PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #9

Discussion in '2000's Missing' started by J. J. in Phila, Feb 8, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
  2. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
  3. BigCat

    BigCat New Member

    Messages:
    800
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've seen Yardbird's conspiracy theories bandied about on Penn State football fans message board. Like all fan-atics, he sees all good in one side (Paterno) and all evil in the perceived opposite side (Corbett). He's also prone to hyperbole.


    He great exaggerates the decline and fall of Pennsylvania. George Lippard wrote a once-famous-but-now-mostly-forgotten Gothic novel,
    Amazon.com: The Quaker City, Or, the Monks of Monk Hall: A Romance of Philadelphia Life, Mystery, and Crime (9780870239717): George Lippard, David S. Reynolds: Books, about crime and corruption in PA during the mid 19th century. It's nothing new. You would think Yardbird, a man who professes to be a Catholic, would understand the concept of Original Sin and not be so scandalized by it. None of us are perfect. Not Tom Corbett. Not Joe Paterno. Not Ray Gricar.

    That rant wasn't directed at you, JJ. You called Yardbird an unrealiable source. And, who knows, there is probably a kernal of truth in what he wrote. However, his suggestion that the governor of Pennyslvania had a DA murdered is a giant leap, IMO.
     
  4. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, Keisling is self published and has been sued at least once for liable.

    However, he did show up after RFG disappeared initially and JKA was familiar with that.

    I tend to believe Amendola's suggestion that there was disagreement because:

    A. He swore to it, though the characterization might be overblown.

    B. JKA has neither denied it specifically nor offered a summary of her testimony. She can do so legally. She did indicate that she was before the grand jury.

    C. JKA commented on waiting to hear what Schreffler said. He said charges could have been filed.

    For those one or two posters who objected to me saying that RFG's position was at best a colossal lapse of judgment, better start praying that the decision was only a colossal lapse of judgment. I know I am.
     
  5. SeekingJana

    SeekingJana May I be the person my dogs think I am! :)

    Messages:
    5,156
    Likes Received:
    6,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For anyone who doesn't want to slog through the very long " blah blah" part of Yardbird's rehashings, the Karen Arnold par is under the heading
    A moveable scandal: Gov-elect Corbett removed as obstacle,
    AG office nabs Sandusky in several months' time


    about halfway down the page.

    Thanks, J.J. Agree with you on the unreliability of this source and wish Karen Arnold would post with us, or just update her Gricar site!!!
     
  6. SeekingJana

    SeekingJana May I be the person my dogs think I am! :)

    Messages:
    5,156
    Likes Received:
    6,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Are you really going to let a loose cannon like Keisling mess with your head about Ray Gricar's character? Come on!!
    None of us are " all good" or " all bad". :)
    Neither is/ was Ray Gricar, but to allow child rape to go on unabated?
    What have you believed about this man? Do you really think he is capable of allowing harm to come to a child, much less multiple children?

    IF it turns out that we someday find out that he left the country after massive ongoing payoffs ( bribery) or something, I will probably lose the last vestiges of faith I have in human nature.

    I think this is important to remember, please:
    The predictibility of future behavior based upon past performances is a basic principle of adult human psychology. It would, IMO, take a catastrophic, mind- crushing unavoidable crisis to cause a settled, brilliant man whose ethics in office seem to have been lauded and dependable, with financial and legal resources at his right hand and his left hand to turn away from the hurting boys and at least one earnest and very helpful mother..
     
  7. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    First, I hope you are well today.

    It isn't Keisling (please, someone, tell him I'm a space alien). That stuff was from either the CDT or Amendola's request.

    I strongly suspect that JKA disagreed with RFG on prosecuting, but that is from Amendola's request. That could help the case against Sandusky.

    JKA's judgment might have been a lot better in this case.

    I think the decision was a colossal lapse of judgment, at best. He might have though Sandusky would get help or just stop. Also, 1998 was not rape case.

    I hope that is not the case, and so far, there is no evidence for it.

    A colossal lapse of judgment is just that, a bad decision. It implies nothing criminal nor unethical. Everybody makes them.

    So far, I've seen no evidence to the contrary.

    Four months ago, I would have said that such a lapse was impossible. :(

    Now, we're in the Central Pennsylvania Gothic phase.
     
  8. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unreliable source:

    http://www.yardbird.com/joe_paterno_takes_the_fall.htm

    This quote got me thinking; it is attributed to JKA:

    "The grand jury experience was one of the more negative experiences in my life.

    Why would it be more negative? She didn't make the final decision. According to Amendola's characterization, she disagreed with RFG's decision.

    1. RFG's decision was not to prosecute Sandusky.

    2. JKA disagreed with RFG's decision, according to Amendola.

    3. The AG is now prosecuting Sandusky.

    Why would that be a negative?
     
