Murder scenario

[J. J. in Phila]

Note: I offer this as one possible scenario for the disappearance of Ray F. Gricar. It explains the evidence, but is far from the only scenario explaining the disappearance. Something like this might have happened. It is a possibility, not an advocacy.

Murder Scenario

The killer is called K. He has some kind of grudge against Mr. Gricar; it is personal. I do not know what caused the grudge. The killer has a tangential connection to Centre County government, politics, or the State Attorney General’s office. He may be an employee or someone who works for a contractor to one of these groups (that is a large suspect pool). K has a position where he/she could plausibly get the financial records of the governmental/political/campaign body, even as a bookkeeper or a secretary. K may smokes cigarettes.

K’s plan is simple, lure Mr. Gricar (RFG) to a remote place and kill him. The bait is records of something improper, financial impropriety, something like bribery, kickbacks, or even something in the background of Michael Medera, the candidate that RFG is supporting as his replacement.

K might have gotten the idea for the bait from “Memmogate” in the summer of 2004. K’s plan had to be accelerated when RFG announced that he wouldn’t be seeking another term. The plan can only entice a sitting DA.

K forges some documents indicating some wrongdoing. One very good example is something involving kickbacks with the county treasurer’s office, currently being held by Patty Fornicola’s cousin, Richard. Or maybe it’s about a judge, or even someone in the DA’s office. The initial document, “D,” might be somewhat incriminating, but not a slam dunk.

K contacts RFG in mid March and tells him of this these improprieties. RFG suggests he come into the office.

K: I can’t come in. Some will see me in the office, and I’ll lose my job (or “these people play for keeps”).”

RFG: Well, how about my house?

K. Isn’t Patty Fornicola your girlfriend? She might tell someone or let it slip.

RFG: Okay, how about we meet someplace.

K. I have something on CD, do you have a laptop?

RFG: Yes.

K. Bring it.

They work out the arrangements and sometime around 4/1/06, RFG meets K. K gives FRG the forged information on the CD, which is copied to the laptops hard drive. It’s good, but, as K planned it not definitive. K says, I’ll try to get more.

(This is the bait)

For the next two weeks, this bothers RFG. He may be faced with prosecuting his girlfriend’s cousin, or members of his staff, or both. He becomes fatigued from this. (Evidence, the change in behavior.)

K now prepares the place where he will kill RFG. It’s isolated and there is a place to dispose of the body. Something like an old well.

Sometime around 4/14, K gets in touch with RFG and says, “I’ve got a lot more; it’s on disk, but I’ve got them stashed. Meet me someplace and I’ll take you to them. Ah, you’ll have to bring your laptop; make sure the battery is charged.”

K wants a place east of Bellefonte, and RFG suggests an area he knows well, Lewisburg, the Street of Shops. K will be there between 12:30 and 1:30 PM. K insists that RFG make up an excuse so that he won’t be missed.

4/15/05, RFG tells PF that he is going to “play hooky.” (Evidence: PF’s statements). When she leaves he dresses. He wears what he on the day before, not to stand out. At about 11:00 AM he leaves. While driving in Brush Valley, he calls her about the dog (Evidence: PF’s statements. Cell phone records.).

RFG either has brought the water from home or buys it in route (Evidence: DNA on water bottle).

RFG arrives before 12:30 PM and goes through the motions of shopping; he’s seen by the store keeper (Evidence: Store keeper’s testimony). About 12:30 he waits in the car (evidence: Scent in car)

In the early afternoon, K enters, making sure it isn’t a trap. He pretends to start getting into the passenger side, smoking. RFG asks him to put it out. He stays outside, but he gets ash in the car (Evidence: ash, smell of smoke in car). He doesn’t actually enter the car (no finger prints).

RFG offers to drive his Mini to the location, but the killer says, “I’m not going to drive to my place in a red Mini Cooper with a vanity plate reading ‘PFO.’ We’ll take my car; bring you laptop.” (Note: the “D” file was on the laptop.)

RFG leaves the car and walks about 60 feet to K’s vehicle (Evidence: Scent). They drive to the remote location (my guess might be a hunting cabin). RFG and K get out and go in; RFG puts down the laptop while K supposedly gets the CD’s. K kills RFG.

K then disposes of the body, but the laptop is still there, with the hard drive. If the body is found, the laptop might tell who the body is, and how the killer is, if the hard drive is accessed. K could smash it, leaving computer parts around, but that’s more evidence. He pulls the drive and goes back to Lewisburg (which might not be too far). He removes the drive and tosses it in the river; he tosses the laptop off the bridge (Evidence: Hard drive and laptop). He might wait to nightfall to do it.

One small tangential point for now, J.J. You assert that Michael Madiera was the candidate that Gricar supported as his replacement. I do not believe that we know that to be the truth, only that Gricar supported Madeira in the primary election. Apparently Gricar had not voiced a choice for the general election before his disappearance and publically offered praise for Karen Arnold as well.

