TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren, 44, Signal Mountain, 30 April 2011 - #13

[Snowbunny]

I'm reading a lot of analysis and criticism of MP's interview based on responses (or lack there-of) and body language. But the question I have for many of you who are being critical is simply is there any answer he could have given that would have satisfied you and not drawn your ire? Please understand, I'm not intending this to be combative or as a criticism of how you feel, after all it's been stated frequently that we are all entitled to our opinions. But is seems to me that if he'd expressed more remorse for Gail or stated that he was heartbroken by her loss that many of you would accuse him on being insincere and pandering to public opinion.

My point is that many of you have clearly vilified MP. You have your reasons. But in all fairness I read these criticisms and believe there is nothing he could have said for which you wouldn't have found fault.

MP is not the victim here...Gail and her children are. You don't go on the news and smile as you discuss a tragedy of this magnatude. He cried about losing his job which was his own fault, but there were not tears for Gail losing her life and the children losing their mom. He would have been better off not saying anything. He and his attorney did their best to make Gail out as a crazy person and if she was having some sort of meltdown he probably contributed to it under the circumstances. Where is his compassion for Gail? I think this is exactly what people are trying to say here.

 

[Emeralgem]

I'm reading a lot of analysis and criticism of MP's interview based on responses (or lack there-of) and body language. But the question I have for many of you who are being critical is simply is there any answer he could have given that would have satisfied you and not drawn your ire? Please understand, I'm not intending this to be combative or as a criticism of how you feel, after all it's been stated frequently that we are all entitled to our opinions. But is seems to me that if he'd expressed more remorse for Gail or stated that he was heartbroken by her loss that many of you would accuse him on being insincere and pandering to public opinion.

My point is that many of you have clearly vilified MP. You have your reasons. But in all fairness I read these criticisms and believe there is nothing he could have said for which you wouldn't have found fault.

At this stage of the game, for me, you are most probably right..JMHO

But in all fairness, since LE has publicly stated they didn't have enough evidence to properly analyze what really happened, they haven't given me any concrete evidence to prove this was actually a tragic accident, so unfortunately I'm still inclined to believe MP is involved with what happened to his wife...As I see it...It is what it is..
I would love to believe her husband and the father of her two children would not harm her, unfortunately, I can't..JMHOOTS....

 

[Elley Mae]

I'm reading a lot of analysis and criticism of MP's interview based on responses (or lack there-of) and body language. But the question I have for many of you who are being critical is simply is there any answer he could have given that would have satisfied you and not drawn your ire? Please understand, I'm not intending this to be combative or as a criticism of how you feel, after all it's been stated frequently that we are all entitled to our opinions. But is seems to me that if he'd expressed more remorse for Gail or stated that he was heartbroken by her loss that many of you would accuse him on being insincere and pandering to public opinion.

My point is that many of you have clearly vilified MP. You have your reasons. But in all fairness I read these criticisms and believe there is nothing he could have said for which you wouldn't have found fault.

I have not followed this case like I did the oj case anthony and Dr.Greineder case on TV, having come in on this at the end,after the jeep discovery I noticed that there are those that just "know" "feel" that he is/had to be involved in her demise.

I myself don't see that, I think that they were about to end their marriage and lots of crap happened and lots of feelings got hurt and she had a very weird fatal accident and some feel surely he had to have had a hand in this. He had a great job and she had a great job then she lost her job and i'll beat that things started to fall apart then. they were living very nicely. She suspected him of something or she wouldn't have hired a PI, turns out he was ( I think) lol
I watched his interview too, he was a strange one, but thinking about it he was in the BCBS (insurance) so he was a sales man so to speak, reminded me of the guy at the grave yard trying to sell me plots, they have a tendency to smile (weirdly) after they say something that they think is (right) or what they said is a great idea, and we should all agree.It's a sad case. jmo

I would love to hear from her sister

 

[ThoughtFox]

I know we are all largely anonymous on this site, so you'll just have to trust me when I say I'd be one of the last persons who would ever defend anyone for cheating on their spouse. It is never excusable. However, if I follow this line of reasoning in reverse what I conclude is this. If you cheat on a spouse you are not a good person (man or woman), and if you are not a good person by this criteria then you are more likely to physically harm your spouse; conversely, if you do not cheat on your spouse you are a good person and likely to not physically harm your spouse.

