Odds and Ends, Pt. I [Archive] - In Session Message Boards

gstickley

02-12-2008, 01:41 AM

Are the planets aligned a certain way or something?

Within the past week or so, we have the following. After 2.75 yrs., information is forthcoming, questions being answered, heretofore unheard from people reportedly coming forward.

***PB answering questions on an almost daily basis; in fact, sometimes 2 at a time.

***PB having a blog ref. RG.

***PB speaking of having ideas of upcoming articles.

***Questions being asked about the remarks made by LE, with discrepancies suddenly being brought to light.

***Sloane reportedly crawling out of the woodwork, telling PB that RG had spoken to him about Wiley & another case of disappearance, after 2.75 yrs.

***JJ suddenly coming forward with a possible witness about RG's supposed interest in disappearance.

***TOL's drunken friend may now be considered credible.

***The idea that others may come forward with information about RG's supposed interest in disappearance.

***Rickard suddenly coming forward for the 1st time to answer a question that has been asked for 2.75 yrs.

What is going on in Centre Co.??? After all this time, is there a real interest in what happened to RG??? Why is there suddenly an apparent interest in getting RG's name out in public??? Why is LE suddenly 'suspect' after all this time???

You people in the Centre Co. area ought to keep your eyes open. The sky may be falling on ya. If not that, something . . . . . All stranger than fiction . . .

sherrijean981

02-12-2008, 02:09 AM

Could be because of the 3 year anniversary of RG's disappearance and some of us are pushing for answers from different sources. Pete has said he was going to get an interview with Det. Rickard and Cindi had called to talk to Det. Rickard, questions are flying fast and loose at PB. Plus the call to John Clay about doing a segment for the 3rd Year Anniversary.

Someone was bound to get the stopper unstuck. JMO

J. J. in Phila

02-12-2008, 02:11 AM

Cinderella

02-12-2008, 03:04 AM

Originally posted by gstickley
Are the planets aligned a certain way or something?

Within the past week or so, we have the following. After 2.75 yrs., information is forthcoming, questions being answered, heretofore unheard from people reportedly coming forward.

***PB answering questions on an almost daily basis; in fact, sometimes 2 at a time.

***PB having a blog ref. RG.

***PB speaking of having ideas of upcoming articles.

***Questions being asked about the remarks made by LE, with discrepancies suddenly being brought to light.

***Sloane reportedly crawling out of the woodwork, telling PB that RG had spoken to him about Wiley & another case of disappearance, after 2.75 yrs.

***JJ suddenly coming forward with a possible witness about RG's supposed interest in disappearance.

***TOL's drunken friend may now be considered credible.

***The idea that others may come forward with information about RG's supposed interest in disappearance.

***Rickard suddenly coming forward for the 1st time to answer a question that has been asked for 2.75 yrs.

What is going on in Centre Co.??? After all this time, is there a real interest in what happened to RG??? Why is there suddenly an apparent interest in getting RG's name out in public??? Why is LE suddenly 'suspect' after all this time???

You people in the Centre Co. area ought to keep your eyes open. The sky may be falling on ya. If not that, something . . . . . All stranger than fiction . . . [/*]

I will say what I think it is. I think a large part of it is Detective Rickard. It takes a while to go through information. Maybe at the time, his saying nothing was the best thing. Because he didn't give wrong information. He is very nice and I think that he really truly wants to find out what happened to Ray. He is one that takes time to listen what you have to say.

Also Pete couldn't answer the questions himself, he needed cooperation and he wasn't getting it.

Plus don't forget Prayer. God can do all things.

And oh btw, we have 2 new commissioners.

Serendipitous1

02-12-2008, 10:21 AM

Interesting discussions last night. Following up on gstickley's post, I looked through my collection of 2007 news articles (it took less than a minute)...DZ moved on, MR moved up, 2-year anniversary came and went with no new information, PF clings to hope, family's hope pinned on MR.

PB responded to 67 inquiries in the CDT's Q&A last year...nearly half of them occuring in January, and all of them basically just rehashing old information. This year in the Q&A began as last year ended...with a question about the prints found in/on the Mini Cooper.

More rehash followed, a plug for this forum in PB's blog, a brief diversion to old bone fragments found in Centre County. Then, just this past weekend, things changed...at least in the Q&A. There was a bit of new information from SS, and PB and MR apparently set up a meeting or conference. That appeared to come to fruition just yesterday, with an answer to the question about the prints.

But the most promising thing I saw in the Q&A was PB's hint (yesterday) of new story ideas he is working on for articles in the newspaper. The sky is not likely falling (unless you count today's winter storm). But I have a feeling that we will soon be seeing some much needed public attention given to this mystery. I only hope it is the kind of attention that Ray Gricar deserves. All JMOO

gstickley

02-12-2008, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by Serendipitous1

(snip)

But the most promising thing I saw in the Q&A was PB's hint (yesterday) of new story ideas he is working on for articles in the newspaper. The sky is not likely falling (unless you count today's winter storm). But I have a feeling that we will soon be seeing some much needed public attention given to this mystery. I only hope it is the kind of attention that Ray Gricar deserves. All JMOO [/*]

Why now, S1, why suddenly now, after all this time???? Inquiring minds want to know . . .

Serendipitous1

02-12-2008, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by gstickley
Why now, S1, why suddenly now, after all this time???? Inquiring minds want to know . . . PB (CDT Q&A, 5/16/06): "...I can't ask Zaccagni anything now, as he no longer is allowed to speak with the press." PB (ibid, 2/9/08) "Detective Rickard and I spoke briefly about a week ago, with plans to set up a time to talk maybe this past Thursday or Friday. [But] My calls weren't returned." "...this is a reason why questions to this forum aren't answered quickly. I just don't have the access that I used to."

Edited to add: PB (ibid, 2/11/08) "I talked with Detective Matt Rickard today...".

gstickley

02-12-2008, 11:52 AM

Okay, S1.

Now, what about Sloane & his apparently sudden departure from silence for so long? The Wiley disappearance has been bantered around on the board for months. Suddenly, SS comes forward with information that RG had indicated an interest in the Wiley case, plus another disappearance also??? Why now, Mr. Sloane, why now???

tonyGricar

02-12-2008, 01:45 PM

Originally posted by Serendipitous1
Interesting discussions last night. Following up on gstickley's post, I looked through my collection of 2007 news articles (it took less than a minute)...DZ moved on...[/*]Z apparently just retired a week or two ago. He's now a CC Deputy...

tonyGricar

02-12-2008, 02:00 PM

Originally posted by gstickley
Okay, S1.

Now, what about Sloane & his apparently sudden departure from silence for so long? The Wiley disappearance has been bantered around on the board for months. Suddenly, SS comes forward with information that RG had indicated an interest in the Wiley case, plus another disappearance also??? Why now, Mr. Sloane, why now??? [/*]"Sudden departure from silence" and "Suddenly, SS comes forward" imbues a rather dramatic overtone to the reality of someone (PB) simply asking a new question (read: not the usual rehash). No offense to this board or the people here, but the CTV is not as widely read as some of you clearly think. I know Sloane doesn't read it.

Fwiw, I'm aware of no "fascination" held by Ray on the Wiley case. I'm aware that he had knowledge of it, but so do alot of people.

I was in Wiley's former stomping grounds of Hinckley a few weeks ago. Nothing to report...

J. J. in Phila

02-12-2008, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by tonyGricar
"Sudden departure from silence" and "Suddenly, SS comes forward" imbues a rather dramatic overtone to the reality of someone (PB) simply asking a new question (read: not the usual rehash). No offense to this board or the people here, but the CTV is not as widely read as some of you clearly think. I know Sloane doesn't read it.

Fwiw, I'm aware of no "fascination" held by Ray on the Wiley case. I'm aware that he had knowledge of it, but so do alot of people.

I was in Wiley's former stomping grounds of Hinckley a few weeks ago. Nothing to report... [/*]

I can pretty much guarantee that it wasn't "suddenly." The thing that tipped me off about any mention of Wiley was JKA featuring of it in pages.

Other than an example of walk away, I did not suspect anyone in Centre County ever heard of him. I pressed PB to ask the question and he did. He got the answer. It took six months.

I do find it unusual, to say the least, that RFG was discussing the Wiley case at least six years after it happened, with someone who had no connection to the case or to the area. I also do find it unusual that the name rings a bell, kinda sorta, with JKA.

day2day

02-12-2008, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by tonyGricar
Z apparently just retired a week or two ago. He's now a CC Deputy... [/*]

I am sure my friends in CC can rest sound knowing THAT!!:chicken: :lol: JMO

Cinderella

02-12-2008, 03:51 PM

One of the biggest things that happened is that Judge Brown had to retire so he is no longer a Judge at the Courthouse. Judge Grine filled his position and Judge Grine is the one that handpicked Ray. Wonder if that has anything to do with it. Maybe Judge Grine was pressured into his memory being faulty.

Cinderella

02-12-2008, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by tonyGricar
Z apparently just retired a week or two ago. He's now a CC Deputy... [/*]

Z wan't in that position at the Bellefonte school long.

Cinderella

02-12-2008, 03:55 PM

BTW, Sherriff Denny Nau was asked by someone if he knew Joseph Leathers and he said no. Billy Joe Leathers aunt said that he is like family. So why did he have to lie about that?

Cinderella

02-12-2008, 04:05 PM

I think the former Judge Brown owed someone a favor and it was paid in full. When you think about Ray not looking at Brown, but looking around the room, that tells something. Even the secretary noticed something different.

Then when Ray saw CF and Judge Griine they said that he left.

Ray was avoiding the courthouse. I think that he was avoid PF also. I don't think that he saw her after the Thursday night in the park.

I think that Ray knew that he was being set up. The words of Carla Baron come back to me. She said that Ray had been warned.

J. J. in Phila

02-12-2008, 07:40 PM

I doubt that this involves a judge. And I'll give Grine, JKA, and the witnesses a pass for not having a perfect memory. We're asking too much of them.

Politigal

02-12-2008, 09:59 PM

Not that it amounts to a hill of beans, but a visitor read my googlepages on the case yesterday for approx 23 minutes from Kuala Lumpur at the Islamic International University Malaysia. They searched google for keywords - Barbara Gray Gricar.

Serendipitous1

02-12-2008, 10:52 PM

Originally posted by Politigal Not that it amounts to a hill of beans, but a visitor read my googlepages on the case yesterday for approx 23 minutes from Kuala Lumpur at the Islamic International University Malaysia. They searched google for keywords - Barbara Gray Gricar. BG is apparently a prolific author and world traveller. MOO

Tree_of_Life

02-13-2008, 01:32 AM

J. J. in Phila

02-13-2008, 12:09 PM

Originally posted by logicworks
Couple of questions here.........

In the case of a missing person, does LE request that a will be opened and read prior to seven years passing in order to ascertain whether any recent changes had been made?

As far as I know, not, nor is it required in guardianship cases. The last one I am sure of.

Did LE immediately place a 'hold' on his mail with it going directly to LE prior to going to attorney or the designated 'power of attorney', LG, I presume.

Just curious...........

No, and it would a federal judge or federal magistrate to divert the mail.

Cinderella

02-13-2008, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by Politigal
Not that it amounts to a hill of beans, but a visitor read my googlepages on the case yesterday for approx 23 minutes from Kuala Lumpur at the Islamic International University Malaysia. They searched google for keywords - Barbara Gray Gricar. [/*]

So what if Barbara Gray Gricar did read that. It doesn't surprise me. She is still trying to find Ray also. If she didn't read it then I would start to wonder. Let her have her privacy.

J. J. in Phila

02-13-2008, 03:44 PM

Originally posted by logicworks

How can it then be concluded that a full investigation has taken place?

Surely if a will was found to have been written let's say a month before disappearance it could indeed be of interest to LE.
Since there were no children who were minors, guardianship would not be a question in RG's case.

LG is currently the "guardian of the estate" of RFG. That has nothing to do with his will and means that she administers RFG funds on his behalf, i.e, makes sure his taxes are paid, files the proper paperwork with the bar association, invests his funds.

That has nothing to do with any will. As I've pointed out, until such time as RFG is declared dead, found to be dead, who inherits has nothing to do with this.

I was guardian of my father for more than two decades, while he was alive; I inherited nothing until he died. During that time, my signature, as guardian, appeared on his bank accounts, his tax returns, et c. I received and legally opened all mail for him.

Why wouldn't the family of the missing person be responsible for the forwarding of all incoming mail? Surely if the person is no longer at a certain address, the person who is living in a house the missing person had lived in wouldn't be in charge. If that person moved, are we then to assume that because that is the missing person's address, all mail would still go to that address, with the new resident then responsible for it?
JMO [/*]

No, LG, as guardian, is responsible for all of that.

sherrijean981

02-13-2008, 04:03 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

LG is currently the "guardian of the estate" of RFG. That has nothing to do with his will and means that she administers RFG funds on his behalf, i.e, makes sure his taxes are paid, files the proper paperwork with the bar association, invests his funds.

That has nothing to do with any will. As I've pointed out, until such time as RFG is declared dead, found to be dead, who inherits has nothing to do with this.

I was guardian of my father for more than two decades, while he was alive; I inherited nothing until he died. During that time, my signature, as guardian, appeared on his bank accounts, his tax returns, et c. I received and legally opened all mail for him.

No, LG, as guardian, is responsible for all of that. [/*]

But JJ, your Dad didn't disappear under strange circumstance. If RG didn't walk away and someone killed him, there could be a reason in the will. Like a lot of money that someone found out about, that they needed, and thought they would get it even if not dead, only suspected suicide. Someone no longer in the will or he was going to take out of the will. He disappears before that can be done.

A lot of the true crime books I read have people disappear and it is found out there were large insurance policies taken out in their name just a few months before they disappeared. And the person who disappeared them would have been the beneficiary. Those wills were checked before they ever found the body. It was after they found out who inherited, and then they put the pressure on THAT person who confessed and then found the body. I don't remember the name of the book I am thinking about but there were 2 large policies taken out on his life.

tonyGricar

02-13-2008, 04:16 PM

Some strong assumptions seem to be coming out of this discussion. To me, the only way pertinent documents wouldn't be turned over is if people were being uncooperative.

J. J. in Phila

02-13-2008, 05:56 PM

Originally posted by sherrijean981

But JJ, your Dad didn't disappear under strange circumstance. If RG didn't walk away and someone killed him, there could be a reason in the will. Like a lot of money that someone found out about, that they needed, and thought they would get it even if not dead, only suspected suicide. Someone no longer in the will or he was going to take out of the will. He disappears before that can be done.

If RFG is declared dead, the will could, obviously, give a motive, but RFG hasn't been declared dead. Anybody in category might stage a suicide or an accident, but neither of things were staged, at least not clearly. A murderer would have to realize this, if an inheritance was the motive (which I doubt).

Cinderella

02-13-2008, 06:01 PM

What about the cell phone records? Why are they still being withheld? I wish they would be released.

Cinderella

02-13-2008, 06:14 PM

Originally posted by Politigal
Not that it amounts to a hill of beans, but a visitor read my googlepages on the case yesterday for approx 23 minutes from Kuala Lumpur at the Islamic International University Malaysia. They searched google for keywords - Barbara Gray Gricar. [/*]

Pgal, Sorry. I didn't read your post right the first time. Sorry for the post that I made about it.

Politigal

02-13-2008, 06:59 PM

Originally posted by Cinderella

Pgal, Sorry. I didn't read your post right the first time. Sorry for the post that I made about it. [/*]

no problem

J. J. in Phila

02-14-2008, 02:14 AM

Originally posted by Cinderella
What about the cell phone records? Why are they still being withheld? I wish they would be released. [/*]

I think we would ALL like to see at least a log released.

Politigal

02-14-2008, 10:32 PM

For anyone local to Bellefonte -- what days does the city pick up garbage?

Cloudbuster

02-15-2008, 03:30 PM

I know I would like to see a log realeased to confirm some of the calls I believe that came in and went out. I don't think there is a whole lot but would find it interesting and sorta like a confirmation. Personally its a phone log I would like to see and it's not RG's. Make tha 2 logs Id like to see.:read:

Cinderella

02-22-2008, 02:17 PM

Lyrics to The Twist

http://www.stlyrics.com/lyrics/heartsinatlantis/thetwist.htm

The Twist

Come on baby let's do the twist
Come on baby let's do the twist
Take me by my little hand and go like this
Ee-oh twist baby baby twist
Oooh-yeah just like this
Come on little miss and do the twist

My daddy is sleepin' and mama ain't around
Yeah daddy is sleepin' and mama ain't around
We're gonna twisty twisty twisty
'Til we turn the house down
Come on and twist yeah baby twist
Oooh-yeah just like this
Come on little miss and do the twist

Yeah you should see my little Sis
You should see my my little Sis
She really knows how to rock
She knows how to twist
Come on and twist yeah baby twist
Oooh-yeah just like this
Come on little miss and do the twist
Yeah rock on now
Yeah twist on now
Twist.

It was a big hit then and people are still twisting.

J. J. in Phila

02-22-2008, 03:53 PM

This one might be more apropos, the tune, but not the lyrics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3iogTKbW0o&feature=related

The original video is better, but this is still vintage. A bit retro, but I have a feeling so are some elements of this case.

Friday is my day to to be cryptic. ;)

J. J. in Phila

02-22-2008, 04:16 PM

Darn, wrong version! You should be able to get the tune, however.

J. J. in Phila

02-22-2008, 04:27 PM

Here is a better, more contemporary version:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a15HRV0mX0&feature=related

:)

The tune is quite catchy.

Cinderella

02-22-2008, 04:31 PM

I just got done reading all the words that Mickey can mean. It also rhymes with O'Kicki.

Mickey can mean anything that you want it to mean. I glad that Mickey makes you happy.

I also saw that a body part was referred to as a Mickey. :rolleyes:

J. J. in Phila

02-22-2008, 04:53 PM

Originally posted by Cinderella
I just got done reading all the words that Mickey can mean. It also rhymes with O'Kicki.

Mickey can mean anything that you want it to mean. I glad that Mickey makes you happy.

I also saw that a body part was referred to as a Mickey. :rolleyes: [/*]

"Mickey" has had some amazing parodies. I seem to remember one. Seem to have heard it during my misspent youth. :)

No body part parody however.

J. J. in Phila

02-22-2008, 06:16 PM

Yes, I do seem to remember a parody from the Spring of 1989; I do believe I was living in Cambria County at the time. ;)

Cinderella

02-22-2008, 07:24 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
Yes, I do seem to remember a parody from the Spring of 1989; I do believe I was living in Cambria County at the time. ;) [/*]

You are being cryptic, aren't you. :shrug:

sherrijean981

02-22-2008, 07:33 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
Yes, I do seem to remember a parody from the Spring of 1989; I do believe I was living in Cambria County at the time. ;) [/*]

I remember it very well. I found the articles!

J. J. in Phila

02-22-2008, 07:36 PM

Originally posted by Cinderella

You are being cryptic, aren't you. :shrug: [/*]

No, not really. What year did a certain personage whose name rhymes with Mickey happen to very much in the news, and subject to a parody of the song "Mickey."

I seem to remember these lines:

"_______ people say that you are such sleeze,
sitting around in you chambers in your BVD's."

Interesting case, perhaps some would say fascinating.

Cinderella

02-22-2008, 07:42 PM

J. J. in Phila

02-22-2008, 07:54 PM

Originally posted by Cinderella

Is he still in Slovenia or did he die. He was a pervert that kept track of others. [/*]

O'Kicki is dead. RFG may not be. This other case, ultimately a walkaway case, is one of which people could become fascinated with.