Please see the following, which I remembered having read some time in the past and dug up when I saw your reference to Gricar's support of Madiera in this scenario:

http://blogs.centredaily.com/the_thi...he_record.html

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by lustorumanimae
Could you give us a link to the public offering which gives PFO
as Gricar's vanity plate?

It seems to only come up on the catched CDT Forum.

http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:...=clnk&cd=1</a>

[J. J. in Phila]

K is the name for the killer.

He might be a "he" or a "she." "He" includes unknown gender.

The keys and wallet might have gone in the water. That isn't the laptop drive did. It was to destroy the "D" file(s).

You can add someone with access to Arnold's records as well.

The killer does have an unwitting accomplice here, Ray F. Gricar. By agreeing to the secret meeting, RFG get's to Lewisburg, and doesn't tell PF the purpose of the trip. He doesn't even tell her until he's in route. He accompanies K to the site of the murder, willingly.

RFG met K before and K has provided possible information of major corruption (it's fake, but RFG doesn't know that). RFG is expecting to find more information and be turning on his computer in anticipation.

As for K being brilliant, except for the ash and possibly a cigarette butt, there are no clues to who he is. The one clue is the ash, his one mistake.

And guess what, while this fits the evidence reasonably well, it does not preclude the other options.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by lustorumanimae
Just these observations, JJ:

Gricar announced he was not going to run again in January, 2004, two years before the end of his term.

The end of term is still coming. On January 1, 2006, the plan won't work. The remote area will be so "remote" in hunting season; IIRC small game season begins in late summer or early fall.

You've also assumed that RFG was wearing the clothes the entire day. I know that, if I have a morning meeting, I will wear a suit and change into casual clothes after I get home. He might not have not put on the jeans until later in the day. The fleece was an outer jacket and people do wear the same outer clothes day in and out.

Cell records don't factor in this, because you have no more
idea what's in them than any other poster on the board.

All posters have access to the CDT Forum. I will take this report as accurate.

However, biggest problem IMO. You're basically suggesting that
Gricar would put his trenchcoat on and do his own sleuthing into what K. might have, or that he would be a party toward covering up misconduct. And that he would do it alone and without involving LE at any level, even though what you're describing
is basically that he was being blackmailed.

He's neither sleuthing nor being blackmailed. RFG is getting a tip. If it looks like enough to him, he turns it over to the local, PSP, or he applies to form a grand jury. Anything sent by K prior to this is not actionable. Further, if K was a legitimate source, he can't blackmail RFG precisely because of this. If K couldn't produce the evidence, RFG can't do anything.

As to the danger, the first meeting is someplace in public: that's where K hands over "D." After that K seems to be legitimate. He's not threatening RFG, but trying to get him information.

...that's when he would have brought someone in from the AG's so there could be no arguments about bias/vindictiveness/favoritism. Let's him keep his distance from the entire situation from beginning to end and preserve relative
harmony on the home front.

As far as I know, something involving your girlfriend's cousin isn't a conflict of interest, though it might be personally troubling to RFG. The problem with passing the buck is that:

A. K won't talk to anyone else.

B. While there is some possible problems shown in "D," what K has given to RFG, there isn't enough to begin an investigation. That would be why RFG goes out on 4/15.

Keep in mind, RFG is trying to get information to begin an investigation, so he can prosecute a case of corruption. He's not doing anything illegal or unethical; he's actually trying to do his job.

Not very adept observations.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Cinderella

Can you discount her? She possibly could have planned it.

She could have planned it; so could any poster on the board.

This becomes a question of motive. It's not financial, and it not that she wants to leave RFG. She gets no income or inheritance (at least for seven years) if RFG vanishes. She can kick him out of the house anytime she wants to; it's her house.

I could see a person in a relationship getting angry at her partner, and in a fit of rage, killing him. This was something not done in a fit of rage; whatever happened, it was well planned. The killer had to think about all angles, if there was a killer.

I can't come up with a realistic motive for PF.

I can't come up with a realistic motive for PF.

Just a hypothetical, J.J. So note the disclaimer.

But assume for the hypothetical that sometime prior to Friday 4/15, either RG has made it clear to PF that he is having reservations about continuing the relationship with her. Or RG has been more overt and told PF that he wants to end the relationship with her. Perhaps, for the sake of the hypothetical, this what has made him seem to PF to be "fatigued" in prior weeks, when in reality he has been using "napping" as a method of withdrawal from the relationship. This is not an uncommon occurrence in a troubled relationship, one partner withdrawing by sleeping more.

