TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren,44, Signal Mountain, 30 April, 2011 - #11

[cocomod]

I have a question for those that have followed the Susan Powell case. There are some clear similarities between the cases; however, I have found very few that actually think that Susan left on her own. In Gail's case, I can see some that still believe that it is possible that she left on her own. Why? What makes this case different?

I will say that the only difference I have found is that there are not friends standing up and saying emphatically that Gail would NEVER leave her children. That is the biggest difference I can see in this case.

For me though, I just can't put it together that Gail would leave for the following reasons:
She didn't take the money
She was abused and likely wouldn't leave her children in that situation
She was planning on leaving MP, and she was getting things together to do it the right way, and she seems close to realizing this end to her marriage
She was being "followed"
MP was having an affair
MP was taking her money
MP immediately began to disparage her
MP did not even try to help find her
MP immediately hired an criminal defense attorney

 

[Emeralgem]

I have a question for those that have followed the Susan Powell case. There are some clear similarities between the cases; however, I have found very few that actually think that Susan left on her own. In Gail's case, I can see some that still believe that it is possible that she left on her own. Why? What makes this case different?I will say that the only difference I have found is that there are not friends standing up and saying emphatically that Gail would NEVER leave her children. That is the biggest difference I can see in this case.

For me though, I just can't put it together that Gail would leave for the following reasons:
She didn't take the money
She was abused and likely wouldn't leave her children in that situation
She was planning on leaving MP, and she was getting things together to do it the right way, and she seems close to realizing this end to her marriage
She was being "followed"
MP was having an affair
MP was taking her money
MP immediately began to disparage her
MP did not even try to help find her
MP immediately hired an criminal defense attorney

BBm..Thats a question I'm trying to figure out also....JMHO..

 

[glorias]

Even if LE wouldn't tell Gail's family they thought she was in hiding, there is no way to explain the fact that they are still investigating and featuring it on their web page asking people to submit information. CUE is also investigating, and I'm positive both CUE and LE know enough about VAWA to have considered it and looked for any signs that Gail was in hiding. They aren't wasting their own resources looking for someone they think has gotten a new life.

ETA: I don't personally feel LE has done enough investigating to determine whether she ran off or not. No timely searches, no or very few interviews, friends and relatives say she wouldn't have just run off, etc.

The reason there are two "sides" in this case is because someone who treated Gail poorly and who possibly has motive to harm her (and who one friend says may have harmed her in the past) wants everyone to believe she just ran off. If she DID run off, she likely did so because of his abuse. It's not a "good thing" that she possibly ran off, it's a BAD thing, and it means those kids are left with someone who harmed/scared his wife to the point that she abandoned everything and went into hiding.

Further, many who suggest she ran off on her own often change their story. One day they say she had an accident, the next day suicide, the next day is in hiding, the next day they suggest Witness Protection. While I acknowledge that's their right to change their mind as often as they want, I also personally feel that the switching of theories so often means there isn't a lot of evidence to support ANY of those theories. Just my 2 cents on that.

 

[confused]

For me though, I just can't put it together that Gail would leave for the following reasons:
She didn't take the money
She was abused and likely wouldn't leave her children in that situation
She was planning on leaving MP, and she was getting things together to do it the right way, and she seems close to realizing this end to her marriage
She was being "followed"
MP was having an affair
MP was taking her money
MP immediately began to disparage her
MP did not even try to help find her
MP immediately hired an criminal defense attorney

Although most anyone who has followed this from the start has probably heard all the reasons you listed, there are several of them that have only been stated by Arlene D and have never been shown to be factual.

1. No one knows how much money she may have left with. As much planning as we have been told she was doing, she may have gone to the lake on the 29th to dig up a coffee can stuffed with $100 bills. We just don't know.

2. We do not know that she was abused. Again Arlene D claims it, but none of Gail's other friends have said that. Neither has her sister or brother.

3. She does appear to be preparing for a divorce. According to the interviews Arlene has given, it seems that Arlene was encouraging Gail to gather 'evidence', even going so far as to put a tracker on Matt's car, which I believe is an illegal act.

4. She claimed to have been being followed, and even wrote down lic. Plate numbers. I think it was Suzy Button who said she saw a strange car once, but that really could have been anything. We don't have enough info to determine if she was really being followed.

5. He was having an affair.

6. There has been no proof that Matt took ANY money, be it his, her's or theirs. Once again, Arlene D is the only person who has said this. If there is missing money, it could be that Gail put it in her coffee can. We don't know.

