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

[absentia]

Whoa ... didn't see that coming. Interesting.

wow. that adds another layer to the emotional profile I wrote about the type of female who could do this.

 

[suspicious1]

Just saw a post by New1 that was re-posted by Mizstery.
Thank u. It made me think about something else.

It does seem strange that at first we heard JC was walking around on fire and then we heard she was lying next to her car.

What if there were two vehicles (one with loud pipes) and JC wasn't even in her car. What if JC was in someone else's car and somebody was driving her car..
I don't know where I'm going wit this but what if JC wasn't set on fire inside her car...just what if the car was torched first and then JC...

What I'm getting at is...what if JC was on fire heading toward her car? Just thinking out loud

 

[absentia]

Such a scenario would be very difficult to pull off without detection in such a small community. Everybody knows everybody. Jessica's murder comes across as an act of retaliation, imo. Her parents have given the impression they believe she was lured and that seems to fit the circumstances of how she was found.

JMO

I'm not saying this is what happened to JC, just that the psychology of couples killing a third partner exists in certain relationships. that could have led to what happened to JC - the dysfunctional relationship causing it, not that she was held and used as a sex partner (rape victim) and then killed. but that couples can and do kill off a third partner/party together.

 

[absentia]

Just saw a post by New1 that was re-posted by Mizstery.
Thank u. It made me think about something else.

It does seem strange that at first we heard JC was walking around on fire and then we heard she was lying next to her car.

What if there were two vehicles (one with loud pipes) and JC wasn't even in her car. What if JC was in someone else's car and somebody was driving her car..
I don't know where I'm going wit this but what if JC wasn't set on fire inside her car...just what if the car was torched first and then JC...

What I'm getting at is...what if JC was on fire heading toward her car? Just thinking out loud

great thought. maybe she wasn't in her car but they were both set on fire in the same location to make it look like she was set on fire in her car or that her car just blew up to cover a homicide. that would explain why the 911 caller supposedly didn't report a person on fire - she either wasn't there yet or wasn't on fire yet. I wonder if they saw a second vehicle. maybe the 2nd vehicle brought her to the site after her car was burning and then they lit her on fire.
if she had been on fire in her car, would she be able to get out? that would explain why she was outside of the car. she was maybe not in it when it was set on fire.

 

[Ms Pragmatic]

I'm putting a few things in my "question mark" column. Not that I doubt these things 100%, but just reading through MSM and seeing things reported a few different ways, I'm not sure how much of a factor they should be when formulating a theory.

First item is the "party". Was there or wasn't there? What does a party mean? So many different ways to interpret that. I do believe if there WAS a party, it wasn't a formal affair. Was she actually attending a party or did she agree to drop someone off at one? so for NOW, too many what ifs that would require speculation. I'm going to leave that out.

Second thing is whether or not she spoke. Maybe she did. Maybe she was able to utter a name. I can't place much weight on what she said, though. Too many things sound like Eric or Derrick. I also don't know how "with it" she was when she said the name(if she did). For now, I've also got to let that go.

So what do I know to be true? Not much. JC slept most of the day. Mom wanted her to clean her room. There may or may not have been a phone conversation with some unknown individual before she left home. She tells mom she needs to clean her car and get some food. She doesn't intend to be gone long. We know for sure she bought gas at AA's place of employment. AA says she bought $14 in gas. No confirmation of that, but I will go with that. aA states that she came back in for cigs. Her family says she doesn't smoke, but that could be a habit she kept hidden. I believe that she smoked, though, because it appeared to me she was extinguishing a cigarette before she entered the gas station. We also have CM/SR. saying she asked JC for a smoke, but that JC didn't have her flavor. AA also states she bought cigs. That tells me she smoked.

When she left the gas station, it appeared she left alone. She turned South, I believe. Where was she going?? What/who would have been in that direction? Was she really intent on getting something to eat and cleaning her car? I don't know. My gut tells me she had other plans, but I've got no proof. if her intentions were always to do as she said or if those were good excuses to leave the house. Or maybe her plans changed with a phone call from the gas station? And again, I'm back to Auntie. I don't know why, but I always come back to Auntie.

 

[Yvettea]

I'm not saying this is what happened to JC, just that the psychology of couples killing a third partner exists in certain relationships. that could have led to what happened to JC - the dysfunctional relationship causing it, not that she was held and used as a sex partner (rape victim) and then killed. but that couples can and do kill off a third partner/party together.

When I read this Charlotte Wilkerson's comments came to mind. Who did Jessica leave the party with? Charlotte was emphatic that's when it happened and it wasn't supposed to go like this. She had known Jessica her whole life. Who else had?

 

[Ms Pragmatic]

Oh, and real quick...if I'm going to eat and I plan on eating alone, I go through a drive-thru. If Im going into a fast food joint or restaurant, I'm taking a friend with me or meeting a friend there or going to where my friends work. I don't like to eat alone in an establishment. Maybe I'm odd?

