Page 17 of 37 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415161718192021222324252627 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 425 of 919

Thread: TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren, 44, Signal Mountain, 30 April 2011 - #3

  1. #401
    hollyblue's Avatar
    hollyblue is offline It may be the cock that crows, but it is the hen that lays the eggs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,113
    Beautiful day, beautiful area......there should be so many volunteering, imo. Take some time and a drive with the kids ...to try and find the jeep.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to hollyblue For This Useful Post:


  3. #402
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,216
    Quote Originally Posted by hollyblue View Post
    No prob! The facts and timeline have been confusing in the past 24 hrs. I think some....including me are feeling anxious about the search today.

    I'm wondering if the searchers have been instructed to mark possible area if items of clothing or things that just may be connected are found?
    Again, I do apologize.. Thursday and Friday after the storms were a blur for me..And to some degree still are..
    We left out of our home on Saturday morning at 3:30 am by flashlight to take the shuttle to Atlanta's airport.
    "It's been clear from day one that the contradicting statements from the family members are not the truth," said Capt. Johnny Greenwood, spokesman for the Putnam County Sheriff's Office.

    JUSTICE HAS BEEN KIDNAPPED AND HIDDEN IN THE LAW

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Emeralgem For This Useful Post:


  5. #403
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,663
    Quote Originally Posted by Pearl* View Post
    Is it right that we now know she simply gave those passports to a friend for safekeeping? Was it just her passport or the passports for the children too? Of course regardless...it could just as easily be argued she was trying to keep HIM from taking the children out of the country. Right?
    Aren't children sometimes included on their parents' passports? This is what I recall but it was about 13 years ago this was true--things may have changed.
    Last edited by Columbo; 05-22-2011 at 05:39 PM.

  6. #404
    hollyblue's Avatar
    hollyblue is offline It may be the cock that crows, but it is the hen that lays the eggs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,113
    Quote Originally Posted by Pearl* View Post
    Is it right that we now know she simply gave those passports to a friend for safekeeping? Was it just her passport or the passports for the children too? Of course regardless...it could just as easily be argued she was trying to keep HIM from taking the children out of the country. Right?
    Don't think it was ever specified whose passports SB had, but I would think that keeping the kids passport from him could be argued on her behalf too.

  7. #405
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,216
    O/T
    Callie Starnes
    Correction: Williams went missing from her East Ridge home. Her car and body were found in Sequatchie County.
    calliestarnes Callie Starnes
    Hitchcock says Williams' body was found in wooded area. Too early to tell if foul play is involved. Authorities on scene.
    calliestarnes Callie Starnes
    BREAKING: Missing Sequatchie woman, Nancy Williams, just found dead. Sheriff Hitchcock confirms.
    "It's been clear from day one that the contradicting statements from the family members are not the truth," said Capt. Johnny Greenwood, spokesman for the Putnam County Sheriff's Office.

    JUSTICE HAS BEEN KIDNAPPED AND HIDDEN IN THE LAW

  8. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Emeralgem For This Useful Post:


  9. #406
    Why do we keep calling it a DV call doesn't that stand for domestic violence? I thought they were all verbal altercation calls.

  10. #407
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by hollyblue View Post
    Weren't they in the affidavit?

    ETA: May 6, 2011 - Matthew Palmgren files a motion for exclusive use and possession of the couple's home. He also files a restraining order against his wife, and a request for temporary custody of the couple's children. In his affidavit, Matthew Palmgren says his wife had suffered "bouts of depression," was paranoid in days before her disappearance, and had changed pin numbers to bank accounts that contain hundreds of thousands of dollars. He adds he was concerned his wife might try to take their children out of the country.

    http://www.wrcbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=14669942

    He said he proposed to meet Mrs. Palmgren at the residence on April 30, but when he arrived she was gone, having left the two children "by themselves without any supervision."

    http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_200931.asp
    That was in the local media, just curious with abandonment statements if anyone had actually seen the affidavit?

  11. #408
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,663
    Quote Originally Posted by sophieness View Post
    Why do we keep calling it a DV call doesn't that stand for domestic violence? I thought they were all verbal altercation calls.
    Is there a distinction between the two? Is DV necessarily physical? Seems like verbal altercations could very well lead to physical violence.