Serendipitous1

02-22-2008, 11:25 PM

I was waiting for confirmation from the CDT...but I think that glow in the night sky was not from a Navy rocket. It appears to have been the result of several bridges burning. MOO

J. J. in Phila

02-22-2008, 11:41 PM

Originally posted by Serendipitous1
I was waiting for confirmation from the CDT...but I think that glow in the night sky was not from a Navy rocket. It appears to have been the result of several bridges burning. MOO [/*]

It might be, but I have been indicating that RFG has had an interest in walkaway cases for a while. I've strongly suspected it since July.

Now, I will repeat, that interest does NOT prove, not by a long shot in my book, that RFG walked away. It is another piece of the puzzle, perhaps only one showing a blue sky above the scene or a detail of the scene itself.

Serendipitous1

02-23-2008, 12:32 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila <Snip>
It might be, but I have been indicating that RFG has had an interest in walkaway cases for a while. I hope it was worth it then. But, from where I sit, all I see is the afterglow of what could have been. JMOO

J. J. in Phila

02-23-2008, 12:57 AM

Originally posted by Serendipitous1
I hope it was worth it then. But, from where I sit, all I see is the afterglow of what could have been. JMOO [/*]

You might be looking at the the sunset (or the dawn). Which direction were you facing? :)

The key question is, if RFG walked away, how did he get out of Lewisburg. Unless that one is answered, it is but a false dawn (and I don't have an answer, just questions).

Motivation is there; Opportunity is there. Are Means there? So far, I'm not aware of any evidence about it.

Serendipitous1

02-23-2008, 01:13 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila <Snip>
You might be looking at the the sunset (or the dawn). Which direction were you facing? :) East...toward that city some of us would just as soon cede to NJ (the a-hole of the US). MOO. . .:cuss:

Cinderella

02-23-2008, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

You might be looking at the the sunset (or the dawn). Which direction were you facing? :)

The key question is, if RFG walked away, how did he get out of Lewisburg. Unless that one is answered, it is but a false dawn (and I don't have an answer, just questions).

Motivation is there; Opportunity is there. Are Means there? So far, I'm not aware of any evidence about it. [/*]

Either the mystery woman or the murderer.

Cinderella

02-23-2008, 01:45 AM

Why didn't they at least provide a sketch of the mystery woman even though they thought that they knew who she was? Did she take a polygraph? Where she works, they don't co-operate in this matter anyway. How do they really know that she is telling the truth? Because her boss says so?

J. J. in Phila

02-23-2008, 01:55 AM

Originally posted by Cinderella
Why didn't they at least provide a sketch of the mystery woman even though they thought that they knew who she was? Did she take a polygraph? Where she works, they don't co-operate in this matter anyway. How do they really know that she is telling the truth? Because her boss says so? [/*]

Since they don't know who the mystery woman was, they obviously couldn't polygraph her. The old friend, no.

From everything that I've seen, no one could give enough information for a sketch.

I would not say that her workplace is uncooperative. I do feel, however, that this woman, along with many others, should be looked at again.

Cinderella

02-23-2008, 03:26 AM

I think and hope that Detective Rickard is starting from almost scratch. At least I heard good things about his wanting to solve this case.

Politigal

02-23-2008, 10:41 PM

just another case of phoney tears

http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/crime_courts/story/416984.html

The judge called Grant's actions "demonic, manipulative, barbaric and dishonest." She noted how Grant went so far as to cry on camera begging for his wife to come home after he had already killed her.

Cinderella

02-23-2008, 10:58 PM

Some women or men cry to get what they want or sympathy. I never could get into that act.

BTW, I had to bring this over from the other board as we are not supposed to comment. I just love the news that was release about Ray from MM and SW. "He may be alive. He may be dead."
Thanks S1, for posting that new revealing picture of what is on MM's mind. Now that the interview is over we will return to Sesame Street.

------------------------------

Serendipitous1
Senior Member

Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Central PA
Posts: 1297
Hotbox procrastinators?
SW and MM at the 11/21/06 "news conference" -
http://pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsbu...ss/p_97089.html

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-22-2008 11:59 PM

Politigal
Senior Member

Registered: Jun 2006
Location: Posting my opinions
Posts: 2410
Re: Hotbox procrastinators?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Serendipitous1
SW and MM at the 11/21/06 "news conference" -
http://pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsbu...ss/p_97089.html [/*]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How profound of them ----

"He may be alive. He may be dead."

__________________
Consider *who* had access to Patty Fornicola's upstairs closet where the laptop was kept....

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-23-2008 06:42 PM

J. J. in Phila

02-23-2008, 11:18 PM

Well, are either of sure if RFG is alive or dead. I'm not.

Cinderella

02-23-2008, 11:29 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
Well, are either of sure if RFG is alive or dead. I'm not. [/*]

Well then J. J. in your book, Ray must be either half dead or half alive. Have you been tipping the bottle tonight? hammer

J. J. in Phila

02-24-2008, 12:50 AM

Originally posted by Cinderella

Well then J. J. in your book, Ray must be either half dead or half alive. Have you been tipping the bottle tonight? hammer [/*]

Just either alive or dead. Either is possible.

Cinderella

02-24-2008, 01:02 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

Just either alive or dead. Either is possible. [/*]

Don't you realise what you said. They commented this:

"He may be alive. He may be dead." Didn't you read the article?

J. J. in Phila

02-24-2008, 01:49 AM

I read the blurb. MM said, "I think the family has understood that this may never be solved. ... He may be alive. He may be dead."

I disagree with the first part, but RFG may be alive or RFG may be dead.

sherrijean981

02-24-2008, 02:15 AM

JJ, You were talking of Judge O'kicki in a post the other day. I know he had walked away from a jail sentence he was to serve - 2 to 5 yrs- but he had managed to leave the country early enough to set up a law practice in Slovenia. His name had turned up on the active PA Lawyer list, having filed for papers in Slovenia before he was disbarred here.

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:2Zj7GlQP3yAJ:query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html%3Fres%3D9502E5D6143DF932A25750C0A962 958260+joseph+o%27kicki&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us

Has anyone ever checked that list to see if RG's name is on it and in another country?

Isn't Slovenia the country RG has family in?

Was he familiar with Judge O'Kicki, as in knowing him, not of reading of him?

Could Judge O'Kicki have sent RG the mysteriously disappeared manuscript O'Kicki was supposed to be writing?

Was this the other person RG was interested in who had walked away?

Cinderella

02-24-2008, 02:17 AM

J. J.,

Nevermind, I don't think you get it. hammer hammer

J. J. in Phila

02-24-2008, 02:42 AM

I've met Judge O'Kicki, so it's possible that RFG did. He was around since the early 1970's; he was also President of a state judges association. I doubt it RFG ever had any professional dealings with him.

Yes, Slovenia is the the country that the Gricar family is originally from and RFG did visit it, within the 20 years prior to his disappearance. I don't think O'Kicki set up a practice in Slovenia, but he was of Slovenian ancestry as well.

O'Kicki actually left from the State College Airport in 1992-3, and first went to Canada.

RFG qas known to have been interested in visiting Slovenia:

Good questions. I don't think I've ever said this publically before, but it has always intrigued me. Ray kept a road atlas of the United States in one of his desk drawers in his courthouse office. Ray's best friend, Assistant District Attorney Steve Sloane told me about it. Steve said he had scenic driving routes highlighted in yellow all across the country. Ray also longed to return to Eastern Europe to visit family.
Pete Bosak 7/22/06

I think it's fair to say that Sloane says a lot.

I think you were the one that asked this question.

Cloudbuster

02-24-2008, 03:39 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

No, not really. What year did a certain personage whose name rhymes with Mickey happen to very much in the news, and subject to a parody of the song "Mickey."

I seem to remember these lines:

"_______ people say that you are such sleeze,
sitting around in you chambers in your BVD's."

Interesting case, perhaps some would say fascinating. [/*]

O'Kicki saga nears an end

Saturday, July 04, 1998

O'Kicki, in wonderful, half-coherent letters home, said he was writing a tell-all book. His enemies -- which is to say most of the people who had once helped him -- would tremble.

Bill Keisling heard it all. His small company was supposed to publish O'Kicki's book and, two years after its putative author reached room temperature, not one page has appeared.

That's not to say there wasn't very large talk. Keisling tried to line up a literary agent for the judge. O'Kicki's response was to demand a big advance which the agent, not being from Cambria County, did not deliver.

After O'Kicki died, people began talking about the book. Last month, one of his daughters telephoned to ask whatever became of the manuscript her father mentioned when she visited him.

"The whole affair was starting to remind me of 'The Maltese Falcon,' that somebody was going to walk into the room and drop it on the floor, like Sidney Greenstreet," Keisling said. "I've never seen the manuscript, but people have been talking to me about it incessantly. I ought to sit down and write the damn thing."

It might take as much. Jim Yelovich, who represented Joe 10 years ago and Sylvia last week, doubts a book was finished. When O'Kicki's belongings were examined after his death, no manuscript turned up.

"Another Joe O'Kicki story, I suspect," Yelovich said.

Maybe the last.

http://www.post-gazette.com/columnists/19980704broddy5.asp

Pennsylvania County Judge Guilty of Corruption

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DEFDD153EF93BA25751C1A96F9482 60

Keisling wrote:

Why would a drug gang target someone like Ray Gricar? I later asked a long-time observer of the law enforcement and security professions. "Because Gricar hurt them," came his answer. Are you kidding? he grimaced. He looked annoyed by the stupidity of my question. The internet press release crows that DA Gricar's office started the investigation, only later turning it over to the state attorney general's office. "Gricar cost them at least a million and a half dollars."

Not too many DAs, he predicted, will be posing for the attorney general's press releases in the near future.

http://www.yardbird.com/midnight_ride_another_missing_PA_prosecutor_2.htm

Cinderella

02-25-2008, 01:14 AM

An oldie but goodie.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/centredaily/news/special_packages/ray_gricar/qa_forum.html?forumId=1882&mode=display&action=&type=list&pageNo=32

Q It has been reported that Gricar was seen in Bellefonte that fateful Friday afternoon driving a gold or silver, metallic-colored car. Someone else suggested that Gricar's girlfriend, Patty Fornicola, may own such a car. Any confirmation on that?
Anonymous 5/15/06
A Yes. Patty Fornicola had a car that could match that general description, police tell me. But lead investigator, Bellefonte Police Officer Darrel Zaccagni, told me Fornicola had her car that afternoon, so Ray couldn't have been driving it. I personally have never seen Patty's car, other than Gricar's Mini Cooper. The assistant district attorney who said she saw Gricar at 3 p.m. the day he vanished told me that while it was a metallic-colored car, she did not believe the body style matched Fornicola's car. Besides, she said, she was looking at Gricar and to see if Fornicola was with him. She was not, the witness told me. Gricar was alone, she said.
Pete Bosak 5/15/06

Cinderella

02-25-2008, 01:44 AM

http://www.realcities.com/mld/centredaily/news/special_packages/ray_gricar/qa_forum.html?forumId=1882&mode=display&action=&type=list&pageNo=25

Q This question may have been asked before, but why did Ray Gricar play hookey on the Thursday afternoon before he disappeared, but is on camera entering the courthouse after hours on that same date? Doesn't this seem like he was planning "something"?
Anonymous 6/04/06

A I don't know what it indicates. But you are right, Ray took Thursday, April 14, 2005 off during the afternoon. But security cameras found Ray entering the courthouse later that evening wearing his blue jacket, blue jeans and tennis shoes. Those are the same things he was reported to be wearing the Friday he disappeared too. As to why he took that Thursday afternoon off, that was never explained to me in detail. I'm not sure he even told Patty, other to say he was "playing hooky." I'll see what else I can find out.
Pete Bosak 6/05/06

J. J. in Phila

02-25-2008, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by Cinderella

A Yes. Patty Fornicola had a car that could match that general description, police tell me.
Pete Bosak 5/15/06 [/*]

Keep in mind that Fenton knew what kind of car PEF drove and it wasn't the same one.

gstickley

02-25-2008, 01:53 AM

Originally posted by Cinderella
http://www.realcities.com/mld/centredaily/news/special_packages/ray_gricar/qa_forum.html?forumId=1882&mode=display&action=&type=list&pageNo=25

Q This question may have been asked before, but why did Ray Gricar play hookey on the Thursday afternoon before he disappeared, but is on camera entering the courthouse after hours on that same date? Doesn't this seem like he was planning "something"?
Anonymous 6/04/06

A I don't know what it indicates. But you are right, Ray took Thursday, April 14, 2005 off during the afternoon. But security cameras found Ray entering the courthouse later that evening wearing his blue jacket, blue jeans and tennis shoes. Those are the same things he was reported to be wearing the Friday he disappeared too. As to why he took that Thursday afternoon off, that was never explained to me in detail. I'm not sure he even told Patty, other to say he was "playing hooky." I'll see what else I can find out.
Pete Bosak 6/05/06 [/*]

Ya reckon he ever found out what RG was doing? Wonder who he checked with? It's only been 1 yr. 8 mos. since he was gonna check.

Cinderella

02-25-2008, 02:05 AM

http://www.realcities.com/mld/centredaily/news/special_packages/ray_gricar/qa_forum.html?forumId=1882&mode=display&action=&type=list&pageNo=19

Here is one about the e-mail.

Q I have read that Mr. Gricar always informed his staff when he would be out of the office. Did Mr. Gricar notify his staff that he would be playing "hooky" on 4/15/2005? Or did Patty Fornicola inform the rest of the staff after his last phone call?
Meliss, Columbus 8/01/06

A Hi Meliss. Ray told his office he would be taking the day off through his live-in girlfriend, Patty, who, I'm sure you all know, works in the District Attorney's Office. Ray told her that morning he was not going to to work. So when Patty got to the office, she sent out an inter-office e-mail telling everyone Ray would not be in.
Pete Bosak 8/03/06

Cinderella

02-25-2008, 02:06 AM

Originally posted by gstickley

Ya reckon he ever found out what RG was doing? Wonder who he checked with? It's only been 1 yr. 8 mos. since he was gonna check. [/*]

You might want to e-mail him now that LE is working with him.

Cind.

Cinderella

02-25-2008, 02:09 AM

Here is a post about the cell phone calls that I never knew.
http://www.realcities.com/mld/centredaily/news/special_packages/ray_gricar/qa_forum.html?forumId=1882&mode=display&action=&type=list&pageNo=19

Q Does the D.A.'s office have a lie detector that Patty and his daughter could have "practiced" on? Are there any times that Patty and Ray stayed late alone? Where was Ray's cellphone, in the car? Did Patty try to contact him via cellphone when he did not show up? Why isn't there any "digital bread crumbs" for that?
Anonymous 8/03/06

A Thanks for taking time to write. As to your first question, absolutely not. There is no way to practice for a lie-detecter test. As for Ray and Patty staying late alone at the office, I'm sure that could have happened, but I'm not sure I'm seeing the relevance? Ray's cell phone was found in the Mini Cooper. And, yes, Patty tried to call him multiple times throughout the day trying to find him. Obviously, Ray didn't answer.
Pete Bosak 8/03/06

Pete says throughout the day. I thought that she called him in the evening. I wonder what is right.

Cinderella

02-25-2008, 02:18 AM

http://www.realcities.com/mld/centredaily/news/special_packages/ray_gricar/qa_forum.html?forumId=1882&mode=display&action=&type=list&pageNo=17

Q Where did the water bottle Ray left in the car come from? Did he bring it from home, or buy it on the way? Ray called Patty to say he wouldn't be home in time to walk the dog. When was the dog due to be walked next?
Anonymous, NYC 6/13/06

A I don't know yet about a water bottle being purhcased. But the dog was due to be walked around noon, or mid-afternoon.
Pete Bosak 8/09/06

Cinderella

02-25-2008, 02:21 AM

http://www.realcities.com/mld/centredaily/news/special_packages/ray_gricar/qa_forum.html?forumId=1882&mode=display&action=&type=list&pageNo=16

This is very interesting:

Q Is there a description of the construction worker type person who was seen leaning into Ray's car... I think I know who it was.
Anonymous, Lewisburg PA 8/24/06

A I'm not aware of any description other than that. But if you know who it was, please e-mail me at pbosak@centredaily.com. Please.
Pete Bosak 8/25/06

Here is an answer to it.

A Sorry it took so long to post something but I've been enjoying some vacation time. I did receive an e-mail from that reader, who described a mentally unstable man he had a run in with while in Lewisburg, looking into Ray's disappearance. He encountered this man, who fit the "construction worker" type description in a Lewisburg park. But I do not yet know whether he told police of his encounter. I'll let you know as soon as I do.
Pete Bosak 9/20/06

J. J. in Phila

02-25-2008, 02:22 AM

Originally posted by Cinderella

Pete says throughout the day. I thought that she called him in the evening. I wonder what is right. [/*]

"Day" can refer to 4/15/05.

Cinderella

02-25-2008, 02:28 AM

I agree but I thought that PF only called him after he didn't show up at home. Did she try to call him during the afternoon of the 15th.?

J. J. in Phila

02-25-2008, 02:33 AM

Originally posted by Cinderella
I agree but I thought that PF only called him after he didn't show up at home. Did she try to call him during the afternoon of the 15th.? [/*]

We don't know the times of those calls. I've thought that there might be one early, like when she came home, to see about dinner, or before she left for the gym. I don't have a solid answer on that one (I'm working on it).

Tree_of_Life

02-26-2008, 06:47 AM

For those who may be interested or not, here are a few pictures taken from Google Earth of the SOS/park area in Lewisburg. According to the image data these were taken in late 2004 making them pre-disappearance.

http://picasaweb.google.com/vancouverp/RG/photo#5171236953140381554

http://picasaweb.google.com/vancouverp/RG/photo#5171236953140381570

http://picasaweb.google.com/vancouverp/RG/photo#5171236957435348882

Click Download Photo to see the full-size version.

Too bad the satellite was flying overhead on Friday, April 15th 2005........

-TOL

sherrijean981

02-26-2008, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by Tree_of_Life
For those who may be interested or not, here are a few pictures taken from Google Earth of the SOS/park area in Lewisburg. According to the image data these were taken in late 2004 making them pre-disappearance.

http://picasaweb.google.com/vancouverp/RG/photo#5171236953140381554

http://picasaweb.google.com/vancouverp/RG/photo#5171236953140381570

http://picasaweb.google.com/vancouverp/RG/photo#5171236957435348882

Click Download Photo to see the full-size version.

Too bad the satellite was flying overhead on Friday, April 15th 2005........

-TOL [/*]

If you look at the 2nd map, it has a small red vehicle sitting in the first parking spot across from the Packwood Museum, on Water St., just off Rt 45. Do you think so?

tonyGricar

02-26-2008, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by Tree_of_Life
Too bad the satellite wasn't flying overhead on Friday, April 15th 2005........ [/*]Availability of "various" satellite data was checked on. Nothing panned out.

Tree_of_Life

02-26-2008, 05:36 PM

Originally posted by Tree_of_Life

Too bad the satellite was flying overhead on Friday, April 15th 2005........

-TOL [/*]

Whoops, meant to say WASN'T. Thanks for answering my next question Tony.

Serendipitous1

02-26-2008, 06:05 PM

"Reginald Steadman of the Centre County Sheriff's Department said he knew Gricar well. Steadman said Gricar was interested in possible retirement spots, and Steadman showed him maps of locations in England. Police did ultimately search those areas of England, but there was no sign of Gricar."

http://www.wjactv.com/news/15415783/detail.html

Would that be "New" England?

sherrijean981

02-26-2008, 06:22 PM

Originally posted by Serendipitous1
"Reginald Steadman of the Centre County Sheriff's Department said he knew Gricar well. Steadman said Gricar was interested in possible retirement spots, and Steadman showed him maps of locations in England. Police did ultimately search those areas of England, but there was no sign of Gricar."

http://www.wjactv.com/news/15415783/detail.html

Would that be "New" England? [/*]

I also read in that article that DA Madeira said RG had not run for election again and was retiring "due to the caseload and complexity of the cases". What???

