MS - Jessica Chambers, 19, found burned near her car, Panola County, 6 Dec 2014 - #5

[MSCJgrad]

This is a great post, and I do see your point in all of this. My 2 cents: burning people seems to be some sort of 'trend' lately. http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2014/02/16/2956842/columbus-police-arrest-3-in-rape.html. ,<- this is an instance of a woman being raped and set afire a year ago today. http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...tml?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter, <- this is an instance of a man set afire Dec. 15. http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...tml?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter, <- this is an instance of a man being shot and set afire in his car on Dec. 19. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-wife-demanded-dealt-not-protest-speech.html, <- this is an article from today documenting Mexican gang members admitting to have burned 43 students to prove a point, http://www.kmbc.com/news/records-to-be-released-in-case-of-woman-raped-set-on-fire/30216918<- a report of a woman being raped and set on fire Nov. 24, 2014 near Wichita. http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2014/12/25/jackson-woman-arrested-for-setting-another-woman-on-fire/20892909/<-This one is from Christmas eve of this year, just a few days ago, and LOCAL, as it was covered by a local newspaper, where a woman set another woman on fire, http://www.nbc4i.com/story/26738542/woman-tells-police-she-was-set-on-fire<-, this one from Oct. 8 of this year, another woman set on fire after a sexual assault, http://gawker.com/5954013/louisiana-woman-set-on-fire-in-reportedly-race-related-attack, <-this one from 2 years ago, another woman set on fire, http://www.wjla.com/articles/2014/1...ow-being-investigated-as-a-murder-108663.html, <- this one from early November of this year, yet another woman set on fire. These stories go on and on and on. There are far too many to list. Setting people, mostly women, seems to be all too common these lately.

I apologize for this terribly long and tl;dr post but it has some substance (I believe) in determining the kind of perpetrator they should be looking for.

You know, considering what information we were given initially, before LE imposed a dummy up order on Family, witnesses and medical staff, we know that

A. Someone witnessed a person on fire walking down the road.
B. Jessica had accelerant introduced orally/nasally or both.
c. Jessica gave a name or names to first responders.

All of those can be somewhat corroborated through evidence or statements.
A. The soles of her feet weren't burned but every other part of her body was "seriously" I would imagine by seriously that would indicate a burn beyond first degree. That could mean she was on her feet for a time. Even if she had very durable soles, the uppers on her shoes were likely obliterated as she had serious burns on her dorsals.
B. I'm not sure how exactly anyone other than a medical professional could make that particular evaluation, but Ali Alsanai corroborated it by saying LE provided that information to him, and Ben Chambers later did the same quoting medical personel.
C. It's been reported too many times by too many sources to reject it as hearsay in mnsho. I've even read somewhere that she was screaming in the hospital, soandso did this. Now before you go poohpoohing the possibility, talk to people in burn wards. People that can tell you how long before the swelling, blistering,and inflammation which accompany serious burns would prohibit speech. I know damned well if someone set me on fire, I'd struggle with my last breath to damn their *advertiser censored* to prison.

I have a point, I promise.

I believe fire was the murder weapon and it was intentional although I myself have one possible counter argument for the theory.

A beating gone too far, and fire to eradicate the evidence. Okay, that assumes two things. The perpetrator(s) believed Jessica was dead or near death. Although initially we have reports of a gash to the head, Ben Chambers now vehemently denies it. The sclera should exhibit the presence of blood in serious head trauma, and no report seems to mention any form of assault. If so why didn't LE offer, they beat the hell out of her then set her on fire to AA? I think much of this theory is attributed to Ms. Wilkerson's observation of they went too far. Well yeah, setting someone on fire is too far, but it doesn't have to imply an assault beforehand. Here is where my counter argument comes in. If by chance you set someone on fire, and they woke up as people ablaze tend to do, you might very well haul *advertiser censored* out of there when they emerge screaming from the vehicle. You might at that point drop the phone you were holding and determine too late you had done so.

