The Crockpot (miscellaneous topics)

[Politigal]

On the upstairs closet...........

Patty said that the laptop wasn't being used any more. And, Gricar wasn't seen carrying the laptop on the Thurs night surveillance video.

Reportedly when police went to Patty's house to look at the desktop computer Patty went upstairs to fetch Gricar's county issued laptop for them, only to find an empty case with peripherals in her upstairs closet.

It was also reported that police did not fingerprint that case.

I'm curious though about that closet. Was it Gricar's personal closet? Or was it just a storage closet? And who besides Patty or Gricar had access to it? Did they frequently have guests who stayed overnight in an upstairs bedroom? Did they have a housekeeper who could have had access? Who else had keys to Patty's home?

If Gricar didn't take that laptop out of that closet....wouldn't it make sense that Patty was the most likely person to have access to it?

Or, do you think the laptop had been removed from the closet some time prior? After all, there were probably other compatible peripherals at the courthouse that could have been used to recharge or whatever.

Or, if some one else removed it from the closet, why wouldn't they take the peripherals? If there was something incriminating on the laptop, it seems to me that it would have been easier for someone to erase the harddrive or work on the laptop, with the cables handy, etc....unless that someone also worked at the courthouse & knew they had access to compatibles.

[J. J. in Phila]

1. It was removed, on 4/15/05, in order to be used in the field. RFG wanted to use it and took it out of the case to check the power.

2. It was removed by someone, inclusive of RFG, for the purpose of having the data destroyed.

[gstickley]

On the upstairs closet...........

(snip)
It was also reported that police did not fingerprint that case.

I'm curious though about that closet. Was it Gricar's personal closet? Or was it just a storage closet? And who besides Patty or Gricar had access to it? Did they frequently have guests who stayed overnight in an upstairs bedroom? Did they have a housekeeper who could have had access? Who else had keys to Patty's home?

If Gricar didn't take that laptop out of that closet....wouldn't it make sense that Patty was the most likely person to have access to it?

(snip)


Here's where I get to loudly say, "IF LE HAD INVESTIGATED, AS IN 'SEARCHED' THE HOUSE---AND FINGERPRINTED---THE ANSWERS MIGHT HAVE BEEN THERE."

[J. J. in Phila]

Here's where I get to loudly say, "IF LE HAD INVESTIGATED, AS IN 'SEARCHED' THE HOUSE---AND FINGERPRINTED---THE ANSWERS MIGHT HAVE BEEN THERE."

Probably not.

If someone, as you've suggested, could have driven the Mini for more than an hour, and not leave any evidence, walking into a house will leave zero evidence as well. A five minute trip into the house is even less likely to leave evidence.

If RFG removed the laptop, which is the most likely situation, finding his prints on it wouldn't prove anything, because he'd obviously handled the case prior to 4/15/05. Likewise, if PEF removed it, she could have easily claimed that she moved the case weeks ago.

If a "porn buddy" removed the case, it would not prove too much, in all probability. The "buddy" would have to be someone who knew, and possibly worked with, RFG, and could claim to have handled the case previously. There is actually a good argument against a "buddy." He would have walked in, grabbed the case, and walked out, not carefully removed the laptop from the case and put the case back.

Somebody not only removed the laptop, but took it out of the case and put the case back. The person most likely to do that is RFG.

[Tree_of_Life]

We don't even know the last reported sighting of the laptop prior to it turning up in the river, do we?

There is another possibility as to why the laptop was found sans case: perhaps Gricar had it out downstairs in the living room using it on the morning of 4/15. He is just looking something up and didn't need to drag out all the accessories. He then decides for whatever reason to take the laptop with him. Perhaps he is in a hurry and doesn't have time or care about going back upstairs to retrieve the case. Perhaps he doesn't intend to use it for an extended period of time as to need the power supply.

Just trying to think of these possibilities by comparing how I use my laptop. I usually always take the case and power supply when I know I am going out and might need it for an extended period of time. But if I was already using it in an area of the house that was away from its normal "plugged-in" location -- then say I had to leave. I might just grab it because I was in a hurry or even if I wasn't hurried but I thought I probably wouldn't need it.

[J. J. in Phila]

Good to see you Tree.

There would be two possibilities regarding why the laptop was out of the case:

1. He was planning to destroy the data by destroying the hard drive. The case would add more bulk. He may have even removed the drive there.

2. He was planning to use it in the field, as it were. He removed it to check the battery. It worked and he could turn it on there. There would be no need to take the accessories.

Both are posible and both point to different things.

[Politigal]

I've posted before about the John Glasgow case in Little Rock, AR and how similar his disappearance is to Gricar's....his car was found several miles away from his home abandoned, with his cellphone, etc..no fingerprints inside and no real evidence or proof as to who actually drove his car there. His family now believes he is most likely dead.

http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article.aspx?aID=111575

[J. J. in Phila]

I've posted before about the John Glasgow case in Little Rock, AR and how similar his disappearance is to Gricar's....his car was found several miles away from his home abandoned, with his cellphone, etc..no fingerprints inside and no real evidence or proof as to who actually drove his car there. His family now believes he is most likely dead.

http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article.aspx?aID=111575


And in this case, how many witnesses saw him in the area of the car?

[Politigal]

There were several "credible" sightings of Glasgow....(just like in Gricar's case, Caylee Anthony's case, Lori Hacking's case, Laci Peterson's case, etc.)

Glasgow was supposedly seen at a nearby tobacco store, at a waffle house, and at a motel. None of those sightings could be corroborated. (again, just like in Gricar's case, Caylee Anthony's case, Lori Hacking's case, Laci Peterson's case, etc.)

Period. And as reported, his family believes that he's dead.

[J. J. in Phila]

There were several "credible" sightings of Glasgow....(just like in Gricar's case, Caylee Anthony's case, Lori Hacking's case, Laci Peterson's case, etc.)

Glasgow was supposedly seen at a nearby tobacco store, at a waffle house, and at a motel. None of those sightings could be corroborated. (again, just like in Gricar's case, Caylee Anthony's case, Lori Hacking's case, Laci Peterson's case, etc.)

Period. And as reported, his family believes that he's dead.

Did any of those sightings see him at the same place at the same time? Did any see him driving his car?

[UndertheRadar]

Lest this whole idea of multiple witnesses at the same time and place driving the car thing (and that whole scenario is questionable) get too much love, it's worth considering a few things about oversimplifying how much weight to give that phenomenon.

A couple of recent studies have shown that witnesses do talk to each other, as frequently as nearly 90% of the time. When they do talk to each other, there's more chance their reporting is going to be similar than dissimilar. Based on that alone, multiple witness reports can be problematic.

Even if it can be absolutely proven that witnesses had no conversations, there's no guarantee information isn't indirectly passing from witness to witness because of small and often subtle flaws in LE questioning techniques. It's possible no one is even aware of this when it occurs, but the net effect is the same, a greater chance witness reports are more similar than dissimilar.

Other studies have found that saying someone isn't the person in question actually carries more weight than multiple witnesses saying someone is the person in question.

Applied to the RG, case, for instance, we know that multiple reports of RG and the LMW were taken. But do we know whether LE interviewed others who saw the same man and woman, witnesses who might have said, "No, it didn't look like Ray Gricar to me"? That kind of witness is apparently often "discarded," but according to these studies, means more than the multiple witnesses saying it was.

[gstickley]

This is the first statement made by the "credible witness" whose statement has been used over & over to "prove" RG was with a MW inside the mall:

Local district attorney missing
04/18/05
By Josh Kowalkowski
Collegian Staff Writer

"The car was parked out here [Saturday]," said Brad Alvey, who owns Remember When Café, located in the Street of Shops. "Nobody that I'm aware of saw him."

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, the witnesses for Friday have not been identified publicly, with two exceptions; one of those was a report in the early afternoon. The reports of the details were not reported until more than six months later, and then in an out of town paper. LE got their statements early in the case.

This is just more spin to try (and fail miserably) to explain away the witnesses.

And guess what else, there are no material conflicts in what they say.

[UndertheRadar]

Immaterial whether witnesses were publicly identified or not. The science stands, and I will go with empirical data over guess work any day of the week.

Multiple witnesses can in some cases add credibility to an identification, but it's an oversimplification to assume that they do so.

Furthermore, it's a valid question to ask in any of the supposed multiple witness situations in the RG case (in Lewisburg or Wilkes-Barre, for instance) whether a) LE interviewed for/found any witnesses who negated the identification and b) discarded those negated identifications as is so frequently the case.

[gstickley]

How many "witnesses" said, "I know Ray Gricar and that was Ray Gricar I saw?"

[UndertheRadar]

I fail to understand why, after 3.8 years, no timeline of verified sightings has been released by LE. We still have only 'bits and pieces' to go on. We are told of the witness at the museum, parklet area, but then we are told the dog picked up no scent other than in the SOS lot. Guess we'll see that timeline of VERIFIED witnesses same time we see the tracking report, the cell phone activity report, etc. In the meantime, I will hold with TG's opinion of the number of verified witnesses.
JMO
JMO

I, too, doubt we'll see that list of verified witnesses. But it would certainly cut down on the Miraculously Morphing Witness sightings I keep finding as I research the issue.

[UndertheRadar]

How many "witnesses" said, "I know Ray Gricar and that was Ray Gricar I saw?"

To my knowledge, one vague report of a doctor who supposedly knew RG and supposedly saw him in Huntingdon the day before he went missing, but no released reports of anyone who personally knew RG seeing him after the alleged Friday morning phone call.

[gstickley]

That's the only one I remember.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, how can the witnesses possibly be talking to each other if there don't know who the other witnesses are? The don't wear a sash across their chest that reads "WITNESS."

Right not, this is what we have reported for Lewisburg:

4/15/05 in or near Lewisburg

Woman at Museum, around lunch time, reported Centre Daily Times (CDT)

McKnight’s witness, c. 5:00 PM, includes Mini, CDT

Witnesses, Mini being moved in lot, c. 5:30-6:30 PM (at least three), CDT, Cleveland Scene (CS)

Alvey, Remember When owner, in SoS, in the evening (after 6:00 PM), possibly 4/16/05, reported Daily Collegian (DC), unidentified, but alluded to in CDT, CS. Second witness in SoS. (CS)

4/16/05 in Lewisburg

1. Bennett, lunchtime, CDT

2. Workers, 2, saw RFG at the SoS, just after lunch, CDT

Now the 4/16/05 witnesses were identified and all work in the area, so yes, it is possible they had contact. The museum woman was identified, but that was earlier in the day; Alvey was identified. The other five or more never were. Yet putting them together, they lead to the SoS. We're up to six witnesses that saw RFG in close proximity to his car over a two hour period. Even a mistaken witness should report mid afternoon sightings.

[gstickley]

This is the first statement made by the "credible witness" whose statement has been used over & over to "prove" RG was with a MW inside the mall:

Local district attorney missing
04/18/05
By Josh Kowalkowski
Collegian Staff Writer

"The car was parked out here [Saturday]," said Brad Alvey, who owns Remember When Café, located in the Street of Shops. "Nobody that I'm aware of saw him."

Amazin' Grace . . . how quickly we forget . . .

[UndertheRadar]

I'd like to see the links for the witnesses who supposedly saw the Mini being moved in the lot between 5:30 and 6:30.

I didn't do the studies on multiple witnesses. I just report on what I've read over the past few years. But it would certainly make sense in a town as small as Lewisburg where clearly an important person supposedly went missing from a little parking lot. Hot excitement for small town life, all those police gathered in one small spot--draws a crowd, creates conversation and gossip. Guess the big city life doesn't have that kind of thing.