7. To my knowledge Matt never announced anything disparaging about Gail. he has only done one press conference and did not do so then. Matt's attorneys filed court docs which claimed Gail was having mental issues, and listed meds she was being prescribed. Matt did not release those papers to the general public. Once again, that would be Arlene D.

8. I don't think that any one of us can possibly know if or what Matt has done to help find Gail. If anyone can claim to absolutely know for sure, then I would love to hear how they came into that knowledge.

9. Numerous people hire attorneys each day. Many hire CD attorneys, and do so for many varying reasons. If I needed an attorney, I would ask around and want to know who was considered the best attorney in my area. That is the one I would hire. It would not matter if that attorney was a CD, a family or even a corporate, if they were the best, I could afford them, and they were willing to take me on, that is who I would hire. iIt only seems logical, and I would think most anyone would do the same.

 

[McSpy]

I have a question for those that have followed the Susan Powell case. There are some clear similarities between the cases; however, I have found very few that actually think that Susan left on her own. In Gail's case, I can see some that still believe that it is possible that she left on her own. Why? What makes this case different?

I will say that the only difference I have found is that there are not friends standing up and saying emphatically that Gail would NEVER leave her children. That is the biggest difference I can see in this case.

For me though, I just can't put it together that Gail would leave for the following reasons:
She didn't take the money
She was abused and likely wouldn't leave her children in that situation
She was planning on leaving MP, and she was getting things together to do it
the right way, and she seems close to realizing this end to her marriage
She was being "followed"
MP was having an affair
MP was taking her money
MP immediately began to disparage her
MP did not even try to help find her
MP immediately hired an criminal defense attorney

I agree. Gail's case is classic. MP lied about his affair to her. It was what drove her crazy. She KNEW it was going on, but he played her with the denials and made her out to be crazy lunatic, if she questioned him. Her life as she knew it was crumbling. He wasn't honest for a reason. He had a plan. Possibly, she left on her own accord, but I see this as a classic case-- a stereotype. There was a lot to lose for both of them--- the kids and the money. It didn't have to be that way, but sometimes people feel entitled and more deserving. They want their cake and eat it too. He even wanted the Jeep, if I recall correctly. I could be WRONG, but I think something happened to Gail. I HOPE I'm wrong.

 

[CatFancier]

Although most anyone who has followed this from the start has probably heard all the reasons you listed, there are several of them that have only been stated by Arlene D and have never been shown to be factual.

1. No one knows how much money she may have left with. As much planning as we have been told she was doing, she may have gone to the lake on the 29th to dig up a coffee can stuffed with $100 bills. We just don't know.

2. We do not know that she was abused. Again Arlene D claims it, but none of Gail's other friends have said that. Neither has her sister or brother.

3. She does appear to be preparing for a divorce. According to the interviews Arlene has given, it seems that Arlene was encouraging Gail to gather 'evidence', even going so far as to put a tracker on Matt's car, which I believe is an illegal act.

4. She claimed to have been being followed, and even wrote down lic. Plate numbers. I think it was Suzy Button who said she saw a strange car once, but that really could have been anything. We don't have enough info to determine if she was really being followed.

5. He was having an affair.

6. There has been no proof that Matt took ANY money, be it his, her's or theirs. Once again, Arlene D is the only person who has said this. If there is missing money, it could be that Gail put it in her coffee can. We don't know.

7. To my knowledge Matt never announced anything disparaging about Gail. he has only done one press conference and did not do so then. Matt's attorneys filed court docs which claimed Gail was having mental issues, and listed meds she was being prescribed. Matt did not release those papers to the general public. Once again, that would be Arlene D.

8. I don't think that any one of us can possibly know if or what Matt has done to help find Gail. If anyone can claim to absolutely know for sure, then I would love to hear how they came into that knowledge.

9. Numerous people hire attorneys each day. Many hire CD attorneys, and do so for many varying reasons. If I needed an attorney, I would ask around and want to know who was considered the best attorney in my area. That is the one I would hire. It would not matter if that attorney was a CD, a family or even a corporate, if they were the best, I could afford them, and they were willing to take me on, that is who I would hire. iIt only seems logical, and I would think most anyone would do the same.

See, really no one has said much except AD so the argument that she's the only one saying things doesn't wash with me.

As for MP's attorneys putting things out there with the implication that it isn't from MP? He hired them, they are speaking for him, in the courthouse and out.

