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

[Trackergd]

Interesting article from 2012. http://www.centredaily.com/news/special-reports/article42808203.html

May have been posted before. Don't remember reading it.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Interesting article from 2012. http://www.centredaily.com/news/special-reports/article42808203.html

May have been posted before. Don't remember reading it.

That is a blog entry from 2012. It is also the most favorable comment on JKA at the time.

 

[Song in My Heart]

:canada:
Hello & Happy Canada Day to All!

Can anyone point me to a link(s) of video for the first three press conference held by Bellefonte police and family members?

I think the dates were 4/18/2005, 4/25/2005 & 4/29/2005.

Thanks very much!

 

[J. J. in Phila]

:canada:
Hello & Happy Canada Day to All!

Can anyone point me to a link(s) of video for the first three press conference held by Bellefonte police and family members?

I think the dates were 4/18/2005, 4/25/2005 & 4/29/2005.

Thanks very much!

I have seen a video of the 4/18/05 "Phone home" press conference, but I don't know where. I have never seen video of the other two.

 

[Sutton]

I scanned through June postings, and don't see that this podcast has been mentioned. I listened to it while walking my dog, but am going to re-listen because it requires undivided attention. I would be interested to hear what regular posters think of the episode--does it contain major mistakes or new info?

I have a hard time keeping up with Ray's case (or the possibly related details) but he is on my top five list that I hope is one day publicly solved. Thanks to everyone who cares enough to keep discussing his disappearance.

Computer link:
http://lancasterpodcaststudio.com/podcast/001-the-ray-gricar-disappearance/

iTunes:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/mysterious-disappearances/id1118720484?mt=2

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Thank you. Brett tried to write a book about it.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

It was quite interesting, but I can make a counter argument regarding the assets, or lack thereof, that it could point to suicide. The laptop, as I have previously stated, could be coincidence. We do know that RFG wanted to rid himself of the data on it.

Brett, however, is quite right about nobody else knowing that what was on the laptop was not duplicated.

That all does point away from foul play.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

There were two points I found interesting in the podcast:

1. Someone who knew RFG saw him driving back toward Bellefonte in another car with a passenger. (He might be confusing this with Fenton)

2. Someone in Lewisburg saw RFG going into a motel.

 

[Sutton]

The podcast describes an incident when RFG was investigating an accusation against Mr. Sandusky. RFG arranged a face-to-face meeting between the accuser and Sandusky. RFG then made an excuse to leave the room for a few moments. The victim and Sandusky talked at length, and had a cordial conversation. RFG was surprised the accuser engaged in conversation with Sandusky and did not attempt to leave the room. This played a part in his decision not to bring charges against Sandusky.

This seems like a shockingly insensitive approach to child sex abuse allegations. But was this type of investigation that uncommon in 1998? Awareness and education of how to interview possible victims has evolved in the last two decades.

JKA handled all the other abuse cases that came into the DA's office. She was probably much more aware of how to handle victims. RFG's approach and his refusal to move forward was probably incredibly frustrating to her.

Based on this account, RFG was insensitive to any additional trauma the meeting would cause the victim. Maybe he made the wrong choice in not prosecuting Sandusky in 1998. It's easy to consider all the details we now know and say RFG was wrong. But he didn't know those details. I think he made big mistakes in how he looked into the allegations. (Isn't there an account of him listening in on a boy's mother confront Sandusky? Something to do with the cassette recording?) But I don't know all the details of the 1998 investigation, and I'm not a DA. So I can't say RFG made the wrong decision.

Interesting article from 2012. http://www.centredaily.com/news/special-reports/article42808203.html

In 2012 (?), Sandusky's attorney, Joseph Amendola, said in a sworn statement, that JKA told police she and RFG had extensive disagreements over the 1998 police investigation into Sandusky.

JKA then reached out to a reporter to say Amendola's statement wasn't true. However, she didn't say, "Ray and I agreed over the police investigation," which would have been the most clear thing to say. She only went so far as to infer that Amendola's statement wasn't true. I think she's contesting Amendola's wording. Maybe she said to police that she and RFG had extensive disagreements over the DA's investigation.

In the blog, J.J. mentions that JKA might be contesting Amendola's use of "extensive" disagreements. Could JKA also be referring to whose investigation she disagreed with?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Based on the testimony at the trial, that incident never happened with Victim 6. Victim 6 never met with anyone from the Centre County DA's Office. C&YS, DPW, University Police, yes, but not the DA's Office.

There was a second victim, B. K., that was contemporaneous with Victim 6.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Snipped for brevity.

In 2012 (?), Sandusky's attorney, Joseph Amendola, said in a sworn statement, that JKA told police she and RFG had extensive disagreements over the 1998 police investigation into Sandusky.

JKA then reached out to a reporter to say Amendola's statement wasn't true. However, she didn't say, "Ray and I agreed over the police investigation," which would have been the most clear thing to say. She only went so far as to infer that Amendola's statement wasn't true. I think she's contesting Amendola's wording. Maybe she said to police that she and RFG had extensive disagreements over the DA's investigation.

In the blog, J.J. mentions that JKA might be contesting Amendola's use of "extensive" disagreements. Could JKA also be referring to whose investigation she disagreed with?

According to Amendola's filing, JKA had "extensive disagreements" about the case. It would be the conduct of the investigation until she was removed from the case. JKA would have been removed between 4/7 and 4/13/98. The DA's Office got it on 4/4/98.

Just as a refresher, Schreffler (Univ. Police) and Ralston (SCPD) hid in another room when the mother of Victim 6 confronted Sandusky. Sandusky admitted that he hugged the boy, lifting him, from behind, when both were naked in the shower; he also answered "I don't think so ... maybe," when asked if his genitals touched her son. There was no tape, but there were three witnesses to his statement.

There is a Dictaphone tape, made by Steve Sloane (SPS), a then ADA and RFG's closest friend in the county, about a meeting at "football building" on 10/13/98. It included RFG, Schreffler, Ralston, SPS, and Fran Ganter. SPS became involved in the case after JKA was removed. The subject of the meeting was an "investigation," though of who or what is unknown.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Just a note regarding the Sandusky related cases. Gary Schultz, who oversaw the PSU Police, was compelled to testify relating to the insurance coverage. He took the Fifth to almost all questions. One question was if Schultz had any contact with the DA's Office in 1998. Curley was not asked that question.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

What a nest of worms. My first response to all of this new information is to think that PSU (in terms of the Athletic Department and perhaps beyond) was much like the Catholic Church in turing a blind eye to molestation. It's very hard to understand, from our point of view today, how decent people in major institutions could be indifferent to what happened to these kids, but all we have to do is think how many individual families deny molestation that occurs within the family. There is shame. There is the desire to protect an institution that both embodies and supports their identities. I'd let go of this case a bit because the Freeh report was so flawed and THAT just looked like an attempt to close down discussion. And then the whole Kathleen Kane mess started. Where is the deep investigation of Second Mile and those who might have been connected to Sandusky? Was Sandusky a solitary molester or part of a network, perhaps loosely connected, of pedophiles? I'm not sure even now that anyone in power (political or institutional) in PA wants the answer to that question or the question of what happened to RG. But the efforts to keep this quiet make me wonder whether RG was a threat to someone important who may not yet be on our radar.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Or as I call it:

CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA GOTHIC

I do not mean it in a humorous manner.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

My own thoughts about most matters touching on the political is that I've seen the man behind the curtain and no longer believe.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

There was another podcast called "Thinking Sideways." Here is the link: http://thinkingsidewayspodcast.com/ray-gricar/

 

[Trackergd]

There was another podcast called "Thinking Sideways." Here is the link: http://thinkingsidewayspodcast.com/ray-gricar/

This is an interesting podcast and touches many of the points you have expounded upon over the last couple of years.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

This is an interesting podcast and touches many of the points you have expounded upon over the last couple of years.

I e-mailed them a few things and the response was that they wish they had them for the podcast.

 

[asp17061]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Unresolved...rou/document_reveals_new_clues_in_ray_gricar/ james renner seems to have taken an interest.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Unresolved...rou/document_reveals_new_clues_in_ray_gricar/ james renner seems to have taken an interest.

Renner has had a long term interest about this. He wrote a very good article, "The River's Edge," in November of 2005. Like RFG, Renner is from Cleveland.

What I find interesting is that suddenly, people are starting to talk about the case.