[J. J. in Phila]

[/B]

Amazin' Grace . . . how quickly we forget . . .

Alvey saw him on Friday, 4/15/05. The quote you just posted refers to Saturday, 4/16/05. Bennett saw him Saturday. But thanks for demonstrating that the witnesses didn't talk to each other.

UTR, the links have been posted repeatedly; the papers are cited. It was also mentioned by Buehner in his press conference and that was linked, twice, IIRC. Feel free to look them up.

[UndertheRadar]

Bear with me folks. I'm just trying to get as close to an accurate read as possible on these claims of multiple witnesses placing Ray Gricar in the SOS parking lot between 5:30 and 6:30.

Pgal asked for links back in October and was told the reports were "all published."

I've asked for links and get the same response.

I've spent a couple weeks as time has allowed digging around the 'net for any references to said supposed multiple witnesses, and I guess you will all have to forgive my thick-headedness and inability to google properly, but I am just not finding any such thing.

Here's what I have found though, and it all leads me to wonder about Magically Morphing Witnesses:

Mike Joseph describes one witness who reports a man "who may have fit Gricar's description" standing beside a Mini-Cooper around noon on Friday along the Susquehanna River. (Witness focus was on the car; she remembered the make of car from a movie.)

Bob Buehner, in the text of his letter, says, "As you may recall, Ray was clearly seen by several witnesses in Lewisburg, PA on Friday, April 15, 2005, standing by his Mini Cooper by the park near the Lewisburg River Bridge. Those witnesses indicated that it appeared he was waiting for someone and even moved his car." (This location is a block from the SOS. Is this sighting the same as the one Mike Joseph refers to? Has one witness become more than one? Has "may have fit Gricar's description become "Ray was clearly seen by several witnesses"? Is this a different sighting entirely?)

A blogger reports that witnesses told LE they saw RG moving the Mini-Cooper several times in the SOS parking lot. No reference to time frame, and no documentation or reference to where this report may have come from (news article, discussion with LE, etc.)

A message board poster on another board, but known to this board, posts that Buehner reported multiple witnesses ID'ing Gricar moving his vehicle in the SOS lot. (Is this in addition to the Buehner claim of witnesses who allegedly saw RG moving his car a full block away from the SOS lot? Or is this a "mistakement"?)

The CS reference for the multiple witnesses between 5:30 and 6:30 moving car I can only assume is the Cleveland Scene/Free Times article by Renner, unless some other article can be provided to show otherwise. That article contains no reference to Mini being moved in the SOS lot, and it contains no reference to the car being moved between 5:30 and 6:30. There are references to the car being moved by the park, which would seem to correspond with the text of Buehner's letter.


Can anyone provide links and/or text from a fact-checked source showing multiple witnesses that put RG or someone resembling RG moving the Mini-Cooper in the SOS lot between 5:30 and 6:30 on Friday, 4/15? I would appreciate seeing any documentation for this claim, as I have found nothing whatsoever to verify it.

[Politigal]

Bear with me folks. I'm just trying to get as close to an accurate read as possible on these claims of multiple witnesses placing Ray Gricar in the SOS parking lot between 5:30 and 6:30.

Pgal asked for links back in October and was told the reports were "all published."

I've asked for links and get the same response.

I've spent a couple weeks as time has allowed digging around the 'net for any references to said supposed multiple witnesses, and I guess you will all have to forgive my thick-headedness and inability to google properly, but I am just not finding any such thing.

Here's what I have found though, and it all leads me to wonder about Magically Morphing Witnesses:

Mike Joseph describes one witness who reports a man "who may have fit Gricar's description" standing beside a Mini-Cooper around noon on Friday along the Susquehanna River. (Witness focus was on the car; she remembered the make of car from a movie.)

Bob Buehner, in the text of his letter, says, "As you may recall, Ray was clearly seen by several witnesses in Lewisburg, PA on Friday, April 15, 2005, standing by his Mini Cooper by the park near the Lewisburg River Bridge. Those witnesses indicated that it appeared he was waiting for someone and even moved his car." (This location is a block from the SOS. Is this sighting the same as the one Mike Joseph refers to? Has one witness become more than one? Has "may have fit Gricar's description become "Ray was clearly seen by several witnesses"? Is this a different sighting entirely?)

A blogger reports that witnesses told LE they saw RG moving the Mini-Cooper several times in the SOS parking lot. No reference to time frame, and no documentation or reference to where this report may have come from (news article, discussion with LE, etc.)

A message board poster on another board, but known to this board, posts that Buehner reported multiple witnesses ID'ing Gricar moving his vehicle in the SOS lot. (Is this in addition to the Buehner claim of witnesses who allegedly saw RG moving his car a full block away from the SOS lot? Or is this a "mistakement"?)

The CS reference for the multiple witnesses between 5:30 and 6:30 moving car I can only assume is the Cleveland Scene/Free Times article by Renner, unless some other article can be provided to show otherwise. That article contains no reference to Mini being moved in the SOS lot, and it contains no reference to the car being moved between 5:30 and 6:30. There are references to the car being moved by the park, which would seem to correspond with the text of Buehner's letter.


Can anyone provide links and/or text from a fact-checked source showing multiple witnesses that put RG or someone resembling RG moving the Mini-Cooper in the SOS lot between 5:30 and 6:30 on Friday, 4/15? I would appreciate seeing any documentation for this claim, as I have found nothing whatsoever to verify it.

I have a feeling we'll all be looking like smurfs shortly.....

blue in the face

[J. J. in Phila]

I have a feeling we'll all be looking like smurfs shortly.....

blue in the face

The blue facial color might indicate a lack of oxygen to the brain.

J. J. in Phila
12-08-2008, 10:45 PM
The number of witnesses that saw RFG moving the car in the parking lot on 4/15/05 is now listed at "three or four good wintesses." I'll list it as three, possibly more. That brings it up to four witnesses that saw RFG in the Mini on 4/15/05 in or around Lewisburg.

http://www.freetimes.com/stories/13/30/the-rivers-edge-homicide-suicide-hoax-a-prosecutor-vanishes-and-the-clues-point-everywhere-and-nowhere-at-oncethe-rivers-edge[/i]

And from Buehner's letter to MM:

As you may recall, Ray was clearly seen by several witnesses in Lewisburg, PA on Friday, April 15, 2005, standing by his Mini Cooper by the park near the Lewisburg River Bridge. Those witnesses indicated that it appeared he was waiting for someone and even moved his car.

And mention at the press conference:

12-14-2008, 02:27 PM
J. J. in Phila J. J. in Phila is invisible
Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,739
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstickley View Post
Aaaahhhh, yes. By DZ himself, one who speaks the truth, to Renner, a writer, who, according to several, plays fast & furious with the truth. Wonderful proof.
Interestingly, Buehner said something quite similar:

Witnesses also said Gricar, for some reason, moved his car from one spot to another in the fairly small Street of Shops parking lot, according to Buehner.

http://z10.invisionfree.com/usedtobedoe/ar/t2226.htm

Are you saying Buehner "plays fast & furious with the truth?" Did you just forget that little tidbit?

Note what Buehner asked for. He wanted motel records checked in a 30 mile radius of Lewisburg. Why would he want that, if he thought the witnesses were wrong?
__________________

P'gal, at one point you claimed that there was no such statement from Buehner, even after the posts were made with links. You only want statements about what you want to have happened, not what really happened.

You better have your Surf condition checked.

:rolleyes:

[J. J. in Phila]

BTW, here is the link to Buehner's letter:

http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/story/691532.html

It might be well to reread it; he very plainly thinks it was murder and that RFG was in Lewisburg on 4/15/05.

[UndertheRadar]

I have a feeling we'll all be looking like smurfs shortly.....

blue in the face

Azure blue, navy blue, powder blue, baby blue, soldier blue, colonial blue, take your pick.

Because the links show exactly what I envisioned, no real evidence of multiple witnesses seeing RG or someone resembling RG moving the Mini around the SOS lot between 5:30 and 6:30.

Nothing in the Free Times article does; DZ talks about alleged witness sightings in the park and museum areas who allegedly "watched him driving his Mini Cooper back and forth on Friday" and allegedly saw him "park it two or three different times across the street" near the museum on Saturday.

These are apparently the same witnesses BB refers to in his letter.

The blogger who referenced witnesses in the SOS lot wrote the article referenced in the invisionfree link. That article, however, contains content almost entirely devoted to the contents of BB's letter. In context:

Buehner, who repeatedly spoke of his respect for his friend Gricar, released a letter he sent to Centre County District Attorney Michael Madeira and Union County District Attorney Peter Johnson. The letter — which Buehner said Madeira never answered and did not acknowledge until he learned of the news conference — tells of a sighting of Gricar, not previously made public, in Lewisburg on April 15, 2005, the day he vanished.

It also lists the name, address and telephone number of a company that Buehner said might have the expertise to recover data from a computer hard drive believed to have come from Gricar’s laptop computer. The drive was found in the Susquehanna River about six months after Gricar’s disappearance. A federal government lab determined it was too badly damaged for data to be recovered, but Buehner said the company he referenced was able to retrieve data even from hard drives damaged in the 2003 disintegration and fiery reentry of Space Shuttle Columbia.

Buehner said he mailed the letter to Madeira on June 3.

Madeira “did nothing” in response, Buehner said. “He did absolutely nothing for four weeks. This is the state that the investigation (is in) and it is shameful, it is reprehensible, and, frankly, it’s intolerable. The investigation that should have been done has not been done in this case.”

Gricar took April 15, 2005, off from work, and called his girlfriend that morning to tell her he was taking a drive on state Route 192. His Mini Cooper was found the next day in a parking lot across from the Street of Shops, an antiques mall in Lewisburg.

Some witnesses reported seeing Gricar at the antiques mall with a woman who police have not been able to identify. Witnesses also said Gricar, for some reason, moved his car from one spot to another in the fairly small Street of Shops parking lot, according to Buehner.

The article is primarily about the letter BB wrote. In the letter, BB cites witnesses who place someone resembling RG, moving a Mini, a block away from the SOS.

That's all I really wanted to know. I like to be sure we're dealing with premises that are as close to accurate as we can get them. That's difficult in a case where so little has been released and where reports aren't always clear, as is true with the witness reporting. I'm satisfied now we don't have a "cluster" of witnesses putting someone resembling RG moving his car in the SOS lot between 5:30 and 6:30 on Friday.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, he said "parking lot," at the press conference. In his letter, he does not specify where. I do not recall multiple witnesses seeing RFG moving his car someplace else.

DZ said:

“Friday night, people remember the car sitting in the parking lot. It’s a very distinct car. Two people in the antique mall are positive they saw him in there.

http://www.freetimes.com/stories/13/30/the-rivers-edge-homicide-suicide-hoax-a-prosecutor-vanishes-and-the-clues-point-everywhere-and-nowhere-at-oncethe-rivers-edge

Do you think his was moving his car in the Street of Shops? All these witnesses, six (possibly seven) so far, are saying that they saw RFG between 5:00 PM an 6:30 PM on Friday. We know of one witness, who worked at the museum, saw him earlier. Are you suggesting that even more witnesses that saw him earlier?

[J. J. in Phila]

I found this line in Buehner's letter to be very interesting:

It is my understanding that there is a pretty clear description of the female seen in Ray's presence on Saturday, April 16, 2005.

Note the day.

DZ had that as Friday night.

