PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #13

[J. J. in Phila]

Not having to face Sandusky's victims and explain why he didn't prosecute sounds better. Not having to face his daughter to explain his cowardice sounds better. Not wanting to deal with the wrath of the Penn State football fanatics sounds better. Those are just some the options. I could think of others.

And, by the way, if there was/is "another woman", it wouldn't automatically mean the above possibilities are incorrect. Fleeing with another person and starting a new life together, with brand new identities, is much more attractive when possible scandal is hanging over one's head.


JMO

I've I thought that motive for walkaway would not necessarily be limited to one thing. It could add to it, but not by much.

RFG would only deal with the football fan(atics) if he did prosecute Sandusky. McQueary didn't face the victims.

Lauro? He is retired from DPW, still getting a pension, and now working in the private sector in the same field. Raykovitz, the president of TSM? Private practice in a group, in State College. Jay Paterno, heir to Joe, is hawking his new book and eying a political career.

Yes, he'd have to tell his daughter. A bit embarrassing, but worse than disappearing forever?

Further, he could never know if 1998 would come out. We didn't know about it for about 6 years.

 

[MissJ]

He went to University of Dayton and Case Western Law.

The question though is, why the secrecy? Why not just call PEF and mail in his resignation?

The finances look like there was not a lot of money left behind.

That has always been the puzzling part. To add to the excitement? Maybe she had a reason for not wanting it out in the open.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

That has always been the puzzling part. To add to the excitement? Maybe she had a reason for not wanting it out in the open.

His heirs would get more, but it wouldn't explain why he'd leave it behind.

The resignation would probably be sent to the county commissioners, not PEF. Further, he had to have known there with massive investigation into his disappearance. Why not call up the Bellefonte Police? According to Zaccagni, that is what they were hoping for.

If he did something criminal, that could endanger his pension, it would explain it. There wasn't anything that I know of regarding Sandusky, or any of his other cases.

The only thing that I could see is an off-shore account that he would have trouble accessing.

 

[SeekingJana]

We're all missing something, and I don't know what it is.

I have posted this very same thought over and over. What I believe happened, if he was not murdered ( and there is NO evidence of murder), is that there was a one-two punch that got him moving. For example, people can have a disease which is silent until there is a new injury or illness. Then the disease manifests itself, sometimes in a rampant way. I don't mean that Ray had a disease, it is an example of how the one- two punch works. The second episode activates something which has been dormant.

For Ray, it could be that his lover needed him with her- illness, loneliness, an ultimatum type of thing- Be with me in 30 days or this is over kind of deadline.
AND something from work was pressing on him- I do NOT think Sandusky for one minute, but maybe a broad type of threat, or maybe he and Patti were at odds over a fairly serious matter, or maybe he was dreading the act of retiring ( not retirement itself but the process of leaving and the parties and so forth)..
Maybe it was a lack of planning for old age, or maybe bad stock investments which lost a lot of his money ( despite what a friend said on the subject- sometimes people blow smokescreens).

I think what is missing is really our ability to group reasons together and come up with a person who was unhappy, wanted to be somewhere else, could have had a true and deep love for someone unknown to us, and it all came together as THEY BOTH planned their separate leave- takings.
It's been over 9 years and we are no closer to knowing what happened to him than we were in the beginning, for the most part. I think it's because our ways of thinking are linear instead of circular. I believe that for a person as seemingly settled as he seemed to be, there were multiple and compelling factors from different segments of his life which caused him to leave.

I still maintain that the woman could have left first, and could be the one who had the financial assets of her own, now supporting both of them. Husbands die, leaving huge insurance policies, widows are unsettled after the deep mourning lifts, and they often contact old friends, old lovers.. it is SO easy to find anyone, and has been since the late 90's.
I think the info on the laptop was personal in nature- emails. Love letters via emails. Putting it all together, it does fit. But there has to be a form of reasoning other than linear. It has to include multi-factors to really be compelling and for everything we know or think is true to fit.

 

[SeekingJana]

or he could simply have joined her wherever she is/was.

yes! This!

 

[SeekingJana]

I'm from a small town so a few thoughts:
1) As I learned, you are only the subject of town gossip until another person messes up or otherwise does something to talk about. Ray was mature enough to know that a personal "thing" such as a love affair would blow over. He and she might have WANTED to trick the Bellefonte PD without committing a crime, and have simply left on the sly I've disappeared for a week or two, and there is a big thrill involved in living your own life without prying eyes and wagging tongues.
Moving to a place where NO ONE knew me has changed my life in almost every way possible. You don't realize it until or unless it happens to you or you plan it for the purpose of being unknown.

2) As hard as I try, I cannot believe Ray would have passed Victim 6 as a witness unless he had his own very strong convictions at that time. Since no other cases were in his jurisdiction, he had no responsibility. He did what he thought best. Knowing what has been reported about Victim 6's long extended years with Sandusky and his mother's blessing for it, I think Ray did what he was supposed to do and he has no guilt and certainly, IMO, no blame for Sandusky.

3) There could be reasons coming from the woman as to why she left secretly and so did he at some point. She could have had an abusive ex an old boyfriend in prison for assaulting her, a stalker, many reasons why her location would be best left a secret. IF Ray thought there was any chance that she could be traced through him ( like if maybe the HD wasn't completely destroyed) he would likely have left covertly as she did.

Often, women have been traced and tracked until they were dead. I think he was smart enough to have helped someone he loved escape a kind of torment unnoticed, and handled his own leave- taking the same way in case there was a link he was not cognizant of. He was CAREFUL. He was a PLANNER most of the time. He was exceptionally smart. He would know how to cover tracks, leave no trace.. for her as well.

 

[BigCat]

I've I thought that motive for walkaway would not necessarily be limited to one thing. It could add to it, but not by much.

RFG would only deal with the football fan(atics) if he did prosecute Sandusky. McQueary didn't face the victims.

Yes, you have consistently pointed out he could have prosecuted Sandusky in 2005. My counter-argument is that to have done so would have invited the wrath of the football fans.

Lauro? He is retired from DPW, still getting a pension, and now working in the private sector in the same field.

Lauro, as you are aware, has been very emphatic that he would have prosecute (or whatever the correct term is) had he seen Chambers' and Seasock's reports. I'm not sure I completely believe him, but my point is he went out of his way to distance himself from the decision not to bring charges against Sandusky. More or less, pointing the finger at RFG.

Raykovitz, the president of TSM? Private practice in a group, in State College.

He also made it clear he was never aware of the 2001 allegation.

Jay Paterno, heir to Joe, is hawking his new book and eying a political career.

God help the people of PA if Jay is elected to office. Seriously though, his father managed to hang on to power almost long enough to never have to answer any questions about his knowledge of Sandusky's criminal behavior. It wasn't until the release of the Freeh report that we learned he knew about the 98 investigation. He lied. The PSU 3 are still denying any knowledge of the 98 investigation. Absolutely no one wants to own it. Why?

Yes, he'd have to tell his daughter. A bit embarrassing, but worse than disappearing forever?

Remember we were discussing what scenario was more likely. All I can say there isn't a woman in the world I forsake a relationship with my daughter for. Not one.

Further, he could never know if 1998 would come out. We didn't know about it for about 6 years.

True. But my original statement was subjunctive in a nature: "if he had heard rumors,...".

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Without snipping, I do want to respond to Jana's post.

First, I would not rule out a financial reverse. That, however, could point to suicide probably better that walkaway.

Second, though I think it would be difficult, yes an unknown lover could have picked him up. Why would there be a need for secrecy? He could phone the next week and mail in his resignation.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Yes, you have consistently pointed out he could have prosecuted Sandusky in 2005. My counter-argument is that to have done so would have invited the wrath of the football fans.

So what if he doesn't. So a former DA, who isn't practicing law looks like he backed off of prosecuting an icon.

Lauro, as you are aware, has been very emphatic that he would have prosecute (or whatever the correct term is) had he seen Chambers' and Seasock's reports. I'm not sure I completely believe him, but my point is he went out of his way to distance himself from the decision not to bring charges against Sandusky. More or less, pointing the finger at RFG.

Different standard. Neither could be used as evidence in a criminal trial. There is a question about why it was not forwarded to him, but there can be an honest explanation.

He also made it clear he was never aware of the 2001 allegation.

That has not stopped the football fanatics. In his case he actually was a psychologist and did work closely with Sandusky. He didn't catch it. He was told by Curley that Sandusky was showering, in 2001, but he didn't know about 1998 nor that 2001 was sexual.

God help the people of PA if Jay is elected to office. Seriously though, his father managed to hang on to power almost long enough to never have to answer any questions about his knowledge of Sandusky's criminal behavior. It wasn't until the release of the Freeh report that we learned he knew about the 98 investigation. He lied. The PSU 3 are still denying any knowledge of the 98 investigation. Absolutely no one wants to own it. Why?

The evidence is that they knew of an incident, but they are not being charged with anything related to 1998.

Remember we were discussing what scenario was more likely. All I can say there isn't a woman in the world I forsake a relationship with my daughter for. Not one.

I could believe that more than I could embarrassment (and think of Bill's conversation with Chelsea).

True. But my original statement was subjunctive in a nature: "if he had heard rumors,...".

Even if he heard rumors, he could say, **I thought it was a weak case.** The DA in Union County, Johnson, had a previous report on someone that has been mentioned, Jack Harclerode, a former professor at Bucknell, who was convicted some of the same things as Sandusky. The first victim had a criminal record (murder) and Harclerode still has not been charged in that case. Johnson has stated that he thinks the first victim, who is a convicted murderer, is not strong enough to go into court; Harcelerode has never been charged in regard to the first victim.

RFG could do the same thing, even if his argument was a lot weaker.

 

[SeekingJana]

Without snipping, I do want to respond to Jana's post.

First, I would not rule out a financial reverse. That, however, could point to suicide probably better that walkaway.

Second, though I think it would be difficult, yes an unknown lover could have picked him up. Why would there be a need for secrecy? He could phone the next week and mail in his resignation.

Watch his " Disappeared" segment again. ( I think it was in the interviews in " Disappeared").
The Bellefonte police spokesperson AND one of Ray's friends both allude to him " wanting to show up the police by outsmarting them". or words to that effect.

That's one reason he would disappear without a trace. The other would be to create the scenario for legal death, as has been done. It benefitted Lara.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Watch his " Disappeared" segment again. ( I think it was in the interviews in " Disappeared").
The Bellefonte police spokesperson AND one of Ray's friends both allude to him " wanting to show up the police by outsmarting them". or words to that effect.

That's one reason he would disappear without a trace. The other would be to create the scenario for legal death, as has been done. It benefitted Lara.

It is another possible motive. There is also a benefit that people will still be talking about him 9 1/2 years later.

That is part of the reason why I'm not focusing on motive for walkaway too much. http://www.centredaily.com/2012/09/26/3350117_the-motive-problem.html?rh=1

 

[TechWriter797]

If he were meeting a woman he'd planned to leave with, why were they shopping together where they could be seen and remembered? I just don't get the shopping part.

 

[TechWriter797]

If he were leaving, why did he not take the laptop (or just hard drive) with him?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

In the case of the Mystery Woman, she may not have the person RFG was meeting, but just a random shopper,

If he were leaving, why did he not take the laptop (or just hard drive) with him?

A. It wasn't his.

B. It conceivably could be traced.

 

[BigCat]

I'm from a small town so a few thoughts:
1) As I learned, you are only the subject of town gossip until another person messes up or otherwise does something to talk about. Ray was mature enough to know that a personal "thing" such as a love affair would blow over. He and she might have WANTED to trick the Bellefonte PD without committing a crime, and have simply left on the sly I've disappeared for a week or two, and there is a big thrill involved in living your own life without prying eyes and wagging tongues.
Moving to a place where NO ONE knew me has changed my life in almost every way possible. You don't realize it until or unless it happens to you or you plan it for the purpose of being unknown.

2) As hard as I try, I cannot believe Ray would have passed Victim 6 as a witness unless he had his own very strong convictions at that time. Since no other cases were in his jurisdiction, he had no responsibility. He did what he thought best. Knowing what has been reported about Victim 6's long extended years with Sandusky and his mother's blessing for it, I think Ray did what he was supposed to do and he has no guilt and certainly, IMO, no blame for Sandusky.

I stated previously that I could see RFG passing on prosecution because the potential for stigma and harassment for the victim and the uncertainty of obtaining a guilty verdict. It would also be disastrous for his re-election chances. Weighing the positive and negatives, RFG may have made a reasonable decision not to prosecute.

But the October 98 meeting at the PSU football building with the investigating officers and a member of the football coaching staff complicates the matter. Traditionally, in college towns with major football programs, punishment for player misbehavior was often handled "in house." The police, whether city or campus, would notify the coaching staff when a player got in trouble and the coaches will handle it. It's a way to save the football program from any bad press.

This type of relationship is changing, mainly because it's impossible to keep player indiscretions out of the media due to the internet and social media, but in this particular case we're discussing something that occurred in 98. Penn State was extreme in handling player punishment "in house" because of the university's isolated location (limited media scrutiny) and the fact that Joe Paterno had been at PSU since the days of the Eisenhower Administration. It doesn't get much more "old school" than Joe Pa.

My concern for RFG is that, in the October 98 meeting, he warned the PSU police and the PSU coaching staff that Sandusky was not allowed to shower with boys anymore (Seasock's recommendation and the warning that Schreffler had already given Sandusky) and that Sandusky was to get some kind of counseling. I find it difficult to believe that RFG would simply not press charges and wash his hands of the situation. I give him more credit than that.

Obviously, the above conditions were never met, if such a warning was delivered.

3) There could be reasons coming from the woman as to why she left secretly and so did he at some point. She could have had an abusive ex an old boyfriend in prison for assaulting her, a stalker, many reasons why her location would be best left a secret. IF Ray thought there was any chance that she could be traced through him ( like if maybe the HD wasn't completely destroyed) he would likely have left covertly as she did.

Often, women have been traced and tracked until they were dead. I think he was smart enough to have helped someone he loved escape a kind of torment unnoticed, and handled his own leave- taking the same way in case there was a link he was not cognizant of. He was CAREFUL. He was a PLANNER most of the time. He was exceptionally smart. He would know how to cover tracks, leave no trace.. for her as well.

Yikes! That brings back bad memories of an unhealthy, co-dependent past relationship of mine. As I've gotten older and, hopefully, wiser, I now realize that I was in such a relationship because I wanted to feel better about myself. I felt guilty about my failures to meet my responsibilities and there was nothing like a damsel in distress to make me feel the hero. Of course, it ended in disaster.

If RFG was in such a relationship, then I don't believe he was in a good place in his life.


JMO

 

[BigCat]

Even if he heard rumors, he could say, **I thought it was a weak case.** The DA in Union County, Johnson, had a previous report on someone that has been mentioned, Jack Harclerode, a former professor at Bucknell, who was convicted some of the same things as Sandusky. The first victim had a criminal record (murder) and Harclerode still has not been charged in that case. Johnson has stated that he thinks the first victim, who is a convicted murderer, is not strong enough to go into court; Harcelerode has never been charged in regard to the first victim.

RFG could do the same thing, even if his argument was a lot weaker.

Respectfully snipped

See my above response to Jana about the October 98 meeting. If he thought it was a weak case and then passed on a warning to the PSU coaching staff, it would complicate matters. He could never accuse Joe Paterno of not following through with his recommendations. No way.

Curley and Schultz face a similar dilemma in their upcoming trial. They need to say JoePa never conveyed to them that McQueary witnessed a sexual assault during their trial. Will they go there? Will Curley admit that Paterno recommended not reporting the allegation to outside authorities?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Respectfully snipped:

I stated previously that I could see RFG passing on prosecution because the potential for stigma and harassment for the victim and the uncertainty of obtaining a guilty verdict. It would also be disastrous for his re-election chances. Weighing the positive and negatives, RFG may have made a reasonable decision not to prosecute.

I think that you also have to factor in how RFG conducted himself in May-June of 1998. He removed JKA, who did know what she was doing in these type of cases. He never interviewed Victim 6, so he could not evaluate how good a witness he would be. He made his decision prior to Schreffler talking to Sandusky. These are things that move his decision beyond him thinking that the case was weak.

There are also questions about the flow of information to Lauro. RFG may have assumed, wrongly, that Lauro had things like the Chambers Report. JKA normally handled the coordination, but she wasn't involved. Lauro could have contracted Chambers directly and gotten the report.

But the October 98 meeting at the PSU football building with the investigating officers and a member of the football coaching staff complicates the matter. Traditionally, in college towns with major football programs, punishment for player misbehavior was often handled "in house." The police, whether city or campus, would notify the coaching staff when a player got in trouble and the coaches will handle it. It's a way to save the football program from any bad press.

This type of relationship is changing, mainly because it's impossible to keep player indiscretions out of the media due to the internet and social media, but in this particular case we're discussing something that occurred in 98. Penn State was extreme in handling player punishment "in house" because of the university's isolated location (limited media scrutiny) and the fact that Joe Paterno had been at PSU since the days of the Eisenhower Administration. It doesn't get much more "old school" than Joe Pa.

My concern for RFG is that, in the October 98 meeting, he warned the PSU police and the PSU coaching staff that Sandusky was not allowed to shower with boys anymore (Seasock's recommendation and the warning that Schreffler had already given Sandusky) and that Sandusky was to get some kind of counseling. I find it difficult to believe that RFG would simply not press charges and wash his hands of the situation. I give him more credit than that.

Obviously, the above conditions were never met, if such a warning was delivered.

I strongly suspect that such a warning was given in 1998, something along the lines of RFG not prosecuting if Sandusky "received help with the problem." That would be neither illegal nor unethical, but it would have a great deal of impact on the PSU 3 trial, if they were on the receiving end of that information.

 

[Trackergd]

Back from a week in the Nevada desert. No email and cell phone coverage is a wonderful thing in this day and age.

Anyone have a theory as to what PSU might have as a form of "leverage" on RFG to make the Sandusky issue "go away"?

 

[MissJ]

I have posted this very same thought over and over. What I believe happened, if he was not murdered ( and there is NO evidence of murder), is that there was a one-two punch that got him moving. For example, people can have a disease which is silent until there is a new injury or illness. Then the disease manifests itself, sometimes in a rampant way. I don't mean that Ray had a disease, it is an example of how the one- two punch works. The second episode activates something which has been dormant.

For Ray, it could be that his lover needed him with her- illness, loneliness, an ultimatum type of thing- Be with me in 30 days or this is over kind of deadline.
AND something from work was pressing on him- I do NOT think Sandusky for one minute, but maybe a broad type of threat, or maybe he and Patti were at odds over a fairly serious matter, or maybe he was dreading the act of retiring ( not retirement itself but the process of leaving and the parties and so forth)..
Maybe it was a lack of planning for old age, or maybe bad stock investments which lost a lot of his money ( despite what a friend said on the subject- sometimes people blow smokescreens).

I think what is missing is really our ability to group reasons together and come up with a person who was unhappy, wanted to be somewhere else, could have had a true and deep love for someone unknown to us, and it all came together as THEY BOTH planned their separate leave- takings.
It's been over 9 years and we are no closer to knowing what happened to him than we were in the beginning, for the most part. I think it's because our ways of thinking are linear instead of circular. I believe that for a person as seemingly settled as he seemed to be, there were multiple and compelling factors from different segments of his life which caused him to leave.

I still maintain that the woman could have left first, and could be the one who had the financial assets of her own, now supporting both of them. Husbands die, leaving huge insurance policies, widows are unsettled after the deep mourning lifts, and they often contact old friends, old lovers.. it is SO easy to find anyone, and has been since the late 90's.
I think the info on the laptop was personal in nature- emails. Love letters via emails. Putting it all together, it does fit. But there has to be a form of reasoning other than linear. It has to include multi-factors to really be compelling and for everything we know or think is true to fit.

I agree. I do think what was on the computer was personal. It is a big deal to blow up your life at the age he was at disappearance. Much easier to get up and leave. He left PEF a car and his daughter money. He wouldn't feel quite so guilty. My first love contacted me about a year ago. He had a near fatal accident and wanted to find me. Told me how traumatic our breakup had been and so forth. In short he wanted to know was I interested in a reunion. Had I been single I would have. But RFG was NOT married and I don't think IMO he was THAT committed to PEF. I do think he felt guilt. Probably still does if he is alive. Sometimes a change in life circumstances brings clarity as to what is most important in life. I can see this being what was going on with RFG. Would explain his odd behaviour before he left too. JMO

 

[TechWriter797]

Anyone have a theory as to what PSU might have as a form of "leverage" on RFG to make the Sandusky issue "go away"?

Money