TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren, 44, Signal Mountain, 30 April 2011 - #7

[believe09]

No, not the same at all.

You see, at first Matt let LE do a walk through the house. In an initial walk through, LE is not allowed to even open a drawer or move a chair. Everything they cannot see, like in a drawer or under a bed, is not subject for their search. ONLY what is in PLAIN SITE as they pass through a room.

IMHO, and I know others here disagree with me, there was enough probable cause in the VERY BEGINNING to warrant a SW. But this LE didn't do that, they waited almost two months.

Then, when LE did say they wanted a search, the spouse had his CRIMINAL defense attorney draw up the SPOUSE'S TERMS, before LE could do the search. And then, the spouse had his OWN PI accompany LE.

Sorry, suspect. IMHO. NOT to mention the fact that there's witnesses who are willing to testify under oath the the PI took out BOXES AND BOXES of miscellaneous stuff. Which was kinda' verified when it was revealed LE didn't find any computers and the spouse's CRIMINAL def attorney told the MEDIA that he had the computer and had pulled the harddrive.

From what I understand, LE has AD's phone #. They might try calling her. That might work wonders. :slap:

JMHO
fran

BBM fran-we know at a minimum, according to AD, that they both called and texted her.

 

[Emeralgem]

We have given a lot of latitude on the threads here regarding discussing MP and his actions, and what we think they mean. LE has not named a POI. It is only fair to explore the actions of others, including AD, and what those actions might mean. In the interest of balance.

So is AD stating, via Sleuthy, that HCSO is not to be trusted and that SMPD is also not to be trusted? Where is the evidence that they are not to be trusted? We dont bash LE here, but if there is verifiable evidence that HCSO and SMPD are incapable of performing an impartial investigation, I would be interested to read about it.

Does anyone know if AD has been offered and has taken a LDT? Can anyone point to anything that shows AD has fully cooperated with LE? I am also curious simply because on the other side of the coin, we have picked MP apart for cooperating so late into the investigation...assuming that he didnt cooperate while the case was initially unfolding.

I'm not bashing LE however, I've been around long enough to know LE does cover their rear ends when they haven't/aren't performing up to par...Personally, I am interested in knowing WHY SMPD viewed her as just having left on her own, apparently no big deal, when we now know Gail asked her sister to call SMPD and requested SMPD meet her at her residence when she arrived on the 30th...Also, SMPD knew there were problems in that household...
I'm also concerned as to WHY Mike Mathis had to be on the scene when LE searched the premises of both MP and his mother's residence...WHY LE waited for almost two months to search the residence... Personally, I believe we just may have a conflict of interest going on..JMHO

 

[Oriah]

I don't think BCBS of TN is a franchise. It is an independent not for profit company using the Blue Cross-Blue Shield name. It is not related to the other Blue Cross Blue Shield companies across the US. I don't understand what you mean about the company not being "at will". The at will law in TN, as I understand, applies to all employees in TN. It is set up in this state to protect the employer above the employee regarding termination of employment. My prediction is we will hear little more about a wrongful termination lawsuit in this case. May be a red herring. In this case, in this state, useless waste of time to try. If his attorney is as good as some say, he knows this. :twocents:

Hi Melodie, I didn't mean a literal franchise. Just a comparison to parent companies, and the standards they have to set for their independent 'companies.'

I believe an employee who has been terminated (even in an 'at will' state) has the right to file wrongful termination. Might not go anywhere, but that would depend on cause, I would think.

I don't know.
I'll ask over in the attorney thread.

 

[BeanE]

Questions, questions, questions. Ugh.

BBM: I agree, believe09. I'd be interested to find verifiable evidence of this as well. But I wouldn't think that would be possible, given the nature of LE- based investigations? How could verification of this be had during an open investigation?

I guess that's why I am wondering so much about the specific PI's involved- because they are not bound to the same code that LE is.

Why so much investigation into legal/financial issues, and not into locating Gail, at this point? Gail would be the person who could best answer these questions.

I have no idea as to who cooperated with whom, or at what point in this investigation. But the time frame of Gail hiring her PI (for a singular purpose) and Matt hiring his PI (for a singular purpose) does not mesh up for me. Does that make any sense?

Of course, we have no idea what LEA's are involved here- but I would think both PI's would have already cooperated with whatever LEA they were asked to cooperate with- as would all other parties involved, such as friends and family. Right?

If anyone did not comply, it does give pause for thought. :waitasec:

BBM.

Oriah, I am so confused. What legal/financial issues? (I'm assuming you're talking about Matt's PI, since Gail's PI is likely no longer working on this case.)

 

[believe09]

Well, Matt's attorney wrote the terms of the search. Perhaps MM was representing Matt's interests if his attorney could not be present. I have seen that happen in other cases, so it wouldnt surprise me if that was the case here.

 

[BeanE]

No, not the same at all.

You see, at first Matt let LE do a walk through the house.

What? When? Where did this come from?

 

[BeanE]

As for AD-I hear a lot from her regarding her statements of affection for her friend. But I still see a disconnect between her statements and her behavior. So the question is why?