And for the sake of the hypothetical, let's imagine that perhaps RG may have even not come home for a night or two prior to his disappearance. Perhaps, in our hypothetical, the walk in the park on Thursday evening is a "meeting" between PF and RG, maybe a meeting requested by PF to try to smooth things over or maybe one set up by RG to try to end things for good. Yes, the explanation from PF was that they are/were "private people," but one must admit the details we know of the walk in the park and the greeting by VW and the subsequent revelation/non-revelation of this story are not inconsistent with this hypothetical. VW tells them what a nice couple they make, or words to that effect, and gets barely any response at all from the couple. PF leaves this walk in the park out of her accounting to the authorities from what we have come to understand; apparently the walk in the park would not be in LE's timeline nor in the public timeline were it not for VW taking the story to the media.

But regardless, the "talk" does not produce what PF is hoping for.
The man she regards as her "soul mate" is lost to her in our hypothetical.

Now J.J., you can apparently only imagine "a person getting angry" and killing "in a fit of rage." But there are other scenarios by which intimates murder intimates, and they involve a "slow burn" approach, not a "getting angry" and killing in a "fit of rage" approach.

One such "slow burn" occurs when a wronged spouse or significant other sits and contemplates the lover off in the arms of someone else. As that image continues to play again and again across the brain, the resolution becomes stronger and stronger: "If I can't have him/her, then NO ONE WILL."

Another "slow burn" occurs when a wounded spouse or significant other has had previous disappointment in love, and the newly ended relationship becomes a symbol of yet another failure. In this case, the resolution becomes, "NOT AGAIN. I will not let him/her DO THIS TO ME AGAIN."

Read enough true crimes, and you'll see these motifs played out again and again.

Hypothetically speaking, one of these slow burn situations might hypothetically have been at work.

An interesting irony in your scenario with "K," J.J.

Your buddy "K" has a deep well sufficiently hidden to stash RG's body so effectively that nobody has found it for a year and a half. The well is apparently located on a property by a cabin deep in the woods somewhere near Lewisburg where "K" could have buried the laptop and hard drive after he smashed it. There are also mountain streams and springs running through those woods where he could have dumped the laptop and the hard drive.

Yet "K" returns to Lewisburg, to the bridge near where the Mini is parked, and THERE, he tosses the hard drive and the laptop into the water.

All of which is, in effect, using the laptop and the hard drive as staging.

Maybe "K" just never thought about that, lol.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar
An interesting irony in your scenario with "K," J.J.

The well is apparently located on a property by a cabin deep in the woods somewhere near Lewisburg where "K" could have buried the laptop and hard drive after he smashed it. There are also mountain streams and springs running through those woods where he could have dumped the laptop and the hard drive.

Not quite.

K does not want that hard drive to contain any data. He smashes it, in the cabin, fragments get scattered. It might actually lead people to the remains.

K wants the hard drive destroyed, so he throws it in a nearby stream. It just happens to be a trout filled stream where a lot of fisherman will be tomorrow, the first day of trout season.

Further, if it's found in the area, it draws LE's attention. K obviously doesn't want that. He removes the drive and tosses it, and the laptop in the river at different locations.

K doesn't want people finding it quickly or finding it associated with the body or with him.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar



But regardless, the "talk" does not produce what PF is hoping for.
The man she regards as her "soul mate" is lost to her in our hypothetical.

The walk occurs around 5:00 PM. PF would have to kill RFG after 9:10 PM, get an accomplice and plan all these details, including disposing of the body. If she didn't poison him, she has to clean up the house as well.

That is way too much to plan, even if some of the details were possible, in such a short space of time.

There are still real problems in that area; doing it without intense planning make makes those problems worse.

If, as in the hypothetical, RG had not been home already for several nights, the planning stage may have already begun before that Thursday night. Two sets of plans running parallel: here's what will happen if we can smooth things out; here's what I'll do if things don't go the way I want them to.

The Thursday walk in the park where, in the hypothetical the demise of the relationship is clear, then becomes the trigger point for a plan already created to go into action. This leaves from approximately 6 p.m. on Thursday until 11:30 p.m. on Friday for our hypothetical PF to carry out a plan, not to PLAN and carry out a plan, before she calls LE to report RG missing. If our hypothetical PF enlisted the aid of an accomplice, she has about 60 "person-hours" between her and an accomplice (minus her time at work and at the gym) to carry out whatever needs to be done.

Keep in mind, for the purposes of our hypothetical, that other than PF's account, we have no objective, verifiable evidence that RG is alive past approximately 9:10 p.m. on Thursday night. We have Carolyn Fenton's sighting on Friday afternoon, but that sighting, unfortunately, has been called into question, and we can't rely on that as a definitive piece of evidence of RG's health and well-being and existence in Bellefonte on Friday, 4/15 at the Courthouse in the afternoon. I certainly wish that we could.

That said, your dismissal that this is "way too much to plan" is once again a spaghetti cooker infomercial. Please stop trying to sell me your spaghetti cooker, J.J. I ain't buying.

