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

[Oriah]

Agreed. So at the minimum he had not retained family law attorneys, apparently, prior to that date. Apparently, neither had Gail because no one has stepped forward confirming that. At least in public.

I agree. So then where does this leave us??

Gosh, I go back to cell pings.

Sprint has the record of calls, correct? Incoming and outgoing, whether received or not. So do all of the other carriers.

If Gail's phone pinged off of that tower in that time frame- and that is the last known ping from her phone- then her phone is somewhere in that tower range; or it was disconnected or otherwise destroyed- or it was with someone else.

Is Gail's cell account still active? If not, when did it become inactive?

 

[hollyblue]

It's my understanding that it's very unusual for an adult female Gail's age to be diagnosed as having ADD, let alone be on meds for it.

I'd like to know what that medication was, because I have a feeling it's one that's also prescribed for other things, and that it was given to Gail for other things than ADD. Klonipin would be an example. It's my understanding that it's prescribed for ADD, but also for panic/anxiety disorders, and for schizo-affective disorder. It's my understanding those disorders could easily account for some of Gail's reported behaviors - e.g., calling people and saying she was scared but not saying why; suddenly thinking a friend was taking her kids and calling 911; thinking she might be being followed.

I was also curious about Arlene's mention of schizophrenia. Where did that come from? Did she say that Matt had put that in his legal document?

Arlene mentioned she was taking meds for ADD in the radio interview, plus a few more meds. It's unlikely for ADD diagnosis in an older adult, but if she was seeing someone previously for depression for the death of her brother and/or father, she may have been diagnosed....maybe even when she was a teen and has been on the meds since?

You'll have to shake my memory about Arlene's mention of schizophrenia. ??

 

[believe09]

Well, we have reports that a legal separation and or divorce was in progress. But no evidence that a legal separation had been filed prior to Gail going missing. We have reports that Gail hired a PI and Matt's car had been tagged with a GPS that Gail was manipulating on her own.

Why not have her PI handle the information? Maybe he did. But I digress.

Where are the GPS records? Gail believed she was being followed and was writing down LPN's. Was she being followed by an undisclosed PI hired by MP or perhaps the woman/women he was seeing?

 

[BeanE]

Not to change the subject BeanE, but this is something I've been wondering about?

Respectfully snipped:

<JBean confirmed a list of meds Gail was on, and while we can't go too much into it because of confidentiality reasons, she confirmed there was nothing on there for psychoses, merely meds for depression.>

This is something that has caused me additional concern- specifically about Gail's missing information and poster information.

Without violating Gail's privacy, they should include 'needs medicine' (if any prescription medication(s) are not missing along with Gail. )

A 'needs medicine' alert is an important component, at least from a SAR aspect.

Is Gail in need of prescription medication? If she is, does she carry it with her or in her vehicle?

TIA.

I've noodled on that too, Oriah. We've seen on missing person posters where they say, e.g., has asthma but does not have inhaler, and the news articles tell us the person's one and only inhaler was at home, and the prescription had not been refilled.

In Gail's case, no medication alert was issued when the typical 30 day prescription point passed.

The assumption I've made therefore is that the doctor who prescribed Gail's meds asserted that she is not medication dependent.

I would only expect a med alert for an endangered person with no reported physical problems if that person was on psychotropics. JBean had posted that Gail was not.

The other scenario in which I would not expect a med alert for an endangered person with no physical problems would be if that person had been on psychotropics, but hadn't taken them for a period of time. It's my understanding that after a period of time, the person is no longer deemed med dependent.

Another scenario is that some people get 90 and 180 day supplies of meds. It's cheaper and more convenient w/some insurance plans. We haven't hit the 90 or 180 day mark yet.

If a large amount of medication is missing from the home, and Gail didn't typically carry large amounts of her medication with her, that's of concern to me, and something I've wondered about. It would account for some LE actions/lack of actions.

Likewise if such items as a gun or hose is missing, and Gail did not typically carry a gun or hose.

 

[BeanE]

I am not Irish, but I will say that I personally have seen no evidence that MP's pi is actually looking for Gail. A lawyer whose job it is to protect his client's telling me so isn't enough for me, but that's imo of course. I can't speak to the counseling part, though I wish MP would have allowed his kids to speak to their maternal relatives or the police early on as it would have done wonders for public perception of him. I am one on the fence in this case, but I cannot ignore some early actions. As always, imo.

In my opinion, good PIs work very, very quietly. Mathis is supposed to be good.

The children have been allowed to visit with their maternal relatives, and I assume, during those visits, to speak. They could, of course, have sat in silence - I dunno.

I respect a parent's decision not to have their child interviewed by LE, particularly in the position these children are in.

Great to see another bean!!!! :great:

 

[SCSleuther]

It's my understanding that it's very unusual for an adult female Gail's age to be diagnosed as having ADD, let alone be on meds for it.

I'd like to know what that medication was, because I have a feeling it's one that's also prescribed for other things, and that it was given to Gail for other things than ADD. Klonipin would be an example. It's my understanding that it's prescribed for ADD, but also for panic/anxiety disorders, and for schizo-affective disorder. It's my understanding those disorders could easily account for some of Gail's reported behaviors - e.g., calling people and saying she was scared but not saying why; suddenly thinking a friend was taking her kids and calling 911; thinking she might be being followed.

I was also curious about Arlene's mention of schizophrenia. Where did that come from? Did she say that Matt had put that in his legal document?

Actually it is not very unusual at all, for an adult female to be diagnosed with ADD, although in most cases, the ADD was probably present in childhood just never diagnosed. I am exactly the same age as Gail (and quite a similar "life situation", as you will... I was only diagnosed 2 years ago with ADD - around age 42.

I have to take 2 different types of Adderall daily. Do I like/am proud of taking these meds daily? Heck no. And I am bad about remembering to take it. But I can tell ...as the day wears on, if I forgot to take it or not.

Also, (I am NOT a doctor)....but Adderall is a stimulant (Amphetamine). Klonopin is a benzodiazepine, a muscle relaxant, and usually used more for treatment of anxiety/pain disorders/mania...more a "chill pill", if you will...


[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adult_attention_deficit_hyperactivity_disorder"]Adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

It should be noted that every normal individual exhibits ADHD-like symptoms occasionally (when tired or stressed, for example) but to have the diagnosis, the symptoms should be present from childhood and persistently interfere with functioning in multiple spheres of an individual's life: work, school, and interpersonal relationships.

The symptoms that individuals exhibit as children are still present in adulthood, but manifest differently as most adults develop compensatory mechanisms to adapt to their environment.

 

[BeanE]

BBM: Bean, this has been nagging at me as well.

Do we have any other documentation that Gail and the children's passports are missing?

Susie Button's statements in news articles. She's the passport recipient. Neighbor across the street from the Palmgren home.

Let me know if you want the links, Oriah, and I'll go pull them. I'm trying to be lazy. Haven't had my second cup yet, and it's after 11 already! :floorlaugh:

 

[believe09]

In my opinion, good PIs work very, very quietly. Mathis is supposed to be good.

The children have been allowed to visit with their maternal relatives, and I assume, during those visits, to speak. They could, of course, have sat in silence - I dunno.

I respect a parent's decision not to have their child interviewed by LE, particularly in the position these children are in.

Great to see another bean!!!! :great:

BBM-were they alone with the maternal relatives? Well if so, that is definitely a point on Matt's side of the balance sheet imo.

 

[BeanE]

Agreed. So at the minimum he had not retained family law attorneys, apparently, prior to that date. Apparently, neither had Gail because no one has stepped forward confirming that. At least in public.

I've been posting that I've been wondering about Gail's PI. We have Arlene's statements that she had one, but nothing else yet to confirm it.

Oddly, yesterday, I noticed Gail's sister Diane said this on May 17th(!), which makes me wonder if, even on May 17th, Diane hadn't been able to confirm a PI.

She also suspected her husband was having an affair, according to friends and family, and had discovered hotel invoices from the DoubleTree hotel and a Hampton Inn in Chattanooga, invoices that showed his name and that he had paid in cash.

“There was talk about that. She had no proof at that point,” Nichols said. “She did mention she found some things and she was going to further investigate it. She may have found something. She could have gotten concrete proof.”

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2011/may/17/missing-woman-search-continues-gail-palmgren/

But Arlene said that Gail told her the PI had turned over all his reports to Gail on Thu Apr 28. How could Diane not have known about that all the way on May 17?

