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

[hollyblue]

As I see it, the insult in saying she has "mental issues" is in the way it is being used to portray her. Not to mention that it may not even be true. Besides the reports of her friends from early on, there's also the Signal Mountain detective's statement from early in the investigation, that he could find no basis for that claim.

And now, in the latest article, accusations of a psychotic episode? That is a very specific medical diagnosis, if I understand it correctly. Who, I wonder, made such a diagnosis? MP's attorney? Or was it the attorney "friend"?

How many times have people who are in a close relationship with others who are alcoholic, dysfunctional or trying to deal with controlling manipulators stay unaffected? Even someone who gets help in trying to deal with it is going through a tough battle. Manipulation and lying are not a degree of mental aptitude? Er.... I'm sure many of us here have been on that road to "cope" with such and at times you feel you are being dragged into the head of such a person. Not fun trying to make logic out of unreasonableness and at times you think your head will explode!

Shoot, many posters here, including myself, have said they have a headache trying to figure out cases here.....can you imagine putting yourself in close contact with the people involved? Psychotic episode? Close. IMO

I'd like to know (even tho not likely) if any of the plate numbers she logged lead to anyone within the circle of this investigation.

 

[hollyblue]

I think the comment says much more about the witness' character and credibility than about Gail. I would think a prosecutor would enjoy cross-examining him.

The lawyer friend didn't express his opinion of MP either. If it was admirable, Hoss would have brought it forward, imo. How many friends have we seen come forward for MP tauting his good graces?

 

[Pearl*]

I don't think the FB guy released C's statement. He gave the media C's phone number and they contacted her directly.

Yes, that is my understanding as well. It doesn't make me feel any better about it either. Why did Carol need a go-between? And more importantly, why was LE not involved in this release of this critical information? Does LE need a go-between too?

 

[hollyblue]

Yes, that is my understanding as well. It doesn't make me feel any better about it either. Why did Carol need a go-between? And more importantly, why was LE not involved in this release of this critical information? Does LE need a go-between too?

From what I gathered, CC felt much like AD in LE not doing anything and contacted Clive....who called the media. I don't believe LE bothered to check out the lead until the media contacted them about the sighting. IMO. There was mention of last Wednesday, at the time...and that would have been the 6/15. So..?

LE uses a go between when they dont' want to firmly place a word or their foot on anything that may be a banana peel. imo. Saw it happen in the Koecher case.

 

[ThoughtFox]

wow, I was under the impression that this forum was an effort to find Gail! it seems that it has evolved into a hateful, name calling Internet lynch mob against Matt. I have read page after page about wanting him to open the house up for searches, about no one but Matt saying that she was having issues... Now, you are getting what you wanted and of course it isn't enough. it doesn't convict Matt, so it can be right, can't be true.

Personally, I'm quite happy that LE is doing searches. And actually they did some of the searches in Alabama quite a while ago.

Whether they find anything that might "convict" MP is up to the DA.

Who stated that these people were HIS friends? I don't recall seeing that stated, and if that was the case and she feared him so, why the heck would she have gone there and stayed.

Because in cases of divorce, friends often split up too. I think it's clear that Gail might not have known who her real friends were sometimes.

Carol's sighting announcement last week was pretty much taken as the gospel, but these people are instantly dismissed. Yes, it was his attorney who released the statement, but it was the FB guy who released Carol's, and both were printed in the Chattanoogan. What makes Carol more correct?

No one has said Carol was "correct" at all. In fact, many have questioned whether her sighting is valid.

But really this is comparing apples and oranges. The Defense Attorney works for MP and his job is to make his client look good.

But I don't think their strategy is working because a husband should know more about what is going on with his wife than a perfect stranger. And yet we know he was out of town for a week before she disappeared, and as soon as he got home they had a run-in with LE before Gail went to Alabama. He wasn't acting like a particularly concerned husband even then.

Also, Carol got scared and doesn't want her full name released anymore... I understand that, but that cat is already out of the bag. Many of you have commented how that could scare other witnesses off. What do you think all the positiveness on here about the new witnesses is going to do? I know that if I have any info , I would be very careful how it got to the authorities. Especially if it was something that seemed to support Matt.

