk to her. I was traveling a different way. I wish that you would have come out and said, I am the one that asked Cind to turn around and go by PF so we could talk. Instead you left me take all the heat of being a stalker when it was you that wanted to stop and talk to her. I didn't ask you to say anything, but I was hoping that you would own up to the one that wanted to stalk her if that is what she wants to call it. It would have been the right thing to do. That was after you had posted about talking to her.

I was on CTV before you and doing fine. I don't need you to take my part or tell me what I can or can't say.

BTW, I think that you take great pleasure in not being referred to as a stalker in this case, but if there is a stalker it is you. You wanted to talk to her. So if I got accused of stalking, I drove over so you could talk to PF. CASE CLOSED [/*]

Well Cindi if You had not gotten pi&&ed off and removed all your posts we would know what you said or didn't say, wouldn't we?

I have said many times my memory is going, to you and others.

If you would read all the input EVERYONE puts on here you would remember me posting that it was me who wanted to stop and talk to PF. I did post that you went down the street in front of her house and I asked you to turn around. When we saw her down the street I said to stop so we could talk to her. Which you did. I wasn't aware of the fact you and TG were having a lot of problems and he wanted you nowhere near PF. You conveniently kept that to yourself.

I also told TG that I was the one who wanted to talk to PF.

Now stalking isn't seeing someone on the street and wanting to stop and talk to them. Stalking is constantly sending emails, letters, phone calls, following them around everywhere.

That day was the first I have been on Halfmoon Hill since my brother lived up there years ago. We (you and I) even stopped and talked to the woman who was living in my brothers old house and I was telling her about the ghosts that were in the house. Which she knew about!

If we had not stopped to talk to that woman we would never have seen PF. We left that woman's house and PF was coming out of her house as we were coming up to the intersection. It was a chance meeting and I wanted to talk to her.

And I am not sorry we talked to her. It sure put a picture on the "evil Patty" some people are trying to make her out to be, and I wasn't seeing it or feeling it.

My husband was reading the posts made last night and when he came to yours and your denying asking me to tell everyone what went on that day he wanted to know if you were the same person I was with that day? I told him you were and he wanted to know what you were trying to do? What is she up to with all this? Why would that person now be turning on you that way? He read the posts and remembers you wanting me to tell everyone I was there too after I had said I wasn't going to talk about it. And he isn't losing his memory - he remembers everything!! And he remembers telling me to stay away from you and now look what she is doing to you.

HMM? I should have remembered him telling me that, guess I forgot!!

[Politigal]

Come on ladies...back to your corners. :tongue:

You each recall different things about your visit. And that's ok.

I think no matter what our opinions of PF are, no one really knows what went on behind closed doors with her and RG.

No one.

[J. J. in Phila]

I remember some of the conversation, vaguely, but to me, it always sounded like a random encounter and not stalking.

I also said that, while I would not have spoken to PEF (unless she spoke to me first, of course), if I would go to Bellefonte, I would go past the house, just to see it; I would not trespass (I don't think either Cind or SJ did). My curiosity would get the better of me. :tongue:

I'd also go to the Courthouse and Street of Shops in Lewisburg.

Now, if PEF was curious about who I was, and said so publicly, I would contact her. I doubt if she is in the least interested in me.

[Cinderella]

First of all, Politigal, kindly butt out. After this post there will be no more discussion. As she will be on ignore. Thank you Politigal, I knew that you would understand.




SherriJean,

Even though I had my posting deleted, if I posted something in answer to you, it is with your records. So I searched your records. Here is what I found.

sherrijean981
Senior Member

Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Milroy, PA
Posts: 2042

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Laws


Found the above post by Cinderella interesting in that it seems that her recollection of the event varied so differently than what was repeated as PF's recollection. Cinderella's very positive, PF's very negative. Cinderella's point of interest being Ray Gricar & PF's being PF.

Cinderella & her accompanying friend didn't sense any negativity once their conversation got going so then I would guess that PF has the ability to act other than how she was actually feeling according to the portrayal communicated to TG. MOO [/*]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Being the "accompanying friend" I did not sense any negativety to our conversation either. PF very graciously answered most questions, referring us to others if she felt it wasn't her place to answer, and talked to us of RG and things. If PF was put off by us, feeling she was being stalked, then she was classy enough to not show it.

If there was contention there, I have never been brought in to it. If there was a problem between PF, TG and Cindi, then I was not aware of it. I do know Cindi was worried about being seen but I said why, we are doing nothing wrong, we did not expect PF to be home or to see her, and it was my idea to stop and say hello and let her know we were part of the forum. If I had known everything that went on between TG and Cindi I would not have let her go near PF.

Now you are the one making assumptions to how PF can "act". You are now making more of a short conversation than was there.

I now believe Cindi and TG have had numerous problems on and off the forum that no one knows about and by her stopping she just made TG and PF angrier. That is between them. I will say the post you have quoted was Cindi in her anger, agitating TG again. JMO



Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

09-14-2007 09:01 AM


I must have stated that a friend was with me. I did not give your name out. You gave your name out on your own. I did not ask you to. Friend was enough for me.

When you stated that Cindi was worried about being seen, I wasn't worried, I just didn't want to go to her and talk to her.

You state that had you known everything about what went on with Tony Gricar and me, Cindi, that you would have not let me go near Patty?

So I am the one the made Tony and Patty angrier by you insisting that you wanted to stop. BTW, you do mention in a post that you were the one that wanted to stop and talk to PF.

Which brings me to the question, why don't you feel like you were stalking if it was your decision to talk to PF.


Concerning your comments about me:

I went to the Willowbank office with you to try to help you. I didn't ask you to state that you were there with me when I met PF or I would have just said that SJ and I saw PF today, not calling you friend. I didn't know that your husband reads the website, but if he has things to add, the more the better. I didn't turn on your. I told exactly what happened. You also never told me that he told you to stay away from me. I could have saved gas money by taking you to show you where people lived and not made the trip to Bellefonte to try to help you out. Your husband doesn't have to worry anymore about you staying away from me as I don't feel the need to be with someone that stabs you in the back. I didn't turn on you. I opened my mind to if PF could have been involved. I guess that is what you consider turning on you.

Whatever I do on the forum is none of your business. If I want to say something, I will say it. If I want something deleted, I will delete it. All I can say is you can copy the whole site and then you will have everything that you need in case someone deletes something. Politigal is entitled to do as she wishes also. So butt out.

END OF CONVERSATION. I AM FINISHED. BTW, I AM USING MY IGNORE BUTTON ON YOU.

[UndertheRadar]

Once again, JJ, simply because you can think of only two cases that support your side of the argument, that doesn't mean there isn't evidence to support the other side.

In the past century, there have been approximately 100 women who have been SERIAL KILLERS, the majority of whom have used poison and suffocation as their means of killing. That's serial killers we're talking about, not single instance murderers who were women. By and large, women choose poison, suffocation, and strangulation as their means of murder, though of course there are always exceptions who go the bloodier route.

Spare us the "no all night poison store" routine. Under every kitchen sink in America (except those belonging to the most anti-chemical freaks), you'll find a huge repository of poisons. Many prescription drugs are lethal in non-therapeutic doses. Even something as simple as OTC Benadryl could make someone sleep so soundly that suffocation or strangulation would be simple.

And please spare us the "but there might be a problem with . . . " scenarios. All these kinds of things have been tried successfully in the past and have unfortunately ended in the deaths of spouses and boyfriends/girlfriends.

Sometimes people even get away with murder. I wouldn't be surprised, for instance, if Drew Peterson is ultimately charged with the murder of his third wife Kathleen--yet her death was somehow ruled an accidental drowning.

[Cinderella]

J. J.,

I can only see PF harming him in one instance. Accidentially.

He could have been strangled there would be hardly anything to clean up.

He could have been pushed from the top of the stairs. He could have hit his head. There would not be necessarily any blood.

He could have been poisoned. Would there be blood?

I don't think that it had to be messy at all.

People die all the time in car accidents and there is no bleeding.
Maybe internal injuries.

[sherrijean981]

Stalking

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking

Quote:

"Effects of stalking
Stalking does not consist of single incidents, but is a continuous process. "

[Cinderella]

J. J.,

For an example, one night I was coughing all night long. I had prescription cough syrup with codeine. My ex-husband was leaving for work and knew that I was coughing. He brought the bottle of cough syrup and a tablespoon and asked do you take two of these. I was so tired from coughing, I wasn't paying attention at all and I said yeah.

I heard the alarm go off to get the kids up for school and was sitting in a chair trying to read the newspaper and I was really out of it. I had to go to bed. He was just trying to help me out and it really put me out. If he would have said do you take three, I might have said yeah. It could have killed me.

[Chump#7]

... Broken neck, swift smack to the head, pushed down the stairs... Be as bloody as you want in the woods...

ETA: I see that's been covered. Carry on.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Chump#7
... Broken neck, swift smack to the head, pushed down the stairs... Be as bloody as you want in the woods...

ETA: I see that's been covered. Carry on. [/*]

Now sit back and wait, Chump. There will be "problems" with each of these.

[Cinderella]

NICE TO SEE YOU CHUMP. :seeya:

[Cinderella]

What about Karate. It can kill. It could be clean.

[Cinderella]

How about just a shove in the water someplace. It could have been in a secluded area. Maybe Lake Raystown for all we know.

[gstickley]

Even gunshot wounds to the head can sometimes be relatively bloodless (ex. the bullet remains in the head); there wouldn't have to be a "bloodbath" situation, with blood splattered all over the walls, floors, ceilings, etc.

We went through the "cleaning up of the blood" previously. IMO, it can be done without too much effort, just a little elbow grease & some cleaning supplies. And . . . unless a blood detecting agent like Luminol is used, you'd never know. And . . . it wasn't used here!

[Cinderella]

Stickley,

The best thing I heard to use was bleach. That's how one lady cleaned the mess up and got away with it. She even was tried by a jury.

Side note: Her washing machine broke and I worked with a co-worker whose husband was called out to fix it as it was broke. Needless to say, he hurried up, fixed it and got the HAY out of there.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by gstickley

We went through the "cleaning up of the blood" previously. IMO, it can be done without too much effort, just a little elbow grease & some cleaning supplies. And . . . unless a blood detecting agent like Luminol is used, you'd never know. And . . . it wasn't used here!

Exactly. A walkthrough looking for the big picture isn't giving anybody a microscopic look at what might have happened in that house. And obviously, the investigation was predisposed to look at PF as "victim" in this situation, either victim of a walkaway errant boyfriend or victim of a tragic disappearance, even going so far as to keep the LMW under wraps for a year to protect her feelings rather than ask the public for any information that could be added to that piece of the puzzle.

Think about how Drew Peterson got away with murdering Kathleen if he is indeed her murderer (and it certainly looks that way). She had told family members she feared Drew. She winds up dead in a bathtub, yet it's ruled accidental drowning, even though we've got Michael Baden and other forensic experts saying adults do NOT drown accidentally in bathtubs unless they are drunk, drugged, or have some kind of seizure problem, none of which was the case with Kathleen. How did this get ruled accidental? Think deference to a police officer in the community played any role?

[slaphappy]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


Exactly. A walkthrough looking for the big picture isn't giving anybody a microscopic look at what might have happened in that house. And obviously, the investigation was predisposed to look at PF as "victim" in this situation, either victim of a walkaway errant boyfriend or victim of a tragic disappearance, even going so far as to keep the LMW under wraps for a year to protect her feelings rather than ask the public for any information that could be added to that piece of the puzzle.