[Cloudbuster]

IMOO there is only ONE person who knew Ray that saw him and that's CFenton. She saw him right behind the courthouse in his local area. I don't care what car he was driving, she knew him and what he looked like. That leads me to believe that friday at 3 pm RG was still alive. Question is what happened to him afer that? and why did he have another car? There are other reasons a person might be using another car. One possibility is he was doing undercover survalience. A red mini with vanity plates is not a good idea if that be the case. He may have even been watching someone from the Chouse and perhaps pulled into the CH lot to see if that person was still there??? Otherwise I would think he was putting something in PF's car OR putting the mini keys in her car. If she found the keys with no note perhaps hours later she assumed he left? I really don't think the public got every detail. That may be something LE with held.
JAO

[UndertheRadar]

Buehner's letter specifies exactly where the witnesses allegedly saw someone resembling RG moving the car:

by the park near the Lewisburg River Bridge. Those witnesses indicated that it appeared he was waiting for someone and even moved his car.

This location, of course, is a block away from the SOS lot.

Verification that Buehner added additional witnesses specifying the SOS at lot when speaking at the press conference? Not the invisionfree link about Buehner's letter, but a transcript of the press conference?

Friday night, people remember the car sitting in the parking lot.

DZ's quote here is what Bennett has said--that the car was seen in the SOS lot. Not RG or someone resembling RG. Not a car being moved, but a car sitting in the lot.

No change in what I see. Still no evidence of a "cluster" of witnesses to RG or someone resembling RG in the SOS lot between 5:30 and 6:30 on Friday.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, you have it from the press conference and PB, who was there, noted it and not just in the story. DZ notes the people seeing him in the Mini in the evening in Renner's piece.

Now, that raises the question about how many more witnesses saw RFG. I'm up to 7, but it's starting to look like it might be 10 on Friday alone.

Now, according to Buehner, another witness saw RFG with a woman on Saturday.

[UndertheRadar]

The notation at the invisionfree link is about the contents of the letter. Without a transcript of the press conference, it appears BB's actual reference (in the letter) to a moving Mini one block from the SOS may have been mistakenly referenced as a moving Mini in the SOS lot. Since no other source anywhere appears to mention moving Mini-Coopers in the SOS lot, I would like to see BB's actual words indicating additional witnesses to RG moving the car at a second location.

As for DZ, there is no reference in the Free Times article to people seeing RG or someone resembling RG in the Mini Friday evening. To the car in the lot, yes. To RG being there, no.

[Politigal]

This thread sort of reminds me of "Point/Counterpoint" with Dan Akroyd & Jane Curtin.....

:laugh:

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, PB also mentioned it in his blog, and before the tragedy that struck the Buehner family, the two did communicate and Buehner was even with PB. PB mentioned the Mini being moved in the parking lot to me, after that story and they did talk about it as well.

Now, we have Buehner saying the Mystery Woman was seen with RFG on Saturday. That sounds like more than casual contact.

[UndertheRadar]

Verification from any other fact checked source?

Because none seems to appear anywhere mentioning RG or someone resembling RG moving the Mini in the SOS lot Friday evening.

Because the search for the truth should rely as much as possible on verified information.

Because there are simply too many ways for this "information" to be a "mistakement" based on BB's written claim about the Mini being moved a full block away from the SOS lot. That full-block-away moving of the Mini was at least reported elsewhere.

Though ultimately, of course, none of it may matter, given the poor rate of return on witness sightings in missing persons' cases. Keeping tally would seem a waste of time in light of what we know of other cases.

Seven named plus various unnamed witnesses to LP walking her Golden Retriever in her own neighborhood in a narrow window of time did not produce a live LP.

Dozens of witnesses to Jennifer Kesse in the same area did not produce a live Jennifer.

Three hundred fifty sightings of Brooke Wilberger did not produce a live Brooke.

One would be hard pressed, in fact, to come up with anything resembling a substantial list of missing persons' cases where witness sightings of the missing person were accurate ID's. A few abducted child cases (Elizabeth, Shasta) where the child was kept alive come to mind where eventually a single witness sighting was an accurate ID.

The vast majority of witness sightings in missing persons' cases, though? Well-intentioned, but inaccurate and ultimately worthless.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, your verification is in the article previously cited and in PB's blog.

[J. J. in Phila]

If there was any car movement at all in a one or two block area that day, I wonder why it wasn't immediately viewed as suspicious activity, after it was determined the vehicle was being driven by a disappeared DA, under suspicious circumstances. Nothing about him in the decades prior to, leading up to the day of disappearance when he took nothing with him, nor has he used any money or credit cards since, points toward any planned or unplanned walk away, IMO.

It is not necessary to have evidence of foul play in order to move an investigation to foul play. All that is required is 'suspicious activity'.

I recall early reports of the car being moved, which I did not take to mean in ONE lot, but rather from one lot to another. If we were to create a map from what we know of sightings, we would have him at
----the museum/park at noon,
----at Shickellemy Park near Sunbury,
----somewhere on the Interstate being tailed,
----parked somewhere, likely close, while walking inside SOS with MW,
----coming out of a quarry sometime close to their closing time, IIRC,
----on route 15 at 5 pm-ish,
----pulling into the lot 5 pm-ish,
----in the lot, 5 pm-ish, construction worker leaning in car,
----in the lot 5:30-6:30 pm-ish, parking
----car parked somewhere while he's in the SOS, noon-ish Saturday,
----car in front position around 2 on Saturday,
----car found in another position at 6:30-ish, Saturday.

Now that's a lot of movement for a man hexx-bent on walking away.
We're talking about a man, in a committed relationship, SO waiting at home for his return, called SO earlier to report in on dog care, and he's just mosey-ing around a town 60 miles from home, cell phone shut off, as if he isn't committed to anyone or anything, without a care in the world, while driving her car. This takes 'relaxing' to a whole new level from what appeared to have been his 'norm'. Work three hours on Thursday evening in order to play all day Friday and Saturday, without even a call home? I don't buy it.

No reason whatsoever, if he met someone, for him to be bouncing all around the area. Why wouldn't he have just park his car and leave with her early on?

I've never read anything that states at anytime during all of this car movement that there was a woman with him other than Z's version of the 'stroll in the SOS'. Are we to suppose that during the other sightings she was on the sidelines 'ew--ing and ah---ing' over his parking abilities, and once proven he could park a car, he could then hop into her car with her and take off somewhere?

If he was going there to meet someone, he could have parked the car, got out, got into another car with the person and left. If he had to wait for the other person to get done work to come pick him up, the car should have been left there on Friday, no more movement. Why stay in the area overnight if leaving, knowing full well the SO will call LE concerned?

Frankly, it sounds to me like someone took the entire list of witness sightings, likely after they were all shown photos of both subject and clothes, which by the way, we have no proof he even had on that day, and called all of the sightings legit. What kind of investigator would do that? Never mind----I think I already know......one with an overactive fantasy about MW.
JMO

Okay, let's examine this:

----the museum/park at noon, . Museum woman possibly others, "around lunchtime."

----at Shickellemy Park near Sunbury,
----somewhere on the Interstate being tailed,
---coming out of a quarry sometime close to their closing time, IIRC,

Not verified, both were a car, not RFG.

----parked somewhere, likely close, while walking inside SOS with MW,
----on route 15 at 5 pm-ish,
----pulling into the lot 5 pm-ish,
----in the lot, 5 pm-ish, construction worker leaning in car,
----in the lot 5:30-6:30 pm-ish, parking

I know of no claim that the construction worker was around 5:00 PM or that he was seen "pulling in."

We have this sequence:

RFG in Mini, seen heading toward parking lot at 5:00 PM. Seen w/Mini in lot between 5:30-6:30 PM. Seen out of the Mini, in SoS between 5:30-6:30 PM.

----car parked somewhere while he's in the SOS, noon-ish Saturday,
----car in front position around 2 on Saturday,
----car found in another position at 6:30-ish, Saturday. Never been established that it was moved. It was observed in the lot at various times during 4/16/05.

[Serendipitous1]

I accept each and every supposed sighting of a red-n-white Mini Cooper and/or a man resembling RG, as being informational...but I reject each and every supposed sighting of RG's red-n-white Mini Cooper and/or RG as being definitive. That is to say...in regard to the "sightings", I bristle against statements that this was RG or was his Mini Cooper, without objective proof...of which there is none, at least publicly disseminated (to include the interpretation of bloodhound proclivities, etc.).

The only exception, made public, seems to be (as Cloudbuster pointed out) CF's sighting. Her sighting was supposedly confirmed by a judge. These are two people who knew RG. But when that sighting became publicly known, the judge apparently wimped out, publicly, leaving CF (and SPM) to "twist slowly in the wind"...would not want to compromise "the case", ya know.

But what "case" would that be...murder, without a body? "We" cannot have all these sightings if "we" want to prosecute without a body. "We" cannot have all these missed leads floating around if "we" want to prosecute, without a body. But there they are...the supposed sightings and missed leads...so deal with it. After all, this is still just a missing-person case...right?

[UndertheRadar]

I know how many times I have been certain I had seen someone and it turned out to be someone else so until there is confirmation that RG is who was seen that day in another car, I do not see it as having been proven beyond a doubt that it was him. SPM was not there to witness it was RG. The judge was. If they already know it was Friday, that it was RG, then likely they also know a great deal that we don't, and they aren't telling.

I wonder what the family believes about this sighting. Have they ever commented on it?


Last weekend we were at a public event, and going in, I was absolutely positive a woman several people in front of us was someone I know fairly well and whom I see and talk to at least every two weeks. When we got up next to her, I realized I was mistaken, but she certainly could have been a body double for the woman I know.

That, of course, got me thinking about RG and witness sightings, and during the event I found my eyes drifting around to people I could see in our immediate section. Amazing how many middle-aged men were within sight and wearing blue fleece and blue jeans. (I couldn't see their feet, but sneakers aren't exactly a rarity with jeans.) Out of those, I counted at least five who could have been mistaken for RG. I don't mean "mistaken" if photos of each were laid side-by-side with RG's, but certainly "confused with RG" if one were just going about life and then asked later to recall seeing anyone matching that description and wearing that kind of clothing. Later we went to dinner, and within easy line of sight, yet another person would have fit the bill.

All that got me thinking about Central PA and its largely Germanic/Eastern European heritage. If RG had gone missing in a wide variety of other cities or states or neighborhoods, his particular "ordinariness" would have stood out as something not so ordinary. In Central PA, his coloring, bone structure, etc. are all pretty much part of the typical heritage of the area (which might explain why I can also think of at least 3 family members who could, in the right circumstances, be "confused" with RG by an eyewitness.) I don't know what that's worth, but it's a thought I hadn't really considered before.

As for the CF sighting, I do remember asking TG about his thoughts on that sometime back in the summer of 2006. I can't replicate his exact response, but I do know it amounted pretty much to, "Don't know what to make of it."

[UndertheRadar]

Verification from any other fact checked source?


Other being the operative word.

[Politigal]

from boardreader.com

http://boardreader.com/s/tonygricar+fenton.html?d=0&b=0&extended_search=1&q1=tonygricar+fenton&dateSwitch=0

tonyGricar described Fenton's 'sighting', according to investigators, as having changed over time, from her first report (resembled Ray... 'Ray' was driving at the time. I believe LE reacted to Fenton's first report if, in fact, she wasn't positive then. .

and

But, as tonyGricar pointed out, why would he risk returning to Bellefonte and being seen at the very place he was most recognizable

[Cloudbuster]

I was thinking about Thursday when RG was sighted by a Dr at Raystown lake. I don't think the body of water implicates suicide thoughts. I think RG made that drive to meet someone.

Remember that was a time when people from the drug bust was being asked to make deals of plea bargins and such. If that was the case I can see why nobody knew he was going there thursday. I would think RG would keep those things secret.