Some of Matt's secrets have come out of the bag, too, and can't be put back in.

But of course he and his attorneys aren't talking about adultery as a possible factor in the divorce plans, or as part of Gail's distress before she disappeared.

I want Gail home too...I want her safe and for all this to be worked out, but the venom being shown against Matt and even anyone who makes a positive statement about him is unbelieveable. I hold firm to my belief that although he may have been wrong in his affair, etc. He would not and has not done anything sinister to Gail and is just as confused by all this as we are.

I think MP is confused by the fact that the public and LE are questioning him at all, and probably confused that he has lost his job over this. So I'm sure there are "anger issues" on his part.

 

[Pearl*]

From what I gathered, CC felt much like AD in LE not doing anything and contacted Clive....who called the media. I don't believe LE bothered to check out the lead until the media contacted them about the sighting. IMO. There was mention of last Wednesday, at the time...and that would have been the 6/15. So..?

LE uses a go between when they dont' want to firmly place a word or their foot on anything that may be a banana peel. imo. Saw it happen in the Koecher case.

So did Carol ask Clive to call the media? If that is the case, it would be good PR to let the public (and therefore any potential witnesses out there) know that they will have no requests to give media interviews, especially from anybody other than LE. IMO, even a request is a form of pressure, and with the repeated assurances I have read, that Clive is in constant contact and working with LE, the interpretation could easily be that he is acting on their behalf. My understanding is also that Carol knows the Chattanoogan editor, which makes me think she would have been able to make her own phone call if that's what she wanted to do.

I think witnesses tend to come forward by choice, and are more likely to do so without indications they might lose control over the extent of their involvement. "Official" requests and assurances of safety are very important. Since the interview, I have even read a post that said "Ignore that" regarding Carol's later claim to have seen a suspicious car in her neighborhood. I would feel betrayed by that comment if I were Carol, and I would be less likely to come forward if I were another witness reading that comment--made by the very person who called the media in the first place!

Again, my concern is that potential witnesses be ENCOURAGED to come forward. My sense is that the community is backing away somewhat in willingness to be involved. My intent is not to perpetuate rumors, but all this detail regarding the presentation that is being made to the public is FACT. Therefore, my belief is that these comments are within bounds. My apologies to the mods if I am wrong.

It is an issue that no one can comment on the fb page anonymously, and therefore IMO those posts present a distortion of what people really think about this. As a local, I believe it is fair for me to comment on local perception and atmosphere.

If it is necessary to name dates and times of specific posts that concern me, I will be happy to do so. Again, I do not know how to link specific posts.

https://www.facebook.com/permalink....eed_comment#!/BRINGGAILNOWACKIPALMGRENHOMENOW

 

[confused]

<modsnip removed quoted post>
<modsnip >. There has been nothing found by the police to connect him with ANY sinister acts. He just happens to be the husband, and his actions and reactions are not what many think they should be, BUT I can not say how I would respond if this were my life-so I wont judge him.

As for the searches, I know from the beginning he has claimed to be cooperating with the LE, and this new statement would also suggest that. As far as coming to a compromise on the search, I don't see where the police are focing this. They don't have a search warrant, this is him voluntarily allowing them into his home and other areas. That compromise part may mean that they can search the car, but not remove the seats to do so... or they can search the house, but not remove the carpeting to spray luminol on the floors (think how great that would be for the kids to see). I can see him setting limits on a voluntary search. Until we know more about what those are, who are we to decide that he is hiding something for doing so.

I don't know anything about the witnesses from AL who brought out this story. Someone commented that they waited so long to say something...maybe they didn't. Maybe they told the story ASAP when they heard Gail was missing. Maybe the LE has known it all along, and the attorneys just got around to releasing it to the paper. Maybe they have been on vacation for 3 weeks and didn't realize till they returned what was happening. There are any number of reasons that we are just hearing it, and none of them make it more or less true. Also, I will state again that if they were HIS friends, why would she have gone to them??? If she was being so smart and thorough with everything, why would she have gone to someone who was closer to him than her? It wasn't like AD kicked her out and she had nowhere else to turn, right?