Now on to my point. If you've determined fire is how you want to murder someone, you're a special kind of person. The kind of person prepared not only to cause suffering, but to observe it. You could change your mind midstream, but if you had that kind of conscience, you'd have already turned yourself in. Whoever did it, sat there and watched at least for a while. To be able to sit through that level of suffering is pyschopathic in nature, not sociopathic. Whoever started the fire did so when they knew Jessica was alive, even if just clinging to life. If she were so close to death from a beating, would she have lingered so long with thermal injuries so bad? Thermal injury was the cause of death, not organ failure, not a brain bleed, not cardiac arrest (although she certainly did suffer at least one)
My best friend was a grenadier during the Vietnam war. He frequently carried phosphorus grenades. Those are used as an effective demoralizing weapon. They burn the victim badly. and burn until the fuel is depleted. My friend told me "Joe, I still remember their screams when I hit a target(s) I will never forget them." He had people actively trying to kill him, and what he remembered was their suffering. Someone out there has forgotten, at least one someone, or they just don't care, because Jessica was less than human, to him, her, or them.

An enraged partner of an adulterous spouse? To set fire to a live human being? One of the first charecteristics of a true psychopath is the inability to cultivate and maintain relationships. I could see a jealous wife stabbing, shooting or choking a mistress without reservation, but burning her alive? Jessica died of thermal injury, not blunt force trauma, not asphyxiation, not blood loss, not complications from any of the above.

To hide the evidence of rape, or any evidence for that matter? The car was a complete burnout in my opinion. Jessica was there for at least 20 minutes. I'd say if they wanted to eradicate evidence they stayed behind at least long enough to see her exit the car, and would have at least crushed her skull with a boot if nothing else. She was left to languish as punishment.

You're looking for a person, or people who have a complete disconnect with humanity as a whole. Not sociopathic misfits. Someone who is so far removed from humanity they could sit and listen to that child screaming for mercy, and having no ears to hear it, or heart to feel it.

This wasn't an angry spouse, it wasn't a jealous boyfriend, It wasn't someone just trying to eradicate evidence. It was someone so disconnected from humanity that we can't understand their motivation. This wasn't an impulse crime, the few things we "know" don't corroborate with an impulse crime.

tl;dr synopsis, I believe that a psychopath or multiple psychopaths murdered Jessica based on preliminary reports. Reports provided before LE issued dummy up orders to preserve exposure on details of the crime.

 

[MSCJgrad]

My opinion is, a jury is educated prior to the trial, in depth regarding what they are there to do. They are educated, at great lengths, about what reasonable doubt is, and when they are legally required to express their own reasonable doubt. A defense attorney would have to put forth little effort to acquire reasonable doubt from jurors regarding the handling of the car as evidence, IMO.

I'm not sure that the mere opportunity of tampering will mean much.

It doesn't to me and I'm not sure if it will to a jury. Evidence is what counts.

DNA is DNA. You can't find OJ Simpsons blood and say it's not his by saying it was "contaminated" later on. JMO.

 

[anonone]

This is a great post, and I do see your point in all of this. My 2 cents: burning people seems to be some sort of 'trend' lately.

I blame "How to Get Away with Murder" on ABC.

 

[anonone]

A defense attorney would have to put forth little effort to acquire reasonable doubt from jurors regarding the handling of the car as evidence, IMO.

Champion and LE will simply state any evidence from the car was gathered and documented prior to towing. The trial court judge will not abuse their discretion admitting the evidence under those circumstances. Prosecution will argue the tow truck driver could have repaired the car and sold it and it would not make a difference regarding the evidence and argue that David Walker is grasping at straws to detract attention from the crime.

 

[Crosby87]

At 35 mm, Jessica stops and picks something up before she enters the store

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1-E-FBpUIQ

 

[MSCJgrad]

Respectfully, it's not about conspiracies, it's about the law. "If a prosecutor or defendant objects to a piece of evidence, the objecting party must come forward with evidence showing that the disputed evidence should be excluded from trial. Then the trial judge decides to admit or exclude it based on a preponderance of the evidence presented. " http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+Doubt.

Well, if you believe in conspiracy's then we have a difference in opinion. That's what I see having to happen for tampering of evidence to be possible in this case. JMO.

 

[cady]

Interesting NEW speculation out there this morning...JMO

 

[MSCJgrad]

"If a prosecutor or defendant objects to a piece of evidence, the objecting party must come forward with evidence showing that the disputed evidence should be excluded from trial. Then the trial judge decides to admit or exclude it based on a preponderance of the evidence presented." http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+Doubt. The store stop wouldn't change the evidence, it would prevent it from being admitted in court in the first place. I do not know FFJ personally, and I am not speaking on his behalf, it is just MOO that this is what he is getting at.

How can a stop at the store change the evidence? The burn pattern won't change and neither will the ash or residue. There really isn't much to be affected. I don't think there will be a problem.

 

[MSCJgrad]

I know this question was not directed at me but...IMO...there is no way the perp is a stranger to Jessica, unless they were contracted in some fashion by a person she is familiar with.

This post should be a sticky....it's excellent. imoo


Do you think the perp was a stranger to Jessica?

 

[IBsleuthin]

I recently read on a twitter post which did NOT supply documentation that there is no recording of the 911 call because the fire chief was called directly. NO IDEA as to the truth of this, but if true, it would explain a few things...so, hypothetically, how would this change the story? Just got me thinking... JMO

It changes a whole lot. I'd have him on the stand and hammer him. I'd unshell that whole crew. In our sheriff's department ALL CALLS are recorded. All of them coming in no matter what phone they are on.

I smell something fishy about that call.

 

[MSCJgrad]

Thanks you for this. I have been wanting to mention the fact that gangs are no stranger to the area, but got caught up responding to other posts. These posts are frustrating to respond to, as all of the pictures of the people we have mentioned in this thread proudly flashing their gang signs, that I can find, are only o social media, not MSM. I will do some digging later and see what I can come up with that is allowed on WS.

Hopefully you will be able to access the Archives of The Panolian via this process:

• first click this link
• across the top banner locate "Options"
• open the dropdown menu to "Archives"
• When the subsequent download is finished, it is possible to select various full years from 2007 to 2014

I have provided the front page of January 1, 2013 in the above link. This is relevant to George Mister; it begins a tale of crime with his arrest, "Sheriff: alleged kidnapper is local gang leader". Later, you will need to open January 11 to page 7, "Bond reduction denied for defendant in kidnapping/robbery". The article details some interesting and perhaps relevant facts about how George Mister operates, as well as the status of his $110,000 bond.

Using the Archives from January 1, 2013 to the current day (via the above procedure) one will wonder why Mister's bond eventually was reduced enough to allow him to be free by May 24, 2013, and then re-arrested for "saggy pants".

However, regardless of the fate of George Mister, the front pages of 2013 detail a culture of drugs, gangs, violence, and murders in the Batesville/Courtland and/or Panola County Sheriff's Department jurisdiction.

I probably should have begun looking in an ascending order from 2007.

Panola County is steep -- and in deep -- in a cesspool of drugs, gangs, violence, and murders; I note though that sometime by summer 2013 DA John Champion had requested US Marshall assistance; I note also that the community is well aware of and working on these criminals.

 

[RANCH]

Respectfully, it's not bout conspiracies, it's about the law. "If a prosecutor or defendant objects to a piece of evidence, the objecting party must come forward with evidence showing that the disputed evidence should be excluded from trial. Then the trial judge decides to admit or exclude it based on a preponderance of the evidence presented. " http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+Doubt.

I agree. I doubt there's a conspiracy to hide evidence in this case. Unless there's evidence showing that someone has tampered with evidence in or on the car I don't see how a judge will exclude anything found in or on it.

I guess a defense attorney could tell a jury that any evidence found is suspect. I wouldn't just take his word on it though. Maybe the defense will get lucky and get a Casey Anthony or OJ jury who will ignore the evidence and believe any story they dream up. I hope not. JMO.

 

[MSCJgrad]

I blame "How to Get Away with Murder" on ABC.

I have not seen that... I'm not much of a TV person. I am not wanting to place blame or point the finger at any one person or any group (or gang) of people, I am just noting that this sure does seem to be happening a lot lately.

 

[IBsleuthin]

BBM

No one had to actively do anything to the car, just the fact that they had the opportunity to do so, will make any evidence related to the car cannon fodder for the defense attorney.

The evidence does not have to be altered, you only need prove that the possibility existed.

The way the vehicle was parked IIRC, one whole side of it was not visible from inside M&M.

If I was carrying a blood spattered shirt as evidence, and I exposed it to any circumstance where it could come in contact with any substance which would contaminate it, out of my direct line of sight, would you consider it possibly contaminated?

(BBM) In absolute agreement. Also, this gaff with the car stopping at the gas station could work both ways. If I was a defense attorney and prosecution brought up ANYTHING found on that car that tried to link my client to that crime? HA!

The FIRST argument I would have was, "If the tow truck driver stopped at the gas station, WHERE ELSE did he stop?" My new law firm would be @$$ U ME & associates.

We @$$ume that he only stopped at the gas station.

If the prosecution came to me and said, we found your client's fingerprints inside the trunk of that car, I would smile so big and happy and say, "WHY YES as a matter of fact my client showed great concern for the fact that this event happened and when Bob Blahblah here stopped with the tow truck outside the Tastee Freeze, my client walked over and had a look at the car and ran his hands around that opening on the trunk."

Reasonable doubt.

For all we know, Bob blahblah aka Tow Truck Driver man stopped for groceries, to go to the bathroom and to buy some fishing bait along the way. I'd have a field day with this. (He MIGHT have even gone to Lake Enid for crappies)...after all the car was already processed so who cares right?

 

[MSCJgrad]

Champion and LE will simply state any evidence from the car was gathered and documented prior to towing. The trial court judge will not abuse their discretion admitting the evidence under those circumstances. Prosecution will argue the tow truck driver could have repaired the car and sold it and it would not make a difference regarding the evidence and argue that David Walker is grasping at straws to detract attention from the crime.

IMO, my faith in the justice system in Panola County thus far is not great, and I would just hope that the judge hearing this case would operate in the same manner that LE has displayed thus far. Further, to respond to, "Champion and LE will simply state any evidence from the car was gathered and documented prior to towing", in my opinion, it is as much of an issue, if not more of an issue, that evidence at the scene of the crime could have been disturbed in the premature moving of the vehicle. This issue seems to keep coming up...everyoe knows my opinion by now, and it is just MOO. I am not claiming to be right, I am not saying that you are wrong. Either the evidence will be admitted or it won't. I am with a previous poster when they stated that hopefully it won't matter anyway, as I hope they have stronger, more defining evidence to find who did this. Keeping the focus on Jessica, and letting her rest in peace by bringing justice to those who murdered her. lease:

 

[anonone]

Maybe the defense will get lucky and get a Casey Anthony or OJ jury who will ignore the evidence and believe any story they dream up. I hope not. JMO.

OJ was appropriately found not guilty. Jason killed Nicole and Ron.

 

[FindHG]

Bolded in red, I have made modification and/or additions for further clarity. I hope some of this helps answer a few questions.

Thank you so much ZOOL, for taking the time to do this location info, helps a lot. Along with the WSers who took a ride there and local impressions on MSM, it still feels like the selection of the location itself (skibaboo's map here) has more to tell.

And for all this background info and how to get to it, appreciated, in addition to:

updated names and timeline by NineMilly

[URL="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?266728-MS-Jessica-Chambers-19-found-burned-near-her-car-Panola-County-Dec-2014-5&p=11350328#post11350328"]estimates based on what's known of last 90 minutes by MyBelle and MSCJgrad[/URL]

 

[AdamJacobAaronsMama]

This is what I believe. If that's the case, then alibis have to be rechecked and so do cell phone records. If her windows were up in the car and the fumes odorless, she would have ingested the fumes and not been aware. She left, turned onto Herron Rd and lit a cigarette is what happened, imo.

The problem I have with this theory is that
a) they can't guarantee she will light a cigarette in the vehicle (even if she did it a hundred times before, if you want someone dead===why would you take the chance it wouldn't go through)
b) they can't guarantee she will light a cigarette somewhere where she could get immediate assistance (what if she lit it at the gas station, or in her driveway)
c) they can't guarantee that she will be the one killed (what if someone else drove the vehicle and lit the cigarette)
d) they can't guarantee that she would be the only one killed (what if others were in the vehicle whenever she decided to light a cigarette).
e) The seats would've felt wet to Jessica if they doused the car in lighter fluid.

Too many variables with this scenario. I would think they would want to actually see her die, not take the chances on it not happening at all or happening in a way where she would have immediate assistance.

 

[absentia]

What I don't think is likely is that a cigarette-moocher is picky. I don't think so.

I also don't like the comment LF made about JC's eyelashes---kinda' disparaging to me.

Moo

I've been wondering if SR/CM called JC over for a cig so JC wouldn't see gascanman filling up the container? Dunno why this would be necessary but maybe they thought they'd need to hide that from her. Not sure if video footage timing lines up with that as the section with gascanman is partially missing.

 

[CHERIE.T]

Cig gal, who then got in the car with gas can man?
This thread would be really confusing to someone who has never heard of this case lol.

It IS confusing.
Yes cig girl who was in the car with gas can man.