Now, I'm going to bet that's not what most of us think. But that seems to be the jump that is being made. Because he cheated he is more likely to desire to physically harm Gail. Like most of us I know a number of people who have cheated on a spouse and they are not bad people. They are people who made horrible decisions that often resulted in heartbreaking consequences for themselves and others. But I just don't get the jump we seem so ready to make between cheating and murder. And yes, I know there had been some domestic issues, but none of us know what was truly going on in those situations and I have seen nothing that indicates MP ever physically harmed or threatened Gail.

Again, not trying to be argumentative, just trying to better understand the rationale behind holding on to the theory that MP caused Gail's death in spite of the fact there seems to be no evidence to support it.

According to the press conference yesterday they didn't even have enough "evidence" to animate the Jeep tumbling over the bluff. That's probably because their animated models wouldn't work at the speed of the car given by the black box. Then they covered themselves about the black box by saying it was unreliable anyway.

What evidence? A missing rock that no one even noticed was missing?

 

[Blue Moc]

Look, if you like the guy and you believe whatever he says, I'm happy for you....

Some of us have followed this case from day one, just like we follow other cases here.

There are probably many people who like this guy, but he should realize that a smiling face and some down-home talk doesn't fool everyone.

snipped for space.

ThoughtFox, I understand and appreciate we may have different opinions here, but I don't understand the animosity I perceive right off the bat because of these different opinions. Just because I don't believe he killed his wife doesn't mean that I believe everything he says. It does mean I believe there is no evidence to support many of the claims made about his guilt in her death.

And for the record, I've also followed this case almost from day one. However, I have by my own choice done so largely from the sideline. But I am not new to the details of what has taken place nor do I believe that I've been "fooled" by MP simply because I don't see the "evidence" as you do.

 

[Mom who cares]

My apologies if this has been asked before. Are deer common on this mountain road?

 

[Jade]

snipped for space.

ThoughtFox, I understand and appreciate we may have different opinions here, but I don't understand the animosity I perceive right off the bat because of these different opinions. Just because I don't believe he killed his wife doesn't mean that I believe everything he says. It does mean I believe there is no evidence to support many of the claims made about his guilt in her death.

And for the record, I've also followed this case almost from day one. However, I have by my own choice done so largely from the sideline. But I am not new to the details of what has taken place nor do I believe that I've been "fooled" by MP simply because I don't see the "evidence" as you do.

I completely understand I feel the same way.


MO

 

[ThoughtFox]

snipped for space.

ThoughtFox, I understand and appreciate we may have different opinions here, but I don't understand the animosity I perceive right off the bat because of these different opinions. Just because I don't believe he killed his wife doesn't mean that I believe everything he says. It does mean I believe there is no evidence to support many of the claims made about his guilt in her death.

And for the record, I've also followed this case almost from day one. However, I have by my own choice done so largely from the sideline. But I am not new to the details of what has taken place nor do I believe that I've been "fooled" by MP simply because I don't see the "evidence" as you do.

And I respect your opinion.

 

[my_tee_mouse]

While I doubt very much that MP is unhappy that Gail is dead, I don't believe he arranged it. I can put this down to a bizzare accident. Either that, or that maybe some unconnected random person hit her from behind and panicked and fled, especially if she was driving too slowly and someone got "road rage." Was it mentioned if her car had any rear-end damage?

Up here when an unexplained accident occurs, there's usually a deer involved...automatic reaction is to turn and avoid the deer.

 

[ThoughtFox]

Up here when an unexplained accident occurs, there's usually a deer involved...automatic reaction is to turn and avoid the deer.

Maybe the deer went over with the Jeep and rock? Did they find any antlers?

(sorry, couldn't keep myself from typing that... I need to go read a different forum for a while...)

Sorry if I sound snarky, but given the lack of evidence, she could have swerved for any number of things. A turkey, a vulture, a squirrel, an ice cream truck, a UPS truck, a fallen tree branch. For a closed case, there is still plenty of room for speculation.

 

[almino]

Homeowners Testimony of what she heard the weekend of Gail's disappearance:
- "I was in the master bedroom located in the back of my home". So not close/not facing the road.
- "I heard a sound like crashing of metal". What was that? Did another vehicle hit Gail? Would hitting the rock sound like crashing of metal?
- "the extended sound of screeching tires". That would have to be tires on a road surface, correct, not tires going through grass.
- "then a rumbling sound." Maybe the sound of the car grabbing the rock and continuing over the brow.
- "and a loud bang." The hit of the jeep on the ledges?
- "concurrent with those sounds I also heard the sound of a car pulling into our drive then backing out and driving away." What was this car doing? What did it see? Why didn't it stop if all this was going on?