Think about how Drew Peterson got away with murdering Kathleen if he is indeed her murderer (and it certainly looks that way). She had told family members she feared Drew. She winds up dead in a bathtub, yet it's ruled accidental drowning, even though we've got Michael Baden and other forensic experts saying adults do NOT drown accidentally in bathtubs unless they are drunk, drugged, or have some kind of seizure problem, none of which was the case with Kathleen. How did this get ruled accidental? Think deference to a police officer in the community played any role? [/*]

UndertheRadar,

Did they really keep that under wraps to spare Patty's feelings? That just angers me!! I thought it was just a part of the investigation that they wanted to keep private, like when the police hold that key piece of evidence that only the killer would know.
Even though many have suggested that Patty wasn't investigated enough (which does sound like the case) I just don't think she had anything to do with Ray's 'vanishing'

Just posted on another thread that I have no idea how you guys keep up with each others posts!! It amazes me! Everytime I get on to catch up with the latest, I feel like I'm in a tailspin.:seeya:

[gstickley]

Slaphappy, I hope you don't mind me jumping in here, but I want you to read one of my all-time favorite news articles about the disappearance of District Attorney Ray Gricar. Please make note of the date, which is approx. 1 yr, 1 mo. after Mr. Gricar's disappearance.

http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/14546212.htm

Posted on Wed, May. 10, 2006

Police revelations refocus attention on missing D.A.
Police seek 'construction-worker type.'

By Pete Bosak
pbosak@centredaily.com

BELLEFONTE -- Previously undisclosed news that missing former District Attorney Ray Gricar may have been seen talking to an unknown woman the day he disappeared set off media firestorm in Bellefonte today.

Bellefonte police Chief Sean Weaver and the lead investigator on the case, Darryl Zaccagni, said they have fielded calls all morning from national media, including Fox News' Greta Van Susteren.

Law enforcement officials were seeking to put a positive spin on the events, saying the information -- that a witness reported seeing Gricar talking to a woman in a Lewisburg antique mall on April 15, 2005, the day he disappeared -- is old news to investigators.

Zaccagni said he revealed the information this week, as Dateline NBC is preparing a story on Gricar, in hopes of finding the woman.

"This is definitely not a new revelation," Weaver said. "But we're hoping this national attention, in the form of Dateline NBC, will give us that one lead we need to find Ray."

Zaccagni revealed today that police are also looking for a "construction-worker type" who was seen leaning into the passenger side of a red Mini-Cooper -- the type of car Gricar drove -- in the parking lot of the Lewisburg antique mall.

Gricar's vehicle was found in that parking lot April 16, 2005. Police have said they found cigarette ashes in the car, although Gricar did not smoke and did not allow anyone to smoke in the vehicle.

It was not clear why the information about the woman or the construction worker was not made public earlier. For more than a week after Gricar's disappearance, Bellefonte police held almost daily news conferences that were covered by both local and national media.

"Hindsight is 20/20," Zaccagni. "If you're going to find fault, yeah, maybe we should have went to the media about this woman sooner. But there was no attempt to hide anything at all. She just fell by the wayside."

Although Zaccagni now describes the witness report as the first credible sighting of Gricar after he went missing, he and Weaver said police were following a plethora of leads at the time and it simply did not come up in communications with the media.

That may, in part, have been out of concern for Gricar's family and loved ones, Zaccagni said, and concerns that they would be hurt if the revelation raised questions about whether Gricar was having an affair.

In addition, Zaccagni said, with all the attention on the case, "I thought she would have come forward if she were really there."

Gricar and the woman were walking through the market, and there was no physical contact between the two, the witness reported. Investigators are interested in talking to her though "she is definitely not a suspect," Zaccagni said.

Weaver said police have no idea who the woman is, what her relationship with Gricar was, or even if she actually exists. It's possible, he said, that she was simply another shopper at the mall who kept bumping into Gricar, and who had no idea who he was.

After receiving the witness' report, police spoke with an acquaintance of Gricar who fit the description of the woman, but determined that it was not her.

Gricar's nephew, Tony Gricar, of Dayton, Ohio, said Tuesday night that he could not initially recall police telling him of reports of the woman seen with Gricar at the antiques market.

"To me, that's an odd little bombshell," he said. He added that he welcomed the attention the news is drawing, and hopes it will lead to new information on the case.

Tony Gricar discounted any notion that his uncle could have been seeing the woman spotted with him in the market, saying that would have been uncharacteristic of the busy prosecutor.

"Rationally speaking, with the work he was doing and living with Patty, I don't see that as being too realistic," he said.

Centre County District Attorney Mike Madeira emphasized that police were not holding back any information.

"This isn't new," he said. "It is a simply a review of old stuff we didn't have leads on then. But this is an opportunity for national exposure to perhaps generate some lead."

[UndertheRadar]

Thanks for jumping in, GS. I was just about to go through my files and pull that up for Slaphappy, and you saved me the trouble. :)

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, you make an assumption that RFG would sit there say and just let PEF kill him, in terms of strangulation and suffocation. If RFG was a bedridden 90 year old man, yes, she could have. He's 59 years old, in good health and looks to be 6 inches taller than PEF. Do you seriously think that if he was attacked, RFG would not resist? :rolleyes:

As for the poisons "under every kitchen sink," yes, you have bleach, detergent, cleaning supplies, bug spray, and maybe rat poison. The problems, multiple, are, most of them have an oder and all of them have a taste. I cannot see RFG being offered a glass of milk with bleach in it, and not noticing it (and yes, I tried about ways to do it).

The second problem is that a lot of what is suggested is not quick acting. In this case, as suggested by GS, PEF goes home and tried to do something.

A third problem is, especially in small doses, a lot of the poison won't kill, it may make RFG sick, but it's not fatal.

If it is something other than poison, like pushing RFG down the stairs or drowning him in the shower, make it look like a tragic accident. **Ray fell down the stairs,** **The hair dryer slipped into the tub,** **Ray slipped in the shower.** That is easy, and the current Peterson case, that has been one suggestion.

And none of this explains how the Mini got to Lewisburg.

[slaphappy]

gstickley:) ,

Thank you so much for responding. That is such a sad, sad article!! So many things to comment on ... "she just fell by the wayside" ???? What the heck? It's only about a missing DA:rolleyes: What a load of crap!!


I don't know how I ever missed that article. I've read comments on here over time about it, but just thought it was opinions about how the case was handled and why. If someone I cared about 'vanished' I wouldn't care what they dug up!! Put it out there for goodness sakes!

Reminds me of that comment (Paraphrasing here ....there were so many leads that he couldn't check them all out. That would only lead to more theories about Ray. One of them might lead to where Ray is, but there'd be alot of theories to go through.) Wish I could remember what article that was in. Maybe I'll hunt it up tonight. I about choked when I read that one.

What a damn shame for Ray Gricar.

Thanks, gstickley:seeya:

[UndertheRadar]

Well, I warned Chump you'd come up with "problems" that were insurmountable strawmen as to why these things could never happen, even though they've all been used by women, some as small as PF, on men, some younger and larger than RG.

No one is suggesting RG was sitting in an easy chair while PF just walked up to him and started to strangle or smother him, JJ. Read up on cases where women **have** done in their lovers and husbands. Medications and poisons have successfully been hidden in food, milkshakes, wine, etc. Doesn't matter how many "this could happens" you come up with. People have done it, and done it successfully, so it **can** be done and **has** been done.

And no, in most cases it's not "easy" to explain something as an accident. It was easy in the Peterson case, because of the deference showed to Peterson. That never should have happened. OTOH, I know of a situation where someone elderly really *did* have an accidental fall down the stairs as the result of a stroke. Family members were questioned by LE up and down, even though the person who fell did not die immediately but was comatose and covered with black and blue marks from the fall. There were suspicions of elder abuse (all completely unfounded) that the family had to be cleared of. Now maybe you're suggesting it would be "easy" in PF's case because she'd get the same deference that Drew Peterson got???

As for the Mini, you're going to have to do a lot more than offer your assertion that someone, PF or otherwise, couldn't have driven it Lewisburg. That assertion pales in comparison to the actual evidence that's been offered to counter your claim.

[gstickley]

Ah, Slappy, I don't mind looking it up for you. It's another of my all-time favorite press releases, & I always know just where to find it!

Posted on Sat, May. 13, 2006

Missed leads
Ignored sightings, witnesses spur questions in Gricar probe

By Pete Bosak
pbosak@centredaily.com

CDT/Nabil K. Mark

BELLEFONTE -- One year after former Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar seemed to step off the face of the planet, a review of the police investigation has uncovered new details that indicate key elements may have been missed.

Following the previously undisclosed news this week that a witness reported seeing Gricar talking with a woman in a Lewisburg antiques mall the afternoon he disappeared, the Centre Daily Times reviewed the early days of the police investigation by interviewing Gricar's family, friends and co-workers. Some startling revelations emerged:

u An assistant district attorney is certain she saw Gricar in Bellefonte at 3 p.m. on Friday, April 15, 2005, the day he vanished. It was reported to police but dismissed as not fitting the timeline police had established for Gricar.

u Police admit they are not monitoring Gricar's checking and savings accounts for strange activity, which experts called a serious mistake.

u Two close and longtime friends of the missing district attorney -- Ed Walker and Assistant District Attorney Steve Sloane, who is perhaps Gricar's best friend -- say they were never interviewed by Bellefonte police Officer Darrel Zaccagni, the lead investigator in the case. Zaccagni also never interviewed Gricar's co-workers in the courthouse or District Attorney's Office.

"I find that incredibly odd," Sloane said.

The men have never been asked for advice or their thoughts on Gricar's state of mind in the months and weeks leading up to his disappearance.

"I'm really surprised (Zaccagni) didn't talk to Steve," Walker said.

Zaccagni said conducting interviews of Sloane, Walker and a bevy of county workers likely would yield nothing.

"If my chief wants me to go and do that, I have no problem with doing that," Zaccagni said. "It may be worthwhile, it may not be. But I really don't have an answer to that. It could be a lot of time to lead us nowhere. It could provide us a real lead.

"But it more likely would just lead us toward a theory," he said.

New sighting

Authorities say the last credible sighting of Gricar occurred on the afternoon of April 15, 2005, at the Street of Shops, a Lewisburg antiques mall. That's where his red Mini Cooper was found the next day.

But Centre County Assistant District Attorney Carolyn Fenton said she saw Gricar in the county courthouse parking lot in Bellefonte about 3 p.m. April 15, Zaccagni revealed.

Fenton, then a law clerk for Judge David E. Grine, was taking the afternoon off after a trial ended and was feeling guilty about leaving early, she said.

"I see a car leaving the parking lot and the driver was Ray," Fenton said Friday. Police never revealed the sighting until questioned by the Centre Daily Times, which then contacted Fenton.

"I thought, 'Well, even the district attorney is taking the rest of the day off, so I don't feel so bad now,' " Fenton said.

She looked to see if Patty Fornicola, Gricar's housemate, girlfriend and co-worker, was in the passenger seat. But Gricar was alone, Fenton said.

Fenton said she was about 15 to 20 feet away. Gricar was driving a gold or silver, metallic-colored car, not his Mini Cooper or Fornicola's Honda, she said.

When she heard Gricar was missing, she went to police. But her sighting was immediately ruled out as not fitting the timeline they'd established, which put Gricar in Lewisburg at that time.

Gricar had called Fornicola about 11:30 that morning to tell her he was taking a drive toward Lewisburg, police said, and reported sightings of him at the antiques mall followed.

Surveillance footage shows Fenton leaving the courthouse at the time she remembers, but cameras did not pan wide enough to catch the car she said was driven by Gricar.

Gricar's daughter, Lara Gricar, seemed stunned by the information when contacted at her Lake Stevens, Wash., home.

"I've never heard that before," she said.

Uncharacteristic behavior

Centre County Criminal Court Administrator Cheryl Spotts was never interviewed by police. But she has long been struck by what she says was odd behavior by Gricar about a month before his disappearance.

"I remember distinctly a meeting we had, March the 9th," Spotts said. It was a meeting in the chambers of Centre County President Judge Charles C. Brown Jr. They were there to talk about a potential death-penalty case and set a trial date.

"It just seemed that Ray wasn't with it," Spotts said. "He was just looking around, which kind of shocked me because this was a death-penalty case."

At one point, Brown told Gricar he had two weeks available in October for the trial.

"Ray just turned and looked at the bookcases," Spotts said. "He didn't even look at the judge when he said it.

"He just said, 'I won't be here,' " Spotts said.

What he meant is not known. That was a time of year Gricar sometimes would vacation in Vermont, Sloane said. Other sources also speculated that Gricar was referring to vacation plans. Gricar's 60th birthday was Oct. 9.

But his behavior left Spotts unsettled enough that she remarked on it to several co-workers at the time.

Spotts said she did not go to police with this information because she knew they hadn't believed Fenton's supposed sighting of Gricar.

"So why would they believe me?" Spotts said.

Spotts' story about Gricar's behavior on March 9 startled Zaccagni.

"That's the first I've heard of that," Zaccagni said. "No, we did not talk to every county employee Ray had contact with. But we made it known we would sit down with anybody."

He said Sloane was interviewed for hours in the days after Gricar disappeared by a state police profiler, who later said Gricar likely committed suicide.

Zaccagni could not recall the profiler's name.

"To be honest with you, we never got the written reports (from the profiler)," Zaccagni said. "But we spoke verbally."

Call for 'another set of eyes'

*****SNIP*****
Pete Bosak can be reached at 235-3928.

http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/14569409.htm

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, I also know of cases where someone tried a poison milkshake. Of those that I saw, 4 out of 5 failed.

http://www.ksdk.com/news/watercooler/hot_topics_article.aspx?storyid=111417

http://www.courttv.com/news/2006/0407/kissel_ap.html

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Mother-who-tried-to-poison-children-escapes-jail/2005/06/01/1117568256558.html

http://tdcaa.infopop.net/2/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=347098965&f=157098965&m=6063090757

http://www.dailytribune.com/stories/010605/loc_brother06001.shtml

The one that didn't was beaten to death.

In half the cases, the victims thought the poisoned food looked or tasted funny.

What evidence to you have that anyone other than RFG drove the Mini to Lewisburg? We have a lot that he did, and nothing that he didn't.

[Politigal]

oh Gawd....here we go again...

[Cinderella]

I know someone who put rat poison in his wife's coffee. She drank quite a bit of it until she started getting sick and had the coffee tested.

[Politigal]

There are any number of ways that someone could have been murdered - messy & non-messy.

And look how many hours there were to clean & dispose of evidence.

Further, there was *NO FORENSIC INVESTIGATION* at the home.


Piece .....of.....cake


IMO

[Cinderella]

J. J. and Pgal,

LOL, Sorry, but I think that I will skip the cake

It kinda makes one think about who is preparing their food or drink.

[Cinderella]

J. J.,

Are you obsessed with Milkshakes?

[gstickley]

Originally posted by Politigal
There are any number of ways that someone could have been murdered - messy & non-messy.

And look how many hours there were to clean & dispose of evidence.

Further, there was *NO FORENSIC INVESTIGATION* at the home.


Piece .....of.....cake


IMO [/*]

Yeah, Pgal. From shortly after 9:00 PM on Thu., 04/14, until whatever time work began the next day; then from whatever time work ended until whatever time LE went to house, & I seriously doubt if any "investigation" occurred at that time!

REMEMBER: "never considered a suspect"!

[Cinderella]

J. J.,

Really, where do you come up with some of these sites.

ROTFLMAO Laughing so hard, tears are running from my eyes.
Great stress reliever. Next time that I am depressed, I will just
come back to this link of yours and know that whatever is wrong with me isn't really all that bad.

http://tdcaa.infopop.net/2/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=347098965&f=157098965&m=6063090757

[Politigal]

Originally posted by Cinderella
J. J.,

Are you obsessed with Milkshakes? [/*]

apparently that, and speeding down busy highways :eek:

Can you picture it? Man on a mission with a straw. :hat:

[Politigal]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
UTR, I also know of cases where someone tried a poison milkshake. Of those that I saw, 4 out of 5 failed.

http://www.ksdk.com/news/watercooler/hot_topics_article.aspx?storyid=111417

http://www.courttv.com/news/2006/0407/kissel_ap.html

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Mother-who-tried-to-poison-children-escapes-jail/2005/06/01/1117568256558.html

http://tdcaa.infopop.net/2/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=347098965&f=157098965&m=6063090757

http://www.dailytribune.com/stories/010605/loc_brother06001.shtml

The one that didn't was beaten to death.

In half the cases, the victims thought the poisoned food looked or tasted funny.

What evidence to you have that anyone other than RFG drove the Mini to Lewisburg? We have a lot that he did, and nothing that he didn't. [/*]

There are lots of "successful" poison cases

Woman convicted of poisoning her husband (he died)
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20070821-1221-poisoned.html

Wife poisoned husband (he died) and then she went to the salon
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/11/11/crime.husband.reut/index.html

Woman poisons husband and her boyfriend
http://www.courttv.com/trials/turner/050604_ctv.html

Man poisoned wife
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/29/national/main2053704.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_2053704

Man poisoned wife
http://www.wisn.com/news/13779393/detail.html

Man poisoned wife and killed another man
http://www.rediff.com/us/2001/aug/01us4.htm

[Cinderella]

Originally posted by Politigal


apparently that, and speeding down busy highways :eek:

Can you picture it? Man on a mission with a straw. :hat: [/*]

And probably listening to PRINCE on the car stereo. But he would still talk his way out of a ticket.

[Cinderella]

I still like this link of J. J.'s the best. If you can't do it one way, there are many other choices.

http://tdcaa.infopop.net/2/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=347098965&f=157098965&m=6063090757

[slaphappy]

Originally posted by gstickley
Ah, Slappy, I don't mind looking it up for you. It's another of my all-time favorite press releases, & I always know just where to find it!

Posted on Sat, May. 13, 2006

Missed leads
Ignored sightings, witnesses spur questions in Gricar probe

By Pete Bosak
pbosak@centredaily.com

CDT/Nabil K. Mark

BELLEFONTE -- One year after former Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar seemed to step off the face of the planet, a review of the police investigation has uncovered new details that indicate key elements may have been missed.

Following the previously undisclosed news this week that a witness reported seeing Gricar talking with a woman in a Lewisburg antiques mall the afternoon he disappeared, the Centre Daily Times reviewed the early days of the police investigation by interviewing Gricar's family, friends and co-workers. Some startling revelations emerged:

u An assistant district attorney is certain she saw Gricar in Bellefonte at 3 p.m. on Friday, April 15, 2005, the day he vanished. It was reported to police but dismissed as not fitting the timeline police had established for Gricar.

u Police admit they are not monitoring Gricar's checking and savings accounts for strange activity, which experts called a serious mistake.

u Two close and longtime friends of the missing district attorney -- Ed Walker and Assistant District Attorney Steve Sloane, who is perhaps Gricar's best friend -- say they were never interviewed by Bellefonte police Officer Darrel Zaccagni, the lead investigator in the case. Zaccagni also never interviewed Gricar's co-workers in the courthouse or District Attorney's Office.

"I find that incredibly odd," Sloane said.

The men have never been asked for advice or their thoughts on Gricar's state of mind in the months and weeks leading up to his disappearance.

"I'm really surprised (Zaccagni) didn't talk to Steve," Walker said.

Zaccagni said conducting interviews of Sloane, Walker and a bevy of county workers likely would yield nothing.

"If my chief wants me to go and do that, I have no problem with doing that," Zaccagni said. "It may be worthwhile, it may not be. But I really don't have an answer to that. It could be a lot of time to lead us nowhere. It could provide us a real lead.

"But it more likely would just lead us toward a theory," he said.

New sighting

Authorities say the last credible sighting of Gricar occurred on the afternoon of April 15, 2005, at the Street of Shops, a Lewisburg antiques mall. That's where his red Mini Cooper was found the next day.

But Centre County Assistant District Attorney Carolyn Fenton said she saw Gricar in the county courthouse parking lot in Bellefonte about 3 p.m. April 15, Zaccagni revealed.

Fenton, then a law clerk for Judge David E. Grine, was taking the afternoon off after a trial ended and was feeling guilty about leaving early, she said.

"I see a car leaving the parking lot and the driver was Ray," Fenton said Friday. Police never revealed the sighting until questioned by the Centre Daily Times, which then contacted Fenton.

"I thought, 'Well, even the district attorney is taking the rest of the day off, so I don't feel so bad now,' " Fenton said.

She looked to see if Patty Fornicola, Gricar's housemate, girlfriend and co-worker, was in the passenger seat. But Gricar was alone, Fenton said.

Fenton said she was about 15 to 20 feet away. Gricar was driving a gold or silver, metallic-colored car, not his Mini Cooper or Fornicola's Honda, she said.

When she heard Gricar was missing, she went to police. But her sighting was immediately ruled out as not fitting the timeline they'd established, which put Gricar in Lewisburg at that time.

Gricar had called Fornicola about 11:30 that morning to tell her he was taking a drive toward Lewisburg, police said, and reported sightings of him at the antiques mall followed.

Surveillance footage shows Fenton leaving the courthouse at the time she remembers, but cameras did not pan wide enough to catch the car she said was driven by Gricar.

Gricar's daughter, Lara Gricar, seemed stunned by the information when contacted at her Lake Stevens, Wash., home.

"I've never heard that before," she said.

Uncharacteristic behavior

Centre County Criminal Court Administrator Cheryl Spotts was never interviewed by police. But she has long been struck by what she says was odd behavior by Gricar about a month before his disappearance.

"I remember distinctly a meeting we had, March the 9th," Spotts said. It was a meeting in the chambers of Centre County President Judge Charles C. Brown Jr. They were there to talk about a potential death-penalty case and set a trial date.

"It just seemed that Ray wasn't with it," Spotts said. "He was just looking around, which kind of shocked me because this was a death-penalty case."

At one point, Brown told Gricar he had two weeks available in October for the trial.

"Ray just turned and looked at the bookcases," Spotts said. "He didn't even look at the judge when he said it.

"He just said, 'I won't be here,' " Spotts said.

What he meant is not known. That was a time of year Gricar sometimes would vacation in Vermont, Sloane said. Other sources also speculated that Gricar was referring to vacation plans. Gricar's 60th birthday was Oct. 9.

But his behavior left Spotts unsettled enough that she remarked on it to several co-workers at the time.

Spotts said she did not go to police with this information because she knew they hadn't believed Fenton's supposed sighting of Gricar.

"So why would they believe me?" Spotts said.

Spotts' story about Gricar's behavior on March 9 startled Zaccagni.

"That's the first I've heard of that," Zaccagni said. "No, we did not talk to every county employee Ray had contact with. But we made it known we would sit down with anybody."

He said Sloane was interviewed for hours in the days after Gricar disappeared by a state police profiler, who later said Gricar likely committed suicide.

Zaccagni could not recall the profiler's name.

"To be honest with you, we never got the written reports (from the profiler)," Zaccagni said. "But we spoke verbally."

Call for 'another set of eyes'

*****SNIP*****
Pete Bosak can be reached at 235-3928.

http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/14569409.htm [/*]

gstickley:cool: That's it!! That's the one!! Can you imagine even admitting that outloud?? I think I would be too embarrassed to tell the family that all leads weren't checked out (not too embarrassed for the family if something lurid was found!)

With a mentality like that, will Ray Gricar ever be found?

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by slaphappy


gstickley:cool: That's it!! That's the one!! Can you imagine even admitting that outloud?? I think I would be too embarrassed to tell the family that all leads weren't checked out (not too embarrassed for the family if something lurid was found!)

With a mentality like that, will Ray Gricar ever be found? [/*]

Like I've said, the first weekend, GREAT. After that, a whole bunch of stuff hasn't been cleared.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Politigal


apparently that, and speeding down busy highways :eek:

Can you picture it? Man on a mission with a straw. :hat: [/*]

:biggrin:

[J. J. in Phila]

Well, let's see. Most of the poisoned food/ beverages doesn't seem to work.