That was not what Rg had said in an article done on him in 2004 when he gave notice he was not running again and was retiring the end of 2005. It had been a goal and plan of his to retire when he turned 60, and he wanted to travel and spend time with his daughter and PF, seeing more of the US and the New England States.

Wonder why Bosak didn't get the info they received?

sherrijean981

02-26-2008, 06:56 PM

Cinderella

02-26-2008, 10:45 PM

Isn't it funny, Det. Z went there and now we have some information coming out of there. Next they will be saying that Denny Nau the Sheriff has a horse as big as his hat. This is getting worse everyday.

Serendipitous1

02-26-2008, 11:27 PM

Originally posted by sherrijean981
WJAC-TV had it on the news earlier. Mr. Steadman is English and it was England he told Rg about. RG told him it sounded like a nice place to retire to, took the books home and later gave them back to him. So it was 'old' England then...interesting. WJAC-TV video about the book buzz:
http://www.wjactv.com/video/15419223/index.html

gstickley

02-26-2008, 11:45 PM

This keeps getting better-n-better, & the discrepancies keep getting bigger & more widespread. What to believe?? Who to believe?? Either this is one heck of a conspiracy, or else there are some people deep into misdirection or downright lies, or else there are some mighty incompetent people involved in the investigation of the disappearance of Ray Gricar. Take your pick, you probably won't be too far off with any of the above.

For example, the fingerprints. Five sets; five prints; no, three prints; no, one print; one print on the outside door window; one print on the water bottle. Who actually knows how many prints, if any, were on the vehicle? I guess I had more faith in the PSP lifting the prints, but how would you know; their information would have been given to BPD. So, how would you know??

For example, the Wiley thing. JJ remembers the Wiley case from someplace back in time, brings it to the board as an example of maybe RF walking away. Then Karen Arnold responds to this farce, indicating in her Magnificent Manuscript that she thought she remembered Mel Wiley's name being mentioned in the office, but stated it was not mentioned by RG. JJ keeps up with his 'KA did it, KA did it' no matter how many times the entire quote is brought to the board. (I know, I brought it to the board numerous times.) Then out of nowhere comes S. Sloane, who reportedly had spoken with RG about Wiley some years prior to RG's disappearance & years after Wiley disappeared; Goodness Gracious, now it's a sure thing that RG was interested in the Wiley case & very well could have followed Wiley into the wild, blue yonder, or whatever. Today, we have another instance of some writer, who years ago, started writing about a Centre Co. murder case in which the main character disappears, and reportedly RG 'helped' her in her book. Holy Cow! Now it's surely a complete certainty that Ray Gricar walked away!!!

BPD. We now have a new person in charge of the Gricar disappearance upon the final retirement of DZ. Mr. Rickard supposedly began working on this investigation about a year ago when DZ supposedly was planning to move away from the PD & into the school system. Now that, supposedly, DZ is finally gone, Mr. Rickard has supposedly found some untruths, downright lies, misinformation, incompetency (take your pick) with things reported by DZ. All is well with the world. Mr. Rickard has supposedly been kept 'up to speed' or something like that since the very beginning. I can understand why Mr. Rickard wouldn't/couldn't come forward with his newfound information, I think. What I cannot understand is where was DZ's &/or Rickard's supervisor (supposedly Mr. Weaver) for the past almost 3 years. Did he never check the reports of DZ or the information fed to the public for the past 3 years by DZ? Was he part of the untruths, downright lies, misinformation, incompetency (take your pick)?

PB & the CDT. Wow. What a wealth of information is finally coming forward, after so long a time with . . . not much. I'm wondering when all the questions asked by PB's public will be answered, you know, the 'will get back with you on that' answers. I'm also wondering why the discrepancy between what he told Pgal. in his e-mail & what he told TG just in the past week. I'm also wondering about his article today in which he talks about who else---Mel Wiley. What I didn't understand is the fact he supposedly read Karen Arnold's Magnificent Manuscript & trashed it & her because she didn't talk to him. I went back & read the magnificent manuscript again tonight and, yep, it was still there: Karen Arnold never said anywhere in her magnificent manuscript that Ray Gricar had spoken about Mel Wiley. Aah, more untruths, downright lies, misinformation, incompetency, poor reporting, or maybe an agenda???

Mr. Madiera. Well, that's another story. We'd always been told that Ray Gricar had planned to retire at age 60, to travel, to visit his daughter, etc. Today, Mr. Madiera told us that Ray Gricar actually was to retire basically 'because he was fed up with the job' (my words). Hummm. Somehow, I can't see Mr. Gricar telling him that. Somehow I can't see Mr. Gricar voluntarily disappearing whether he was fed up with the job or tired or whatever without waiting until the 8 months were up. This may be hard to believe, but I don't think all the rocks were overturned!!!! I think Mr. Madiera should check the BPD to see why there are discrepancies supposedly occurring.

I know all the hundreds, no thousands, of Centre Co. citizens who come home from their jobs, the factories, the fields, whatever, after a hard day's work & rush to their computer to log into this message board to find out what is going on with the Ray Gricar disappearance probably won't appreciate this post. However, since I don't live in "Happy Valley" or "Stepford" or whatever, this is the way it looks to me. Someone needs to wake up & ask questions. Someone who is truly interested in finding the answer as to whatever happened to Ray Gricar.

This is just my own opinion, this 26th day of February, 2008, 1045 P.M.

tonyGricar

02-26-2008, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by sherrijean981

WJAC-TV had it on the news earlier. Mr. Steadman is English and it was England he told Rg about. RG told him it sounded like a nice place to retire to, took the books home and later gave them back to him. [/*]That's the first time I've seen anyone comment from the Sheriff's Dept.

Cinderella

02-27-2008, 12:02 AM

Stickley, I couldn't have said it better. Thanks for your post.

Serendipitous1

02-27-2008, 12:09 AM

Originally posted by tonyGricar That's the first time I've seen anyone comment from the Sheriff's Dept. I can remember reading a stray quote from a deputy and a few lines from the sheriff in 2005. But it is interesting how new faces and stories emerge right after provocative articles are published. I wonder who will be next? Interpol?...or maybe the night-janitor at the courthouse?

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 12:12 AM

Originally posted by gstickley
Holy Cow! Now it's surely a complete certainty that Ray Gricar walked away!!! [/*]Quite the display of hyperbole and your own manipulation of the various details you cite, but I have to ask you about the above. How on earth do you draw that out of the recent news reporting? Seriously.

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 12:14 AM

Originally posted by Serendipitous1
I can remember reading a stray quote from a deputy and a few lines from the sheriff in 2005. But it is interesting how new faces and stories emerge right after provocative articles are published. I wonder who will be next? Interpol?...or maybe the night-janitor at the courthouse? [/*]I was slightly amused by Tor getting camera time on this one. Interesting. And he stole my cliche...

Cinderella

02-27-2008, 12:31 AM

I like Tor Michaels and miss him from his WBLF station. He was one to put all the politicians in their place. He is the one that asked the question of MM about doing a sketch of the mystery woman. MM stated that they didn't have a sketch artist.

Too bad that he went to work for Conklin. If anyone could apply the pressure it was Tor.

gstickley

02-27-2008, 12:33 AM

Originally posted by tonyGricar
Quite the display of hyperbole and your own manipulation of the various details you cite, but I have to ask you about the above. How on earth do you draw that out of the recent news reporting? Seriously. [/*]

TG, this is how I really see it, & I don't believe I 'manipulated' the details (however, will admit to being a smart***). I guess the recent news reporting, once I'd read it several times, didn't mean very much. I'm very confused about the reporting from the PD; I'm not used to that type thing occurring. I believe people ought to be able to believe what they read in their local newspaper. I believe people ought to be able to believe their local police. I'm not able to see this. And, for what it's worth, I will never believe your uncle disappeared after showing an 'interest' in other disappearance cases; IMO, that has been blown so out of proportion that it's almost laughable, and for what reason???

Serendipitous1

02-27-2008, 12:37 AM

Originally posted by tonyGricar I was slightly amused by Tor getting camera time on this one. Interesting. And he stole my cliche... Well traveled...that cliché! And I seem to recall that that name came up in some of the huffing and puffing on another forum. MOO

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 12:51 AM

Originally posted by gstickley
TG, this is how I really see it, & I don't believe I 'manipulated' the details (however, will admit to being a smart***). I guess the recent news reporting, once I'd read it several times, didn't mean very much.

And, for what it's worth, I will never believe your uncle disappeared after showing an 'interest' in other disappearance cases; IMO, that has been blown so out of proportion that it's almost laughable, and for what reason??? [/*]I, as much as anyone, can recognize your frustration, but there are often reasons for the way certain events unfold that people on the other side of the table don't realize/recognize.

The only reason this became news, IMeducatedO, is because various news agencies had the story, and someone had to run it. It was gossip around town, and it only takes one to flinch to get everyone to report on it. I have no problem with it, because I recognize that the media has been looking (for quite some time) to get something to cover on this case. The public has wanted it, we've wanted it, and the news media has wanted it. Unless there's something, anything, the media will not rehash old stories, save for the anniversary dates. It's the nature of the beast.

As for why the BPD hasn't been speaking, I think we all know why that was. Did I agree with it? No. I think I alluded to that with my transparency comment.

Fwiw, these "revelations" mean very little to me, or to my cousin. The date is the only thing that stands out. I think anyone would recognize that's intriguing. Nothing else, to me, is.

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 12:54 AM

Originally posted by Serendipitous1
Well traveled...that cliché! And I seem to recall that that name came up in some of the huffing and puffing on another forum. MOO [/*]You have a good memory. I seem to recall a little creation of, and creative license applied, as it pertained to some radiowave-only reporting.

sherrijean981

02-27-2008, 01:18 AM

Originally posted by tonyGricar
That's the first time I've seen anyone comment from the Sheriff's Dept. [/*]

When I saw Mr. Steadman talking on WJACTV, I thought it looked like he was one of the men in the Sheriff's department who man's the scanner when you go in the courthouse.

I have been in the courthouse a couple times in the past year and have seen a couple of the officers but not him.

Maybe the people are coming out and talking because they know the new detective on the case will listen to them, not categorize it as "not in the time line", not important, or doesn't matter.

It is what I have been hoping for, bits and pieces from employees in the court house. People who have talked with RG and who might just have the right piece of information.

sherrijean981

02-27-2008, 01:27 AM

I also saw Tor Michaels on WTAJTV. He was going on about the investigation and seemed rattled about it. I was wonder why he doesn't get his new boss to do something to help in the investigation, since he is at a higher level than county now. Why doesn't he himself try to do something from where he is, only not ruffle so many feathers this time.

I remember when Ruth Rudy was a representative, if you had a problem in any government office, you could go to her and that office would do their best to help. What is different with Scott Conklin's office looking into this?

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 01:38 AM

Originally posted by sherrijean981
Maybe the people are coming out and talking because they know the new detective on the case will listen to them, not categorize it as "not in the time line", not important, or doesn't matter.

It is what I have been hoping for, bits and pieces from employees in the court house. People who have talked with RG and who might just have the right piece of information. [/*]I don't think it's really so much an issue of people talking more now due to a new detective on the case. More likely, it's an issue of different sources for different members of the media. I've noticed many times where tv differed from print when it comes to this case. Tor weighing in is a good example. I recall he and Sinderson chatting quite a bit.

I vaguely recall the England thing. It's not really news per se, until something else alluding to walkaway makes it such.

Politigal

02-27-2008, 01:40 AM

Originally posted by tonyGricar
I don't think it's really so much an issue of people talking more now due to a new detective on the case. More likely, it's an issue of different sources for different members of the media. I've noticed many times where tv differed from print when it comes to this case. Tor weighing in is a good example. I recall he and Sinderson chatting quite a bit.

I vaguely recall the England thing. It's not really news per se, until something else alluding to walkaway makes it such. [/*]

IMO, it seems people are all too eager to jump on the "walkaway" band wagon...

Why?

sherrijean981

02-27-2008, 01:57 AM

Originally posted by Politigal

IMO, it seems people are all too eager to jump on the "walkaway" band wagon...

Why? [/*]

HOPE! It is better to have hope, it is positive, an energy to help you go on.

I guess I would jump on the "walkaway band wagon" because it would mean he was alive, a prayer answered. He could walk back in their lives at any time.

If he is dead, and never found, there is never that chance of coming back in their lives, they will never know where he is or how he died. Unless by some fluke his body would be found to give them closure.

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 02:19 AM

Originally posted by Politigal

IMO, it seems people are all too eager to jump on the "walkaway" band wagon...

Why? [/*]Similar to what I pointed out to Gstick, I actually don't see that at all. The media is covering the story, because it does have some interesting bits, but if you actually read or listen to the quotes, there isn't much stock being put into them. I've not talked to a single person who's had their opinion swayed by this (my phone has been working over-time the last week).

The media's reporting on the possible book connection, but I'm not sure how these comments are quantified as jumping on a walkaway bandwagon:

---"It’s strange because we don’t know if Ray ever read the book,” Rickard said. “It’s not at his house. It’s not in his belongings. I don’t know what to make of the book. Could it just be coincidence? I don’t know. But it’s strange.” ---

---“Anything can be shaped into anything if you try hard enough,” said Tony Gricar. “I just don’t see anything to it.” ---

---"Madeira said. “I would say we have the ability now, with 20/20 hindsight, to make some element of the story fit some parts of just about any book.” ---

---“It didn’t have any recent significance,” Sloane said. “I don’t even know why I remember it. He used to talk to me about a lot of people he worked with back in Cleveland.” ---

Politigal

02-27-2008, 02:28 AM

I was referring to some on board here

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 02:28 AM

Originally posted by gstickley

For example, the Wiley thing. JJ remembers the Wiley case from someplace back in time, brings it to the board as an example of maybe RF walking away. Then Karen Arnold responds to this farce, indicating in her Magnificent Manuscript that she thought she remembered Mel Wiley's name being mentioned in the office, but stated it was not mentioned by RG. JJ keeps up with his 'KA did it, KA did it' no matter how many times the entire quote is brought to the board. (I know, I brought it to the board numerous times.) Then out of nowhere comes S. Sloane, who reportedly had spoken with RG about Wiley some years prior to RG's disappearance & years after Wiley disappeared; Goodness Gracious, now it's a sure thing that RG was interested in the Wiley case & very well could have followed Wiley into the wild, blue yonder, or whatever. [/*]

Oh, I think there is a lot more to this; JKA mentioned it on her very first page. She even admits that I made a reference to it as a list of walkaway cases. Interestingly, "Lustor" made an issue of that. Now, JKA's emphasis, 10 paragraphs of it, on Wiley, with kinda sorta maybe she heard of the case at the office (in her case 3 years and 200 miles away), gave me pause.

Without that, Mel Wiley would be just another name on a list to me, which it was when I posted it the first time.

Now we know that it was discussed by RFG with another member of the staff (7 years and 200 miles away, at least Hinckley stayed put).

Do I think it is possible RFG walked away? Absolutely. Do I think that is more likely than not that RFG walked away? Right now, no. I need that funny little, inconsequential, thingy called EVIDENCE. :) That is my only true love.

I've always said that someone might say something that will trigger something that will break the case.

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 02:45 AM

---“It didn’t have any recent significance,” Sloane said. “I don’t even know why I remember it. He used to talk to me about a lot of people he worked with back in Cleveland.” ---

But let's be fair here, RFG didn't work Wiley in Cleveland; I think if he had, I'd find it less strange. They were not in the same county, and Wiley became chief after RFG left and doesn't seem to ever worked in Cleveland. Same media market, but Akron is a bit closer.

As for P'gal's comment, yes, but only because of the strangeness.

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 02:48 AM

Originally posted by Politigal
I was referring to some on board here [/*]I don't know if I'd use the term "some", or even "individual", in that context. There's no reason to completely discount the theory, and since the book reporting is the news of the day, it stands to reason to be the topic of the day.

Btw, we're digging around to see if anyone knew of Ray reading the book. It can be difficult to readily access relevant parties.

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 03:10 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
---“It didn’t have any recent significance,” Sloane said. “I don’t even know why I remember it. He used to talk to me about a lot of people he worked with back in Cleveland.” ---

But let's be fair here, RFG didn't work Wiley in Cleveland; I think if he had, I'd find it less strange. They were not in the same county, and Wiley became chief after RFG left and doesn't seem to ever worked in Cleveland. Same media market, but Akron is a bit closer. [/*]I'm not sure where the issue of fair comes into play on this. Those were Steve's words, and I understand what he meant. The over-parsing is a bit much. Sloane would be the first to tell you about Ray's passion for all things Cleveland. And I would assume with your familiarity with reporters, politics, etc, you just as easily know that the next line out of Sloane's mouth could have been an unreported addition to that quote.

Next time you're in Hinkley, lemme know how convinced you are that it's Akron and not Cleveland. I don't know anyone who considers Medina County to not be part of the Cleveland area. To be honest, I'm amazed at how much difficulty you even have in conceding this point (closer to Akron, by 3 miles, but Cleveland media market???). I go to Cleveland and Akron quite often, so I do have a bit of local knowledge. The fact that one of the Cleveland Metroparks is in Hinkley, and that the hugely popular (in it's time) Cleveland flagship FM station, WMMS was nicknamed The Buzzard, seems to be illustrative of that point. Besides, I often see the Hinkley Buzzards wearing Browns gear...

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 03:34 AM

Originally posted by tonyGricar
I'm not sure where the issue of fair comes into play on this. Those were Steve's words, and I understand what he meant. The over-parsing is a bit much. Sloane would be the first to tell you about Ray's passion for all things Cleveland. And I would assume with your familiarity with reporters, politics, etc, you just as easily know that the next line out of Sloane's mouth could have been an unreported addition to that quote.

Not attempting to over-parse, really, but I think that we should be clear that Sloane wasn't quoting as saying, "... or old poker buddies like Mel Wiley." I think I would find the reference far less unusual if it were.

Next time you're in Hinkley, lemme know how convinced you are that it's Akron and not Cleveland. I don't know anyone who considers Medina County to not be part of the Cleveland area.

I have no doubt that they are part of the same media market, but I've tried to look at where the story would primarily covered. I've attempted to see how many stories the Plain Dealer did in 1992-4 on Wiley and how much it was emphasized.

It still comes down to means, for me at least. If RFG walked away, there would be evidence. If that evidence is present, He walked; If there isn't evidence, he didn't,

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 04:08 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
I have no doubt that they are part of the same media market, but I've tried to look at where the story would primarily covered.

It still comes down to means, for me at least. If RFG walked away, there would be evidence. If that evidence is present, He walked; If there isn't evidence, he didn't, [/*]It's well-established that it's part of the same media market, but a city of Cleveland park is in the town, JJ. As Casey Kasem once said, "Ponderous, man... ponderous.".

Of course walkaway comes down to means. We've been looking for that since Day 1. Money and transportation being high on that list. Nothing has been ruled out, just like nothing has been ruled in. I don't think that's even up for debate.

Serendipitous1

02-27-2008, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by tonyGricar
I don't know if I'd use the term "some", or even "individual", in that context. There's no reason to completely discount the theory, and since the book reporting is the news of the day, it stands to reason to be the topic of the day.

Btw, we're digging around to see if anyone knew of Ray reading the book. It can be difficult to readily access relevant parties. Retired state police Cpl. John Skerchock: “Ray definitely was in possession of that book.”

http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/story/429569.html

Cinderella

02-27-2008, 11:02 AM

Originally posted by logicworks
How did Ms. West FINALLY come to hear of RG's disappearance, and why didn't she contact police? How did she know where to contact PF? What years did the author attend PSU?

