Hello Jeni4Smith,
And welcome to WS. I wanted to respond to your questions
You wrote:
"On My Behalf" can be a term used to indicate that the PI was doing what he was asked to do and not there on his own accord. It isn't necessarily the indicator you presented, just to be fair.
Also, "Rest assured, Gail's sudden departure from the Lake house was absolutely due to something she learned to take away her peace there."... is this something that is fact or your opinion? Please clarify.
Nope, it is not necessarily the indicator, but
this article says:
>>"We've done everything in our power to find Gail. We've hired a private investigator. We've continued to look, turning over everything we can," said Palmgren.
...Palmgren hired Private Investigator Mike Mathis, a former detective with the Chattanooga Police Department to help with the search.<<
You see...when someone states that they have done everything in their power (but uses "we've" instead of "I've" oddly) and it is with the intention of suggesting that they have done it "to find Gail" -- that they have done it to "help with the search" -- then that would make it appear that they have done it on behalf of the missing party. Right?
There is no way that those statements were made except to try to indicate to the public that MP was doing what he/we could to find Gail, he/they were making an effort on Gail's behalf. Or was it on the children's behalf? Didn't MP file to get custody of them? Or was it on MP's behalf, he who had filed for separation, exclusive use of the home, custody of the children, restraining order (wasn't it all of those things on around the 6th of May?)
I suppose to be fair, one could stretch and think that what was written about "on my behalf" could just have been to explain that Mr. Mathis was "serving" MP. On the other hand, I am reading what I think is the deeper meaning that seems fairly apparent, at least to me. I think that it is really clear that Mr. Mathis is serving MP's behalf, not Gail's, and not Gail's and MPs.
The letter...
>>It is my understanding that you are in possession of a security system DVR that you picked up from Best Buy in P[*advertiser censored*]ville, Alabama on May 2, 2011. This is my property. Please give this DVR immediately to Mike Mathis, who is the private investigator whom I have hired on my behalf. I have asked Mr. Mathis to deliver this letter to you.
Further, if you should have any other property that belongs either to me or to Gail, please give the same to Mike Mathis as well.<<
You see, if this was done on Gail's behalf, or Gail and MP's behalf (and not just specifically on "my behalf," it certainly seems that MP would have been seeking to catch flies with honey and not vinegar. He would have opened his letter with an intro to Mr. Mathis who has been hired to find Gail -- appealing to Gail's friend to assist. Instead he starts with something like, "You picked up something, it is mine, give it to me immediately, give it to Mr. Mathis, I sent him, he's working for me, give it."
Now then...maybe others don't read the letter that way, but I do. AND if this was about Gail, I believe MP would have called the local LE and said, "The neighbor has something that could be helpful to finding Gail, could you please go speak with her about the DVR she picked up, perhaps there is something on it that you can use to help find Gail." Nopers, that isn't what happened...
So, deductive reasoning and gut tells me that this was on "my behalf" (as in MP's) and not at all on Gail's behalf. If it was on Gail's behalf, I believe that the use of LE would have been the ticket. See what I mean? MP has a college degree -- he knows how LE can work on someone's behalf, then again maybe he didn't want to call the LE who gave his wife numbers for a safe house and maybe he didn't want to call the Alabama LE because they were probably in communication with his local LE? Why send a PI to strong arm a neighbor into giving him something, when LE could have done that by subpoena in an investigation? oh my!
As far as something taking Gail's peace away... She was known to love the Lake house, she texted her friend about something "happy" (as in let's go to a happy place or some such), her friend said she left abruptly on the last day she was seen "from the Lake house" and without explanation to the person with whom she had plans (that neighbor), and then later she was seen leaving her neighborhood in Signal Mountain while not acknowledging another neighbor/friend... Gail also spoke with her sister that very morning, or if there is confusion about the time of that call with her sister -- then later on that day, and she was scared and thought someone was following her.
None of the above sounds like a woman who hadn't lost her peace somehow, and then left the place that meant peace to her as a result. Call it opinion, but I don't abruptly leave a place I drove 4 hours intending to stay, make "happy" plans with a friend while I'm there, and then just abruptly head out without word to my friend before or on the long drive of heading out, and later say "I'm scared" to my sister AND diss my friend at the other end when they try to get my attention as I am driving by. Nopers...
I guess I cannot bend about the "on my behalf" or something taking Gail's peace away, causing her to leave the Lake property. I suppose we can call it opinion... I suppose I could also be of the opinion that Gail was at peace in leaving her DL, her children, all of her homes etc... I am not though
Why do you think Gail left the Lake home?
