PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #14

[J. J. in Phila]

Welcome to the thread, South fishy. On the previous thread are links to a map and some site photos.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Two things I previously mentioned.

1. A very good map of the area: https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=z69ZxbaBvzmM.kMN08HHDqNB0

2. Lewisburg site photos, with some measurements: https://picasaweb.google.com/LookingforRay

 

[MissJ]

For RFG to walk away with enough money to live on he would have had to have a huge savings somewhere. It was suggested $4000. a month was not much to live on so what would he have to have to walk away? $4000. or more a month for 20 years to live? He could not have saved that in a few short years. It would take 10-20 years to do that at his salary. I doubt he walked away to live in poverty. No one does that unless running from someone or something bad. He didn't have huge responsibilities of any kind. No reason he couldn't get his retirement and then walk away. He wasn't running from legal issues so why would he care if someone had his address? I doubt PEF would have stalked him if he left. If $4000. a month is not enough to live on then why suggest he would have settled for less?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

For RFG to walk away with enough money to live on he would have had to have a huge savings somewhere. It was suggested $4000. a month was not much to live on so what would he have to have to walk away? $4000. or more a month for 20 years to live? He could not have saved that in a few short years. It would take 10-20 years to do that at his salary. I doubt he walked away to live in poverty. No one does that unless running from someone or something bad. He didn't have huge responsibilities of any kind. No reason he couldn't get his retirement and then walk away. He wasn't running from legal issues so why would he care if someone had his address? I doubt PEF would have stalked him if he left. If $4000. a month is not enough to live on then why suggest he would have settled for less?

First, we don't know if there is "something bad" out there. When I read Ganim's first story on 3/31/11, I did not even expect Gricar's name to be mentioned in regard to it.

Second, and I'll put this out as a possibility.

Scenario: Late 1990's, RFG's relationship with EG is deteriorating. He knows he's heading for a breakup and he'd rather that he and his daughter get his money. He moves it offshore, perhaps slowing. March 2001, he files for divorce. There is an agreed to disposition of assets that are still here, but not those offshore. EG may not know about them.

Divorce is settled in late July 2001. RFG can start moving funds back to the US, slowly. 9/11/01 something happens, a major terror attack in NYC and DC. RFG discovers that there will be tighter monitoring of money coming in from offshore; he has a problem.

However, he realizes that if the money can't go to him, he can go to the money. If he goes prior to his retirement, his heirs will get a bigger hunk of change, so that is additional incentive. He also realizes that maybe there are some bad guys out there that could want ti hurt him or his loved ones. Another incentive. He also cannot be tracked down by the press and have to answer what he did, or didn't do, in any specific case. Another incentive. He could also back with the satisfaction that he was smarter than everyone in Centre County. Another incentive. He could also travel by doing this. Yet another incentive.

It would also depend on how much he had, but remember the incentive. His heirs will get more this way.

Okay, we have motive (potentially) and opportunity. Do we have means? No, but a forensic audit could prove, or disprove, the scenario.

 

[MissJ]

I believe he could have walked away if "bad guys" were after him or his family. Did he have enough money thta during his divorce he needed to hide it?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I believe he could have walked away if "bad guys" were after him or his family. Did he have enough money thta during his divorce he needed to hide it?

We don't know. No forensic audit.

Also, in a divorce, assets tend to get liquidated.

I hope that people can see why I wanted to see a forensic audit done. It could potentially rule out that possibility (and would help, at least, with dispelling the idea that RFG was paid off).

 

[SuperSmith]

I'm curious as to your view of what's been painted here?

I had no idea who Gricar was

...and ther lies your problem in understanding what I posted.

 

[SuperSmith]

We don't know. No forensic audit.

Also, in a divorce, assets tend to get liquidated.

I hope that people can see why I wanted to see a forensic audit done. It could potentially rule out that possibility (and would help, at least, with dispelling the idea that RFG was paid off).

I hope a forensic audit is done too so this walkaway theory is gone for good.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I hope a forensic audit is done too so this walkaway theory is gone for good.

It is possible that it would go a long way to proving or disproving walkaway or suicide. Please keep in mind that I am not directing the investigation.

 

[Trackergd]

There are a number of theories with regard to this case. I am not out to prove or disprove any of them at this juncture. I am also not out to impune RFG's character. My sole motive is to determine if there is anything questionable about the documents I purchased from Centre County and that are public record. It may take a bit of time for the individual I have engaged to do this as may end up being her Masters thesis. Once I have what she discovers, it will be shared here for all of you to peruse. It has some "curiosities" at this point, nothing more.

 

[SeekingJana]

I hope they will do a forensic audit of everything Mr. Gricar had in any account from 2000-2005, although it certainly is late ( to state the obvious) for a thorough or accurate audit to be performed, it would seem.
I can't believe it wasn't done at the time the " walkaway" theory came into being with Patty and Lara begging him to come home, like he was a little boy who was playing hooky. SMH. This really makes me angry as it could have clarified a lot of things years ago with the " missing" vs " foul play" theories.

 

[south fishy]

...and ther lies your problem in understanding what I posted.

No, there lies why I asked you the question. No need to be snotty. Seems to me that not knowing who he was before hearing and reading about him locally, then at WS, would mean I have no preconceived notions. If I knew who he was prior, I may be insulted if there was something specific talked about here as theory that I knew was not true. Did you know him? If so, that answers my question. If not, why would you answer my sincere and valid question in such a way? Geesh.

 

[MissJ]

We don't know. No forensic audit.