I was willing to consider a tragic accident, but this testimony seems to bring perhaps a different scenario to life. It seems that Gail's car being in drive, then neutral, then park plus the adding of brakes and slowing says to me that with all her might Gail was trying to stop.

The crashing metal sound bothers me because the report doesn't show damage to the front of her vehicle, so I don't think that it was the sound of hitting the rock. Did the other vehicle strike her rear if there was another vehicle? All the major damage was in the rear.

What was Gail overcorrecting her driving for? What was she trying to avoid or get away from?

Is anyone else bothered by these details?

 

[Snowbunny]

My best advice to MP would be if he wants compassion then he needs to start showing compassion. At one time he loved Gail enough to marry her and have two children with her, but now that she is gone he shows no emotion that she's gone. That's why people are turned off by him. He says it hurts what people are saying about him, but did he ever stop to think how much it hurt Gail to find out about Tammie? Put yourself in Gail's shoes and then you just might begin to understand why people are so angry with you and your actions. You never once have shown any compassion for Gail throughout this whole ordeal. I hope for the kids' sake you have shown that sense of emotion even though you haven't in public.

 

[Emeralgem]

Homeowners Testimony of what she heard the weekend of Gail's disappearance:
- "I was in the master bedroom located in the back of my home". So not close/not facing the road.
- "I heard a sound like crashing of metal". What was that? Did another vehicle hit Gail? Would hitting the rock sound like crashing of metal?
- "the extended sound of screeching tires". That would have to be tires on a road surface, correct, not tires going through grass.
- "then a rumbling sound." Maybe the sound of the car grabbing the rock and continuing over the brow.
- "and a loud bang." The hit of the jeep on the ledges?
- "concurrent with those sounds I also heard the sound of a car pulling into our drive then backing out and driving away." What was this car doing? What did it see? Why didn't it stop if all this was going on?

I was willing to consider a tragic accident, but this testimony seems to bring perhaps a different scenario to life. It seems that Gail's car being in drive, then neutral, then park plus the adding of brakes and slowing says to me that with all her might Gail was trying to stop.

The crashing metal sound bothers me because the report doesn't show damage to the front of her vehicle, so I don't think that it was the sound of hitting the rock. Did the other vehicle strike her rear if there was another vehicle? All the major damage was in the rear.

What was Gail overcorrecting her driving for? What was she trying to avoid or get away from?

Is anyone else bothered by these details?

Plenty bothered.. I haven't had the opportunity to read the entire report, but is it mentioned the jeep was in neutral?

 

[Emeralgem]

Maybe the deer went over with the Jeep and rock? Did they find any antlers?

(sorry, couldn't keep myself from typing that... I need to go read a different forum for a while...)

Sorry if I sound snarky, but given the lack of evidence, she could have swerved for any number of things. A turkey, a vulture, a squirrel, an ice cream truck, a UPS truck, a fallen tree branch. For a closed case, there is still plenty of room for speculation.

And as I see it IF Mrs. E heard a car turning around or backing out of her dirve way at the same time she heard a terrible crash, someone knows something and LE needs to find out who that someone is...JMHO.

 

[Jade]

Homeowners Testimony of what she heard the weekend of Gail's disappearance:
- "I was in the master bedroom located in the back of my home". So not close/not facing the road.
- "I heard a sound like crashing of metal". What was that? Did another vehicle hit Gail? Would hitting the rock sound like crashing of metal?
- "the extended sound of screeching tires". That would have to be tires on a road surface, correct, not tires going through grass.
- "then a rumbling sound." Maybe the sound of the car grabbing the rock and continuing over the brow.
- "and a loud bang." The hit of the jeep on the ledges?
- "concurrent with those sounds I also heard the sound of a car pulling into our drive then backing out and driving away." What was this car doing? What did it see? Why didn't it stop if all this was going on?

I was willing to consider a tragic accident, but this testimony seems to bring perhaps a different scenario to life. It seems that Gail's car being in drive, then neutral, then park plus the adding of brakes and slowing says to me that with all her might Gail was trying to stop.

The crashing metal sound bothers me because the report doesn't show damage to the front of her vehicle, so I don't think that it was the sound of hitting the rock. Did the other vehicle strike her rear if there was another vehicle? All the major damage was in the rear.

