MS - Jessica Chambers, 19, found burned near her car, Panola County, 6 Dec 2014 - #7

[ZOOL]

Sorry, but I'll have to disagree. If you look at the photo of George Mister, Jr. on the front page of the January 1, 2013 Panolian, you'll see a man who looks nearly identical to the George Douglas Mister, Jr. who was interviewed on Fox News 6 with Rachel/Denise Tutor.

I thought we'd established a few threads ago that this IS the same man, and he is out while awaiting trial for the "kidnapping, armed robbery, assault, resisting arrest, drug possession, and felony firearm possession" charges. (page A3, Jan. 1, 2013, The Panolian)

Taking another look at that interview on Fox 6, Tutor said she was questioned because of a text message she sent to Jessica a couple of days before her death. (I know I had been confused about this earlier, thinking GM had sent the text, but it was DT, not GM). When GM is asked about how he knew Jessica, he replies "she's a good friend." We talked about the smirk from Tutor for pages awhile ago.

What I didn't pay as much attention to the first time around is that GM seems to indicate that police were implicating him in the crime the way they questioned him, when Tutor jumps in.

GM: "They saying I. . ."
"It was a lover's quarrel," interrupts DT
GM: "It was a lover's quarrel."

(emphasis mine)

It could be that he just couldn't get his words together first, but it does look like he was about to say that the police were saying GM had done something.

The image presented in the January 1, 2013 Panolian definitely bares a remarkable similarity to the Fox interview. What bothers me is the reference in the article to 1994. A subsequent Vinelink search on George Mister will produce a "George Mister Jr.", birth date 8/18/1970, and the relevant photo shows a man who appears to have similar features to the Fox-character, but without the stringy hair-style.

My point that I think that I am trying to suggest here is that the Panolian, January 1, 2013, photograph may not be the correct person for the article. If you think about the charges, and the $110,000 bond, it seems highly unlikely that that person charged would be walking the streets with his pants sagging by May, 2013. That man would have been 43 years old.

Thus I believe the "saggy pants" George Douglas Mister III is the person who walked that walk, and he is also the person in the Fox interview standing next to Rachel Denise Tutor. He does not appear to me to be 44.

However...in the final analysis, I would be happy if LE had Geo Sr, Geo Jr, and Geo III all behind bars for the next 60 years!

 

[SeriouslySearching]

What I meant is that it was staged to give the appearance it was an accidental car fire.

I don't see how they expected it to resemble an accidental car fire since cars don't just burn for no reason. It is my opinion they really did not care how it looked to LE or anyone as they were probably under the impression no evidence would be left of them in or on the car (also in or on Jessica...if someone did set her aflame). Fire is an easy way to get rid of DNA and other evidence.

 

[bessie]

Bessie, would you consider putting a poll thread up for this case? I would love to see just who people here think murdered Jessica. 1 person...2 people, 1 male 1 female...2 people, both male...2 people, both female...3 or more people. TIA

ETA...I suppose accidental death should be a poll option too, and maybe suicide, as a couple people have leaned towards that theory.

Here ya go. The thread is in the poll forum. I hope we can keep it open. That will depend on all of you. The poll thread is not intended to be a discussion thread. Cast your vote and then, if you wish, you can post one remark about why you voted as you did.

Poll: What Happened to Jessica Chambers?

 

[cady]

He is to me. Is anyone officially a POI?

Not that WE know of. JMO

 

[southernyankee]

I don't see how they expected it to resemble an accidental car fire since cars don't just burn for no reason. It is my opinion they really did not care how it looked to LE or anyone as they were probably under the impression no evidence would be left of them in or on the car (also in or on Jessica...if someone did set her aflame). Fire is an easy way to get rid of DNA and other evidence.

Whatever happened to Jessica - I mean, whatever the catalyst action truly was (murder, assault, suicide, accident, etc.) - if thought was given by anyone to the precise location of where her car ended up + all the particulars of its arrangement (parking brake on etc.), I don't think it was thought about as deeply and in as much detail as we've thought about it here.

I think some of the decisions made - by Jessica and/or by anyone else involved at that scene (prior to the arrival of the firefighters) were made very hastily because they had to be - as a reaction (to the fire, to sudden violence, to getting help, to the fear of being caught, etc.).