I find it abundantly interesting that this is "way too much to plan," but your explanation for a previous poster's link on a private high school website in Cincinnati was to say that the poster must have put it up there. Now THERE was a case of "too difficult to pull off" if that poster were just a recreational poster interested in the Gricar case if I ever heard one, since it means you think he somehow was able to access a password protected private website and put up a webpage that no one has since removed. You were perfectly willing to offer that absurdity as an explanation, but you can't imagine anyone being able to plan a crime unless it fits your theory of the crime. Very interesting.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar
If, as in the hypothetical, RG had not been home already for several nights, the planning stage may have already begun before that Thursday night. Two sets of plans running parallel: here's what will happen if we can smooth things out; here's what I'll do if things don't go the way I want them to.

As soon as you get to a crime of passion as a conspiratorial contingency plan, it falls apart. I'm not buying it. It's ridiculous.

It's hard to get an accomplice in a crime of passion, much a crime of passion that may or may not take place depending on a conversation's outcome three hours before.

It's even harder to then, at night, to dispose of the body, plant the amount of evidence needed and have the victim's family stay at the sight 48 hours later.

There are too many problems for it to work, including an accomplice that is close enough to PF to either kill or not kill the DA at PF's whim.

I find it abundantly interesting that this is "way too much to plan," but your explanation for a previous poster's link on a private high school website in Cincinnati was to say that the poster must have put it up there.

You are right. It is INCREDIBLY HARD Google the name "Gricar."

(In case you didn't get it, that's sarcasm.)

Still not buying your spaghetti cooker, J.J. I can boil water.

It's not a crime of passion as in snap and rage if we're talking the slow burn motives I laid out, the ones you couldn't possibly muster up on your own. Remember them? And as far as "too hard to get an accomplice close enough," again, check out other true crimes where such accomplices have been easily come by. They happen, J.J.

Last, it wasn't the googling Gricar part (though even that has its issues), it was the suggestion that the poster put up the page that was so absurd. Let's see, a recreational poster breaks the code to enter a password protected website and manages to put up material on a private school's password protected webspace, all so he can have a link to put up on a crime board. Yeah, that makes sense.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar
Still not buying your spaghetti cooker, J.J. I can boil water.

It's not a crime of passion as in snap and rage if we're talking the slow burn motives I laid out, the ones you couldn't possibly muster up on your own. Remember them? And as far as "too hard to get an accomplice close enough," again, check out other true crimes where such accomplices have been easily come by. They happen, J.J.

I have never heard of a true crime where the prepretrator said, "Will get ready to plant all this evidence (some of which might be impossible to plant). Accomplice, stand by and wait until I have this conversation to we'll decide if we'll carry it out in about four hours."

You your spaghetti preparation is as strong as this theory, I'd suggest you put some water in the pot before you set the stove to boil and put in the spaghetti. Don't add the water after the spaghetti is burnt to a crisp.

Let's see, a recreational poster breaks the code to enter a password protected website and manages to put up material on a private school's password protected webspace, all so he can have a link to put up on a crime board. Yeah, that makes sense.

No, it doesn't especially since the site is not password protected. It comes up without a password.

Let me explain. If you have the time, you put the name "gricar" into Google. You look at the results. You come up with all sorts of things, an obituary of an unrelated Gricar (posted), the meaning of the name Gricar in Solvenian (posted) and the sight you refer to (also posted). You then find the link and explore the site.

Did Saunterer find it by Googling, or did he hear that RFG hear that there was a nephew of that name? He's been to the area, and has communicated with TG, who might have mentioned it offhand, without realising it.

Frankly, Saunterer could post inappropriate (and loony) things at times, but I'd like to see him back.

J.J.,

No one suggested the accomplice was on "standby" before the conversation on Thursday took place. That is your fictionalized version, designed as a strawman.

Now let me explain this. You asserted that a poster had potentially put up the webpage, not the link. OBVIOUSLY the poster had put up the link. Everyone who reads the forum knows that. In addition to your googling explanation (which has its weaknesses because of how deeply buried in the site the link is) you additionally asserted an explanation that the poster may have put the page up. That is what would have required a password, and that is the absurd explanation. Unless of course the poster were not a recreational poster but someone who had access to that webspace.

Would everyone please just get off of the subject of Patty somehow being involved! I think she has no clue what happened to Ray. She passed a lie detector so give her a break. Can you imagine being in her shoes? The only thing that I think is unexpalinable is why did Ray say I won't be here? Also I would really like to know what happened to Saunterer. I was on vacation for a few weeks!