What was Gail overcorrecting her driving for? What was she trying to avoid or get away from?

Is anyone else bothered by these details?

The resident account is only part of the picture and considering she wasn’t even sure what day it was and only gave her story months later not having thought enough of it to alert LE even after a high profile mom was missing from a couple miles away coincidentally in that time frame.

Remember it was on the heels of the worst, most deadly line of tornados that ever struck the region. If that doesn’t stick in your mind I don’t know what does.

The rock was at the edge of the road so it had to be dealt with to access the grass.

I was thinking maybe the sound of the crash and tires was the hitting the rock and starting its propulsion.

Tires spinning as the jeep got its traction.

It doesn’t seem like the rock would damage a jeep especially if it was being moved not like running in to a rock face or an immovable object.

It would seem that since it is a sheer drop that the mountain itself and the resident’s position in the house would make the sound of the first downward impact distant.

As far as overcorrecting I’m thinking she made a wide turn

If she was trying to stop why didn’t she turn away from the steep drop? The tries tracks go right straight to the edge.

I forget which poster it was but they gave the best description – it is like looking out a airplane window at that spot.

If there had been another ear witness to collaborate it would be helpful but we only have a single person’s memory of the day and witness memories are not always accurate from what I gather in other cases.

IMO

 

[my_tee_mouse]

Maybe the deer went over with the Jeep and rock? Did they find any antlers?

(sorry, couldn't keep myself from typing that... I need to go read a different forum for a while...)

Sorry if I sound snarky, but given the lack of evidence, she could have swerved for any number of things. A turkey, a vulture, a squirrel, an ice cream truck, a UPS truck, a fallen tree branch. For a closed case, there is still plenty of room for speculation.

You forgot skunk!

And I totally agree...for a closed case, there is still plenty of room for speculation. Which means her children will not have closure (because you'd better believe that no matter what they are told now, they will look into it for themselves later, "you" being the collective "you," of course).

And turtle! Let's not forget turtle!

 

[Elley Mae]

http://timesfreepress.com/news/2012/jan/05/palmgren-crash-ruled-an-accident/

Her Jeep Rubicon went over the edge of Signal Mountain, plummeting 155 feet.
That is a long distance,I am thinking the vehicle landed on the rear or rolled over before coming to rest,she was ejected from the vehicle but I didn't see were it said the distance of her remains where from the vehicle.
the pic at this link
http://timesfreepress.com/news/2011/dec/05/gail-palmgren-jeep-removal-planned-for-today/

 

[ThoughtFox]

And as I see it IF Mrs. E heard a car turning around or backing out of her dirve way at the same time she heard a terrible crash, someone knows something and LE needs to find out who that someone is...JMHO.

I thought the same thing because how could she hear a crash and then someone turning around? Gail couldn't turn around if she already went off the bluff, so who was it? If it was just someone driving along, why didn't they report it? Well, I can think of several reasons ~ it was someone chasing or following Gail, or it was someone who ran into her and they had car damage also.

If I had heard a terrible crash, I would have gone outside to see what happened, wouldn't you?

 

[ThoughtFox]

You forgot skunk!

And I totally agree...for a closed case, there is still plenty of room for speculation. Which means her children will not have closure (because you'd better believe that no matter what they are told now, they will look into it for themselves later, "you" being the collective "you," of course).

And turtle! Let's not forget turtle!

Exactly! Turtles are actually a hazard ~ I've stopped for them plenty of times.

This being on the bluff, it could have been an eagle. I would brake for an eagle.

But yes about the closure, I keep wondering what will happen someday when the kids look back on the official explanation. It may take years but they will certainly ask some hard questions.

 

[my_tee_mouse]

I thought the same thing because how could she hear a crash and then someone turning around? Gail couldn't turn around if she already went off the bluff, so who was it? If it was just someone driving along, why didn't they report it? Well, I can think of several reasons ~ it was someone chasing or following Gail, or it was someone who ran into her and they had car damage also.

If I had heard a terrible crash, I would have gone outside to see what happened, wouldn't you?

Yes, I would.

Relying on ya'll who can read the report, but...okay so there's no damage to the front of the Jeep. We know the weight of the rock but not the height? Could it have been dragged along by some portion of the undercarriage of the Jeep?

I am totally bummed that now that we have the official report, we seem to have just as many if not more questions. Urg.