Wednesday, 1/7/09

[Politigal]

What should we discuss today....

Evidence?

or

the lack of Evidence?

When Tony posted on the board after learning that no identifiable prints had actually been found in Gricar's Mini Cooper, he wrote (in parentheses) that this was more indicative of foul play....

If Gricar actually made the call that morning to Patty, telling her he's on 192, and if Gricar actually drove the car to Lewisburg....why would Gricar get rid of his prints in the car?

[gstickley]

My big question is: why all the inconsistency in the fingerprints in the Mini in the 1st place? Five sets of prints, five prints, three prints, all legible prints were identified to RG, no prints. Either there were prints lifted or there weren't. There shouldn't have been any inconsistency in that whatsoever. And I don't understand why it took so long for this information to become known. There would/should have been a report in the files; the investigating officer, the chief, the DA, & most certainly the PSP would/should have known about it; the PSP esp. since they processed the vehicle. (And some wonder why there are still questions asked about the investigation!!!)

[UndertheRadar]

My big question is: why all the inconsistency in the fingerprints in the Mini in the 1st place? Five sets of prints, five prints, three prints, all legible prints were identified to RG, no prints. Either there were prints lifted or there weren't. There shouldn't have been any inconsistency in that whatsoever. And I don't understand why it took so long for this information to become known. There would/should have been a report in the files; the investigating officer, the chief, the DA, & most certainly the PSP would/should have known about it; the PSP esp. since they processed the vehicle. (And some wonder why there are still questions asked about the investigation!!!)


I agree this is the bigger question, GS.

Frankly, a lack of usable prints in/on the Mini wouldn't necessarily be surprising, according to a number of studies I've looked at. IIRC, one major study across quite a few cities and including thousands and thousands of crime scenes, usable prints were found at something like only 45% of those scenes, and a majority of the prints belonged to people who had legitimate reasons to be at the scene.

So no usable prints in the Mini could just be the typical odds.

But the discrepancies . . . there's the real mystery!

[Politigal]

I agree this is the bigger question, GS.

Frankly, a lack of usable prints in/on the Mini wouldn't necessarily be surprising, according to a number of studies I've looked at. IIRC, one major study across quite a few cities and including thousands and thousands of crime scenes, usable prints were found at something like only 45% of those scenes, and a majority of the prints belonged to people who had legitimate reasons to be at the scene.

So no usable prints in the Mini could just be the typical odds.

But the discrepancies . . . there's the real mystery!

For Christmas, I bought my granddaughter a "Super Sleuth Detective Kit" complete with fingerprint powder & tape. We're going to try it out this weekend in my vehicle to see if we can lift some prints. :)

[Politigal]

and for anyone who wants to make their own fingerprint powder -

http://www.ehow.com/how_4473122_make-fingerprint-powder.html

[UndertheRadar]

For Christmas, I bought my granddaughter a "Super Sleuth Detective Kit" complete with fingerprint powder & tape. We're going to try it out this weekend in my vehicle to see if we can lift some prints. :)

LOL, a Junior In Session Board member in the making! :wink:

Be sure to report back to us on the results!

[gstickley]

We've also been discussing the laptop & hard drive since they were found. IMO, neither were thrown in the river by RG. Therefore, someone else had access to both & disposed of them. How & when the "someone" came to gain the access are other big questions. Did LE ever check to see if anyone had ever seen RG without the case for the laptop? Did they dust the case for prints? Did they dust the closet door for prints?

The laptop has been identified as "belonging" to RG; the hard drive has not:

Posted on Thu, Dec. 08, 2005
Hard drive yields no clues to DA disappearance
enissley@centredaily.com
By Erin Nissley

FBI agents examining what police believe is the hard drive of missing District Attorney Ray Gricar's laptop computer have been unable to access any data from the drive, said the police officer investigating Gricar's disappearance.

Bellefonte police Officer Darrel Zaccagni said he spoke with an FBI agent today, who said the hard drive was heavily damaged and that the FBI is almost certain its experts will be unable to pull any information from it.

The hard drive was found in November, pressed into the muddy bank of the Susquehanna River in Lewisburg, and was sent to a clean room in a California FBI laboratory for analysis. Police believe it is the hard drive that was missing from Gricar's county-issued laptop, which was found in late July in the Susquehanna River by fishermen.

But because they cannot access the hard drive, FBI analysts cannot even confirm that the hard drive indeed came from Gricar's computer, Zaccagni said.

(snip)
http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/13361179.htm

[UndertheRadar]

Maybe you should get the results published in a peer-reviewed journal first. :laugh:
_______________
:biggrin:

[Politigal]

Maybe you should get the results published in a peer-reviewed journal first. :laugh:

She's 10, so kidzbop or braingle might be the avenue...lol

[Politigal]

Dixon initially said...."no stranger's prints" were found in the car.

Since both Patty Fornicola & Gricar drove the car, I took that to mean that her prints were possibly found in the car.

[Cloudbuster]

Three distinctly different 'stories' here------one by Dixon, one by Zacchani, AND the last one we heard-----NO readable prints.

1. Dixon also revealed three of five sets of fingerprints found on Gricar's car belong to the missing prosecutor, while the other two sets haven't been identified.(ANY progress being made on those two sets of prints, other than saying now they never existed??)

CHIEF DIXON: The vehicle was processed by the Pennsylvania state police on scene and at their station. They did find five fingerprints. The only couple that was able to be identified, certainly belonged to Ray himself.

2. "All of the legible prints in the car were identified," Zaccagni said. "And they were Ray's."

There were no indications anyone tried to "wipe the car clean" of any other fingerprints, Zaccagni said. (WHAT other fingerprints is Z referring to, if they were all Ray's??)

3. No readable prints found in the car.


Which one to believe? I choose door #1. Too detailed to have been made up, IMO, and I don't believe DD had any reason whatsoever to lie.
JMO

I think they should compare the unknown prints to people RG knew starting with the ex comissioner.

[Cloudbuster]

I will never believe that the hard drive they have is RG's. The drive they had came out of a computer the same and RG erased it. (my belief with good reason of my own). The orginal drive holds a key to this case. Whats on that drive is the root of what caused all this. I believe there are 2 people who know about this. One told the other and including where it was. Question to me is if it's still there? Problem is out of the 2 they remain silent. She and he are not talking.