  12. #409
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by Emeralgem View Post
    O/T
    Callie Starnes
    Correction: Williams went missing from her East Ridge home. Her car and body were found in Sequatchie County.
    calliestarnes Callie Starnes
    Hitchcock says Williams' body was found in wooded area. Too early to tell if foul play is involved. Authorities on scene.
    calliestarnes Callie Starnes
    BREAKING: Missing Sequatchie woman, Nancy Williams, just found dead. Sheriff Hitchcock confirms.

    She was actually from East Ridge, East of downtown Chattanooga, but found in Sequatchie County, on the other side of Signal Mountain. Hopefully, there was no foul play. She supposedly had headaches when she left Monday, her car was found in Sequatchie County (claims were she knew the area well) and parked in the same place as of Monday (based on GPS) and hiked a lot.
    What a shame!

  13. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to happy409 For This Useful Post:


  14. #410
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by Columbo View Post
    Is there a distinction between the two? Is DV necessarily physical? Seems like verbal altercations could very well lead to physical violence.
    They call it a domestic dispute call here!

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to happy409 For This Useful Post:


  16. #411
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,663
    Quote Originally Posted by happy409 View Post
    That was in the local media, just curious with abandonment statements if anyone had actually seen the affidavit?
    happy409, here's a link to an article that discusses the affidavit. I was sure that someone, possibly JBean, posted a link to the actual affidavit but I can't find it.

    http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_200931.asp

  17. #412
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,216
    Quote Originally Posted by sophieness View Post
    Why do we keep calling it a DV call doesn't that stand for domestic violence? I thought they were all verbal altercation calls.
    In reference to myself I refer to the call on the 29th as being a DV call due to the fact she was given a number/s to a safe house/s..JMHO

    ETA.. I was married for 35 years when my husband passed and I cannot even begin to count the many verbal altercations we had over a 35 year period but not once were the police ever called out to settle our verbal disagreements....JMHO
    Last edited by Emeralgem; 05-22-2011 at 06:36 PM. Reason: add thought
    "It's been clear from day one that the contradicting statements from the family members are not the truth," said Capt. Johnny Greenwood, spokesman for the Putnam County Sheriff's Office.

    JUSTICE HAS BEEN KIDNAPPED AND HIDDEN IN THE LAW

  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Emeralgem For This Useful Post:


  19. #413
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Mayberry
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by sophieness View Post
    Why do we keep calling it a DV call doesn't that stand for domestic violence? I thought they were all verbal altercation calls.
    Here's one definition I found from a quick google:

    http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...estic+Violence

    Any abusive, violent, coercive, forceful, or threatening act or word inflicted by one member of a family or household on another can constitute domestic violence. [bbm]

    I think it's fair to say that "simple" verbal arguments seldom lead to police calls. I'm betting that over the course of their marriage, there were more than 3 verbal arguments. Something had to have made these different, in order for 911 calls to take place. And... just because "verbal altercation" was all that was recorded in the police report, we cannot assume no more took place than that, although depending on what was said and how it was said, that could be enough to justify a call for help. It's possible that once the police arrived, nobody wanted to admit to more than a war of words. Typically, in my experience, a woman calls for help because she needs an out-of-control situation to be diffused. Often, all that is necessary is the call and the police presence to accomplish that goal.

    I've read several times on the forum that "no crime" was committed. That may or may not be true. Police can only report based on the evidence they have, which may or may not present ALL the facts.

    Let's not forget that Gail was reported to have had a black eye the weekend of 4/10. Surely no one really believes her excuse of having run into something.

  20. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Pearl* For This Useful Post:


  21. #414
    Quote Originally Posted by Columbo View Post
    Is there a distinction between the two? Is DV necessarily physical? Seems like verbal altercations could very well lead to physical violence.
    I think there is a distinction. One can lead to the other but they are not exactly the same. DV is a crime, and a verbal altercation is not always a crime, nor does it necessarily say threats took place. We don't know, exactly what happened. Domestic dispute is what is said here too when physical violence did not take place. When I read DV calls, I take it for granted that there was violence or threat of violence.

    I'm not defending MP or saying no DV took place. I just kinda want to go on what we know as far as those phone calls when we are talking factually, and it doesn't sound like that is how they were classified by police.

