TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren, 44, Signal Mountain, 30 April 2011 - #9

[confused]

How can "sleeping on the job" be a good thing considering two children don't have a clue as to what has happened to their mother?

Also, I was under the impression there is a thread in the parking lot to discuss what goes on behind the scene with FB pages and their players...Am I wrong in my assumption?

I think you misread...Pearl said if the LE were sleeping on the job, then the non-stop talkers are doing a good thing-not the LE.

There is a thread in the Parking Lot, BUT it has been closed for a while, I guess you are both right and wrong on the assumption. Maybe the mods will reopen it soon!:seeya:

 

[hollyblue]

But the searches of MP's properties are consent searches, so without a warrant they may have HAD to let MP know when they were coming? Otherwise, is it really consensual?

I believe it was Sleuthy who said the PI was seen taking boxes out of the AL and SM home around the time of the press conference. (May 17th & 19th) So how does that fit in with the chain of possession of evidence? Then later D&H admitted they had possession of the computers....this was prolly some of what the boxes contained. IMO

 

[Sleuthy1]

:twocents:Yes...It was me that posted that information about MM removing boxes from both homes on the dates you mentioned above and yes there are witnesses to their removal, in both states.:twocents:






http://www.facebook.com/BRINGGAILNOWACKIPALMGRENHOMENOW

 

[hollyblue]

:twocents:Yes...It was me that posted that information about MM removing boxes from both homes on the dates you mentioned above and yes there are witnesses to their removal, in both states.:twocents:

I hope someone took pictures...

Sleuthy1, do you know when exactly CC made the call of sightings to LE? (Date?) Did she call CB before she talked to LE in SM? Thanks.

ETA: I had to delete my first post because of quote problem.

 

[Sleuthy1]

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_203258.asp

Witness Says She Saw Gail Palmgren On Remote Signal Trail At Time She Disappeared
Says She Looked "Like Deer In The Headlights;" Had Female Passenger Who Kept Looking Away
posted in The Chattanoogan.com on June 13, 2011

C.C.'s STORY -----><snip>She said, "We talked about it all the way home - how unusual it was to see a nice new Jeep like that on that rough trail and how strange she was acting."
Ms. Coppinger said a few days later she saw a picture of Ms. Palmgren on TV and she recognized her as the woman in the Jeep on the trail. She said, "When I saw her picture on TV I knew it was her. I would just about bet my life it was. It was the same model car - the same everything."
She said at first she thought it was just a domestic situation, but she later decided to call the Sequatchie County Sheriff's Office. She said there was no return call. She then called an officer she knows there and he contacted the Signal Mountain Police.
Ms. Coppinger said she gave a phone interview to a Signal Mountain detective. Then last Wednesday she took a Signal Mountain detective and two county detectives to Big Fork Road. She showed them the first two places they had seen the Jeep, then took them to Insurance Bluff and the spot at the bottom of the hill where she saw it last.
She said the detectives checked out the bottom of Insurance Bluff and found some dead dogs and old cars, but no sign of Gail Palmgren or the red Jeep Rubicon.
<snip>

The alleged sighting(s) x3 took place on Saturday April 30th 2011 between 4 & 6:30pm EST (estimate) on the Big Fork Trails

 

[hollyblue]

Thanks Sleuthy1, good recap, but it doesn't answer my question. That article was a month and a half after the sighting. My concern is when did she first call LE...and then finally talk to SMPD or SMPD/HCSO. I'm wondering why if CC called in the tip...say a few days after or a week...why didn't LE release this info to the media sooner. There are many things with this sighting and the info given/not given that make me scratch my head. No description of the other pick up truck, yet, she states she hopes they will come forward.... nor does the reporter ask. LE didn't even give that area a looksee until the week prior to this article. The Wed before....6/8, I believe. TY imo

 

[Some1Nose]

Respectfully snipped:

