Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
mbrn30000

The disappearance of Ray Gricar (Part 2)

769 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

2-B

Unfortunately a lot of links are gone. If I recall the scent dog was around the car, parking lot, in front of the SOS. Not sure if it was a scent dog or cadaver dog that did the river banks.

None in front of the SOS. The scent dogs were taken to the river banks and did not ID Ray's scent anywhere along the river. (They were also taken elsewhere according to a source, the implication being they were taken to locations of alleged sightings. I can't verify that, so please don't use that as factual. However, it makes sense. Bloodhounds are routinely used to rule in/rule out sightings, a method of corroboration, so it would not surprise me).

On the second river search, a boat was used and a cadaver dog was taken on the river in the boat. The cadaver dog's findings were also negative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2-B

Karen's subsequent action of spelling out what she knew and a problem that was going on to others and divesting herself from being involved make perfect sense to me. I think this forum carries a long standing burden with it and I think maybe it's gone on long enough.

I'm not going to go into detail on this, except to say that someone on a board concealing her own identity was in a very tenuous position to be writing a section of a manuscript which criticized others for concealing their identities on a message board. There was no "divesting."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2-B

on another note - the Grand Jury has completed it's investigation of Stacy Parks Miller forgery case & a report is expected soon.

http://www.fox8tv.com/News/NewsDetails.asp?NewsID=17931

Thanks, MrsPC. I wanted to see what the CDT had to say about this because the link in your post used the phrase "may be issued" with regard to the report. We've been burned in the past expecting reports that never materialized.

At any rate, this is the link to the latest CDT article that came up on a site search:

http://www.centredaily.com/2015/07/27/4851446/da-stacy-parks-millers-attorney.html

It's not about the Grand Jury report, but it's a fascinating look at how far we've fallen here in CC. The comments section is a must-read, with one commenter pointing out that SPM has allegations "coming at her from all directions," something that never happened to Ray Gricar "because he was clean."

But for pure priceless, check out the "nickname" comment. (I have no idea who these folks are, but they've got his number.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2

I've watched all those Dateline episodes, too. But it's 99/100 times a big, strong husband/boyfriend killing the wife/girlfriend. I don't think I've seen a case where the woman took out the guy in a heat of passion scenario unless a good weapon like a gun or a butcher knife was lying right within reach. Those methods are pretty bloody, Gricar didn't own a gun, and I just have trouble seeing how 5'2" PF takes out 6'0" fit Ray--unless you want to argue she planned ahead and poisoned him or planned ahead and got help to kill him.,

Watch it to and there are a lot of women that kill, and how do you know, the police never search out Patty and Ray`s home for any domestic violence or foul play, just believed her story that Ray took off on a ride the next morning.I don't get it usually they check out the place that person was last seen,

Edited by docyabut2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2-B

Quick TV alert for Thursday, 7/30:

Dateline tonight is a re-run, very much worth watching. Texas DA, ADA, and wife of one of them are murdered. A small town police force does things right, doesn't shrug their shoulders and say, "Gee, going back through their caseloads would be too much work." They just roll up their sleeves and get the job done.

On at 9pm on the East coast.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2-B

How do you know? The police never search out Patty and Ray`s home for any domestic violence or foul play, just believed her story that Ray took off on a ride the next morning.

While they didn't bring in a forensic unit, police didn't "just believe her." They did do a walk through inspection of the home looking for signs of fresh cleaning of rugs, walls, etc., for blood, for any signs there had been a struggle. By Saturday night, the house was where out of town folk were camping out, so between LE and Ray's loved ones, if Patty murdered Ray in a bloody struggle at the house, she had to have done an amazing clean up job, so much so that she wasn't worried anyone would find blood spatter/droplets she'd missed.

As SS said, mighty ballsy. If you've ever had a child or pet run through the house with even a minor bleed, you know you wind up finding blood spots you missed. Stabbing or gunshot--that would be a whole different order of blood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2

While they didn't bring in a forensic unit, police didn't "just believe her." They did do a walk through inspection of the home looking for signs of fresh cleaning of rugs, walls, etc., for blood, for any signs there had been a struggle. By Saturday night, the house was where out of town folk were camping out, so between LE and Ray's loved ones, if Patty murdered Ray in a bloody struggle at the house, she had to have done an amazing clean up job, so much so that she wasn't worried anyone would find blood spatter/droplets she'd missed.

