A New Investigation

[day2day]

I found a couple of really good "old" posts. The threads were closed so I thought I would bring them here so we can discuss them.

The first post is from ParlorElephant

Let's start a new investigation, Logicworks.

First question. When did Gricar disappear? Objective fact: 9 PM on Thursday, April 14th. Corroboration? Courthouse surveillance camera.

Disappearance date selected by the investigation: April 15th. Why? Because PF says she got a call FROM HIM at the office on April 15th. Corroboration that Gricar placed that call? None.

Second question. Did he leave the courthouse and go home on April 14th or somewhere else? He went home. Why? PF says so. Corroboration? None.

Third question. Was he at home on the morning of April 15th before PF went to work? Yes. Why? PF says so. Corroboration? None.

Did he drive the mini on April 15th? He drove it to Lewisburg sometime in the morning. Why? Because PF says she got a call saying so at the office on April 15th. And that a day or two later it was found in Lewisburg in the appropriate place to match that conversation. Corroboration that HE was the one that drove it there? None. Strong suggestion that he was not? Smoke-filled car driven by a man who didn't smoke and according to family members hated smoking.

If Gricar drove the car, was the laptop in the car? Yes. Why?
Because it was missing when he was reported missing and turned up months later in the river. Why would that suggest it was in the car? Well, it couldn't be found and it eventually turned up in the river so FOLLOWING THE SUICIDE THEORY, for which of course there is zero evidence, that's the only place it could have been. Corroboration that it was ever in his car? None. Didn't have it when he left the courthouse on April 14th. Corroboration that it was in his house on April 15th? None. Corroboration that there was anything of value or potential danger on the laptop? None.

Premise that Gricar jumped into the river because he was depressed? Corroboration? None. Innuendo? After all, his
brother was once found in a river. Lewisburg has a river. His car was in Lewisburg near a river. Voila! He must have jumped in the river. Suicide note? No. Known reason to be considering suicide? No. Any prior history of suicide attempts? No. Strong suggestions he did not: if he wanted to drown himself, he was smart enough not to try it in a couple of feet of water in full view of anyone in the parklet; he was not given to dramatics; he was not given to destroying property; lack of a shred of evidence that he was depressed.

Over the summer months, the suicide theory seemed to be losing some public 'traction'. No body. No clues. The 'sure as day' collection of 'eyewitnesses' who 'saw' Gricar in Lewisburg turning out to be about as reliable as those in Wilkes-Barre, Texas, Michigan and all those other places from which reports of sightings came in. Still no reason offered to think he decided to cap off a relaxed day of antique shopping by killing himself and his laptop.

Then his laptop turns up in the previously thoroughly-searched river, very near the spot where the 'suicide' 'occurred', embedded. That must have been quite a powerful throw from the bridge to imbed it through several feet of standing water. The hard drive is missing. Why does that matter? Investigative premise: there's something of value on the hard drive to the investigation. Corroboration? None.

Public still skeptical about the suicide scenario. The hard drive makes its appearance? What's next? Wallet? Keys? Does the appearance of any of these items establish that he jumped into the river? No. Does it establish that he is responsible for them being in the river? No. Is it just coincidence that these
things manage to elude the initial search to surface over time and keep the suicide theory afloat?

ParlorElephant is NOT suggesting that the items were put in the river by LE. He doesn't think that. Corroboration. None. But every day PE wonders just a little more if this is someone's game. A game played out at the cost of the reputation of the man who it would appear is helpless to stop it.

A lot's been said, on these boards and off, about whether Gricar's disappearance is 'related' to the Luna murder. Why would it be? Two different LE agencies, two different states, different prosecution jobs, two men who presumably never met, never worked together. (PE doesn't put much stock in Keisling's thing about the 'big drug dealers' connecting the dots -killing prosecutors is bad for business.)

When you look at what happened AFTER Luna was killed, things get a little weird.

-------Luna's murder weapon, suddenly surfacing months after his death at the very spot searched without success by 150 LE the day of his murder. Gricar's laptop making a similar delayed appearance after a multi-day intensive river search immediately after his disappearance. A hard drive following not far behind, same general location.

--------Allegations of suicide in both cases with zero evidence to suggest it - a hard sell with Luna, given the extensive injuries -
with Gricar no body.

--------Assaults on Luna's reputation - maybe he traveled to Pennsylvania to tryst with a prostitue and was killed by her/him, maybe he was involved in pornography, maybe he stabbed himself 36 times to avoid taking a polygraph as to what became of $36,000 which disappeared between the courtroom and the evidence locker in one of his past cases. Allegations that Gricar may have had a lover, may have been suicidally depressed for some unknown reason, may have been engaged in some unspecified and unknown misconduct in connection with his job,
may have disregarded his responsibilites at work to take off for parts unknown. Corroboration? None.

Hard questions. Here's another. Why does this new DA just came in and right away said thanks, but no thanks, to the idea of getting help in the investigation from the Attorney General office. Other DAs sound like they think its needed and overdue at this point. Didn't this new guy say his connections with the Attorney General office would give the county a lot of options to do better investigations? Plus - MOO - seems like just self-preservation that you would want to know if the guy before you got 'disappeared' because of the work he was doing.

Keep applying that logic, Logicworks!