 

[suspicious1]

great thought. maybe she wasn't in her car but they were both set on fire in the same location to make it look like she was set on fire in her car or that her car just blew up to cover a homicide. that would explain why the 911 caller supposedly didn't report a person on fire - she either wasn't there yet or wasn't on fire yet. I wonder if they saw a second vehicle. maybe the 2nd vehicle brought her to the site after her car was burning and then they lit her on fire.
if she had been on fire in her car, would she be able to get out? that would explain why she was outside of the car. she was maybe not in it when it was set on fire.

That's exactly what I was thinking but u expressed it so much better. LOL

If set on fire in her car would she have been able to get out? I have wondered this from the beginning.

 

[MizStery]

See May 7th, 2009 for another arrest for DV. http://www.panolian.com/contentitem/134653/1180/panola-county-arrest-log

Entered a plea of guilty for DV and fined. http://www.panolian.com/editionview...fba&Page=791b7a92-b6ef-4e47-8a1b-c940054412b4

Link to Zool post on thread #5:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?266728-MS-Jessica-Chambers-19-found-burned-near-her-car-Panola-County-Dec-2014-5/page7

Originally posted by Zool:
<snipped>
As an aside, I noticed in the Chandler interview that there is a car parked facing north on Herron. Then I read in the article that Chandler wrote and quoted Fowler:


[...] Fowler passed by the scene Saturday on her way to crappie fish at Enid Lake. [Chandler]

"Sunday morning, I took my phone off the charger and looked at Facebook, like I almost always do, and I saw the Fly High Jessica Chambers page," Fowler said, referring to the digital memorial Chambers' friends and family had set up. Once she realized what happened, "I got sick to my stomach," Fowler said. "I can't believe I didn't see anything when I passed by here. I wish I had. I would have helped her. I would have fought for her if I had to."--[Fowler]


Or in other words, the interview takes place on Sunday. When Fowler mentions "here", she is referring to the fact that she and her friend, Amber Shields, and Chandler are standing at the crime scene on Sunday. Her reference to "passing by the scene Saturday on her way to crappie fish at Enid Lake" clearly states that she drove by the crime scene on Saturday. Yet it does not say at what time.

However, since a car is visible on Sunday on the opposite side of the road of the crime, parked headed north, it is possible that either Fowler or Shields lives south of 2344-2355 Herron Road (closer to Benson Road, i.e. closer to Pope Co.), and that a trip to Main St., Courtland, is a regular trip heading north on Herron. (*note: It is also possible that the car belongs to Chandler.)

Later from Chandler we learn that indeed this northerly drive (i.e. north-to-south) may indeed be the case: "Shields -- who, like Fowler, lives close to the scene -- went to school with Chambers at South Panola High School...."

What may be important here is the time on Saturday when Fowler drove by the scene. However I doubt it.

If she lives "close by" on Herron Road, she can drive by the crime scene any time she wants on Saturday, and consequently make the statement that she does -- with one exception: She clearly states, "I can't believe I didn't see anything when I passed by."

That statement implies that she feels that she OUGHT TO have seen something.

Since she makes that statement on Sunday, Dec 7 (i.e. the following day of the crime), and since she has knowledge of the time of the crime, she places herself somewhere close within the timeline of the crime. If she really drove by the crime scene at 4:20 pm, that time confounds the M&M video timeline. Why would she believe that she ought to have seen something at 4:20 pm when Jessica did not leave her home until sometime (disputed) around 6:20 pm (or even 5:20 pm)?

Bottomline: Ms Fowler could be just a well-meaning friend who feels that she ought to have been able to do something. Or a highly suspicious POI.


Note: just noting to myself coincidence is interesting.

:moo:

 

[imkeylime]

Oh, and real quick...if I'm going to eat and I plan on eating alone, I go through a drive-thru. If Im going into a fast food joint or restaurant, I'm taking a friend with me or meeting a friend there or going to where my friends work. I don't like to eat alone in an establishment. Maybe I'm odd?

No, I don't find that odd at all. I'm the same way ... and I think it would apply even more to most 19-year-olds. The only way my daughter eats by herself is if she's also reading a book or working on her computer at Dunkin' or Panera. Apart from that, she'd drive through.

OTOH, I don't find JC's "pajamas" an issue in terms of stopping by a casual party. Some people might have even been staying the night at such a party. I don't mean it would have been a sleepover, just that it might have been OK to crash there. Regardless, some sleep pants seem to be worn in public by her age group.

That said, I'd find it more likely that she'd go to such a party in her sleep pants IF she knew the people at the party fairly well. JMO.

