MS - Jessica Chambers, 19, found burned near her car, Panola County, 6 Dec 2014 - #11

[rbarber17]

Just looking down the road here, hoping that the perp(s) are soon caught and the wheels of justice can eventually bring about a conviction. Do you think the DA would be able to convince a jury to impose the death penalty if there was no eyewitness, only circumstantial evidence? That assumes of course, that there was only one participant. If there was more than one involved, then hopefully one would turn State's evidence, and plea bargain life without parole in exchange for testimony against the other person, who would most assuredly receive the death penalty for such a horrible crime. Thoughts, comments, concerns, gibes?

JMO
:jail:

 

[Steleheart]

You might try a different search engine like yahoo or bing.
I just entered your search terms on Yahoo and I got all kinds of active MSM links on the first page of results.

Hmmm now I got it all on Google.

Strange

 

[BirdycatNY]

Hmmm now I got it all on Google.

Strange

Google settings will affect searches, like if you look for anything in the past 24 hrs there won't be nearly as much as if no time limit or web vs news vs videos, so may be your settings were different. I know sometimes I find legitimate news articles on this case but they don't come up right away on the searches, just needed to dig through other stuff like spam and extremist sites etc.

 

[BirdycatNY]

Just looking down the road here, hoping that the perp(s) are soon caught and the wheels of justice can eventually bring about a conviction. Do you think the DA would be able to convince a jury to impose the death penalty if there was no eyewitness, only circumstantial evidence? That assumes of course, that there was only one participant. If there was more than one involved, then hopefully one would turn State's evidence, and plea bargain life without parole in exchange for testimony against the other person, who would most assuredly receive the death penalty for such a horrible crime. Thoughts, comments, concerns, gibes?

JMO
:jail:

I don't think death penalty will be off the table. Other cases have had circumstantial evidence or even no body ( I think Lacy Peterson case for example, but that could be wrong IDK?), but do not know if any convictions resulted in death penalty or LWOP. Will try to find some cases, but due to the horrific nature of the crime my guess is DP is still in play in Jessica's case, but IDK. Jmo/

 

[rbarber17]

I don't think death penalty will be off the table. Other cases have had circumstantial evidence or even no body ( I think Lacy Peterson case for example, but that could be wrong IDK?), but do not know if any convictions resulted in death penalty or LWOP. Will try to find some cases, but due to the horrific nature of the crime my guess is DP is still in play in Jessica's case, but IDK. Jmo/

I hope so.

One other thing, somewhat related since it would be part of the trial. One or more of the first responders heard Jessica say, "Eric so-and-so did this..." or something like that. Would such testimony be admissible, or would it be considered hearsay, since the person making the original statement would not be available in court for the defense to cross examine? Or would that fall into the category of a dying declaration, and be therefore admissible?

 

[BirdycatNY]

I hope so.

One other thing, somewhat related since it would be part of the trial. One or more of the first responders heard Jessica say, "Eric so-and-so did this..." or something like that. Would such testimony be admissible, or would it be considered hearsay, since the person making the original statement would not be available in court for the defense to cross examine? Or would that fall into the category of a dying declaration, and be therefore admissible?

In general, Dying declarations are considered exceptions to the hearsay rule and dying declarations are admissible in federal context at least (for example example FedRulesEvidence Rule 804 https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_804). But since we the public don't have specifics on Jessica's statements, LE/FBI/DA most certainly will have more information and better idea whether Jessica's statements considered dying declarations. It also depends on what rules apply in this case ie MS state/fed rules of evidence etc.

Note- there are also other exceptions and different exclusions to hearsay FRE rules (at least in the federal context) so other hearsay statements can be admissible if fall under exceptions, exclusions or admissions, but not sure in this case because not publicly available and what evidence rules apply, MS state/or/federal. I think other WSrs mentioned MS does not disclose evidence/information until trial and needs to go through grand jury (if that's wrong, someone please correct). Maybe someone with MS insight can elaborate? Jmo/Tia/

 

[gngr~snap]

The most frustrating thing about this case is that all, and mean ALL of the previous MSM links to news sites have disappeared from any Google search and all we are left with are the extremist blogs. Just Google Jessica Chambers burned. There are 2 old stories and then just SM and blogs. I am still convinced that MSM has deleted their archives from Google search. For what reason?

Why is DEA even involved in a girl's death?

MOO

Try more a more generalized search
"Girl burned car Mississippi"
Or
"Woman set on fire in Mississippi news"
Or
"Breaking news girl burned in Mississippi"

I have found that NOT using her name gets better results news wise.
Moo


Sent from my LG-D801 using Tapatalk

 

[anonone]

In general, Dying declarations are considered exceptions to the hearsay rule and dying declarations are admissible in federal context at least (for example example FedRulesEvidence Rule 804 https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_804). But since we the public don't have specifics on Jessica's statements, LE/FBI/DA most certainly will have more information and better idea whether Jessica's statements considered dying declarations. It also depends on what rules apply in this case ie MS state/fed rules of evidence etc.

Note- there are also other exceptions and different exclusions to hearsay FRE rules (at least in the federal context) so other hearsay statements can be admissible if fall under exceptions, exclusions or admissions, but not sure in this case because not publicly available and what evidence rules apply, MS state/or/federal. I think other WSrs mentioned MS does not disclose evidence/information until trial and needs to go through grand jury (if that's wrong, someone please correct). Maybe someone with MS insight can elaborate? Jmo/Tia/

The trial court judge will not allow in the "Eric" comment. I believe this will be a death penalty case and the hearsay admission will not make a difference in the verdict. Hence, the trial court judge will not even entertain the possibility of a reversal on appeal due to an abuse of discretion. Better to not allow the statement admitted into evidence.

The statement will not matter. (modsnip) When a statement is made that an arrest will be made in 3 to 4 months with comments from LE stating that they need a little more evidence, one can bet the farm a grand jury has been convened. (modsnip)

 

[anonone]

Just looking down the road here, hoping that the perp(s) are soon caught and the wheels of justice can eventually bring about a conviction. Do you think the DA would be able to convince a jury to impose the death penalty if there was no eyewitness, only circumstantial evidence?

Champion will make certain this is a death penalty case. The evidence is overwhelming (especially to a jury of one's peers), IMO.

 

[wfgodot]

273 days now. No arrests.

 

[anonone]

273 days now. No arrests.

The sky is blue. Grass is green.

 

[BirdycatNY]

The trial court judge will not allow in the "Eric" comment. I believe this will be a death penalty case and the hearsay admission will not make a difference in the verdict. Hence, the trial court judge will not even entertain the possibility of a reversal on appeal due to an abuse of discretion. Better to not allow the statement admitted into evidence. Also, her mother already commented she had no tongue in the hospital. ...

I don't think there is enough about what/if any statements Jessica made, whether the DA will use/seek admission of any dying declaration statements in prosecution's case or speculate what a judge will decide to allow in evidence. I don't know all of what Jessica said, did CHaley or any first responder(s)/LE publicly discuss Jessica's statements, idk, but don't think public has information about what Jessica said. I was talking in generalities, regardless of this particular case, that dying declarations (among other exceptions, exclusions and admissions to hearsay) are exceptions to the hearsay rule in criminal cases, whether it is applies/used in this case is a different matter.

fyi- there are severe burned victims that were able to name their murderers i.e. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...aped-burned-alive-side-road-article-1.1153367. Additionally, I am not sure what car sold etc you are referring to, Can you elaborate? It sounds like you may be a local with more facts though? Jmo/

 

[SCHMAE]

Awful long wait for news

 

[Cricket99]

273 days now. No arrests.

 

[rbarber17]

273 days now. No arrests.

Nine month anniversary tomorrow.

 

[rbarber17]

(modsnip)

Not sure about the trial judge excluding Jessica's statement, if the prosecution doesn't even introduce it during the trial phase. Here in NC anyway, there is a separate sentencing phase whenever someone is found guilty in a capital murder trial. I assume the same holds for MS. The sentencing phase, IMO, is the time to introduce her dying words to help sway any fence sitting jurors reluctant to sentence someone to death.

JMO

 

[cady]

I think that it is discretionary for the judge. Anonone's explanation of that is in the post. LOL (modsnip) JMO

 

[cady]

Nine months Jessica. I think of you every day. JMO

 

[MizStery]

First and foremost,this is my theory of the events. So please read my post as a theory of what could have happened. I welcome criticism this is a discussion of the crime. I am not privy to any of the actual evidence.


My Fox Memphis is the reference for the 'original' Champion Feb 17,2015 timeline which I refer to in my post.

The Clarion Ledger is the reference for the 'latest' Champion timeline of Feb 25th which I refer to in my post.
http://www.clarionledger.com/story/...e-call-in-jessica-chambers-timeline/23996469/


Referencing the hour 6:30 to 7:31:

According to Champion:Jessica called her mother** this was the last known communication made from Jessica.Investigators are not sure of the actual location where Jessica called & talked to her mother from.

I have always felt Champion was playing a game of chess with us & he was using that call** as a part of his strategy. OK,Champion on Feb 17th entirely omitted Lisa's conversation with Jessica. Then,in the latest version Feb 25th of the timeline he artfully puts it back in.Why does he initially ignore this critical detail on Feb 17th then decide on Feb 25th to include it? In addition on Feb 25th he tweaks Lisa's version with the caveat that it was Jessica who initiated the call** ? I think that is significant. I think he is playing cat and mouse with the narrative. But why?

John Champion said,"They could put Jessica on the scene where she was found at 7:31."

I think the significance is;Jessica initiated a call for help on her cell at 7:31 and it was interrupted. Who ever was there wrestled her cell away and threw it out of her reach.

I also think that at least one 'particular' person who was witness to a mortally burned Jessica was also involved in the events of the missing hour. I think that is why it is of particular importance to prove the whereabouts of all the perpetrators of this murder. I am saying that this 'particular' person would be part of a coverup or part of the actual crime. I do not know which? But,I do believe there is a coverup. (My opinion only)Tom Dees unfortunately chose not to pursue this story as an investigative journalist. The question is would any of us given the methodology practiced by the criminals operating in this place?

:cow:

 

[cady]

First and foremost,this is my theory of the events. So please read my post as a theory of what could have happened. I welcome criticism this is a discussion of the crime. I am not privy to any of the actual evidence.


My Fox Memphis is the reference for the 'original' Champion Feb 17,2015 timeline which I refer to in my post.

The Clarion Ledger is the reference for the 'latest' Champion timeline of Feb 25th which I refer to in my post.
http://www.clarionledger.com/story/...e-call-in-jessica-chambers-timeline/23996469/


Referencing the hour 6:30 to 7:31:

According to Champion:Jessica called her mother** this was the last known communication made from Jessica.Investigators are not sure of the actual location where Jessica called & talked to her mother from.

I have always felt Champion was playing a game of chess with us & he was using that call** as a part of his strategy. OK,Champion on Feb 17th entirely omitted Lisa's conversation with Jessica. Then,in the latest version Feb 25th of the timeline he artfully puts it back in.Why does he initially ignore this critical detail on Feb 17th then decide on Feb 25th to include it? In addition on Feb 25th he tweaks Lisa's version with the caveat that it was Jessica who initiated the call** ? I think that is significant. I think he is playing cat and mouse with the narrative. But why?

John Champion said,"They could put Jessica on the scene where she was found at 7:31."

I think the significance is;Jessica initiated a call for help on her cell at 7:31 and it was interrupted. Who ever was there wrestled her cell away and threw it out of her reach.

I also think that at least one 'particular' person who was witness to a mortally burned Jessica was also involved in the events of the missing hour. I think that is why it is of particular importance to prove the whereabouts of all the perpetrators of this murder. I am saying that this 'particular' person would be part of a coverup or part of the actual crime. I do not know which? But,I do believe there is a coverup. (My opinion only)Tom Dees unfortunately chose not to pursue this story as an investigative journalist. The question is would any of us given the methodology practiced by the criminals operating in this place?

:cow:

Thanks MIZ..... Tom Dees was not the only one to shy away from real investigative journalism. This case had all the ingredients for MSM to make a boatload of money. Something scared them off. My thought is that PanolaCounty is very insular. Lots of horrific things happen and the way it is dealt with is to never speak the truth and attend funeral after funeral and attach angel wings to the deceased, go to church and continue on in whatever your enterprise is. All of these folks are related in some way, and they protect one another because the next person who mysteriously dies, could be you or your child. Ugly. But that's the way I see it after 9 months of observation. JMO