<Do you know how many cell phone towers are in the vicinity of the last ping? Not sure if this was already covered? I noticed on Google Earth that the SM/Chatt Walmart, Suck Creek, and Mtn Creek Apts are all within close proximity to the last ping. Must be why LE searched Suck Creek...wish they had done a more extensive search of that waterway, etc.>

Hi Some1- it has been discussed, but let's bring it up again because there has been much debate concerning the pings.
Here is a good resource (with coords):

http://www.city-data.com/towers/cell-Signal-Mountain-Tennessee.html
http://www.city-data.com/towers/cell-Chattanooga-Tennessee.html

But please note that all towers may not be registered with the FCC... *sigh.*

Thanks Oriah...interesting site!

Now, I'm kinda confused :waitasec:, though, as yesterday, I was going back over some MSM articles regarding Gail's disappearance and re-read the following one dated 5/17/11 wherein DN stated that the last ping from Gail's cell phone was "near the north base of SM". Suck Creek, Walmart and Mtn Creek Apts seem to be in the opposite direction?! (Had read other postings of the last ping being near Walmart?)

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2011/may/17/missing-woman-search-continues-gail-palmgren

That article speaks volumes about the foul play or possibly an accident theories, also! IMO

 

[BeanE]

Thanks Oriah...interesting site!

Now, I'm kinda confused :waitasec:, though, as yesterday, I was going back over some MSM articles regarding Gail's disappearance and re-read the following one dated 5/17/11 wherein DN stated that the last ping from Gail's cell phone was "near the north base of SM". Suck Creek, Walmart and Mtn Creek Apts seem to be in the opposite direction?! (Had read other postings of the last ping being near Walmart?)

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2011/may/17/missing-woman-search-continues-gail-palmgren

That article speaks volumes about the foul play or possibly an accident theories, also! IMO

A ping comes from a tower. The phone itself can be anywhere within a 20 mile radius of that tower.

To further complicate things, if a phone sends out a signal to a tower, and that tower is 'busy', the signal will go to another tower, usually the next nearest one, and that tower will send out a ping.

Because of all this, it's not possible to pin down exactly where the phone was when it sent the signal to the tower.

All you can do is look at the locations within that 20 mile radius, and take a guess at where the phone was.

If you look at the whole history of the person's pings, and you have information about where they were from other sources when they traveled certain routes, you can make a somewhat more educated guess about where they most likely were going on the day in question.

For example, if other information confirms that on other days when they followed the same ping route they were going to Taco Bell for lunch at that time, then you could say that since they were following the same ping route on the day in question, they were probably going to Taco Bell for lunch again. LE would then go to Taco Bell and try to find video or employees or customers who could tell them if indeed the person was there.

To even further complicate things, we have the cautionary tale of pings from Gabe Johnson's case. There we learned two important things about pings - that the ping info provided from the service provider to LE may be incorrect, and also that if the phone is disposed of - as it may be in clever ways - the subject person and their phone may be nowhere near each other.

Pings, unfortunately aren't exact. That's why it takes LE so long to analyze them. They have to study the history and come up with probable routes, and then go out and try to track down other witnesses, credit card transactions, store video, etc, to try to pin down where the phone and the person were. It takes a lot of work and a long time.

 

[Emeralgem]

Thanks Oriah...interesting site!

Now, I'm kinda confused :waitasec:, though, as yesterday, I was going back over some MSM articles regarding Gail's disappearance and re-read the following one dated 5/17/11 wherein DN stated that the last ping from Gail's cell phone was "near the north base of SM". Suck Creek, Walmart and Mtn Creek Apts seem to be in the opposite direction?! (Had read other postings of the last ping being near Walmart?)