With all the docs that Gail is supposed to have given Arlene, did she not give even one page from the PI that his name could have been gotten from by May 17th??

I would think if Arlene had anything like that, she would have faxed it directly to the family on the very first day they talked, which I believe was Sun May 1?

 

[BeanE]

They have the cell phone records for Gail. Different carriers handle things differently-there is also a chance that the carrier would have agreed to give the records to a family member as long as a police report was on file or sent as back up.

Thanks, believe. The reporter who tweeted that LE didn't have the phone records - Meredyth something-or-other - seemed to know far less about the case than we do. :floorlaugh:

 

[Oriah]

Well, we have reports that a legal separation and or divorce was in progress. But no evidence that a legal separation had been filed prior to Gail going missing. We have reports that Gail hired a PI and Matt's car had been tagged with a GPS that Gail was manipulating on her own.

Why not have her PI handle the information? Maybe he did. But I digress.

Where are the GPS records? Gail believed she was being followed and was writing down LPN's. Was she being followed by an undisclosed PI hired by MP or perhaps the woman/women he was seeing?

Do we know the exact location of where Matt's vehicle was tagged with a GPS?
It seems that the data following that would have been tracked by Gail's PI- at least up until she disappeared. At which point I would think they went from the SMPD to HC to the TBI.

So where IS that record??

 

[BeanE]

You'll have to shake my memory about Arlene's mention of schizophrenia. ??

I'll have to shake my own memory first :floorlaugh: I keep looking for the recorded interview on YouTube.

Let's see. Recall mode. I think she said that Matt had said it. I think she used the phrase paranoid schizophrenia as well.

I think that's the end of my recall. I'm sorry. Maybe someone else remembers more detail?

 

[Oriah]

Susie Button's statements in news articles. She's the passport recipient. Neighbor across the street from the Palmgren home.

Let me know if you want the links, Oriah, and I'll go pull them. I'm trying to be lazy. Haven't had my second cup yet, and it's after 11 already! :floorlaugh:

Nope, don't need the links, Bean. But thank you!!

Been trying to figure out who is telling the truth here.

If passports for the children and Gail were given to SB... then I would think LE would have them in evidence now (considering MP's concern about the children being taken out of the country) unless Gail reclaimed them.

If LE doesn't have them, then I am thoroughly confused.

And if they are missing from SB but used or not used- then I guess I don't understand what is going on?! :waitasec:

 

[rosiebean]

In my opinion, good PIs work very, very quietly. Mathis is supposed to be good.

The children have been allowed to visit with their maternal relatives, and I assume, during those visits, to speak. They could, of course, have sat in silence - I dunno.

I respect a parent's decision not to have their child interviewed by LE, particularly in the position these children are in.

Great to see another bean!!!! :great:

I am going by what I have read in the media and from verified posters here, so it would be entirely speculative on my part to assume anything about the PI's actions...and the only thing I've read about his actions were his attempts to get the DVR back. I have honestly tried to figure out how that would lead to finding Gail but have not been able to come up with anything. Perhaps someone local has posted about the PI's efforts (as I would guess friends would be spoken to and word would get out), and I freely admit I may have missed that fact.

Likewise, I am guessing that someone verified has confirmed that the kids have spoken with their maternal relatives. I think that's great, and it makes MP look much less suspicious, imo. But why did Gail's family try to go to court over the children? Or have any issues between the two families been worked out since then?

I cannot agree about the loss not speaking to LE. They were the last to see Gail and spend time with her, they would have the most to offer in terms of what her frame of mind was like, if she'd mentioned or had been talking about a specific person or place etc. Their information would be extremely valuable and having it filtered through a second or third party dilutes its value. If Gail was really experiencing a mental break, it would be vital to find her before she hurt herself or someone else...and imo keeping the kids away from LE set the search back. Certainly it was the right of their parent to make that decision. I simple think it may have hindered finding Gail.

 

[BeanE]

BBM-were they alone with the maternal relatives? Well if so, that is definitely a point on Matt's side of the balance sheet imo.

Even if that is so, Matt allowed the children to visit - and I assume to speak with during those visits - their maternal relatives. The statement I was responding to claimed that Matt had not allowed the children to speak with their relatives.

Matt is the children's parent. The maternal relatives are, well, maternal relatives, an aunt and uncle who've had a distant relationship with the children.