  9. pittsburghgirl

    pittsburghgirl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,583
    Likes Received:
    393
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Have you ever been in front of a Grand Jury? Or testified in court (not as a defendent, a witness) or been deposed? It's not pleasant. I would imagineit's very difficult for a good lawyer, especially a former prosecutor, to be on the other side of the questioning. I would certainly like to know exactly what she meant; however, it's highly unlikely she was referring to the eventual indictment of Sandusky or to her disagreement with RG in 1998 as she was talking about her experience in front of the grand jury, not about how she felt about the case. A person can have negative feelings about testifying against a disgusting criminal but still be mighty glad he might be put away for good--at least in a world where people are normal and have complex feelings that can, at times, be contradictory. Let's hope JKA explains her comment, if she meant anything other than the observation that being on the witness stand is not a good experience,

    I have no use for Amendola or for anything he says in defense of Sandusky. Birds of a feather.
     
  10. pittsburghgirl

    pittsburghgirl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,583
    Likes Received:
    393
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Collosal lapse in judgment: the person or persons who decided that Josh Powell could have (first) custody of his kids then later (supervised) visits in his home pending a detailed psych eval after incest materials, linked to him, were found on his father's computer--and considering that Powell was the only suspect in his wife's murder.

    Close call, as indicated by current prosecutors but subject to second-guessing, 14 years later: Deciding not to prosecute an active Penn State coach/hero in 1998 for showering with a boy (no rape, no sodomy, no oral sex, no claims of fondling) with nothing more than the child's word and a sting that failed to elicit a confession to molestation.

    Sandusky hasn't been convicted yet. He is certainly perking up at the thought of a jury from Centre County. Could a bunch of evidence gets thrown out--given the cover-up we've seen already? Will attempts to discredit the witnesses follow the attempts to discredit McQuery? Could Sandusky somehow walk away with a "not guilty" at the end of all of this--in spite of far more evidence than RG had in 1998? Sandusky must have a lot of friends in Centre County as he has been walking around there a long time, leaving victims in his wake as he made use of PSU's storied football program to recruit those victims. I sure hope he is convicted, but I won't be surprised if he isn't.

    Finally, what we know of RG's career indicates that it is far more likely that he was killed to cover up some criminal enterprise than he walked away because he was a criminal.
     
  11. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Grand jury, no. Court, yes. Questioned extensively by an attorney, yes. Written product used in court, yes. I would not call any of them negative.

    Never as a defendant, though. (And JKA is not a defendant!)

    She was a defense attorney for about a year and prosecutor for 18 years. It would not be a new experience for her. I'd imagine, and heard this from trial lawyers who had testified, that it isn't difficult.

    .

    They ask you questions; you give honest answers. She indicated it was in regard to the 1998 incident. She said:

    In an email Tuesday, Arnold inferred what Amendola said was not true, but she didn’t elaborate.

    “If you want to know what I said on anything concerning the 1998 investigation, you will find that in my grand jury testimony,” Arnold said in the email.


    Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/02/08/3082313/amendola-seeks-evidence.html#storylink=cpy

    The characterization might be Amendola's, but it is clear that the prosecutors say there was some disagreement between JKA and RFG about the 1998 prosecution. I would not blame her one bit in disagreeing with RFG's decision. JKA would have right to do so; it was a poor decision on RFG's part.
     
  12. pittsburghgirl

    pittsburghgirl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,583
    Likes Received:
    393
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I have no doubt that JKA and RG had disagreements about Sandusky's case and many other matters. That's the nature of smart professionals working together.

    Many people find testifying in court to be difficult and stressful. I spent a full dayngiven a 1000 page deposition in a civil case and felt like I needed a shower and a strong dri k afterward. Very unpleasant experience, and I literally nothing to offer either side. But JJ, your experience and mine has nothing to do with how JKA might have felt on the stand, perhaps being forced to recall her boss, whom she (like me) seems to presume is dead?
     
  13. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This isn't about the Powell case.

    You really do not consider a naked bear hug from behind "fondling?"

    And it wasn't 14 years, as RFG could have filed at any point prior to the end of his term. Let's recap:

    1998-99: RFG, who was facing re-election, fails to file charges against Sandusky, popular football coach.

    2000-01: RFG, who was facing re-election, fails to file charges against Sandusky, a former football coach.

    2001-05 RFG, who was planning to retire at the end of his term, fails to file charges against Sandusky, a former football coach.


    Might it be that some of his "friends" decided not to prosecute? You raised the point.

    As I said, you had better pray that this was nothing more than a colossal lapse of judgment. I am.
     
  14. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, any disagreement will come out. Obviously, Schreffler thought that there was enough evidence to prosecute in 1998.