As SS said, mighty ballsy. If you've ever had a child or pet run through the house with even a minor bleed, you know you wind up finding blood spots you missed. Stabbing or gunshot--that would be a whole different order of blood.

Just look at the McStays case they are saying all four were killed in that home by blunt force drama, but yet in a walk through found no evidence at frist, Patty had all night and the next day to clean up before reporting Ray missing. They really should have send in the forensic investigators then, but to late now

Edited by docyabut2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2

There is just something fishy about patty`s whole story.

Edited by docyabut2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SuperSmith

Watch it to and there are a lot of women that kill, and how do you know, the police never search out Patty and Ray`s home for any domestic violence or foul play, just believed her story that Ray took off on a ride the next morning.I don't get it usually they check out the place that person was last seen,

That's because it was reported as a missing person, later cooperated by the phone call from 192, and then the found Mini in Lewisburg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lpshred

I missed the new topic, so I've been catching up the last few days. I'm totally loving all of the relatively fresh thoughts being thrown around. One of the things I've realized is that whatever your scenario of choice, there almost had to have been an accomplice.

1. Suicide - There's no scent trail from the Mini, so how did Ray get from the Mini to his final resting place or who else staged the Mini in Lewisburg? Who staged the laptop and hard drive weeks later?

2. Walkaway - See comments above about Mini placement?

3. Murder - PF can't both make and receive the cell phone call at 11:30. What about the cell phone tower pings while PF is at work

I'm still firmly in camp murder/foul play, but I've realized this was more than a one person job.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2

That's because it was reported as a missing person, later cooperated by the phone call from 192, and then the found Mini in Lewisburg

Same with the MacStays, the family was reported missing, later their car was found at a store parking lot at the Mexican border, making it looked like that's where they disappeared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2-B

Same with the MacStays, the family was reported missing, later their car was found at a store parking lot at the Mexican border, making it looked like that's where they disappeared.

The potential similarity between McStay and Gricar has been clear since the McStay remains were found: that for all the years of protests to the contrary in Gricar, it is indeed possible to stage a car in one location, making it appear as the Point Last Seen of a MP, while the murder may have taken place elsewhere (and in McStay, for the remains to be in yet another location).

I have long focused on the question of when the cell phone was turned off (and who turned it off) to potentially help narrow the timeline and geography of what happened to RG.

Ray's phone pinged off towers in Brush Valley near Madisonburg for the 11:30-ish call to Patty. It did not provide LE with handshake pings that allowed them to follow the Mini to Lewisburg. Yet according to Craig Bennett, the Mini did not arrive in the SOS lot until somewhere between 5:30 and 6:30 on Friday evening.

All other sightings of "the" Mini have been ruled out as being Ray's according to TG (there were at least three other red and white Minis in the area that Friday/Saturday, and apparently police traced the alleged sightings to Other owners). So a lot of the early talk about RG being seen with the Mini here and there around Lewisburg was just that, talk that amounted to nothing.

That leaves us with 5-6 hours between the last known communication from Ray's phone (and from Ray himself, if we assume the poly results from the Secret Service are accurate). Was Ray meeting with someone? Was he intercepted by someone whom he had told about his plans to head to go toward Lewisburg? Was he perhaps not alone on his ride but instead with someone he knew and trusted?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2-B

Just look at the McStays case they are saying all four were killed in that home by blunt force drama, but yet in a walk through found no evidence at frist, Patty had all night and the next day to clean up before reporting Ray missing. They really should have send in the forensic investigators then, but to late now

The discussion was about ways a petite woman like PF might have hypothetically killed a 6'0" man **in the heat of passion,** however, and at her size, blunt force trauma is highly unlikely. Ray was about ten inches taller than PF and in good physical shape, likely able to disarm her very easily no matter how often she worked out simply because of size differential. Chase Merritt, OTOH, is a huge, hulking guy. Joey McStay was not his physical match, and Summer and the boys would have been easy targets.

Now if you want to argue that PF pre-meditated killing Ray or enlisted help to kill him, that's another ballgame entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2-B

I'd like to go back to the laptop for a minute. A month or so ago, BD was again making the claim that DZ "knew" (as in factually knew) RG himself had removed the laptop from the upstairs closet based on a 10/29/05 CDT article no longer available online. I said at the time I wasn't going to pay the archive fee because I knew there would be nothing in the article showing DZ had evidence Gricar removed the laptop.

