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

[SCSleuther]

Thanks thoughtfox (and BeanE for your earlier post as well) !

<quote snipped for space>

No, this isn't about yesterday. This goes back to the "consent to search" agreement from MP's attorneys on June 18.

Chatt Times Free Press June 18 ~ Palmgren Agrees to Property Searches

...The consent order was drafted by Palmgren's defense attorneys, Lee Davis and Bryan Hoss.

...The agreement is being coordinated through the Hamilton County district attorney's office.

(I enjoy your thoughtful discussion and am just bouncing ideas around...)

I recall (and read thoroughly) the 6/18 agreement and did not find an actual date called out. The last two lines of your quote that I put in blue above are what further lead me to believe the dates were not determined at the time of the 6/18 agreement...

So...(perhaps the date of the search was just determined yesterday...or maybe not...) but the bigger question I have is why "announce" it?? IMO, they've been fairly close to the vest on information, so the only reason I can think of... is a 'tactical' strategy... ('cause surely it cannot be that they are just stoopid...).. of course, unless it was written in the agreement, and I missed it...

 

[Pearl*]

Found website to listen to the talk radio live. AD not on yet, but they just referenced it as coming up.

http://www.wgow.com/article.asp?id=506372

Or...this may be more direct link: http://player.streamtheworld.com/_players/citadel/?sid=5866


I hope the link works.... I got there by a google for WGOW Chattanooga 102.3

ETA: Ok...they just said it would be at 2:30. Laundry time for me.

 

[Jade]

Found website to listen to the talk radio live. AD not on yet, but they just referenced it as coming up.

http://www.wgow.com/article.asp?id=506372

Or...this may be more direct link: http://player.streamtheworld.com/_players/citadel/?sid=5866


I hope the link works.... I got there by a google for WGOW Chattanooga 102.3

Thank you.

Studio web cam is video streaming not audio so guess you pull up both?

http://wgowwebcams.americainter.net/

 

[Sleuthy1]

I have to say, despite what I stated in my post, I have a hard time believing he would actually slash tires, but it seems like an odd coincidence. Maybe Arlene isn't even sure he did it--it seems odd that, as outspoken as she is, this incident didn't surface before now, when it happened two weeks ago. To me that says she won't accuse anyone because she doesn't know for sure who did it, either. It indicates integrity on her part.

I definitely do not think the children are going around slashing tires.

I truly don't believe that anyone here wants him to be guilty of doing anything to Gail. His own behavior and actions are making him out to be a man of poor character. I don't think anyone is saying he's a monster.

In my original post about the "tire" occurrence, I did not state anyone saw who did the it....or who AD suspected may have done it. I only stated the facts, as I knew them to be. No suspect or POI, just how things occurred that day, as per a close neighbor. I didn't mean for this story to end up like the "game" we used to play in the classroom in elementary school. Where the teacher whispers something to the 1st child sitting in the first desk and then the 1st child whispers to the 2nd, and so on UNTIL those whispers reach the last child in the classroom. Then the teacher asks the child "what is it that you have heard?" and the child reveals a phrase that appears to be NOTHING like what the teacher originally whispered into the 1st child's ear.
It seems to me that is what occasionally happens here (and elsewhere). It can happen anywhere there are multiple ppl speaking about certain subjects, those of which all the information is not known to be 100% factual information. Nobody accused anyone of anything. As a matter a fact, I said "you draw you own conclusions, I know I have".

 

[Allusonz]

Maybe I am missing something here as I have not been able to follow this as much as I would of liked of late thus maybe I have missed some things

Why would someone give 20k to a husband that she finds out has been cheating and whom is probably being divorced from? Then subsequently agrees to another 20k under the same conditions but adding a number of additional reports with LE even after finding out money is being withdrawn on a regular basis. Yet during all this time is giving items she considers important to various people and changing PIN numbers on her accounts.

I know how much I am able to do whether it be through my business or personal accounts online but whom truly knows if it is that person on the other end if somehow a party has obtained PIN numbers/passwords etc?

Something is simply not adding up here

 

[confused]

I, like everyone else, would like to see the truth of the matter but it will have to be in due time by correct process if it is going to be revealed in a court of law.

It is a fact that GP dropped off the children in the home where MP could rightly be assumed to be in person at some point in the immediate future.

