Page 18 of 37 FirstFirst ... 8910111213141516171819202122232425262728 ... LastLast
Results 426 to 450 of 919

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

  1. #426
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    32,253
    There are some states, such as California, if there is 'evidence' of physical violence, they do NOT need the spouse's testimony or statement to place the abusive person under arrest. Of course, this is in response to a 911 call or just bringing the matter to LE attention.

    I have a friend who was in an abusive situation. Long story as it went on for years, but the last time police were called regarding her and her husband's situation, she wasn't even the one who called LE. It was a friend and it was the worst attack up to the point. She had awful visual evidence on her neck and face. All she had to do was tell LE he did it, they did the rest and arrested him within hours, if not minutes.

    My friend did get a RO, but the attack was so visually vicious, the courts ordered a 'criminal restraining order,' meaning while he was in jail, even verbally say on his phone calls, which were monitered, he couldn't even 'utter' her name! Yeah......she finally wised up and filed for divorce WHILE he was still and jail and stuck to it!

    I'm not saying that happened here But this is an example of the different ways LE takes and reacts to domestic violence calls, both verbal and physical.

    JMHO
    fran

    PS....OTOH, if there's NO physcial evidence, LE just has the alleged victim's word. My friend called 911, he was gone (by the time LE responded) but they took a report. He was eventually cited and ordered to appear in court. She relented her 911 statement (eventhough it was TRUE), but he had talked her into relenting. When she did, she stuck to it, even as the judge sentenced her to 100 hours of community service and a blemish on HER record, for filing a 'false police' report, or 911 report.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to fran For This Useful Post:


  3. #427
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by fran View Post
    IMHO, Gail would most likely have let him walk home if he were not in a condition to take care of himself, ie POSSIBLE (per rumors) that he had a drinking problem. So who know? he was most likely under the influence.

    JMHO
    fran
    AGREED!! ...and remember MP wants everyone to think she's delusional and paranoid...any police officer hearing that may think it's best for them to separate, cool down, sleep it off, that is a common thread here with domestic calls.

    But, if it was that BAD, WHY did she go back so quickly, drop the kids in what appears to be in a hurry, possibly taking all their stuff in the house (including her purse or personal ID'd items), what did she see/hear for her to take off with only the keys and cell phone, leaving her children behind? Many would agree they wouldn't take children with them if they felt they'd be put in harm's way?!?

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


  5. #428
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    East Tennessee
    Posts
    8,057
    I think it's interesting that for two of the police calls Gail was the one who left the house.

    One time she left and spent the night at the mother-in-law's house.

    But that begs the question of why he didn't go there, since it was his mother, not hers?

    I don't think that's normally what happens. It's true the police will try to diffuse the situation by asking one or another to leave, usually the husband if they suspect abuse is going on. Not leave forever, just for the night.

    So why was Gail the one who had to leave the house?

    This may seem like nitpicking, but it fits with the husband's attitude of separating Gail (and her family) from the children and her own house (which he quickly protected with a restraining order against her).

    I told my husband about that today and he said, "Doesn't sound like he wants her to come home - how can she?"

    Then we have Gail asking to leave with the kids to drive all the way to Wetumpka, AL, alone with kids and dogs in the car. That sounds desperate to me. The fact he didn't want to go with her or insisted on driving in a separate car sounds like his problem, not hers. So I understand why she wanted to get away with the kids, especially if he was already saying she wasn't in her right mind. What I don't understand is why she came back so quickly since school was out until Monday, and until I hear a good reason I'm just not going to be satisfied.

    Did hubby call and give her an ultimatum? Did he threaten her? Did they talk on the phone at all while she was in AL?

    ETA: Was the mother-in-law involved in persuading her to come home from Alabama? I want to know more about that, since the husband was with his mother (he says) just before Gail arrived home.

    All of this starts to remind of the old movie "Gaslight" in which a husband convinces his wife that she is going mad, when really he is the cause of all the weird things happening to her. It happens all too often, I'm afraid. We see this all the time.

    I'm the proud mother of a new attorney!
    It's better to know some of the questions than all of the answers. ~ James Thurber
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing ~ Edmund Burke
    Why shouldn't truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. ~ Mark Twain

  6. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to ThoughtFox For This Useful Post:


  7. #429
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    32,253
    Quote Originally Posted by happy409 View Post
    AGREED!! ...and remember MP wants everyone to think she's delusional and paranoid...any police officer hearing that may think it's best for them to separate, cool down, sleep it off, that is a common thread here with domestic calls.

    But, if it was that BAD, WHY did she go back so quickly, drop the kids in what appears to be in a hurry, possibly taking all their stuff in the house (including her purse or personal ID'd items), what did she see/hear for her to take off with only the keys and cell phone, leaving her children behind? Many would agree they wouldn't take children with them if they felt they'd be put in harm's way?!?

    We have seen this before, where the ABUSED spouse will actually leave their children behind. IMHO, it's usually because the victim feels personally threatened but NO threat to the children. It might be actually, quite the opposite, IMHO. The abuser of the spouse, is over-indulgent with the children.

    As far as her returning them when she already had them. Well think about this for a minute. Just a SUPPOSE. ......while she was at the lake home, he called her, threatened her as he MAY have done in the past, but told her she could just leave the kids and he doesn't give a darn what happens to her. She MAY HAVE known if she took the kids he'd go to the ends of the earth to track her down. But if she left the kids, they'd be safe and she, being away from her POSSIBLE abuser, is safely out of his reach.

    Just some possiblities,
    JMHO, of course!
    fran

  8. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to fran For This Useful Post:


  9. #430
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    East Tennessee
    Posts
    8,057
    Quote Originally Posted by fran View Post
    We have seen this before, where the ABUSED spouse will actually leave their children behind. IMHO, it's usually because the victim feels personally threatened but NO threat to the children. It might be actually, quite the opposite, IMHO. The abuser of the spouse, is over-indulgent with the children.

    As far as her returning them when she already had them. Well think about this for a minute. Just a SUPPOSE. ......while she was at the lake home, he called her, threatened her as he MAY have done in the past, but told her she could just leave the kids and he doesn't give a darn what happens to her. She MAY HAVE known if she took the kids he'd go to the ends of the earth to track her down. But if she left the kids, they'd be safe and she, being away from her POSSIBLE abuser, is safely out of his reach.

    Just some possiblities,
    JMHO, of course!
    fran
    Fran: You and I are totally on the same wavelength here.

    As you can see from my previous post which echoes yours, I am beginning to wonder what went on while Gail was in Alabama.

    Who called her?
    Was she threatened over the phone or in text messages?
    Did the mother-in-law get involved and persuade her to bring the kids home?

    She knew the husband loved the kids, but probably didn't love her anymore.

    The more I thought about this today, the angrier it makes me feel about her situation. I feel she was being pushed to always concede to someone else's demands and felt alone except for the police. It's horribly sad.

    I'm the proud mother of a new attorney!
    It's better to know some of the questions than all of the answers. ~ James Thurber
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing ~ Edmund Burke
    Why shouldn't truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. ~ Mark Twain

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


  11. #431
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    32,253
    Just a heads-up!

    One of the owner-partners of Websleuths is on Websleuth Radio right now. To hear Tricia talk to some of our Websleuth members just go to the top of the Websleuth's page and and click on the proper link. On the right side when you see Tricia, click to listen in!

    She's talking about the Anthony case....

    fran

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to fran For This Useful Post:


  13. #432
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    32,253
    LOL, I hope I didn't run anybody off! We can still post!

    The show was awesome and quite a success as far as listeners went! Even caused a {blip} on our own forum.


    fran

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


  15. #433
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    728
    Quote Originally Posted by Emeralgem View Post
    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..
    Some speculation: We recently found out that Gail texted Arlene at 1:49 PM saying she was coming on down, which is earlier than we previously thought. Also, some locals have helpfully confirmed that the kids were out of school on Friday. I think it's possible Gail and the kids were planning on going down to Alabama, maybe for a weekend away, but a verbal altercation happened before they left.

    Keep in mind though that Matt has told the media this was an unplanned trip to Alabama. If he has been so worried about Gail taking the kids, maybe he was worried before she disappeared, too. Maybe he got mad that she was leaving with them for the lake house, thinking she was "stealing" them, and they got into the verbal altercation.

    When Gail called 911 she was presented with options like the safe house, she may have decided to just go on down to Alabama like she wanted to in the first place. Matt may have insisted she bring the kids back, which would explain why she came back so soon on the 30th. She and the kids weren't even at the lake house 24 hours.

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


  17. #434
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Mayberry
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by fran View Post
    There are some states, such as California, if there is 'evidence' of physical violence, they do NOT need the spouse's testimony or statement to place the abusive person under arrest. Of course, this is in response to a 911 call or just bringing the matter to LE attention.
    This is true in Tennessee as well.