So now we have PEF waving her magic wand to create a poison apple and then using a teleport spell to get the Mini to Lewisburg.

When do Hansel and Gretal (as opposed to Gretta V.S.) make their appearance?

:rolleyes:

[UndertheRadar]

What do you mean "Most of the poisoned food/ beverages doesn't seem to work"?

JJ, do a little more research. Poison is one of the top three methods used when women kill on their own, strangulation and suffocation being the other two.

Additionally, they hire someone to do the killing for them, sometimes younger males (like Pam Smart did), a male who can be coerced and manipulated because he needs or wants money, or even a professional hitman.

You live in your own little world of denial.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
Well, let's see. Most of the poisoned food/ beverages doesn't seem to work. Wrong again

So now we have PEF waving her magic wand to create a poison apple and then using a teleport spell to get the Mini to Lewisburg. Can you say ACCOMPLICE?

When do Hansel and Gretal (as opposed to Gretta V.S.) make their appearance? at the press conference

:rolleyes: [/*]

:tongue:

[Politigal]

Originally posted by logicworks



IMO, most likely drugged. Weaned into not noticing the 'flavor' the weeks prior to, enough to make his behavior seem 'odd';(have to have him acting a bit out of character, if someone is to believe something was wrong with HIM), sleeping more.
Poison too risky, with vomiting. Gun, too noisy. Hitting hard or knives, too messy. Strangulation alone, too 'iffy', strength-wise. No mess in the house if drugged and removed.
JMO [/*]

Drugging makes a lot of sense, but it shows planning.

I don't know why but I still don't believe this was planned. I still tend to think it was due to something going awry that Thursday night.

And once again, we only have Patty's word that he was taking naps, etc.

I can understand someone telling a coworker they are tired ...I do that on a daily basis.

[Cloudbuster]

Thanks everyone that responded to the text map question. Weirdly though if you keep clicking on the links there are more names some that are not familiar to this case at least I thought?

[J. J. in Phila]

Ah, now we have Merlin the Magician as "professional hitman" that transports the Mini to Lewisburg. :rolleyes:

Actually, a professional hit would be possible, but I doubt that PEF could arrange and pay for one after 5:30 PM on 4/14/05. That's GS most recent scenario, PEF got angry after the walk in the park and did it. I've never heard of a hitman taking a credit card or personal check. :rolleyes:

Yes, PEF could have hired someone, in advance, to hire someone to kill RFG, but so could EG, BG, LG, TG, CG, MM, JKA, SS, MS, LM, JL, BJL, Det Z, Vargas, UTR, and any number of other initials, including RFG in a Bullworth scenario. Most of those people don't have a motive, and what's PEF's?

I doubt if any of the people listed could get a hit scheduled within a day.

More Patty bashing.

UTR, in all serious, yes, anyone could have hired someone to kill RFG, blackmailed someone into doing it, but that would have to be a long term plan, not a crime of passion. And even in that case, it doesn't explain the Mini getting to Lewisburg.

Your scenarios are getting more and more bizarre.

[UndertheRadar]

JJ, you still don't read very well. I mentioned hit men only in a list of the top ways that women (in general) choose to kill men: poison, suffocation, strangulation, and having someone else do the killing for them (younger males, males who can be manipulated by money, and hitmen). General statement in response to your claim that "poison doesn't seem to work."

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, as I've stated, poisons, especially concocted in the time frame referred to, generally are not that effective (one problem being they tend to be spotted, even by children). Strangulation and suffocation has a problem, too; most people tend to resist when being strangled or suffocated. A hit man generally cannot be hired and paid off in four hours (especially after the banks are closed).

Another problem, which after more than year you still can't explain is, if any of these things occured, how did the car get to Lewisburg.

UTR, RFG drove the car to Lewisburg. Come up with a credible scenario involving that.

[UndertheRadar]

JJ, you can state whatever you want to about poisons. But you have exactly the same problem in doing that as you do with your assertions that someone else couldn't have driven the Mini-Cooper to Lewisburg: your assertions don't have any evidence for them, and they don't match reality.

YOU are the one who believes RG drove the Mini-Cooper to Lewisburg and that something happened to him after that, that he walked away, committed suicide, or was murdered. YOU come up with a credible scenario involving that. I haven't seen you do it yet.

You're not going to be happy until everyone on the board agrees that RG took the laptop out of the case to check the battery level on a laptop he rarely if ever used, popped it under his arm without the case despite being a meticulous man who obsessed over dust covers for electronic equipment, and set off to on a drive to Lewisburg for whatever purpose, either to hop into his newly purchased car (registered under his fake name which LE has neglected to check out) or to meet with some shadowy figure wearing a trench coat who wants to pop some CD into his laptop with the lure of false information in an effort to kill RG. And let's not forget that RG, who prides himself on being available to LE in the event of something serious occurring, makes sure in either scenario that he turns off his cell phone so he isn't disturbed, since he's just on a pleasure drive on his day off.

[UndertheRadar]

Now, personally, I was thinking it would be a cinch to cover the taste of Benadryl or many prescription drugs if those were used in a nice spicy marinara sauce or putanesca sauce, anything with a lot of pungent garlic and onions. Little did I know there would be a recipe for concealing the taste of **rat poison** right in the Court TV files!

Nannie's Apple & Prune Pie

Approx. Time: 45 minutes
Oven: 350 degree baking temp.

Ingredients: 1 c. water, 1 c. flour, ½ c. butter, 3 eggs, pinch of sugar, 4 apples sliced, 1 c dried prunes, dash of granulated sugar, 5 tablespoons rat poison

* Bring to boil water, butter, sugar. At boil, stir in flour.
* Over low heat, continue to stir until able to form doughy ball. Into dough, mix egg mixture (well beaten) until ball is smooth.
* Grease 9-inch pie tin.
* Roll out pastry, lining bottom and sides of pan with pastry dough, clipping excess for pie top.
* Add apple slices and prunes in hearty layers. It is best to soak prunes overnight in rat poison; generic hardware store variety will do quite well.
* After spreading pears and prunes into shell, pour d lethal juice of marinated prunes over apple and prune contents. Juice adds extra flavor and conceals taste of rat poison. (If sting of arsenic tartness remains, add extra tbsp of sugar for good measure.)
* Cover pie with leftover dough in preheated oven for 45 minutes, checking occasionally. Top with granulated sugar while top crust is fresh from oven.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/women/doss/1.html

Sweet little Nannie Doss, the Giggling Granny, murdered four husbands and seven other family members. Guess that rat poison pie recipe worked pretty darned well!

[Chump#7]

Well, I warned Chump you'd come up with "problems" that were insurmountable strawmen as to why these things could never happen, even though they've all been used by women, some as small as PF, on men, some younger and larger than RG.

Heh. No warning needed, I expected it as well. Very entertaining. I've been trying to catch up to you guys by reading the boards from the beginning, and - that's the MO. Talk about grasping at straws.

Help me out here, y'all. These boards are about the disappearance of Ray Gricar, right? And I think it's understood[/*] by all that participate here that there just isn't enough evidence (that we're aware of) to support any theories to the point of making a confident accusation of anyone. Right? So we're left to speculate a gazillion scenarios about what may have happened to Ray Gricar in hopes that if we kick this around enough we just may stumble upon something that turns out to be that little piece that opens the door and gets this investigation going in some direction. It's all fair game to speculate , right? But when it comes to PF? Dudes, what is up? Gets a little heated in here. Why is it that speculation in any way involving PF has a kneejerk perception as an accusation of PF by certain posters? The lengths at which people go to defend PF where no such defense is needed is... I don't know. It's something else though. I see no passionate kneejerk hissyfit defenses of other possible persons that *could* have been involved in Ray's disappearance - BJL, JL, Murtha (heh), drug movers, shakers, quakers, aliens... you know them all.

So anyways, to those of you that are passionate about Patty having absolutely no involvement, or absolutely possessing no information that could help find out what happen to Ray Gricar (that's your right, and she's lucky to have you):From someone who is looking at this whole big mess objectively - your behavior/activity on these boards in regards to PF is in itself probably the number one reason anyone would raise an eyebrow in her direction that otherwise wouldn't . Seriously. Lighten up - just spitballin', folks

Back at you Cindi :seeya:

SJ, It just dawned on me that you reside in what we used to call Kishaquawishedicouldsayit.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by Chump#7


Heh. No warning needed, I expected it as well. Very entertaining. I've been trying to catch up to you guys by reading the boards from the beginning, and - that's the MO. Talk about grasping at straws.

Help me out here, y'all. These boards are about the disappearance of Ray Gricar, right? And I think it's understood[/*] by all that participate here that there just isn't enough evidence (that we're aware of) to support any theories to the point of making a confident accusation of anyone. Right? So we're left to speculate a gazillion scenarios about what may have happened to Ray Gricar in hopes that if we kick this around enough we just may stumble upon something that turns out to be that little piece that opens the door and gets this investigation going in some direction. It's all fair game to speculate , right? But when it comes to PF? Dudes, what is up? Gets a little heated in here. Why is it that speculation in any way involving PF has a kneejerk perception as an accusation of PF by certain posters? The lengths at which people go to defend PF where no such defense is needed is... I don't know. It's something else though. I see no passionate kneejerk hissyfit defenses of other possible persons that *could* have been involved in Ray's disappearance - BJL, JL, Murtha (heh), drug movers, shakers, quakers, aliens... you know them all.

So anyways, to those of you that are passionate about Patty having absolutely no involvement, or absolutely possessing no information that could help find out what happen to Ray Gricar (that's your right, and she's lucky to have you):From someone who is looking at this whole big mess objectively - your behavior/activity on these boards in regards to PF is in itself probably the number one reason anyone would raise an eyebrow in her direction that otherwise wouldn't . Seriously. Lighten up - just spitballin', folks

Back at you Cindi :seeya:

SJ, It just dawned on me that you reside in what we used to call Kishaquawishedicouldsayit. [/*]

Awesome post!!

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Chump#7


Heh. No warning needed, I expected it as well. Very entertaining. I've been trying to catch up to you guys by reading the boards from the beginning, and - that's the MO. Talk about grasping at straws.

Help me out here, y'all. These boards are about the disappearance of Ray Gricar, right? And I think it's understood[/*] by all that participate here that there just isn't enough evidence (that we're aware of) to support any theories to the point of making a confident accusation of anyone. Right? So we're left to speculate a gazillion scenarios about what may have happened to Ray Gricar in hopes that if we kick this around enough we just may stumble upon something that turns out to be that little piece that opens the door and gets this investigation going in some direction. It's all fair game to speculate , right? But when it comes to PF? Dudes, what is up? Gets a little heated in here. Why is it that speculation in any way involving PF has a kneejerk perception as an accusation of PF by certain posters? The lengths at which people go to defend PF where no such defense is needed is... I don't know. It's something else though. I see no passionate kneejerk hissyfit defenses of other possible persons that *could* have been involved in Ray's disappearance - BJL, JL, Murtha (heh), drug movers, shakers, quakers, aliens... you know them all.

So anyways, to those of you that are passionate about Patty having absolutely no involvement, or absolutely possessing no information that could help find out what happen to Ray Gricar (that's your right, and she's lucky to have you):From someone who is looking at this whole big mess objectively - your behavior/activity on these boards in regards to PF is in itself probably the number one reason anyone would raise an eyebrow in her direction that otherwise wouldn't . Seriously. Lighten up - just spitballin', folks

Back at you Cindi :seeya:

SJ, It just dawned on me that you reside in what we used to call Kishaquawishedicouldsayit. [/*]


It is no longer called Kish. It is now Indian Valley. Even Kish Park was changed to Derry Park. Miss that old park.

I think JJ and I are the only ones who are standing up for PF, so I will say thank you for the advice but .........