Finally, and this is slightly off topic, but could have been important. There was a search and rescue in Chattanooga this week-which unfortunately turned into a recovery. A man fell off a boat into the river/lake. They searched for the better part of 3 days for him. His body was found. The only reason that I mention it is that they were searching in an area Gail could have been in. I guess what I am trying to say is that searchers were out for days, and did not find anything related to Gail.

 

[JBean]

<modsnip removed quoted post>
<modsnip >. There has been nothing found by the police to connect him with ANY sinister acts. He just happens to be the husband, and his actions and reactions are not what many think they should be, BUT I can not say how I would respond if this were my life-so I wont judge him.

As for the searches, I know from the beginning he has claimed to be cooperating with the LE, and this new statement would also suggest that. As far as coming to a compromise on the search, I don't see where the police are focing this. They don't have a search warrant, this is him voluntarily allowing them into his home and other areas. That compromise part may mean that they can search the car, but not remove the seats to do so... or they can search the house, but not remove the carpeting to spray luminol on the floors (think how great that would be for the kids to see). I can see him setting limits on a voluntary search. Until we know more about what those are, who are we to decide that he is hiding something for doing so.

I don't know anything about the witnesses from AL who brought out this story. Someone commented that they waited so long to say something...maybe they didn't. Maybe they told the story ASAP when they heard Gail was missing. Maybe the LE has known it all along, and the attorneys just got around to releasing it to the paper. Maybe they have been on vacation for 3 weeks and didn't realize till they returned what was happening. There are any number of reasons that we are just hearing it, and none of them make it more or less true. Also, I will state again that if they were HIS friends, why would she have gone to them??? If she was being so smart and thorough with everything, why would she have gone to someone who was closer to him than her? It wasn't like AD kicked her out and she had nowhere else to turn, right?

Finally, and this is slightly off topic, but could have been important. There was a search and rescue in Chattanooga this week-which unfortunately turned into a recovery. A man fell off a boat into the river/lake. They searched for the better part of 3 days for him. His body was found. The only reason that I mention it is that they were searching in an area Gail could have been in. I guess what I am trying to say is that searchers were out for days, and did not find anything related to Gail.

You raise some good points and some that I agree with.

I think these people most likely came forward prior but the attorneys have released it as backlash to AD's claims.

If LE did not look closely at MP they would be acting irresponsibly, particularly based on his behavior. Doesn't mean he did anything related to gail's disappearance at all, and is merely an uncaring husband. SO's are always the first to be ruled in or out and at this point he doesn't seem to be ruled all the way out. But many of us are holding out hope that he will be.

As I have posted many times, we all must be patient with LE's investigation. My hope is that these searches might reveal something on her computer that will help find Gail, if computers are being made available.

confused do you have any theories as to what has happened to Gail?

 

[JBean]

Sometimes it takes awhile for LE to get all the facts straight. Things take time to come together. If Gail was having mental health issues the family and only close friends would know. People with mental health issues can hide it well when in public. The children may have been in fear of there mother being off a bit and taking back roads.
Sounds like Gail needed a break, re: bank accounts, change of address, removing furniture from home.
It is also very hard to get help for someone with mental health issues if they are not willing to get proffesional help. So begins the downward spiral.

I totally agree with you regarding trying to get help for someone with mental health issues being very difficult if not impossible.

Personally I wasn't really thinking about anyone getting help for Gail, since she was an adult, but rather gettting help for the kids to keep them out of harm's way. For example, the week of the conference coincides exactly with the time that MP said Gail was delusional. We know that the conference was not critical to attend, so I question why the father of these children did not make sure he was available to his children while they were under the care of a delusional mother? IOW, maybe there is nothing to be done for Gail, but there is plenty that can be done to make sure the kids are safe.

I am trying to reconcile this in my mind.

