TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren, 44, Signal Mountain, 30 April 2011 - #12

[ThoughtFox]

Here's a better picture:

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2011/dec/04/path-being-cleared-pull-gail-palmgrens-jeep-mounta/

 

[Cazzie]

I'm having trouble seeing that those photos are of the same vehicle. Not just the red vs. blue...

 

[jeni4smith]

I'm having trouble seeing that those photos are of the same vehicle. Not just the red vs. blue...

The pictures are taken from opposite sides of the jeep. The one that you can clearly see is red is from one side, the one is question is from the other side. The top was peeled back in the wreck, so you are seeing the inside of the roof.

If you look at the front, you can see that the jeep is red in the shadow.

ETA: If you look at the picture where you can clearly see the jeep, notice that it is not sitting flat on the ground. The back end is lodged against the tree. The picture in question is looking at the back end that is against the tree.

 

[carole]

I think that picture must have been taken as the sun was going down behind the mountain. If you look at the front, it appears dark grey, but that's because the red is in shadows.

The top frame of the car is black because it wouldn't have been seen with the roof on it.

I believe the "blue" thing at the back is ceiling of the jeep roof, but it's torn back on it's hinges. It can't be a new plastic cover the searchers put there because you can see piles of leaves on it where they fell naturally. Also, notice that the chrome bumper looks blue also, which I think is just because the light is dim.

In this photo, look at the left side of the vehicle, that is the hood of the jeep.
Look close and you can see that it is red. The open areas in the middle are the roof with the top fabric peeled down on the right side over the back bumper. The jeep is almost lying on the driver side. The underside of the jeep is against the trees.

 

[Darcyline]

It is strange because the front looks pretty much intact to me, but the back doesn't even look like a vehicle. I am leaning toward accident right now, so I am not insinuating anything, but it is pretty amazing how one angle looks horrific and the next almost looks normal.

 

[carole]

It is strange because the front looks pretty much intact to me, but the back doesn't even look like a vehicle. I am leaning toward accident right now, so I am not insinuating anything, but it is pretty amazing how one angle looks horrific and the next almost looks normal.

I think it's because of the fabric of the roof showing. The blue is fabric, not metal.

 

[Darcyline]

Well, not even looking at the fabric but doesn't the actual back-end look torn up too? Maybe I am imagining. I guess I am just surprised you can roll off an incline like that and have the vehicle rolling, but the front-end look fairly normal. I guess she was rolling on her side though which makes sense.

 

[noZme]

I am behind on this story & have a couple questions:

What has been reported about the other vehicle found crashed near Gail's jeep?

Were Gail's dogs with her & has there been any mention of finding evidence of them?

 

[Darcyline]

I am assuming (may be wrong) that the other vehicle is super old. They seemed to dismiss it being related very quickly and I feel like the only way to do that so quickly would be if it was obviously a beater someone pushed over in the 80s or something. Some people have said that a body was found in that vehicle, but I have never seen a credible link to that-just LE saying it isn't related.

 

[ThoughtFox]

I'm having trouble seeing that those photos are of the same vehicle. Not just the red vs. blue...

The bluish looking photo was taken at a different time of day from the opposite side. The newer pic from the Times Free Press is the same vehicle from the opposite side of the tree.

 

[ThoughtFox]

I am behind on this story & have a couple questions:

What has been reported about the other vehicle found crashed near Gail's jeep?

Were Gail's dogs with her & has there been any mention of finding evidence of them?

No one has mentioned the dogs, so I assume they were left at the house with the kids.

 

[glorias]

I live in Red bank, a community on the east side of Signal Mtn. I've followed this story locally, and I've followed it on this site.

In retrospect, I am very disappointed in our search efforts. It's hard for me to believe that all of these bluffside roads were not minutely searched for signs that a vehicle had gone over the side. This location on this road is probably the first place to look, based on what we knew at the time.

I agree. It seems like a difficult place to search, but on the other hand, if they knew that GPS showed a huge drop in sea level that afternoon and knew what time it was (as Matt's lawyers claimed after sending out that release a few days ago) then why couldn't they have figured out a radius she could have traveled and searched those areas? Wasn't it something like 10 minutes after she left when the GPS registered the fall? Determining a possible radius traveling at in-town speeds for 10 minutes and searching all the areas where such a huge drop could occur seems very doable to me.

 

[Peliman]

I agree. It seems like a difficult place to search, but on the other hand, if they knew that GPS showed a huge drop in sea level that afternoon and knew what time it was (as Matt's lawyers claimed after sending out that release a few days ago) then why couldn't they have figured out a radius she could have traveled and searched those areas? Wasn't it something like 10 minutes after she left when the GPS registered the fall? Determining a possible radius traveling at in-town speeds for 10 minutes and searching all the areas where such a huge drop could occur seems very doable to me.

I don't think the GPS could be read until after they found the vehicle, wasn't it inside the jeep?

Did you mean another device?

 

[glorias]

Respectfully, I disagree. With the history of Gail's troubled marriage, Matt's affair, apparent DV calls to the home, Gail placing assets with supposed trusted friends....etc., etc., etc...

I think it would be much too coinkie-dinkie that she had an accident.

I don't have much confidence that local LE are really looking into what really happened...not back when she disappeared, nor now. JMO. And I'll leave it at that.

JMO, but we would fail women (and men, but statistically it's usually women who are abused) in need of help to just write this off as an accident. Perhaps there is a minute possibility of it, but I don't think that's what happened. JMO.

Gail. :rose: You didn't deserve this.

I hope for a full investigation by competent SBI, FBI....

I've thought for a very long time that if she had an accident or met with some unrelated foul play (carjacking, etc.) that it was possible, but would be a heck of a coincidence, especially given how the main players in this situation acted after she disappeared. Like I said a couple days ago, I'm sure this will be called an accident, but I am always going to wonder about aspects that never made any sense. Mainly I wonder why people hired criminal defense attorneys, why LE (and others) acted so blase about searching for her, why people defending Matt came up with some out-there theories that made either Gail or Arlene into sinister criminals.

 

[glorias]

I don't think the GPS could be read until after they found the vehicle, wasn't it inside the jeep?

Did you mean another device?

They released the statement before the Jeep's GPS was located, IIRC. Jana Barnello at News Channel 9 tweeted "HCSO told them they know crash time/date b/c cell "ping" shows when device height above sea level changed suddenly" -- sounds to me like it's from the GPS in the cell phone, not from the Jeep. And if they knew about those pings a long time ago, then I have a lot of questions as to what, if anything, they did with that cell phone ping info.

 

[Willow57]

. . .Or it could simply be a sad tragic accident of a poor-distraught woman driving too fast. Sad either way. There is another car there so there must have been an accident or some mishap there before

 

[Cazzie]

They released the statement before the Jeep's GPS was located, IIRC. Jana Barnello at News Channel 9 tweeted "HCSO told them they know crash time/date b/c cell "ping" shows when device height above sea level changed suddenly" -- sounds to me like it's from the GPS in the cell phone, not from the Jeep. And if they knew about those pings a long time ago, then I have a lot of questions as to what, if anything, they did with that cell phone ping info.

Well that would be interesting.

Cell phone ping data shows elevation of the cell phone? That's believeable, but I never thought about that before.

If so, this just gets hinkier and hinkier.

Maybe it's a reporter error?

 

[Peliman]

They released the statement before the Jeep's GPS was located, IIRC. Jana Barnello at News Channel 9 tweeted "HCSO told them they know crash time/date b/c cell "ping" shows when device height above sea level changed suddenly" -- sounds to me like it's from the GPS in the cell phone, not from the Jeep. And if they knew about those pings a long time ago, then I have a lot of questions as to what, if anything, they did with that cell phone ping info.

It was tweeted on 2 December

janabarnelloJana Barnello
Matthew Palmgren's atty: HCSO told them they know crash time/date b/c cell "ping" shows when device height above sea level changed suddenly.

2 Dec

HCSO seems to be the one that revealed that info to the attorney.

 

[Peliman]

I'll speculate on the cell phone ping. I'd imagine Gails cell phone was pinging off a tower at a high elevation on the mountain. When the jeep went over the cliff and stopped at the tree it could no longer ping the high tower because it was blocked from the side of the mountain and pinged a lower tower in the valley area somewhere.

 

[Snowbunny]

Whisperers said that she figures maybe Gail backed over the boulder trying to turn around and forgot that she was still in reverse when she gunned the vehicle to get over the boulder. Its a possibility.