Now we also have one who has come on here and made a post that PF and TF are murderers. Guess you overlooked that one? We then have others who are trying very hard to get her there and back, and we have those who are objective. We all are passionate about what we believe in.

I personally don't know who did anything, if anything was even done. I don't know if PF has done anything but if it is ever found out she did I will apologize to the forum for that. If RG is out there somewhere then he is an A$$ for doing this to her.

I don't feel my feelings on this forum as to PF have been any louder or problem causing than what has gone on here BEFORE I got on here.

If you are talking about what just happened with Cindi and I, don't pass judgement if you don't know all that went on BEHIND the scenes and OFF THE FORUM. Everyone can put me on ignore but how childish is that. No matter what has been said on here I have read EVERYONE'S posts and respected their freedom of speech. I just don't like someone putting an answer on the forum to a question that was asked of me, just because I didn't read it fast enough, and a stpud question at that! If I remember correctly someone did the same thing to TG and he wasn't too happy about it either.

Yes, we can all speculate and I have done so as well, but the only thing anyone wants to speculate on is how to connect PF. I saw that from the very beginning, BEFORE I was posting. When I mention anything it is shot down because it would take it away from Bellefonte and PF.

PF has to live in Centre County and walk the streets of that small town. If you think the citizens of Bellefonte are not reading and talking on the streets of Bellefonte about what is being said about PF, then think again. I have heard it many times. Now if PF has done nothing to cause RG to disappear what is being said on here is causing her tremendous pain. It is only fair that ONE person can stand here and defend what is not known.

I have never been on a forum before and I don't know what brought me here many hours a day but I feel it was for a purpose. Maybe to take up defence of her from what had been going on for over a year BEFORE I posted. Whatever reason, I am here and will stay here. I just wish RG's friends and co-workers would get on here too.

Back at you Chump! :D

[Chump#7]

I wasn't thinking of you in my post at all, SJ. Not one bit.

You temper the PF speculation in an honest and healthy way (from what I've seen). Always room at the table for that.

:)

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar
Now, personally, I was thinking it would be a cinch to cover the taste of Benadryl or many prescription drugs if those were used in a nice spicy marinara sauce or putanesca sauce, anything with a lot of pungent garlic and onions. Little did I know there would be a recipe for concealing the taste of **rat poison** right in the Court TV files!

Nannie's Apple & Prune Pie

Approx. Time: 45 minutes
Oven: 350 degree baking temp.

Ingredients: 1 c. water, 1 c. flour, ½ c. butter, 3 eggs, pinch of sugar, 4 apples sliced, 1 c dried prunes, dash of granulated sugar, 5 tablespoons rat poison

* Bring to boil water, butter, sugar. At boil, stir in flour.
* Over low heat, continue to stir until able to form doughy ball. Into dough, mix egg mixture (well beaten) until ball is smooth.
* Grease 9-inch pie tin.
* Roll out pastry, lining bottom and sides of pan with pastry dough, clipping excess for pie top.
* Add apple slices and prunes in hearty layers. It is best to soak prunes overnight in rat poison; generic hardware store variety will do quite well.
* After spreading pears and prunes into shell, pour d lethal juice of marinated prunes over apple and prune contents. Juice adds extra flavor and conceals taste of rat poison. (If sting of arsenic tartness remains, add extra tbsp of sugar for good measure.)
* Cover pie with leftover dough in preheated oven for 45 minutes, checking occasionally. Top with granulated sugar while top crust is fresh from oven.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/women/doss/1.html

Sweet little Nannie Doss, the Giggling Granny, murdered four husbands and seven other family members. Guess that rat poison pie recipe worked pretty darned well! [/*]

Like my ggrandson says nasteeee! No more apple and prune pie for us!

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Chump#7


Heh. No warning needed, I expected it as well. Very entertaining. I've been trying to catch up to you guys by reading the boards from the beginning, and - that's the MO. Talk about grasping at straws.



Here is a good example of grasping at straws. It's from the "prune" example UTR gave:

"Up until then, why let me tell you, he looked in fine shape. Then ...well ...two days later ...dead. I nursed him, believe me, I nursed him, but I failed."

P. 8

"In January, 1953, (Lou) came to stay. She had obviously picked a bad time. After a couple of days with her daughter, she fell ill with chronic stomach pains and died."

p. 11

On a cool September evening, Doss sat at the dinner table sliding his cleaned-off dinner plate aside to partake of Nannie's prune cake. That night, he began wrenching and grasping his stomach in violent pain. Spasms were ungodly. "(He) took to his bed for days, losing 16 pounds in weight," Terry Manners' Deadlier Than the Male tells us. "Finally, his doctor sent him to the hospital, where he stayed for twenty-three days."

p. 13

It is not always effective and it is not quick working. I'm the guy who raised the possibility of poison. There are problem with it. The poisons are either slow acting, have "delivery" problems, or are just not available by going under the kitchen sink.


Help me out here, y'all. These boards are about the disappearance of Ray Gricar, right? And I think it's understood[/*] by all that participate here that there just isn't enough evidence (that we're aware of) to support any theories to the point of making a confident accusation of anyone. Right?


There is some evidence that has been released, notably about the Mini. The problem is, a lot of these theories, like the one GS tossed out, conflict with the known evidence.

Why is it that speculation in any way involving PF has a kneejerk perception as an accusation of PF by certain posters? The lengths at which people go to defend PF where no such defense is needed is... I don't know. It's something else though. I see no passionate kneejerk hissyfit defenses of other possible persons that *could* have been involved in Ray's disappearance - BJL, JL, Murtha (heh), drug movers, shakers, quakers, aliens... you know them all.


No, if you go back, I've said the same thinks about motives in the Vargas case. I've also said, even in my "Murder Scenario," that, if it was true, you could eliminate the entire stafff of the DA's office.


So anyways, to those of you that are passionate about Patty having absolutely no involvement, ... [/*]

I'm not passionate about PEF, but I am passionate about the evidence. We've had a few comments about PEF crying, and what that shows. When it comes up, I note how some, if not most, can fake it. Suggesting that it is possible for her to fake attitudes is far from defending her. On this thread, I have readily conceded that one person in a relationship could commit a crime of passion, including PEF.

Suggesting that PEF could not somehow manage to drive the Mini to Lewisburg, without leaving a trace, while still leaving traces of RFG driving it, isn't "defending" PEF. It is defending rationality.

We have several posters who basically say "Patty did it" for some reason of their own, but ignore the known evidence. They concoct these wild scenarios that can be easily disproved and instead of moving on, to work on another scenario, maybe even one that would involve PEF, but consistent with the evidence, they still try to jump back to tired stuff that doesn't work.

[gstickley]

Hey, Chump Boy: Loved your post; it is true, ahh, so true! Especially the 3rd paragraph.
>
>
>
>
(Wonder which theory of mine is being dissed this time; I've had so many. After all, I am the "peddler of theories".)

:D

[UndertheRadar]

Oh, come on, JJ. The Nannie Doss apple pie recipe was a joke, because I thought it was hysterical that right here on CTV we had our own rat poison pie recipe. It wasn't an instruction manual for how PF might have gone about poisoning RG.

Ever hear of Michael Swango? He used arsenic to poison and kill at least 30, more likely 60 of his colleagues and patients while working as a doctor and emergency services technician in various places. It took years for authorities to catch up with him, and his poisoning was pretty darned **effective.**

You assume for your own purposes that this was a "crime of passion," spur of the moment to set up your straw man, and you argue that there was "no motive" for PF. But you routinely ignore possibilities that are sitting there right in front of your eyes. I continue to believe there's a huge possibility for motive sitting right there in the Tyrone antique shop, RG in the shop approximately two weeks before his disappearance with a woman described by two shop owners who knew RG as tall, thin, attractive, with long dark hair. They observed RG and this woman over a twenty minute time period and both were adamant that she was not LG and *not* PF. They observed RG and the woman leave together in the Mini Cooper.

That time frame coincides pretty nicely with the time frame in which RG is described as napping more (one explanation could be distancing himself) and acting "distraught."

As for your argument that you're "defending rationality" by saying that PF couldn't drive the Mini-Cooper to Lewisburg, that's just bullpuckey. Again I repeat, your **assertion** means nothing. You have **never** offered a single shred of science or authority to back up that position, just your own say so. Those of us who have taken the other side have put plenty of evidence up on this board to show that it **could** be done.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Chump#7
From someone who is looking at this whole big mess objectively - your behavior/activity on these boards in regards to PF is in itself probably the number one reason anyone would raise an eyebrow in her direction that otherwise wouldn't

Great post all the way around, Chump, but this is particularly true. I remember posting a long time ago that if PF has friends on the board who think they are doing her a favor with some of their tactics, they really ought to think again--for precisely the reason you point out here. {{Eyebrows up}}

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar
Oh, come on, JJ. The Nannie Doss apple pie recipe was a joke, because I thought it was hysterical that right here on CTV we had our own rat poison pie recipe. It wasn't an instruction manual for how PF might have gone about poisoning RG.

Ever hear of Michael Swango? He used arsenic to poison and kill at least 30, more likely 60 of his colleagues and patients while working as a doctor and emergency services technician in various places. It took years for authorities to catch up with him, and his poisoning was pretty darned **effective.**

You assume for your own purposes that this was a "crime of passion," spur of the moment to set up your straw man, and you argue that there was "no motive" for PF. But you routinely ignore possibilities that are sitting there right in front of your eyes. I continue to believe there's a huge possibility for motive sitting right there in the Tyrone antique shop, RG in the shop approximately two weeks before his disappearance with a woman described by two shop owners who knew RG as tall, thin, attractive, with long dark hair. They observed RG and this woman over a twenty minute time period and both were adamant that she was not LG and *not* PF. They observed RG and the woman leave together in the Mini Cooper.

That time frame coincides pretty nicely with the time frame in which RG is described as napping more (one explanation could be distancing himself) and acting "distraught."

As for your argument that you're "defending rationality" by saying that PF couldn't drive the Mini-Cooper to Lewisburg, that's just bullpuckey. Again I repeat, your **assertion** means nothing. You have **never** offered a single shred of science or authority to back up that position, just your own say so. Those of us who have taken the other side have put plenty of evidence up on this board to show that it **could** be done. [/*]

What I noticed during another woman was not sleeping more or distraught. A different attitude, new clothes, new after shave, nicer clothes to work (she worked there), a little later coming home, leaving a little earlier, taking shower as soon as he go home, checking up on me at work or calling from his other job for no reason. (making sure I wasn't out somewhere to see him with her) and a whole lot more things I could say but some too personal.

Never taking naps, seemed to have more energy. Never looking distraught. More like having his cake and eating it too. :D

[Politigal]

I guess what gets me is....

RG was only depressed looking - in Patty's company - at the park.

RG was only distraught looking - at the office - where Patty also was.

It just seems to revolve around Patty IMO.

He was described as ok at the Prison Board Meeting Thursday morning. (Patty wasn't there.)

He was described as ok in emails with another attorney.

He was described as ok in a phone conversation with Lara.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Politigal
I guess what gets me is....

RG was only depressed looking - in Patty's company - at the park.

RG was only distraught looking - at the office - where Patty also was.

It just seems to revolve around Patty IMO.

He was described as ok at the Prison Board Meeting Thursday morning. (Patty wasn't there.)

He was described as ok in emails with another attorney.

He was described as ok in a phone conversation with Lara. [/*]

PF was not with him when the Attorney General and the Drug Task Force had that photo in about the Taji Lee Drug Bust.
There were photo's posted when RG was with PF and he looked very happy.

TG and SS both said RG was discussing his retirement and THEIR trips west and Northeast. He went out in public with her to the Gamble Mill and no one has said he looked distraught at any of those dinners. He wouldn't even go out with her if that was how she made him feel.

No, something else was going on. Something very serious and I don't think it was PF. I don't think it was another woman. I think whatever it was on that computer and she knew nothing about it. I think he was on his way to meet someone about something. I just don't know what. But I am still searching and googling.

