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

[Sleuthy1]

I was under the impression his flight was due to arrive back in to Chattanooga on Friday evening but he arrived home much earlier during the day....JMHO

yes ....was due in Friday night @ 11:35pm-ish EST (IIRC):twocents:

 

[confused]

BBM- I'm curious, MP and GP seem like well educated and intelligent parents, their children are 9 and 12 years old. I know for a fact that LE is very friendly with children at the elementary level on the mountain. Why would you believe this to be too late? Are you aware as a friend they handled the children differently than you? :twocents:

No, I am not. My point was that teaching your children to feel comfortable talking to police officers, you have to start out with saying hello, going up to maybe ask a question etc. I believe that is what the original post (by Pearl - I think) was saying, and I agree. Children can be very intimidated by anyone who wears a uniform. For example, my children always loved firemen. On TV they thought firemen were the coolest thing. Even when we would see a fire truck out somewhere they would ooh and ahhh. One day we had the chance to see the firetruck and talk to a fireman-in full uniform. The kids were terrified, and it was all I could do to keep them from running back to our car. I don't know if Gail and Matt did this with their kids, and if not, then it is too late to do so for this case.

 

[Irish_Eyes]

I would guess they are free to say whatever they need to in counseling. I would further guess that matt just doesn't want people approaching the kids about gail and I think that is reasonable.

I would expect that his attorney did some digging and found the "right" counselor to send the children too, i.e. someone who will be able to testify favorably for his client in case of any potential future divorce litigation. MP seems like the type of client who follows his attorney's advice to the letter in regards to public statements, property searches, etc. His attorney seems like the type who is pretty on top of his game and will provide zealous representation. I can't imagine this attorney letting MP send the kids to just anyone, there is too much at stake.

 

[Sleuthy1]

Question -

Statements are being made that if the kids don't talk to LE, they'll have no one to talk to, because Matt is supposed to have told the kids they're not allowed to talk to anyone about Gail.

The kids are in counseling.

Am I therefore to understand that Matt is not allowing the kids to even talk to their counselor about Gail?

Am I to understand that the counselor actually agreed to this?

That concerns me, because I would think that's a pretty serious ethics and best practices violation on the part of the counselor. I mean, that violates some of the most basic tenets of therapy, and renders it useless. It's hard for me to imagine a counselor actually agreeing to that.

:twocents:Okay....Now all the lawyers on WS forgive me when I say this....you are not the target of my rant ... okay? BUT...."WHAT IF" ....when MP's attorney, in court this past weeks(emergency hearing) said to Chancellor Frank Brown. The children are in counselling...or they have a counselor". WHAT IF it was a play on words...just for show...for the judge and the media ...indeed this may be true, they may be in counselling...BUT, he NEVER stated that the children were CURRENTLY IN ACTIVE COUNSELING...did he? He turned around and looked at the press and said " this is a private matter" or a "family matter" .....something to that extent. WHAT IF ....MP's attorney IS (was) referring to the counselling sessions that GP had set up for the children ...Remember, AD has stated in her interviews, that GP got the children into counselling, to ready them for the upcoming separation & divorce. Once again, GP was thinking ahead and planning for their future. Getting the children setup with a good counselor, someone she had chosen, to guide the children through the tough time they were about to experience.:twocents:
I for one would like to see the visitation dates(not the counselors notes) but the actual dates of sessions post GP going missing. I bet it is non existent...or at most very few visits since GP went missing...Just saying:banghead:

 

[Sleuthy1]

I would guess they are free to say whatever they need to in counseling. I would further guess that matt just doesn't want people approaching the kids about gail and I think that is reasonable.

:twocents:SO why would MP be fearful of DN & KN approaching and speaking to the children (their own niece & nephew)? Why does MP fear the aunt and uncle speaking to them? Why mot trust them with the kids....they had never been treated that way before. Just saying:twocents: I can think of ONLY ONE REASON for MP not allowing the kids to talk with the kids post April 30th 2011:twocents:JMOHO

 

[happy409]

yes ....was due in Friday night @ 11:35pm-ish EST (IIRC):twocents:

Thanks to all, I see the clarification from Bean's awesome timeline!! :woohoo:

 

[Melodie]

I think I am the one who is misunderstanding-I am reading DN's FB post (as reproduced by Sleuthy thank you) that DN is looking for general help, not searches...."please keep your eyes and ears open" I guess that is how I am interpreting this.

I hope the vigil goes well tonight and I am hoping someone steps forward and provides information or evidence that can shed some light on her location.