 

[suspicious1]

great thought. maybe she wasn't in her car but they were both set on fire in the same location to make it look like she was set on fire in her car or that her car just blew up to cover a homicide. that would explain why the 911 caller supposedly didn't report a person on fire - she either wasn't there yet or wasn't on fire yet. I wonder if they saw a second vehicle. maybe the 2nd vehicle brought her to the site after her car was burning and then they lit her on fire.
if she had been on fire in her car, would she be able to get out? that would explain why she was outside of the car. she was maybe not in it when it was set on fire.

Just another thought...

How far away was her phone found? I initially assumed that maybe the perps were trying get rid of evidence and that was the direction they were headed in but...

What if JC herself dropped her phone in that location? Maybe trying to run away from the perps?

Just thinking out loud.

 

[absentia]

Why do we keep saying Jessica's last words were something like "Eric?" Or that the last time she spoke to her mother was around 6:48?

Remember, her mother says she talk to Jessica in the hospital.



http://www.local8now.com/news/state...-girl-on-fire-285160651.html?device=phone&c=y

that's what I thought too. I thought her mom talked to her in the hospital. But JC said that to her mom on the phone. then her mom saw her in "Med" (hospital). So I don't think she was talking or conscious when her mom got to the hospital.

 

[anonone]

I don't change my mind very often, as I usually make very informed decisions. Although I thought this was DV homicide at first, I have changed my mind about it.
I still think it's DV related, but I am on board with the "jealous female" idea. Not so much as a jealous female, but as a female perpetrator of a DV-like homicide. A domestic relations situation, but with the female as the perpetrator of violence, not out of a fit of jealousy, but from the same reasons men abuse women - entitlement and the belief they have the right to PUNISH the victim.
She may be the victim of DV herself, past or present, and has learned this behavior or is seeking ways to find control and power, and/or seeks to protect her ego from the reality of being victimized by becoming perpetrator.

This woman would have a grandiose sense of her place/position in her family and her domestic relationship, giving off the impression she is the queen when really she feels very inferior and her man frequently strays. her lack of control over her man's infidelities and her sense of inferiority causes her to punish the other female(s) she perceives to be threatening her relationship/family WHEN SHE HAS THE CHANCE TO DO SO. she feels completely justified in what she has done and she feels good about the stability of her position and her family for the moment. she feels she has saved her family. she and her man have probably trauma-bonded over this experience if he participated at all, making them seem or feel closer for now, when really her man will stray again and again. He allows her to blame the other women to avoid responsibility and will be complicit in the destruction of one of his flings to maintain his role and to allow his wife to believe he has done nothing to wrong her. she has a fantasy ideal of her family - happy mom (her), dad and child. it is too threatening emotionally and psychologically to admit her man is the problem, and not the other women. she uses control and co-dependence to get her man to give the appearance of dedication and faithfulness, but this is temporary and fleeting for him. He feels controlled and restricted, and hides things from her (bc he is probably a selfish, disrespectful and dishonest person). She sense this and this anxiety about him is projected onto his other women, as it's too threatening for her to admit he's a cheat and not her adoring husband. She has totally de-personified and demonized JC in her mind as the source of all evil and all the problems in her life and probably feels relief of her anxiety, and seems happy and free right now. Although she believes herself to be a good person, she rationalizes what she has done as necessary for the betterment of her family and does not feel guilt. she does not perceive it to be a bad thing. She can protect herself from the horror of it bc it has given her the control she needed and therefore is justified as the means to the end - her stability and control. She also uses her position at her job to make herself feel important and valuable, although it is a low position, it is better than most others around her. she has some power over others at work that makes her feel good about herself. she probably mis-uses her power at work and has employees/co-workers who resent her treatment of them. she is not unattractive, but she is jealous of other women's attractiveness and will attempt to ridicule them or use their features as a way to criticize them to make herself feel better/in control. She is ultimately proud of what she's done as she is very family centered and will not allow anyone to get in the way of her perception of her happy family.

I know there is a culture of "side (women "*****es")" that some married/committed men in gangs have. It must be hard for the wives/gf's to be forced to accept these mistresses simply bc it's the culture to do so. It is an abuse to suffer through an affair. maybe someone snapped.

This is simply my imagination of the type of woman who could/would do this kind of thing to a 19 yo girl, if it is a female perp.

JC's past is full of so many people and events/experiences that seem relevant to what happened to her that it's hard to imagine they have nothing to do with it, and it was something totally unexpected like this.

I think you are spot on, absentia.