"West, upon recently hearing of Gricar’s disappearance, contacted his former prosecutor’s girlfriend to point out what West said are similarities between her fictional work and the real missing person case" [/*]

Isn't it funny how PF is still in control. I agree with you Logic, why call PF. Ray wasn't married to PF at the time. Why not call LE. Then again it is wise to take the heat off of someone and put it on someone else. Wonder what her next move will be?

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 11:09 AM

Originally posted by logicworks
How did Ms. West FINALLY come to hear of RG's disappearance, and why didn't she contact police? How did she know where to contact PF? What years did the author attend PSU?

First, she didn't attend Penn State; she worked there for 14 years. She re-met her then (possibly current) husband at a reunion in 1985 and was out of the area when the book was published. Parts were written in 1989, as there is a reference to the Berlin Wall coming down. (I'm either brilliant, or I read the author's blurb).

Second, as noted, the alumni directory is a good source; I would suspect that would be the right way. Conversely, Ms. West could have simply called the County Courthouse.

Third, there are Internet sources where Ms. West could find out this case, perhaps even those that are as curmudgeonly as this one. :)

Not directed at LW, but I prefer Wagner to Mahler. :)

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 11:14 AM

Originally posted by Cinderella

Isn't it funny how PF is still in control. I agree with you Logic, why call PF. Ray wasn't married to PF at the time. Why not call LE. Then again it is wise to take the heat off of someone and put it on someone else. Wonder what her next move will be? [/*]

It would be really funny if PEF could manipulate the actions of an author in RI, or a retired PSP Corporal.

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by logicworks

There hasn't been anything out in the news in two years, and all of a sudden, out of the clear blue sky, someone in Greenwich, RI, hears of RG's disappearance. How 'fortuitous'!!

If I was an author who researched with RG, and I 'happened' across the news and saw similarities, there would be NO question whatsoever, the very FIRST place, and ONLY place I would go with it would to LE.

You've noted it yourself. There was a change in personnel handling this case. That has been the big difference. Obviously Detective Rickard was informed and read the book. I'm not entirely sure that we could have expected that from DZ.

Now I really doubt if an author living out of state or a retired PSP corporal are somehow being manipulated by PEF.

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 12:40 PM

Originally posted by logicworks

Wouldn't take much.
Just a 'point' toward the book.
What is so different about this than the 'point down route 192', but NOT to Lewisburg, and 'point toward the closet' but NOT to the river?
Goal........enhance the runaway theory.
If he ran away, where is the evidence?
JMO [/*]

A lot harder:

1. She'd have to know than obscure book existed.

2. She'd have to know that the author had gone to RFG for help researching it, a decade before being involved with him.

3. She'd then have to know that her borrowed the book about 14-15 years before.

4. Then she'd have to hope that someone will make a connection.

Oh, yes, maybe, she can call up the author (who isn't in the alumni directory, has a different last name, and lives in a different section of the country than she did when the book was published). She might be able to contact old professors, or someone that kept in touch with a thesis editor and get her to make the connection. (Had I read it without knowing the context, I wouldn't have seen the link, but I'm not too imaginative.)

Oh, I forgot, the author contacted PEF.

sherrijean981

02-27-2008, 12:41 PM

What got me thinking from the comments on the CDT site this morning, had to do with RG owning property. He was married to BG and EG and in both marriages, homes were owned with RG.

What happened after that point (or was it due to those divorces) that RG no longer wanted anything in his name?

Cinderella

02-27-2008, 01:29 PM

I wonder what the authors story is about this? Did someone call her and tell her the Ray disappeared? One of the first sights that comes up is the Ray Gricar site on the internet. Why call PF. I am not buying this story at all. Someone set it up, wonder who? I think that Pete should do an interview of Ms. West and find out how she heard about this case now. So it Ray did read a copy of it, so what. People are getting pretty desperate.

Yeah Ray is going to walkaway and make sure that his prints aren't in the Mini. LMAO

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 01:33 PM

Originally posted by logicworks
Now, how exactly DID the author find out about the disappearance, and why exactly did the author NOT contact LE?
JMO [/*]IIRC, the author found out about Ray missing after talking with another former local. She then began researching Ray's disappearance, online, and that's when she drew parallels (or not-so-parallels) between her book and the case.

Logic, as some here can attest, not everyone goes to the police. Do you have any idea how often that's happened in this case? I'm sure there was some hesitance because of the elastic nature of the book and it's "connection". I've received a multitude of similar contacts from people before they went to LE. How it's shocking that she would contact her to see if she knew if Ray had it, or read it, is beyond me I guess. Now, someone who claims they saw Ray, and could alter a timeline but are not interested in reporting it to the police? That's shocking, but apparently less salacious with regards to these PF conspiracy theories?

Unless something else comes up, which I don't foresee, my guess is you'll hear nothing about 20/20 by the end of this week. Take the media coverage that it's getting, and be glad there's some attention still being paid. This is what we've taken from it. If more comes up, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

Cinderella

02-27-2008, 01:36 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

SNIP
______________________

(I'm either brilliant, or I read the author's blurb).

______________________
SNIP

Yes, J. J. I think that you think that you are brilliant, but there is one problem to that.

Mark me down as being cryptic today. :biggrin:

I bet that you even researched until you found the book, right.

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by logicworks

If RG had a research file on it, all of it could have been in there INCLUDING the borrowed book, with someone else's name on the sleeve showing it was borrowed. Do you KNOW for a fact the book was returned, and if so, when? Pet peeve of most book lenders is they never get the book back.

What would make you thing that RFG would have a research file on Ms. West's book? The main file on the Aardsma case was with the PSP as of 1999 (and they were not showing it).

No, I don't know for a fact that it was returned but I do know that it wasn't in RFG's things. If it was PEF, why not make reference to it much sooner; why not leave it there it could be found?

Further, how would PEF know that a retired PSP trooper would read the story and speak to the BPD a day later? The guy who actually lent out the book is dead.

Now, how exactly DID the author find out about the disappearance, and why exactly did the author NOT contact LE?

Judging from the distance, probably the Internet and we don't know if she didn't attempt to contact LE. This lead is a bit more solid today than it was yesterday, but I was very skeptical of it (and still am far from convinced). I could see anyone not paying any attention to it.

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 01:45 PM

Originally posted by Cinderella
[QUOTE]Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

SNIP
______________________

(I'm either brilliant, or I read the author's blurb).

______________________
SNIP

Yes, J. J. I think that you think that you are brilliant, but there is one problem to that.

Mark me down as being cryptic today. :biggrin:

I bet that you even researched until you found the book, right. [/*]

Cind, I have a copy of 20/20 Vision. I'm not brilliant; I just read the author's blurb. It really wasn't too difficult to go onto Amazon and order the right book.

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 01:55 PM

Much like West's diversion to fiction, I'm almost ready to veer from a book about this case to another:

The Palpability of Histrionics: An Online Community Tome

I already have someone in mind to write the forward.

Cinderella

02-27-2008, 01:55 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

Cind, I have a copy of 20/20 Vision. I'm not brilliant; I just read the author's blurb. It really wasn't too difficult to go onto Amazon and order the right book. [/*]

You do do book reivews on Amazon.com don't you? So it wouldn't be hard for you at all to come up with the book.

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 02:09 PM

Btw, I do think that a better title for PB's column today should have been: "Ex-officer sure Gricar possessed novel"

Cinderella

02-27-2008, 02:18 PM

I have lots of books that I haven't read.

Chump#7

02-27-2008, 02:37 PM

Originally posted by tonyGricar
Btw, I do think that a better title for PB's column today should have been: "Ex-officer sure Gricar possessed novel" [/*]

Rather than read ? Correct?

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 02:49 PM

Originally posted by Chump#7
Rather than read ? Correct? [/*]Correct.

One who might actually know if he read it can be very difficult to get ahold of.

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by Cinderella

You do do book reivews on Amazon.com don't you? So it wouldn't be hard for you at all to come up with the book. [/*]

Singular, I've written one review, IIRC. It isn't exactly hard to type in the title/author and look for the result.

TG, it should be possible to check with others in the household at the time and see if he actually read it.

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 04:31 PM

I think one of sadder things I've seen is that the new comments in the press have not generated new comments on the State College board. :(

Unfortunately, we seem to be the only ones interested. :(

I wish there was a "whaa!" emoticon.

tonyGricar

02-27-2008, 04:48 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
TG, it should be possible to check with others in the household at the time and see if he actually read it. [/*]I was alluding to that, but "possible" can often be easier in theory than practice. On a related note, Lara has no recollection of the book.

J. J. in Phila

02-27-2008, 09:08 PM

I was thinking more of BG. LG would have been about 10-11 when it was published.

gstickley

02-28-2008, 12:02 AM

Excellent post, Logicworks, excellent post.

J. J. in Phila

02-28-2008, 12:37 AM

First, the lack of readable fingerprints doesn't point to foul play; it doesn't point away from foul play either. Somebody left the prints in the car, but they couldn't be read. We can't say who the last person was who drove the Mini.

Second, since the drive was found, we had additional information.

1. Fenton seeing RFG in a different car at 3:00 PM on 4/15, RFG behaving oddly for a month before he disappeared, including the Spotts comment. Neither of those points to foul play. That came out in May of 2006.

2. Wiley being mentioned around the office and RFG being distraught. That came from JKA's Google pages in July of 2007.

3. Wiley again and 20/20 Vision. The latter I don't find compelling enough to move my numbers, but, I've got to admit it is strange, especially since we now know RFG had a copy of the book. (My first thought was of the novella Futility: Wreck of the Titan. If you are not familiar with it, Google it.)

Now, I've very happy that LE is being more open, and that the "mistatements" have been corrected. I don't know why you are complaining about it.

You seem to be saying that people should only be looking for information, discussing things, only if it supports your theory. You've been the one saying that you want every stone turned over. There is no telling what they'll find.

You also now seem to be coming up with a conspiracy theory that involves me, an author in RI, PB, Detective Rickard, and a retired PSP trooper (at least three of those people I never heard of a fortnight ago). To do what?

I should remind you that the AG declined to take over the case; both the AG and the Centre County DA (current and acting) has declined to call a grand jury (something I've supported and you've opposed).

I'm overjoyed that Rickard and Weaver are being more open. Continue, please! :)

J. J. in Phila

02-28-2008, 01:14 AM

Let's see, a few days ago, you were complaining:

Originally posted by gstickley

Golly gee, Logicworks. Don't you know that someone reportedly living in Phila. would have a much better understanding of 'local dynamics' than someone who lives there, works there, talks to locals there, is there every day, has been there for years, has family friends there, & on & on & on????????????????????????????

:biggrin: [/*]

Now you are agreeing with LW that I'm too accurate.

BTW: The CDT should be thankful that I don't work for them; had it been my decision I would have told PB to kill the 20/20 Vision story. :) I do love irony. Journalism is not my forte.

J. J. in Phila

02-28-2008, 03:03 PM

Apparently, RFG read it.

First, look at the second paragraph. “I can confirm that Ray Gricar read that book,” said retired state police Cpl. John Skerchock. Later on in the report, I wrote about the retired corporal talking about his former colleague — now deceased — and how he loaned the book to Gricar. Skerchock said his partner told him he and Gricar talked about the book and the missing prosecutor's take on it. "Skerchock said the Aardsma lead investigator talked with Gricar about West’s book." He told me he is sure Gricar read it.
Pete Bosak 2/28/08

What that means, is it just a giant coincidence, I don't know.

Serendipitous1

02-28-2008, 06:38 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila <Snips>
Apparently, RFG read it.
What that means, is it just a giant coincidence, I don't know. I do not see how to pursue its meaning...except maybe by finding the copy of the book given to RG. Seems like he would have had to have kept the book if it (and the Wiley stuff) was to play some part a dozen or more years later. LE apparently searched for the book among his belongings, but came up empty.

Lots of paperbacks in the SoS though...wonder if anyone searched for it there. MOO

Cinderella

02-28-2008, 06:47 PM

Even though someone may have a book, who really knows if Ray read the book or not.

To me taking a murder and making it Sci. Fiction is something else. I wonder if Ray knew in advance how the writer was going to write the story. To me at any rate, I would be disagreeing with someone turning a murder in Sci. Fi.

Even if he did so what. I read Helter Skelter, but I didn't go on a rampage and kill people. hammer

I would think that just wanting to disappear would be the last reason that Ray disappeared. He would not have left his community down.

I am sure that this story really takes the heat off of someone if Ray was murdered.

J. J. in Phila

02-28-2008, 07:49 PM

Originally posted by Serendipitous1
I do not see how to pursue its meaning...except maybe by finding the copy of the book given to RG. Seems like he would have had to have kept the book if it (and the Wiley stuff) was to play some part a dozen or more years later. LE apparently searched for the book among his belongings, but came up empty.

Lots of paperbacks in the SoS though...wonder if anyone searched for it there. MOO [/*]

After nearly three years, I doubt that the addition or subtraction on one thin paperback could be determined.

Assuming that this is not a coincidence (and I'm not prepared to make that assumption), we have to ask why?

Whomever (not necessarily RFG) set it up this was trying to send someone a message. Let me continue to speculate:

1. It is a message from a killer that he's committed a perfect crime. That would assume:

i. The killer knew about a then 15 year old book.

ii. The killer knew that RFG had helped with the research (I did multiple searches to see it there was a link and the closest was a post from Day2Day).

iii. The killer knew that RFG had access to the book.

iv. The killer knew that someone would eventually make a connection (which looks like it would be limited to investigators in th Aardsma case and Ms. West). On top of that, a Kennedy half dollar, or a gummy bear would have made better clues.

2. It's a very clever form of suicide note from RFG. The detective in the book seems to contemplate that and speaks of getting his "house in order." A bodiless suicide presents problems.

3. As the plot involves a faked death and disappearance, it's a message that RFG did that. Again, to whom? PEF probably wasn't familiar with the book or with Ms. West and I doubt this would have been dinner table conversation. Sloane didn't join the office until 2-3 years after the book was published. Lara (10-12 when it was published) and I'd guess Tony hadn't heard of it before last week.

If someone was sending a message, who sent it, who was sent to, and what does it mean (which was my experiment of the other thread)?

My only guess is that unless a killer was gigantically familiar with RFG's comings and goings in 1985-90, it wasn't a killer.

It could be a coincidence as well. I'm still undecided.

Cinderella

02-28-2008, 08:02 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

After nearly three years, I doubt that the addition or subtraction on one thin paperback could be determined.

Assuming that this is not a coincidence (and I'm not prepared to make that assumption), we have to ask why?

Whomever (not necessarily RFG) set it up this was trying to send someone a message. Let me continue to speculate:

1. It is a message from a killer that he's committed a perfect crime. That would assume:

i. The killer knew about a then 15 year old book.

ii. The killer knew that RFG had helped with the research (I did multiple searches to see it there was a link and the closest was a post from Day2Day).

iii. The killer knew that RFG had access to the book.

iv. The killer knew that someone would eventually make a connection (which looks like it would be limited to investigators in th Aardsma case and Ms. West). On top of that, a Kennedy half dollar, or a gummy bear would have made better clues.

2. It's a very clever form of suicide note from RFG. The detective in the book seems to contemplate that and speaks of getting his "house in order." A bodiless suicide presents problems.

3. As the plot involves a faked death and disappearance, it's a message that RFG did that. Again, to whom? PEF probably wasn't familiar with the book or with Ms. West and I doubt this would have been dinner table conversation. Sloane didn't join the office until 2-3 years after the book was published. Lara (10-12 when it was published) and I'd guess Tony hadn't heard of it before last week.

If someone was sending a message, who sent it, who was sent to, and what does it mean (which was my experiment of the other thread)?

My only guess is that unless a killer was gigantically familiar with RFG's comings and goings in 1985-90, it wasn't a killer.

It could be a coincidence as well. I'm still undecided. [/*]

That is a bunch of Hogwash. Are you next going to tell us who the murderer was. As the murderer must be brilliant. :rolleyes:

J. J. in Phila

02-28-2008, 08:45 PM

Originally posted by Cinderella

That is a bunch of Hogwash. Are you next going to tell us who the murderer was. As the murderer must be brilliant. :rolleyes: [/*]

No, but if this was a message, there are exceedingly few people who would get it. They have to know the book exists and that there was a connection between RFG and West, involving the book.

If I read the novel, and didn't know that that the RFG was involved with the research, I wouldn't have seen a connection. Only knowing that RFG had been involved in the research and that he had read it would I see a connection, such as it is.

Now, I would have seen the connection between the Aardsma murder and the book.

Serendipitous1

02-28-2008, 08:52 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila <Snip>
After nearly three years, I doubt that the addition or subtraction on one thin paperback could be determined. Assuming that this is not a coincidence (and I'm not prepared to make that assumption), we have to ask why? I am not advocating anything either...except that, if one wanted to follow this potential 'clue' (West's book), one would want to find that copy (as LE has tried to do). RG possibly sighted in the SoS. Lots of paperback books in the SoS. MOO

Cloudbuster

02-28-2008, 08:53 PM

Examine and look toward a male ADA.

J. J. in Phila

02-28-2008, 09:38 PM

Originally posted by Serendipitous1
I am not advocating anything either...except that, if one wanted to follow this potential 'clue' (West's book), one would want to find that copy (as LE has tried to do). RG possibly sighted in the SoS. Lots of paperback books in the SoS. MOO [/*]

If checked on 4/16-4/18/05, yes. Nobody saw a connection then. Look, if I had read the book prior to RFG's disappearance, I wouldn't have made the connection. It's only after knowing RFG helped out with the research and read 20/20 Vision does it have any potential relevance; the number of people who knew that was probably under 10. West didn't even know.

LW, it seems clear that RFG did have and read the book, at least as clear as can be 18 years after the fact. If we are looking at something long term, 1990-95 could become very important.

J. J. in Phila

02-28-2008, 10:52 PM

Originally posted by logicworks

If he read the book, returned it, never had a file or a copy after that, that proves nothing.
If instead he had a file, a copy of the book, discussed it with the second wife, and she knew he would have moved it and would not have tossed it, then that fact may hold importance.

I've never said that it proves anything, except that he read it.

The second wife hasn't exactly been forthcoming with information.

The question of importance really depends upon what other evidence there is. If this was murder, it drastically reduces the pool of suspects. If this was walkaway or suicide, it might add to motivation. Does it indicate anything, in and of itself? No.

J. J. in Phila

02-29-2008, 10:00 AM

Originally posted by logicworks

IMO, the question of importance is why isn't anyone able to pull the evidence together enough to determine what happened?

In my opinion, the major question is what happened, not who the prior administration in the BPD conducted the administration.

We have been told the PSP-CIA looked through everything, but IIRC, it took months for Z to get the evidence 'ready' for them to look at, but that was done with hand-tied, no testing permitted, no interviews, and no report in the end, other than every stone overturned. More of the 'clutching' to keep the case in Bellefonte. Why does the case NEED to remain in the locals hands only?
JMO [/*]

I'm not seeing anyone in the BPD "clutching" to keep the case there. I am seeing a lack of other agencies willing to take the case. It's been pointed out again and again that both the Centre County DA and the PA AG can form a grand jury to investigate this case. They don't need the BPD's permission, but they have declined.

It should also be pointed out that neither candidate for DA during the last election suggested that they would call one, if elected and the case went unresolved (though both linked their websites to the family website) or even raise the possibility that they would consider it.