I will say I question why the DA in the county where he disappeared would not want to help find RG, take the case in his county? Where RG left his car being in a parking lot near where county's DA and the AG drug task force were doing investigations on drug deals at that time? With 2 people near that park arrested? He didn't think anything strange about that? What is with that DA when others in surrounding counties also thought it odd he didn't keep the case in his county?

Hmmmm, just something to ponder?

[Politigal]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


PF was not with him when the Attorney General and the Drug Task Force had that photo in about the Taji Lee Drug Bust.
snipped

[/*]

As S1 so aptly explained, the Drug Bust Press Conference was a serious moment for all in the picture......like they were all tough on crime.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


What I noticed during another woman was not sleeping more or distraught. A different attitude, new clothes, new after shave, nicer clothes to work (she worked there), a little later coming home, leaving a little earlier, taking shower as soon as he go home, checking up on me at work or calling from his other job for no reason. (making sure I wasn't out somewhere to see him with her) and a whole lot more things I could say but some too personal.

Never taking naps, seemed to have more energy. Never looking distraught. More like having his cake and eating it too. :D

1) Maybe RG wasn't "having his cake and eating it too." Maybe he had just spent some time with a female **friend** and was being accused of "having his cake and eating it too."

2) You were apparently sitting back and watching your then-husband's change in behavior but hadn't confronted him yet, because everything you described above are activities a person would do while still "getting away" with cheating on a spouse. What if nagging little questions started being posed to your then-husband? Some men withdraw from nagging little accusations by sleeping more (can't bother me if I'm asleep) and then they're "on edge" when they're awake.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, first of all, I didn't suggest a crime of passion, GS did:

Originally posted by gstickley
Man takes off work one day.
Man comes back & woman & man go for walk in park.
Man wants out. Woman wants to talk him into staying.
Woman goes home; man goes back to work.
Woman has now checked everything, including unused laptop; maybe finds something to add to her suspicions.

When & if man comes home, woman confronts man.
Man is going!
Woman is left with the loss again, the gossip, the smirks, the looks. Left again!
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."

(At no time have finances entered the picture.) [/*]

Just a few days ago on this thread. Now, I think that a "lover's quarrel" could escalate into murder, but the evidence does not point to that.

I have heard of medical professionals, in hospitals murdering people. The closest thing we have to a medical professional in this an ex-EMT, who didn't have access to the house, and probably doesn't have access to any poison. Hint: Her initials are not PEF.

There are some problems with a long term poisoning, namely, it might get interaction with alcohol, and RFG did consume alcohol.

UTR, the whole concept of forensic science is that if someone enters a place they take something from that place and leave something in that place.

What was left by the last driver? Fingerprints, scent, and DNA. Whose were those? RFG. Who did witnesses see around the Mini (and possibly in the Mini)? RFG.

You spent weeks last year insisting that all the evidence was planted. Until I asked how. Then it stopped.

To get where you want to be, you have to assume that all the evidence is wrong and that all the witnesses are wrong or dishonest. Sorry, but that strains rationality well beyond the breaking point.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


There were photo's posted when RG was with PF and he looked very happy.

TG and SS both said RG was discussing his retirement and THEIR trips west and Northeast. He went out in public with her to the Gamble Mill and no one has said he looked distraught at any of those dinners. He wouldn't even go out with her if that was how she made him feel.



Can you point us to any photos of RG and PF taken in the two weeks prior to his disappearance? Were there any plans for RG and PF to go to the Gamble Mill on Friday, April 15 (or any plans for them to have dinner together at all that evening, for that matter)?

We have RG looking depressed according to VW in the park on 4/14, both of them essentially non-responsive to a comment about being a "perfect couple," RG headed back to the office that night, and no plans mentioned for them to have dinner together the next night.

[J. J. in Phila]

Just for the record, "GStickley" posted her comments on this thread 12-03-2007 06:53 PM, less than 48 hours ago.

[J. J. in Phila]

IIIRC, VW said RFG smiled slightly and nodded.

It TG were still here, I'd ask if they went out to dinner that night. They were within 300 yards of Gamble Mills.

[UndertheRadar]

Wow, JJ, your self-proclaimed "nearly photographic memory" fails again.

Just YESTERDAY at 1:30 pm on this very thread, you said, "UTR, we are talking a crime of passion, basically unplanned."

[UndertheRadar]

And JJ, as for the concept of forensic science, I understand it quite well.

I also understand the specifics of what various FBI forensic experts have said about the likelihood of certain types of forensic evidence being left behind. I understand what actual studies have shown in real life data collection at crime scenes about what's actually found at crime scenes. I understand that the law enforcement community and the legal community are both rather frustrated with a public who is consumed with what they call "The CSI Mentality," which is what you seem to suffer from.

Don't even get me started on your complete misunderstanding of scent theory.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by Politigal


As S1 so aptly explained, the Drug Bust Press Conference was a serious moment for all in the picture......like they were all tough on crime. [/*]

RG's look was a whole lot more than just being serious and tough on crime. Put the photo's side by side and look at his eyes, his face. It was so much more than an argument with a SO, a man having an affair, a man who has tried many, many drug dealers and abusive spouses or SO's, murderers, etc. This was very serious.

And I can not believe his best friends knew nothing about it. Even ED could not believe LE did not talk to SS. SS even mentioned that he could see or believe RG could do a walk-away. Did he talk to SS about something like that? Or is that what SS wants people to think he did?

Who was talking Wiley in the office? SS or RG? SS being a writer would know the story of Wiley since he was a writer too. What does SS know?

Wish LE would pursue the questions/answers with the employees in the DA's office and other court house departments.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


Can you point us to any photos of RG and PF taken in the two weeks prior to his disappearance? Were there any plans for RG and PF to go to the Gamble Mill on Friday, April 15 (or any plans for them to have dinner together at all that evening, for that matter)?

We have RG looking depressed according to VW in the park on 4/14, both of them essentially non-responsive to a comment about being a "perfect couple," RG headed back to the office that night, and no plans mentioned for them to have dinner together the next night. [/*]

Did LE ever ask PF if they had plans for dinner? Why does RG looking depressed have to have anything to do PF? He was holding her hand, doesn't sound like he was upset with her.

Do we really know everything about the case or only what they want us to know? I think we don't, there is a lot more and we will never be told everything they know, who they could be investigating, who they are watching, whose phone records are being looked at, etc, etc. We know what they want us to know and that is it.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, as you should be able to understand, I have been referring to GS's post, on this thread.:rolleyes:

As to forensics, it breaks all barriers of rationality to suggest that someone else drove the car for more than an hour and not only left no evidence of being there, but didn't destroy the evidence of RFG being there.

It also doesn't explain the scent, or the witnesses.

If the car had been wiped down, I think you would have a point. I think if they found PEF's prints in the car, or other evidence of her being there, you would have a point. So far, the only point is your attitude to PEF.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


Did LE ever ask PF if they had plans for dinner? Why does RG looking depressed have to have anything to do PF? He was holding her hand, doesn't sound like he was upset with her.

Do we really know everything about the case or only what they want us to know? I think we don't, there is a lot more and we will never be told everything they know, who they could be investigating, who they are watching, whose phone records are being looked at, etc, etc. We know what they want us to know and that is it. [/*]

The have said that the looked at the home phone record, and RFG cell records.

Since PEF called RFG's cell, some of her activities were checked.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


1) Maybe RG wasn't "having his cake and eating it too." Maybe he had just spent some time with a female **friend** and was being accused of "having his cake and eating it too."

2) You were apparently sitting back and watching your then-husband's change in behavior but hadn't confronted him yet, because everything you described above are activities a person would do while still "getting away" with cheating on a spouse. What if nagging little questions started being posed to your then-husband? Some men withdraw from nagging little accusations by sleeping more (can't bother me if I'm asleep) and then they're "on edge" when they're awake. [/*]

Oh no, I confronted him with it all. Practically from the beginning. I was made to feel like I was crazy, had to "lighten up" and a lot more. He didn't withdraw from me even then. Just put all the questions I ask out of his mind and into mine. He was never on edge. Felt he could do who he wanted when he wanted. He never looked like RG did in that photo.

[UndertheRadar]

JJ, please post links to forensic experts who provide scientific back up for your claim that it "breaks all barriers of rationality to suggest that someone else drove the car for more than an hour and not only left no evidence of being there, but didn't destroy the evidence of RFG being there."

GS and I and others have posted such links and quotes from experts to show that it **could** be done. So far, you've done nothing but assert that it could not be done.

The scent is easily explained if you only understood scent theory, which it is clear that you do not.

The "witnesses" are also easily explained when you understand that experts' cautions with regard to witnesses in missing persons' cases.

You are trying to get the rest of us to place absolute faith in things as "evidence" when those things do not deserve absolute faith.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


Oh no, I confronted him with it all. Practically from the beginning. I was made to feel like I was crazy, had to "lighten up" and a lot more. He didn't withdraw from me even then. Just put all the questions I ask out of his mind and into mine. He was never on edge. Felt he could do who he wanted when he wanted. He never looked like RG did in that photo. [/*]

But he's just one man, and he's not RG, SJ. From everything you've told us, your former husband was a low-down, no-good, SOB with little conscience, or at least that's how you've painted him here. Wouldn't expect him to feel bad about anything if he was cheating on you.

If RG **had been** having an affair, I think he's probably a man who would have been conflicted about it, not someone who would have acted as your former husband did.

And, as I pointed out, it's quite possible that RG could have been spending some time with someone who was simply a female **friend** and might have reaped accusations about a possible affair all the same.

This goes back to the discussion of possible abandonment issues we were all having the other day . . .

[UndertheRadar]

Here's a guy who committed four **rapes** and attempted a fifth without leaving a single shred of forensic evidence.

I think we'd all agree that accosting couples on a lovers' lane and raping the woman would involve a whole lot more possibility for leaving forensic evidence than simply driving a vehicle:

http://archive.thisishampshire.net/2005/4/2/8964.html

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, from the article:

"We just had no forensic evidence whatsoever, and were relying on circumstantial evidence, which is not good enough for the courts."

In the RFG case, there is not even circumstantial evidence that some other than RFG drove the Mini.

Circumstantial evidence would be a wipe down of the car. None exists.

Interestingly, the article noted:

Det Sgt Gunner rejects the idea that the offender is a former policeman, believing instead that he has probably read about the subject of police forensic investigations and has learned what he thinks are ways to avoid detection.




Interestingly, there is at least one person associated with RFG who was "read" and probably more than "read," about forensic techniques, but it isn't PEF.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


But he's just one man, and he's not RG, SJ. From everything you've told us, your former husband was a low-down, no-good, SOB with little conscience, or at least that's how you've painted him here. Wouldn't expect him to feel bad about anything if he was cheating on you.

If RG **had been** having an affair, I think he's probably a man who would have been conflicted about it, not someone who would have acted as your former husband did.

And, as I pointed out, it's quite possible that RG could have been spending some time with someone who was simply a female **friend** and might have reaped accusations about a possible affair all the same.

This goes back to the discussion of possible abandonment issues we were all having the other day . . . [/*]

My thoughts on RG are that I DON'T think he would cheat on PF, while in a relationship. He didn't on the other two (or at least it has not come out he did), why start now? I wasn't saying he would do what my ex did, I am saying his look has nothing to do with an affair. His look is much more serious, something so troubling he can not talk to even PF and it has nothing to do with a woman/affair/relationship.

I was saying a man can have an affair and not have that look of distress/distraught playing with another woman, but I don't think that was what RG was doing.