I do not agree that it seems logical to hire a criminal defense attorney for a divorce or any other matter that has nothing to do with criminal defense. Whether they were amazing, I could afford them, etc., I would be choosing an attorney with experience in the field I NEED.

If I need a criminal defense attorney, I would look for the best, one I could afford and one who was willing to take me on.

 

[glorias]

snipped to save space

2. We do not know that she was abused. Again Arlene D claims it, but none of Gail's other friends have said that. Neither has her sister or brother.

3. She does appear to be preparing for a divorce. According to the interviews Arlene has given, it seems that Arlene was encouraging Gail to gather 'evidence', even going so far as to put a tracker on Matt's car, which I believe is an illegal act.

BBM. See, I don't get this, and I know this has been brought up before so hopefully it's okay for me to mention this. Why is it that AD's words are dismissed in some cases and not in others? It seems like some people will dismiss almost anything that AD said because it's just rumor or unproven, but when she says something that can be used to prove a point, suddenly her words are just fine. It seems like this happens with MP, too. Personally, I find it inconsistent.

7. To my knowledge Matt never announced anything disparaging about Gail. he has only done one press conference and did not do so then. Matt's attorneys filed court docs which claimed Gail was having mental issues, and listed meds she was being prescribed. Matt did not release those papers to the general public. Once again, that would be Arlene D.

The lawyers are working on MP's behalf. They didn't just make stuff up, they got the mental issues info from MP and are giving out info to Jammer and The Chattanoogan with his permission. If they made stuff up and said things to disparage Gail which MP didn't approve of, I can't imagine he'd still retain them.

Besides, MP brought up psychiatric issues in the phone interview with TFP early on. You can read it here. This isn't info that AD released, info that MP alluded to when talking to the media.

 

[McSpy]

Although most anyone who has followed this from the start has probably heard all the reasons you listed, there are several of them that have only been stated by Arlene D and have never been shown to be factual.

1. No one knows how much money she may have left with. As much planning as we have been told she was doing, she may have gone to the lake on the 29th to dig up a coffee can stuffed with $100 bills. We just don't know.

2. We do not know that she was abused. Again Arlene D claims it, but none of Gail's other friends have said that. Neither has her sister or brother.

3. She does appear to be preparing for a divorce. According to the interviews Arlene has given, it seems that Arlene was encouraging Gail to gather 'evidence', even going so far as to put a tracker on Matt's car, which I believe
is an illegal act.

IMO, she was preparing for a divorce, because he was preparing for a divorce. The writing was on the wall. Did she really want the marriage to be over? I
don't think it was her desire, which may be why she was depressed.

4. She claimed to have been being followed, and even wrote down lic. Plate numbers. I think it was Suzy Button who said she saw a strange car once, but that really could have been anything. We don't have enough info to determine
if she was really being followed.

5. He was having an affair.

It is pretty clear he was having an affair. Probably, co-workers at Blue Cross knew it, as well.

6. There has been no proof that Matt took ANY money, be it his, her's or theirs. Once again, Arlene D is the only person who has said this. If there is missing money, it could be that Gail put it in her coffee can. We don't know.

7. To my knowledge Matt never announced anything disparaging about Gail. he has only done one press conference and did not do so then. Matt's attorneys filed court docs which claimed Gail was having mental issues, and listed meds she was being prescribed. Matt did not release those papers to the general public. Once again, that would be Arlene D.

8. I don't think that any one of us can possibly know if or what Matt has done to help find Gail. If anyone can claim to absolutely know for sure, then I would love to hear how they came into that knowledge.

9. Numerous people hire attorneys each day. Many hire CD attorneys, and do so for many varying reasons. If I needed an attorney, I would ask around and want to know who was considered the best attorney in my area. That is the
one I would hire. It would not matter if that attorney was a CD, a family or even a corporate, if they were the best, I could afford them, and they were willing to take me on, that is who I would hire. iIt only seems logical, and I would think most anyone would do the same.

There is no reason to hire a criminal lawyer for a divorce. It is like hiring a patent attorney for a divorce. These are specialties. Some lawyers may do both criminal and divorce within their firms, but I think he hired this lawyer as a go between with police on Gail's disappearance. It is hard to not think that.
It seems so blatant.