Now, we have a BPD under new leadership that is more open with the press and willing to look at evidence. I say great!

gstickley

02-29-2008, 10:32 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

Now, we have a BPD under new leadership that is more open with the press and willing to look at evidence. I say great! [/*]

What 'new leadership' in the BPD? I thought it was Same Chief, New Indian. Still doesn't explain why the Same Chief allowed the Old Indian to apparently 'screw up' so much; ie: fingerprints, lack of interviewing neighbors &/or co-workers, etc., or why the Same Chief allowed the investigation to 'die' for so long. Did Old Indian 'control' the department &, now that he's gone, it's okay to do something??? Weird. Who was actually in charge of BPD? Same Chief or Old Indian?

J. J. in Phila

02-29-2008, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by logicworks

I have read where the AG's office stated as much, while at the same time failing to mention that MM was 'one of their own' first, nor did they mention not wanting to further muddy the press with any further investigation.

Sorry, but what does MM's former employment status have to do with it.

Name one other organization who has stepped up to the podium and stated 'we will not investigate the Ray Gricar case'.

As a practical matter there are no other organizations with jurisdiction. No federal crime has been committed or even suspected. PSP cannot just march in and assume jurisdiction.

The BPD is NOT under new leadership..
The chief has been there as long as the new DA. THEY are the leaders. The officers do their bidding.
Three year mark is right around the corner.......
JMO [/*]

:rolleyes: The same people that were there, in this investigation, DZ and Weaver, are gone. New evidence is surfacing. Detective Rickard is being more open and more aggressive. And LW is complaining.

gstickley

02-29-2008, 06:33 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

The same people that were there, in this investigation, DZ and Weaver, are gone. New evidence is surfacing. Detective Rickard is being more open and more aggressive. And LW is complaining. [/*]

When did Weaver leave? And who took his place as Chief?

J. J. in Phila

02-29-2008, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by gstickley

When did Weaver leave? And who took his place as Chief? [/*]

Sorry, I mistyped. Dixon left.

gstickley

02-29-2008, 09:04 PM

Yes, Dixon did leave . . . a long time ago.

And Weaver is not new; he's been around a long time, as this article from Crime & Justice was dated 01/11/06. As a matter of fact, Weaver's been chief 2 yrs., 2 mos.

(Also interesting is M. Madeira's comments on seeking assistance from the AG's office.)

Madeira praises Gricar probe

By Pete Bosak, Centre Daily
BELLEFONTE -- Centre County's new district attorney and Bellefonte's new police chief agreed Tuesday that "no stone has been left unturned" and that all leads in the disappearance of former District Attorney Ray Gricar have been fully investigated.

District Attorney Michael Madeira and Police Chief Shawn Weaver came to that conclusion after talking with investigators in the case during a 90-minute meeting at the county courthouse.

Madeira hoped that he and Weaver, with fresh perspectives, could perhaps come up with some new angle to pursue after meeting with investigators, including Bellefonte police officer Darrel Zaccagni and state troopers. But after the meeting, both men said the investigation into Gricar's April 15 disappearance has been exhaustive and thorough.

"From my overview of what I've seen from them today, they have done a great job looking into all information that has come in and exhausting every lead," Madeira said. "I will say I was impressed by the level of the work that was done. They have left no stone unturned."

Madeira also said Tuesday he would not formally seek assistance from the state Attorney General's Office, saying there is nothing that agency can offer that has not already been brought to bear in the search.

Weaver, who was sworn in less than two weeks ago, also praised the efforts of local, state and even federal authorities.

"I'm very pleased and proud of the hard work all of the agencies involved have put into this," Weaver said. "All the I's are dotted and T's crossed. I am totally and fully satisfied that every lead and every tip that we received has been fully investigated."

J. J. in Phila

02-29-2008, 09:30 PM

And Weaver was not the Chief at the time of the initial investigation.

gstickley

02-29-2008, 09:40 PM

And . . . what has Weaver done in the past 2 yrs., 2 mos.?
Did he correct any of DZ's "mistakements"?
Did he even know of DZ's "mistakements"?
If he didn't, why wouldn't he know of DZ's "mistakements"?

J. J. in Phila

02-29-2008, 11:11 PM

Originally posted by logicworks
QUOTE]Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

It's a neat little package, all tied up in political 'strings'.......no one else can open it up and the one who can, refuses.

What "political strings?"

What exactly is the connection between Dixon's leaving 2.5 years ago and new information coming out now? Are you implying that Dixon somehow remotely controlled both Z and the investigation from afar? Sounds like the next Sci-FI book in the making.

We've seen more openness. We've seen the two people that were involved in the initial investigation not there. I'm not seeing this as bad.

The new information does nothing to change the status of this case. Unfortunately it appears to be in a manner intentionally focused toward runaway, and the more it's pushed, the less people believe it.

You should follow the evidence, not what you believe is being "pushed." LE and the press seem to be doing that. If that evidence doesn't go the way you want it go, too bad. If that evidence doesn't go the way I want it to go, too bad (I actually just want it resolved).

New evidence.........No prints in the car were readable, meaning there were smeared prints but no one can say whether they were intentionally smeared plus, we have an author with clues that point toward 'outer space'.

New evidence is that we can't say who drove the Mini last. We've had additional new evidence.

I'm going to ask you this, if all the evidence had come out in the first week, what would the public perception? Murder?

Forgetting 20/20 and Wiley, let's look at has come out either new or had become more publicized.

1. RFG was acting differently, and saying "I'm not going to be here," when referring to October.

2. CF sees RFG in a different car on 4/15, in Bellefonte.

3. A book is placed on Smith's desk detailing how to replace a DA.

4. A "mystery woman" being seen with RFG in Lewisburg.

If these things were released in late April 2005, would anyone think this was a murder? Would that be the impression left?

These four items were known by May 1, 2005, and were not released.

While none of those things prove that RFG walked away, they would certainly create the impression that he did. Do you think that public interest in RFG (in what is still a potential murder case) could have been sustained, if that was released in late April 2005?

When exactly do we get down to the evidence; ya know.....the phone log and the dog tracking report and the 'sighting' list?

Hopefully redacted lists will be available at some point as will more on the dog scenting.

The current push toward runaway lacks evidence, and until there is evidence that proves it, I will continue to complain.
JMO [/*]

The evidence that there has been may "push towards walkaway" in your mind, but none of it is conclusive or a revelation. At best, what has been released deal with motivation; I've been saying for a while, motivation is not of great importance, look at means.

J. J. in Phila

03-01-2008, 12:07 AM

Originally posted by logicworks

Pete and re-peat.

1. PO'd and on vacation.

No evidence of the first, possible on the second.

2. Tell us what the Judge and video said about what she said.

Judge said "maybe," video said not in range.

3. Probably detailed about a thousand other things too.

Possibly, but still leaves that impression.

4. Name your credible witnesses to this?

JMO [/*]

We seem to have several.

Again, you misunderstand. What would have been the public relations effect had all of that been released in the fortnight after RFG disappeared? It was all known at that point.

No doubt the theory would have been that RFG walked away, possibly with some other woman (I frankly don't think much of 'He ran off with another woman' scenario.).

I can understand why that information wasn't released, simply because it would to that potentially wrong conclusion on the part of the public. Any member of the public that might have important information and not report it because he thinks **Oh Ray Gricar ran off; I'm not going to spoil his new life!**

sherrijean981

03-01-2008, 12:49 AM

As Ms Spotts said, why say anything if they aren't going to believe someone who was certain she (CF) saw him in the parking lot and it was not in the time line by LE.

How many people have actually said things or reported things and we haven't heard about it and it wasn't investigated? If DZ never questioned friends and co-worker's, how many other's had he turned his back on?

I hope Det. Rickard does start asking questions and looks at calls made, that could be on a list somewhere in his boxes of goodies on the case. I would love to be one of the pairs of eyes helping look at that stuff.
JMO

J. J. in Phila

03-01-2008, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by logicworks

I think you underestimate the ability of the Centre County residents, and especially those who knew the DA, of being capable of seeing beyond a 'Z fantasy'.

First, this wasn't exactly a "Z fantasy," since it was witness reports, not DZ's commentary. Second, since the evidence was not released, it was not a public "Z fantasy." Third, judging from the comments on the various message boards, including this one, walkaway was on the minds of a lot of people very early on.

If LE had come out with that information early on, Mr. Smith would have had some big pressure put on him to move the case up immediately to a 'force' that would get at more than the 'Z fantasy' removing it from BPD's hands before the new DA stepped in.

This could be called LW's fantasy. :rolleyes:

We may be rural but don't underestimate our ability to see through evidence that wasn't and still isn't.

I don't doubt the average persons ability to judge evidence, just yours. You have to remember that DZ was neither disseminating this evidence nor creating it. He was, if anything, suppressing it and discounting it.

gstickley

03-01-2008, 03:38 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

(snip)

I don't doubt the average persons ability to judge evidence, just yours. You have to remember that DZ was neither disseminating this evidence nor creating it. He was, if anything, suppressing it and discounting it. [/*]

Since DZ was not the Chief of Police, on whose authority did he 'supress & discount' evidence? Did he not have a supervisor with whom to report??

J. J. in Phila

03-01-2008, 04:12 PM

Originally posted by gstickley

Since DZ was not the Chief of Police, on whose authority did he 'supress & discount' evidence? Did he not have a supervisor with whom to report?? [/*]

I am reasonably certain that an investigating officer does not have to stop and wait for the Chief to make the decision. I'd also strongly suspect that a lot of information that could have led the average observer to focus more on walkaway was not released in the first weeks (and that is a good thing). I'm still at 57% percent that it was something other than walkaway.

I'm very happy that Detective Rickard (MR) is on this now.

Serendipitous1

03-01-2008, 05:07 PM

I think SW absolutely shut DZ down...but also that, but for SW, we would not be hearing from MR now. I would like to hear from TT. I would like to hear from a lot of people. But, thinking about the recent revelations, all we have heard so far is one correction to an earlier 'mistakement', and speculation about walk-away...which is the one theory (no crime) for which clues can be divulged without jeopardizing 'the investigation'. MOO

As an aside: apparently the usage of 'fortnight' is making a come-back of sorts...and rare Marwari horses from the desert region (do not tell logicworks) . . . :eek:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/08/AR2006090800610.html

gstickley

03-01-2008, 05:22 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

I am reasonably certain that an investigating officer does not have to stop and wait for the Chief to make the decision. I'd also strongly suspect that a lot of information that could have led the average observer to focus more on walkaway was not released in the first weeks (and that is a good thing). I'm still at 57% percent that it was something other than walkaway.

I'm very happy that Detective Rickard (MR) is on this now. [/*]

And I am reasonably certain that an investigating officer should be in contact & reporting to his Chief or supervisor. And if said investigating officer is not, then the Chief or supervisor is pretty lax in his supervisory position. And if said Chief or supervisor stands by & allows said investigating officer to make such 'mistakements', such as those being alleged these days, then said Chief or supervisor would be as bad as said investigating officer.

Further,since the 'information' was not released in the first weeks, how does one know what the 'average observer' might 'focus' on. Since the first few weeks were spent with 'suicide' in being 'pushed', was that what the 'average observer' was supposed to 'focus' on? In fact, it was a year after the disappearance occurred that 'walkaway' was allowed to go to the forefront of 'focus'.

At what point is the 'average observer' permitted to 'focus' on foul play?

Was it not announced approx. a year ago that Mr. Rickard would be the "investigating office" upon DZ's move to the school system? Was it also not announced at that time that Mr. Rickard had been involved in the investigation since the beginning? If so, why is Mr. Rickard just now coming forth with 'information' seemingly to contradict certain comments made by DZ? One would think, if Mr. Rickard were involved from the beginning, he might have known, or Chief Weaver certainly should have known, that perhaps DZ didn't have his act together or that 'mistakements' had been made. Why has it taken this long for the "mistakements" to be made public?

gstickley

03-01-2008, 05:33 PM

LW, your post reminded me of questions I've had for a long time.

Does anyone know why Sloane, Smith, Arnold, or any of the ADA's weren't as newsworthy as the defense attorneys, such as Bryant, Young, etc.? I wasn't aware of the case in 2005, in fact, never heard anything about it, but I have never seen any videos, or comments made, about the ADA's 'going National'. There didn't appear to be any bad feelings from Arnold, according to her Magnificent Manuscript, and Sloane has been described as his best friend, but does anyone know of any other 'problem' there may have been in the DA's office? Just seems strange they all wouldn't have been 'out there' in the media quite a bit.

Serendipitous1

03-01-2008, 05:41 PM

Correcting 'mistakements' already 'out there' is one thing...and providing new information which might point toward a crime is quite another. I doubt we shall ever hear of the latter unless and until there would be an indictment...hence the seemingly imbalanced reporting. MOO

J. J. in Phila

03-01-2008, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by logicworks

What do you mean the runaway theory was not pushed by Z?
Z pushed the runaway theory from the git-go, moving him from Wilkes-Barre to Michigan, across the USA to up into Canada.

“It’s 10 miles from the Canadian border,” Zaccagni said, adding that a passport is not needed to cross into Canada. “And we know Ray likes cars. Maybe he went to Detroit to be around cars.”

Oh, you mean he didn't board a plain after being in Oprah audience or catch the Astros playing in Texas? :rolleyes:

Investigating a sighting isn't pushing anything, but I'm glad to know that [iyou don't think[/i] sightings should be investigated.

Look at the public relations that were offered in this case early on, particularly on national TV news.

I have, a "split bar" certainly isn't screaming one direction or another.

Outside of family and LE, who was called upon to offer up insights into RG, the DA? Those who came on the national news were all people directly related to PF, from Young to Bryant to Clay to Z. She was in charge of what went out nationally.

Where do you get this stuff? The family, including PEF, wasn't initially talking. Then Bryant, who wasn't close, and that changed.

Pray tell, how are these people "related" to PEF?

Young is called a colleague of his for 20 years. Why wasn't it KA instead, who worked with him nearly 20 years?

Because, she doesn't speak to the press.

Clay leads right into runaway on the CNN news, 8/2/05.
"You know, Ray, you know, he was set to go into work that day on April 15th, tax day for us. And he decided he was going to drive to Lewisburg. He called Patty, told her that he was going to be late, and that's the last we heard from him, right around 11:15 on April 15th.

He made it to Lewisburg, presumably. His car was found there. And there was an eyewitness that said they saw him the next morning. So you know, the question is, what did he do the night of April 15th? They couldn't get ahold of him on his cell phone. He had turned it off. And Patty says -- here's some other interesting things. Patty says there's nothing missing from the house. He didn't take anything with him, but he did take that laptop. And she says that he really wasn't a lap-top guy and found it unique or strange that he would have taken it with him. And you know, here we find that it was discarded in the river near where that car was."

This wasn't right away and it doesn't point to walkaway.

It is obvious who was in charge of public relations in this case.
Just another ring in the three-ring circus.

The only circus I've seen is the one created by conspiracy theorist trying to read now, what is it, 10-20 people into this, including PEF, DZ, Dixon, PB, Clay (and I don't know that is), Bryant, J. J., Pamela West, Skerchock, the reporter at WJAC and Young. BTW, those are the people that I think you've intimated were involved in last week.

I'm waiting for the part about the Jesuits, Freemasons, Illuminati, Bindlesburg Goup, and (for Cind) Bohemian Grove. :rolleyes:

Serendipitous1

03-01-2008, 05:52 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila <Snip>
I'm waiting for the part about the Jesuits, Freemasons, Illuminati, Bindlesburg Goup, and (for Cind) Bohemian Grove. :rolleyes: You forgot Nostradamus' quatrains. . . .:D

J. J. in Phila

03-01-2008, 05:58 PM

Originally posted by Serendipitous1
You forgot Nostradamus' quatrains. . . .:D [/*]

I'd really like to see the organizational chart on all this. ;)

Serendipitous1

03-01-2008, 06:06 PM

Me too...lol. But it is bath night...and that is Bingo night at the home. Catch you 'youngins' later. OMG . . .:tongue:

J. J. in Phila

03-01-2008, 11:02 PM

Sloane is talking to the press, Smith has talking to the press, but Arnold isn't talking to anyone, including the family.

I think a good question is, why isn't Arnold talking?

J. J. in Phila

03-01-2008, 11:31 PM

I went back and read the first 30 days of posts from this site. Walkaway was considered from that time (as was RFG doing something wrong and fleeing) and it jumped up with the Wiles-Barre witnesses. Could you have imagined the effect of the Lewisburg Mystery Woman, and the Fenton sighting on public perception, especially after no body was found.

gstickley

03-01-2008, 11:46 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
Sloane is talking to the press, Smith has talking to the press, but Arnold isn't talking to anyone, including the family.

I think a good question is, why isn't Arnold talking? [/*]

Do you not remember the Magnificent Manuscript? Seems KA talked quite a bit more than the all the others combined.

Did Sloane or Smith appear on National TV, such as Bryant, Young, etc.? If not, why not? One was best friend, the other was apparently second-in-command. (I really don't know; however, I haven't seen or heard of anything in old reports of Dateline, WJAC-TV, Greta, etc.)

gstickley

03-01-2008, 11:49 PM

J. J. in Phila

03-02-2008, 12:17 AM

Originally posted by gstickley

Could you imagine the effect of any Mystery Woman, including the Tyrone Mystery Woman, the gold/tan car, the Fenton sighting on public perception had it been made known at the time it was learned. Do you not think maybe someone, even if it were just one person, might have come forward with pertinent information had they known about the above at the time??? [/*]

Gee, I could have read 20/20 Vision two and half years earlier. :rolleyes:

Publically, everyone would talking about how and why RFG ranoff. LW complains because the headling was possible suicide.

I wouldn't have been asking questions in November 2005 (I think that was my first one on the CDT Forum), if this looked liked a guy who "ran off with a mystery woman." I doubt if there would be a CDT Forum if that's what the public thought in April-May of 2005.

Let's see, over the past few months a few posters have complained:

1. That there are are no flyers post and not enough publicity.

2. When RFG is the front page story in the local paper and on local news, the same posters complain that the media is trying to "push" a walk away story.

3. When pointing out LE didn't disclose witnesses that pointed to walkaway, at a time when it would have seriously prejudiced the public to that theory, the same posters complain that LE isn't releasing the information.

I've said this time and again. The reason I'm interested in this case is because of the very real possibility (42% by my account) that a long term public official was murdered. If he wasn't, I stop posting.

J. J. in Phila

03-02-2008, 12:33 AM

Originally posted by gstickley

Do you not remember the Magnificent Manuscript? Seems KA talked quite a bit more than the all the others combined.

No, she actually mentioned me in her Pitiful Pages than she did RFG. JKA spent more time discussing the dynamics of this board than she did Ray Gricar. She has not appeared on TV, never been interviewed by the press, in spite of requests.

Let me put it this way, TG, LG, PEF, have all been interviewed by the press; they have answered questions. JKA has not. JKA has also show an unwillingness to get answers to the points she herself raises. I wonder why?

We also found out that some thinks that she posted were inaccurate. I think that this was by accident, but I'm wondering why LW hasn't written her into Great Gricar Conspiracy!

Did Sloane or Smith appear on National TV, such as Bryant, Young, etc.? If not, why not? One was best friend, the other was apparently second-in-command. (I really don't know; however, I haven't seen or heard of anything in old reports of Dateline, WJAC-TV, Greta, etc.)

I would say that because there is a family spokesman and TV would rather speak to those. I would also note that Smith was not close to RFG.

gstickley

03-02-2008, 12:45 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

No, she actually mentioned me in her Pitiful Pages than she did RFG. JKA spent more time discussing the dynamics of this board than she did Ray Gricar. She has not appeared on TV, never been interviewed by the press, in spite of requests.

Let me put it this way, TG, LG, PEF, have all been interviewed by the press; they have answered questions. JKA has not. JKA has also show an unwillingness to get answers to the points she herself raises. I wonder why?

We also found out that some thinks that she posted were inaccurate. I think that this was by accident, but I'm wondering why LW hasn't written her into Great Gricar Conspiracy!