Thus - it would be presumptive to assume that all the details of the scene were deliberately staged.

 

[PeterThomasFan]

Just throwing this out there as an observation about Herron Road.

• Herron Road is narrow and drivers must use a lot of caution when oncoming cars approach.
• There is not a lot of traffic on Herron Road (IMO).
• I did not locate and speed limit signs on Herron Road. Would probably be safe to say 25-30 MPH.
• Herron Road is not an overly winding road but, there are slight curves from the NE and SW directions from the crime scene.
• There are no street lights so, the road would have been pretty dark (less the full moon) on that night.
• Crime scene (2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS) is 328 feet above sea-level (34.236663,-89.954157).
• Approaching the crime scene from NE or SW are both lower elevations:

From NE heading SW: 3.5% grade between 6 Main St., Courtland, MS and 2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS​

6 Main St., Courtland, MS is 305 feet above sea-level (34.237561,-89.952290)
2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS is 328 feet above sea-level (34.236663,-89.954157)
These locations are 0.12 mi apart (652 feet), and the elevation change is 23 feet​


​

From SW heading NE: 5.6% grade between 2322 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS and 2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS
2322 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS is 308 feet above sea-level (34.236267,-89.955223)
2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS is 328 feet above sea-level (34.236663,-89.954157)
These locations are 0.06 mi apart (352 feet), and the elevation change is 20 feet

​

• Being that both approaches to the crime scene have slight curves in the road and are lower in elevation, it is quite possible that a driver would have less visibility of an on-coming car. Especially if driver(s) were speeding.

Google Map - 2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS

 

[cady]

You could be correct because the Feds are involved. They are sneaky like that. However, I think (or it is my opinion and I know I say "I think" a lot instead of IMO)...when search warrants are issued then we will be informed by the media so we can begin to follow their path.

Doesn't anyone find it odd that we have heard of NO search warrants? The only search I know of was JC's house and they probably did not need a warrant. Do not know if there was a warrant for M&M, either. Sounds like Ali let them take the surveillance stuff willingly. JMO

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Just throwing this out there as an observation about Herron Road.

• Herron Road is narrow and drivers must use a lot of caution when oncoming cars approach.
• There is not a lot of traffic on Herron Road (IMO).
• I did not locate and speed limit signs on Herron Road. Would probably be safe to say 25-30 MPH.
• Herron Road is not an overly winding road but, there are slight curves from the NE and SW directions from the crime scene.
• There are no street lights so, the road would have been pretty dark (less the full moon) on that night.
• Crime scene (2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS) is 328 feet above sea-level (34.236663,-89.954157).
• Approaching the crime scene from NE or SW are both lower elevations:

From NE heading SW: 3.5% grade between 6 Main St., Courtland, MS and 2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS​

6 Main St., Courtland, MS is 305 feet above sea-level (34.237561,-89.952290)
2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS is 328 feet above sea-level (34.236663,-89.954157)
These locations are 0.12 mi apart (652 feet), and the elevation change is 23 feet​


​

From SW heading NE: 5.6% grade between 2322 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS and 2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS
2322 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS is 308 feet above sea-level (34.236267,-89.955223)
2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS is 328 feet above sea-level (34.236663,-89.954157)
These locations are 0.06 mi apart (352 feet), and the elevation change is 20 feet

​

• Being that both approaches to the crime scene have slight curves in the road and are lower in elevation, it is quite possible that a driver would have less visibility of an on-coming car. Especially if driver(s) were speeding.

Google Map - 2352 Herron Rd., Courtland, MS

Thank you for the time it took to lay all this out! Nice work, PeterThomasFan! Also I didn't realize there was a full moon. Kudos.

 

[FelicityLemon]

My opinion is that the GM in the interview with DT is 44 and looks older to me, but some lifestyles age you quickly. And it is also my opinion that we can't -nor should we -assume everything said in that interview was the truth. Or anybody's interviews really. People will say what they want to be known whether it's the truth or wishful thinking. If there was a text sent (and I believe there was) from DT's phone to JC, somebody else's fingers could have been tap tap tapping. It would be so useful to know what it said.