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2011/may/17/missing-woman-search-continues-gail-palmgren

That article speaks volumes about the foul play or possibly an accident theories, also! IMO

IMO.. The Signal Mtn Blvd, Suck Creek Road, and Mtn Creek Rd area is not what I would refer to as being the north base of the mtn.. It makes more sense to me for the Big Fork Rd area traveling toward Sequatchie County to be referred to as being north base... JMHO

http://mapq.st/ozctBw

 

[Emeralgem]

A ping comes from a tower. The phone itself can be anywhere within a 20 mile radius of that tower.

To further complicate things, if a phone sends out a signal to a tower, and that tower is 'busy', the signal will go to another tower, usually the next nearest one, and that tower will send out a ping.

Because of all this, it's not possible to pin down exactly where the phone was when it sent the signal to the tower.

All you can do is look at the locations within that 20 mile radius, and take a guess at where the phone was.

If you look at the whole history of the person's pings, and you have information about where they were from other sources when they traveled certain routes, you can make a somewhat more educated guess about where they most likely were going on the day in question.

For example, if other information confirms that on other days when they followed the same ping route they were going to Taco Bell for lunch at that time, then you could say that since they were following the same ping route on the day in question, they were probably going to Taco Bell for lunch again. LE would then go to Taco Bell and try to find video or employees or customers who could tell them if indeed the person was there.

To even further complicate things, we have the cautionary tale of pings from Gabe Johnson's case. There we learned two important things about pings - that the ping info provided from the service provider to LE may be incorrect, and also that if the phone is disposed of - as it may be in clever ways - the subject person and their phone may be nowhere near each other.

Pings, unfortunately aren't exact. That's why it takes LE so long to analyze them. They have to study the history and come up with probable routes, and then go out and try to track down other witnesses, credit card transactions, store video, etc, to try to pin down where the phone and the person were. It takes a lot of work and a long time.

Under those circumstances how can anyone even begin to speculate as to where that last ping came from considering I suspect most of the residents in the Chattanooga, Red Bank, Hixson area live within a 20 mile radius of Signal Mtn ..JMHO

 

[Oriah]

Under those circumstances how can anyone even begin to speculate as to where that last ping came from considering I suspect most of the residents in the Chattanooga, Red Bank, Hixson area live within a 20 mile radius of Signal Mtn ..JMHO

BeanE is correct in that it is difficult and tedious work. :banghead:

The possible location of an item that 'pings' (this is not only cell phones, but other devices as well) begins when you start overlaying the radius of every tower that may have serviced the device. So eventually you can narrow down which ones 'collide' so to speak.

Somewhat like a Spirograph.

Now I'm dating myself, lol.

 

[Pearl*]

How can "sleeping on the job" be a good thing considering two children don't have a clue as to what has happened to their mother?

Also, I was under the impression there is a thread in the parking lot to discuss what goes on behind the scene with FB pages and their players...Am I wrong in my assumption?

Wow. I must have had a serious pronoun reference problem in my post last night. It's never good for ANYBODY to sleep on the job, and if the meaning of what I said came across that way, then I was typing way too late.

The post I was responding to has been removed. I was not making any reference to FB. I was responding to a general comment about people who are talking a lot (no names in either post) and whether that is a good thing. My guess is that the comments I made about that could probably be applied to most any criminal case--not just missing person.

Talkers can be either hurting, helping, or having no impact. And that depends greatly, I think, on whether LE is working hard on the case or not. Some on this case believe they are, and some believe they aren't. Some believe they aren't unless somebody is pushing them. And I think most people believe that, mixed in the whole bag, we've got a liar or two.

Doesn't that fairly well sum it up for everybody? We all want the truths to come out but have differences of opinion on how to approach it and on who is making a tragic situation more complicated and hurtful than it has to be.

It is heart-breaking that these two children have no idea where their mother is. I think about that every day. I would hope that EVERYBODY is working as hard as they can, in whatever way they can, toward getting some answers.

 

[Annie_61]

Wow. I must have had a serious pronoun reference problem in my post last night. It's never good for ANYBODY to sleep on the job, and if the meaning of what I said came across that way, then I was typing way too late.