I agree and no, I don't believe you are misunderstanding. I think she was definitely pleading for general help. I think in these cases, the families usually send out a "general request" for help and that's when the community volunteers get involved and organize the searches and other events such as the candlelight vigil. Usually, the families are too upset and stressed to organize these things by themselves and they have their own families and lives to attend to. In this case, Gail's family is very far away, which would surely make it even more difficult for them to arrange all of this. If I were in their situation, I would look at it as such a blessing and would be so grateful to have so many friends and indeed strangers helping me find my missing loved one. JMHO.

 

[Pearl*]

I would expect that his attorney did some digging and found the "right" counselor to send the children too, i.e. someone who will be able to testify favorably for his client in case of any potential future divorce litigation. MP seems like the type of client who follows his attorney's advice to the letter in regards to public statements, property searches, etc. His attorney seems like the type who is pretty on top of his game and will provide zealous representation. I can't imagine this attorney letting MP send the kids to just anyone, there is too much at stake.

Bingo. My thoughts precisely. Thus my earlier comment about Matt hand-picking a counselor. Sure, any parents who find a counselor for their child are hand-picking them, but not necessarily with the same purpose I suspect Matt may have. It's a conflict of interest.

And Sleuthy, to reference your post as well since it's so closely related, I think the issue of semantics play in the courtroom is a valid concern. Was it "in counseling [been to one session]," or "have a counselor [appointment set]", or what? Semantics. Sort of like that word "abandoned" that has made me bristle since the first time I heard it used to describe Gail's actions.

I don't know what it's going to take for the Court to have the grounds to intervene in this case, but I see a desperate need. If the GAL hearing is still on the books, why can't THAT one be expedited to emergency status? That hearing sure does have more grounds for urgency than the one held earlier this week, IMO.

I read the attorney comment related to the ex parte order, on the separate thread, essentially stating the ex parte order had no chance to stand. My thought is still the question of why the hearing qualified as an emergency. If the order had been dismissed on July 11 for whatever reason, so be it. Maybe other wheels could have been in motion by then in order to scoop it up.

I wonder how many assets have disappeared since that order was lifted.

ETA: An Order signed in error (if that is what happened) is still a valid Order until a Judge lifts it. I STILL think it was a raw deal for the hearing to be bumped as it was. All necessary apologies could have been made on July 11. ullhair:

 

[glorias]

Beane, an addition or clarification to your mindmap. According to the separation filing and according to Matt, Gail began getting paranoid and writing down license plate numbers, etc, approximately 4 weeks prior to the date of the filing(may 6). This would put the sudden upsurge in paranoid and delusional behavior around April 8.
Not surprisingly this date coincides with other events on your map. But interestingly also at this exact time, there is an entry on your map that Arlene says Gail is her normal self and Gail is handing documents to Arlene. This was a busy time,imo.

You answered something I was going to ask: When did this increase in paranoia and fear happen? Since it was around April 8, I think it's possible that people who didn't see Gail every day were unaware things had gotten as problematic as they had because it happened so quickly. Just 3 weeks from escalation to disappearance.

Gail was giving info to various people, and each of these people were possibly seeing just one little piece of a huge puzzle. If these people didn't get together -- which they probably didn't, since they likely didn't even know of each other's existence -- they wouldn't have been able to piece the puzzle together.

That's partly why the G's description of Gail being so out of it bothers me. No one else, as far as we know, has said these things. Not Susie, Diane, Arlene, or any other friends/relatives who spent some time with Gail. So either Gail was freaked out because of something related to the G's themselves, or she maybe wasn't as disturbed as they're claiming.

 

[Pearl*]

:twocents:SO why would MP be fearful of DN & KN approaching and speaking to the children (their own niece & nephew)? Why does MP fear the aunt and uncle speaking to them? Why mot trust them with the kids....they had never been treated that way before. Just saying:twocents: I can think of ONLY ONE REASON for MP not allowing the kids to talk with the kids post April 30th 2011:twocents:JMOHO

Matt does seem to have worked harder than anybody else to make Matt appear guilty.

Maybe Lee Davis' assessment of Matt's intelligence, as conveyed through Jammer in the radio broadcast, wasn't as unfair as I thought.

:bricks:

 

[Pearl*]

It could be worse.

Nope. First time I've ever read a post of yours that was TOTALLY wrong. You said could be worse? :floorlaugh:
Naw, I'll sleuth out the problem. cguru:


...or just collapse sections on the screen like you said.

 

[Annie_61]

Beautiful vigil for Gail tonight on Signal Point. Just lovely. Come home, Gail. You are missed.

You have done yourself proud, to go and show support :angel:

I have just seen BGHN page and what CB had to say, my heart went out to him and those there to help. I hope Gail is found soon, thoughts and prayers from across the oceans.