If some people didn't want a book written before, they're going to hate what comes out of this tragedy.

And a hearty WHOOHOO :loveyou: :loveyou: :loveyou: to Bessie for adding that obvious Delete field - I could never find it before; I assumed it was like when I stand in front of the fridge growling because I can't find what I'm directly looking at.

 

[New1]

Thanks for reminding me of DT's reference to her text message.

On a separate note: Upon looking at "George Mister Jr." (whose name is clearly visible in the interview)...

I now feel that the Panolian article regarding the GM Jr. who was arrested for the wild kidnapping/robbery in December 2012 is NOT the same as "George Mister Jr." of this interview.

Since the "2012 GM Jr." was described as being familiar to LE since 1994, that would make the character in the interview approximately 40+ years old. However that character appears younger; my guess would be a young, 30-something. Thus I am guessing that the "2012 GM Jr." is his father; I am also guessing that the reference then to "gang leader of MVL" relates to the father.

I saw the interview, then later I happened upon a picture of "Boone" on a site that can't be linked here, and the George Mister that was interviewed with Rachel Tutor and "Boone" are either identical twins or one in the same person, IMO.

 

[ZOOL]

Excellent, PeterThomasFan.

What I have not been able to understand are the remarks some posters have made suggesting that the pictures of tracks leading into the crime scene suggest that Jessica may have had an accidental swerve in. But the pictures I have seen suggest only that someone (probably the Jerr Dan, or LE) pulled out from that scene and drove back into Courtland. Using your supplied Google Map Street View image, and then driving directly along the centerline of Herron Road supports the tracks moving towards Courtland. A swerving set of tracks would necessitate Jessica's car being in the left side of your view. And if you pulled a complete 180-degree reversal on your view, if Jessica were driving in from Benson Road, then those tracks would be not the ones that I have seen. Consequently I do not understand the theory that leads to the possibility of an accident.

 

[OneLove]

Doesn't anyone find it odd that we have heard of NO search warrants? The only search I know of was JC's house and they probably did not need a warrant. Do not know if there was a warrant for M&M, either. Sounds like Ali let them take the surveillance stuff willingly. JMO

I have wondered about the surveillance hardware. I know peeps were harshly critical about LE 'merely' taping the footage, but is it possible that they were not entitled to seize it without a search warrant? Maybe they were actually being 'smart' to film what they could immediately after the event that night in case it "disappeared" before a warrant for seizure of it could be obtained from a judge.

Anyone know the laws concerning this? I'm not sure that LE can simply seize property, especially if it is necessary for the functioning or security of the business.

And is it possible that LE asked for the original AND the hardware that first night and were told no?

I can see how the loss of security cams without advance warning would certainly jeapordise that business. And then there is also the possibility that the owner wanted to "vet" the tape first for personally damaging evidence not related to JC's situation.

 

[suspicious1]

Just wanted to throw something out there.

Need I remind you that I don't know the situation with JC having had her car taken away but something happened in my family yesterday that I wanted to share with my WS family.

My younger cousin got in trouble Friday and had her car taken away from her by my uncle (whose name is on the registration). The reason he took the keys from her was because he found out that she had been letting other people (boyfriend/friends) drive her car while she was at work.

IMO, his main point was the fact that the car & insurance was in his name.

 

[FelicityLemon]

I have wondered about the surveillance hardware. I know peeps were harshly critical about LE 'merely' taping the footage, but is it possible that they were not entitled to seize it without a search warrant? Maybe they were actually being 'smart' to film what they could immediately after the event that night in case it "disappeared" before a warrant for seizure of it could be obtained from a judge.

Anyone know the laws concerning this? I'm not sure that LE can simply seize property, especially if it is necessary for the functioning or security of the business.

And is it possible that LE asked for the original AND the hardware that first night and were told no?

I can see how the loss of security cams without advance warning would certainly jeapordise that business. And then there is also the possibility that the owner wanted to "vet" the tape first for personally damaging evidence not related to JC's situation.

DOH! *slapping my forehead* Brilliant comment! I was being such a smartypants when I first saw that incident and thinking how lame that was - that they were taping from the monitor when so much could have been edited or merely not shown at all. Thank you!