tiredoftheguff, I think everyone understands your concern about Patty from a human perspective and would agree from that perspective. From the perspective of discussing the disappearance, though, keep in mind that anything centering on PF has been entirely hypothetical and completely non-accusatory. It's important to examine the mystery of RG's disappearnce from ALL angles and not to shut down inquiry from any angle so long as we still have a missing man and no solid leads. I say that despite the polygraph for this reason: if polygraphs were solidly scientific, we could hook up all witnesses and suspects and use polygraphs in the courtrooms across the United States, using polygraph results as the basis for all legal findings and allowing us to do away with judges and juries. Obviously, there are enough problems with polygraphs that their results are not even admissible for use in a court of law. Therefore, they figure into my own particular thinking with no more weight than LE gives them, and that is as an investigatory tool. I can't honestly believe that if LE were to polygraph a person in a case, have that person "pass" a polygraph, and then later be presented with solid incriminating evidence against the person they wouldn't move to build a case against the person simply because they had a "passed" polygraph. It might be more difficult a case to build with the polygraph results, but I doubt they'd sit there and say, "Oh, well, X must be innocent because the polygraph said so despite a mountain of evidence that says otherwise." (And that example is purely hypothetical, of course.)

As to the fate of Saunterer, you can check his status by looking at his profile.

[J. J. in Phila]

First for the clothes, Lustor, you claimed 16 hours. Nobody has said that; that is your manufacturing.

I would suspect that those were not RFG would wear to the meeting. They are clean and they don't stand out.

I normally wear the same outer coat, day in and day out, if the weather dictates that type of coat.

Jeans, part of one day and the rest of the next, sure. I'd be surprised if he would wear jeans to any kind of a formal meeting.

As for the CDT, the reports are second hand, but so is the report of RFG's disappearance. It's possible that it is wrong (on both counts), but unlikely.

Originally posted by lustorumanimae





***The police have all sorts of tiplines. At one time as part of
the 'drug war', the DA's Office itself had a well-publicized one.
If you are so incredibly naive as to think that when tips come in,
the DA gets in his car and goes out to meet the shadowy source
of such to discuss more details, you've watched way too much
TV.

[/i]

This is perhaps the most troubling part of your post, Lustor. You have described RFG as both responsible and professional. I do not disagree.

Then you claim that when this professional responsible person gets what could be a credible tip that there is major impropriety in Centre County government, possibly his his own office or involving his potential successor, he says, "Call the tip line!"

If that were the case, RFG would be abandoning his duties as a DA. If K really had information, and later revealed it, K said, "I called DA Ray Gricar and he told me to call the tip line!"

[/i]
Nor did I state that it was 'conflict of interest'. But it
would certainly have the potential for being CLAIMED to be
conflict of interest because of Gricar's live-in relationship with
RF's cousin.

[/i]

You missed the point of the set up. K releases information that is suspicious, but not yet enough to be actionable. The information is that maybe something is wrong, but maybe there isn't anything wrong after all.

There is not enough to do anything, but there is enough for RFG to listen to K. That's all that K needs to do.

This is television, JJ. Nothing else. This is Serpico talking in the basement under the NY deli to his shadowy informant (and even he was LE). The answer to "I won't talk to anyone
else" may be one initial courtesy meeting between K and Gricar, in Gricar's office or the backroom of a police department after hours.

And real life. K says, at this point, "I'm worried about my job." Was it Arnold that was fired with the change of administrations at the DA's office?

[i]I believe
your hypothetical reflects a fantasy view of LE, where DAs
go out and turn up evidence, turn if over to LE, then change
hats and ride on to victory in the courtroom. [/b]

Except, of course, you've misread again Lustor. Even after the first meeting, there is not enough evidence to give. That is why it is referred to as "bait."

DA's in PA can request county grand juries. It is possible that RFG was hoping to do that, with adequate information to have a basis for applying to impanel one.

I know it doesn't involve your favorite suspect, Patty Fornicola, but it is hard, even hypothetically, to involve her. The reason is, of course, that she wasn't involved with its execution.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar
J.J.,

No one suggested the accomplice was on "standby" before the conversation on Thursday took place. That is your fictionalized version, designed as a strawman.

Not a strawman, as soon as you bring up the Thursday "walk in the park."

Are you suggesting that PF could have planned all of this and recruited an accomplice to murder of the District Attorney, in about 3.5 hours? She's calling around to her girlfriends and say, "Hi, this is Patty. Are you free to come over tonight and help me kill Ray?!!!"

Now let me explain this. You asserted that a poster had potentially put up the webpage, not the link. OBVIOUSLY the poster had put up the link. Everyone who reads the forum knows that. In addition to your googling explanation (which has its weaknesses because of how deeply buried in the site the link is) you additionally asserted an explanation that the poster may have put the page up. That is what would have required a password, and that is the absurd explanation.

Let me explain this slowly.

You go to Google. You type in the name "Gricar." That is G-R-I-C-A-R. You press the search button. One of those many pages is the one for an art teacher. You click it and you find a photo a guy named Gricar. You take off the "class_of_2005.htm" in the web address and press "go" (or its equivalent on your ISP). That takes to page where there is a link that says "I'm sorry." You press that link. You get the I'm sorry page.

There is no password; there is no hacking. There is Googling.

It would not require a password to create a parody site. As this isn't the official school site, I thought that this might have been one.