It is a fact that the P family has moved in order to obtain increasingly higher levels of employment that has led to their current level of living so by disallowing a move would be contrary to GP wishes for maintaining a family lifestyle.

Otherwise she would have just moved out with whatever they could carry and leave him and the “assets” behind.

They own several homes which they travel to frequently so to prohibit moving about freely when it is an established pattern is keeping the children from their routine.

There is no comparison to Josh Powell leaving town as he is not a high level executive with a PHD who had a history of moving for work & may have to move to find a comparable position. It is a comparison that is unnecessarily sensationalist and sets a tone for the over the top accusations.

If the siblings have relevant damning information I hope that it is presented in the proper manner so as to be revealed in a court of law so measures can be taken.

Itemizing a coin collection in the same document as counseling for the children gives the appearance of trivializing the proceedings and takes the impact off of what is now an increasingly tragic situation as more time passes and GP and her jeep are still missing.

All IMO

Excellent thoughts, and posted very well. Thank you for taking the time to think before responding. This is the type of info I come here to see.

 

[confused]

Yes, I think that is interesting too.

I wonder if LE has perhaps begun to use the public interference to their advantage. Announce it to get everybody speculating and gossiping about what might be at those properties, why it's taken so long, why they aren't doing their jobs and haven't from the begnning ... while maybe they're off in a different direction working more discreetly?

IMO if we know for a fact that LE hasn't been searching in this area, it means they have good reason to believe she's not here. They'll let people wear themselves out looking though. Keeps them busy and out of their way for a while.

Reminds me of parenting.

LOL, now that we can agree on!

 

[confused]

Strange choice of words - "he consented to the search."

Is his name on the deed of his mother's home/condo?

Of course it was listed before as one of the properties they were going to search, but it just occurred to me while reading that tweet that his mother would actually be the one consenting, correct?

Don't know about the deed to his mother's home, but I would think she could always give her ok for him to speak on her behalf, and save herself from the cost and need to get an attorney. He already has a good one, so let them handle it.

 

[Sleuthy1]

AD will be interviewed today on Chattanooga Talk Radio WGOW 102.3 at 1:00 P.M.

http://www.wgow.com/article.asp?id=506372
LISTEN LIVE TODAY...NOW

 

[fbx]

Thanks Pearl. I think that post might have been mine, lol.

So does this mean that Gail and Matt do NOT have Verizon cell service? Or just that we don't know?

Gail's missing phone is Sprint. More than this I do not know.

 

[Pearl*]

Today's radio broadcast referred to Carol's sighting of Gail at Big Fork as if it were confirmed. Do we know if this is the case?

 

[Columbo]

In my original post about the "tire" occurrence, I did not state anyone saw who did the it....or who AD suspected may have done it. I only stated the facts, as I knew them to be. No suspect or POI, just how things occurred that day, as per a close neighbor. I didn't mean for this story to end up like the "game" we used to play in the classroom in elementary school. Where the teacher whispers something to the 1st child sitting in the first desk and then the 1st child whispers to the 2nd, and so on UNTIL those whispers reach the last child in the classroom. Then the teacher asks the child "what is it that you have heard?" and the child reveals a phrase that appears to be NOTHING like what the teacher originally whispered into the 1st child's ear.
It seems to me that is what occasionally happens here (and elsewhere). It can happen anywhere there are multiple ppl speaking about certain subjects, those of which all the information is not known to be 100% factual information. Nobody accused anyone of anything. As a matter a fact, I said "you draw you own conclusions, I know I have".

I know what you mean about sometimes it's like that "telephone" game from elementary school, but not in this case. If you follow the post back, you will see what I mean. I really did understand everything you said in your post. I know you said "draw your own conclusions" which I did in my post that confused was responding to, and I was responding to that (her response).

 

[happy409]

Today's radio broadcast referred to Carol's sighting of Gail at Big Fork as if it were confirmed. Do we know if this is the case?

I don't believe so, I recall Jammer just read from an MSM article. It was interesting that AD when asked, she stated she was not there at Big Fork (and had an alibi) and when asked by Jammer if she may know who it may have been, AD guessed TH. It appears that was expected and Jammer in previously speaking to Davis retrieved information that TH had an alibi (at a softball tournament) in MS that same time. AD stated she believed the tournament was several weeks afterward, and Jammer stated there could have been one that weekend too....so AD just dissented not knowing for sure where TH was during that time.