 

[MyBelle]

I don't see how they expected it to resemble an accidental car fire since cars don't just burn for no reason. It is my opinion they really did not care how it looked to LE or anyone as they were probably under the impression no evidence would be left of them in or on the car (also in or on Jessica...if someone did set her aflame). Fire is an easy way to get rid of DNA and other evidence.

Fire in a secluded area is also an incredibly horrific way to torture someone to death.

It did resemble an accidental car fire to whomever reported it. I don't know of too many motorists who intentionally torch their own car on the side of the road and I doubt Jessica intentionally set the fire.
First responders did not expect to see a human being ablaze when they arrived.
The car was far enough off the road to obscure any activity around it to passing motorists prior to the start of the fire.

JMO

 

[ZOOL]

I have wondered about the surveillance hardware. I know peeps were harshly critical about LE 'merely' taping the footage, but is it possible that they were not entitled to seize it without a search warrant? Maybe they were actually being 'smart' to film what they could immediately after the event that night in case it "disappeared" before a warrant for seizure of it could be obtained from a judge.

Anyone know the laws concerning this? I'm not sure that LE can simply seize property, especially if it is necessary for the functioning or security of the business.

And is it possible that LE asked for the original AND the hardware that first night and were told no?

I can see how the loss of security cams without advance warning would certainly jeapordise that business. And then there is also the possibility that the owner wanted to "vet" the tape first for personally damaging evidence not related to JC's situation.

In the tv series Law & Order the detectives often ran afoul of persons who refused their requests to hand over evidence without a warrant. The detectives merely replied that they could stay there while someone got the warrant, and they could make life miserable for the reluctant persons until the warrant arrived, and "wouldn't they rather be cooperative?"

Sometimes people were; sometimes they were not.

Yet if the detectives suspected that someone intended to "vet" the equipment, the detectives would have camped out on their doorstep until the warrant arrived, and made the reluctant persons sweat with busy work.

 

[MyBelle]

Doesn't anyone find it odd that we have heard of NO search warrants? The only search I know of was JC's house and they probably did not need a warrant. Do not know if there was a warrant for M&M, either. Sounds like Ali let them take the surveillance stuff willingly. JMO

Considering Mississippi uses the Grand Jury system, search warrants may be sealed.

JMO

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Fire in a secluded area is also an incredibly horrific way to torture someone to death.

It did resemble an accidental car fire to whomever reported it. I don't know of too many motorists who intentionally torch their own car on the side of the road and I doubt Jessica intentionally set the fire.
First responders did not expect to see a human being ablaze when they arrived.
The car was far enough off the road to obscure any activity around it to passing motorists prior to the start of the fire.

JMO

I agree it is a horrible way to torture someone. But why didn't they just pour it all on Jessica and burn her without burning the car if she was the intended target? It would have drawn less attention and she probably would not have gotten help as quickly.

You bring up a scenario I had not considered: Arson and perhaps murder for insurance money. Who stood to gain if this car went up in smoke? Was it in Jessica's name? Did the insurance cover a life policy for her? Could Jessica have owed money and she did this with some help to collect, but burned herself quite by accident?

 

[MSCJgrad]

I don't think the car was staged to look like an accident, but it would not exclude an intent to blow up the car. Interesting angle that it could have been about the car though. Food for thought. Punishment? Threat gone awry? Control?

BBM

Or sending a message to someone? Or destroying something thought to be in the car? Maybe the car itself was evidence? IDK...

 

[MyBelle]

I agree it is a horrible way to torture someone. But why didn't they just pour it all on Jessica and burn her without burning the car if she was the intended target? It would have drawn less attention and she probably would not have gotten help as quickly.

You bring up a scenario I had not considered: Arson and perhaps murder for insurance money. Who stood to gain if this car went up in smoke? Was it in Jessica's name? Did the insurance cover a life policy for her? Could Jessica have owed money and she did this with some help to collect, but burned herself quite by accident?

I really think you are placing the wrong emphasis on car insurance or life insurance as a motive.

I think her killer knocked her out and she was in the car. Pouring a flammable substance on someone conscious and lighting them on fire is going to result in screams. Because it was in a secluded location, she didn't get help quickly enough to save her.

JMO