In support of pinkToes and others of like mind... It's clear (in my opinion) that there is "staging" on some level. By whom and for what purpose is the mystery. If you try to take everything on face value the way it has been reported through official channels, you'll spin in circles and never solve this case, because a very careful planned deception has taken place (again, in my opinion). Only by questioning the official line, thinking outside the box, and asking "is there another possible explanation?" will anyone ever get to the truth.
For example, (and just for fun), consider the following hypothetical storyline:
PF has a plan to have RG murdered (motive unknown, but if you live with someone long enough there's probably a reason). :floorlaugh: The plan for how to murder RG and stage the other evidence has been planned months in advance. The plan is to bump Ray off, and stage things with similarities to his brother's suicide (to put LE on the trail of suicide), and also to stage some things like a book (20/20 Vision) RG is familiar with, to put LE on the trail of a "walk away". (PF knows the history around Ray's brother, she knows about the book, and she knows every other intimate aspect of RG's life necessary to pull this off.) PF needs a way to let a hit man know when RG will be in a certain area between Centre Hall and Lewisburg, so she uses RG's laptop to get on Mapquest and determine the exact timing. Later she realizes this search will be traceable, so she does another search for how to destroy a hard drive. She thinks that once the hard drive has been destroyed that no one would ever know that the searches were made (she doesn't understand how computer searches are saved on a different machine). She waits patiently for a day that she knows RG will be going antiquing. The night before he goes missing, he tells her "I think I'll take tomorrow afternoon off and go antiquing." She slips out at night and makes a call from a nearby (untraceable) pay phone to her hired gun, and says "Tomorrow is the day. I'll let you know when he leaves the house." When Ray is showering in the morning (or the night before), she slips his laptop into the back of the Minicooper. As he is leaving, PF says to RG "call me when you get to Center Hall and let me know if the Whistlestop is open, (or makes up some other reason for him to call her). On some back road between Bellefonte and Lewisburg, RG is forced off the road. At gunpoint, RG is told to stay in his car. A blonde woman enters the front passenger side. A gunman crouches in the back. RG is instructed to drive around Lewisburg for awhile (or else!) to establish sightings of him there. Then he is instructed to drive back to where he was forced off the road, where he enters the (metallic colored) car of the gunman. The gunman crouches in the back of the metallic colored car and instructs RG to drive back to the court house (where he'll be seen again, and which will cause another wild goose chase leading nowhere), and then head out of town. Meanwhile, the blonde woman takes off her blonde wig, and drives RG's Minicooper back into Lewisburg (while smoking a cigarette), throws the computer and hard drive into the river, parks the Minicooper with RG's cell phone in it, and disappears. (It's necessary that the cell phone be found to help verify PF's story that RG called her to say he would be going antiquing). RG is taken on a long ride from which he never returns. Because this was a professional hit, his body will never be found. LE will spend years reading 20/20 Vision, and researching Ray's brother's suicide, and otherwise chasing their own tails.
This hypothetical has some problems (I'm sure J.J. can point them out - LOL). But
my point here is not that I have an iron clad case against PF, or that I even remotely suspect her. The point is that in order to first start considering a scenario like this one needs to question some basic assumptions. (We know that someone called PF using RG's cell phone, but we only have PF's word as to what was said to her. We know RG's car was found in Lewisburg, but do we really know he drove it there? What about the dogs failing to find his scent? What about the cigarette smoke? We know there were searches on RG's computer. Do we know for certain that he made the searches? Etc.) If instead you say "well, we know RG called PF at such and such time, and we know RG was spotted in Lewisburg at such and such time", then I predict you'll get nowhere.
I've arrived at this conclusion because I first concluded that suicide ain't it. That leaves walk-away (in which case RG is doing the deceiving), or foul play (in which case the bad guys are doing the deceiving). In either case, things will not be as they appear, by design of the deceiver(s).
Ever since the O.J. Simpson trial, I have made a little mental note: If I ever need to kill somebody, be sure to leave behind some clothing that doesnt fit me, like maybe a glove
A little deception can go a long way.