 

[confused]

Personally, I'm quite happy that LE is doing searches. And actually they did some of the searches in Alabama quite a while ago.
(snipped)
No one has said Carol was "correct" at all. In fact, many have questioned whether her sighting is valid.

But really this is comparing apples and oranges. The Defense Attorney works for MP and his job is to make his client look good.
(snipped)
I think MP is confused by the fact that the public and LE are questioning him at all, and probably confused that he has lost his job over this. So I'm sure there are "anger issues" on his part.

Yes, I know they did searches in AL a while ago. It is my understanding that at that time, MP would have allowed for searches here, but the LE didn't see reason. I wish they had done them then, it could have maybe have gotten people to realize that Matt isn't the monster many portray his as, and maybe the focus could have gone toward what really happened.

I also know that Carol's sighting was not taken as fact by everyone, but the first day or so that it was out there, most seemed to believe it. Since, I have heard questions and comments that show people are thinking and wondering about it. Almost every comment posted here about the new witness is negative. And it is apples to apples...both accounts are reported in the Chattanoogan as MSM fact. (Now I know that MSM is not always correct) Carol is just some woman who thinks she saw Gail. This new witness is apparently an attorney in AL-he is an officer of the court. Matt's attorney is also an officer of the court. BTW, Matt's attorney's job is not to make his client look good-that's what you hire a PR rep for ... it is to defend him against incorrect accusations and there have been a LOT of accusations flying around here. As officers of the court, either of these attorneys know that if they are caught lying, they can loose there liscense to practice. Why would they want to do that???

Finally, I think you intentionally took my comments about him being confused out of context. For one second, just suppose that Matt did not have anything to do with this...just for a second- now, he comes home to the argument, she leaves, she comes home to drop the kids, but doesn't stick around to meet him, she is seen driving off and has not been heard from since. That is pretty confusing...for anyone! Now, I believe that Matt is innocent in her disappearance. I think he is confused by all of it, just like we are.

 

[JBean]

Couple housekeeping issues:

1. If you see a post that violates etiquette or TOS, please alert on it by using the little red triangle in the top right cornere of the offending post. Do NOT repsond to it and report it, just report it, please.

2. If you want to post as a friend or have any type of inside perspective based on firsthand knowledge you must be verified first or your inside posts will be removed, multiple offenders will be given a TO.

Thanks and where is Gail?

 

[confused]

You raise some good points and some that I agree with.

I think these people most likely came forward prior but the attorneys have released it as backlash to AD's claims.

If LE did not look closely at MP they would be acting irresponsibly, particularly based on his behavior. Doesn't mean he did anything related to gail's disappearance at all, and is merely an uncaring husband. SO's are always the first to be ruled in or out and at this point he doesn't seem to be ruled all the way out. But many of us are holding out hope that he will be.

As I have posted many times, we all must be patient with LE's investigation. My hope is that these searches might reveal something on her computer that will help find Gail, if computers are being made available.

confused do you have any theories as to what has happened to Gail?

<modsnip>
Yes, I realize that the SO is always the first suspect, and with good reason. I personally feel that the LE has been investigating him closely from the beginning, hence MP getting the attorney. I also feel that Matt had no part in Gails disappearance, so they haven't made him a POI or obtained a search warrant, etc. It seems to me that they checked him out, he understandably got an attorney, cooperated, and pretty much the LE moved on. Doesn't seem like the public has moved on.

Do I have theories...yes, but I will not post them in a public forum.

 

[JBean]

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=140929"]Marc Klaas Joins Websleuths Radio Tonight - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[fireflylink]

<modsnip>
Yes, I realize that the SO is always the first suspect, and with good reason. I personally feel that the LE has been investigating him closely from the beginning, hence MP getting the attorney. I also feel that Matt had no part in Gails disappearance, so they haven't made him a POI or obtained a search warrant, etc. It seems to me that they checked him out, he understandably got an attorney, cooperated, and pretty much the LE moved on. Doesn't seem like the public has moved on.

Do I have theories...yes, but I will not post them in a public forum.

confused, First, let me say that I respect your personal desire to defend someone you personaly know as a friend. That being said, allow me to express my feelings regarding the searches, AND my own opinion/perspective on the property searches.

Where to begin searching:
Gail has disappeared, and the last confirmed sighting of her was in her vehicle, that vehicle has not yet been located. The most prior confirmed locations Gail was seen in this instance are family properties. Thus, go back to the residences...her confirmed locations prior to the vehicle. Had they been a local store, a friends home or a workplace, etc. those places would be the next logical place to search/investigate.

Where else to search?
Attempts have been made to try and identify where she might have gone, or with whom on the day she disappeared. This would have led investigators to additional search locations/opportunites would be followed up on.

Why search the residences?
In any missing person's case the home should be searched. The missing person in this case lives there... carried on daily activities, used computers, jotted to-do lists, put notes on the refrigerator, may have maintained calendars, journals, or had another way of documenting both normal routines and family life in a busy household. Additionally, she may have logged information regarding her concerns and fears about being followed, license plates etc.

IMVHO, the search is NOT about targeting the SO(MP) but, IS about using every means available to locate her and bring this situation to a close. Despite any negativity which has been perceived as being against her SO (your friend), this should be seen as a constuctive opportunity to lead (hopefully), to answers about why she has not returned OR leads which may point in an entirely different direction than her SO.

What has prevented this MOTHER from being involved in end-of-year school activities, shopping for summer clothes, haircuts, soccer games, family cookouts, summer vacation activities, birthdays, bed time stories, mother's day and father's day?

The only way for all involved (family and friends) to find answers, to be able to move forward in their lives, is to start at the beginning and investigate forward in hopes of finding out what has prevented Gail from returning home for more than 7 weeks. Any information, no matter where or to whom it may or may not lead needs to be investigated by LE in order to find the true facts leading to her disappearance.

I hope this helps.

 

[confused]

confused, First, let me say that I respect your personal desire to defend someone you personaly know as a friend. That being said, allow me to express my feelings regarding the searches, AND my own opinion/perspective on the property searches.

Where to begin searching:
Gail has disappeared, and the last confirmed sighting of her was in her vehicle, that vehicle has not yet been located. The most prior confirmed locations Gail was seen in this instance are family properties. Thus, go back to the residences...her confirmed locations prior to the vehicle. Had they been a local store, a friends home or a workplace, etc. those places would be the next logical place to search/investigate.

Where else to search?
Attempts have been made to try and identify where she might have gone, or with whom on the day she disappeared. This would have led investigators to additional search locations/opportunites would be followed up on.

Why search the residences?
In any missing person's case the home should be searched. The missing person in this case lives there... carried on daily activities, used computers, jotted to-do lists, put notes on the refrigerator, may have maintained calendars, journals, or had another way of documenting both normal routines and family life in a busy household. Additionally, she may have logged information regarding her concerns and fears about being followed, license plates etc.

IMVHO, the search is NOT about targeting the SO(MP) but, IS about using every means available to locate her and bring this situation to a close. Despite any negativity which has been perceived as being against her SO (your friend), this should be seen as a constuctive opportunity to lead (hopefully), to answers about why she has not returned OR leads which may point in an entirely different direction than her SO.

What has prevented this MOTHER from being involved in end-of-year school activities, shopping for summer clothes, haircuts, soccer games, family cookouts, summer vacation activities, birthdays, bed time stories, mother's day and father's day?

The only way for all involved (family and friends) to find answers, to be able to move forward in their lives, is to start at the beginning and investigate forward in hopes of finding out what has prevented Gail from returning home for more than 7 weeks. Any information, no matter where or to whom it may or may not lead needs to be investigated by LE in order to find the true facts leading to her disappearance.

I hope this helps.

Thank you for your post...I am not sure why you intended it for me, but again thank you. I completely agree with you about the searches. As I posted earlier, I wish they had searched earlier...for many reasons, including to quiet the rumors and speculations. I'm not convinced that they did not search earlier-just did not release that info, thus my comment that they had checked him and moved on. I don't feel that the search would be to target Matt.

I also agree with you that all information should be checked by LE. That is what is so bothersome about the new "witness" information. Many are already discounting it and claiming it as only PR statements from Matt's attorney. We don't know that and have not heard any info from the LE on it. Conclusions are being jumped to very quickly, and IMO many times it is not based on the facts we know, but the biases of posters.

 

[Columbo]

Thank you for your post...I am not sure why you intended it for me, but again thank you. I completely agree with you about the searches. As I posted earlier, I wish they had searched earlier...for many reasons, including to quiet the rumors and speculations. I'm not convinced that they did not search earlier-just did not release that info, thus my comment that they had checked him and moved on. I don't feel that the search would be to target Matt.

I also agree with you that all information should be checked by LE. That is what is so bothersome about the new "witness" information. Many are already discounting it and claiming it as only PR statements from Matt's attorney. We don't know that and have not heard any info from the LE on it. Conclusions are being jumped to very quickly, and IMO many times it is not based on the facts we know, but the biases of posters.

bolded by me.

It seems as if LE has kept any and all important information completely quiet. So--if this new witness statement is that reliable or valid, wouldn't LE have asked the attorneys to keep hush on the matter?

 

[Pollywog]

Yes!!
And then at the end of the article saying what a hard time he's having because "he has lost his wife and his job" ...give me a break. Do they think they are fooling someone?

He lost his job becaue of something he did that went against the company. Has he really "lost" his wife and just what does "lost" mean to him? I doubt he is having a hard time over her not being there IMO.

 

[Snowbunny]

I don't think anybody should be releasing any kind of statements or information except for LE. Any and all information concerning this case should go directly to LE only, not only for the sake of the case but for the safety of those involved giving the information. This is why rumors start, because you don't know if they are fact or fiction.

 

[Melodie]

I am close to someone with mental illness who has psychotic episodes and she has never disappeared. As a matter of fact, when she is psychotic, everyone hears from her a little too much. Based on the things said about Gail by everyone, including MP himself in an early statement-"She has left before, but always stayed in contact with the kids..." I am convinced that she would not just leave with no contact for this long. It doesn't make any sense at all. In cases like this, I always think it would be so easy for one to erase all or most doubt about his or her involvement. If he were not being watched closely by LE, I believe they would make a statement saying so, as was done in the Holly Bobo case regarding her brother. In that case, even though LE did not want to clear anyone, they did make a statement saying that they believed the brother's story about what happened to Holly on the day she disappeared, which may have been prompted by all the media and internet rumors about him. In this case, I believe they cannot make any sort of statement regarding a suspect or POI at this point, because they do not have enough evidence. But, I believe they are watching him and waiting... I think it's time for the TBI to be brought in on this case.

 

[happy409]

<modsnip>
Yes, I realize that the SO is always the first suspect, and with good reason. I personally feel that the LE has been investigating him closely from the beginning, hence MP getting the attorney. I also feel that Matt had no part in Gails disappearance, so they haven't made him a POI or obtained a search warrant, etc. It seems to me that they checked him out, he understandably got an attorney, cooperated, and pretty much the LE moved on. Doesn't seem like the public has moved on.
Do I have theories...yes, but I will not post them in a public forum.

I personally think the public would move on more rapidly if Gail was not continually thrown under the bus by MP's attorney's to MSM. Although, this is MY impression of the articles each time they make comments.

It appears to me IMHO that the attorney's are consistently releasing negative comments (from whoever) about Gail. Why do it? You are correct, it's actually not good PR for Matt, and confusing the public. Does Matt not have any control over what they are saying about his wife, the mother of his children, regardless of the circumstances of their impending divorce?

They mentioned how much he had lost, how hard it was for him...what about what the kids have lost? Just ONE ounce of sincerity of Gail's disappearance would go a long way. I don't even recall (please correct me if I misstate) the attorney's (if they are speaking for MP) asking for help in finding Gail, advising Matt to post a reward, something, showing he believes she is alive (that would certainly clear their client), why is that? JMHO.