A week or so ago, curiosity got the better of me (I know, dumb idea), and I shelled out for the article. It was an Erin Nissley piece, which I was glad to see, because she was always pretty objective and careful in her reporting and when she had the Gricar Q&A before Bosak took over. The bulk of the first part dealt with efforts to read the hard drive. Here's the relevant portion, and I apologize that when I copied the article from the archives, the original paragraphing was not retained:

Gricar was last heard from April 15, when he called his girlfriend to say he was taking a drive along state Route 192. Gricar, who police and family say was not a technophile, seldom took the laptop with him on trips. Knowing that, Zaccagni said he wonders why Gricar took the laptop with him that daybut left the case and the power source. "He made a conscious decision to go upstairs, take the laptop out of the case, get into his car and leave," Zaccagni said. "There's something on that laptop that must be key." Sitting in the lobby of the Bellefonte police station, Zaccagni listed the possibilities. "Was he doing something, an investigating of some kind that he put together on his own, some sort of government thing or someone important in the community?" he asked. Maybe, Zaccagni continued, he was making plans to start a new life, and the hard drive contained e-mails, bank information and maps. Or maybe Gricar kept a journal or diary on the laptop that he didn't want anyone else to read.

[bolding mine]

I think it's clear from the passage this is DZ being DZ, not DZ with evidence that Gricar himself removed the laptop. Nissley objectively lays out that those close to RG knew he was not a technophile and rarely used the laptop. The next sentence is clearly DZ speculating: "Knowing this, Zaccagni said he wonders...."

A few thoughts:

1. Gricar was known as "a paper and pencil guy," someone who had to ask his nephew how to open a jpg sent to him. I think it's important to remember that this was 2005, not 2015, and that Ray was then 59, not 29. Today we are all used to having smartphones in our pockets and living our lives constantly connected to cyberspace in one way or another. But that state has been a rapid explosion. My first computer was a work-issued laptop in 1997, less than 8 years before RG disappeared. Email at the time was not the primary mode of professional communication, and we were all still on slow as molasses 28K dial up modems. Personally I was an immediate sucker for the new technology at my fingertips, but it's clear Ray was not. His online adventures seemed to be email, some online searches, and following the Cleveland Indians. Patty's observation was that he rarely used the laptop except for conferences.

2. Patty can only say that the laptop went in the closet when they got the desktop (IIRC, January 2005). No one can say whether Ray at some point took it into the office and left it there (DZ asked everyone to search their office workspaces for it). No one can say whether Ray took it that Friday or whether someone else with access to the home removed it at some point.

3. The computer being gone with the case remaining intrigues me. If Ray were taking it that Friday, why bother to remove it from the case, then take it unprotected for whatever reason? It certainly wouldn't provide much of a "stall" if he were pulling a walkaway. As we all know, Patty went to get it and immediately discovered it was missing. OTOH, if someone else removed it, it makes sense to take the laptop and leave the case as a decoy. If that was the situation, it worked, since no one apparently noticed the computer missing till LE came calling and Patty asked if they wanted the work laptop.

Just thoughts, just spitballing.

Edited by 2-B
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2

I'd like to go back to the laptop for a minute. A month or so ago, BD was again making the claim that DZ "knew" (as in factually knew) RG himself had removed the laptop from the upstairs closet based on a 10/29/05 CDT article no longer available online. I said at the time I wasn't going to pay the archive fee because I knew there would be nothing in the article showing DZ had evidence Gricar removed the laptop.

A week or so ago, curiosity got the better of me (I know, dumb idea), and I shelled out for the article. It was an Erin Nissley piece, which I was glad to see, because she was always pretty objective and careful in her reporting and when she had the Gricar Q&A before Bosak took over. The bulk of the first part dealt with efforts to read the hard drive. Here's the relevant portion, and I apologize that when I copied the article from the archives, the original paragraphing was not retained:

Gricar was last heard from April 15, when he called his girlfriend to say he was taking a drive along state Route 192. Gricar, who police and family say was not a technophile, seldom took the laptop with him on trips. Knowing that, Zaccagni said he wonders why Gricar took the laptop with him that daybut left the case and the power source. "He made a conscious decision to go upstairs, take the laptop out of the case, get into his car and leave," Zaccagni said. "There's something on that laptop that must be key." Sitting in the lobby of the Bellefonte police station, Zaccagni listed the possibilities. "Was he doing something, an investigating of some kind that he put together on his own, some sort of government thing or someone important in the community?" he asked. Maybe, Zaccagni continued, he was making plans to start a new life, and the hard drive contained e-mails, bank information and maps. Or maybe Gricar kept a journal or diary on the laptop that he didn't want anyone else to read.