    That word "evidence" can get very complicated though.

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Pearl* For This Useful Post:


  19. #435
    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

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by ThoughtFox View Post
    I think it's interesting that for two of the police calls Gail was the one who left the house.

    One time she left and spent the night at the mother-in-law's house.

    But that begs the question of why he didn't go there, since it was his mother, not hers?

    I don't think that's normally what happens. It's true the police will try to diffuse the situation by asking one or another to leave, usually the husband if they suspect abuse is going on. Not leave forever, just for the night.

    So why was Gail the one who had to leave the house?

    This may seem like nitpicking, but it fits with the husband's attitude of separating Gail (and her family) from the children and her own house (which he quickly protected with a restraining order against her).

    I told my husband about that today and he said, "Doesn't sound like he wants her to come home - how can she?"

    Then we have Gail asking to leave with the kids to drive all the way to Wetumpka, AL, alone with kids and dogs in the car. That sounds desperate to me. The fact he didn't want to go with her or insisted on driving in a separate car sounds like his problem, not hers. So I understand why she wanted to get away with the kids, especially if he was already saying she wasn't in her right mind. What I don't understand is why she came back so quickly since school was out until Monday, and until I hear a good reason I'm just not going to be satisfied.

    Did hubby call and give her an ultimatum? Did he threaten her? Did they talk on the phone at all while she was in AL?

    ETA: Was the mother-in-law involved in persuading her to come home from Alabama? I want to know more about that, since the husband was with his mother (he says) just before Gail arrived home.

    All of this starts to remind of the old movie "Gaslight" in which a husband convinces his wife that she is going mad, when really he is the cause of all the weird things happening to her. It happens all too often, I'm afraid. We see this all the time.
    Messing with her head. My thoughts, exactly. I think most of those ^^^^ types in Gaslight are always the passive/aggressive one. imo. "Fifty Ways to Leave Your Lover" #? Start an argument so you can be alone. Friday's are usually a good target date so they can start "their" weekend. That's why I ask why he wasn't at work on Friday. Take off to start his week-end plans for himself?

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


  21. #436
    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 fran View Post
    LOL, I hope I didn't run anybody off! We can still post!

    The show was awesome and quite a success as far as listeners went! Even caused a {blip} on our own forum.

    fran
    I listened.Very good intro show. Heard Kimster and AZLawyer. We are a family! The blip was very noticeable.

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


  23. #437
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,216
    Quote Originally Posted by hollyblue View Post
    Messing with her head. My thoughts, exactly. I think most of those ^^^^ types in Gaslight are always the passive/aggressive one. imo. "Fifty Ways to Leave Your Lover" #? Start an argument so you can be alone. Friday's are usually a good target date so they can start "their" weekend. That's why I ask why he wasn't at work on Friday. Take off to start his week-end plans for himself?
    BBM IMO Sounds more like "50 Ways To Meet Your Lover"...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

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


  25. #438
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by fran View Post
    We have seen this before, where the ABUSED spouse will actually leave their children behind. IMHO, it's usually because the victim feels personally threatened but NO threat to the children. It might be actually, quite the opposite, IMHO. The abuser of the spouse, is over-indulgent with the children.

    As far as her returning them when she already had them. Well think about this for a minute. Just a SUPPOSE. ......while she was at the lake home, he called her, threatened her as he MAY have done in the past, but told her she could just leave the kids and he doesn't give a darn what happens to her. She MAY HAVE known if she took the kids he'd go to the ends of the earth to track her down. But if she left the kids, they'd be safe and she, being away from her POSSIBLE abuser, is safely out of his reach.

    Just some possiblities,
    JMHO, of course!
    fran
    I concur! That seems logical and why she would leave them at the house, possibly thinking SHE was possibly in danger, and didn't bring the children with her, knowing this wasn't about them. BUT, if she didn't leave in haste and/or planned on being away purposely, you would think she would have at LEAST taken her driver's license, told a neighbor or her sister where she would be.

    Per MP they were to meet back at the house...to do what? Why didn't she wait for him to return? (if he was even at his mother's), and I read she lives at the bottom of the W road...so 25 minutes is a stretch!

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


  27. #439
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    985
    Sounds to me that perhaps her husband was intimidating and frightening her on a regular basis, and is now hoping to capitilize on her departure by gaslighting her -- i.e. making it appear that she is the one with the problem. Manipulators are exceedingly skilled at doing that sort of thing.

  28. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to ThePhantom For This Useful Post:


  29. #440
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    728
    Maybe she left the kids at the house because someone asked her to meet at another location without the kids.

  30. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to glorias For This Useful Post:


  31. #441
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,011
    Quote Originally Posted by Emeralgem View Post
    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
    Em, didn't the neighbor stated that she saw Gail two weeks ago with a blackeye so I would imagine that it wasn't just a verbal altercation going on here but rather a physical altercation as well. That would stand to reason why LE gave Gail a phone number to a safe house.

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


  33. #442
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,011
    In the state I now live in if there is a physical altercation involved then someone is going to jail period, no ifs, ands, or butts about it.

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


  35. #443
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    692
    Quote Originally Posted by glorias View Post
    Maybe she left the kids at the house because someone asked her to meet at another location without the kids.
    This is my belief or one of them! I believe she was either frightened away (maybe accompanied away) or lured. Perhaps he was there without his vehicle so that she would THINK he wasn't there. The children may not have even seen him. According to neighbor she looked frightened or pre-occupied, I forget just how she explained it. But this is the picture that was brought to mind for me. It is my belief She had a very good reason for snubbing her trusted neighbor.

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


  37. #444
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,011
    In my state if you file any sort of legal action against someone who has not been notified of said action then they have to run it in the paper for a period of time before any action can go forward.

  38. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Snowbunny For This Useful Post:


  39. #445
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    692
    I recently filed a restraining order on behalf of a minor child (not in TN) but because the injunction could not be served they will only issue a 20 day temp. with me re-filing every 20 days..... crazy....

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


  41. #446
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,011
    Quote Originally Posted by glorias View Post
    Maybe she left the kids at the house because someone asked her to meet at another location without the kids.
    More than likely if it was the husband they would have a phone record that he spoke with her, unless he tried to contact her earlier on her way back from AL with the kids and she didn't take his phone calls and it went straight into voice mail but you would think the cops would beable to listen to her voice mail if he left one. I don't trust this guy for nothing after the funny stuff he thinks he's pulling here.

  42. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Snowbunny For This Useful Post:


  43. #447
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dana Point,CA
    Posts
    20,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowbunny View Post
    In my state if you file any sort of legal action against someone who has not been notified of said action then they have to run it in the paper for a period of time before any action can go forward.
    It addresses in the filing that she is impossible to serve her because her whereabouts are unknown and she has not made contact with friends or family.

    He is asking for the emergency custody and TRO be granted prior to service in the best interest of the children and in due time they can address the separation and permanent arrangements.

    IOW's when she can be properly served and respond they can settle everything out. But in the meantime he wants to have a TRO and exclusive use of the home for the sake of the children.

  44. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to JBean For This Useful Post:


  45. #448
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowbunny View Post
    More than likely if it was the husband they would have a phone record that he spoke with her, unless he tried to contact her earlier on her way back from AL with the kids and she didn't take his phone calls and it went straight into voice mail but you would think the cops would beable to listen to her voice mail if he left one. I don't trust this guy for nothing after the funny stuff he thinks he's pulling here.

    If this was even close to planned (since it appears many things were in process prior to her disappearance), a pre-paid phone can be bought at the local gas station. I imagine any calls that were made that weren't supposed to be public will not be.

  46. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to happy409 For This Useful Post:


  47. #449
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowbunny View Post
    Em, didn't the neighbor stated that she saw Gail two weeks ago with a blackeye so I would imagine that it wasn't just a verbal altercation going on here but rather a physical altercation as well. That would stand to reason why LE gave Gail a phone number to a safe house.
    I just can't imagine them not referencing that in their report though? That wouldn't seem like an honest report if that was the case. I haven't seen those reports, but the media has referred to specific parts of them several times as if they had.

  48. The Following User Says Thank You to sophieness For This Useful Post:


  49. #450
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by fran View Post
    IMHO, she could have also contacted a distant family member. She wouldn't have to tell them where she is, just that she's safe and the less they know, the better.

    but alas! That isn't happening here either.
    Or even any of her HS/College friends all over the country. But, no word anywhere . . .

    Gail Marie, where are you???

  50. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to MacGyver For This Useful Post:


Page 18 of 37 FirstFirst ... 8910111213141516171819202122232425262728 ... 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
  •