 

[redfish]

I thought perhaps redfish would say who he or she thought the person is--that's all. Or maybe it was just a general statement.

Columbo, I was thinking maybe she would talk to her private investigator. He knew better than anyone what was going on. Perhaps he knows something more now.... I hope he has come forward.

 

[BeanE]

I would expect that his attorney did some digging and found the "right" counselor to send the children too, i.e. someone who will be able to testify favorably for his client in case of any potential future divorce litigation. MP seems like the type of client who follows his attorney's advice to the letter in regards to public statements, property searches, etc. His attorney seems like the type who is pretty on top of his game and will provide zealous representation. I can't imagine this attorney letting MP send the kids to just anyone, there is too much at stake.

So, you think Matt's attorney arranged with a counselor beforehand that no matter what the kids told the counselor, this counselor, without even knowing yet what the kids would say - which, if I went by Gail's threads, could include that Matt killed their mother - would testify to a certain list of things?

Again, a grave ethics violation - and just too much of a stretch for me.

 

[BeanE]

:twocents:Okay....Now all the lawyers on WS forgive me when I say this....you are not the target of my rant ... okay? BUT...."WHAT IF" ....when MP's attorney, in court this past weeks(emergency hearing) said to Chancellor Frank Brown. The children are in counselling...or they have a counselor". WHAT IF it was a play on words...just for show...for the judge and the media ...indeed this may be true, they may be in counselling...BUT, he NEVER stated that the children were CURRENTLY IN ACTIVE COUNSELING...did he? He turned around and looked at the press and said " this is a private matter" or a "family matter" .....something to that extent.

I suppose the attorney could have stood up and flat out lied to the court, on record, to the judge, in front of the media, on video.

That would be a pretty serious ethics violation I would think - and to do it on video even, and with independent witnesses, really really stupid of him.

It's just too much of a stretch for me, personally.

 

[BeanE]

:twocents:SO why would MP be fearful of DN & KN approaching and speaking to the children (their own niece & nephew)? Why does MP fear the aunt and uncle speaking to them? Why mot trust them with the kids....they had never been treated that way before. Just saying:twocents: I can think of ONLY ONE REASON for MP not allowing the kids to talk with the kids post April 30th 2011:twocents:JMOHO

I thought there had been visits with the kids and Gail's siblings. I think Diane and Kevin's attorneys said in court there had been visits. I'll look it up as soon as I have my coffee. Just woke up lol.

 

[BeanE]

You answered something I was going to ask: When did this increase in paranoia and fear happen?

BBM. Increase.

I want to point out that if you look at the timeline, you see that throughout many, many years, there are no reports whatever of Gail having paranoia, delusion, erratic behavior, behavior outside the norm - not a single report.

This leads me to be compelled to stress that this was not an increase, but an onset, a beginning, something new.

My opinion.

One of several reasons I feel compelled to point this out, is that the onset appeared to have occurred around the same time as the reported black eye. I ponder whether Gail may have had a head injury at that time, which brought on the behavior/symptoms that do not seem to be her norm. I just think it's something to note and keep in mind as a possibility.

 

[hollyblue]

I think we all get that impression and I feel more concerned each day about them as they get older and if for some reason Gail never returns. I would imagine they would feel they should or could have done something to possibly help at the time, and have more issues that may have been avoided in the first place. I believe they know A LOT of what went on. I do hope they get the opportunity to talk about it. JMHO

When I think about the children, I think how GP lost her own mother at 14, and there is no way she would have left them wondering where she was and the trauma that goes with it. No way. Not even a few weeks---after what we have seen as far as her preparations for the upcoming separation. Losing a mother is tragic enough, but not even knowing where she is or why...I can't imagine. I hope the counseling is a comfort for them.

 

[BeanE]

I've seen a couple people say that no one except the Birmingham people reported unusual behavior in Gail.

I disagree.

In addition to the Birmingham people, Gail is reported to have called 911.

Matt, Arlene, Susan, Diane, an SMPD LEO all reported behaviors that appear to me, and that I believe would appear to most people, to be outside the norm.

If it was just one person reporting unusual behaviors/symptoms, I would have completely disregarded it, but it is specifically because it was multiple people that it concerns me.

 

[Oriah]

Oriah, although there is no signage to identify it, the tower was up prior to storms, and the storms DID take out a tower in that area. It fell across the road and had to be cut in two places to allow for traffic on a very narrow road, the ends on either side and scraps that remain are marked with orange safety tape. A few days ago it was still there and had not been removed.

Thank you, fireflylink.