I think the person didn't show (KA mentioned door slamming more than usual? ) I think I would be angry to if I drove all the way to Huntingdon and the person was a no show. Thats a drive during a work day and yea Id be slightly crocked about it wouldn't you? It just seems to make the most sense.

Lets put it in the crockpot on slow to see if it cooks lol.

Perhaps a second meeting got scheduled for friday? This person might be afraid of being seen with the DA (excuse) or the person decided to set the DA up? If RG showed up at Huntingdon for the person, then the person knows he or she could get him to show up again? Only this time the (second time might have been with ill intent.)

Large bodies of water seem to be places to meet. Parks are also on that list. They seem to be places that users frequent to meet in rural areas. RG was supposedly in casual clothing and he did have sunglasses.

It's just a crockpot thought.

[UndertheRadar]

I wonder what the family believes about this [the CF] sighting. Have they ever commented on it?


"It's just incredible," Tony Gricar said Saturday.

He was particularly disturbed by the fact that Fenton's sighting of Gricar was rejected. "She's as credible a witness as we've had all along," Tony Gricar said.

Fenton told police in the days following Gricar's disappearance that she saw him in a metallic-colored car, not his red Mini Cooper or Fornicola's Honda. Fenton said she is sure of what she saw, but police said it could not have been Gricar because he was spotted by witnesses in Lewisburg during the early afternoon.

"But she knew him," Tony Gricar said in near disbelief. "The single most-credible witness was discredited because of timeline issues when police didn't even have a credible timeline."



http://www.justiceforchandra.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=24005&sid=eb86a5df5403300df85d3bd91d558198

[J. J. in Phila]

I accept each and every supposed sighting of a red-n-white Mini Cooper and/or a man resembling RG, as being informational...but I reject each and every supposed sighting of RG's red-n-white Mini Cooper and/or RG as being definitive. That is to say...in regard to the "sightings", I bristle against statements that this was RG or was his Mini Cooper, without objective proof...of which there is none, at least publicly disseminated (to include the interpretation of bloodhound proclivities, etc.).

The only exception, made public, seems to be (as Cloudbuster pointed out) CF's sighting. Her sighting was supposedly confirmed by a judge. These are two people who knew RG. But when that sighting became publicly known, the judge apparently wimped out, publicly, leaving CF (and SPM) to "twist slowly in the wind"...would not want to compromise "the case", ya know.

But what "case" would that be...murder, without a body? "We" cannot have all these sightings if "we" want to prosecute without a body. "We" cannot have all these missed leads floating around if "we" want to prosecute, without a body. But there they are...the supposed sightings and missed leads...so deal with it. After all, this is still just a missing-person case...right?

First, in nearly every investigation, the level of "objective proof" that you want will be nonexistent. It would still be both admissible and persuasive in court.

Second, Grine did confirm that he saw RFG driving a metallic colored car in the parking lot behind the Courthouse. He cannot remember the day. Now, why is RFG driving an unknown car or either 4/14 or 4/15?

[Politigal]

An interesting statement by Zaccagni on witness sightings of Gricar:

http://tinyurl.com/bzreq4

Reports of Gricar sightings in Wilkes-Barre also have not panned out. Zaccagni said the most recent sighting of Gricar comes out of Michigan, and like other leads, officers are following up, even though there is a strong likelihood it will turn out to be yet another red herring.

"We'll check it out," Zaccagni said.

[J. J. in Phila]

An interesting statement by Zaccagni on witness sightings of Gricar:

http://tinyurl.com/bzreq4

Reports of Gricar sightings in Wilkes-Barre also have not panned out. Zaccagni said the most recent sighting of Gricar comes out of Michigan, and like other leads, officers are following up, even though there is a strong likelihood it will turn out to be yet another red herring.

"We'll check it out," Zaccagni said.

I think the most interesting thing is that LE knew that the witness was a police officer and never bothered to mention it.

[Politigal]

Apparently old news reports aren't available about Grine seeing Gricar....and all I've been able to locate is something to the effect of Grine recalling seeing Gricar behind the courthouse...not sure if it was Thurs or Friday....but no mention of Grine seeing Gricar in a silver car.

:confused:

[J. J. in Phila]

Apparently old news reports aren't available about Grine seeing Gricar....and all I've been able to locate is something to the effect of Grine recalling seeing Gricar behind the courthouse...not sure if it was Thurs or Friday....but no mention of Grine seeing Gricar in a silver car.

:confused:

Grine came out in the Q and A after the missed leads. I think PB has referred to it in his blog as well.

His report was identical to Fenton's, except he couldn't remember the day.

[Politigal]

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2009/02/02/district_attorney_to_run_despi.aspx

Centre County needs another DA besides Madeira IMO....but maybe Deboef can pull it off??

[Politigal]

from the article I posted

Madeira said no one else has indicated to him they will be challenging him for the position, but "in politics, you take nothing for granted."

It really surprises me that more people aren't running ....whazzup with that??

[Serendipitous1]

I agree with the others. SPM said the judge confirmed CF's sighting, presumedly meaning RG driving an unfamiliar car, behind the courthouse, on Friday at about 3 pm. But all PB has ever said was that the judge is not sure of the day (hard to believe considering CF reported her sighting to police that first Monday). Nothing has been published to indicate what it was that the judge saw, regardless of the day. It can only be implied.

As to MM running as the incumbent...I would like to see MM handed his hat. If the locals "smell blood", several should be tossing their hats in the ring. But RG was not an issue 4 years ago...so it is hard to envision him being a factor now.

[Cloudbuster]

I didn't know where to put this link. It is a fast criminal search link that I have added to my toolbar to get to it in a hurry. I thought I would share it with those that are interested.

http://www.criminalsearches.com/

[Cloudbuster]

Also for anyone new there is this helpful link (the USJ portal: Use the participents name its easier.

http://ujsportal.pacourts.us/DocketSheets/CP.aspx

[Politigal]

I didn't know where to put this link. It is a fast criminal search link that I have added to my toolbar to get to it in a hurry. I thought I would share it with those that are interested.

http://www.criminalsearches.com/


thx for the link CB

[sherrijean981]

Good to see you Tree.

There would be two possibilities regarding why the laptop was out of the case:

1. He was planning to destroy the data by destroying the hard drive. The case would add more bulk. He may have even removed the drive there.

2. He was planning to use it in the field, as it were. He removed it to check the battery. It worked and he could turn it on there. There would be no need to take the accessories.

Both are posible and both point to different things.

JJ I haven't been on for a couple weeks but went through to read a few of the last posts. Have a question.

Who exactly were the courthouse informers who said that Ray was looking for something to clean his computer up?

[J. J. in Phila]

JJ I haven't been on for a couple weeks but went through to read a few of the last posts. Have a question.

Who exactly were the courthouse informers who said that Ray was looking for something to clean his computer up?

It has never been published, but the source was not PEF or Sloane.

[Politigal]

http://tinyurl.com/dfkyzy

Gricar kept the county-issued laptop at his home, Weaver and Madeira said. Madeira said Gricar inquired about software to erase the hard drive sometime in the 16 months before he disappeared, but there is no receipt or other evidence that he ever purchased that software.

Ok....my question is this -- why the 16 month reference?

What does that mean? Does it mean the person that Gricar spoke with about erasing the hard drive, had only been acquainted with Gricar 16 months prior to his disappearance? or had only worked with Gricar for 16 months prior to his disappearance?

What does the 16 month time frame signify???

[J. J. in Phila]

http://tinyurl.com/dfkyzy

Gricar kept the county-issued laptop at his home, Weaver and Madeira said. Madeira said Gricar inquired about software to erase the hard drive sometime in the 16 months before he disappeared, but there is no receipt or other evidence that he ever purchased that software.

Ok....my question is this -- why the 16 month reference?

What does that mean? Does it mean the person that Gricar spoke with about erasing the hard drive, had only been acquainted with Gricar 16 months prior to his disappearance? or had only worked with Gricar for 16 months prior to his disappearance?

What does the 16 month time frame signify???

RFG asked the question within the prior 16 month period. From what has been intimated, it was not a recent request, but one made in late 2003 or early 2004.

[Serendipitous1]

RFG asked the question within the prior 16 month period. From what has been intimated, it was not a recent request, but one made in late 2003 or early 2004.After he had announced he would not seek another term? He has to turn county property back in, including that seldom used laptop. So what? I would be looking for a way to erase the memory, before turning that computer in, regardless of what my present use of it was.

[J. J. in Phila]

After he had announced he would not seek another term? He has to turn county property back in, including that seldom used laptop. So what? I would be looking for a way to erase the memory, before turning that computer in, regardless of what my present use of it was.

I'm not sure it was "after." I merely gave a factual answer to P'gal's question.

I would be looking to erase the drive prior to returning it, but not asking about it around two years prior to having to return it. That would be very low on retirement priority list.

Now, there could be other reasons for doing that, but it is odd that RFG asked about destroying the data (frankly far in advance) and we find that the data has been destroyed. It could be coincidence, or not.

[UndertheRadar]

After he had announced he would not seek another term? He has to turn county property back in, including that seldom used laptop. So what? I would be looking for a way to erase the memory, before turning that computer in, regardless of what my present use of it was.

My thoughts exactly.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, first, I'm not sure if it was after and the first thing on my agenda after announcing retirement in two years would not be to erase my hard drive.

[Politigal]

What really puzzles me.....is *if* RG was interested in erasing the hard drive.....he *knew* of his own nephew's computer expertise & experience......and Patty was computer literate, working with laptops at work, and at home, both in her previous position and in the new clerical position.

Tony could easily have done the scrub for RG. Patty could probably have done it. Or, the Centre County IT dept could have done it, with RG standing right there to watch.

It just seems weird that he wouldn't have consulted one of them.

[UndertheRadar]

I don't believe anybody listed RG's priorities and demonstrated that erasing his hard drive was the first item on the agenda.

I do know, having had a loaner laptop for a few years while doing a special project for work, that I began thinking about its return and the hard drive contents long before the actual return would take place. I had absolutely nothing illegal, immoral, or fattening on the computer, and 98% of it was work-related, but I didn't like the idea of turning work product out into other hands. This was many years ago when I knew much less about computer software for taking care of such things (and in fact, when such software may not have been widely available).

I'm just saying . . . it's not an unusual thought to have way ahead of time, even with nothing to hide. Even with only work product on his laptop, RG likely would have had some sensitive case materials on the computer that shouldn't fall into just "any" hands.

[Cloudbuster]

Maybe RG was thinking he might not be able to wait to retire. Perhaps the thoughts of retiring early wore on his mind. Perhaps its something within the job that made him feel like he might leave it at anytime? Maybe just to be on the safe side of it he wanted the laptop wiped. Maybe something was going on in work that he felt at ease knowing the laptop was wiped.

[Politigal]

http://tinyurl.com/dfkyzy

Gricar kept the county-issued laptop at his home, Weaver and Madeira said. Madeira said Gricar inquired about software to erase the hard drive sometime in the 16 months before he disappeared, but there is no receipt or other evidence that he ever purchased that software.

Ok....my question is this -- why the 16 month reference?

What does that mean? Does it mean the person that Gricar spoke with about erasing the hard drive, had only been acquainted with Gricar 16 months prior to his disappearance? or had only worked with Gricar for 16 months prior to his disappearance?

What does the 16 month time frame signify???

hmmmm

I was reading old posts last night and according to JJ, 16 months was the period of time that RG and Patty had lived together, prior to the disappearance.

JK Arnold included this 16 month reference in her googlepages section on JJ as well.


So, it appears the 16 month time frame is the period of time Patty was with Gricar, and IMO, I think her role in disseminating the news of hard drive erasing software is *greater* than some would believe.

