There are two things I find particularly unusual -and frankly disturbing- about PaPaw's case: A consistent pattern of ever-changing stories, and things being "debunked." Example include:
(RBBM)
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ounty-10-March-2017-1&p=13453732#post13453732
Pmerle00 posted the above on June 23rd. Why wasn't she made aware of it sooner? I remember us talking about how odd it was that everything was locked up when BC came home if PaPaw was attacked in the shop, and especially so if this was a case of robbery gone wrong; it is virtually unheard of for a perp to take the time to make sure the place s/he is robbing is secure and protected. Did someone see the discussion on here, realize the state in which PaPaw's shop and the house were found indeed appeared suspicious and change their story?
Another example:
(RBBM)
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ounty-10-March-2017-2&p=13528087#post13528087
I cannot go into details, but the explanation given by a family member in an FB post as to how and why PaPaw ended up going to Walmart to get the mascara that day is completely different than the information given to Pmerle00.
Things being "debunked" (or shown to be different than what Pmerle00 has been told):
(RBBM)
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ounty-10-March-2017-1&p=13511195#post13511195
Public records show otherwise .
(RBBM)
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ounty-10-March-2017-2&p=13526202#post13526202
As per DPFPS publications, they were required to respond by Feb. 28th if they wanted the payments to go to semi-annual; otherwise, their payments would have stayed monthly. Therefore, this is misinformation and a moot, irrelevant point, IMO. If it is true that the distribution form had not been returned at the time of PaPaw's disappearance, then the potential problem would have been that the DROP payments would have stopped altogether because PaPaw was no longer there to sign the form.
Pmerle00 also shared with us:
(RBBM)
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ounty-10-March-2017-3&p=13564481#post13564481
So -as suspected-, at least PaPaw's regular/non-DROP payments would have continued as usual without him being declared deceased.
Then this morning, I found a couple of quotes from Sheriff Meeks that I hadn't seen before (All BBM):
"'His wife, she works in Dallas, came home around 7 p.m. and was unable to get a hold of him,' Meeks said."
and also
"Chambers often spent time in a workshop on the property.
'And thats where we observed indicators that he did not leave on his own,' Meeks said. 'Several items of his were also missing.'"
http://www.heraldbanner.com/news/up...cle_c5d512b2-0683-11e7-971c-e3cda73252a4.html
The article was last updated at 6:15pm on Mar. 11, not even 24 hours after PaPaw went missing, so perhaps Sheriff Meeks still wasn't familiar with all the facts and details of the case. But as Dayzee pointed out, two days later at the press conference, he stated BC had "returned home a few minutes prior to the call," which he said came in "at approximately 6:55pm."
I know I forget things from time to time and don't always remember things accurately. But it is the consistent pattern of inconsistencies that really trouble me here.
The mascara story was told to me directly by Becca, who then contradicted that story on FB in the comment you mentioned.
The Letters of Testamentary were also explained to me by Becca as NOT a death certificate. Y'all uncovered a certificate of death note, which we have requested a copy of and will share when we receive it.
The DROP money letter was also explained to me by Becca. I am now looking into this more closely, as information is clearly contradicted here, so I'm not sure yet whether to correct myself or not.
I do believe that Meeks' information about her timeline was bad. I have seen the timestamps on the texts (on my way home, home, where are you, I'm looking for you, call me back, etc.). They show 6:14 (I'm home, where are you, your truck is here but I can't find you anywhere) to 7:01 (call me ASAP).
I understand how frustrating it must be to go on something I say and then have me find out I was misinformed (either purposefully misdirected or unintentionally miscommunicated with). Believe me, I am a hundred times more frustrated with not being given the 100% truth from the get-go. I don't like to be wrong. But I also don't want to withhold info here when I think it could be important. :-(