If you seek, you will find.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Cinderella
Also what about the dark haired woman seen with Ray. Maybe he met someone else that he really cared for.

Who is to say that with woman RFG wasn't K? I don't make any claim that K was a man. The "he" is gender neutral.

As to the rest, with K around, why bother with poison, with LE members of the Gricar family could find.

Now, if there is a K, it's possible that K was "hired" by someone, but it is not necessary. I'm looking at how a murder could have occurred. It's possible, but there is no evidence that there was one.

Let me explain this slowly.

You go to Google. You type in the name "Gricar." That is G-R-I-C-A-R.

Let me explain this slowly, J.J. Don't patronize me. I can match you wit for wit in intelligence, and you're well aware of that. Furthermore, I have pointed out to you that I am not talking about your assertion that Saunterer discovered the link and put it up.

I am talking about your assertion that Saunterer created the page.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by UndertheRadar



I am talking about your assertion that Saunterer created the page. [/b]

Are you telling me you have never heard of a "mirror site" or a "parody" site. It's possible to create a site and add something to it, creating a parody.

If you doubt it, go to Google main page at:

http://www.google.com/

Type in the words "French military victories" without the quotes, and press "I'm feeling lucky." Tell me what you find. Hint: That is not a Google page.

I was suggesting that this was what Saunterer might have done, since the official school site didn't yield anyone named Gricar.

Why do you find it so interesting that someone that excessively Googled the name Gricar (as seen from other posts) might have found the site?

Are you telling me you have never heard of a "mirror site" or a "parody" site.

J.J., no, I am not telling you that. I know exactly what mirror sites and parody sites are, and I also know that the link was 100% verified NOT to be a mirror or parody site.

Consider this my last post to you. I told you not to patronize me, yet your very next post to me continued to do that in its very first sentence.

That, in fact, is the reason you have raised red flags for me on this board from practically your first day here, J.J.

As someone who has a deep belief in the importance of online community, I think the only way a group can work together on solving a mystery and getting justice in a case is for all voices to be heard on all theories. From very early in your stay on this board, you began trying to shut down voices and shut down discussion of theories. That doesn't help solve mysteries or produce justice. And it only serves to destroy online communities.

Meanwhile, not responding to your posts will free up my Gricar-related case time to do more research and theory-related thinking instead of having to follow you around the board exposing your wide array of incorrect information and fallacy-based thinking.

[J. J. in Phila]

Radar, you are being treated exactly as you have treated me. If you can't take it don't post. Here is a good example:

Sometimes I think it's possible you've missed your true calling and should be writing scripts for infomercials.

And that is how you so often sound, J.J., anytime anyone raises a foul play scenario. While you won't come out and say directly that you're "selling" the board the suicide or walkaway scenarios, it's clear that you're writing an informercial designed to show us just how hard it is to cook spaghetti the old-fashioned way.

http://board2.courttv.com/showthread...0&pagenumber=2

You do two things, first you attack the theory, then you attack the motives of the poster. Both you and Lustor have done that; it has been done by you to Saunterer, after he was banned, me, and TG, that I have seen; I suspect others if I'd do a search.

You'll note the accuracy of your attack on my motives can be seen on a thread which I started entitled "Murder scenario." Yes, I think it is a possibility.

You have pursued a theory "hypothetically," involving Patty Fornicola. Problem is, to pursue her, you've said, in effect, the evidence is all planted and the witnesses are all wrong. You can't really explain how this evidence was planted, but that doesn't stop you or Lustor.

In reading your, and Lustor's posts, this is a pattern, which another poster TiredoftheGuff, commented on. Some have commented on it privately.

Your correct on one point. I want to rule out theories or at least put them into the least likely category. I can't do that with any of the three.

I can put into highly improbable (and perhaps impossible) the theory that PF was involved in carrying out foul play against RFG. If you want to engage the evidence that has been made public, we can get some of pieces of the puzzle to fit.

If you want to cry and run home to Mommy, go right ahead.

I'll happily shoot down any theory, including my own (see some my posts on the Felton sighting), that doesn't fit.

Cinderella....I stand behind my post and thank you so much for refreshing my memory. It was very kind of you! I have only said one thing on this board that I truly regret. A long time ago I said that Ray was having an affair. Someone told me that and I posted it. I have no proof and feel that I should not have posted it. I do have certain suspicions about what did possibly happen.
Tony has previously said that the family reads the message board. If my statements in the past have upset or hurt them in any way then I am terribly sorry. That has never been my intention. From the begining I have wanted to try in my own small way to help resolve this case. Not for any other reason than for his family. I don't want recognition, reward money, or even to be acknowledged in any way in the event that some day my info would prove to be true! One thing you should know is that when you disrespected Ray by calling him names and accused him of being alive and such....you REALLY crossed the line! You totally dissed him and his family to the point that Tony left the board! Where do you get off doing that? When you pm'd me several times awhile back I responded to you with compassion and empathy. All I am saying is give Patty the same. How would you feel if your boyfriend disappeared? You would be devastated! I personally know what it is like to have something so horrible happen to you that you don't even want to live and then some people come along and make matters worse! This is unacceptable behavior. Integrity is very important to me. I do not lie. I do not make things up The things that I have posted are things that I have been told and I believe to be true. PERIOD

[J. J. in Phila]

TiredoftheGuff (and Cind),

If there was a realistic scenario, or evidence, that PF was involved in foul play regarding RFG, I'd be the first to be screaming for intense investigation.

In the early days of this, PF's house was searched (though not with a full forensic team). The police looked for signs on a struggle or of a cleanup. They found none. Within 24 hours of the report, members of the Gricar family were in the house, possibly staying there. It is exceptionally likely that they would have seen something.

While not admissible, the polygraph is about 80% likely to detect a lie; not perfect, but not bad either. PF passed. The odds seem to be exceptionally low that she was involved in the execution of foul play.

Let's get back to the evidence:

1. The laptop. Why wasn't it in the house?

2. The drive. Why was it removed?

3. The cigarette ash (the most overlooked clue). Who was smoking?

[J. J. in Phila]

"Execution" here means actually physically carrying out the act of foul play. No, not "execution style."

As for the well, I once mentioned I lived in a small town when I was a child. A few of the older homes (circa 1880-1900) had wells on the property. Sometime in the early 1900's they installed a water system. All the houses had water via pipe, but the wells were still there. Sometimes the well would be filled in, but others had a cement plug in them. That sealed them so you didn't have a "Baby Jessica" situation.

Basically, the well in those cases isn't used for water; it's just abandoned and covered over, either with cement, a sheet of metal, or boards. I would be too surprised to see a few in Bellefonte itself. The town is old enough.

Was the cell phone turned off? I know PF just got the voice mail.

[J. J. in Phila]

[

If he was hiding, why wouldn't he call LE?

I've never said he was dead. The murder scenario here is just one explanation. I'm arguing it is consistent with the evidence.

[J. J. in Phila]

First, some wells do have water, some go dry. It depends on if the water table has lowered or not. Even actively used wells can go dry.

Second, even for small game, hunting season doesn't start until late summer or early fall. K would have plenty of time to cover it over. You don't look for places near a stream; fishing season started the next day, IIRC.

Originally posted by Cinderella


Another thing is if this scenerio just happened to be the scenerio, finding a cabin close to Lewisburg is like finding a needle in a haystack. There are way too many cabins. So one has to wonder the distance away of the cabin. If it is a cabin or farmhouse, barn, etc.

First, you have find the right haystack. We have three: Homicide, Suicide, and walk away.

If you can eliminate some of the haystacks, then you look for the tread that is threaded to the needle. You look at "cabins," remote areas, where someone that fits the suspect list has access. Then you look at ones where there was damage while the owner was out, especially those that have been burnt down.

You are no where near the search point yet.

Originally posted by Cinderella

The hunters should have probably noticed something anyway.

Cinderella, You're right. Spring gobbler season begins the last Saturday of April or the first Saturday of May depending on how the calendar falls, just two weeks after Ray's disappearance. So there likely would have been hunters in the woods.

[J. J. in Phila]

The "cabin" or remote building is going to have a lot of trace evidence after the murder. At some point, it becomes likely for K to burn it, in this scenario. He destroys the evidence.

Yes, wells can be "capped" by several feet of cement; I've seen these. Think of a cork in a bottle, with the well being in the bottle. The can also be covered by boards or a metal plate (I've also seen the latter).

Who's mad? I went to bed.

Actually, you have relatively few hunters (compared to other game). Even then, you have 1-2 weeks to clean up.

http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/cwp/v...a=460&q=161003

You'll note that most hunting occurs in the late summer to late fall/early winter. In Central PA, deer season is so popular that the schools are closed on the day of buck season. That's when you get a lot of people in the woods. I believe the Lewisburg chief commented on the possibility of finding the body in the winter hunting season.

The car in the water, a sealed oil drum, weighting the body, a shallow grave, burial in a cellar, a well, are all possibilities. I chose a well because it's fairly deep and K wouldn't have to take time to dig it.

[J. J. in Phila]

The Ohio River begins in Pittsburgh, about 120 miles from Bellefonte (and further from Lewisburg).

A car could be used, but it's larger so you'd need more water to hide it. Ironically, a small car, like a Mini Cooper, would be easier to sink.

[day2day]

Originally posted by Cinderella
J. J.

I personally don't think that L.E. reads these boards. I asked a detective one time and he said that they don't waste their time. He said that there are a lot of rumors and nuts out there and they found that they were better just solving it on their own. I think that they think of the boards like they think of psychics.

But at any rate, maybe LE know that he is alive and they are not telling anyone, just waiting for the right timing.

About the wells, do the old wells still hold water?

Another thing is if this scenerio just happened to be the scenerio, finding a cabin close to Lewisburg is like finding a needle in a haystack. There are way too many cabins. So one has to wonder the distance away of the cabin. If it is a cabin or farmhouse, barn, etc.

The hunters should have probably noticed something anyway. So I don't think that this is the right scenerio. Also someone would have to be going to that camp or else they might be found being on someone elses property. JMO, MOO

I believe that LE reads these forums. Maybe NOT in this case..(cause are they really LOOKING for him?!) but it other cases I am pretty sure they do!

jmo of course

[J. J. in Phila]

I'd really like to look at what we know (sorta) and the three scenarios and see what can be eliminated (or nearly eliminated).

This particular thread is one way that a murder could have been committed (and I'd argue consistent with the known evidence), but it's not the only one.

I'd like to see the arguments for and against the other theory.

It's like looking for one needle in one of three haystacks. First, we have to figure out which haystack in the needle most likely to be in.

The only thing that, in thinking about this, is that suicide is less likely.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Cinderella
J. J.,

Ok now you are starting to tear apart my theories. I have a question.

1. If you don't know what happened to Ray, how do you know a larger car was used?

I should have said "if a larger car was used." It easier to hide something smaller in the water, like the Mini, than an something large, like an SUV. It's far easier to hide something like a weighted oil drum in a river than the Mini.

In Phila, a bit more than a year ago, two people, and the pickup truck they were driving, vanished.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Cinderella

I don't know about anyone else but I am tired of games.

Count me out. I think that I will just let the higher official handle this case and not worry about it anymore.

[/b]

Cind, if you are looking for me to stand up and "This is what happened to Ray Gricar," I'm sorry, I can't help you; I don't know and I don't have a favored theory.

About the only thing that anybody here will be able to do is rule things out or suggest things that might rule some possibility out. I've said that consistently. It's not a game, but it ultimately might help someone in figuring out what happened.

If I was brilliant, I'd be able to say, "This is what happened." I have not. I can say something couldn't, or is exceptionally unlikely to, have happened.

I seriously doubt this was suicide, for example, but I can't rule it out. That's the closest to a favored theory that I can get.

No games.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by Cinderella
J.J.,

I can't understand why you posted some horrifying things and put a smilie face with it????

Cind, I'm pointing out that it is a lot easier to to hide something the size of an oil drum in a body of water, than it is to hide a car. It has to with the theory; it's possible, but unlikely.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by logicworks


So it appears the postman must have taken the tape with him, and that later it was tracked down as being in the postman's or post office's possession. Then LE retrieved it, and by LISTENING to it determined it had nothing to do with the Gricar disappearance, because it had nothing other than aerobic instructions on it?

LW, good point.

The tape might not have been related to the disappearance, but it might have been dropped by K, in this scenario.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally posted by logicworks




1. Possibly had it on the passenger seat and it slid out, when the passenger door was opened from that side. In the daylight one might have noticed it but after dark might not have realized it fell out. Doubtful, unless it was very dark in that location.

I've never had anything on the seat of my car slide out, unless it's fludh against the door. The parking lot does not have a particular slope (and I park on a slight slope.

This one doesn't fit the evidence.

2. Someone opened the passenger door from the driver's side to toss out the cigarette butt and didn't realize the bag had slid between the passenger seat and the door and it fell out. NOTE....a tall person might have seen it fall out. A short person might not have because it could have been below their line of vision.

Likewise, I've never had anyhing that small fall out of the door from between the seat and the door. It get's caught beteen the seat and the frame.

Size doesn't matter. I'm taller than RFG by 1-2 inches, and I couldn't see it at that angle.

3. Possibly sat a bag down to fish out a cigarette to 'blow some smoke' around and didn't realize the bag with the tape fell out.
Wonder how far under the passenger side it was and how the lighting was at night on that side of the car.

Someone standing beside the car, talking to RFG, fishes into a bag or purse, pulls out the pack of cigarettes and snags the bag too. Possible.

4. The person, K, has the tape in a shoulder bag, that is opened; K has it over his right shoulder. K opens the door and gets partway into the car, with the lit cigarette. RFG tells her to toss the cigarette out. K does so, and the tape falls out. Possible.

[J. J. in Phila]

VV1V 1SSSSS1S D
2V 2S 2S D
3V 3S 3S D
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

F= floor of the car
D= Car Door
S= Passenger seat
1S,2S= side of the passenger seat.

The graphic is not to scale.

Sorry for the crudeness of the diagram.

If 2S is even an inch down, and the tape is wedged there, it could be below the line of sight. Any idea of the distance between far edge of the passenger seat and the middle of the driver's seat?

Also, the person reaching might have to bend a bit to reach the door handle; that could mean that either the person have very long arms or he's several inches taller.