 

[absentia]

Link to Zool post on thread #5:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?266728-MS-Jessica-Chambers-19-found-burned-near-her-car-Panola-County-Dec-2014-5/page7

Originally posted by Zool:
<snipped>
As an aside, I noticed in the Chandler interview that there is a car parked facing north on Herron. Then I read in the article that Chandler wrote and quoted Fowler:


[...] Fowler passed by the scene Saturday on her way to crappie fish at Enid Lake. [Chandler]

"Sunday morning, I took my phone off the charger and looked at Facebook, like I almost always do, and I saw the Fly High Jessica Chambers page," Fowler said, referring to the digital memorial Chambers' friends and family had set up. Once she realized what happened, "I got sick to my stomach," Fowler said. "I can't believe I didn't see anything when I passed by here. I wish I had. I would have helped her. I would have fought for her if I had to."--[Fowler]


Or in other words, the interview takes place on Sunday. When Fowler mentions "here", she is referring to the fact that she and her friend, Amber Shields, and Chandler are standing at the crime scene on Sunday. Her reference to "passing by the scene Saturday on her way to crappie fish at Enid Lake" clearly states that she drove by the crime scene on Saturday. Yet it does not say at what time.

However, since a car is visible on Sunday on the opposite side of the road of the crime, parked headed north, it is possible that either Fowler or Shields lives south of 2344-2355 Herron Road (closer to Benson Road, i.e. closer to Pope Co.), and that a trip to Main St., Courtland, is a regular trip heading north on Herron. (*note: It is also possible that the car belongs to Chandler.)

Later from Chandler we learn that indeed this northerly drive (i.e. north-to-south) may indeed be the case: "Shields -- who, like Fowler, lives close to the scene -- went to school with Chambers at South Panola High School...."

What may be important here is the time on Saturday when Fowler drove by the scene. However I doubt it.

If she lives "close by" on Herron Road, she can drive by the crime scene any time she wants on Saturday, and consequently make the statement that she does -- with one exception: She clearly states, "I can't believe I didn't see anything when I passed by."

That statement implies that she feels that she OUGHT TO have seen something.

Since she makes that statement on Sunday, Dec 7 (i.e. the following day of the crime), and since she has knowledge of the time of the crime, she places herself somewhere close within the timeline of the crime. If she really drove by the crime scene at 4:20 pm, that time confounds the M&M video timeline. Why would she believe that she ought to have seen something at 4:20 pm when Jessica did not leave her home until sometime (disputed) around 6:20 pm (or even 5:20 pm)?

Bottomline: Ms Fowler could be just a well-meaning friend who feels that she ought to have been able to do something. Or a highly suspicious POI.


Note: just noting to myself coincidence is interesting.

:moo:

I agree. 4:20 is irrelevant. not an actual time relating to Fowler's drive. maybe a reference to Fowler smoking pot.
to place one's self at the scene and time of a crime is highly suspicious.

 

[Yvettea]

that's what I thought too. I thought her mom talked to her in the hospital. But JC said that to her mom on the phone. then her mom saw her in "Med" (hospital). So I don't think she was talking or conscious when her mom got to the hospital.

That makes more sense. I remember reading about this days ago and not being sure what it meant. Thank you.

 

[suspicious1]

I don't know why JC may have been set on fire outside of the car...

Maybe there was a fight and during the struggle...she dropped her phone.

 

[MotherOcean]

Just saw a post by New1 that was re-posted by Mizstery.
Thank u. It made me think about something else.

It does seem strange that at first we heard JC was walking around on fire and then we heard she was lying next to her car.

What if there were two vehicles (one with loud pipes) and JC wasn't even in her car. What if JC was in someone else's car and somebody was driving her car..
I don't know where I'm going wit this but what if JC wasn't set on fire inside her car...just what if the car was torched first and then JC...

What I'm getting at is...what if JC was on fire heading toward her car? Just thinking out loud

It's not strange at all. I posted verification in another thread but now I can't find it. The 911 caller saw her walking and on fire. The first responders found her lying down when they arrived.

 

[cady]

When I read this Charlotte Wilkerson's comments came to mind. Who did Jessica leave the party with? Charlotte was emphatic that's when it happened and it wasn't supposed to go like this. She had known Jessica her whole life. Who else had?

I keep wondering if Sha-Sha was used as a conduit to lure JC and that Sha-Sha was duped. I think everyone knows Sha Sha, she has been around forever and is apparently the person that JC visited with across the street, according to Lisa. I could be totally off-base, but I get the feeling that she would not deliberately set JC up, but that she may be a blabber. JMO JMO

 

[MotherOcean]

Has a POI been named? It seems like this young lady who came to the site of the fire is being strongly implicated here.

 

[anonone]

I keep wondering if Sha-Sha was used as a conduit to lure JC and that Sha-Sha was duped. I think everyone knows Sha Sha, she has been around forever and is apparently the person that JC visited with across the street, according to Lisa. I could be totally off-base, but I get the feeling that she would not deliberately set JC up, but that she may be a blabber. JMO JMO

Great point. I think Charlotte, <modsnip>, and Allen (Jessica's brother, aka Ben Jr.) are the same age and went to the USP together.