[J. J. in Phila]

hmmmm

I was reading old posts last night and according to JJ, 16 months was the period of time that RG and Patty had lived together, prior to the disappearance.

JK Arnold included this 16 month reference in her googlepages section on JJ as well.


So, it appears the 16 month time frame is the period of time Patty was with Gricar, and IMO, I think her role in disseminating the news of hard drive erasing software is *greater* than some would believe.

You are wrong again, P'gal. I just posted that the information did not come from someone in the DA's Office, and that would include PEF as someone it did not come from.

PEF's sole contribution in the erasure matter is that maybe, possibly, there might have been a box that contained an erasure program in his stuff 12-15 months before he disappeared. The reports, at least one, is that RFG actually asked about how to do erase the drive.

It is odd. Two years, roughly, prior to having to return the laptop is more than unusual, if that was why RFG asked. My guess is, because the laptop was going to be used at the home computer, that there was something RFG didn't want PEF to have access to (and that might be completely unrelated to this). There, the timing seems to be better.

[Politigal]

Does anyone have a link to who RG spoke to about erasing the drive?

(to my knowledge....there are none)

[J. J. in Phila]

Does anyone have a link to who RG spoke to about erasing the drive?


No, because I've indicated that it hasn't been reported. I was reported that it wasn't PEF. I'll confirm that at least one was not an employee of the DA's Office.

[Politigal]

So, it appears we have no information on who RG spoke to and nothing to substantiate any claims that it wasn't someone in his office.

[J. J. in Phila]

So, it appears we have no information on who RG spoke to and nothing to substantiate any claims that it wasn't someone in his office.


No, you don't have the information. This is another situation where I'm telling you that you will look foolish when the information comes out if you pursue that direction. Don't say you were not warned. ;)

The information is solid, but the relevance to the disappearance of RFG is questionable.

[Politigal]

I don't believe anybody listed RG's priorities and demonstrated that erasing his hard drive was the first item on the agenda.

I do know, having had a loaner laptop for a few years while doing a special project for work, that I began thinking about its return and the hard drive contents long before the actual return would take place. I had absolutely nothing illegal, immoral, or fattening on the computer, and 98% of it was work-related, but I didn't like the idea of turning work product out into other hands. This was many years ago when I knew much less about computer software for taking care of such things (and in fact, when such software may not have been widely available).

I'm just saying . . . it's not an unusual thought to have way ahead of time, even with nothing to hide. Even with only work product on his laptop, RG likely would have had some sensitive case materials on the computer that shouldn't fall into just "any" hands.

I agree...And, I doubt the lap top had anything whatsoever to do with his disappearance anyway.

The disposal of the lap top and the hard drive were probably a ruse.

IMO

[UndertheRadar]

My admittedly unsolicited opinion: no one can ever look "foolish" asking that sources of information be confirmed, especially information that appears on an internet message board.

[J. J. in Phila]

I agree...And, I doubt the lap top had anything whatsoever to do with his disappearance anyway.

The disposal of the lap top and the hard drive were probably a ruse.

IMO


It may or may not be a ruse; it may or may not be linked. The erasure request may be important or not. It shouldn't be the focus at this point because, currently, it cannot yield additional information.

UTR, while no one can look foolish asking a question, they can, and often do look foolish assuming an answer.

[Politigal]

My admittedly unsolicited opinion: no one can ever look "foolish" asking that sources of information be confirmed, especially information that appears on an internet message board.

Thx, while it's sometimes "fun" to play secret squirrel....it's better to provide backup for what we post, thereby adding credibility.

[UndertheRadar]

So, it appears we have no information on who RG spoke to and nothing to substantiate any claims that it wasn't someone in his office.

This is what Pgal said when she was told she'd look foolish when the information "came out." Simply a claim that we have no documented information regarding who RG allegedly spoke to in or out of the office. And it is true. We have no documentation.

A request for documentation is valid.

Either it's "Secret Moose and Squirrel" stuff and doesn't belong on this board at all. Or documentation should be provided.

Otherwise, seems to me it's just rumor-mongering and puffery. MOO.

[J. J. in Phila]

Thx, while it's sometimes "fun" to play secret squirrel....it's better to provide backup for what we post, thereby adding credibility.


No, the information is there. Some more trickled out today; it wasn't TG. Like much of what I post, it will eventually come out. I just question what, ultimately, will be the relevance.

[Politigal]

It's been reported that Gricar was a very private person. He didn't socialize with his neighbors. He hardly socialized with his coworkers. One of his friends had been out on extended medical leave, so it's doubtful he had recently hung out with Gricar (imo.) His family lived many miles away in WA and OH. So, I'm wondering what a typical weekend was like for RG and Patty, or if they had any particular plans for the weekend he disappeared. It appears that their every Friday evening dinner at the Gamble Mill Inn wasn't going to happen that day.

I read where Richard Fornicola's daughter got married that Saturday (4/16/05,) and have previously posted wondering if RG and Patty had been invited to the ceremony.

[J. J. in Phila]

It's been reported that Gricar was a very private person. He didn't socialize with his neighbors. He hardly socialized with his coworkers. One of his friends had been out on extended medical leave, so it's doubtful he had recently hung out with Gricar (imo.) His family lived many miles away in WA and OH. So, I'm wondering what a typical weekend was like for RG and Patty, or if they had any particular plans for the weekend he disappeared. It appears that their every Friday evening dinner at the Gamble Mill Inn wasn't going to happen that day.

I read where Richard Fornicola's daughter got married that Saturday (4/16/05,) and have previously posted wondering if RG and Patty had been invited to the ceremony.

I'm not sure that he didn't socialize with his neighbors. SS was on medical leave, but was able to (barely) travel for more than a two hour round trip. Walker was healthy.

My weekends are usually not "typical," meaning, except for church, I don't have a set pattern; RFG was not regarded as being practicing. I'm not sure, except for sports enthusiasts, there is a "typical" weekend.

[Politigal]

re: the neighbors

"In Bellefonte, courthouse workers and several neighbors of Gricar described the prosecutor as friendly, though he did not socialize much outside of work.

"I don't think anybody knows Ray well around here," said Ted Ranio, 69, a retired police officer and factory worker who has lived in Gricar's neighborhood since 1964."

Family of missing prosecutor keeps vigil as police look for clues (phillyBurbs.com) | Pennsylvania News (http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:Edym80BjJYAJ:www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/103-04192005-478333.html+%22ray+gricar%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2&ie=UTF-8)

[J. J. in Phila]

re: the neighbors

"In Bellefonte, courthouse workers and several neighbors of Gricar described the prosecutor as friendly, though he did not socialize much outside of work.

"I don't think anybody knows Ray well around here," said Ted Ranio, 69, a retired police officer and factory worker who has lived in Gricar's neighborhood since 1964."

Family of missing prosecutor keeps vigil as police look for clues (phillyBurbs.com) | Pennsylvania News (http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:Edym80BjJYAJ:www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/103-04192005-478333.html+%22ray+gricar%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2&ie=UTF-8)

The key words are "friendly" and "socialize." Does "socialize" mean going out to dinner with the neighbors? Does "friendly" mean just saying "hello" when they passed in the street, or talking about vacation plans for 15 minutes?

About two months ago, a man that I've known for 9 years, and who's wife I've known for 16 years, was stunned to find out that I attended Penn State, despite the fact that commonly wear a school tie in his presence, a class ring, and have an alumni association decal on my car. I would say we're friendly and socialize, and he's no dummy, but I still found that surprising.

[Politigal]

I was thinking last night ....

I wonder what Patty Fornicola thinks of the possibility of a new DA and a *renewed* investigation into Gricar's disappearance?

:mellow:

[J. J. in Phila]

Probably quite favorable. You will note that MR has been re-interviewing people and doing new interviews.

[ladyheartfixer]

IF...(and that is a big if)...it is confirmed that RG was seen at Lake Raystown...and this is said to be a doctor who confirmed this...(no I don't have a link...I read it on here)....could it have been the doctor who was helping to get the new evidence needed on the "shaken baby case". And as someone on one of the other threads said...maybe he (RG) switched out the hard drive to keep that evidence quiet until court date? I dunno...had to make my monthly contribution to the topic...hello to everyone still here keeping RG's name in the mix!!

[gstickley]

Hi, Lady. We've missed you. We need you to drop in more often, like a couple times a day . . .:smile:

[J. J. in Phila]

Good to see you. And don't be a stranger (though I might have to cut back here a bit, myself).

IF...(and that is a big if)...it is confirmed that RG was seen at Lake Raystown...and this is said to be a doctor who confirmed this...(no I don't have a link...I read it on here)....could it have been the doctor who was helping to get the new evidence needed on the "shaken baby case". And as someone on one of the other threads said...maybe he (RG) switched out the hard drive to keep that evidence quiet until court date? I dunno...had to make my monthly contribution to the topic...hello to everyone still here keeping RG's name in the mix!!

He'd have to turn over any information to the defense, or risk getting it tossed out. Lake Raystown is pretty far from Danville.

[Cloudbuster]

Danville to Lewisburg is 15.8 miles and takes 22 minutes. I used 100 north water street in Lewisburg as my starting point.

[J. J. in Phila]

Danville to Lewisburg is 15.8 miles and takes 22 minutes. I used 100 north water street in Lewisburg as my starting point.

The idea of meeting someone in a parking lot, and not getting written reports sent to the office, would be suspicious as if RFG didn't want the meeting to be known, if this meeting someone involved in the Vargas case.

[gstickley]

IF...(and that is a big if)...it is confirmed that RG was seen at Lake Raystown...and this is said to be a doctor who confirmed this...(no I don't have a link...I read it on here)....could it have been the doctor who was helping to get the new evidence needed on the "shaken baby case". And as someone on one of the other threads said...maybe he (RG) switched out the hard drive to keep that evidence quiet until court date? I dunno...had to make my monthly contribution to the topic...hello to everyone still here keeping RG's name in the mix!!

IF RG was gathering new evidence, perhaps it's possible he didn't want anyone else in his office aware of it; thus, the meetings outside the office & the area to keep the office "fly in the soup" in the dark about who, what, why he was meeting someone. And, what better way to keep the evidence/information confidential than to use the laptop.

And, any "evidence" collected would definitely have to be turned over to the defense if it were to be used in court . . . but it had to be collected first!

[J. J. in Phila]

The thing is, RFG supposedly never collected evidence. Getting it in a parking lot would be very strange.

[Cloudbuster]

He could have went to Dansville Geisinger medical center first then just stopped at the SOS shop. If he did meet with any doctors or nurses at Danville after seeing he disappeared do you honestly think they would come forward to admit to that even? I know if I seen RG disappeared I would shut up to out of fear.

Does anyone know how far away was Shenadohah park from Dansville? We have heard hardly nothing about that sighting. Like was he alone or with someone. In a DP case yes a prosecutor does investagate.
Lucus's mom was staying in Crawford county at the time, thats far but I think I-80 is used.

[Cloudbuster]

Also PF had stated that Ray was working hard latly. That seems to indicate as in hard on the DP case because yes they are hard cases to prove.

[J. J. in Phila]

He could have went to Dansville Geisinger medical center first then just stopped at the SOS shop. If he did meet with any doctors or nurses at Danville after seeing he disappeared do you honestly think they would come forward to admit to that even? I know if I seen RG disappeared I would shut up to out of fear.

Does anyone know how far away was Shenadohah park from Dansville? We have heard hardly nothing about that sighting. Like was he alone or with someone. In a DP case yes a prosecutor does investagate.
Lucus's mom was staying in Crawford county at the time, thats far but I think I-80 is used.