That's exactly what I've been feeling recently. This makes me very uncomfortable:

J: Alright. Any last words you'd like to throw out there, Arlene?

A: I just want closure, and it's been dragging on too long, and I wish the police would have done their job in the beginning instead of ignored everything.

J: Will you at this point cooperate with Signal Mountain police, Hamilton County Sheriff's Department, will you cooperate with authorities, maybe to end and to get some closure?

A: If it's on my terms.


https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1I9EShqx08jSRHdlHg0oVNL7UdQTdCyWGGc0iYCef8jk&pli=1

 

[believe09]

Thanks, BeanE. She sounds just like MP. To be blunt.

 

[BeanE]

HCSO and SMPD are respected jurisdictions. If there is malfeasance on their part, or influence peddling, I would think that this would be excellent food for discussion with the amount of local media involved in this case.

<snip to point>

If she feels that the LE handling the case is working in cahoots with MP, I would like to get some evidence of that, that's all.

BBM. I'd like evidence that the attorneys, PI, SMPD, HCSO, and Jammer the radio jock are all colluding with Matt to cover up murdering Gail.

 

[Pearl*]

J: Will you at this point cooperate with Signal Mountain police, Hamilton County Sheriff's Department, will you cooperate with authorities, maybe to end and to get some closure?

A: If it's on my terms.

Ouch....

 

[BeanE]

I'm not bashing LE however, I've been around long enough to know LE does cover their rear ends when they haven't/aren't performing up to par...Personally, I am interested in knowing WHY SMPD viewed her as just having left on her own, apparently no big deal, when we now know Gail asked her sister to call SMPD and requested SMPD meet her at her residence when she arrived on the 30th...Also, SMPD knew there were problems in that household...
I'm also concerned as to WHY Mike Mathis had to be on the scene when LE searched the premises of both MP and his mother's residence...WHY LE waited for almost two months to search the residence... Personally, I believe we just may have a conflict of interest going on..JMHO

BBM. And we know that subsequently LE and Gail talked, and we know that LE has never revealed what they talked about.

Perhaps Gail told LE in that phone call that she was leaving.

I have noodled on that, and it would make a lot of things make sense.

 

[Oriah]

BBM.

Oriah, I am so confused. What legal/financial issues? (I'm assuming you're talking about Matt's PI, since Gail's PI is likely no longer working on this case.)

Sorry for the confusion!

I have several trains of thought going on here.

The first is why did both Gail and Matt hire PI's at the specific time they each did? One conclusion seems like it would be that Gail hired her PI to gather evidence used in a family court-such as divorce. Or possibly to also gather evidence that might be used in a criminal court (such as fraud) - or one investigation might support the other.

The second thought comes from the timing of Gail's disappearance.

If I hired a PI to investigate something my spouse might be doing that would be grounds for either divorce- or other charges- and then I disappeared... I would hope the PI that I hired would continue working for me.

If I hired a PI to investigate the disappearence of my spouse- I would have already exhausted all LEA's available resources, and would turn to alternate resources. But I would hope those alternate resources would focus on safe recovery or rescue... because I would be worried about an accident or other misfortune.

Does that make any sense? Shoot, I am no more articulate now than I was earlier. Sorry- tired!

 

[fran]

BBM fran-we know at a minimum, according to AD, that they both called and texted her.

But they didn't say they wanted her to come in and talk to them. They just barked orders, from what I understand.

IF LE wants to talk to AD, all they have to do is call the local LE, have them make arrangements for a sit down with AD and go to Alabama and talk to her. Appears they haven't done that, or at the least, no one's reporting it.

I think around here somewhere, I saw or heard that AD is in the process of having copies made of the harddrive at her local PD. So, her local agency has talked to her, somewhat.

I heard AD say, in her first Jammer interview I believe, that she wasn't willing to give the ORIGINAL harddrive to LE because she feared it would disappear. But at the same time, she said she had PROMISED Gail that she wouldn't give it to anyone but Gail herself. When LE initially refused to even get involved with the harddrive, is most likely when AD decided she couldn't trust anyone.

FWIW and IMHO, I THINK AD is untrusting of the local TN LE, because the PI working for Matt, and who has taken belongings out of the TWO residences prior to LE doing a thorough search, the PI worked for the local LE in Tn.

AD's mistrust may be misplaced, but I completely understand her hesitation.

At least she's offering to have LE make a copy of the harddrives. That's more than MP's attorney offered. With regard to the family's home computer, he said he'd let 'em know if there's anything that will assist in locating GP. OH, and he didn't say that to LE that I know of, he said it to a reporter.

JMHO
fran

 

[believe09]

Personally I think that is a tough one, Oriah. He likely had a retainer and then accumulated billable hours. I am sure, or I assume, he turned over anything he had to LE. Would you search and accumulate a big bill for your client, or would you turn it over to LE to handle?

 

[believe09]

But they didn't say they wanted her to come in and talk to them. They just barked orders, from what I understand.

IF LE wants to talk to AD, all they have to do is call the local LE, have them make arrangements for a sit down with AD and go to Alabama and talk to her. Appears they haven't done that, or at the least, no one's reporting it.

I think around here somewhere, I saw or heard that AD is in the process of having copies made of the harddrive at her local PD. So, her local agency has talked to her, somewhat.

I heard AD say, in her first Jammer interview I believe, that she wasn't willing to give the ORIGINAL harddrive to LE because she feared it would disappear. But at the same time, she said she had PROMISED Gail that she wouldn't give it to anyone but Gail herself. When LE initially refused to even get involved with the harddrive, is most likely when AD decided she couldn't trust anyone.

FWIW and IMHO, I THINK AD is untrusting of the local TN LE, because the PI working for Matt, and who has taken belongings out of the TWO residences prior to LE doing a thorough search, the PI worked for the local LE in Tn.

AD's mistrust may be misplaced, but I completely understand her hesitation.

At least she's offering to have LE make a copy of the harddrives. That's more than MP's attorney offered. With regard to the family's home computer, he said he'd let 'em know if there's anything that will assist in locating GP. OH, and he didn't say that to LE that I know of, he said it to a reporter.

JMHO
fran

I get your point, but I think what I bolded is the key here. We dont know what LE has asked AD for and to do because we only have one side. LE doesnt isnt going to get into a media tit for tat with a material witness. They can compel her to turn over the original. They can compel her to appear unless she has lawyered up. If they have not compelled her to appear, I would think that a.) what she has to say is not important to them or b.) she has lawyered up.

She has been free with information to the general public-has she lawyered up regarding LE?

 

[Oriah]

Well, Matt's attorney wrote the terms of the search. Perhaps MM was representing Matt's interests if his attorney could not be present. I have seen that happen in other cases, so it wouldnt surprise me if that was the case here.

I am still hung up on this, believe09.

I asked in the attorney thread what the ramifications might be in court, should evidence be entered under a 'search' conducted under an attorney-drafted seach- vs a LE/court ordered SW.

I can certainly see (and have seen) searches conducted with an attorney(s) present.

But, it seems to me that the likelihood of any evidence recovered in an attorney written agreement (as opposed to simply having an attorney present during a search of private property) would be torn to pieces in court.

Kwim?

 

[believe09]

I get your point. It is sort of like the reverse in my mind...LE has a warrant for a search that covers XYZ. They find the weapon covered in blood in the ceiling fan, but the ceiling fan was not included in the search document. Someone has to be there to make sure the agreed upon terms are enforced....and IIRC the weapon would be thrown out by a judge if seized any way.

At least on Law and Order it would be.

 

[MacKat]

I am glad that DNA samples were provided, in spite of Hoss' allusion to that being halted by Gail's siblings court action.

I also like the theory that Gail may have been on to the possibility that her husband was in trouble at work for misuse of work property.

bbm

Gail seemed to be sending/giving a lot of "stuff" to various people for various reasons in the days/weeks before she vanished. Is it possible that Gail met with/spoke with a higher up at BCBS about Matt and TH? She had proof.

And, if this is even remotely true..it could have made for quite the discussion between Gail and Matt. If she had said to him...this is what I did or this is what I am going to do.

 

[believe09]

bbm

Gail seemed to be sending/giving a lot of "stuff" to various people for various reasons in the days/weeks before she vanished. Is it possible that Gail met with/spoke with a higher up at BCBS about Matt and TH? She had proof.

And, if this is even remotely true..it could have made for quite the discussion between Gail and Matt. If she had said to him...this is what I did or this is what I am going to do.

I am happy to take this one step further-she cracked his cell phone, why not any computer he might have had at home? Just speculation.

 

[Melodie]

That's exactly what I've been feeling recently. This makes me very uncomfortable:

J: Alright. Any last words you'd like to throw out there, Arlene?

A: I just want closure, and it's been dragging on too long, and I wish the police would have done their job in the beginning instead of ignored everything.

J: Will you at this point cooperate with Signal Mountain police, Hamilton County Sheriff's Department, will you cooperate with authorities, maybe to end and to get some closure?

A: If it's on my terms.




https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1I9EShqx08jSRHdlHg0oVNL7UdQTdCyWGGc0iYCef8jk&pli=1

:twocents:With all due respect Beane, I think that last statement is incomplete. I listened to that interview and when Jammer asked that question, I believe that Arlene connected it to the DVR, specifically. In other words, he was driving at something and her first statement referred to that. After she said "If it's on my terms", she added something specific about the DVR, saying that she would turn that over, but her "terms" involved giving them a copy of the DVR that was made by her local LE agency that she trusts. She knew that was what he meant. She has talked to LE many times, by the account of many people. She offered them the DVR and other information very early on and they didn't want it. Later, all of a sudden, they want it now and I think she would be foolish to just hand it over without making a copy first and that way everyone can feel secure. I don't believe Arlene has anything to be afraid of regarding being a suspect. I guess it's just typical in these types of cases for people to do that, but in my opinion, that energy is completely misdirected. JMHO