[UndertheRadar]

The passage you quoted

"We just had no forensic evidence whatsoever, and were relying on circumstantial evidence, which is not good enough for the courts"

obviously refers to the ability to make an arrest stick, JJ. That's not the issue in the discussion we're presently having. It's your repetitive and unsupported argument that someone couldn't have driven the Mini-Cooper to Lewisburg without leaving evidence. It has **nothing** to do with whether an arrest could be made on the basis of finding evidence of PF in the Mini-Cooper. For crying out loud, JJ. Anybody with an IQ higher than the average houseplant can figure out we couldn't indict or convict PF on the basis of fingerprints or DNA in the Mini-Cooper.

Not sure what you mean when you say "at least one person associated with RFG who was "read" [sic] and probably more than "read," [sic] about forensic techniques." Do you mean someone who knew RG was "reading" about forensic techniques?

Whoever you are referring to, are we supposed to believe that PF, who was married for ten years to a probation officer, worked in domestic violence, lived with Centre County's DA, and probably majored in criminal justice or a related field didn't have any interest in or knowledge of forensic techniques? Oh come now.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


My thoughts on RG are that I DON'T think he would cheat on PF, while in a relationship. He didn't on the other two (or at least it has not come out he did), why start now? I wasn't saying he would do what my ex did, I am saying his look has nothing to do with an affair. His look is much more serious, something so troubling he can not talk to even PF and it has nothing to do with a woman/affair/relationship.

I was saying a man can have an affair and not have that look of distress/distraught playing with another woman, but I don't think that was what RG was doing. [/*]

You're sure reading a LOT more into that one photo than I would, SJ. To me, RG merely looks appropriately serious. It was a serious occasion.

If we're going to "read" into photos, people are going to raise the issue of the "smirking" photo again, the one where PF and MM look like they're both the cats that swallowed the canary.

Fair is fair.

To me, a snapshot captures a millisecond in time. RG's shot at the drug press conference is what I would call appropriate to the situation. You could hardly expect him to put on a huge smile for a serious situation.

[Politigal]

I've been guilty of that -- trying to read too much into single photographs.

I do think you can tell a lot more from the videos - where you can see eye movement, body language, hear the voice, accent, etc.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Politigal
I've been guilty of that -- trying to read too much into single photographs.

I do think you can tell a lot more from the videos - where you can see eye movement, body language, hear the voice, accent, etc. [/*]

I would agree with you on that, Pgal. There's a whole field of study about non-verbal communication. It's actually something jury consultants use as part of the way they help lawyers select juries.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


I would agree with you on that, Pgal. There's a whole field of study about non-verbal communication. It's actually something jury consultants use as part of the way they help lawyers select juries. [/*]

This video of Patty saying "we will wait, as long as we need to" is a good study IMO....

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2005/08/02/obrien.missing.prosecutor.affl

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar

Not sure what you mean when you say "at least one person associated with RFG who was "read" [sic] and probably more than "read," [sic] about forensic techniques." Do you mean someone who knew RG was "reading" about forensic techniques?

Whoever you are referring to, are we supposed to believe that PF, who was married for ten years to a probation officer, worked in domestic violence, lived with Centre County's DA, and probably majored in criminal justice or a related field didn't have any interest in or knowledge of forensic techniques? Oh come now. [/*]

I wondered what he was talking about too.

Wow, I didn't realize what she majored in. That is great! Having watched Perry Mason growing up it was something I used to think I would enjoy. But I thought there was a reference to her as being "just a clerk" as if she was not in the same class as RG, not good enough for him? I am quite sure they would have interesting conversations!

Good for you PF!!!!

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


You're sure reading a LOT more into that one photo than I would, SJ. To me, RG merely looks appropriately serious. It was a serious occasion.

If we're going to "read" into photos, people are going to raise the issue of the "smirking" photo again, the one where PF and MM look like they're both the cats that swallowed the canary.

Fair is fair.

To me, a snapshot captures a millisecond in time. RG's shot at the drug press conference is what I would call appropriate to the situation. You could hardly expect him to put on a huge smile for a serious situation. [/*]

If I remember correctly :D I don't think I was the only one who commented on the photo. Now I wasn't cutting him down for the look I was saying what I thought the look was.

You are again going from RG to PF and what you perceive as a smirk. Did you see the video when that photo was taken? She was making a statement and they caught her in the middle of a statement.

Did Pgal keep all the photo's she had on one of her sites where RG was in a many photo's? You can't seriously tell me from looking at those photo's that his look isn't much more distraught than in photo's taken from when the girl on campus killed students? Or in his photo with LG and PF, or with his nephews or with his car? You are disappointing me UTR!

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981



Wow, I didn't realize what she majored in. That is great!

I'm making an educated guess, SJ. She went to Penn State, where there's a major in Criminal Justice/Administration of Justice. She wound up working in probation and as a victims' witness advocate, so those two areas would fit that major. "Clerk" could be filled by someone with a high school diploma or a business school diploma, I would assume.

I have no idea what her major was--just a guess based on job areas.

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981
Did you see the video when that photo was taken? She was making a statement and they caught her in the middle of a statement.



Don't you see this is EXACTLY my point about the drug photo? The photographer may have said, "Everybody line up, we're doing a photo op," and RG put on his serious face for the shot. Ten seconds later he might have been laughing.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


I'm making an educated guess, SJ. She went to Penn State, where there's a major in Criminal Justice/Administration of Justice. She wound up working in probation and as a victims' witness advocate, so those two areas would fit that major. "Clerk" could be filled by someone with a high school diploma or a business school diploma, I would assume.

I have no idea what her major was--just a guess based on job areas. [/*]

Still good for her!! Just being a probation officer is impressive. I know someone who has been trying for years to get a job in that field but he is still waiting. Guess that person was just cutting her up. :shrug:

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


Don't you see this is EXACTLY my point about the drug photo? The photographer may have said, "Everybody line up, we're doing a photo op," and RG put on his serious face for the shot. Ten seconds later he might have been laughing. [/*]

UTR, I just love you soooo much. You never leave me down. :D

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by sherrijean981

Guess that person was just cutting her up. :shrug: [/*]

What person? :shrug:

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar


What person? :shrug: [/*]

Don't remember:shrug:

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


I wondered what he was talking about too.

Wow, I didn't realize what she majored in. That is great! Having watched Perry Mason growing up it was something I used to think I would enjoy. But I thought there was a reference to her as being "just a clerk" as if she was not in the same class as RG, not good enough for him? I am quite sure they would have interesting conversations!

Good for you PF!!!! [/*]

It's Administration of Justice (AJ), as opposed to Criminal Justice, which is a separate major. Criminal Justice is more designed for people actually out in the field doing stuff (making arrests, collecting evidence); I think they had that distinction when PEF was there.

A woman from my high school, who graduated about 6 years before PEF, with a AJ major; she's working as an administrator for the Girl Scouts.

Based on those things, it sounds like a degree more for someone interested in an administrative post that an investigative one.

You can look at both (which have changed since PEF was there) here:

http://admissions.psu.edu/academics/majors/majors.cfm?displayBy=alpha

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


Still good for her!! Just being a probation officer is impressive. I know someone who has been trying for years to get a job in that field but he is still waiting. Guess that person was just cutting her up. :shrug: [/*]

I've never hear of her being a probation officer. Her ex-husband is.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, the police at least have evidence that someone was in the car in those rape cases, circumstantial evidence.

According to her campaign website, JKA had "Advanced training in DNA, ...;" it was a major point in her campaign. My guess would be that she wasn't the only one the office that did; some of the other ADA's probably did as well. I would expect RFG to as well, since he personally prosecuted murder cases.

Since you mentioned it, she was also an ex-EMT.

http://www.arnoldforda.org/

Now, do I think this makes JKA a suspect in murder? No, unless she used her crystal ball to locate RFG on 4/15/05. I don't think she used a magic spell to teleport the Mini to Lewisburg either. :rolleyes:

[UndertheRadar]

Good grief, JJ. I see you and Chubby are at it again, twisting the night away.

The whole point of my posting the link to the article was to show that someone could commit four rapes and attempt a fifth without leaving any forensic evidence, hence the title of the article ("How Farely Mount Rapist Cheated Justice") and this passage:

"We just had no forensic evidence whatsoever, and were relying on circumstantial evidence, which is not good enough for the courts."

**not** your fixation on the speculation as to whether or not the suspect was former LE or someone reading about forensic techniques.

The whole point was that accosting a couple and raping a woman is obviously a situation more likely to create possibilities for leaving forensic evidence than is driving a car, and this guy pulled off not leaving any.

Anybody would have been able to figure that out, anybody not intent on twisting the focus elsewhere, say to KA's website, for instance. :rolleyes:

Unless of course you were worried that PF's background might come into question and you were trying to pull a pre-emptive strike. . .

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila


I've never hear of her being a probation officer. Her ex-husband is. [/*]

I thought it was said on the forum they both were? Will have to Google that one out. Didn't they work together in that department and it was said she had to move to another job?:shrug:

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila


It's Administration of Justice (AJ), as opposed to Criminal Justice, which is a separate major. Criminal Justice is more designed for people actually out in the field doing stuff (making arrests, collecting evidence); I think they had that distinction when PEF was there.

A woman from my high school, who graduated about 6 years before PEF, with a AJ major; she's working as an administrator for the Girl Scouts.

Based on those things, it sounds like a degree more for someone interested in an administrative post that an investigative one.

You can look at both (which have changed since PEF was there) here:

http://admissions.psu.edu/academics/majors/majors.cfm?displayBy=alpha [/*]

What a fasinating field to take! The job opportunities seem endless.

[Chump#7]

A couple of things...

There's been a lot of talk of this 'picture'. In my opinion, having seen Mr. Gricar in person and on television a good chunk of my life - That's what he looks like, nothing more nothing less. Now I've only seen him in situations where he was 'all business' as DA, whether that be on television or live in person. And that's the expression he wore (that I recall). Now friends and family would see his non business side and would have something to contrast that against, but not me. I wouldn't make too much out of that photo. Actually, the one that caught me off gaurd was the photo of him smiling on the website. That's an expression *I* never saw.

What year(s) did PF go to PSU? Was she really in AJ? There was a time when I knew the head (dean? can't recall) of that department. He owes me a 'drink'.

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by sherrijean981

I thought it was said on the forum they both were? Will have to Google that one out. Didn't they work together in that department and it was said she had to move to another job?:shrug: [/*]

I have found one article that she was in a probation office position:

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:NB4Ohgmqin0J:boards.courttv.com/showthread.php%3Fs%3D699ef0f0db8679f2513cc5225c0d4 a5a%26threadid%3D215636%26perpage%3D10%26pagenumbe r%3D250+Patty+Fornicola+Probation&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us

Quote:
"ParlorElephant
Guest

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A
Saunterer,

Must have crossed posts. Missed your followup to CB before posting. PE's understanding PF left probation office position at time of and because of the marriage to another employee in same office (county policy). Not sure why that wouldn't have been also a problem with situation with Gricar - perhaps because not formally married? Supposed to have done general clerical work for private employer til hired by Gricar. Did BW specify what other LE-related employment he was talking about?



Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

04-27-2006 06:40 PM " Quote

[sherrijean981]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila


I've never hear of her being a probation officer. Her ex-husband is. [/*]

I found a link that has what goes on in the Probation Dept. which could be some of what PF did with her degree. Even if an office worker, there was more to the job than just a clerk.

http://www.co.centre.pa.us/301.asp
Quote
"The Probation Office provides both adult and juvenile probation services. The Office prepares pre-sentence investigations for adults and social case histories for juveniles. It establishes payment contracts for payment of fines, costs, and restitution, assists clients in obtaining employment, counseling, education, and makes referrals to various community service agencies.

The Office has the following programs in place:

In-home Detention
Work Release Furlough
Community Service
Centre County Court Treatment for Sexual Offenders
Intensive Supervision (Adult and Juvenile)
One of the most recent programs is the "Prison Program Coordinator," in which prison programs are coordinated under one person providing consolidation. This consolidation helps to expedite the clients through the prison system in an organized manner.