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sophieness For This Useful Post:


  23. #415
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Long island
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by sophieness View Post
    Why do we keep calling it a DV call doesn't that stand for domestic violence? I thought they were all verbal altercation calls.
    Domestic Abuse

    Domestic abuse includes physical and mental abuse. Common tactics used by abusers include dominance, humiliation, isolation, threats, intimidation and denial or blame and these tactics can be cyclical and form a pattern. A victim has a right to walk away from his or her abuser. However, the fear of retaliation or physical altercation may hinder a spouse who seeks escape. The National Domestic Violence Hotline provides service to all 50 states to provide help in these situations.

    http://www.divorcelawfirms.com/legal...abusive-spouse


    when the police (NY) were called about my ex screaming at me, they handed me a pamphlet for dv victims, sent me to my mothers house with kids for night. refusing to do anything else even though he broke things including the front door, threatened my friends, loaded a rifle etc.
    Last edited by silversurvivor; 05-22-2011 at 07:14 PM. Reason: add personal experience

  24. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to silversurvivor For This Useful Post:


  25. #416
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,216
    Quote Originally Posted by sophieness View Post
    I think there is a distinction. One can lead to the other but they are not exactly the same. DV is a crime, and a verbal altercation is not always a crime, nor does it necessarily say threats took place. We don't know, exactly what happened. Domestic dispute is what is said here too when physical violence did not take place. When I read DV calls, I take it for granted that there was violence or threat of violence.

    I'm not defending MP or saying no DV took place. I just kinda want to go on what we know as far as those phone calls when we are talking factually, and it doesn't sound like that is how they were classified by police.
    I can definitely understand what you are saying, but am wondering WHY LE felt it necessary to give her a number for a safe house... Am also wondering WHY she was the one who left instead of him...He could have just as easily gone to his mother's home unless he was impaired and unable to drive..
    IIRC there was another altercation about the dog last Fall, and Gail was the one who left at that time too, and she went to his mother's residence...JMHO
    "It's been clear from day one that the contradicting statements from the family members are not the truth," said Capt. Johnny Greenwood, spokesman for the Putnam County Sheriff's Office.

    JUSTICE HAS BEEN KIDNAPPED AND HIDDEN IN THE LAW

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Emeralgem For This Useful Post:


  27. #417
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Mayberry
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by sophieness View Post
    I think there is a distinction. One can lead to the other but they are not exactly the same. DV is a crime, and a verbal altercation is not always a crime, nor does it necessarily say threats took place. We don't know, exactly what happened. Domestic dispute is what is said here too when physical violence did not take place. When I read DV calls, I take it for granted that there was violence or threat of violence.

    I'm not defending MP or saying no DV took place. I just kinda want to go on what we know as far as those phone calls when we are talking factually, and it doesn't sound like that is how they were classified by police.
    From Tennessee Code Annotated:

    http://www.michie.com/tennessee/lpex....htm&cp=tncode

    36-3-601. Part definitions.

    As used in this part, unless the context otherwise requires:

    (1) “Abuse” means inflicting, or attempting to inflict, physical injury on an adult or minor by other than accidental means, placing an adult or minor in fear of physical harm, physical restraint, malicious damage to the personal property of the abused party, including inflicting, or attempting to inflict, physical injury on any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by an adult or minor, or placing an adult or minor in fear of physical harm to any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the adult or minor;

    AND

    39-13-101. Assault.

    (a) A person commits assault who:

    ...
    (2) Intentionally or knowingly causes another to reasonably fear imminent bodily injury; [bbm]


    I am NOT a legal expert, but here's the direct quote from T.C.A. that I think helps make clear that domestic assault does not require a physical injury. And, yes, it is a crime.

    However, the police may or may not have enough evidence to make an arrest, depending on what they actually see and what the parties tell them. Many abusers can turn it off and on like a switch, proving that YES, they CAN control themselves when they want to.
    Last edited by Pearl*; 05-22-2011 at 07:35 PM. Reason: typo

  28. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Pearl* For This Useful Post:


  29. #418
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    739
    [QUOTE=Pearl*;6531459]From Tennessee Code Annotated:

    http://www.michie.com/tennessee/lpex....htm&cp=tncode

    36-3-601. Part definitions.

    As used in this part, unless the context otherwise requires:

    (1) “Abuse” means inflicting, or attempting to inflict, physical injury on an adult or minor by other than accidental means, placing an adult or minor in fear of physical harm, physical restraint, malicious damage to the personal property of the abused party, including inflicting, or attempting to inflict, physical injury on any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by an adult or minor, or placing an adult or minor in fear of physical harm to any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the adult or minor;

    AND

    39-13-101. Assault.

    (a) A person commits assault who:

    ...

    (2) Intentionally or knowingly causes another to reasonably fear imminent bodily injury;

    I am NOT a legal expert, but here's the direct quote from T.C.A. that I think helps make clear that domestic assault does not require a physical injury. And, yes, it is a crime.

    However, the police may or may not have enough evidence to make an arrest, depending on what they actually see and what the parties tell them. Many abusers can turn it off and on like a switch, proving that YES, they CAN control themselves when that want to.[/QUOTE]

    bbm: I have seen this first hand. VERY SCARY. The first time you conciously witness this can be and should be a real deal breaker.

  30. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to redfish For This Useful Post:


  31. #419
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    33,137
    Quote Originally Posted by sophieness View Post
    Why do we keep calling it a DV call doesn't that stand for domestic violence? I thought they were all verbal altercation calls.
    Verbal altercation calls ARE DV calls. They're one and the same.

    During verbal altercations between SO's, you're only 1/2 second away from physical abuse.

    When there is NO history of DV calls being answered by LE, doesn't mean there was not any. Just that they weren't reported.

    One of my siblings had her arm broken and much more! NEVER once a call to LE. But she has the scars as proof, both physical and emotional.

    Laci Peterson had never reported domestic disturbances to LE. Her husband is now waiting on death row in California.

    I could go on, but one gets the point......Verbal abuse CAN lead to and IS abuse. The visibility of said scars is the only difference. The end result may also be the difference between the verbal and physical as no jail time for 'words,' but possible prison time for physical or murder. Verbal abuse can go on forever, or turn into 'physical' and as we've seen in cases such as the Laci Peterson case, that ONE physical assault is all it took to lead to murder. Sometimes there just isn't that warning shot, ie that first physical contact that makes the victim actually fear for her life.

    I'm not saying that happened here, murder or anything actually physical at all . I'm merely speaking in generalities, fwiw.

    JMHO
    fran

  32. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to fran For This Useful Post:


  33. #420
    I am not saying GP was not abused. What I am saying is we do not know the circumstances of the night before. We know she was afraid in general and thought someone was following her. But the phone call to police we do not know that at that time she was afraid of MP or just angry. The circumstances of the other phone calls that we know of do not point to abuse specifically either, do I think there was more to those calls then we know? yes I do, and I think it's a possibility that she was abused physically, and a probability that she was abused mentally. but I just think it's an oversimplification to call them DV calls when we do not know what or if abuse took place at those particular times. JMO.

    What we have is patterns of behavior when they were apart from each other that are suspicious. We do not know what went on between then when they were together. We can only speculate. I believe DV is common fran- but I do not believe all verbal altercations are 1/2 second away from physical abuse, because I have been in plenty of verbal altercations (arguments) myself, and although with some people that may be true, we cannot say it is true in all cases with all partners. I like that we are giving GP the benefit of the doubt, I do. I'm just saying, whether she called because of physical abuse, verbal abuse, we do not know of those things. We only know that there was arguing on these occasions. Calling police to diffuse an argument does not always say there was abuse going on at that time.

  34. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to sophieness For This Useful Post:


  35. #421
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    739
    Quote Originally Posted by sophieness View Post
    I am not saying GP was not abused. What I am saying is we do not know the circumstances of the night before. We know she was afraid in general and thought someone was following her. But the phone call to police we do not know that at that time she was afraid of MP or just angry. The circumstances of the other phone calls that we know of do not point to abuse specifically either, do I think there was more to those calls then we know? yes I do, and I think it's a possibility that she was abused physically, and a probability that she was abused mentally. but I just think it's an oversimplification to call them DV calls when we do not know what or if abuse took place at those particular times. JMO.
    Sophie, you are right we don't. But SOMETHING made the responding officer give her a safe house number. They do not do this on a whim. They actually take you aside a give you a very firm talking to.

  36. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to redfish For This Useful Post:


  37. #422
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by sophieness View Post
    I think there is a distinction. One can lead to the other but they are not exactly the same. DV is a crime, and a verbal altercation is not always a crime, nor does it necessarily say threats took place. We don't know, exactly what happened. Domestic dispute is what is said here too when physical violence did not take place. When I read DV calls, I take it for granted that there was violence or threat of violence.