    I didn't say it wasn't stressful, but it wasn't one of the "more negative experiences in my life," either.

    But she can write pages about it? Seriously, do you expect anyone to buy it? I have no doubt that she cares deeply about RFG.
     
  15. SeekingJana

    SeekingJana May I be the person my dogs think I am! :)

    Messages:
    5,156
    Likes Received:
    6,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I was the "victim" of a hit and run car accident. Dude left the scene because he was drinking and was scared. I wasn't a BIT scared of testifying in front of the GJ because this is about the ONLY time in a court case or potential case where the witness has a chance to EXPLAIN and briefly EXPOUND upon their statements. The GJ is very interested in what witnesses have to say, and my GJ actually asked ME what I wanted to happen with the hit and run driver. I thought about it for just a moment, and I said " Let him go or maybe pay a fine because I was not hurt, he stopped and knew I wasn't hurt, and he has his whole life ahead of him. Don't ruin it as young as he is".

    I did not know the driver. Not sure I ever knew his name. But I had his license plate number, and the damage to his car matched the damage to mine.. YKWIM.

    Also, recently I have had to testify on the record ( the audio was recorded but I was not informed until about an hour in when I realized he was adjusting the volume because I had slightly moved my chair.
    This was extremely intimidating and I was the prosecutor's witness.
    I was asked more " Why" questions than my 2 year olds ever did.
    My main answer was " I don't know why, I cannot interpret the person's actions because I am too close to the situation to have objectivity. I just know that it happened because it happened to me".

    There's NO WAY Karen Arnold was intimidated before a GJ is my point. She FINALLY had a chance to say some things she might have waited a long time to say.. we don't know. GJs are extremely lenient on what they allow a person to say unless the person rants and raves ( is disrespectful).

    Boy, I've had a full life.. and this week is going to be a doozy-- again. :banghead:

    Going to the hospital for a new and experimental treatment of my renal disease. Won't be online for at least a week, maybe more. J.J. and Lord C., I'm with you in spirit. Esprit de corps. :)
    Maria
     
  16. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    First, I do hope everything goes well.

    I have a very hard time seeing JKA thinking that testifying is, ""more negative experiences in my life," if she said it.

    Further, if the filing is correct, she disagreed with RFG. If she also thought that charges should have been filed, I'm certainly going to be praising her for making the right the decision. I can't figure out how she would argue for any greater leniency, considering RFG did not prosecute Sandusky.
     
  17. pinktoes

    pinktoes New Member

    Messages:
    293
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    JJ: I think you said you've interviewed people close to Gricar. I guess that includes Patty.

    I know PA code still uses the legal term 'paramour', especially in child abuse cases. Since that is what JKA spent a lot of time on, do you think that's why she consistently referred to Patty as Ray's 'paramour'? I.e, just her habit as a lawyer?

    Some people think she was hinting that Patty's affection for Ray was waning, and that Patty herself had a 'paramour' other than Ray.
     
  18. pittsburghgirl

    pittsburghgirl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,583
    Likes Received:
    393
    Trophy Points:
    83
    A prosecutor does not continue to re-think his decision not to prosecute once it is made, unless new allegations are made. As you know, Neither RG nor local law enforcement were told of the 2002 RAPE at PSU which would no doubt have resulted in charges, given that there was a witness. I love how PSU covers up Sandusky's pedophilia but RG takes the blame becausehe felt he didn't have enough to bring charges.

    I pray that RG murderer(s) will be found and brought to jistice, and that Sandusky's protectors don't slip him off the hook.
     
  19. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have never talked to her, and I would find it very uncomfortable.

    I know of none that have suggested that.

    PEF had interesting situation. RFG lived in her house and she owned the car. She also left a possibly higher paying position in the DA's Office to become a clerk about 3 months prior to the disappearance and was planning to retire with RFG. If she didn't want to be with him, she could have to get out and leave the Mini.
     
  20. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Where did you get that? If, as you have suggested, he didn't prosecute for political reasons, those reasons vanished in 2001. RFG for example, didn't file charges in the Mendez-Vargas case for almost a year and only after a lot of internal debate in the office.

    I'm sorry, but that comment bears no resemblance to reality.

    Except he did have enough to bring charges, and PSU didn't cover that one up (unless you are suggesting that RFG was "in cahoots" with PSU in 1998. Are you?).

    I've ask you for evidence that RFG was the victim of foul play. Your statement does not make it so.

    We have evidence that RFG did not prosecute Sandusky in 1998. We know that there was no new evidence in the case, and one victim available in 1998 was not available in 2011.

    Even if this was foul play, you better start praying that RFG's 1998 was only a colossal lapse of judgment (and it may have been).
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice