~ Foul Play ~ Statements

[Politigal]

• Aug 2005
  http://blogs.kansascity.com/crime_sc...g_prosecu.html
  Police have said they have few credible leads and have not ruled out foul play.
  
  
• July 2005
  http://tinyurl.com/6erh9u
  but Zaccagni said there is a growing possibility of foul play.
  
  
• January 2006
  http://www.centredaily.com/news/ray_...tory/3799.html
  "I've said from day one that I thought he was the object of foul play," McKnight said.
  
  
• May 2006
  http://tinyurl.com/5mezjp
  Madeira: And then of course, the third theory is that there was some foul play. Because you’re the chief law enforcement officer, you’ve made enemies over the years. That’s why it seems a possibility.
  
  
• April 2008
  http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive...r_3_years.aspx
  In my mind, if it's foul play, it's the proverbial perfect crime. Walk away, run away -- he had no reason to do that," Tony Gricar said
  
  
• August 2005
  http://tinyurl.com/6cuy9d
  Although Dixon said the missing hard drive could back up just about any theory floating around out there, Tony Gricar said many family members believe it could mean Ray Gricar was killed.
  "Everybody is pretty upset," he said. "It's tough thinking there's the possibility of foul play."
  Tony Gricar said his uncle was "not a technophile" and might not have known how to remove the hard drive.
  Fornicola did not return a call seeking comment Monday.
  Many others keeping tabs on the case also believe the missing hard drive strengthens the theories revolving around homicide.
  "It reconfirms in my mind that he's the object of foul play," said Clinton County District Attorney Ted McKnight.
  "Could he have removed (the hard drive)? Yes. Do I think he did? No."
  
  
  
• February 2006
  Posted by Saunterer on the CTV Board
  All theories aside, foul play seems to be the most likely (and popular) theory. Ray by most accounts just simply wasn't the type to commit suicide, or walk away from everything and drop out of society by his own free will - most who knew him said he cared too much about his family to do that
  
  
• June 2006
  http://tinyurl.com/68mwzh
  This one was a bit different from other cases we have worked, as its still technically a missing persons case, though few people believe that Ray is still with us - foul play seems to be the most plausible in this one, vs the other two (suicide or run away).
  
  
• April 2005
  http://www.fox29news.com/news/safese...ry.asp?1644709
  PORT MATILDA, Pa. (AP) _ The daughter of a Pennsylvania prosecutor says she suspects foul play in her father's disappearance.
  
  
• September 2006
  http://tinyurl.com/55yx4o
  Law enforcement is still saying that nothing supports foul play, but I don't know what that means," Tony Gricar said. "I think (homicide) definitely needs to be looked at."
  Zaccagni said that as time goes on, homicide becomes a more viable explanation for Ray Gricar's disappearance, especially because of how and where the laptop was found
  
  
  
• May 2006
  http://tinyurl.com/68epoq
  The Gricar family, however, no longer holds much hope that Ray Gricar will be found alive, Tony Gricar said.
  Even Lara, who long believed her father was still alive, has accepted that, he said.
  "Early on, she was hopeful," Tony Gricar said.
  
  
• April 2008
  http://www.wnep.com/Global/story.asp?s=8171587
  His nephew said it is likely Ray Gricar is no longer alive.
  

[J. J. in Phila]

From the third anniversary:

And according to Weaver, Gricar was certainly smart enough to make himself vanish.

“You can’t rule any of the three out,” he said.

http://www.dailyitem.com/0100_news/l...106004034.html





Tony Gricar said that without any evidence currently, every possible scenario of his uncle's disappearance is as likely, or as unlikely, as the next.

"It could just as easily be an incident of suicide. In my mind, if it's foul play, it's the proverbial perfect crime. Walk away, run away -- he had no reason to do that," Tony Gricar said.

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive...r_3_years.aspx

The links to these stories appears in the media thread of this site.

[Cloudbuster]

I found some very interesting articles. Pgal can you do a comprehension rundown on this to explain this to me lol?

But, getting back to Move America Forward, Robert Dixon is their new Director. Duane Dixon was the Police Chief in Bellfonte, Pa, when Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar disappeared.


In a case like Reciprocal, they purge the USA. In the case of Brandy Britton and possibly Ray Gricar, they use the local and State Police as their own personal Gestapo.


America may be moving forward, but they sure seem to be leaving a lot of fraud and dead American bodies in their wake.


They should ask the AG if he knows what a noose looks like.



last article on page:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/tal...07/07/22-week/

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

Another member of the ring was Susanna M Jimenez. William Jimenez was a suspect in the disapparance of Centre County Pennsylvania District Attorney Ray Gricar.


