BeanE
Inactive
You can also email Hamilton County Sheriff's Office at investigations@hcsheriff.gov
http://www.hcsheriff.gov/
TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren, 44, Signal Mountain, 30 April 2011 - #9
- Thread starter SheWhoMustNotBeNamed
- Start date
- Status
You can also email Hamilton County Sheriff's Office at investigations@hcsheriff.gov
http://www.hcsheriff.gov/
For those who seem to think he was just being sarcastic when he said "She is not kidnapped", I'm personally wondering WHY he made that statement or how he could be certain she had not been kidnapped considering he, himself, has stated Gail thought she was being followed and was even taking down license plate numbers...Seems to me he would have been somewhat concerned there may have been some merit to Gail's suspicions...JMHO
I still only believe there are two situations here. I will eat my words if I am proven wrong but I feel 100% Gail did not just leave. So I don't even consider that the third scenario.
Perhaps and awful accident and the fact that fall and winter are coming and the tree's will thin out and hopefully uncover any clues that might pertain to an accident. The again, so much time has gone by who knows if any clues could be uncovered.
So much time has gone by and we still have NOTHING. All of you have been so great at going over the same information and still we are not coming up with anything new.
Too many women are missing or found dead at the hands of a loved one. It's happening every day. I see kidnapping being brought up. Even if that was said in a sarcastic tone, you really don't hear of any adults being kidnapped these days.
I am just dumbfounded that there is no new news, clues, evidence or anything else to go on.
At this point in time I think if she had left on her own someone in her small circle would know this. Not easy to just disappear on your own and live on your own these days under the radar.
Perhaps and awful accident and the fact that fall and winter are coming and the tree's will thin out and hopefully uncover any clues that might pertain to an accident. The again, so much time has gone by who knows if any clues could be uncovered.
So much time has gone by and we still have NOTHING. All of you have been so great at going over the same information and still we are not coming up with anything new.
Too many women are missing or found dead at the hands of a loved one. It's happening every day. I see kidnapping being brought up. Even if that was said in a sarcastic tone, you really don't hear of any adults being kidnapped these days.
I am just dumbfounded that there is no new news, clues, evidence or anything else to go on.
At this point in time I think if she had left on her own someone in her small circle would know this. Not easy to just disappear on your own and live on your own these days under the radar.
I'm with you. I don't believe Gail just up and left either..JMHO
Not trying to be argumentative here at all- but the taking down of license plate numbers and 'being followed' has me scratching my head.
What states still have both front and rear plates that are identical?
A front plate with a registration is not common these days.
Did Gail circle around, and/or wait for the vehicle(s) to pass her while making note of the plates?
What states still have both front and rear plates that are identical?
A front plate with a registration is not common these days.
Did Gail circle around, and/or wait for the vehicle(s) to pass her while making note of the plates?
BeanE
Inactive
There's a chart here for which states require rear only and which require front and rear. AL and TN are rear only states.
http://dmvanswers.com/questions/354...icense-plates-on-the-front-and-back-of-my-car
You ask a good question, Oriah. I'll scratch my head with you.
stilettos
Former Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2009
- Messages
- 5,832
- Reaction score
- 8
That is what it appears that some want us to believe..but I am not buying it...she would have surfaced for the children by now.
I'm thinking she may have taken down plate numbers of unidentifed suspicious car/s seen on Ridgerock near her home..JMHO..
IMO. IF someone was following her she couldn't see their license plate number IF it was a Tennesse plate unless she slowed down on the road and they passed her... Wonder IF she ever mentioned the make and model of the car/s she was suspicious of.. Same with SB.. Didn't she also mention seeing a strange car on their street?
There's a chart here for which states require rear only and which require front and rear. AL and TN are rear only states.
http://dmvanswers.com/questions/354...icense-plates-on-the-front-and-back-of-my-car
You ask a good question, Oriah. I'll scratch my head with you.
Scratching away with you, BeanE...
If anyone has any info pertaining to exactly where Gail observed a vehicle following her, I would very much like to know!
Was it on SM? In the town of SM? Chattanooga? Alabama?
TIA if anyone has this info....
Me either..Been there.. Seen that T-shirt...Still not buying it...JMHO
ETA..Hi Shoes..Good to see you.
BeanE
Inactive
Two places I can think of off the top of my head. One is when she drove from the lake house to her Birmingham friends' house. I think that Apr 22 or 23. Whatever that weekend around then is.
The other is Apr 30, when she called Diane before driving away from the house, she said she thought she was being followed. Susie didn't mention seeing a vehicle following Gail that day when she saw her drive away. Doesn't mean she didn't see a vehicle of course - just means she didn't mention it.
However, Susie not mentioning seeing a vehicle led me to wonder if Gail meant more a general "I think I've been followed recently" as opposed to "I think I'm being followed right now".
BeanE
Inactive
Who are the people that you think want you to believe Gail 'up and left'? I haven't seen anything that made me feel someone was pressuring me to believe that. Just wondering where it might be coming from?
Not asking for specific names lol. Just, do you mean certain places on the net, or local community members or what.
TIA
The foundation behind Matt's entire separation,RO, and custody filings are that Gail left on her own,abandoned the children,her home and has not contacted the children.
So, it seems Matt thinks she up and left.
ETA: don't see anything in Stilletto's post about pressuring anyone to believe anything so I am not addressing that in this question.
