Posted on 11/10/2011 10:06:03 AM PST by ColdOne
It is strange that Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar never prosecuted Jerry Sandusky on child-rape charges 13 years ago, some speculate, because Gricar was known for being fiercely independent and hard on crime.
But it is even stranger that we cannot ask Gricar why Sandusky was not put behind bars because the tough-as-nails district attorney disappeared in 2005. And though he was declared dead July of this year, his body has never been found.
"People ask why Ray did not prosecute, and I have no problem saying, because he clearly felt he didn't have a case for a 'successful' prosecution," Tony Gricar, Ray Gricar’s nephew , told The Patriot-News.
"... One thing I can say is that Ray was beholden to no one, was not a politician."
This district attorney who had “a bitter taste in his mouth for the [Penn State] program, and its coach,” according to his nephew, and yet never prosecuted Sandusky, disappeared on April 15, 2005 after telling his girlfriend that he was going on a drive.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcphiladelphia.com ...
I read in another report that the hard disk to Gricar’s laptop was later found in a river in the area where he disappeared, but the data on it was unreadable.
Definitely sounds like foul play, unless he himself dumped the evidence he had collected and then disappeared for his own safety.
It’s certainly possible that there was some other case that might have been the reason for this, but since it seems that the Sandusky case is branching out further and further, it could be that he had reason to fear what he had found.
The other thing possible is Gricar stumbled onto something big and realized Sandusky was only one player of many, some important and powerful. Important and powerful enough to disappear him. He may have held off on Sandusky to net the bigger prize.
Then again maybe not, but I’m not ruling anything in or out.
Sandusky’s primary victims are the boys of course. But he also has fowled the waters of public trust in their institutions. ALL of them. The football program, the University, the police, the district attorney.
In the long run that might be the worst damage he caused.
I think Sandusky was just the tip of the iceberg and Gricar was going for bigger fish. Very dangerous bigger fish.
You tell us what could be more important than a pedophile ring operating in the shower room of Penn State for at least a decade?
OK, if you go back to the grand jury report you will find that there was not enough evidence to conclude that a pedohile ring was operating out of PSU. What was found in the 1998 incident was one incident that Sandusky showered with a boy on the campus of PSU. It is understandable that the DA could conclude it as an isolated incident and could not be successfully prosecuted. DA's make that choice many times in rape cases if the victim does not want to pursue the case.
The fact that Gricar had been searching the internet for ways to wipe a hard drive and the fact the computer was found in the river later with no hard drive lends some substance to your thesis. I don’t think suicide is a viable option given where his car was found in Lewisburg and after that his trail goes stone cold.
Either he has fled or he was offed and the body disposed.
Any evidence to support that claim?
Probably in an old coal mine.
“Nothing is more serious than a ring of pedophiles operating out of a major University, and being supported by the head coach. In this town in this state NOTHING could have been more important.”
You are working under the misconception that our ‘criminal justice’ system is about protecting the public. Respectfully, sir, you are wrong.
The law racket is about damage control, to keep the herd docile and as a revenue stream. Principally though, its purpose is to provide an appearance of security and thus act as a general social sedative. There are individuals within this system who struggle to make it actually work, but the real inertia that moves it is to provide calm and damage control. Nothing more. If you want protection, look elsewhere.
“What was found in the 1998 incident was one incident that Sandusky showered with a boy on the campus of PSU.”
NOT true. The child told everything. Sandusky was ON TAPE in a phone call from the child’s mother ADMITTING it and said he wished he was dead. Gricar HAD that evidence of admission.
Is there any evidence to support that claim. The US legal system works on evidence...not people's imagination.
Explain H0lder.
You can keep up with this baloney about no evidence, and conveniently ignore what I keep telling you is an ADMISSION by Sandusky that Gricar was well aware of, but you’ll be continuing to be ignorant of the facts.
Did you read my whole post? Not ruling anything in or out at this point. Everything is speculation but what we know.
NOT true. The child told everything. Sandusky was ON TAPE in a phone call from the child’s mother ADMITTING it and said he wished he was dead. Gricar HAD that evidence of admission.
Where in the grand jury report does it say that Sandusky sexually contacted that boy in that incident?. Nowhere! It says that he showered naked with the kid and bear hugged the kid but it doesn't mention touching the genitals. The difference difference between what Sandusky did and what was needed to prove sexual contact is probably why Gricar chose not to prosecute.
Yeah, what Sandusky did sure as hell was kinky and indicative of a wierd mind but, by itself, not enough to prosecute.
“In that 1998 case, Gricar had the mother of one boy confront Sandusky in her home while police hid in another room.
According to the grand jury report, Sandusky admitted to taking a naked shower and touching the boy, asked for forgiveness and said, “I wish I were dead.”
About six weeks after the incident, police closed the case.”
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/gricars_nephew_on_1998_sandusk.html
You continue to post as though you think Gricar's only case in all the years that he had been DA was the 1998 case involving Sandusky and PSU. But you are overlooking the fact that as DA he handled far more cases than that. To simply link the Gricar disapperance to the Sandusky case requires one to ignore all of those other possibilities.
I wish. Plenty of dots and a LOT of circumstantial evidence from back then, but no way to make a case without Gricar.
He was traced to the Penn State campus where he was supposed to have had a meeting with an informant. He also had supposedly scheduled a meeting with a ‘battered woman’ he had been helping for the same day he went missing.
The restaurant near where his car was parked was one of those Italian restaurants that no one ever eats at, but there was always a Caddy, a Lincoln, or a Mercedes in the parking lot.
There were other things..,
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/gricars_nephew_on_1998_sandusk.html
I just went back and re-read the grand jury report regarding the 1998 incident and there was no report of sexual touching between Sandusky and those particluar kids. I suspect that is the reason why Gricar did not prosecute. what Sandusky did was kinky...but by itself not enough to prosecute.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.