This is how I see it. I could be wrong, but to an outside observer, this is a case of a missing wife of a guy, who had an affair, and took custody of the children as soon as the wife vanished. I really need help to see it in a different light. Yes, it is possible she took off, but it is hard NOT to think there are other possibilities too, such as foul play.

 

[confused]

Why is it that AD's words are dismissed in some cases and not in others? It seems like some people will dismiss almost anything that AD said because it's just rumor or unproven, but when she says something that can be used to prove a point, suddenly her words are just fine. It seems like this happens with MP, too. Personally, I find it inconsistent.

The lawyers are working on MP's behalf. They didn't just make stuff up, they got the mental issues info from MP and are giving out info to Jammer and The Chattanoogan with his permission. If they made stuff up and said things to disparage Gail which MP didn't approve of, I can't imagine he'd still retain them.

In reference to myself, I do not dismiss anything that Arlene D. says. I take her statements and try to see if anything or anyone else seems to support what she has said. Until I find other proof that what she claims is true, then it is just a rumor. example: She claims to be Gails best friend. Gail is not here to confirm that, so why should I believe it JUST because Arlene says it. Gail does have other friends-any one of them could claim to be her best friend. Which one do you believe?

Also, I was not using Arlene's words to prove a point, I was saying that she said she was encouraging Gail to gather evidence. That doesn't mean I believe or disbelieve it. She may have been threatening to shoot the dog if Gail didn't do it. OR, she may not have had anything at all to do with it, but decided to take the credit for it. I don't know. All I have to go by is Arlene's word, and I don't know if I trust that or not. Until something comes along to support her words, they are just that...Arlene's words.

As for the disparaging remarks...there is a world of difference in giving information to your attorneys, so that court documents can be filed, and publishing medication lists, etc. on FB for everyone to see. Matt retained his attorneys, gave them infomation to be used for legal matter. Arlene published her "best friends' medication lists and other docs on FB, for what purpose - I don't know.

 

[redfish]

Just dropped by to catch up. My opinion has not changed since day one... hinky Matt! In all fairness I seriously try to entertain the theory that Gail remains missing of her own accord. I DO. But many of the arguements just don't hold up to inspection, in my opinion, no matter how you number them. It very well could be true she intended to go away for a short while (days or weeks) but something happened that prevented her from ever returning, again - my opinion. That something wasn't an accident (I don't believe) because had it been - some sign would probably have been found by now. I hope I am wrong.

 

[glorias]

Snipped

As for the disparaging remarks...there is a world of difference in giving information to your attorneys, so that court documents can be filed, and publishing medication lists, etc. on FB for everyone to see. Matt retained his attorneys, gave them infomation to be used for legal matter. Arlene published her "best friends' medication lists and other docs on FB, for what purpose - I don't know.

I was specifically referring to two instances of MP's lawyers putting out disparaging info about Gail: One, the Jammer interview where Lee Davis spoke with Jammer Scott before AD's first interview on the show. Davis informed Jammer of information like Gail's brother's death, which is at best gossip. The second example is when Bryan Hoss told TFP that the G's said Gail was "flat f----d up." That's disparaging, it has nothing to do with the court documents.

As for the court documents, as far as I can tell, they're public. I know a moderator told someone on the forums back in the 1st or 2nd thread that anyone can get copies of the docs by going to the courthouse where they were filed.

Also, the court documents were shown clearly on WCRB back in May, and you can see the names of the medications Gail was on in the news video. It's still online here:

http://www.wrcbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=14627648

I'm pretty sure WCRB showed them on the news before AD posted them on Facebook, but I admit I'm not going to spend hours scrolling through FB to find it.

I guess what I'm saying is that I personally think if AD is being disparaging for posting documents, then WCRB is too, as is the county courthouse for allowing anyone who asks to get a copy of these public documents.

 

[Annie_61]

I won’t quote anyone’s post here as my thoughts revolve around several posts re comments on AD's words.

Why shouldn’t I believe AD is the question I am asking myself? Well at the moment I am finding more reason to believe her than not. She has been open with who she is, she has spoken to the LE and FBI without an attorney and she is willing to take a LD test. Gail must have trusted her enough as a real friend to have entrusted her with the things she did leave with her, nobody has proved she doesn't have the documents she says she has shown the LE. ( I am talking paper work not about the conversation as I know there will be those that point out that is just hear say) There is no proof to disprove what she has said and apart from KP coming out on Facebook and attacking AD’s character he certainly didn’t offer up any proof MP shouldn’t be being looked at for answers to where Gail is. I will give credit where credit is due KP did come out under his name so people knew who he was and his relationship to MP unlike a couple of others on FB that attacked AD character and version of what she says knows using hidden identities and no mention of their relationship to MP.