I would say that because there is a family spokesman and TV would rather speak to those. I would also note that Smith was not close to RFG. [/*]

I'm aware of the fact that TG, LG, PF, were all interviewed by the press & answered questions.

Has Smith (best friend & ADA), Smith (2nd in command), or any other ADA been interviewed & answered questions? In fact, weren't there a couple other ADAs, other than Sloane, Smith, Arnold? Were they interviewed? Has Smith or Sloane (or any of the others ADAs) put up a website ref. Ray Gricar & their knowledge of him? Also, the media didn't seem to have a problem with speaking with Bryant & Young? Where were the ADAs, who worked in the same office with RG?

Which 'thinks' do 'some' think KA posted inaccurately?

gstickley

03-02-2008, 12:58 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
I went back and read the first 30 days of posts from this site. Walkaway was considered from that time (as was RFG doing something wrong and fleeing) and it jumped up with the Wiles-Barre witnesses. Could you have imagined the effect of the Lewisburg Mystery Woman, and the Fenton sighting on public perception, especially after no body was found. [/*]

"Public perception" was the reason??? I don't think so!!!

Taken from Courthouse Steps
"May. 11, 2006

BELLEFONTE -- Previously undisclosed news that missing former District Attorney Ray Gricar may have been seen shopping with an unknown woman the day he disappeared set off a national media firestorm on Wednesday and had investigators scrambling to defend their reasons for not divulging it sooner.

Bellefonte Police Chief Shawn Weaver and the lead investigator on this case, Officer Darrel Zaccagni, said they fielded calls throughout the day Wednesday from national media, including Fox News' Greta Van Susteren. Investigators said they are stunned by the media interest in information they have known since the day after Gricar's April 15, 2005, disappearance.

That's when the owner of a shop in a Lewisburg antiques mall told police he saw Gricar on April 15, walking with and talking to a woman. If that happened, the woman could be the last person to have talked to Gricar.

But police, after speaking with an acquaintance of Gricar who fit the description of the woman and determining it was not her in the antiques mall, did not pursue the lead further. No public appeal was made to find the woman.

Zaccagni said he revealed the information this week to "Dateline NBC" for a story about Gricar it plans to broadcast at 8 p.m. Saturday in the hopes the publicity would help police find the woman, or any other new lead. The mystery woman was described as between 5 feet 8 inches and 5 feet 10 inches tall, dark haired and "good looking," Zaccagni said.

"It all fits very fluently and conveniently together," he said. "In the witness's mind, they knew each other and they had some kind of relationship. But I would argue that we didn't hold this back."

Police defend actions

Law-enforcement officials sought to put a positive spin on the situation Wednesday.

"This is definitely not a new revelation," said Weaver, who took office in January. "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 also revealed Wednesday 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 antiques mall.

"What their relationship is, we don't know," Zaccagni said.

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

For more than a week after Gricar's disappearance, Bellefonte police held almost daily news conferences covered by local and national media. But the mystery woman was never mentioned.

"Hindsight is 20/20," Zaccagni said. "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.

"It just became another Ray sighting that could not be verified," Centre County District Attorney Michael Madeira said. "It was something that was not seized upon at the time by law enforcement or the media because of everything else that was going on at the time."

*****The sighting may have been kept under wraps, in part, Zaccagni said, out of concern for Gricar's family and loved ones should the revelation raise suspicions that 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."

Shocked reaction

The news of the sighting, and the attention it has grabbed, had Gricar's girlfriend, Patty Fornicola, near tears Wednesday. She said she knows the man she planned to spend the rest of her life with did not run off with another woman.

"That is not even a possibility," Fornicola said. "His last words to me in that phone call (on April 15, 2005) was 'I love you.' You don't say 'I love you,' get that same response back and two hours later run off with another woman."

Gricar and the woman were walking through the market, but there was no physical contact between them, the witness reported. 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.

Police aren't even certain the man was Gricar.

While she is of interest, "she is definitely not a suspect," Zaccagni said.

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

"To me, that's an odd little bombshell," he said.

Tony Gricar discounted any notion his uncle could have been seeing the woman spotted with him in the market.

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

Madeira emphasized police were not intentionally holding back information.

"This isn't new," he said. "It is 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 leads."

Cloudbuster

03-02-2008, 01:15 AM

The problem I have with a walk away theory is this: What did he walk away from? The other problem is in leaving a long worked for pension not to mention his collectiables. His daughter. Then you got this problem: No one would ever holds out a secret that long, Im sorry I don't buy into someone in almost 3 years not even hinting they helped him walk off. A secret doesn't always stay a secret. If RG walked away it wasn't by foot. I don't buy it there isn't enough persuading evidence of a walk off. Surely if RG walked away and hid all this so well he surely didn't leave a book on MS desk either, now that's dumb and a dead giveaway. I say look at the ADA relationships as a possible clue might amount. Ray's life was his work and at his work within the COUNTY lies the answer. His hobbies don't seem like they would lead him into any problems but his work could. Ray didn't go to Lewisburg for nothing, and he surly didn't hook up with someone unknown to him. Someone in my opinion knew exactly what they was doing and yet RG had to know them to end up disappeared. I say look at the county and CH for answers. Personally known to the victim.hammer

Cloudbuster

03-02-2008, 01:26 AM

I also forgot to add I don't think Ray was afraid of the drug people and was under no threat cause he stood there and took his last photo after the bust and he looked like fire was in his eyes and you know what? I don't think it was the drug people at all, I think he was miserable with the people he would have to deal with in the system of it all. I think he stumbled on some kind of high level corruption within the county or CH system. He didn't have enough interests for it to be anything else. He spent most his time at the CH even in evenings. I have never read he belonged to any gyms ect., so where would he possibly get into any problems?
JMOO

sherrijean981

03-02-2008, 01:27 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by logicworks

Outside of family and LE, who was called upon to offer up insights into RG, the DA? Those who came on the national news were all people directly related to PF, from Young to Bryant to Clay to Z. She was in charge of what went out nationally.

Quote

That is BS!! Clay happens to be John Clay from WTAJ -TV News, and would have been reporting. Bryant came on and said a lot of nasty things about RG, more a putdown than anything else, and then Young came on and told how she thought of RG, which was a much higher praise than Bryant gave. And DZ was, well, DZ! And where did you ever hear PF was in charge of any interview in Bellefonte, Lewisburg or on national tv?

J. J. in Phila

03-02-2008, 01:29 AM

Originally posted by gstickley

"Public perception" was the reason??? I don't think so!!!

Think again!

By May 15, 2005, we have the sighting in Wilkes-Barre. What were the posters here saying at the time? "Maybe he walked off."

I give the the likelihood of that sighting being generally correct at less than 50%. Strong enough to be possible, but by no means definitive.

That was still enough for numerous posters to raise the walk away theory, even questioning if PEF would know all the suits he owns or if he could have purchased another one.

Note what it says, "The sighting may have been kept under wraps, in part, Zaccagni said, out of concern for Gricar's family and loved ones should the revelation raise suspicions that Gricar was having an affair."

Not only PEF. Why? A very real possibility is that if the public thinks RFG ran off with another woman, nobody will be interested. Big story, middle aged man, unmarried runs off with a younger woman; will that be the "film at Eleven" on WJAC? (An old girlfriend will be LHAO at that comment.) BTW: According to LW, this is part of the "push" to walkaway.

As I've said elsewhere, you seem to want it both ways, if it is reported, it's a "push" to walkaway. If it isn't released, it's hiding the information because of "evil Patty." :rolleyes:

gstickley

03-02-2008, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

(snip)

Note what it says, "The sighting may have been kept under wraps, in part, Zaccagni said, out of concern for Gricar's family and loved ones should the revelation raise suspicions that Gricar was having an affair."

Not only PEF. Why? A very real possibility is that if the public thinks RFG ran off with another woman, nobody will be interested. Big story, middle aged man, unmarried runs off with a younger woman; will that be the "film at Eleven" on WJAC? (An old girlfriend will be LHAO at that comment.) BTW: According to LW, this is part of the "push" to walkaway.

As I've said elsewhere, you seem to want it both ways, if it is reported, it's a "push" to walkaway. If it isn't released, it's hiding the information because of "evil Patty." :rolleyes: [/*]

Ah, JJ, your smoke is getting in my eyes here!!!

I wasn't talking about, didn't mention, PF (evil or sainted) in my post. Your post indicated the information on the MW, gold/tan car, Fenton's sighting were held back because of "public perception" & the thought that this information might cause people to think 'runaway'.

This is a quote by DZ as to why the MW, gold/tan car, Fenton sighting, were not made known: "The sighting may have been kept under wraps, in part, Zaccagni said, out of concern for Gricar's family and loved ones should the revelation raise suspicions that Gricar was having an affair."

My post concerned the fact that, had the information of the MW, the gold/tan car, possibly Fenton's sighting, been made public at the time it was learned, it have been possible someone, even if just one person, might have come forward at that time???
(Gee, I thought I just posted this.)

Are you saying LE was more worried about gossip, what people thought, than they were about giving the public information that might have been used to gain answers?????

Cloudbuster

03-02-2008, 01:56 AM

While Im thinking about it RG wouldn't have ran from PF a small petite woman that's comical to me. He wouldn't need to run from his job, just take a medical leave or use up all your vacation days and sick time. If bad enough retire earlier than planned.
If running for the sake of running and wanted it so discreet why leave a book on Mark Smiths desk, but yet have everything else so well hidden? Makes no sense.
Someone and they know who they are placed that book on Smith's desk. If it was Ray, RG would be more concerned with leaving and why give a crap about placing a book on the desk? Why throw your laptop in the water and bother to take the disk out? Why not just leave it in the case back up in the closet where it was?
Why bother to call PF about the dog? JJ I think your way off on a walk away. If he really wanted to walk away and wanted to be discreet why not just buy a car in cash and go? Someone truly wanting to go don't care about dogs and laptops and a call to let the office know he wouldn't be back. Why bother? You just go and you don't need to work Lewisburg into the equation to do so.
Something more was going on can't you tell?
MOO

J. J. in Phila

03-02-2008, 02:15 AM

Originally posted by gstickley

Ah, JJ, your smoke is getting in my eyes here!!!

No, the light of truth hurts your eyes.

I wasn't talking about, didn't mention, PF (evil or sainted) in my post. Your post indicated the information on the MW, gold/tan car, Fenton's sighting were held back because of "public perception" & the thought that this information might cause people to think 'runaway'.

This is a quote by DZ as to why the MW, gold/tan car, Fenton sighting, were not made known: "The sighting may have been kept under wraps, in part, Zaccagni said, out of concern for Gricar's family and loved ones should the revelation raise suspicions that Gricar was having an affair."

Some of that ties into it, but the "time line" issue also comes into play. Look, this is from a "pretty amazing" guy (according to JKA); to me that evidence is not enough to say that I have firm belief that RFG walked away. You can go back and look at what people were thinking when they heard that two witnesses, who had never met him before, say that they saw him in Wilkes-Barre. There are from posters who follow missing persons cases. The public reaction would have been, RFG walked away

My post concerned the fact that, had the information of the MW, the gold/tan car, possibly Fenton's sighting, been made public at the time it was learned, it have been possible someone, even if just one person, might have come forward at that time???
(Gee, I thought I just posted this.)

Are you saying LE was more worried about gossip, what people thought, than they were about giving the public information that might have been used to gain answers?????

What you don't seem to comprehend is that if all of that was released, a large segment of the public probably would conclude, **RFG walked away, with another woman; we shouldn't care about what happened, because it's his own business.**

Unless LE has really solid proof that RFG really wasn't murdered, they really don't want to create that impression. Why? Because the other alternatives are not really police issues. Unless you are pretty sure that RFG wasn't murdered (and I'm far from it), you don't want the public to reach the conclusion that he wasn't murdered.

J. J. in Phila

03-02-2008, 02:27 AM

Originally posted by Cloudbuster
While Im thinking about it RG wouldn't have ran from PF a small petite woman that's comical to me. He wouldn't need to run from his job, just take a medical leave or use up all your vacation days and sick time. If bad enough retire earlier than planned.
If running for the sake of running and wanted it so discreet why leave a book on Mark Smiths desk, but yet have everything else so well hidden? Makes no sense.

I think that the answer comes from his potential motivation/intent/motive to run away. That is, by far, the least important, and least difficult aspect of this case.

The key question is Did RFG have the means to walk away? If he didn't have the means, even if we found his hypothetical manuscript for "How to Walk Away From Your Live In Ten Easy Steps," then he didn't walk away.

gstickley

03-02-2008, 02:28 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

Unless LE has really solid proof that RFG really wasn't murdered, they really don't want to create that impression. Why? Because the other alternatives are not really police issues. Unless you are pretty sure that RFG wasn't murdered (and I'm far from it), you don't want the public to reach the conclusion that he wasn't murdered. [/*]

JJ, I think you know the way I feel about it. This should have been investigated as "foul play" from Day 1. I don't believe Ray Gricar walked away, and I don't believe Ray Gricar committed suicide. I believe Ray Gricar met with foul play. I also believe that if it had been investigated as "foul play" from the begining, fewer people would have thought foul play. I also believe more information would have been forthcomng. However, when credible a credible person like Ms. Fenton was dissed because 'it doesn't fit the timeline', what was the average citizen to think. Don't you think the average citizen would have noticed had LE actually interviewed people about this case? But, all you have are idiotic statements made by DZ, like the famous "it might just lead to another theory", a statement, I might add, that was never corrected/whatever by a supervisor or anyone else.

J. J. in Phila

03-02-2008, 09:06 AM

Originally posted by gstickley

JJ, I think you know the way I feel about it. This should have been investigated as "foul play" from Day 1. I don't believe Ray Gricar walked away, and I don't believe Ray Gricar committed suicide. I believe Ray Gricar met with foul play.

The problem is, your belief, or mine does not necessarily correspond to the evidence.

If, in an other hypothetical case, LE had discovered a body, they wouldn't, at first, assume that the cause of death was a homicide. They would determine what happened.

The problem is here, they are still determining what happened.

I also believe that if it had been investigated as "foul play" from the begining, fewer people would have thought foul play. I also believe more information would have been forthcomng. However, when credible a credible person like Ms. Fenton was dissed because 'it doesn't fit the timeline', what was the average citizen to think.

I believe that is a fallacy. As soon as there are reports, possibly inaccurate that RFG was alive and driving another vehicle, that, in the mind of the average citizen, says this was not a murder.

Now the real problem is, those reports might very well be wrong, there might very well be a murder, but the average citizen won't care, because they think it's walkaway.

Don't you think the average citizen would have noticed had LE actually interviewed people about this case?

I think the "average citizen," or even an above average citizen, like posters here that follow missing persons cases, when confronted with the Wilkes-Barrie witnesses, thought walk away. I think that if you want to add to that, **I saw RFG in different car, fifty miles away from Lewisburg,** and **I saw RFG with a mystery woman in Lewisburg,** the average citizen would be more inclined to think walk away, rightly or wrongly.

But, all you have are idiotic statements made by DZ, like the famous "it might just lead to another theory", a statement, I might add, that was never corrected/whatever by a supervisor or anyone else.

Should he have discounted the Fenton sighting? No, IMO.

Should DZ have run to the press in April 2005. Only if he wanted everyone to discount both murder and suicide. It's a report, from a credible witness, partly verified, but with no physical evidence.

J. J. in Phila

03-02-2008, 02:55 PM

First, hypothetically, I'll assume that this is a voluntary departure.

Second, "need," is not assumed. That those thinks happened didn't mean that there was a "need" for those things to happen.

Originally posted by logicworks

why did RG need to disappear on the workday?

It would be exceptionally convenient. His SO can't say for sure if he's been back and went out again. She won't miss him until later.

why did the Mini need to be in the picture if run away?

Ah, do you expect RFG to hide in root cellar in Bellefonte? He has to get out of the area somehow.

why did she need to leave a note in the morning at the house telling him to call?

He went back to sleep.

why did there have to be a cellphone call about a dog?

A response to the note, it aso had the effect of leading the search to a place where the Mini wasn't.

why did the call have to come in to the courthouse lines where it couldn't be proven there was a response on the other end; why not at home on message machine?

Did they have a message machine? Could they tell when the call came in? Would PEF have gotten the message?

why would someone in a perfect relationship think he ran away and remove the car immediately?

Several possible reasons, including that LE looked at the situation and determined that the car could not be staked out, or that RFG said something that gave PEF the idea that he wouldn't be returning to the car.

J. J. in Phila

03-02-2008, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by logicworks

Ah, considering your run-away theory has two cars involved, supposedly in the same parking lot, likely he needed assistance to do so. He could have walked ten blocks from home in Bellefonte, met someone there, and took off, no need for the Mini in Lewisburg.

The Mini serves to pinpoint an out-of-town, didn't happen in Bellefonte, location, it provides a resting place for the cellphone with alibi call on it, and is near a water area where 'planting' that will be found can occur. Need water for that........digging in the ground isn't likely to show up later.....tossing in the river is.

How quickly do you think a car would have been spotted in Bellefonte, possibly even by PEF or one of her family? Use your head.

There is also the jurisdictional question. It's a separate jurisdiction.

Then there is the media market effect. Lewisburg is out of the Johnstown/Altoona/State College media market. If either the helper or RFG didn't what to be recognized (that is a big "if"), Bellefonte, and even the whole of the J/A/SC media market is not the place to do it. Basically, anyone with reasonable media exposure couldn't travel west, south, and even north (though there isn't too much north), from Bellefonte and still be in that media market.

That last factor would easily explain why the Mini was in Lewisburg.

Root cellar, you say? Happen to know if there is one at the house and whether LE checked it out?
JMO [/*]

I don't say it, but that's the nonsense you want us to believe. Considering the vintages of the homes in Bellefonte, there would not be one. As pointed out earlier, LE did a search of the house.

J. J. in Phila

03-02-2008, 10:54 PM

Originally posted by logicworks

So now we are to believe someone would have spotted a car, any 'other' car, on a street somewhere in Bellefonte away from the house, when there were no sightings whatsoever, that we are aware of, of the Mini in the neighborhood or Bellefonte or Pleasant Gap, or down route 192 that day?

People spotted it, not while it driving past in a rural area, or even down a street, but when it was parked.

Yes, you should believe that, just as you should believe that RFG got from the park to the office on 4/14/05, even though there were no witnesses of him going through the middle of Bellefonte.

There are parking lots and pull off areas at the base of Halfmoon Hill where he could have easily met someone and never had to move the Mini away from home IF he planned on leaving.

If he, or the helper, was worried about being seen, or if he bought a car, he wouldn't do that in Bellefonte.

If running away, why would he hide that fact and keep LE looking for years for him? Why not just leave a note, 'it's over; I'm outta here', and take his things with him? He didn't need to sneak around to do it.

Aren't we still talking about him? Would we be if he left a note?

No reason whatsoever for a runaway person to go all the way to Lewisburg to do so. First and foremost, what reason for runaway?

One reason might be simply to prove he could, that he was brilliant. Why did Wiley walk away? Carsey? Yet, they did it.

Certainly could have been a 'sticky' situation in the office, considering she thought she would be going with him, but even so, I doubt that he would give up his own good reputation in the County, his retirement, his last eight months salary, if that had happened.
JMO [/*]

If this was a walkaway, it doesn't have anything to do with a "sticky situation." It would have been thought about for a while; think years, not months.

Motive will not be the key for this; MEANS is the key.

Cinderella

03-02-2008, 10:59 PM

Originally posted by logicworks
Taking this little blurb from S1 latest link...........(thanks, S1 for the article)

n The fictional protagonist drives a BMW with a vanity plate referring to a love interest. Gricar drove a Mini Cooper (made by BMW) with a vanity plate referring to his girlfriend.

I asked this question before but no answer, so asking again......
who ordered/purchased the vanity plate? Somehow, I can't imagine RG coming up with that idea. I can see one of the PSU gal students coming up with something like that, but doesn't sound like a 'near 60' guy idea to me.
JMO [/*]

I know this really isn't the answer that you want, but I think JKA stated that PF had a model "Mini" car with a vanity license plate that said PFO. It was probably her idea. I am not sure though.

Cinderella

03-02-2008, 11:02 PM

Taken from the JKA article:

The first is that when the car was purchased, which if I recall correctly was somewhere around Christmas of 2004 or early January of 2005, it was stated by Ray to the staff to have been a gift. His paramour had a small model of the car in her office and of course the vanity plate.

Cinderella

03-02-2008, 11:06 PM

I started a post on the Mini about how it was processed. It seems that we were taken off track with the other news.

Serendipitous1

03-02-2008, 11:07 PM

This is an example of why one needs to read newspapers with a healthy bit of skepticism (can you find the discrepancies?):
http://www.dailyitem.com/0100_news/local_story_061231509.html?keyword=topstory

Another example:
Feb 26: "After reading '20/20 Vision' by Pamela West, formerly Pamela Kraske, Rickard tends to agree."
http://www.centredaily.com/news/ray_gricar/story/426195.html

Feb 27: "The book is a science fiction, futuristic murder mystery entitled “20/20 Vision” by Pamela West, now Pamela Kraske."
http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/story/429569.html

Same reporter, different day. Who is to know what is and is not, when it comes to reporting? My other post stands...we will not hear the particulars of the 'criminal' side of the investigation, unless and until there is an indictment. But, that does not mean there is no criminal side to the investigation. MOO

Serendipitous1

03-02-2008, 11:13 PM

Originally posted by logicworks <Snip>
I asked this question before but no answer, so asking again......who ordered/purchased the vanity plate? Somehow, I can't imagine RG coming up with that idea. I can see one of the PSU gal students coming up with something like that, but doesn't sound like a 'near 60' guy idea to me. You have no idea how that pains me, logicworks...lol! My (and probably RG's, if he were here) opinion. OMG

Cinderella

03-02-2008, 11:17 PM

Thanks for the posts S1. I wonder if we will ever know the truth? I wonder if all the evidence is still there. On one of your links, the CDT link, I found this comment to really pull some weight. If must have been written by someone who knew Ray well.

http://pod01.prospero.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=kr-centretm&tid=3795

I think it is time everyone stops making assumptions and do some real investigative work and find Ray. All the assumptions have to very hard on his family and girlfriend. I spoke to Ray one week before he disapeared, and he sounded happy and full of life and looking forward to retirement.........so look for him and find him...no ever think he just "faded away on his own" or committed suicide. That was not Ray.

Posted by:

2/28/2008 7:16 PM
3795.3 Report as Violation

No rating

Serendipitous1

03-03-2008, 12:08 AM

Whether we believe it or not, the 'writing is on the wall'...has been since '05...unless someone or something comes forward.

Cpl. Jeff Watson, a criminal investigator for the state police at Rockview, took over the Aardsma case. His efforts, like those of his predecessors, went unrewarded. "After 20 years, and some of the best guys in the state police and central Pennsylvania working on this case, I'm not a Sherlock Holmes," Watson said recently as his fingers leafed through the dog-eared file, still classified information. "They've covered everything."
http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/1989/11/11-28-89tdc/11-28-89dnews-01.asp

J. J. in Phila

03-03-2008, 12:09 AM

Originally posted by logicworks

A car parked in Bellefonte is such a rarity everyone would notice any car? Did it have big letters on the side saying 'police' or 'sheriff' or what? What made the 'special car' so noticeable?
Who was so well known in the area they couldn't be seen there because everyone would know who they are?

I'm reasonably certain that people in Bellefonte knew his car much better than the people in Lewisburg, much like the people on my block know my car much better than people in other sections of Phila. They do as a factual matter.

Bellefonte is a small town and RFG was fairly prominent (not to mention fairly prpminent across the J/A/SC media market).

If he could travel through Bellefonte on Thursday evening and not be seen, why fear being seen any other time? He could have put on a knit cap, pulled down and a pair of sunglasses. Whose gonna know it's him?

Likewise, probably most of the population (and then the "knit cap" would be missing). If this was a walkaway, RFg wouldn't want to risk the possibility of being seen with someone else by people who knew him, or being seen walking around Bellefonte, or purchasing another car from a local dealer.

RG was brilliant enough, IMO, to pull off a better runaway plan that you think this was. Doesn't look at all like runaway to me.

I have not give any one theory a greater than 50% chance of being correct.

Anyone can find a means, if there is a need for it.

So far, as far as known, LE has not looked at several possibilities. A car purchase, under a variation of his legal name, a straw purchase by a friend, or the whereabouts of the Inner Circle, who might have given him a ride out.

It fits right in with the 'point in any direction' and the inability to prove anything.....seems to be the goal, IMO.
First show me a motive, what's the coward you portray RG as running away from?

I don't portray RFG as a "coward" and we've heard a potential motive repeatedly. You should be ashamed of yourself for even suggesting it. :cuss: You apparently don't understand it.

J. J. in Phila

03-03-2008, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by logicworks

You have made every effort to alter the known description of the dedicated for decades, hard working DA into a 'turning tail' (word history of coward) with 'tail' supposedly running away from Bellefonte to Lewisburg to hide his 'plan'..... hiding from everyone in Bellefonte, turning his 'tail' on his 'beloved', his family, the County, everyone he knew, not wanting to be seen, placing vague creases in books left on desks, sneaking along a river to throw in gov't issue laptop and hard drive, hiding money, making plans, mapping routes, purchasing a car to get out of town with and then claim it is not you who has continually had him 'turning tail' and running? Pleeeeeze......

You've been the one on this suggesting that RFG ran away from something. I have not. Do you understand that some people walk to things, not from them?

You've been the one using the terms"coward" and "turned tail." :cuss: You should be ashamed of yourself.

Your constant re-play of Wiley, and Carsey, and your latest, a detective in some Sci-Fi book as back-up proof RG 'turned tail' and ran to Lewisburg, crossed a parking lot where either a car he purchased was parked, or the friend, who likewise 'turned tail' on everyone, and assisted RG in running away to somewhere, did so because their 'tails' seen meeting in Bellefonte would have been recognized.

There you go again. I've suggested that there could be, and probably is, evidence of motivation on RFG's part. Even if we can show motivation, that would not be proof that he acted on that motivation.

That is why I've said the key question is, Is there evidence that RFG had the MEANS to walk away?

You push the 'two tail' theory with a 'mysterious-invisible-woman-no-sketch-can- be-made-of' theory; a woman who, like RG, also 'turned tail' and won't come forward and yet we don't have LE handing out a sketch so the public can assist in finding her. Your claim of evidence is some long list of sighters and scent in a lot where a car was parked, none of which I have read were proven sightings of RG by LE, nor reports released on dog tracking results in the lot.

Then you call your first grade teacher and complain that he/she never taught you to read.

You continually portray him as a 'turn tail and run' DA, going against everything RG ever stood for. He never 'turned tail' and ran before, and I do not believe he did so this time. It's your portrayal.

No, that is your portrayal. I've never, ever suggested that RFG ran from any threat. Why do you insisit on portaying RFG as a "coward" who "turned tail and ran?" Your words, not mine.

sherrijean981

03-03-2008, 01:49 PM

If I remember correctly, it was Pamela West that got in touch with LE or PF, which ever article you read, she told the detective about RG helping her with the book and she found similarities to her book. Pete Bosak did a story on it. It wasn't JJ who went looking for her, questioned her or wrote the story for the CDT, or found the clues.

We all have talked about the possibility of suicide, walk-away and murder. Many threads to all 3 possibilities.

At this point it does look more like foul play or walk-away, since after 3 years his body has not been found. Of course it has been shown that some bodies are found years and decades later if they were in the woods or their body was weighted down in very deep water.

There was a link posted before about 4 people who were lost on Lake Erie and found many years later while LE were looking for someone who had drowned in the lake, but it was some type of sonic equipment that found the bodies on the lake floor.

The Editorial in the Opinion Line of the CDT also has it down to 2 theories now, murder or walk-away and with the opinion that we might never know what happened to him.

J. J. in Phila

03-03-2008, 04:45 PM

Originally posted by sherrijean981
If I remember correctly, it was Pamela West that got in touch with LE or PF, which ever article you read, she told the detective about RG helping her with the book and she found similarities to her book. Pete Bosak did a story on it. It wasn't JJ who went looking for her, questioned her or wrote the story for the CDT, or found the clues.

You remember correctly, but also remember that I didn't think the 20/20 Vision story was particularly strong. I got a bit stronger when we were informed that he did read it. And that story, all by itself, has not been enough to cause me to change my likelihood that this was walkaway (not "runaway" or RFG being a "coward," in the words of LW.)

sherrijean981

03-04-2008, 01:02 AM

Where is everyone? Hello!!!!!

Cloudbuster

03-04-2008, 01:49 AM

LW thanks for a very truthful post!! Kudos in how you worded it. I was trying to basically say the same thing and I couldn't find the right words. It seems so clear he didn't cut and run as we keep being told or directed to.

sherrijean981

03-04-2008, 02:08 AM

Originally posted by Cloudbuster
LW thanks for a very truthful post!! Kudos in how you worded it. I was trying to basically say the same thing and I couldn't find the right words. It seems so clear he didn't cut and run as we keep being told or directed to. [/*]

Well we all agree he is missing but not why? How and where do we go from here? What was going on in the news before his disappearance, other than drugs bust, which most think it had nothing to do with it.

Was he having conflicts with anyone, either in the CCCH, another business, someone in government not in CC?

At one time there was mention he did not think his brother commited suicide (sorry TG), and had been investigating it. Does anyone remember it being said and when? Where would he have been looking? Did he keep any type of investigation on his laptop?

I was reading the obituaries a couple months ago and found out a man lived in Centre Hall that had worked at the same place RG's brother had worked. I don't remember his name or the date, but his obit mentioned his work history. At the time I thought it odd that this man would have moved to our area when his only child lived elsewhere, but thought maybe his wife (pre-deceased him) might have had family there. I will have to check my history and see if it comes up anywhere. :read:

Cloudbuster

03-04-2008, 02:28 AM

SJ you mentioned CCH and gov, including drug bust. I still feel there is a element of all 3 in one situation that was going on in 2005.
JMHO

J. J. in Phila

03-04-2008, 02:55 AM

Originally posted by logicworks

RG was in a committed relationship with the voters of Centre County. He vowed to serve us and not for one minute do I believe he ran away, walked away, flew away, strolled away, drove away, hopped away, skipped away, tossed it all away.

Oh please. :rolleyes:

The County Code provided a method for replacement. RFG had already announced his retirement.

That has been your number one theory since day one, still is, yet you have no evidence to prove that is what happened to him.

It's been my number one theory for about 5 weeks, if that long, by a gigantic 1%. Tell me, do you remember a long thread title "Murder Scenario?"

Push it all you want but don't expect me to think RG ran away from obligations he accepted when he could have simply announced early retirement, for whatever reason and 'walked away'. No one would have found fault with that. Since we have had no one come forward and say RG came forward and said he was leaving early, I assume it's because 'walking away' was not his intention.

It has not been reported that RFG had an interest in voluntary departures; that is different than "not coming forward." We do have the "better friend" who says that, and it's not do to money.

BTW, since you don't seem to comprehend it, I've just said:

That is why I've said the key question is, Is there evidence that RFG had the MEANS to walk away?

If the answer is no, then he probably did not walk away. You seem to saying, **Don't confuse me with looking for evidence.**

Another commitment was to a relationship with a SO.

I can think of two other legally committed relationships that were terminated.

Not having done so in either case, equals not a walk-away. It's not as simple as walking away from a bank loan on a mortgage.

Legally, it is. Someone who leaves a debt unpaid can incur all sorts of civil and even criminal penalties. Someone with his debts paid off does not.

You have described him as anything other than someone who walked away. You have him sneaking around doing all of the 'high tech' stuff movies are made of......

Let's see, if he walked away, the "high tech stuff" involves filing out paperwork. Wow, I'm "high tech." LW, where do get this stuff? Seriously. The most "high tech" thing is removing a drive, that involves unscrewing a screw and tossing the drive into the river. :rolleyes:

People who sneak and hide ....

Well, we have two examples, Wiley and Carsey. BTW: Didn't he mention one, seven plus years after the fact, by name.

On another note, I respectfully ask you not to 'should' on me. You can know what you 'should' do, but you can't begin to know what I 'should' do, unless you wish to control and I, of course, do not wish to be controlled about someone else's 'should'.
JMO [/*]

You "should" if you are really interested in the case. You should be open minded. And you should not attempt to spin a theory by misrepresenting it, like using terms like "coward" to describe RFG.

If you don't like it, this site has an ignore function.

J. J. in Phila

03-04-2008, 02:59 AM

Originally posted by Cloudbuster
LW thanks for a very truthful post!! Kudos in how you worded it. I was trying to basically say the same thing and I couldn't find the right words. It seems so clear he didn't cut and run as we keep being told or directed to. [/*]

CB, nobody that I've heard of has suggested a "cut and run." Those ideas are from LW.

There is a suggestion, and a possibility, that RFG wished to walkaway. If that is the case, I'd suspect it was a longstanding wish. I'd also suspect it had nothing to do with anything current in Centre County.

J. J. in Phila

03-04-2008, 03:52 AM

LW, let me ask you a serious question. Suppose that LE checks out the possibility that RFG purchased a car and the whereabouts of the Inner Circle and finds out that there wasn't an unaccounted car purchase and the Inner Circle wasn't involved?

Cinderella

03-04-2008, 05:47 AM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

Oh please. :rolleyes:

The County Code provided a method for replacement. RFG had already announced his retirement.

It's been my number one theory for about 5 weeks, if that long, by a gigantic 1%. Tell me, do you remember a long thread title "Murder Scenario?"

It has not been reported that RFG had an interest in voluntary departures; that is different than "not coming forward." We do have the "better friend" who says that, and it's not do to money.

BTW, since you don't seem to comprehend it, I've just said:

That is why I've said the key question is, Is there evidence that RFG had the MEANS to walk away?

If the answer is no, then he probably did not walk away. You seem to saying, **Don't confuse me with looking for evidence.**

I can think of two other legally committed relationships that were terminated.

Legally, it is. Someone who leaves a debt unpaid can incur all sorts of civil and even criminal penalties. Someone with his debts paid off does not.

Let's see, if he walked away, the "high tech stuff" involves filing out paperwork. Wow, I'm "high tech." LW, where do get this stuff? Seriously. The most "high tech" thing is removing a drive, that involves unscrewing a screw and tossing the drive into the river. :rolleyes:

Well, we have two examples, Wiley and Carsey. BTW: Didn't he mention one, seven plus years after the fact, by name.

You "should" if you are really interested in the case. You should be open minded. And you should not attempt to spin a theory by misrepresenting it, like using terms like "coward" to describe RFG.

If you don't like it, this site has an ignore function. [/*]

J. J., I probably shouldn't say this, but you know how I am, I speak my mind. You have been on the theory about Mel Wiley now for a long time. You have stated that because Ray might have mentioned it once, he must have wanted to disappear like Mel Wiley. I have never viewed it that way if he did walk away. I always felt that there had to be a good reason. You were talking about Ray being so brilliant to pull this off. Logic has stated that he would never walk away and hurt his family.

I copied and pasted a post from the CDT by a person who knew him and spoke to him a week before he disappeared. He said that Ray would never do that willingly. Look up the post.

JKA also wrote in her article that Ray often worked when he was very sick.

i think that everyone is tired of LE trying to guess what happened to Ray and not do something about it. The promises that were made to the Centre County Citizens were never delivered. When Shawn Weaver took over, everything was quieted. No more news conferences, nothing.

So J. J. and Logic, Get back into your corners. Usually I am the one that gets in trouble. Nice to see someone else go at it, without me being included. The emotions are very high. This is a sad, sad situation.

Cinderella

03-04-2008, 06:08 AM

Just now after posting this song came into my head. I know it is true in Ray's situation.

Music by Elton John
Lyrics by Bernie Taupin

What have I got to do to make you love me
What have I got to do to make you care
What do I do when lightning strikes me
And I wake to find that you're not there

What do I do to make you want me
What have I got to do to be heard
What do I say when it's all over
And sorry seems to be the hardest word

It's sad, so sad
It's a sad, sad situation
And it's getting more and more absurd
It's sad, so sad
Why can't we talk it over
Oh it seems to me
That sorry seems to be the hardest word

What do I do to make you love me
What have I got to do to be heard
What do I do when lightning strikes me
What have I got to do
What have I got to do
When sorry seems to be the hardest word
_________________________

These are my thoughts. What does it take to show Ray that we love and care about him. We don't know where he is, but somebody does. We feel lost without his presence in Centre County, not knowing where he is or what happened to him.

It is sad, It's a sad situation. Ray was there for the citizens, but we are not there for him. It's sad, so sad, why can't we talk this over. It is getting more absurd as time goes on. Why can't something be done. Why can't we get the higher up's to care about what we think?

How can anyone just say sorry and walk away and not care? I feel like he wasn't even given a sorry, he wasn't a priority to the higher ups that we are supposed to look up to.

I pray with all of my being that God will bring justice for Ray. I am a conspiracy theorist on this subject of his disappearance. This case is being held on tightly to many people are are involved. I pray that God will break the bonds that is keeping this secret and expose everyone involved now not after they die, but now. God has answered so many of my prayers, I know that a miracle is nothing for God to do. I am patiently waiting for God to bring this case and situation to an end. I know that God loves the truth and I pray that He will reveal everything in his time.

Whoever is involved better be shaking in their shoes. God and only through God are you going to be brought to justice. I can't wait to see it happen. I know that God hears and listens to his people. Get prepared for something to happen. :rose:

J. J. in Phila

03-04-2008, 10:22 AM

Originally posted by Cinderella

J. J., I probably shouldn't say this, but you know how I am, I speak my mind. You have been on the theory about Mel Wiley now for a long time. You have stated that because Ray might have mentioned it once, he must have wanted to disappear like Mel Wiley. I have never viewed it that way if he did walk away. I always felt that there had to be a good reason. You were talking about Ray being so brilliant to pull this off. Logic has stated that he would never walk away and hurt his family.

Cind, I have never said "must." Yes, the Wiley comment, including JKA's comment about it, has been enough on top of a number of things, to give walkaway a slight edge, but not a huge edge. Her comments are what made become suspicious that RFG was aware of the case, by name.

I copied and pasted a post from the CDT by a person who knew him and spoke to him a week before he disappeared. He said that Ray would never do that willingly. Look up the post.

We also have that "better friend" who thought it was walkway. I have to give that some weight.

I also strongly suspect that there more out there, including stuff I don't know about, that will be similar.

Now, I'll ask you the same question I've asked LW. Suppose that LE checks out the possibility that RFG purchased a car and the whereabouts of the Inner Circle and finds out that there wasn't an unaccounted car purchase and the Inner Circle wasn't involved? What would that mean?

gstickley

03-04-2008, 12:25 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

Cind, I have never said "must." Yes, the Wiley comment, including JKA's comment about it, has been enough on top of a number of things, to give walkaway a slight edge, but not a huge edge. Her comments are what made become suspicious that RFG was aware of the case, by name.

[/*]

Could you please show a link wherein KA comments would make anyone "suspicious that RFG was aware of the case, by name"?

Cinderella

03-04-2008, 01:53 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

Now, I'll ask you the same question I've asked LW. Suppose that LE checks out the possibility that RFG purchased a car and the whereabouts of the Inner Circle and finds out that there wasn't an unaccounted car purchase and the Inner Circle wasn't involved? What would that mean? [/*]

I would suggest to you if that happened then he was threatened or had a very compelling reason other than to show how brilliant he is to disappear. Not something that he just wanted to up and do.

Cinderella

03-04-2008, 01:57 PM

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

Cind, I have never said "must." Yes, the Wiley comment, including JKA's comment about it, has been enough on top of a number of things, to give walkaway a slight edge, but not a huge edge. Her comments are what made become suspicious that RFG was aware of the case, by name.

[/*]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. J., JKA never stated that she heard about Wiley from Ray Gricar talking about it. Sometimes, I will still mention Charles Manson, does that mean that I am going to go on a killing spree?

J. J. in Phila

03-04-2008, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by gstickley

Could you please show a link wherein KA comments would make anyone "suspicious that RFG was aware of the case, by name"? [/*]

This:

i]Part of me has a vague sense that perhaps Wiley's name was once mentioned in the office, some reference to "good old Mel Wiley", though not by Ray, but when JJ brought it up, it did not initially sound familiar, so I'm not sure if the memory of the name beingmentioned is in fact accurate.[/i]

http://gricar.disappearance.googlepages.com/partiii:onlinediscussion

It was part of the ten paragraphs discussing Wiley. Now a couple of other things:

1. JKA cannot remember if she saw her boss of 18 years the day before he vanished, she gets various details wrong (the Mini purchase, the Code Book), yes she has "a vague sense that perhaps Wiley's name was once mentioned in the office." That led me to think that her memory might have been reinforced.

2. The fact she (and Lustor) were so interested in the Wiley case, and NOT in the other case I mentioned, Carsey, even though Carsey was much better known (the subject of a bestseller). Possibly something jogged her memory, even on a subconscious level.

3. The timing. Wiley disappeared in 1985 (200 miles away). JKA didn't start working at the office until 1988 (frankly, had she been working there since 1983, I would have dismissed it).

So, that led to my suspicions.

Had JKA said, **J. J. mentioned two case of walkaway, Mel Wiley and Jay Carsey,** and maybe given a brief one or two sentence of each, I wouldn't have noticed it. She spent 10 paragraphs, a whole subsection, discussing Wiley. I noticed.

I guess you could say, as JKA did, "...amazing knowledge for a disabled guy living in Philly." I really should put that in my signature. ;)

Cinderella

03-04-2008, 02:41 PM

This is an untrue statement made. I visited the Centre County Commissioners Office and got copies of the prison board meetings from January until the last prison board meeting that Ray attended which was in April. He had been at all the meetings, so why would 2 commissioners lie about the situation.
There were 3 commissioners at the time. Dershem, Conklin, Exchardos. So who were the two commissioners that lied and WHY?

http://www.centredaily.com/mld/cent...by/11534881.htm

quote:
Snip
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In one of his last county government meetings the day before, Gricar seemed reserved as usual but gave no hint that he planned to take off work the next day.

Two county commissioners at that meeting of the prison board on April 14 said the most unusual thing about it was that Gricar came at all, inasmuch as his attendance record at the monthly meetings was about one out of four."

Snip
_______________________________

Cinderella

03-04-2008, 03:07 PM

When I looked at these articles, I thought to myself that Mark Smith had really jumped the gun. In one day he is talking about being baffled by Ray's disappearance then the next day, he kinda talks about Ray like Ray is not any longer around. What would cause him to think that so soon? I just thought that it was very interesting.

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2005/04/04-19-05tdc/04-19-05dnews-04.asp

April 19, 2005

Snip
-------------------------
Assistant District Attorney Mark Smith said he would fill in for Gricar during his absence. He added, though, that the mood in the District Attorney's office was "somber" and everyone was baffled by Gricar's disappearance.

"It's going to run smoothly in his absence," Smith said. "We will operate as usual."
---------------------------
Snip

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2005/04/04-20-05tdc/04-20-05dnews-05.asp

April 20, 2005

Snip
--------------------------

Smith said Gricar is a very skilled prosecutor who was always very prepared for work.

"Centre County was really blessed to have him here for all the years he was here," Smith said. "He took everything seriously."

Smith said that aside from a few Christmas and office parties, he did not spend much time with Gricar. He added that he was very familiar with how Gricar handled prosecution cases.

Snip
-------------------------------

gstickley

03-04-2008, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

This:

i]Part of me has a vague sense that perhaps Wiley's name was once mentioned in the office, some reference to "good old Mel Wiley", though not by Ray, but when JJ brought it up, it did not initially sound familiar, so I'm not sure if the memory of the name beingmentioned is in fact accurate.[/i]

http://gricar.disappearance.googlepages.com/partiii:onlinediscussion

It was part of the ten paragraphs discussing Wiley. Now a couple of other things:

1. JKA cannot remember if she saw her boss of 18 years the day before he vanished, she gets various details wrong (the Mini purchase, the Code Book), yes she has "a vague sense that perhaps Wiley's name was once mentioned in the office." That led me to think that her memory might have been reinforced.

2. The fact she (and Lustor) were so interested in the Wiley case, and NOT in the other case I mentioned, Carsey, even though Carsey was much better known (the subject of a bestseller). Possibly something jogged her memory, even on a subconscious level.

3. The timing. Wiley disappeared in 1985 (200 miles away). JKA didn't start working at the office until 1988 (frankly, had she been working there since 1983, I would have dismissed it).

So, that led to my suspicions.

Had JKA said, **J. J. mentioned two case of walkaway, Mel Wiley and Jay Carsey,** and maybe given a brief one or two sentence of each, I wouldn't have noticed it. She spent 10 paragraphs, a whole subsection, discussing Wiley. I noticed.

I guess you could say, as JKA did, "...amazing knowledge for a disabled guy living in Philly." I really should put that in my signature. ;) [/*]

Pagragraph 1. Are the words "though not by Ray" invisible to you or something??? Did you read her Magnificent Manuscript?

#1. Who made a determination that KA was "wrong" about the Code book & when was that made? As far as the Mini purchase, I don't remember her exactly giving an exact date she heard about it. Did you read her Magnificent Manuscript?

#2. What is it about KA with you? It's apparent that you've dissed the entire Magnificent Manuscript. Just because she doesn't discuss what you think she should discuss is a bit crazy, IMO. Did you actually read her entire Magnificent Manuscript? Or did you just pick out certain parts? Exactly what is it about KA with you? KA worked in the DA's office, you didn't. KA spoke about her opinion & her knowledge of the inner workings of her office in her Magnificent Manuscript. Did Smith, Sloane, or any of the other DA's. No.

#3. What does #3 have to do with anything?????

Some of us are glad KA had the guts to go public with her opinions & knowledge. Too bad none of the rest of them did. IMO and in the opinions of others, we learned more from KA than from everyone else combined.

So if you or anyone else, including PB, wish to keep spewing the false information, misinformation, smoke & mirrors, whatever, that KA said RG himself discussed Wiley, I'll just keep pulling up her exact comments from her Magnificent Manuscript!

And while we're at it. You keep mentioning KA & Lustor in the same sentence,apparently so anyone reading the board will be convinced they are one & the same; it's been thrown about on the board so many times it's quite sickening, at least to me. But, it's also very funny. Because, there for awhile you included me in your KA . . Lustor . . PE . . gstickley "garbage". If you are so far off the wall in that assumption/insinuation, it sure doesn't give you much credibility at all---what else are you 'off the wall' on! The funny part is: several posters know exactly who I am . . . & they know I'm definitely not Karen Arnold! And what was your reason for your ridiculous assumption/insinuation? Oh, yeah, it was because we "had the same writing style". Have a good day!

sherrijean981

03-04-2008, 03:35 PM

J. J. in Phila

03-04-2008, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by gstickley

Pagragraph 1. Are the words "though not by Ray" invisible to you or something??? Did you read her Magnificent Manuscript?

I read her "Pitiful Pages," and noted that she couldn't recall if she saw 4/14/05. I don't expect her to remember every comment made. However, an Ohio case, not criminal, not well publicized in Centre County, at least three years old, is an unusual even. It raised a flag with me.

#1. Who made a determination that KA was "wrong" about the Code book & when was that made? As far as the Mini purchase, I don't remember her exactly giving an exact date she heard about it. Did you read her Magnificent Manuscript?

WJAC, apparently.

#2. What is it about KA with you? It's apparent that you've dissed the entire Magnificent Manuscript.

Ah, I just said it raised a flag. I do "diss" it, because:

i. It dealt more with this board than it did with RFG.

ii. It had some inaccuracies.

iii. JKA didn't give any real revelations about the case. She raised a flag with me, on the reference to Wiley, but that's all.

iv. Why didn't she do it in April 2005, during the campaign, or after she was no longer with the DA's office. Why wait 19 months.

v. As a compelling piece about why CC residents should be conserned about RFG, she failed miserably (not to mention pitifully).

#3. What does #3 have to do with anything?????

A lot. Why are people, 200 miles away, three (and found out seven plus) years, talking about the case.

Some of us are glad KA had the guts to go public with her opinions & knowledge.

I'm still waiting for her to do that.

And while we're at it. You keep mentioning KA & Lustor in the same sentence,apparently so anyone reading the board will be convinced they are one & the same; it's been thrown about on the board so many times it's quite sickening, at least to me. But, it's also very funny. Because, there for awhile you included me in your KA . . Lustor . . PE . . gstickley "garbage". If you are so far off the wall in that assumption/insinuation, it sure doesn't give you much credibility at all---what else are you 'off the wall' on! The funny part is: several posters know exactly who I am . . . & they know I'm definitely not Karen Arnold! And what was your reason for your ridiculous assumption/insinuation? Oh, yeah, it was because we "had the same writing style". Have a good day! [/*]

Well other than the same writing style, enough when I read it to identify it as belonging to Lustor, I will note Lustor's fixation with Wiley, surprisingly like JKA's. Not just style, but subject matter as well. Go figure! :rolleyes:

gstickley

03-04-2008, 07:24 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

I read her "Pitiful Pages," and noted that she couldn't recall if she saw 4/14/05. I don't expect her to remember every comment made. However, an Ohio case, not criminal, not well publicized in Centre County, at least three years old, is an unusual even. It raised a flag with me.

WJAC, apparently.

Ah, I just said it raised a flag. I do "diss" it, because:

i. It dealt more with this board than it did with RFG.

ii. It had some inaccuracies.

iii. JKA didn't give any real revelations about the case. She raised a flag with me, on the reference to Wiley, but that's all.

iv. Why didn't she do it in April 2005, during the campaign, or after she was no longer with the DA's office. Why wait 19 months.

v. As a compelling piece about why CC residents should be conserned about RFG, she failed miserably (not to mention pitifully).

A lot. Why are people, 200 miles away, three (and found out seven plus) years, talking about the case.

I'm still waiting for her to do that.

Well other than the same writing style, enough when I read it to identify it as belonging to Lustor, I will note Lustor's fixation with Wiley, surprisingly like JKA's. Not just style, but subject matter as well. Go figure! :rolleyes: [/*]

Hummmmm. Seems to me the "Wiley case" was brought up on the message board quite some time before KA's Magnificent Manuscript appeared on a website. I fail to see how KA raised any red flags for anyone. Seems to me the Wiley case was brought up by one "JJ in Phila" who allegedly had read about it in "Time" years & years & years ago. Now, if this character "JJ in Phila" brought up a case, "an Ohio case, not criminal, not well publicized in Centre County" that was years & years old, combined with the fact that this "JJ in Phila" allegedly lives in Phila., a long, long way from Ohio & a long, long way from Centre Co., perhaps that ought to raise a "red flag" for a lot of people.

The writing style thing: think what you want about KA/Lustor; it just indicates . . nothing. gstickley is a perfect example of how "writing style" comparisons are impossible. However, you did not address the insinuations made about gstickley. Care to comment about the idiosy of the insinuations you & others made about gstickley being KA/Lus/PE. Yep, everyone ought to keep that in mind when some posters appear to know everything. Believe me, they don't; any credibility they might have had was shot by their comments not related to the disappearance of Ray Gricar. Remember: if they are so wrong about that, makes sense they might be wrong about a lot of other things too.

(Would much rather have a writing style like Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Jane Austen, etc.; ya reckon that could be checked out?)

J. J. in Phila

03-04-2008, 08:11 PM

Originally posted by gstickley

Hummmmm. Seems to me the "Wiley case" was brought up on the message board quite some time before KA's Magnificent Manuscript appeared on a website. I fail to see how KA raised any red flags for anyone.

It seems to me that there was no connection between the Centre County DA's office and Mel Wiley until JKA though kinda, sorta, vaguely possibly remembered it.

Until that time, it was just one of several walkaway cases. You know who said that:

"He initially raised the case as part of a list of other 'walkoff' situations within the first few days of his entry if I recall correctly." J. Karen Arnold.

Seems to me the Wiley case was brought up by one "JJ in Phila" who allegedly had read about it in "Time" years & years & years ago.

It seems that "GStickley's" memory is worse than JKA's.

Now, if this character "JJ in Phila" brought up a case, "an Ohio case, not criminal, not well publicized in Centre County" that was years & years old, combined with the fact that this "JJ in Phila" allegedly lives in Phila., a long, long way from Ohio & a long, long way from Centre Co., perhaps that ought to raise a "red flag" for a lot of people.

Or he has an Internet connection and uses Google. I just happened to put the Link in as well.

The was the origin of my information; according to JKA, she kinda, sorta, maybe, ah, well, heard it around the office, the same office that she was in with RFG for 18 years. Certainly a different origin.

The writing style thing: think what you want about KA/Lustor; it just indicates . . nothing. gstickley is a perfect example of how "writing style" comparisons are impossible.

It was enough for me to see a resemblance with "Lustor" before I knew it was JKA. And, as noted, the subject matter is the same.

Want to try again?:biggrin:

J. J. in Phila

03-04-2008, 08:18 PM

GS, I've ask you this question before.

Suppose that LE checks out the possibility that RFG purchased a car and the whereabouts of the Inner Circle and finds out that there wasn't an unaccounted car purchase and the Inner Circle wasn't involved? What would that mean?

Care to answer?

gstickley

03-04-2008, 08:49 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila
GS, I've ask you this question before.

Suppose that LE checks out the possibility that RFG purchased a car and the whereabouts of the Inner Circle and finds out that there wasn't an unaccounted car purchase and the Inner Circle wasn't involved? What would that mean?

Care to answer? [/*]

Here is my answer: When Ray Gricar walks up to someone who knows him, someone "credible" that is, or if he appears on a TV show someplace where the world can see him, when he is photographed holding a newspaper with the current date on it, then I might believe Ray Gricar voluntarily walked away. Until then, it is my opinion that Ray Gricar did not voluntarily walkaway. And all your misdirection, 'mistakements', smoke & mirrors, contortions, twists & turns, will never make me change my mind.

(And, for what it's worth, who really knows who was in Ray Gricar's 'inner circle'?)

gstickley

03-04-2008, 09:05 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

It seems to me that there was no connection between the Centre County DA's office and Mel Wiley until JKA though kinda, sorta, vaguely possibly remembered it.

Until that time, it was just one of several walkaway cases. You know who said that:

"He initially raised the case as part of a list of other 'walkoff' situations within the first few days of his entry if I recall correctly." J. Karen Arnold.

/*]

Okay, in November 2006, JJ has arrived & Wiley is discussed on the board.

Wasn't until July 2007 that KA's Magnificent Manuscript came out.

Cinderella

03-04-2008, 09:33 PM

GS, J. J. will never say anything nice about JKA because she offended him and he can't get over it. Suppose JKA was Ray's woman and PF wrote that, J. J. would think that it was BRILLIANT.

PF offended me. Tony told me to stop stalking her. I figured that she must have complained to him because of who she found out that I was on the board. I feel the same way about PF that J. J. feels about JKA. I would like an apology for being called a stalker. I am sure that J. J. might get over his feelings if an apology was offered also. hammer

Although I don't believe that it was JKA's purpose to offend J.J.

gstickley

03-04-2008, 09:50 PM

I know, Cinderella, sometimes you just have to consider the source.

Cinderella

03-04-2008, 09:58 PM

Originally posted by gstickley
I know, Cinderella, sometimes you just have to consider the source. [/*]

You will not change the way that he views the writing. I think that he also wanted to talk to JKA personally. I have never got a good vibe about JKA from either Tony or PF.

I didn't like the word that she used for PF, but I got over it. If PF wrote something about JKA wonder what word she would use?

It must have been awesome working with Ray. I wish that I would have seen on of his trials. I still would like to go to the courthouse and watch some of the attorneys.

J. J. in Phila

03-04-2008, 10:38 PM

Originally posted by gstickley

Okay, in November 2006, JJ has arrived & Wiley is discussed on the board.

Wasn't until July 2007 that KA's Magnificent Manuscript came out. [/*]

Yes, and if you notice, no direct linkage between either the DA's Office or RFG until then. Though we did have a poster named "Lustor" who kept trying to make one. You'll also not that I raised Carsey at the same time. JKA didn't mention it and, as of now, no link to RFG.

J. J. in Phila

03-04-2008, 10:46 PM

Originally posted by gstickley

Here is my answer: When Ray Gricar walks up to someone who knows him, someone "credible" that is, or if he appears on a TV show someplace where the world can see him, when he is photographed holding a newspaper with the current date on it, then I might believe Ray Gricar voluntarily walked away. Until then, it is my opinion that Ray Gricar did not voluntarily walkaway. And all your misdirection, 'mistakements', smoke & mirrors, contortions, twists & turns, will never make me change my mind.

(And, for what it's worth, who really knows who was in Ray Gricar's 'inner circle'?) [/*]

"GStickly," I really don't care about your mind. I've said it before, someone will ask the right question; you are not even close to doing that.

No contortions. Actually, I usually ask questions. I don't have the answers I want.

You also didn't answer my question, which isn't a trick question. I'll re-ask it:

Suppose that LE checks out the possibility that RFG purchased a car and the whereabouts of the Inner Circle and finds out that there wasn't an unaccounted car purchase and the Inner Circle wasn't involved? What would that mean?

BTW: LE, and the press I'd suspect, know who that "Inner Circle" is.

It's not a few thousand people; about 25 at most.

Cinderella

03-04-2008, 11:06 PM

Originally posted by J. J. in Phila

BTW: LE, and the press I'd suspect, know who that "Inner Circle" is.

It's not a few thousand people; about 25 at most. [/*]

Are you going to spill your guts and name them? :chicken:

J. J. in Phila

03-04-2008, 11:16 PM

Originally posted by Cinderella

You will not change the way that he views the writing. I think that he also wanted to talk to JKA personally. I have never got a good vibe about JKA from either Tony or PF.

No, I did talk to her, briefly. I would like to know why she didn't want answers to the questions that she raised?

I usually ask questions because, surprise, I'd like answers to those questions. JKA didn't; I find that unusual.

Frankly, I felt that her Google pages didn't provide too much information that was not known, didn't make a compelling personal description of RFG, and was more interested in this message board than in what happened to RFG. That's sad.

I also wish that she would have done it sooner, and that she would have talked to the family and to her former colleagues to get greater insight. I've had greater inside on RFG, the person, from this site than I did for all JKA's words.

Had she called me up, and asked about Wiley, I would have been to give her the sources (I think I posted the link).

RFG, the attorney was "awesome" and came up with innovative methods of prosecuting (especially filing a charge based on a DNA profile). I didn't read that in he Google pages, unfortunately. That might be too "inside" for most people, however.

Although I don't believe that it was JKA's purpose to offend J.J.

No, but you have to ask why was more prominently mentioned than JKA. It may not have been to offend; it may have been to discourage me from asking questions.

I'm generally not insulted by being said to have "amazing knowledge." ;) I really should put that in my signature.