IMO.. I'm certainly not in MP's head but I'm thinking he doesn't think she up and left, he just wants everyone to believe thats the case...JMHO
I should have been more precise when answering beane's question; so here is my do-over
beane said:
The foundation behind Matt's entire separation,RO, and custody filings are that Gail left on her own,abandoned the children,her home and has not contacted the children.
So, it seems Matt wants us to believe that Gail up and left.
ETA: don't see anything in Stilletto's post about pressuring anyone to believe anything so I am not addressing that in this question.
I should have been more precise when answering beane's question; so here is my do-over
The foundation behind Matt's entire separation,RO, and custody filings are that Gail left on her own,abandoned the children,her home and has not contacted the children.
So, it seems Matt wants us to believe that Gail up and left.
ETA: don't see anything in Stilletto's post about pressuring anyone to believe anything so I am not addressing that in this question.
Agreed, I think MP wants everyone to think that is what has happened. Also, LE early on treating it (in the beginning if I am correct) as a "missing" persons case with no "evidence" of foul play...so that would leave two scenarios (JMO) a terrible accident or she just left. Never once did I think she just up and left. Do not see her leaving the kids with MP.
Furthermore, which I know this has been covered, if anyone truly thought she just up and left they would not be pushing to find her.
Let me clarify one thing, nothing against LE for what I said earlier in the post, when this all started the did not have anything to go on--they still don't we do not have one hard piece of evidence of foul play, but I am pretty sure all of us know it in our guts.
BeanE
Inactive
I should have been more precise when answering beane's question; so here is my do-over
The foundation behind Matt's entire separation,RO, and custody filings are that Gail left on her own,abandoned the children,her home and has not contacted the children.
So, it seems Matt wants us to believe that Gail up and left.
ETA: don't see anything in Stilletto's post about pressuring anyone to believe anything so I am not addressing that in this question.
It's hard for me to conceive of court documents as filed because someone wants me to believe anything. I always think of the audience for court filings as being the judge who will hear the motion, preside over the hearing, etc. I'm just a nosey onlooker.
Not saying I think you're wrong - just saying I never thought about court docs that way, so probably why I didn't 'get' what stiletto was talking about, if indeed that's what she meant.
I guess it's hard too for me with those filings to think of them as being currently in effect, because he dissolved them, didn't he? I'm a bit unclear about their status, because it was reported they were dissolved or withdrawn or whatever, but then at the hearing on Diane/Kevin's motion, it was said that filing was going over to the chancellor handling Matt's filing. I never did understand why a chancellor was handling docs that had been withdrawn. Is that because they could be re-filed? Maybe I should ask this in the legal thread?
Regarding the pressuring - I was thinking in terms of the 'want us to think something'. If I think someone wants me to think something, I think of that in terms of them attempting to apply pressure to me, to influence me, etc.
ETA: Thinking that last over, I suppose it could be a more passive than active 'wanting', in which case, there would be no intended pressure.
I fully realize they may have not had one hard piece of evidence of foul play, but SMPD was aware of the fact they had been called on several occassions, and had also given Gail the number for a safe house..
My understanding is Gail also called her sister on the morning of the 30th and requested she call SMPD. Am I wrong in thinking Gail may have even spoken to someone in the SMPD and requested they meet her at her residence?
IMO.. Something went terribly wrong somewhere for them not to immediately suspect foul play even IF there was no physical evidence of such.....JMHO
I would be interested in seeing anything from Matt that says counter to what he filed in court.It's hard for me to conceive of court documents as filed because someone wants me to believe anything. I always think of the audience for court filings as being the judge who will hear the motion, preside over the hearing, etc. I'm just a nosey onlooker.
Not saying I think you're wrong - just saying I never thought about court docs that way, so probably why I didn't 'get' what stiletto was talking about, if indeed that's what she meant.
I guess it's hard too for me with those filings to think of them as being currently in effect, because he dissolved them, didn't he? I'm a bit unclear about their status, because it was reported they were dissolved or withdrawn or whatever, but then at the hearing on Diane/Kevin's motion, it was said that filing was going over to the chancellor handling Matt's filing. I never did understand why a chancellor was handling docs that had been withdrawn. Is that because they could be re-filed? Maybe I should ask this in the legal thread?
Regarding the pressuring - I was thinking in terms of the 'want us to think something'. If I think someone wants me to think something, I think of that in terms of them attempting to apply pressure to me, to influence me, etc.
ETA: Thinking that last over, I suppose it could be a more passive than active 'wanting', in which case, there would be no intended pressure.
I mean if anyone can show me something that says he thinks she met with foul play or had an accident or any other scenario-I would be interested in seeing it. Until then, I can only go on what he has made public to this point.
I should have been more precise when answering beane's question; so here is my do-over
The foundation behind Matt's entire separation,RO, and custody filings are that Gail left on her own,abandoned the children,her home and has not contacted the children.
So, it seems Matt wants us to believe that Gail up and left.
ETA: don't see anything in Stilletto's post about pressuring anyone to believe anything so I am not addressing that in this question.
JBean, I understand what you are saying.
Respectfully, what I don't understand- is why this would be a normal course of action for a spouse to take- when they are also claiming mental illness of some sort in their spouse- and also that it is common for their spouse to get away for awhile? And then to locate (the previously thought to be missing) passports for their children, after citing that as a concern that their spouse might take their children out of the country? :waitasec:
Without any separation or divorce proceedings on file...how does that add up?
Why would Matt have come to the conclusion that Gail abandoned the children, as opposed to being concerned that she had an accident, or was just seeking some space?
- Status