Interesting...

 

[Pearl*]

I don't believe so, I recall Jammer just read from an MSM article. It was interesting that AD when asked, she stated she was not there at Big Fork (and had an alibi) and when asked by Jammer if she may know who it may have been, AD guessed TH. It appears that was expected and Jammer in previously speaking to Davis retrieved information that TH had an alibi (at a softball tournament) in MS that same time. AD stated she believed the tournament was several weeks afterward, and Jammer stated there could have been one that weekend too....so AD just dissented not knowing for sure where TH was during that time.

Interesting...

Jammer's demeanor seemed to change completely in the 2nd half IMO. He began playing a "game" of Gotcha with AD, which I found unfair to her.

And his statement (supposedly information from Lee Davis this morning) that Gail was seeing a psychologist.... He made a big deal out of that, as if it proved mental instability. I can't even guess how many perfectly sane people I know who go or have gone to talk with a professional during difficult times in their lives. Typically, these professionals are psychologists who provide counseling services. Personally, I think that is a very "sane" choice, especially if insurance covers it.

So, now the children are supposedly in counseling too. Does that indicate they are mentally unstable? I think not.

 

[Sleuthy1]

Today's radio broadcast referred to Carol's sighting of Gail at Big Fork as if it were confirmed. Do we know if this is the case?

:twocents:I have never really put much stock in the "reports" in MSM about this alleged sighting, especially since...IMO there has NEVER been any official police report filed with SMPD or HCSO with regard to this alleged witness's alleged sighting. It was reported by MSM x2, I believe, and in the first MSM article/TV report...the witness ID'd herself (full name)....in the 2nd article followup....the alleged witness to the "trails sightings x3) on Saturday late afternoon...now decided to have her name retracted from the 2nd article and any future articles. Seems like that person(witness) has had nothing further to offer. I cannot help but wonder...where is the police report? She (CC) claimed to be a witness in an ongoing Missing Person's case, yet no official report was ever filed. If I am mistaken, I will be the first to apologize here, but I for one would like to see the report. Is there a report?:twocents: If there is no report, then WHY NOT? Did the HCSO investigators make out their own report of this sighting and eye witness's statement upon them requesting CC take them to the trails(as reported in MSM)where CC allegedly saw the Jeep with GP and a female passenger X3 on the trails the early evening of April 30th 2011, between the hours of 4:30 pm & 6:30 pm EST?(as reported in MSM)? :twocents:
http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_203258.asp

 

[Sleuthy1]

Yes, I think that is interesting too.

I wonder if LE has perhaps begun to use the public interference to their advantage. Announce it to get everybody speculating and gossiping about what might be at those properties, why it's taken so long, why they aren't doing their jobs and haven't from the begnning ... while maybe they're off in a different direction working more discreetly?

IMO if we know for a fact that LE hasn't been searching in this area, it means they have good reason to believe she's not here. They'll let people wear themselves out looking though. Keeps them busy and out of their way for a while.

Reminds me of parenting.

:twocents:I am sure it would not be the first time any PD had thrown false information(leads) out there to the general public, to throw ppl off the track of what is actually occurring. I am sure it is a tactic used by many to point ppl in a different direction, so they just get lost (in the wrong direction) for awhile...and let the PD do their own investigating....w/o being second guessed by many....at least for awhile until those ppl being fed "bogus" leads, catch on to them...JMOHO of course...Not saying this is happening here....but....stranger things have happened...and nothing is impossible in this scenario....just saying:twocents:

 

[happy409]

Jammer's demeanor seemed to change completely in the 2nd half IMO. He began playing a "game" of Gotcha with AD, which I found unfair to her.
And his statement (supposedly information from Lee Davis this morning) that Gail was seeing a psychologist.... He made a big deal out of that, as if it proved mental instability. I can't even guess how many perfectly sane people I know who go or have gone to talk with a professional during difficult times in their lives. Typically, these professionals are psychologists who provide counseling services. Personally, I think that is a very "sane" choice, especially if insurance covers it.

So, now the children are supposedly in counseling too. Does that indicate they are mentally unstable? I think not.

His demeanor did change and I felt AD was put in a position to defend herself, but did handle it well. Trying to whittle away the best friend scenario certainly could have come from other parties previously spoken to that morning as well. Remember, AD and Matt didn't have much of a relationship, but that doesn't mean her and Gail had less of one, JMHO!