It doesn't fit the timeline. MM and LM being sued in regard to sexual harassment.

http://www.centredaily.com/news/breaking_news/story/1117996.html

[Cloudbuster]

What doesn't fit the timeline? Thanks for the newest story link, its interesting. I wonder who all in the CH did LM abuse?

[J. J. in Phila]

What doesn't fit the timeline? Thanks for the newest story link, its interesting. I wonder who all in the CH did LM abuse?

On the timeline, Danville, or meeting someone from there in Lewisburg. RFG is seen in Lewisburg in the early afternoon, and then in the late afternoon/early evening.

[Politigal]

It has not been definitively established that *the* RFG was seen in Lewisburg.....period.

[ladyheartfixer]

ok...so for the sake of arguement...and we all seem up to that...let's say the day prior to his disappearance RG travels to Raystown Lake...not so much evidence gathering as research...he supposedly was recognized by a doctor... perhaps this doctor had a collegue who was able to give some information to RG re: shaken baby syndrome. That info could have been entered into the hard drive and then transported back to Centre county ...maybe he did give the info to someone from Geisinger while in Lewisburg... to give more back up and information to his expert there? If the case couldn't go forward without more research being done...getting rid of RG and the information would have achieved the same outcome.

Just some thoughts...and I do come here almost daily for an update. So...I am around and reading...just usually not contributing unless I have thought my remarks through :smile:

[J. J. in Phila]

ok...so for the sake of arguement...and we all seem up to that...let's say the day prior to his disappearance RG travels to Raystown Lake...not so much evidence gathering as research...he supposedly was recognized by a doctor... perhaps this doctor had a collegue who was able to give some information to RG re: shaken baby syndrome. That info could have been entered into the hard drive and then transported back to Centre county ...maybe he did give the info to someone from Geisinger while in Lewisburg... to give more back up and information to his expert there? If the case couldn't go forward without more research being done...getting rid of RG and the information would have achieved the same outcome.


I'm under the impression that the doctor:

A. Didn't speak with RFG.

B. Was from Centre County.

Now, even the Raystown area is distant from Danville, so what would they both be doing sneaking around well outside of the area.

(I am not clear that the "Doctor" was a physician; there are a lot of Ph D's in the area.)


Just some thoughts...and I do come here almost daily for an update. So...I am around and reading...just usually not contributing unless I have thought my remarks through :smile:

I don't know what to make of the Lake Raystown sighting.

[Serendipitous1]

I see PB passed "the torch". I can understand that. Just wondering though...it appears that the flame has gone out!

[Serendipitous1]

Happy V-day, ladyheartfixer. If I ever get my hands (gun sight) on that pernicious groundhog, Pennsylvanians will be much better off.

[J. J. in Phila]

I see PB passed "the torch". I can understand that. Just wondering though...it appears that the flame has gone out!

I think some of that is addressed in today's blog.

Two problems:

1. Not everyone reads the Insession message boards.

2. For a number of reasons, my access is not at the same level of PB's access.

[puzzled]

I think they should put LM, MM and TC in a work shop. They should take turns putting their nuts in a vise! They should continue to tighten them until they spill what they know about Ray! Or they could remain silent as they have and quickly become nutless.:biggrin:

[Serendipitous1]

Years ago, before RG's laptop was found, I had asked TG if his uncle might ever conduct his own investigation, and if so, whether he might keep information on the laptop computer, with no backup...nothing in his office records and no one else informed. His partial answer was that it would be rare for any DA to run his own secret investigation and that the only thing that might make sense would be something in the public sector, not the private.

But no one, including TG as far as I know, could conceive of anything which RG might have been secretively working on. There was nothing in the wind in regard to corruption in the public sector. I looked high and low too...in every corner of the state. There was public corruption, but nothing that seemed to relate to RG.

But in light of recent allegations, I am wondering if RG got suspicious about possible corruption in his own office...something said to him or something he overheard...which perhaps did not immediately rise to the level of confrontation or an official investigation, but nonetheless required his attention...something he might even have recognized as a potential threat to his own wellbeing.

Would that be a reason to meet with someone privately, outside of the office and county? Would that be a reason to take a laptop out of home storage, avoiding any intra-office record which might be discovered by the wrong person/people? If so, my concern is that RG might not have recognized the imminent danger in such a meeting.

[Serendipitous1]

Suppose RG planned to meet someone (actor) who he did not perceive to be a threat...a meeting he purposely never logged anywhere or mentioned to anyone else...it is super-top-secret for some reason. And suppose he had set the meeting up for Thursday at Raystown Dam, but it was aborted either because he bumped into someone else he knew there and did not want to hang around, or because actor was a no-show. I will even throw in JKA's forcibly closing of his office door as an indication that he returned to his office Thursday afternoon...and was preoccupied by something.

RG was scheduled to work a half-day on Friday. Thursday would not seem to have been a good day to intentionally disappear. So suppose that is not the purpose of the meeting. And suppose the laptop (he could have had it with him Thursday) contained information pertinent to the meeting or he wanted it available for use if needed.

Suppose RG went to his office that evening and contacted (or was contacted by) actor to reschedule for Friday. He chose a particular location in Lewisburg...one he was familiar with and which could easily be found by actor. They might both be coming from Centre County, or perhaps Lewisburg could have just been mutually convenient that day.

RG was scheduled to be off Friday morning, but now would need the whole day. In the morning he informed his girlfriend that he would not be in to work at all. Later that morning he drove to Lewisburg. But actor was delayed, leaving him to while away the time in the park, parking lot, etc. Actor finally arrived and they drove to another location, where RG was intercepted (the crime scene is elsewhere). I could even imagine a possible subscenario here which would explain CF's sighting back in Bellefonte Friday afternoon.

The cigarette ash/smoky smell could have resulted from a brief interaction with actor in the parking lot. RG may have gotten into actor’s vehicle, effectively abandoning his Mini Cooper at that point. If so, he either took his laptop, his cell phone, both or neither. If he took his phone, someone had to return it to the Mini Cooper. That would seem to pose an unnecessary risk of attracting attention, unless perhaps the laptop was still in the car and someone wanted it.

Alternatively RG may have led or followed actor to the other location, and someone returned his car (with his cell phone) to the lot later. There would still be a risk of attracting unwanted attention, but it would likely have been necessary to move the car from where it was. Putting it back in the lot where it (and RG) may have been seen earlier would make some sense. The cigarette ash/smoky smell could have been a result of this activity.

Either way, in this hypothetical, it is unnecessary for anyone to have tailed RG from Bellefonte or even to have known his itinerary for that day. It is possible the “bad guy” was actor, someone who had tailed actor, or someone who knew actor’s itinerary, laying in wait where the interception took place (with or without actor’s direct involvement). It is not possible though that actor is unaware of what happened.

It is necessary for the “bad guy(s)” to possess Gricar’s keys for a time...either to deposit the cell phone and maybe retrieve the laptop, or to return the car to the lot. It would also make sense to keep the computer for a time...to view and/or destroy any information it might have contained. The laptop and its unuseable hard drive were separately planted in the river sometime after the initial search to divert police attention. The keys have not been found.

Just a "tweener" hallucination (between V-day and P-day)...I suppose...and all JMOO.

[puzzled]

I think the actor is the female MW. She holds the answers to this case.
I have felt from the begining that Ray was set up and double crossed, that he was murdered. That he had no idea what kind of evil was after him ....lurking beneath the surface as it were. The only thing that has ever made sense to me was that Ray was lured and murdered. I think that clearly LM thinks he can " fix cases"! I can not imagine that Ray would trust such an inept buffoon to handle the VM case! I think you may be on to something S1. I also think that chances are Ray went missing because of the shaken baby case. I also think that CC courthouse needs a shaking down. Get rid of the corruption now! Goodness and love will always triumph over evil and therefore some day this case will be solved. Ray would want it that way and his family deserves answers!

[Serendipitous1]

A blast from the past in regard to RG’s cell phone records...from the long departed thread here entitled "Disinformation or Mackerel in the Moonlight?" [anyone here old enough to remember Mitch Miller and his gang, feel free to sing along]:

O Mackerel, O Mackerel, Much good of thee is spoken.
O Mackerel, O Mackerel, Of Truth thou art a token.
Do records show a téte-à-téte? Or who made calls as plans were set?
O Mackerel, O Mackerel, To us those records open.

O Mackerel, O Mackerel, We wondered where you vanished.
O Mackerel, O Mackerel, And why you had been banished.
Would what you know about those calls, Upset the cart and cause some falls?
O Mackerel, O Mackerel, The Truth we would be knowing.

O Mackerel, O Mackerel, We’ve asked, but naught availing.
O Mackerel, O Mackerel, For answers we are wailing.
Are there some folks who would be tweaked, If numbers from your list are leaked?
O Mackerel, O Mackerel, To us your list be showing!

ETA: Can't you just hear accompanist JKA on organ?

[J. J. in Phila]

S1, that was basically the first "Murder scenario." The problem that I now have with it is, why does RFG cool his heels in Lewisburg for about five hours? Even if Fenton, the Wilkes-Barre witnesses, and the 4/16/05 Lewisburg sightings are wrong, I think there are least five witnesses that saw RFG in Lewisburg after 5:00 PM. At least three saw him in the Mini.

[Serendipitous1]

S1, that was basically the first "Murder scenario." The problem that I now have with it is, why does RFG cool his heels in Lewisburg for about five hours? Even if Fenton, the Wilkes-Barre witnesses, and the 4/16/05 Lewisburg sightings are wrong, I think there are least five witnesses that saw RFG in Lewisburg after 5:00 PM. At least three saw him in the Mini.Hypothetically, he would be waiting on actor to arrive or possibly rearrive. I wish we had more definitive information on these alleged sightings. With all due respect to you and PB, it is not very useful when you "jump ahead" using information which has not been made available to us plebes.

[J. J. in Phila]

Hypothetically, he would be waiting on actor to arrive or possibly rearrive. I wish we had more definitive information on these alleged sightings. With all due respect to you and PB, it is not very useful when you "jump ahead" using information which has not been made available to us plebes.

The most definite ones are 5:00 PM to 6:30 PM, on 4/15, or of the 4/15 sightings, in terms of reporting. Three or more spotting him in the car; at least two in the parking lot. We also have the the woman at the Packwood Museum at "lunch" time. There appears to others at that location as well. I don't know when.

I could see waiting for the actor to arrive, but four roughly five hours?

[Serendipitous1]

The most definite ones are 5:00 PM to 6:30 PM, on 4/15, or of the 4/15 sightings, in terms of reporting. Three or more spotting him in the car; at least two in the parking lot. We also have the the woman at the Packwood Museum at "lunch" time. There appears to others at that location as well. I don't know when.

I could see waiting for the actor to arrive, but four roughly five hours?It must have been something really important, for RG to have been there past the time when PF had gotten off work and would start to wonder where he was. Everything seems to point to a planned meeting with someone. Maybe a noonish meeting (lunchtime for actor perhaps) did not come off and had to be delayed until after 5 pm (quitting time for actor perhaps).

It is easy to see why some might think intentional disappearance. There does not appear to be any indication of duress in the sightings. And if the sightings after 5 pm are valid, there seems to have been no concern on RG's part to inform PF of the reason for his delay in returning home. But the Saturday sighting(s) make no sense. If the intent was to vanish, why hang around Lewisburg, possibly even stroll around an antique store chit-chatting with some woman, knowing the probability of a BOLO?

OTOH, it could be that RG just never detected a threat...that there were two things in motion that day - meeting with actor and being intercepted by bad guy(s). In a hypothetical foul-play scenario, my concern is that a delayed meeting (or perhaps it was even a second meeting that day) after 5 pm gave someone time to implement a plan...knowing RG would be there.