[bolding mine]

I think it's clear from the passage this is DZ being DZ, not DZ with evidence that Gricar himself removed the laptop. Nissley objectively lays out that those close to RG knew he was not a technophile and rarely used the laptop. The next sentence is clearly DZ speculating: "Knowing this, Zaccagni said he wonders...."

A few thoughts:

1. Gricar was known as "a paper and pencil guy," someone who had to ask his nephew how to open a jpg sent to him. I think it's important to remember that this was 2005, not 2015, and that Ray was then 59, not 29. Today we are all used to having smartphones in our pockets and living our lives constantly connected to cyberspace in one way or another. But that state has been a rapid explosion. My first computer was a work-issued laptop in 1997, less than 8 years before RG disappeared. Email at the time was not the primary mode of professional communication, and we were all still on slow as molasses 28K dial up modems. Personally I was an immediate sucker for the new technology at my fingertips, but it's clear Ray was not. His online adventures seemed to be email, some online searches, and following the Cleveland Indians. Patty's observation was that he rarely used the laptop except for conferences.

2. Patty can only say that the laptop went in the closet when they got the desktop (IIRC, January 2005). No one can say whether Ray at some point took it into the office and left it there (DZ asked everyone to search their office workspaces for it). No one can say whether Ray took it that Friday or whether someone else with access to the home removed it at some point.

3. The computer being gone with the case remaining intrigues me. If Ray were taking it that Friday, why bother to remove it from the case, then take it unprotected for whatever reason? It certainly wouldn't provide much of a "stall" if he were pulling a walkaway. As we all know, Patty went to get it and immediately discovered it was missing. OTOH, if someone else removed it, it makes sense to take the laptop and leave the case as a decoy. If that was the situation, it worked, since no one apparently noticed the computer missing till LE came calling and Patty asked if they wanted the work laptop.

Just thoughts, just spitballing.

Isn't it odd when the police asked Patty for any computers, all of a sudden his lap top goes missing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2-B

Isn't it odd when the police asked Patty for any computers, all of a sudden his lap top goes missing?

Except if you're implying Patty took the computer from the case, it doesn't really make sense given the way things played out, i.e., that she offered up the computer to LE, who had not asked for the work laptop. In a Patty-took-it scenario, wouldn't it have made more sense for her to offer the computer, then go to allegedly look for it, only to "discover" both laptop and case are somehow mysteriously missing?

OTOH, the case left in place would be a better indicator it was left there to make it look as though the laptop was still being stored where it had been.

1. If Ray removed the computer on Friday, I have questions about several things.

First, why would he take the extra time to remove the laptop from its case?

Second, why would a man who obsessed over a dust cover remove a laptop from its case before travel? It's not as if the laptop was just sitting on the kitchen table, case-free, on a regular basis, for him to grab and go.

Third, what decoy value would be gained by Ray removing the laptop? It apparently took Patty all of ten seconds to see it was missing once she went up to get it for LE.

2. OTOH, if someone else removed it at some time prior to that Friday, the case in the closet would remain, making Patty and/or Ray believe the laptop was also there should they happen to look in that particular closet. (It's never been clear to me where it was stored other than in "an [unspecified] upstairs closet.)

I'm not sure I'm expressing my thoughts clearly, but in my mind it seems clear the empty case left in the closet may be a clue.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2

Except if you're implying Patty took the computer from the case, it doesn't really make sense given the way things played out, i.e., that she offered up the computer to LE, who had not asked for the work laptop. In a Patty-took-it scenario, wouldn't it have made more sense for her to offer the computer, then go to allegedly look for it, only to "discover" both laptop and case are somehow mysteriously missing?

OTOH, the case left in place would be a better indicator it was left there to make it look as though the laptop was still being stored where it had been.

1. If Ray removed the computer on Friday, I have questions about several things.

First, why would he take the extra time to remove the laptop from its case?

Second, why would a man who obsessed over a dust cover remove a laptop from its case before travel? It's not as if the laptop was just sitting on the kitchen table, case-free, on a regular basis, for him to grab and go.

Third, what decoy value would be gained by Ray removing the laptop? It apparently took Patty all of ten seconds to see it was missing once she went up to get it for LE.