Somebody had better start changing the water in this hot tub.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/tal...ty-hot-tub.php

[Politigal]

Originally Posted by Cloudbuster

Can anyone explain what these articles mean? No opinions please just what they are meaning?

I'm not really sure, but it looks like the writer is comparing last names...?

[Cloudbuster]

Originally Posted by Politigal

I'm not really sure, but it looks like the writer is comparing last names...?

Thanks Pgal!!! Im not sure what he is trying to say, when they get all political on me it's not my thing. This case is teaching me politics 101 lol. Im drawn to that for some weird reason. I find myself watching CNN everyday now and that is not me at all. I actually always hated CNN and occasionally watched local news. Why the CNN im not sure lol. My SO says Im a walking CNN comercial lol. As a News Years resolution I plan to not watch it anymore lol. Thanks again!!!

Want to put a dent in your conviction (beyond a reasonable doubt?) that RG was in his Mini-Cooper and in Lewisburg sometime after 5:30 on 4/15, JJ?

Start reading the scientific research on eyewitness identification.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, I have. We now have 4 eyewitnesses, minimum, that saw RFG in the car after 5:00 PM, a fifth that saw him withing 30 yards of the car in the same time.

I would like to see the links where 4 eyewitnesses, of the same race as the observed person, wrongly identified the same person, in the same car, at the same place, at the same time. I'll start with that. TIA

Actually, JJ, you need to start much further back than that, with an understanding from a psychological standpoint of how malleable memory is and from a law enforcement standpoint of how witness testimony is like trace evidence.

Current studies by the top researchers in these fields are now revealing that although LE collection and handling of other trace evidence has advanced by leaps and bounds, failures to understand how witness memory works and failures to develop state-of-the-art methods for collecting eyewitness testimony can be responsible for the degradation and loss of witness trace evidence.

Do some extensive reading on that score, and you won't be making claims like you did about "two witnesses, independently" reporting that RG was in the bar in Wilkes-Barre. I assume you weren't aware there are studies showing that even if two independent witnesses have no contact with each other, there can be cross-contamination?

Now I certainly don't claim to be an expert in eyewitness testimony. But I have educated myself pretty extensively by reading on and off for a couple years on this topic. I'd really suggest you do the same. I think you'll find, as I did, that it will give you a concrete basis for doing some measure of evaluation of the RG witnesses. I say some measure, since we are privy only to what's been released in the press and can't evaluate post-sighting exposure, LE questioning strategies or post-questioning confirmations and the like.

[J. J. in Phila]

Okay UTR since you've studied it, the question should be easy:

I would like to see the links where 4 eyewitnesses, of the same race as the observed person, wrongly identified the same person, in the same car, at the same place, at the same time. I'll start with that. TIA

That seems to have to have occurred for you premise to even have a fig leaf of credibility.

Exactly, JJ.

All were ruled out, and for precisely the reasons I've outlined before.

LE suspected SP on day one of the disappearance, so their vetting of the sightings was thorough.

By spring, there was a corpse that had floated up in the bay 90 miles from Laci's house. So the prosecution had a dead body, even more impetus to thoroughly vet the witness sightings, knowing the defense might try to use them.

Yep, more than seven people reported seeing Laci walking her Golden Retriever in her neighborhood near her home in a narrow time frame.

And not one of them was Laci.

Thanks for making my point.

What you haven't considered is the implications of your push to prove the Lewisburg and Wilkes-Barre witnesses as accurate without enough foundation. I'll get into that at some point in the future.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, LE already did that screening process. In the Peterson case, after that was done, there was one witness, and LE found a pregnant woman who was walking a dog at that time.

In this case, LE looked at the witnesses, did the screening process, and found 9-10 minimum, after that. In the case of the 4-5 who saw RFG in the Mini, LE didn't find another person who was driving a red Mini in the same place at the same time, and who could have been RFG.

Considering the minimal numbers of Red Mini's in the area at the time, it isn't too hard to eliminate the people.

In Peterson, LE was working to eliminate the sightings because they believed SP killed Laci.

In Gricar, nothing similar is true. As Dixon said, even though LE had no concrete evidence that RG was in Lewisburg, they were operating on that assumption.

[J. J. in Phila]

He eliminated both a Maryland sighting and one witness that saw RFG at 1:30 PM on Saturday.

Originally Posted by J. J. in Phila

He eliminated both a Maryland sighting and one witness that saw RFG at 1:30 PM on Saturday.

To my knowledge, no sightings have ever been confirmed by LE...none. More on topic...to my knowledge, LE has not said squat about why foul play remains on the table.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally Posted by Serendipitous1

To my knowledge, no sightings have ever been confirmed by LE...none. More on topic...to my knowledge, LE has not said squat about why foul play remains on the table.