Having the laptop and a hard drive show up months later in areas previously searched has always seemed bizarre...as in having been staged after the fact. If someone went to that much trouble, it seems at least possible that the Saturday stuff could have been staged as well, if not just flat out mistaken.

[J. J. in Phila]

S1, I've never been sold on Saturday, for one reason, no one saw RFG in his car. All of that was Friday.

[Serendipitous1]

S1, I've never been sold on Saturday, for one reason, no one saw RFG in his car. All of that was Friday.In addition to CB's 95% certainty sighting of "RG" in the SoS Saturday noonish, there is the gal who posted in another forum about seeing a red and white Mini Cooper in a parking spot mid-afternoon, which was apparently not the spot where RG's car was supposedly found by police a few hours later.

But it has never made sense that RG would still be hanging around Lewisburg then, or that anyone else would dress the part and go into a building with surveillance cameras (unless they knew there was no videotaping going on), or that anyone would be moving the car around at that point.

[UndertheRadar]

For my own purposes in analyzing what we know, I've put a lot less stock in witness sightings and a lot more into whatever small pieces of "hard evidence" are available to us.

That said, I don't think anyone would need involved in RG's disappearance would need to dress the part for witness sightings to surface and multiply. The next time you're out in a large crowd, pay attention to how many middle-aged men, average build and average height, are wearing jeans and a blue fleece top. I've done that several times now while we were out in public venues with large crowds. It's practically a uniform.

[J. J. in Phila]

In addition to CB's 95% certainty sighting of "RG" in the SoS Saturday noonish, there is the gal who posted in another forum about seeing a red and white Mini Cooper in a parking spot mid-afternoon, which was apparently not the spot where RG's car was supposedly found by police a few hours later.

But it has never made sense that RG would still be hanging around Lewisburg then, or that anyone else would dress the part and go into a building with surveillance cameras (unless they knew there was no videotaping going on), or that anyone would be moving the car around at that point.

There were two other employees that saw him at the same time. My problem is that no one saw him with the Mini. So far as I know, the numbers have not changed. It is not a question of seeing someone who looked like RFG, but who looked like RFG and was driving a red Mini.

[Serendipitous1]

Quite right UtR and J.J. There is no reason to think that anyone who did not know RG would remember a man (among the masses, a day or more later) in sufficient detail to be considered an accurate sighting. And RG's physical description is certainly not unique. Without corroborating physical evidence, there would have to be something else, to both trigger the memory and connect to RG, to give any particular credence to a sighting.

[Cloudbuster]

Here is a good link on searching anything Death Penalty. You can look up cases even for 2005 by each month.
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/Pending/scheduled_executions.htm

[Cloudbuster]

This case needs a information broker. Here are some resources.
http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/swrdu/Publications/MissingPersons.pdf

http://www.pieducation.com/aboutskiptracing.htm
http://pursuitmag.com/2008/03/introduction-to-skip-tracing/
http://www.pimall.com/NAIS/bkp.missing.html

http://www.pimall.com/NAIS/missingm.html

[J. J. in Phila]

Quite right UtR and J.J. There is no reason to think that anyone who did not know RG would remember a man (among the masses, a day or more later) in sufficient detail to be considered an accurate sighting. And RG's physical description is certainly not unique. Without corroborating physical evidence, there would have to be something else, to both trigger the memory and connect to RG, to give any particular credence to a sighting.

My initial count of witnesses that saw RFG in or by the Mini is a minimum of six. Four, I have an approximate time on, but two I have something stated,

1. Woman at the Museum. Lunch time. Next to the park.

2. At least two others. Time unknown. Next to the park.

3. McKnight's witness. About 5:00 PM. In or near Lewisburg, heading into Lewisburg.

4. At least two others. 5:30-6:30 PM. In SoS parking lot.

This excludes the people who saw RFG in the SoS, and Fenton/Grine. These are just the people that saw RFG beside or in the Mini.

DZ noted that numbers 1-2 might be "three or four," but I'm listing it as three. The only thing I know 4 is that it was more than one.

[gstickley]

Quite right UtR and J.J. There is no reason to think that anyone who did not know RG would remember a man (among the masses, a day or more later) in sufficient detail to be considered an accurate sighting. And RG's physical description is certainly not unique. Without corroborating physical evidence, there would have to be something else, to both trigger the memory and connect to RG, to give any particular credence to a sighting.

IMO, corroborating physical evidence would be: someone who personally knew RG & could identify him; RG's fingerprints; vehicle registration number or distinguishing markings of RG's Mini Cooper; someone who spoke to RG. Without corroborating physical evidence, there is no credence to a "sighting".

JMO, to which I'm entitled.

[J. J. in Phila]

I can, doubtfully, buy the argument that maybe someone who sort of looked like RFG and sort of dressed like RFG might have been the SoS area. I cannot buy that the same guy was also driving a red Mini.

(That's the reason I'm skeptical of the Saturday witnesses.)

[UndertheRadar]

IMO, corroborating physical evidence would be: someone who personally knew RG & could identify him; RG's fingerprints; vehicle registration number or distinguishing markings of RG's Mini Cooper; someone who spoke to RG. Without corroborating physical evidence, there is no credence to a "sighting".

JMO, to which I'm entitled.

From the FBI's page on RG:

Ray was last seen Friday, April 15, 2005, in Bellefonte, PA and possibly in Lewisburg, PA.

Not last seen in Lewisburg, but possibly seen in Lewisburg.

I agree with your excellent list, GS, and would add these:

1) Dixon's reminder that no concrete evidence such as video or receipts places RG in definitively in Lewisburg;

2) As far as what's been publicly released, we have no scent except where the opened Mini-Cooper sat.

As for the woman at the museum, according to MJ, she apparently reported only that she saw "someone who may have fit Gricar's description." It's clear her focus was the Mini-Cooper, a car she remembered because of a movie she'd seen.

There has to be something more than the mere coincidence of witnesses thinking they saw someone resembling RG near a red and white Mini-Cooper for these sightings to be valid. We can't forget there were three red and white Minis in town that weekend, or that it was parents' weekend at Bucknell, putting a lot of middle-aged types in town to see their college-aged kids. I certainly can't forget that of the 17 or so witnesses who testified to "seeing" Carrie Culberson alive after she disappeared, at least 5 testified to seeing her in her little red car (and one was a police officer who later recanted). Nor can I forget that all the witnesses who "saw" a pregnant LP walking her Golden Retriever in a small area in a narrow time window . . .

Either more is being made of these witnesses than is truly deserved, or LE is holding something back about the sightings that we aren't aware of. It's true that LE can say or not say anything they want to if it will benefit their investigation. But I'm finding it difficult to come up with a reason they would withhold information on sightings. JMO.

[gstickley]

(snip)
Either more is being made of these witnesses than is truly deserved, or LE is holding something back about the sightings that we aren't aware of. It's true that LE can say or not say anything they want to if it will benefit their investigation. But I'm finding it difficult to come up with a reason they would withhold information on sightings. JMO.

I can think of no reason why LE would withhold any information on "sightings" now or in the past. (Remember the "sighting" of RG & a MW inside the SoS was withheld for a year, 'to spare the family or loved ones embarrassment' or some other such nonsense.) (A "sighting" of a tan vehicle was also suppressed for a year.) Didn't understand it then, don't understand it now. At the same time the "sighting" supposedly occurred inside the SoS, LE was reporting the dogs didn't go anyplace except the immediate area of the vehicle. Didn't understand it then, don't understand it now. Same goes for the fingerprints: first they're there, then they aren't.

If there were credible sightings of RG in/around the Mini in Lewisburg on 04/15-16, why hasn't LE reported it? After all, it's been almost four (4) years!!!

[J. J. in Phila]

Let's be clear on LP. One witness saw her walking her dog, and LE found someone else, another pregnant woman walking her dog. You have now at least six that saw RFG with the Mini, including at least two that saw moving the Mini in the lot where it was found. These are minimum numbers.


We have just too many seeing the same thing, in the same place, at the same time to question this. It comes to a point of critical mass. I doubt if all the witnesses are 100% right, but I doubt that all the witnesses are 100% wrong. They would have to be all wrong, for your premise to be correct.

On top of that, there are other witnesses reporting seeing RFG, out of the Mini, but within 50 yards of where the Mini was found. That's just 4/15/05.

[UndertheRadar]

At the same time the "sighting" supposedly occurred inside the SoS, LE was reporting the dogs didn't go anyplace except the immediate area of the vehicle. Didn't understand it then, don't understand it now.

That's another thing I don't get, GS. It's like pulling teeth trying to get a straight answer about where the dogs were taken other than the parking lot and the river bank area. A long time ago, Logic asked BW whether the dogs were taken to the areas of the other sightings, and he gave a somewhat cryptic but affirmative response. SJ has asked PB this question several times and has never gotten an answer. I can't understand why LE would keep that information under wraps (except that confirming no hits other than the parking lot would certainly undermine public acceptance of the so-called sightings).

On another note, as far as the LP case goes, misinformation about that case doesn't help anyone assess the possible strength of witnesses in the RG case. As I've posted before, there were 7 named and various unnamed witnesses who reported seeing a pregnant LP look-alike walking a Golden Retriever in Laci's Loma Linda neighborhood in a narrow time frame. Their names are available in the case records, and of course, none of them was correct, since Laci was already dead by that point.

[J. J. in Phila]

One came out as possible after questioning by LE in the Peterson case. We have at least six with Lewisburg, the Mini, and RFG around it in one day. At least 3 put RFG and the Mini there, together, between 5:00 and 6:30 PM. I don't have the times on the other 2-3 for the lot.

Unlike the Peterson case, there is no other person that it could have been.

And that is just Friday in Lewisburg.

[gstickley]

Hope you don't mind me using your quote, Radar. Somethings just have to be said over & over again.


(snip)
There has to be something more than the mere coincidence of witnesses thinking they saw someone resembling RG near a red and white Mini-Cooper for these sightings to be valid. We can't forget there were three red and white Minis in town that weekend, or that it was parents' weekend at Bucknell, putting a lot of middle-aged types in town to see their college-aged kids. I certainly can't forget that of the 17 or so witnesses who testified to "seeing" Carrie Culberson alive after she disappeared, at least 5 testified to seeing her in her little red car (and one was a police officer who later recanted). Nor can I forget that all the witnesses who "saw" a pregnant LP walking her Golden Retriever in a small area in a narrow time window . . .

[Cloudbuster]

The brown tan car was a report that Milton Barracks had. Their report was that tan car was tailing the red mini cooper. Later Carla Baron talked about a brown car tailing, but Milton already had that report. As to who witnessed it they never said. It supposedly started to tail by the I-80 exit area. At one point and I do not remember who reported this but the red mini was seen exiting a quarry. I always thought that maybe the mini pulled in the quarry to dodge the tan car but I don't know. Also they reported a sighting of RG at a look out area in Shenadohah park. They said nothing else about that sighting. That was a sighting they with held from the public and released it during Carla Barons show.

[gstickley]

The brown tan car was a report that Milton Barracks had. Their report was that tan car was tailing the red mini cooper. Later Carla Baron talked about a brown car tailing, but Milton already had that report. As to who witnessed it they never said. It supposedly started to tail by the I-80 exit area. At one point and I do not remember who reported this but the red mini was seen exiting a quarry. I always thought that maybe the mini pulled in the quarry to dodge the tan car but I don't know. Also they reported a sighting of RG at a look out area in Shenadohah park. They said nothing else about that sighting. That was a sighting they with held from the public and released it during Carla Barons show.