I can't imagine what kind of balance there should exist there. These are by no means equal relationships in any child's life.

The only balance I would expect is between their mother and father with whom they lived and were taken care of all their lives. Everybody else is low on the totem pole.

 

[hollyblue]

rosiebean, the childrens visits with the maternal relatives have been supervised. No direct one on one.

 

[Emeralgem]

BBM-were they alone with the maternal relatives? Well if so, that is definitely a point on Matt's side of the balance sheet imo.

My understanding is NO, they weren't so I'm not giving MP any points..JMHO

ETA..IMO.. His actions have proven he could care less about helping anyone locate his wife and the mother of his children...JMHO

 

[BeanE]

Nope, don't need the links, Bean. But thank you!!

Been trying to figure out who is telling the truth here.

If passports for the children and Gail were given to SB... then I would think LE would have them in evidence now (considering MP's concern about the children being taken out of the country) unless Gail reclaimed them.

If LE doesn't have them, then I am thoroughly confused.

And if they are missing from SB but used or not used- then I guess I don't understand what is going on?! :waitasec:

I'm lost, Oriah. I'm sorry. I can't think of what crime the passports would be evidence for. I personally wouldn't expect LE to hold things that a parent feels may indicate something that causes them fear or concern. If that were the case - they'd need a lot bigger evidence rooms - and that's just for all my fears and concerns when my son was young. :floorlaugh:

It seems to me that the appropriate place for the passports right now would be with the children's current custodial parent - Matt.

I don't recall seeing Susie say what she's done with the passports. I don't know who has them. I don't see a reason for anyone except Matt to have them right now.

 

[rosiebean]

Even if that is so, Matt allowed the children to visit - and I assume to speak with during those visits - their maternal relatives. The statement I was responding to claimed that Matt had not allowed the children to speak with their relatives.

Matt is the children's parent. The maternal relatives are, well, maternal relatives, an aunt and uncle who've had a distant relationship with the children.

I can't imagine what kind of balance there should exist there. These are by no means equal relationships in any child's life.

The only balance I would expect is between their mother and father with whom they lived and were taken care of all their lives. Everybody else is low on the totem pole.

BeanE was responding to my statement, though I have to clarify that I qualified my 'not able to speak to family' comment with 'early on', as it is my understanding that that was the case in the early days...I was also trying to qualify that statement because I was not sure if the situation had changed.

Do Gail's siblings have a distant relationship with the kids? I am very close to all of my nieces and nephews despite at times havingived literally half a world away. Like anyone here, I bring my own experiences and biases with me, and I cannot fathom having this happen to my sibling and having their spouse cut off contact between me and my sibling's child. I would want to comfort the kids and would be concerned that not having one of their parents and having close relatives cut off suddenly would be extremely hard on them. The situation could be entirely different in this case, but it was something that raised my hinky meter.

 

[BeanE]

Likewise, I am guessing that someone verified has confirmed that the kids have spoken with their maternal relatives. I think that's great, and it makes MP look much less suspicious, imo. But why did Gail's family try to go to court over the children? Or have any issues between the two families been worked out since then?

JBean confirmed the children have visited with the maternal relatives. I accept her word for personal reasons.

Also at the court hearing, it was verified there were visits:
http://www.wrcbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=14987811

Gail's family went to court to get court ordered visitation. The documents and articles didn't specify why IIRC, and I'd be uncomfortable guessing.

My understanding is that after the hearing, another hearing on matters including the visitation was to be scheduled with another chancellor. I haven't seen it reported that that hearing has been scheduled.

I cannot agree about the loss not speaking to LE. They were the last to see Gail and spend time with her, they would have the most to offer in terms of what her frame of mind was like, if she'd mentioned or had been talking about a specific person or place etc. Their information would be extremely valuable and having it filtered through a second or third party dilutes its value. If Gail was really experiencing a mental break, it would be vital to find her before she hurt herself or someone else...and imo keeping the kids away from LE set the search back. Certainly it was the right of their parent to make that decision. I simple think it may have hindered finding Gail.

I agree 100% that all those things are gravely important, and that it is of grave importance for info the children may have to get to LE. My personal opinion is that there is no negative impact from the children telling their parent or counselor the info they have, and the parent or counselor relaying that info to LE.