DZ did confirm.

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

On the second point, I'm not sure what they checked. I would also point out that if RFG intended to walk away, that intention may not have been to stay away. Something intervened.

I don't recall BB ever making statements like this:

We have three or four good witnesses from down there who are definitely IDing him in the park.

We can definitely put him there on Saturday, too.

“She’s hoping against hope that Ray is still out there,” he says. “She’ll deal with why he’s doing this to her later.”

[gstickley]

Originally Posted by Serendipitous1

To my knowledge, no sightings have ever been confirmed by LE...none. More on topic...to my knowledge, LE has not said squat about why foul play remains on the table.

Wouldn't you agree that S1 is pretty knowledgeable about this so-called investigation???????????? Repeating his statement: "To my knowledge, no sightings have ever been confirmed by LE...none."

[J. J. in Phila]

Except they were:


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

Now, the quotes seem accurate.

[gstickley]

Originally Posted by J. J. in Phila

Except they were:


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

Now, the quotes seem accurate.

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.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally Posted by gstickley

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?

[gstickley]

Yep, went back & read your link. Thanks for posting it. Buehner did mention witnesses in Lewisburg; McKnight mentioned one on Rt. 15 that was never checked on.

Did you also note that both Buehner & McKnight think RG was a victim of foul play (murdered)? Didn't notice either of them plugging the "walkaway" theory.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally Posted by gstickley

Yep, went back & read your link. Thanks for posting it. Buehner did mention witnesses in Lewisburg; McKnight mentioned one on Rt. 15 that was never checked on.

Did you also note that both Buehner & McKnight think RG was a victim of foul play (murdered)? Didn't notice either of them plugging the "walkaway" theory.

If you'd actually read my posts, I've noted that several times. Both, however, seem to give the Lewisburg witnesses a great deal of credibility (and these are guys who really understand witness testimony).

Two things.

1. I've said that RFG was alive and driving his Mini in Lewisburg beyond a reasonable doubt at 5:00 PM on 4/15/05. I never said he wasn't murdered, and certainly not beyond a reasonable doubt.

2. There is a new murder scenario thread posted.

Read carefully.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISQb8tY7ykU

As far as I can see, Buehner and McKnight don't confirm the accuracy of the sightings. They merely report the sightings and push to have the RG disappearance checked out further because they believe Gricar was murdered.

Short of video, photos, receipts, DNA, etc., I don't see how any sightings can be confirmed as Gricar. Heck, even the sighting by someone who knew him personally (CF) wasn't given much credibility.

[gstickley]

Has there ever been, even one, "witness" who positively identified Ray Gricar as being in Lewisburg on 04/15-16???

I thought not . . .

Was there not a discussion sometime ago about the number of "like" vehicles & the probability of numerous men wearing "like" clothing in the area that particular weekend???

[gstickley]

Originally Posted by UndertheRadar

As far as I can see, Buehner and McKnight don't confirm the accuracy of the sightings. They merely report the sightings and push to have the RG disappearance checked out further because they believe Gricar was murdered.

Short of video, photos, receipts, DNA, etc., I don't see how any sightings can be confirmed as Gricar. Heck, even the sighting by someone who knew him personally (CF) wasn't given much credibility.

You're absolutely correct as far as Buehner & McKnight.

The only person who actually reported seeing Gricar on 04/15 & positively identifying him was CF; I don't think she was given any credibility. There may have been others who saw him but, after CF, who had much more credibility than anyone else, was dismissed, I can understand why no one else came forward, even if they had information.

[J. J. in Phila]

Actually, Buehner called Bennett, the one witness that has been identified multiple times in the press "a highly credible individual."

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

And, guess what folks, Bennett is even at the top of my list for credible witnesses.

TG mentioned a "credible" business owner, who I think Alvey (his name was mentioned once in the press).

You can continue to spin , but it's still there. The thing is, the more evidence that comes out, the more solid the witnesses look.

[gstickley]

Is this the same Mr. Bennett, who "saw" RG & a MW INSIDE the mall or, on some occasions, "saw" RG standing just OUTSIDE the mall as though waiting for someone????? Is this the same mall with the parking lot where the Mini was found??? Is this the same parking lot where the dogs didn't leave the immediate vicinity of the parked vehicle???

[gstickley]

Originally Posted by Serendipitous1

To my knowledge, no sightings have ever been confirmed by LE...none. More on topic...to my knowledge, LE has not said squat about why foul play remains on the table.

Appears that not everyone believes this S1. However, UTR, LHF, Pgal., & I ("The Spinnsters") believe . . . we believe . . . we believe . . . we believe . . . (Please find the music for this!)

Originally Posted by gstickley

Is this the same Mr. Bennett, who "saw" RG & a MW INSIDE the mall or, on some occasions, "saw" RG standing just OUTSIDE the mall as though waiting for someone????? Is this the same mall with the parking lot where the Mini was found??? Is this the same parking lot where the dogs didn't leave the immediate vicinity of the parked vehicle???

Great post, GS!

I also want to ask whether this was the same Mr. Bennett who couldn't remember if the man he saw was wearing a fleece jacket or a fleece vest.

(Mmmm. Was the hair curly . . . or was it straight? Did the guy have a mustache . . . or was he clean shaven? Was it a screw driver or a ham_mer? Was there a barn on the landscape . . . or was it a building-less scene????)

I sure do wish we'd get more differentiation in "some" of these posts between credible witness and accurate identification. That lack of distinction is getting just a little too deliberately slippery IMO.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR and GS, I report what was say (by a guy who has about 15 years experience dealing with witnesses).

Bennett said Saturday. I'm unwilling to that RFG was in Lewisburg, beyond a reasonable doubt, on Saturday.

Now I'm more skeptical of witnesses than even Buehner. I like more than one witness and the identification of the car, but Buehner referred to Bennet as a "highly credible witness." I didn't ghost write his letter or tell him what to think.

And, BTW, he thinks it was murder.

Originally Posted by UndertheRadar

I sure do wish we'd get more differentiation in "some" of these posts between credible witness and accurate identification. That lack of distinction is getting just a little too deliberately slippery IMO.

Quoting myself for emphasis . . .

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, Buehner asked for the motel registrations in a thirty mile radius of Lewisburg to be checked. That is not the action of someone who doesn't believe he was there.

[gstickley]

Originally Posted by J. J. in Phila

UTR, Buehner asked for the motel registrations in a thirty mile radius of Lewisburg to be checked. That is not the action of someone who doesn't believe he was there.

With all the "everything's been done that could be done", "no stone's been left unturned", slap-on-the-back, have-all-the-resources-needed, assisted-by-umpteen-other-agencies, no-other-help-needed, wouldn't you have thought every hotel/motel registration within a 30-mile radius would have already been checked??? 30-miles . . . why not 50 or 100 miles???

And why would Mr. Buehner have to be the one to ask this? Where was the Acting DA? Where was the Crack Investigator? Where was the Chief of Police? Who was in charge of this investigation?

Originally Posted by gstickley

With all the "everything's been done that could be done", "no stone's been left unturned", slap-on-the-back, have-all-the-resources-needed, assisted-by-umpteen-other-agencies, no-other-help-needed, wouldn't you have thought every hotel/motel registration within a 30-mile radius would have already been checked??? 30-miles . . . why not 50 or 100 miles???

And why would Mr. Buehner have to be the one to ask this? Where was the Acting DA? Where was the Crack Investigator? Where was the Chief of Police? Who was in charge of this investigation?

All excellent questions.

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally Posted by gstickley

With all the "everything's been done that could be done", "no stone's been left unturned", slap-on-the-back, have-all-the-resources-needed, assisted-by-umpteen-other-agencies, no-other-help-needed, wouldn't you have thought every hotel/motel registration within a 30-mile radius would have already been checked??? 30-miles . . . why not 50 or 100 miles???

And why would Mr. Buehner have to be the one to ask this? Where was the Acting DA? Where was the Crack Investigator? Where was the Chief of Police? Who was in charge of this investigation?

30 miles might be pushing it, but there is another problem. The last sighting was in Wilkes-Barre, outside of that 30 mile radius. It is well less than 1.5 hour drive. He could have been out of the 30 mile radius.

JJ, the motel idea has become an issue because of Bennett's Saturday noon sighting. If it is a credible sighting, then RG had to spend Friday night somewhere, motels being one option.

[J. J. in Phila]

UTR, that seems to indicate a reasonable likelihood that Bennett was "good enough" to trigger a check.

Then why are you complaining that GS wants to make sure that check is thorough?

You think he drove Friday night to Wilkes-Barre, back to Lewisburg before noon, then on to Wilkes-Barre and hung out in a bar there on Monday on his way to this great, long and carefully planned walkaway?

[J. J. in Phila]

First, I have not said that this was a walkaway. Let's be clear. RFG could have left the area, with the intent to return.

Second, if the Wilkes-Barre sighting is correct, RFG might have gone from Lewisburg to Wilkes-Barre on 4/15/05. It's not hard to get there and back.

I did a range map a while ago and looked at where RFG could have driven to and back between in four hours. It runs from York in the south to Corning, NY, in the north, and from northern New Jersey in the east, to Dubois in the west.