The post I was responding to has been removed. I was not making any reference to FB. I was responding to a general comment about people who are talking a lot (no names in either post) and whether that is a good thing. My guess is that the comments I made about that could probably be applied to most any criminal case--not just missing person.

Talkers can be either hurting, helping, or having no impact. And that depends greatly, I think, on whether LE is working hard on the case or not. Some on this case believe they are, and some believe they aren't. Some believe they aren't unless somebody is pushing them. And I think most people believe that, mixed in the whole bag, we've got a liar or two.

Doesn't that fairly well sum it up for everybody? We all want the truths to come out but have differences of opinion on how to approach it and on who is making a tragic situation more complicated and hurtful than it has to be.

It is heart-breaking that these two children have no idea where their mother is. I think about that every day. I would hope that EVERYBODY is working as hard as they can, in whatever way they can, toward getting some answers.

and I removed what was left of my post as it was thoughts on a post that had been removed so figured wasn't worth leaving

 

[hollyblue]

JMHO, but I think some of the players have quieted down after they talked to the FBI. I don't think they felt comfortable talking with the local LE after what they had been through. They may feel they don't have to scream to be heard any longer....and now feel GP's case is in good hands.

 

[Oriah]

Regarding Gail's phone pings, and a direction of travel that Gail may have taken when leaving the SM residence... I believe it all fits if she took 127 down, then looped around on 27 along Suck Creek.

But that's just her phone pings.
To me, that only means that her cell was in operation along that route.

What about the Jeep?

 

[believe09]

Regarding Gail's phone pings, and a direction of travel that Gail may have taken when leaving the SM residence... I believe it all fits if she took 127 down, then looped around on 27 along Suck Creek.

But that's just her phone pings.
To me, that only means that her cell was in operation along that route.

What about the Jeep?

Other than Gail's location, the information I want the most is whether or not LE has ping info from the jeep.

 

[believe09]

This is Websleuths Position on "reverse speech"

Until someone can show me a legitimate case of reverse speech being used to help solve a police investigation, and I am not talking private detectives, then there really isn't a place for this topic on Websleuths.

Sorry but if reverse speech really worked don't you think we would be using it like mad all over the world?

To start a discussion based on reverse speech does nothing to truly help solve a case. In addition this hurts Websleuths credibility.

You all are fantastic sleuthers and posters. Stick to the facts and what we know works.

Thanks,
Tricia

 

[Emeralgem]

Wow. I must have had a serious pronoun reference problem in my post last night. It's never good for ANYBODY to sleep on the job, and if the meaning of what I said came across that way, then I was typing way too late.

The post I was responding to has been removed. I was not making any reference to FB. I was responding to a general comment about people who are talking a lot (no names in either post) and whether that is a good thing. My guess is that the comments I made about that could probably be applied to most any criminal case--not just missing person.

Talkers can be either hurting, helping, or having no impact. And that depends greatly, I think, on whether LE is working hard on the case or not. Some on this case believe they are, and some believe they aren't. Some believe they aren't unless somebody is pushing them. And I think most people believe that, mixed in the whole bag, we've got a liar or two.

Doesn't that fairly well sum it up for everybody? We all want the truths to come out but have differences of opinion on how to approach it and on who is making a tragic situation more complicated and hurtful than it has to be.

It is heart-breaking that these two children have no idea where their mother is. I think about that every day. I would hope that EVERYBODY is working as hard as they can, in whatever way they can, toward getting some answers.

BBM..Seems I may have been attempting to read and comprehend way too late..

 

[BeanE]

This is Websleuths Position on "reverse speech"

?stsop esrever tuoba woH

 

[Emeralgem]

This is Websleuths Position on "reverse speech"

Is a "statement analysis" classified as being the same as "reverse speech" analysis? I thought there was a difference in the two...
So are you saying neither are accepted here at WS?

IIRC I do recall an "Eyes" site being linked here at WS at one time...Just wondering...JMHO