Was it a matter of who got to whom first?? Who really wants AD discredited the most? Is this a pattern? Hmmm.....JMHO

 

[Pearl*]

His demeanor did change and I felt AD was put in a position to defend herself, but did handle it well. Trying to whittle away the best friend scenario certainly could have come from other parties previously spoken to that morning as well. Remember, AD and Matt didn't have much of a relationship, but that doesn't mean her and Gail had less of one, JMHO!

Was it a matter of who got to whom first?? Who really wants AD discredited the most? Is this a pattern? Hmmm.....JMHO

[bbm]

Yes, I really thought she did a great job. If she was not put on notice that he would be "playing lawyer" with her, however, it was an ambush IMO.

Several pieces of information came out there, which made sense to me, although I know we cannot necessarily qualify all her statements as "fact." Jammer really took her to task to explain why Gail would have taken the $17,000 in order to prepared for a possible choking off of funds while waiting for a court hearing, insisting repeatedly that no judge would allow that to happen....

He obviously doesn't know his local court system very well. It happens all the time. AD was right on target; it takes time to get a hearing, and just like what we were discussing yesterday, Matt can now have free rein with all the funds and assets pending a Court Order restricting him. I wonder how long that will take? If it happens at all.... The opposite is true as well. And, after all.... how well did the Court do yesterday, protecting funds for the children's benefit?

Spouses play "keep away" all the time with funds, pending a hearing ordering them to provide. Then, all sorts of games can happen for them to continue to control funds. Frequently, Courts take all too long to intervene, especially if he (usually the husband) can present a halfway decent argument that needs aren't so dire and he's short of funds. Having a nest egg is VERY wise.

Why $17,000? AD said Gail had calculated how much money would be needed for expenses for a given period of time. If she carefully itemized this, so that she could show the judge her intents were pure, it would be perfectly reasonable for the figure not to be a nice round $20,000, for example.

JMO, based on what I've observed locally in a variety of cases over the years.

These preparations do not sound like tactics of a mentally unstable woman to me.

As an aside, I think it was interesting that Jammer said MP's lawyer portrayed him (in their phone conversation today) as not as bright as Gail. Where is that argument going, anyway?

 

[BeanE]

:twocents:I have never really put much stock in the "reports" in MSM about this alleged sighting, especially since...IMO there has NEVER been any official police report filed with SMPD or HCSO with regard to this alleged witness's alleged sighting. It was reported by MSM x2, I believe, and in the first MSM article/TV report...the witness ID'd herself (full name)....in the 2nd article followup....the alleged witness to the "trails sightings x3) on Saturday late afternoon...now decided to have her name retracted from the 2nd article and any future articles. Seems like that person(witness) has had nothing further to offer. I cannot help but wonder...where is the police report? She (CC) claimed to be a witness in an ongoing Missing Person's case, yet no official report was ever filed. If I am mistaken, I will be the first to apologize here, but I for one would like to see the report. Is there a report?:twocents: If there is no report, then WHY NOT? Did the HCSO investigators make out their own report of this sighting and eye witness's statement upon them requesting CC take them to the trails(as reported in MSM)where CC allegedly saw the Jeep with GP and a female passenger X3 on the trails the early evening of April 30th 2011, between the hours of 4:30 pm & 6:30 pm EST?(as reported in MSM)? :twocents:
http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_203258.asp

It would be logged as a tip, wouldn't it? On a tip sheet? Rather than a police report filled out?

 

[glorias]

snipped...

I cannot help but wonder...where is the police report? She (CC) claimed to be a witness in an ongoing Missing Person's case, yet no official report was ever filed. If I am mistaken, I will be the first to apologize here, but I for one would like to see the report. Is there a report?:twocents: If there is no report, then WHY NOT? Did the HCSO investigators make out their own report of this sighting and eye witness's statement upon them requesting CC take them to the trails(as reported in MSM)where CC allegedly saw the Jeep with GP and a female passenger X3 on the trails the early evening of April 30th 2011, between the hours of 4:30 pm & 6:30 pm EST?(as reported in MSM)?

Yeah, C said she did a phone interview and also went out with them to the trails. So you're saying SMPD has no report but HCSO might? Or that neither have a report?

Edited to add that I should ask if you mean they don't even have any record of C reporting the sighting at all, either in official report or just notes?