The juvenile services, which is part of the Probation Office, is responsible for all juvenile matters in Centre County. This consists of intake, adjudication, disposition, and detention hearings. The Office maintains a 24-hour service which operates under a pager system allowing for close contact with all law enforcement agencies regarding juvenile matters. The juvenile office prepares social case histories on clients, makes recommendations to the Court, provides supervision and counseling, and maintains a close relationship with juveniles and their families, schools, and other involved institutions. " Quote

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Chump#7
A couple of things...

There's been a lot of talk of this 'picture'. In my opinion, having seen Mr. Gricar in person and on television a good chunk of my life - That's what he looks like, nothing more nothing less.


Just on the Photo, I do agree with UTR, at least to the extent that we really can't read to much into it.


What year(s) did PF go to PSU? Was she really in AJ? There was a time when I knew the head (dean? can't recall) of that department. He owes me a 'drink'. [/*]

Yes, she was an AJ major and she graduated in the mid-1980's (I prefer NOT to give a specific year).

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by sherrijean981


I have found one article that she was in a probation office position:

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:NB4Ohgmqin0J:boards.courttv.com/showthread.php%3Fs%3D699ef0f0db8679f2513cc5225c0d4 a5a%26threadid%3D215636%26perpage%3D10%26pagenumbe r%3D250+Patty+Fornicola+Probation&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us

Quote:
"ParlorElephant
Guest

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A
Saunterer,

Must have crossed posts. Missed your followup to CB before posting. PE's understanding PF left probation office position at time of and because of the marriage to another employee in same office (county policy). Not sure why that wouldn't have been also a problem with situation with Gricar - perhaps because not formally married? Supposed to have done general clerical work for private employer til hired by Gricar. Did BW specify what other LE-related employment he was talking about?



Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

04-27-2006 06:40 PM " Quote [/*]

So far as I know, only PE and Lustor have her made that claim and when I corrected Lustor, she backed off. As a WVA, she was more than a clerk, but not an investigator.

I've never read anything in the press regarding PEF being a probation/parole officer. The reference to her ex-husband was in the Cleveland article.

I'm also familiar with the state employment rules regarding spouses. I can think of two cases where the spouse for the same agency, though in a different office, a third where did and now divorced and a fifth and sixth where parent and child worked for the same department (including one in the same office). Centre County may have different rules, but they are not standard.

[UndertheRadar]

I don't see anything in the quoted post from PE saying that PF was a probation OFFICER, only that PF worked in the probation OFFICE. Big difference in that wording.

[J. J. in Phila]

It was from a quote from Lustor, as I indicated. I said something like "PEF was not RFG's probation officer," and accused me of having "inside information." I pointed out that the only thing I've heard that her ex-husband was.

I had no "inside information" or unpublished information at the time.

[psu#107]

To Set the record striaght!! PF was a Probation Officer over 7 years and a very good one at that. She was a PSU grad a from Penn State (81-85) BS dgree. Some schools call there program Crimal Justice other call it Adm J. Right now PSU calls it Crime, Law and Justice. Some posters have no idea what they are talking about. This message board is famous for thst. SHE DID not leave because of her marriage to another PO. She left because she wanted a change. Please don't craete things that are not there. PF is an educated women who had nothing to do with this. She is terribly hurt by Ray disappearence.

[Cinderella]

Too bad that we can't get all of our questions answered that fast.
I am an educated woman also, but I didn't get to go to college, does that make me uneducated if I didn't attend college? Does that mean that people with college degrees are better people? :biggrin:

[Cinderella]

I was also terribly hurt over PF saying that I stalked her. Now I don't have a degree, but I would never have made that statement, especially after she was very friendly and never complained to me at the time.

So I came to a different conclusion after being labeled a stalker.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by psu#107
PF is an educated women who had nothing to do with this.snipped [/*]

so you think RG's "disappearance" was probably caused by someone uneducated?

[Cinderella]

Pgal,

If they are uneducated, they must really be brilliant to pull this off.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by psu#107
To Set the record striaght!! PF was a Probation Officer over 7 years and a very good one at that. She was a PSU grad a from Penn State (81-85) BS dgree. Some schools call there program Crimal Justice other call it Adm J. Right now PSU calls it Crime, Law and Justice. Some posters have no idea what they are talking about. This message board is famous for thst. SHE DID not leave because of her marriage to another PO. She left because she wanted a change. Please don't craete things that are not there. PF is an educated women who had nothing to do with this. She is terribly hurt by Ray disappearence. [/*]

This is the first time I've heard about PEF being a probation officer.

I know that they still do offer a AJ major, both BS and BA, Criminal Justice (BS and BA), and a third degree program, Crime, Law and Society. He major was what was then AJ (which fits in well with what she was doing as a WVA.

(That's why I provided the link.)

[Serendipitous1]

Originally posted by psu#107
To Set the record striaght!! PF was a Probation Officer over 7 years and a very good one at that. She was a PSU grad a from Penn State (81-85) BS dgree. Some schools call there program Crimal Justice other call it Adm J. Right now PSU calls it Crime, Law and Justice. Some posters have no idea what they are talking about. This message board is famous for thst. SHE DID not leave because of her marriage to another PO. She left because she wanted a change. Please don't craete things that are not there. PF is an educated women who had nothing to do with this. She is terribly hurt by Ray disappearence. [/*]Thanks psu. It is a fact that "Probation Officer" is the occupation which PF and TB both listed on their marriage application in May 1989. So if, as you say, she graduated in 1985 and spent [the next] 7+ years in that position, then she and her husband worked there for something like 3 years after being married. Not exactly a forced exit after marriage, IMO.

Politigal: psu said PF is a college grad and, in his/her opinion, had nothing to do with RG's disappearance. The two cannot logically bridge to an uneducated disappearer (new word). Nevertheless, if RG was the victim of foul play, I believe the perpetrators are morons...and PF does not seem to be in that class. MOO

Neither does high acumen equate to good common sense. I have seen examples here (and I do not include nor exclude myself). MOO

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Serendipitous1
Thanks psu. It is a fact that "Probation Officer" is the occupation which PF and TB both listed on their marriage application in May 1989. So if, as you say, she graduated in 1985 and spent [the next] 7+ years in that position, then she and her husband worked there for something like 3 years after being married. Not exactly a forced exit after marriage, IMO.



Since the date is being thrown around, the alumni association lists the graduation date as a year later (which is a bit more age appropriate).

There is, however, quite a gap between graduation and when PEF became a WVA (IIRC, and I may not here, that was 1999).


Politigal: psu said PF is a college grad and, in his/her opinion, had nothing to do with RG's disappearance. The two cannot logically bridge to an uneducated disappearer (new word). Nevertheless, if RG was the victim of foul play, I believe the perpetrators are morons...and PF does not seem to be in that class. MOO


I disagree. The intelligence of someone who can either lure someone as experienced as RFG into a trap (or get the Mini to Lewisburg) seems to be beyond the capacity of the collective intelligence of the posters on this board.

If this was foul play, there is not only a killer out there, but an exceptionally brilliant or exceptionally lucky killer.


Neither does high acumen equate to good common sense. I have seen examples here (and I do not include nor exclude myself). MOO

Agreed!!! :D

[Cinderella]

It is so hard to imagine that there are not more clues to this case.
He supposedly went missing on a Friday. Tax day and fishing season. Where I live the traffic is heavy on Friday's. There has to be people out there that saw something. A person just doesn't fall off the face of the earth.

This case has to be one of the hardest cases to solve.

From reading over some of the old news articles, it seems to me that the eyewitness accounts were better that he was in Wilkes-Barre then Lewisburg. If he had a suit on then he must have been planning on meeting with some high up people.

This case as so many other cases just boggles the mind.



Just saw this in the CDT today.

http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/crime_courts/story/279134.html

Bones washed up at Allegheny Co. bridge confirmed as human

[Cinderella]

Here is another link that includes the picture of the shoe that was found with the bones.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/breaking/s_541381.html

[Politigal]

Originally posted by Cinderella
Here is another link that includes the picture of the shoe that was found with the bones.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/breaking/s_541381.html [/*]

This link said the bone fragments were charred....

hmmmm

[Cinderella]

I guess that I should have said that a sneaker was found with the bones instead of a shoe. I truly hope the sneaker doesn't belong to Ray. I would still like him to be found alive.

[Cloudbuster]

Im looking at cases prior to RG's disappearance and was wondering if LMarshall is any relation to the the owner Marshall from state college that owns the antique shop in Tyrone? These cases are a little interesting. Does anyone know if LM and RG got along?
http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/das-office-requests-gag-order-in-scott-case,16826/

http://www.post-gazette.com/regionstate/20010216psu3.asp

http://fight-a-dui.com/2006/10/18/dui-charges-dismissed-after-legal-error/

http://fight-a-dui.com/category/information-by-state/pennsylvania/

http://ydr.inyork.com/ydr/psu/ci_7226307

http://community.centredaily.com/?q=node/156

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2006/11/11-08-06tdc/11-08-06dnews-08.asp

http://statecollegelaw.com/Nudity_ppost.html

http://psustudents.com/news/local/story/237935.html

http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/j/p/jph13/wmart.html

[Serendipitous1]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
<Snips>
Since the date is being thrown around, the alumni association lists the graduation date as a year later (which is a bit more age appropriate). There is, however, quite a gap between graduation and when PEF became a WVA (IIRC, and I may not here, that was 1999). [/*]Born in 1963, I would think a college degree in either 1985 or 1986 is logical. With respect to the negative implications of coworkers marrying and continuing in their employ, I say............pooh!

The intelligence of someone who can either lure someone as experienced as RFG into a trap (or get the Mini to Lewisburg) seems to be beyond the capacity of the collective intelligence of the posters on this board. [/*]Not mine though.

If this was foul play, there is not only a killer out there, but an exceptionally brilliant or exceptionally lucky killer. [/*]We disagree on this (not nearly one candle-power, and only lucky so far)...go figure!

[UndertheRadar]

**Big Disclaimer**: I am NOT arguing this happened in PF's house. I don't want to hear from JJ after this post how now we have UTR arguing blah blah blah blah.

That said, I wanted to point out some interesting comments from Dr. Michael Baden on GVS tonight re the Stacy Peterson case.

Greta asked whether Stacy could have been dismembered in the bathtub of the home (this in conjunction with the "blue barrel" discussion) without LE having detected that at this point.

Dr. Baden's response was unequivocally **yes,** that if the police had not done a "thorough search" of the home, it would be very possible for Drew to have hidden a dismemberment in the bathtub. Baden pointed out that since this was Stacy's home, finding her hair or traces of her blood in the bathroom would not be inconsistent with her living there, and a less than thorough search wouldn't necessarily reveal anything amiss in the home even following a dismemberment.

Now, I consider a dismemberment fairly **extreme,** to say the least.

Yet we've heard on these boards ad nauseum, ad infinitum how no murder could have taken place undetected at PF's home, because, gosh golly, police did a walk through and saw nothing out of place to make them think a crime happened there.

Dr. Michael Baden is an internationally renowned, Board-certified, forensic pathologist; he is presently or has been the Chief Medical Examiner of New York City; the chief forensic pathologist for the New York State Police; a co-Director of the New York State Police Medicolegal Investigation Unit . . . .

[UndertheRadar]

Originally posted by Cinderella
I guess that I should have said that a sneaker was found with the bones instead of a shoe. I truly hope the sneaker doesn't belong to Ray. I would still like him to be found alive. [/*]

Just one of those situations where it would be nice if, as in some other cases, the brand of shoes had been released on flyers.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Cinderella
Here is another link that includes the picture of the shoe that was found with the bones.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/breaking/s_541381.html [/*]

The Susquehanna doesn't flow into the Allegheny, so it's unlikely it is RFG.

[Politigal]

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila


The Susquehanna doesn't flow into the Allegheny, so it's unlikely it is RFG. [/*]

there's no proof RG was in or near the Susquehanna