2. OTOH, if someone else removed it at some time prior to that Friday, the case in the closet would remain, making Patty and/or Ray believe the laptop was also there should they happen to look in that particular closet. (It's never been clear to me where it was stored other than in "an [unspecified] upstairs closet.)

I'm not sure I'm expressing my thoughts clearly, but in my mind it seems clear the empty case left in the closet may be a clue.

Usually in a case of a disappearance, the authorities always asked for any person`s personal comptuters to trace that person, its just odd that Patty reports Ray`s PC was missing, and they end up finding it in the river.Like you said the case, the wires all were there, but the lap top.

Edited by docyabut2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saunterer

on another note - the Grand Jury has completed it's investigation of Stacy Parks Miller forgery case & a report is expected soon.

http://www.fox8tv.com/News/NewsDetails.asp?NewsID=17931

Oh come on (shades of billywahoo and PF's polygraph results)...SPM passes a big litmus test and no one but me says congratulations? Did the rest of you really expect/wish her to fail? I am still hoping she will have something to say about the Ray Gricar disappearance...anything she can say publicly...when the time is right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saunterer

I do not quite understand why the original forum on this topic was archived, since I had no issues with using it and especially since there is no "sticky note" here referring readers to it:

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=254389&st=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saunterer

Usually in a case of a disappearance, the authorities always asked for any person`s personal comptuters to trace that person, its just odd that Patty reports Ray`s PC was missing, and they end up finding it in the river.Like you said the case, the wires all were there, but the lap top.

I always found it odd that officials in Union County (where the Mini Cooper was found) and in Northumberland County (where the laptop and hard drive were supposedly found) both refused to open an investigation.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2-B

I always found it odd that officials in Union County (where the Mini Cooper was found) and in Northumberland County (where the laptop and hard drive were supposedly found) both refused to open an investigation.

Refresh my memory on that if you can, please. Did they refuse, or were they prevented from doing so because Bellefonte retained jurisdiction?

I know Bellefonte had the case because RG was reported missing by Patty to the BPD prior to the Mini being found. And I know BB and TMcK were not happy about Northumberland and Union Counties not being involved. But what specifically created the jurisdictional issues that kept LE from from those two counties from being involved--their refusal to do so or BPD's unwillingness to have them help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lpshred

Refresh my memory on that if you can, please. Did they refuse, or were they prevented from doing so because Bellefonte retained jurisdiction?

I know Bellefonte had the case because RG was reported missing by Patty to the BPD prior to the Mini being found. And I know BB and TMcK were not happy about Northumberland and Union Counties not being involved. But what specifically created the jurisdictional issues that kept LE from from those two counties from being involved--their refusal to do so or BPD's unwillingness to have them help?

I'd be interested to know this as well. It would help answer the negligence vs. intentional malfeasance question around how the case was handled.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wijg

Oh come on (shades of billywahoo and PF's polygraph results)...SPM passes a big litmus test and no one but me says congratulations? Did the rest of you really expect/wish her to fail? I am still hoping she will have something to say about the Ray Gricar disappearance...anything she can say publicly...when the time is right.

Saunterer... are you implying that SPM may have somehow been involved? Or are you just saying that since she's privy to more information as the DA, that you hope she'll reveal some of what she learned? Just curious. Thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saunterer

Refresh my memory on that if you can, please. Did they refuse, or were they prevented from doing so because Bellefonte retained jurisdiction?

I know Bellefonte had the case because RG was reported missing by Patty to the BPD prior to the Mini being found. And I know BB and TMcK were not happy about Northumberland and Union Counties not being involved. But what specifically created the jurisdictional issues that kept LE from from those two counties from being involved--their refusal to do so or BPD's unwillingness to have them help?

The Lewisburg PD and Union County DA were more than happy to let the BPD handle the investigation, even though the BPD had no jurisdiction in Union County. West Chillisquaque Township had no PD; the PSP handled their investigations. The Northumberland County DA deferred to the PSP and BPD. The BPD had no jurisdiction in Northumberland County. The PSP did a lot of the forensics but, until more recently, did not handle the investigation.

One of the more interesting tidbits I picked up on years ago (via a certain DA) was the lack of communication between the BPD and PSP. This lack was also highlighted by the AG's (Tom Corbett's) refusal to put the state's full resources into an effort to find out what happened to one of the state's representatives.

The Centre County DAs (acting and elected) refused to refer the matter to the AG from the get go. But the Attorney General's Law did and does not prevent the state from conducting its own parallel investigation. It was Tom Corbett who was derelict in his duty. JMOO.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.