    I'm not defending MP or saying no DV took place. I just kinda want to go on what we know as far as those phone calls when we are talking factually, and it doesn't sound like that is how they were classified by police.

    They call it a domestic dispute call. All the articles also refer to it as such. Also, police have gone to the house multiple times, so for them to give her numbers, she may have appeared more frightened over other times? I hope they don't end up wishing they did something more.

  38. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to happy409 For This Useful Post:


  39. #423
    Quote Originally Posted by redfish View Post
    Sophie, you are right we don't. But SOMETHING made the responding officer give her a safe house number. They do not do this on a whim. They actually take you aside a give you a very firm talking to.
    Could they have done that because they knew there was a pattern of arguments and 911 calls and thought there *may* be more they did not know about, as opposed to them knowing abuse or violence had taken place? I think it is likely that harm has come to GP. but I DO find those phone calls and the details that have been released strange. In so much as, if I was to call 911 on my partner, I know it would be because I thought he was either out of control and destroying property, threatening me, or hurting me. and if I go so far as to call 911 I'm going to make sure the police know what happened and they wouldn't just be writing verbal altercation over missing dog or jeep etc no crime committed.

    I know DV doesn't always work like that and people get scared or back off etc. I'm just saying, I personally, do not know for a fact that is what happened in this case.

  40. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sophieness For This Useful Post:


  41. #424
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    33,137
    IMHO, I believe the officers word usage on these DV reports, leads me to believe the officers either deffused the situation or the victim changes her story by the time LE arrived on the scene. IF the officers deffused the situation, of course they're going to minimize the seriousness of the dispute.

    OTOH, if the victim changed her story, she may have either been threatened by him if he was arrested, or she feared his arrest could jeopradize her family and most specifically the children and the family's standing in the eye of public opinion. She appears to be too much together to make a 911 call just to control her husband. Obviously by her work history, she's perfectly capable of making decisions in an intelligent and educated manner. She would NOT call LE, imho, unless the situation was out of control.

    It's interesting that during the period this couple was having contact with LE for domestic disturbance calls, one of the neighbors reported to the media, that Gail had a black eye and said 'she ran into something.' I don't recall seeing any mention of this on police reports.

    It's also very PROBABLE, that someone under verbal abuse situations, will deny to LE, upon their arrival on the scene, the true situation that caused them to call LE to intervene. I really don't think that first call about the missing dog, was really about the dog at all. That was the cause of the argument, but most likely NOT the concern cause of the 911 call. My same thought for one of these other calls, about him walking home. IMHO, Gail would most likely have let him walk home unless he were not in a condition to take care of himself, ie POSSIBLE (per rumors) that he had a drinking problem. So who knows? he was most likely under the influence.

    Of course, once again I'm not saying this IS what happened but may POSSIBLY have been the case here, viewing from the outside in and no proof of anything except speculation.

    JMHO
    fran
    Last edited by fran; 05-22-2011 at 07:41 PM.

  42. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to fran For This Useful Post:


  43. #425
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Mayberry
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by fran View Post
    She appears to be too much together to make a 911 call just to control her husband. Obviously by her work history, she's perfectly capable of making decisions in an intelligent and educated manner. She would NOT call LE, imho, unless the situation was out of control.
    I think the timeline is very important. As I recall, the Palmgrens have been married for many years. I've read nothing of 911 calls occurring until November 2010. This indicates to me a rapid escalation, if it is true that no DV calls were made before November 2010. I just can't believe Gail called for trivial reasons.

    NEW THOUGHT: Do we know anything about a DV history before they moved to Signal Mountain?
    Last edited by Pearl*; 05-22-2011 at 07:48 PM. Reason: Addition

  44. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Pearl* For This Useful Post:


Page 17 of 37 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415161718192021222324252627 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren, 44, Signal Mountain, 30 April 2011 *Media Links*
    By imamaze in forum Gail Nowacki Palmgren General Discussion Threads
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 09-27-2011, 11:21 PM
  2. TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren, 44, Signal Mountain, 30 April 2011 - #2
    By imamaze in forum Gail Nowacki Palmgren General Discussion Threads
    Replies: 580
    Last Post: 05-19-2011, 06:04 PM
  3. TN - Gail Nowacki Palmgren, 44, Signal Mountain, 30 April 2011 - #1
    By JBean in forum Gail Nowacki Palmgren General Discussion Threads
    Replies: 827
    Last Post: 05-16-2011, 10:52 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •