TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren, 44, Signal Mountain, 30 April 2011 - #6

[Irish_Eyes]

It seems to me that he is controlling and arrogant: "LE doesn't tell me what to do, I tell them what they can do" type of attitude. I could be wrong.

I don't see that anyone is slamming AD. Raising interesting and pertinent questions, but not slamming. The only person who has been slammed is Matt,

Really? And what about Gail? MP led that charge himself. He asked for divorce and claimed she was paranoid and delusional....he certainly didn't mention that his own infidelities might be the actual cause of the breakdown of the marriage. Nope, it was all crazy Gail's fault. Granted, I'm sure a lot of divorce filings play out much the same way. But usually the other spouse is available to defend themselves.

 

[ThoughtFox]

I don't see that anyone is slamming AD. Raising interesting and pertinent questions, but not slamming. The only person who has been slammed is Matt, and he has been very much slammed, even though there is no evidence connecting him to the disappearance. He is the husband and hasn't reacted like the public wants so he has pretty much been convicted in the court of public opinion.

Look, he's just not an admirable guy. I realize maybe he can't help it.

 

[jd3223]

I haven't posted in a while but have been following along.

Off topic but I vote Pearl* to be a WS Moderator! Her posts are informative, well thought out, and tactful.

As a mountain resident I appreciate your posts.

 

[Pearl*]

I haven't posted in a while but have been following along.

Off topic but I vote Pearl* to be a WS Moderator! Her posts are informative, well thought out, and tactful.

As a mountain resident I appreciate your posts.

Wow! What a compliment! I'm most satisfied with all the mods we have though and don't envy them. Their jobs are quite demanding, reading through all the stuff we write to provoke them. :argue:

 

[Pearl*]

Look, he's just not an admirable guy. I realize maybe he can't help it.

:floorlaugh:

 

[believe09]

It just burns me how people can sit here and slam Arlene like this. She obviously cares about her friend and what happened to her friend. Apparently they are close enough friends that Gail confined in her so what is the discussion about this best friends? It makes no sense. I wish I had a friend like Arlene and we ought to be grateful that she has spoken out on Gail's behalf or we would know nothing.

BBM-we would know nothing...about the inside of the investigation? I am not sure what you mean.

Who is slamming Arlene? We dont allow for that here. We allow for speculation and dialog, but no bashing. Arlene is not being bashed. People are questioning her motives for going in front of the media with details that are very personal to Gail, and information that appears to be from inside of the investigation. These are fair questions.

To confused's point, Matt was not the one passing pills across a counter. But, I would think that maintaining his licensing and his job would be difficult if there was any evidence of substance issues.

It seems clear to me that there was a high probability evidence would be found in the house of something, hence the attempt at limiting the search. I dont know if it applies at all to Gail-the whole situation at this point is mind blowing.

How is LE going to pull this all together? I mean there have been so many hands in the evidence and so many who have taken to the airways with their stories...it is so confusing.

 

[believe09]

The 48 hours is something he is not going to be able to get around given his follow up claims. Who leaves a sick, delusional woman to drive away and twist in the wind? It makes no sense. Who allows the same woman to have her children while in the throws of her delusion?

I mean really. He painted himself into his own corner, regardless of his true motives. IMO.

Her status has still not been changed to Endangered Missing, is that correct? That is the common status for those who may be in distress for whatever reason, including mental illness.

 

[confused]

I don't see that anyone is slamming AD. Raising interesting and pertinent questions, but not slamming. The only person who has been slammed is Matt,

Really? And what about Gail? MP led that charge himself. He asked for divorce and claimed she was paranoid and delusional....he certainly didn't mention that his own infidelities might be the actual cause of the breakdown of the marriage. Nope, it was all crazy Gail's fault. Granted, I'm sure a lot of divorce filings play out much the same way. But usually the other spouse is available to defend themselves.

I will need to go back and check the facts, but I don't think Matt claimed "crazy Gail (your words)" was at fault. He did mention her paranoid and delusional behavior in filings for RO and seperation. I would think that Matt would have wanted the divorce to proceed without all this coming out...and if Gail had not disappeared for whatever reason, they could have divorced like most couples do and none of us would have even known. If Matt is nearly as selfish and uncaring as depicted here, Gail disappearing would be the last thing he would have wanted-it has opened up his life to everyone, everywhere and focused the spotlight on him and any mistakes he has or will make.

So, go ahead and bring out the lynch mobs, but I have wondered a time or two during this whole thing if Gail (as smart as she is, and as angry as she had to have been) maybe did leave on purpose...to put him in a bad spot and bring out all that was going on. Sure seems like she was planning things. Maybe she planned to put him through heck for a while then reappear with papers in hand. I am sure it has been done before, the only glitch here is that she hasn't reappeared-did a real accident occur? Back to square one.

Anyway, thinking out loud...

 

[believe09]

Gail orchestrating her disappearance to make it look like Matt had done something to her-well not only would that take a whole lot of energy, it would mean that her love for her children was non existent.

So the question becomes whether or not anyone who knows her on either side of the fence would believe that Gail would walk away from her children simply to make their father look bad?

I am sceptical but never say never.

 

[JBean]

I will need to go back and check the facts, but I don't think Matt claimed "crazy Gail (your words)" was at fault. He did mention her paranoid and delusional behavior in filings for RO and seperation. I would think that Matt would have wanted the divorce to proceed without all this coming out...and if Gail had not disappeared for whatever reason, they could have divorced like most couples do and none of us would have even known. If Matt is nearly as selfish and uncaring as depicted here, Gail disappearing would be the last thing he would have wanted-it has opened up his life to everyone, everywhere and focused the spotlight on him and any mistakes he has or will make.

So, go ahead and bring out the lynch mobs, but I have wondered a time or two during this whole thing if Gail (as smart as she is, and as angry as she had to have been) maybe did leave on purpose...to put him in a bad spot and bring out all that was going on. Sure seems like she was planning things. Maybe she planned to put him through heck for a while then reappear with papers in hand. I am sure it has been done before, the only glitch here is that she hasn't reappeared-did a real accident occur? Back to square one.

Anyway, thinking out loud...

That's a pretty big glitch, not coming back and all.

No lynch mob here. I think this may have crossed several people's minds early on and all possibilities are on the table.
But at this point in the program, it is the kids she would be hurting more than anything and from what we have come to know about Gail, it just doesn't fit. If she had an accident then I think the jeep would be found by now. If she hid it somewhere it would be revealed.

Personally I continue to try and work every angle that excludes Matt and/or someone involved with Matt in some capacity.

But, his odd behavior does make it increasingly difficult. But my mind is open and all theories welcome.

 

[confused]

Gail orchestrating her disappearance to make it look like Matt had done something to her-well not only would that take a whole lot of energy, it would mean that her love for her children was non existent.

So the question becomes whether or not anyone who knows her on either side of the fence would believe that Gail would walk away from her children simply to make their father look bad?

I am sceptical but never say never.

I would respectfully disagree that doing that would mean non-existant love... She definately had the energy, all the running around she did evidenced that. Maybe she thought if she could make him squirm enough, bring out enough bad, she could claim that she left for justified reasons and get full custody of the kids in the divorce. She didn't really have to worry about the kids, she knew that they would be taken care of, his mom is there for them, and like it or not, he seems to be a fairly involved father.

I didn't really mean that she did it to make him look bad, but as insurance that she would get a good settlement, kids, whatever in the divorce I mean seriously look at how most people here feel about him. Even if she didn't plan it, she suceeded brilliantly. Not saying that it's what happened, but just thinking of new ideas.

 

[Pearl*]

I would respectfully disagree that doing that would mean non-existant love... She definately had the energy, all the running around she did evidenced that. Maybe she thought if she could make him squirm enough, bring out enough bad, she could claim that she left for justified reasons and get full custody of the kids in the divorce. She didn't really have to worry about the kids, she knew that they would be taken care of, his mom is there for them, and like it or not, he seems to be a fairly involved father.

I've read your post three times, and I'm having a lot of trouble understanding how that describes anything but non-existent love.

There is no substitute for a mother's love, and I have no doubt the children are going through tremendous pain right now, wondering what happened to their mother. If she wouldn't be worried about them, thinking their father's love and grandmother's love would substitute for the love and care of their mother, then in my opinion she would not love them at all.

Are you suggesting this scenario would indicate otherwise?

 

[fedfan4life]

I will need to go back and check the facts, but I don't think Matt claimed "crazy Gail (your words)" was at fault. He did mention her paranoid and delusional behavior in filings for RO and seperation. I would think that Matt would have wanted the divorce to proceed without all this coming out...and if Gail had not disappeared for whatever reason, they could have divorced like most couples do and none of us would have even known. If Matt is nearly as selfish and uncaring as depicted here, Gail disappearing would be the last thing he would have wanted-it has opened up his life to everyone, everywhere and focused the spotlight on him and any mistakes he has or will make.

So, go ahead and bring out the lynch mobs, but I have wondered a time or two during this whole thing if Gail (as smart as she is, and as angry as she had to have been) maybe did leave on purpose...to put him in a bad spot and bring out all that was going on. Sure seems like she was planning things. Maybe she planned to put him through heck for a while then reappear with papers in hand. I am sure it has been done before, the only glitch here is that she hasn't reappeared-did a real accident occur? Back to square one.

Anyway, thinking out loud...

Man, you REALLY like this guy. From an outsider's perspective, he looks like a real winner, I have to say.

But, the thought that this loving mother would put her children and family through this just to 'put him in a bad spot' is just a bit outlandish.

Personally, I have been trying to be open-minded about Mr. Palmgren. I mean, just because someone is a <modsnip>mean he's capable of anything sinister. But, day-by-day, things are reported that chip away @ what little amount of optimistic thoughts which remain.

And, I don't mean to be unkind, but speculation like you've posted above makes me dislike this man all the more. It would be one thing if you didn't know him, because I would have some confidence that you were being fair and balanced. But, alas, that is not the impression that is being portrayed...

 

[Pearl*]

I mean, just because someone is a <modsnip name calling> doesn't mean he's capable of anything sinister.

:floorlaugh:

See, jd3223? Mods have to edit. No fun. I'd rather laugh.

 

[Irish_Eyes]

If Matt is nearly as selfish and uncaring as depicted here, Gail disappearing would be the last thing he would have wanted-it has opened up his life to everyone, everywhere and focused the spotlight on him and any mistakes he has or will make. ...[/quote]

That's a completely logical argument. It's a question that stumps me every time I hear of a case where a husband harms his wife or ex-wife. Scott Peterson, Yazeed Essa, Alan Blackthorne, etc., etc., etc. In every case, they had to realize that at least some initial suspicion would be cast upon them by LE, as it's SOP to look at family members first. I can only assume that in each case, they were just so convinced of their own superiority, that they never allowed themselves to believe they would face any consequences. Or they were so blinded by a simmering hatred that they didn't stop and weigh logical concerns. I agree with you it makes no sense, but we constantly see cases here on WS where a woman is missing or killed and weeks or months later her husband/boyfriend/ex-husband is charged. So I think that's where you see the skepticism coming from. What you say makes sense, but if everyone thought like that, half the cases we see on here wouldn't exist.

 

[fedfan4life]

Very well said, Irish Eyes...

 

[glorias]

As for the brother, I believe from looking him up on the net, that he died about 2 years ago.

The brother in Florida was Kevin Nowacki, who has been quoted in some media articles about the case. He's listed as living in Palm Springs. He's not dead.

http://www.wrcbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=14601268

If there is another brother, I hope someone will let me know.

Edit: I see someone else already brought up the two brothers. Sorry for repeating info, I apparently skipped a page when catching up tonight and didn't realize it.

 

[glorias]

snipped...

I didn't really mean that she did it to make him look bad, but as insurance that she would get a good settlement, kids, whatever in the divorce I mean seriously look at how most people here feel about him. Even if she didn't plan it, she suceeded brilliantly.

I'm shocked that leaving children, family, and friends worrying and distraught for nearly 2 months would be anyone's idea of "brilliant success."

If Gail had all the info it appears she had, i.e. hotel receipts and receipts for withdrawals and other stuff Arlene has mentioned, she didn't need to disappear for several weeks without any contact with her family to make Matt look bad. In fact, if she comes back and says it was all a ruse, it makes HER look bad, not him.

 

[Pearl*]

That's a completely logical argument. It's a question that stumps me every time I hear of a case where a husband harms his wife or ex-wife. Scott Peterson, Yazeed Essa, Alan Blackthorne, etc., etc., etc. In every case, they had to realize that at least some initial suspicion would be cast upon them by LE, as it's SOP to look at family members first. I can only assume that in each case, they were just so convinced of their own superiority, that they never allowed themselves to believe they would face any consequences. Or they were so blinded by a simmering hatred that they didn't stop and weigh logical concerns. I agree with you it makes no sense, but we constantly see cases here on WS where a woman is missing or killed and weeks or months later her husband/boyfriend/ex-husband is charged. So I think that's where you see the skepticism coming from. What you say makes sense, but if everyone thought like that, half the cases we see on here wouldn't exist.

In a word, arrogance. They think they won't get caught and that if they do get caught, they can get out of it. I completely agree with you.

These guys are "wired" differently from the rest of us. They don't think like most of us do.

Arrogance moves them to do it, and arrogance gets them caught, because they are overly confident and make a mistake because they don't think about being careful.

 

[believe09]

I would respectfully disagree that doing that would mean non-existant love... She definately had the energy, all the running around she did evidenced that. Maybe she thought if she could make him squirm enough, bring out enough bad, she could claim that she left for justified reasons and get full custody of the kids in the divorce. She didn't really have to worry about the kids, she knew that they would be taken care of, his mom is there for them, and like it or not, he seems to be a fairly involved father.

I didn't really mean that she did it to make him look bad, but as insurance that she would get a good settlement, kids, whatever in the divorce I mean seriously look at how most people here feel about him. Even if she didn't plan it, she suceeded brilliantly. Not saying that it's what happened, but just thinking of new ideas.

So she would inflict such mental and emotional cruelty on her children to prove a point or to obtain custody of them after showing what a bad person he is?

I am listening, but I cannot wrap my mind around it. No matter how loving Matt's mother is to her grandchildren, she cannot take the place of their mother. Their mother who went poof. That is a wound that no amount of caring from someone who is not their bio parent will never ever fill imo.