Confused about Stanley Gryziec case

[ogapogadots]

The informant said the hitman- boss type guy asked him to ONLY rob Stan's house. No murder. Yet Stan was killed. Wife was not. After re-reading forums on this segment recently I also agree that probably what happened was a robbery or lkg for something and Stanley fought for his life and 1 guy (or both) killed him cause he would not let up. These 2 don't seem like killers only small time thieves/bums who had normal nice friends like the bookstore couple. Yet also had a few bad friends. But why did Stanley fear death as evidenced by his daughter saying he might not see her again... AND he was right! Or did he fear getting robbed that may Perhaps result in murder? Seems like something is missing. This feels like a robbery gone unintentional-murder ..... but perhaps was always a true hit from the get go!?

[ThisLittlePiggy]

Some think he "knew too much" of some illegal dealings and he was killed because of that. I do wonder though if he had not tried to fight them off if he might have lived? We'll never know.

[ogapogadots]

Originally Posted by ThisLittlePiggy

Some think he "knew too much" of some illegal dealings and he was killed because of that. I do wonder though if he had not tried to fight them off if he might have lived? We'll never know.

I agree with him knowing too much. I tend to think he was killed on purpose cause he would have to testify one day in court. I no longer think it was a robbery "gone bad".

[ThisLittlePiggy]

I realize somebody could panic and kill someone who showed up unexpectedly during a robbery. But in this case, I doubt that's what happened. I think his murder might have been intended all along.

[Huskerz85]

On the official UM site describing the case, there was a comment dated 9/8/2020 said the following:

In this episode, the suggestion is that the bar owner, apparently for on reason or another, hired people to break into Stanley Gryziec’s home. We don’t know if the suggestion is that the motive was to collect on a gambling debt or the belief that a large sum of money was in the home and left to Stanley by his brother Peter.

In the episode, the bar name is blocked out so we really don’t know who the person is that the informant claims handed money to the two suspects. The name of the bar was Leonard’s Lounge and it was owned by Leonard Tardugno. It has since been torn down and stood right near where Walgreens is located on S James St. Rome. Tardugno had multiple bookmaking arrests and allegedly had ties to the mafia in Utica, where he would place large bets that were too large for himself to handle. Tardugno was even subpoenaed to testify in front of a state commission on gambling many years before. It would be obvious why he couldn’t get a liquor license in his own name and needed a person like Peter Gryziec to place it in his name.

Seems to me that it would have been easy to get a warrant by using the testimony of the woman who lived across the street, coupled with a statement from Peck on the identity of the men who were entered her bookstore. Probably had enough to at least put them in a lineup and place them at the scene.

Now, everyone’s clearly deceased so there will be no solving this in court.

Provided the above is true (even remotely), then it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine that Peter was probably either skimming off the top or otherwise got in to some *really* hot water with this Tardugno.

He gets sick and on his deathbed, confesses his crime(?) to Stanley. Stanley realizes that once Peter dies and is therefore off the hook, Tardugno will probably come after him - thereby explaining why the two never spoke again and Stanley became much more somber in the period leading up to his death.

[Allierain]

After watching this case again today, I am left with ton a of questions. For real. It was driven home by the family that there was a gun involved but it wasn’t reported if Esther heard the shot that supposedly killed Stanley. I don’t know what to make of Amy Scott’s report, I’m skeptical. I’m not sure how she could see so many details of a car and driver in the dark, even if it came close enough to hit her dog. She yelled at the car, ok, so? Why was this car supposedly following her in the next few days, surely it wasn’t because she yelled at them for two seconds? I just don’t see it. And what was her connection to Patsy Peck? Could it be that both women are completely wrong and the men they mention had nothing to do with the Gryziec case? Nothing makes sense except that the police didn’t investigate properly for whatever reason. I don’t see Stanley being murdered over drugs or gambling, especially if he wasn’t running his mouth about it. His brother said something that’s for sure, perhaps Stanley inherited a debt. He never shared it nor did he express concern to his family, other than the comment he made about not seeing his daughter again.

Did anybody ever really dig into this case? I didn’t see it listed as a case covered by TTWC and frankly I haven’t ever listened to one of their podcasts. I’ve heard too many that basically repeat what’s in Wikipedia so I gave up on listening. The only good podcast I’ve ever heard was Accused’s Dave Bocks report.