Cloud, I believe the park mentioned during Carla Baron's show was Shikellamy Park; Detective Thal stated LE indeed had a reported sighting at this park, after Baron directed them there.

[Cloudbuster]

Thanks gs!!!! LOL Im glad you showed me the right spelling. I always get Shikellamy and Shennadoah (forget the spelling) confused. I should know this because I have Carla's tape. She did a case in Shennadoah Park to. Thats probably why I confuse it. This case is enough to make you pull your hair out lol.
Im beginning to think the bridge has a meaning. It represents a arch. Long story.

[UndertheRadar]

Hope you don't mind me using your quote, Radar. Somethings just have to be said over & over again.

No problem, GS.

As for the LP case, a good number of witnesses who allegedly saw Laci and called police were never even contacted by LE, apparently because there were other pregnant women in the neighborhood who walked dogs and because the scent dogs pointed to Laci leaving her home by vehicle. They were focused early, and IMO rightly, on Scott as a suspect, and they dismissed the alleged sightings without even interviewing many of the witnesses.

(But of course, none of that changes the fact that more than 7 people "saw" Laci walking her dog in her neighborhood that morning!)

In the RG case, Dixon was up front early on saying that LE were "assuming" RG had been in Lewisburg. What subtle and unconscious role might that have played in the way witness interviews were handled?

I would love to be assured that at least someone in the investigation has looked long and hard at the possibility of RG meeting with a person known to him at some spot along 192, perhaps in one of the park areas, where the meeting went sour. For a long time, I've believed that many pieces of the puzzle we have in front of us add up to the Lewisburg scene being staged by someone (not RG) who wanted it to look as if RG might have variously flown the coop, committed suicide, or met with foul play there, away from where the crime potentially took place.

As you say, my opinion, to which I'm entitled.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, in the LP case, the witnesses were checked out by the police, and after that, the police (and the witnesses) concluded that it wasn't Laci. While there was at least one witness that LE checked out and the signting was ruled out. That was a witness, female who thought she saw RFG at about 1:30 PM on 4/16/05. These other witnesses were check and the police could not rule these people out.

In the Peterson case, the police found a pregnant woman who was walking her dog, in the area where the witnesses reported seeing Laci. In the RFG case, a second middle age man, wearing a blue pullover, driving a red Mini, moving it back and forth on the street by the park or in the parking lot across from the SoS was not found.

[UndertheRadar]

Re the LP case: no, LE ruled out a good number of the alleged sightings based on the existence of other pregnant women/dog walkers, the scent evidence pointing toward LP leaving in a vehicle, and the presumption that all the alleged sightings were the same as the ones they did check out. By the time the prosecution was preparing for the preliminary hearing, no one had interviewed (or even returned calls to) Mitchell, Maldonado, and others who had allegedly seen LP in the park. That's why SP's parents were so outraged, feeling, I supposedly deservedly so, that potential exculpatory evidence hadn't been checked out by LE.

In the RG case, it's not even certain that the person seen near or with the red and white Mini was RG. The woman at the museum? "May have fit" RG's description? Hardly a definitive claim. And what about the Mini? Did anyone identify the PFO plate on the car to distinguish it from other Minis in the area?

Furthermore, did LE look for other middle-aged males wearing blue jeans and blue fleece in the area? Did they look for witnesses who also saw the "man near or with the Mini" who might have given a negative ID (since a negative ID is more substantial than multiple positive IDs?), or did they run with the positive ID? We don't know the answers to these questions, and it would be foolish to simply assume what happened or didn't happen.

[gstickley]

Anniversary of District Attorney's Disappearance

Posted: April 15, 2008 05:16 PM CDT

Last Updated: April 15, 2008 05:31 PM CDT

Three years later, the disappearance of District Attorney Ray Gricar is still a mystery.

The prosecutor from Centre County was last seen on April 15, 2005. Police have not given up on the search for Gricar and are still following leads into his disappearance.

It is a disappearance that left few, if any, clues as to what happened that day in Union County.

"It's just a complete mystery. It became big news here, because it happened on North Water Street here," said Richard Sauers, executive director of the Packwood House Museum.

Sauers remembers the story well. A prominent district attorney from Centre County, Ray Gricar parked his car near an antique shop in Lewisburg, then vanished and has not been seen or heard from since.

That was 2005. An all-out search followed, along with lots of questions.

"I look down on conspiracy theories, but that's what you have," Sauers said. "Nobody knows, and I don't know if anyone ever will know."

(snip

If the lady at the Packwood House Museum "saw" RG & the Mini on 04/15, I wonder why Mr. Sauers, executive director of the museum, didn't mention it 3 years later. Would have thought that would have been a "biggie"! :thumbdown:

[UndertheRadar]

If the lady at the Packwood House Museum "saw" RG & the Mini on 04/15, I wonder why Mr. Sauers, executive director of the museum, didn't mention it 3 years later. Would have thought that would have been a "biggie"! :thumbdown:

If the best the woman at the museum could actually say was that the man near the Mini "may have fit" RG's description, how "big" is that, really?

If sightings in missing persons' cases were generally correct, more missing people would be brought home more quickly. I actually can't think of a single missing persons' case where a "cluster" of sightings proved to be accurate. Anyone is free to prove my memory wrong--I could be--but the only accurate sightings I can easily bring to mind are the odd abducted-child-held-for-time cases, like Shasta Groene and Elizabeth Smart. And those were single sightings, not clusters.

The problem is that alleged sightings in missing persons' cases are even more unreliable than eyewitness ID's in criminal cases, and that's saying something, given the problems with eyewitness ID's in criminal cases. All studies point to huge problems stemming from the way in which LE handles witnesses in criminal cases. And it's pretty clear in the RG case that very, very early on, LE was going to "go with" the alleged sightings in Lewisburg. Fenton went to the police with her Bellefonte sighting as soon as she heard RG was missing, but her sighting was immediately dismissed because it did not fit the Lewisburg timeline. They'd already locked themselves into a "Lewisburg witnesses are correct, RG was in Lewisburg" scenario a few days into the case. JMO.

[gstickley]

If the best the woman at the museum could actually say was that the man near the Mini "may have fit" RG's description, how "big" is that, really?

IMO, it isn't "big" at all. The "mighta beens", "coulda beens", mean nothing without physical evidence. Apparently there were other red-white Mini's in the immediate area, & apparently jeans-blue fleece is a common attire in the immediate area. IMO, unless RG was the only man in Lewisburg near the SOS, the only man wearing jeans-blue fleece, & RG's Mini was the only red-white Mini in Lewisburg near the SOS, on Fri., 04/15/05, I seriously doubt if anyone made such an impression on a Friday afternoon, in a busy area, during Bucknell Parent's Weekend (or whatever), at the beginning of fishing season (or whatever) that would prove RG was there.

This is my opinion, to which I am entitled.

[J. J. in Phila]

GS, the two sightings in the SoS occurred, IIRC, in the evening of 4/15.

Sorry, but we have too many that put RFG in the same places, at the same time, in the same car. (And that eliminates a number of sightings of him on foot and the Fenton/Grine sighting).

“We have three or four good witnesses from down there who are definitely IDing him in the park. They saw him sitting in his car. They watched him driving his Mini Cooper back and forth on Friday.

http://www.freetimes.com/stories/13/30/the-rivers-edge-homicide-suicide-hoax-a-prosecutor-vanishes-and-the-clues-point-everywhere-and-nowhere-at-oncethe-rivers-edge

You can continue the spin, but it won't change that.

[UndertheRadar]

“We have three or four good witnesses from down there who are definitely IDing him in the park. They saw him sitting in his car. They watched him driving his Mini Cooper back and forth on Friday.

http://www.freetimes.com/stories/13/...he-rivers-edge

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

http://www.centredaily.com/news/ray_gricar/story/3800.html

One thing these two quotes have in common: both are from DZ.

The SOS closes at 5 p.m., so it's hard to see how anyone could be a witness to RG in the SOS Friday evening.

[gstickley]

DA still considered a missing person


Bellefonte police Chief Shawn Weaver and Centre County District Attorney Michael Madeira
Barry L. Reeger/Tribune-Review

By Robin Acton
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Wednesday, November 22, 2006


BELLEFONTE --

(snip)

In the months after Gricar's disappearance, authorities received a number of tips from people who reported sightings of the missing man as far away as Texas.

"I can't say that any of the sightings were credible. We heard everything, frankly, from the sublime to the ridiculous," Madeira said.

(snip)

[J. J. in Phila]

Hey, Rook, you must have been reading my mind! I just went back & read many news releases from late 2005 to 2008 that say the same thing: It was the last time police are sure that anyone heard from or saw him.

You better read my last link.

[UndertheRadar]

And some things bear repeating:

“We have three or four good witnesses from down there who are definitely IDing him in the park. They saw him sitting in his car. They watched him driving his Mini Cooper back and forth on Friday.

http://www.freetimes.com/stories/13/...he-rivers-edge

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

http://www.centredaily.com/news/ray_...tory/3800.html

What might these have in common?

[Serendipitous1]

And some things bear repeating:

“We have three or four good witnesses from down there who are definitely IDing him in the park. They saw him sitting in his car. They watched him driving his Mini Cooper back and forth on Friday.

http://www.freetimes.com/stories/13/...he-rivers-edge

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

http://www.centredaily.com/news/ray_...tory/3800.html

What might these have in common?The affiant...but practicing what I would call "Clintonese" in this case...not at all restricted to DZ.

[UndertheRadar]

The affiant

Well, yes, but the question is whether the commonalities are limited to that alone.

[UndertheRadar]

It seems those of us looking for some kind of corroboration for the alleged RG "sightings" are thinking like the FBI on this issue. Found this interesting little snippet regarding the Sund/Peluso case (the mother, daughter, and daughter's friend who were murdered by Carey Stayner).



While the FBI insists their last sighting was in El
Portal, agents are talking again with witnesses who said
they saw the trio shopping and buying gas the next day
along Highway 108 near where the car was found.

They were reported missing Feb. 17 - a day after they
failed to meet Carole Sund's husband, Jens, at San
Francisco International Airport.

Merchants and tourism officials in Sonora, Twain Harte
and Sierra Village have reported seeing the trio in the
area on Feb. 16 and 17.

Rogers and Maddock said that authorities had been
inundated with tips about sightings, but that not all can
be correct.

"We can't necessarily believe one eyewitness sighting
and not another," Maddock said.

The FBI, which said weeks ago that the three were victims
of a violent crime, has been working on the theory that
they were kidnapped or carjacked outside El Portal late
Feb. 15 or early Feb. 16. The FBI requires documentation
or corroboration before it confirms a sighting in a
missing persons case.

http://www.sfgate.com/e/a/1999/03/23/NEWS902.dtl

[Serendipitous1]

Did any of you 'locals' go to the Democratic party's petition-signing luncheon in Centre Hall today? TDeB and SPM were supposed to be there and I was wondering what they had to say.

[Politigal]

I haven't seen anything new about the possiblity of JKA running for DA....wonder if she's decided against it?

[Serendipitous1]

I haven't seen anything new about the possiblity of JKA running for DA....wonder if she's decided against it?She apparently filed at the last moment, without announcing, four years ago. But we will soon know...the last day to file nomination petitions is March 10.

[Politigal]

She apparently filed at the last moment, without announcing, four years ago. But we will soon know...the last day to file nomination petitions is March 10.

her campaign website (from the last go round) expires 4/1/09

http://whois.domaintools.com/arnoldforda.org

[Cloudbuster]

http://www.centredaily.com/129/story/1158541.html