What is AD motive for wanting to have the LE check MP out more? What has she to gain from anything she has done? She has far more to lose as far as public credibility if anyone is willing to come out and prove her wrong with hard facts and not just comments on her having animals. I know personally if I am upset, frustrated and trying to get a message across I can get things confused and muddled but the one thing that AD has never faulted with is that something has happened to Gail and that MP is certainly not helping to provide information that may help. How many of us journal our life with dates, times of conversations with friends just in case we have to use them to prove we are friends if they go missing. I know I don’t. The longer nobody searched the more she spoke up and gave more details because nobody wanted to listen if she just kept saying “Oh something happened to Gail and I think I know why” the longer Gail is missing and the lack of searching and questioning of those who should be questioned the more she put out there to get the public to listen and start asking as well… and when you look at how much of the threads in here are dedicated to what AD has said and done she certainly has help the public awareness of Gail’s disappearance. (in the right way or wrong way I believe is up to each person to decide for themselves)

I have noticed since CUE has become involved and the FBI she has kept very quiet, almost as if at last someone is at last listening and they might look hard at what is going on.

So do I believe what I have heard from a woman who doesn’t sugar coat with fancy words and is not a fancy speaking attorney but who seems to be a down to earth, straight talking, take no poop, strong woman, who will stand up for a friend and say Hey there is SOMETHING WRONG HERE!!!!! and if I am wrong then I will face the consequences both from the public and Gail if she is really out there and able to come home.
The answer is yes I do and that is just my opinion and one I will keep until MP comes out and proves her words wrong.

May the answer come soon for Gail’s loved ones and friends.

I would like to add, I am not asking anyone to agree with me or even discuss what I have said, this post is just my thoughts after having read this thread and other places on the net. I just felt after reading so many comments for and against AD I wanted to say why I for one believe her and will keep believing her until either Gail walks back into view or someone can provide solid evidence she is wrong. So thank you to those of you that read this for what it is, just one person’s random thoughts on AD and how she is dealing with a missing friend.

 

[Oriah]

BBM.. Dark Red I agree wholeheartedly..

My understanding is Gail was involved with Al-Anon, and not a member of AA.
<modsnip>.JMHO

Perhaps she was, perhaps she wasn't. Perhaps she was a member of neither.

According to Al-Anon and AA guidelines, members should always protect the anonymity of themselves and other members- including at the levels of community, religious communities, press, radio, film, television, the internet- etc.

So really, none of us should have any knowledge of what- if any- groups Gail may belong to. Unless people who are part of those groups are violating guidelines. Or people with intimate knowledge of a member are choosing to violate the privacy of a member, in direct conflict of Al-Anon and AA policy. Kwim?

 

[Emeralgem]

Snipped



I was specifically referring to two instances of MP's lawyers putting out disparaging info about Gail: One, the Jammer interview where Lee Davis spoke with Jammer Scott before AD's first interview on the show. Davis informed Jammer of information like Gail's brother's death, which is at best gossip. The second example is when Bryan Hoss told TFP that the G's said Gail was "flat f----d up." That's disparaging, it has nothing to do with the court documents.

As for the court documents, as far as I can tell, they're public. I know a moderator told someone on the forums back in the 1st or 2nd thread that anyone can get copies of the docs by going to the courthouse where they were filed.

Also, the court documents were shown clearly on WCRB back in May, and you can see the names of the medications Gail was on in the news video. It's still online here:

http://www.wrcbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=14627648

I'm pretty sure WCRB showed them on the news before AD posted them on Facebook, but I admit I'm not going to spend hours scrolling through FB to find it.

I guess what I'm saying is that I personally think if AD is being disparaging for posting documents, then WCRB is too, as is the county courthouse for allowing anyone who asks to get a copy of these public documents.

Thank you for posting that link. I had never seen that news clip... I also didn't realize he has claimed Gail was a danger to her children....

My question for Matt P..
IF your wife was such a danger to her children WHY were you in another state with another woman instead of being home with your children and WHY were you spending nights out in local hotels instead of being home with your children, that is... IF you were so concerned about their welfare?

IMHO.. For Matt P to even make a statment of that nature tends to prove he is the one who is possibly delusional.. He has to be IF he thinks for a second anyone is buying into his claims especially when his actions have proven his children's safety was not his top priority.

I'm NOW thoroughly convinced this man's EGO is run amok..And IF anyone is a danger to the children, IMHO it's him, not Gail...JMHO

 

[Oriah]

I have a question for locals, if anyone has thoughts I would much appreciate!

If one were headed to Anderson Pike from the Palmgrens SM residence they would likely take James Blvd to Taft, then to Anderson Pike, correct? And then if they were to turn around and head back to Taft, the easiest route S (toward Chattanooga) would still be Taft, is that correct?

 

[ThoughtFox]

In reference to myself, I do not dismiss anything that Arlene D. says. I take her statements and try to see if anything or anyone else seems to support what she has said. Until I find other proof that what she claims is true, then it is just a rumor. example: She claims to be Gails best friend. Gail is not here to confirm that, so why should I believe it JUST because Arlene says it. Gail does have other friends-any one of them could claim to be her best friend. Which one do you believe?

No one else has ever claimed to be Gail's best friend. Surely if there was another one, they would have stepped forward by now.

Also, MP and his attorneys have never said that Gail and AD were not friends. I think they knew better than to attack her on those grounds when there were probably plenty of witnesses who would swear they had been friends, including his own children. Instead, MP knew that AD had been trusted with some of their belongings and he sent his PI to get them back. Trust implies that AD was Gail's friend.

I have no doubt that her brother and sister were her friends (and still are), as well as SB from Signal Mt. I think that Gail trusted certain people and they were her friends. I think it is really that simple.

Also, I was not using Arlene's words to prove a point, I was saying that she said she was encouraging Gail to gather evidence. That doesn't mean I believe or disbelieve it. She may have been threatening to shoot the dog if Gail didn't do it.

So now we're back to Gail being "afraid" of AD? How is that a valid line of speculation - what is that based upon? Gail drove through the rubble after the Day of Tornadoes to get to her "safe place" which was near AD's house. The better question, in my opinion, is why she came back to SM, which is where she disappeared.

Remember that she was with MP when the police gave her cards about going to a safe place. AD had nothing to do with that.

 

[Oriah]

Respectfully snipped for space, ThoughtFox- and bolded by me:

<Remember that she was with MP when the police gave her cards about going to a safe place. AD had nothing to do with that.[/quote]>

I have been rather perplexed by this report for some time now.

I don't know what sort of LEA would provide info for 'safe places' to a suspected victim, potential victim, or concerned individual while in the company of the person they are uncomfortable with??

That's not a LE bash at all- just a head scratcher. I mean- that just seems like a very ineffective idea. Kwim?

 

[Emeralgem]

I have a question for locals, if anyone has thoughts I would much appreciate!

If one were headed to Anderson Pike from the Palmgrens SM residence they would likely take James Blvd to Taft, then to Anderson Pike, correct? And then if they were to turn around and head back to Taft, the easiest route S (toward Chattanooga) would still be Taft, is that correct?

Yes, but you do know Anderson Pike will take you to the "W" Road, right,?
The "W' Road going down the mtn will take you to Mountain Creek Road.

http://mapq.st/ngw6fm

 

[Oriah]

Yes, but you do know Anderson Pike will take you to the "W" Road, right,?
The "W' Road going down the mtn will take you to Mountain Creek Road.

http://mapq.st/ngw6fm

Yes, I do. Thank you Em. I can't figure out this dang ping situation, though- because both towers bounce back and forth. So if you were to continue along on Anderson - oh shoot- something just made sense to me... thank you... Ok- off to beat my head against the cell ping wall again...

 

[Emeralgem]

Respectfully snipped for space, ThoughtFox- and bolded by me:

<Remember that she was with MP when the police gave her cards about going to a safe place. AD had nothing to do with that.

>

I have been rather perplexed by this report for some time now.

I don't know what sort of LEA would provide info for 'safe places' to a suspected victim, potential victim, or concerned individual while in the company of the person they are uncomfortable with??

That's not a LE bash at all- just a head scratcher. I mean- that just seems like a very ineffective idea. Kwim?[/QUOTE]

My reply Dark Red

I've wondered the same. Could it be he and whoever was with him left the SMPD and Gail stayed behind to speak further with an officer?
I'm still trying to wrap my mind around him claiming he did not know how long Gail had been at the Lake House.. Does that mean he didn't remember the events of the 29th and going to SMPD that day? JMHO