Also, in a divorce, assets tend to get liquidated.

I hope that people can see why I wanted to see a forensic audit done. It could potentially rule out that possibility (and would help, at least, with dispelling the idea that RFG was paid off).

JMO but I never thought RFG was "paid off". I also don't see him as the kind of man who would walk away from his daughter. Nor would he have thought money made up for it by leaving her his pension.

 

[Trackergd]

What bothers me about foul play is that anyone wishing to "take out" RG would have to know he was going somewhere (Lewisburg for those who agree with PSP and "somewhere else" for those who have their own agenda), followed him and had an elaborate plan in place to abduct him, took the car and dumped it in Lewisburg, dumped the computer and hard drive in the river and left no evidence or body. It would have taken a lot of planning and money and more than one actor. I only see one possible connection that has that amount of resources, but am not willing at this point to say they would have gone to this extent.

 

[MissJ]

What bothers me about foul play is that anyone wishing to "take out" RG would have to know he was going somewhere (Lewisburg for those who agree with PSP and "somewhere else" for those who have their own agenda), followed him and had an elaborate plan in place to abduct him, took the car and dumped it in Lewisburg, dumped the computer and hard drive in the river and left no evidence or body. It would have taken a lot of planning and money and more than one actor. I only see one possible connection that has that amount of resources, but am not willing at this point to say they would have gone to this extent.

Could he have trusted the wrong person and he agreed to a meeting?

 

[Trackergd]

Could he have trusted the wrong person and he agreed to a meeting?

In a one actor scenario, they would have had to lure RG to "somewhere", kill him, disposed of the computer and hard drive leaving the mini in Lewisburg and then dispose of the body elsewhere and not leave one bit of forensic evidence, drop of blood...anything. That is a lot for one person to manage...a real professional. What case would rise to the level of having a professional hit...or at least someone with extensive knowledge on how to perform such an act? I can buy a team doing this, but not one person, and I don't see any significant event that would justify bring in that level of resource to take RG out of the picture. That would be at least a million dollar hit, and the mob generally leaves a body as a warning to others. It would have to be a private contractor or "a" government entity not to leave a body.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Could he have trusted the wrong person and he agreed to a meeting?

A meeting creates some problems, even if we would dismiss the laptop as being coincidental. You have to ask what kind of a meeting.

1. RFG didn't tell any of staff about a meeting, saying he was "playing hooky."

2. He didn't tell is S.O.

3. He didn't maintain any notes about a meeting, it wasn't on his schedule. This even includes his computer, like an exchange of e-mails about the meeting.

4. He turned his phone off prior to getting to Lewisburg, and he didn't turn it on in Lewisburg, even to check his voice-mail.

5. RFG was heading into an area where he wouldn't be recognized readily, as he would in Centre County.

6. RFG didn't inform anyone in LE about a meeting, even the PSP. If there was something, it would be LE investigating.

That pretty much eliminates any legitimate work reasons for the hypothetical meeting. That leaves an illegitimate work related reason or a personal reason, if there was a meeting.

While I won't dwell on this, there is also the possibility that RFG was in Lewisburg on 4/16, which would preclude an exchange of information type meeting, if accurate.

 

[SeekingJana]

IF he had a "meeting" with someone, why in Lewisburg, if he was indeed in Lewisburg? He had his own office in Bellefonte. A DA should have the choice of meeting places and his office would have been more convenient for him. Remember, he is said to have had some mood changes and was tired, according to Patty.

Also, why possibly take an old laptop that was not used any longer ( according to Patty)? Could someone else have put the laptop and the HD in the river at some time after the car was found in the SOS parking lot?

And, one last thing: Why is Patty's word on this stuff the final word on anything without independent verification by the PSP? We are taught- with a missing person, start at the inner circle and eliminate them first. I'm not going to say she killed him or had him killed, but my opinion about her presumption of innocence has changed since I read last week that her polygraph and Lara's polygraph were specific only to questions about the walkaway theory. Not questioned about knowledge of harm to Ray Gricar.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Snipped a bit.

IF he had a "meeting" with someone, why in Lewisburg, if he was indeed in Lewisburg? He had his own office in Bellefonte. A DA should have the choice of meeting places and his office would have been more convenient for him. Remember, he is said to have had some mood changes and was tired, according to Patty.

It was out of the media market, which could indicated a meeting with someone he didn't want to be seen with, or wouldn't be seen with him.

He tired according to PEF, and acting unusually according to a number of others.

The laptop could have been a coincidence. He wanted to to lose that data and, if there was a meeting, decoded that Lewisburg was a great place to do it.

While the didn't asked PEF straight out if she murdered RFG, she was questioned on his location and on the call. Had she murdered him, she would have known where the body was.

 

[SeekingJana]

Snipped a bit.



It was out of the media market, which could indicated a meeting with someone he didn't want to be seen with, or wouldn't be seen with him.

He tired according to PEF, and acting unusually according to a number of others.

The laptop could have been a coincidence. He wanted to to lose that data and, if there was a meeting, decoded that Lewisburg was a great place to do it.

While the didn't asked PEF straight out if she murdered RFG, she was questioned on his location and on the call. Had she murdered him, she would have known where the body was.

I think she could have had guilty knowledge of harm coming to him and still be telling the truth about the 11 AM phone call and not knowing where his body was/ is. I said that I don't think she killed him, but it could have been a hired hit. There are his cell phone records for the last phone call as well. That's a very softball line of questioning, IMO.