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

[flatfootjoe]

I'll bite. Why set someone on fire when you could be discovered? What is the motive other than punitive?

Nothing you couldn't accomplish with a bag of rocks and 3 or 4 weeks in a body of water. One of these activities is riskier than the other. Well they have different kinds of risk attached anyway.

 

[Yvettea]

get rid of evidence

Right. I get that. Set the fire to (finish) kill(ing) her and destroy the evidence.

My question is why tie a little girl to a fence, douse them with an accelerant front and back, and set them on fire like a torch? If that is what happened.

 

[SStarr33]

Right. I get that. Set the fire to (finish) kill(ing) her and destroy the evidence.

My question is why tie a little girl to a fence, douse them with an accelerant front and back, and set them on fire like a torch? If that is what happened.

She was tied to a fence?

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Jessica was burned severely over 98% of her body. You aren't going to get that sort of a burn efficiency to a body that isn't fully exposed to oxygen. If she were laying, sitting, reclining or even prone, the burn would have been denied oxygen on the unexposed surfaces. The ONLY part of her body unburnt were the soles of her feet.

She was restrained, she was unable to move at least for some time.

There are videos of people who are on fire and from what I have seen they are fully engulfed yet their tendencies do not include laying down or rolling on the ground. They scream and try to run because they panic. 98% burns could be easily explained because she was fully doused before lit and she ran which kept the bottoms of her feet from burning. Also if her clothing at the bottom collected more accelerant, it burned faster and burned out before she fell leaving the soles still untouched, imo. Restraints around her ankles would have actually caused her to fall and put out part of the flames I would think. Having her hands restrained would not have any impact on the flames either way as it would not prevent her from falling, imo.

So no...it is nowhere near "official".

 

[Yvettea]

She was tied to a fence?

Sorry the wording used was tree or gate.

I think she was probably secured to the gate or the tree. At least for a short time. Ugh, I didn't really want to think that, or to type it out.

 

[flatfootjoe]

Right. I get that. Set the fire to (finish) kill(ing) her and destroy the evidence.

My question is why tie a little girl to a fence, douse them with an accelerant front and back, and set them on fire like a torch? If that is what happened.

You're seriously asking that question, or is that rhetorical.

Why would someone do that? My brain isn't wired that way, I can't imagine any possible combination of events that would make me set another human being on fire. I'm not a crazy homicidal psychopath though, I don't even know any personally. If it wasn't a matter of symbolism, or a means of punishment, I can't imagine a motive, assuming she were alive.

I can't imagine any other possibility than her being restrained if she was found outside the vehicle. She would have at very least extinguished herself, or at most set the perpetrators or more of the scene on fire trying to.

 

[MSCJgrad]

I am with you when you say that this is one instance that you wish you were wrong. I am one of those people that sincerely likes to be proven wrong-I love a good discussion, and I enjoy being educated by others while taking in new information, new perspectives, etc. Unfortunately, the mishandling of this particular crime scene is nothing that we can wish away.
I am keeping my fingers crossed that Jessica's body preserved some type of evidence-beacuse the entire scene of the fire as well as her car can pretty much be written off as a bust, IMO. What wasn't ruined by LE and first responders was tainted by the complete lack of protocol. However the increased tip $ from the FBI did put a damper in my vibe as far as hoping for evidence to have came from her body. While trying my very hardest not to be pessimistic, I am currently of the opinion that aside from either a direct confession from a perp or somebody snitching with VERY persuasive information-along with some type of evidence-be it shoes/clothing from the night of the murder, the container of accelerant used, a video, or some other sort of physical evidence tying said persons directly to the crime; this is going to be an extremely difficult case to prosecute. This is clearly JMO, and it is subject to change in the morning, and I sincerely hope that what my gut is telling me, is wrong.

Thank you for remembering that. I'm just finding it extremely frustrating to find that same sentiment being echoed so frequently now. Not because "I said it first" but because it probably means I was right. The one time I'd like to be completely off target... I don't want to be right, I want to be horribly mistaken. I want to wake up tomorrow with the knowledge that forensics alone will be sufficient to solve the case. AAMOF IIRC you were there helping me explain why one and one do indeed equal two. Thank you for that as well.

 

[Ms Pragmatic]

Good question. This is why I think this was vengeful, personal, + pre-meditated (the introduction of accelerant).

Furthermore - if a gun was indeed used on Jessica - and it may have been! even unbeknownst to us - it would be known to the medical examiner and those producing the autopsy report. I guess point is, whether we don't know is one thing, but the examiner would be able to ascertain the answer quite readily. (Same goes for whether J had any particular drug or substance in her system - though those tests would take a bit longer, I believe).

You make an excellent point. We do NOT know what happened to her, but LE and the medical examiner do. Nothing has been released, therefore we do not know if she suffered a beating so brutal as to make it possible for them to douse her. No knowledge of rape, abdominal bruising, blunt force trauma. She could have been semi-conscious, or as you said...shot. Maybe even stabbed. I hadn't considered that,

 

[dairydog]

I agree that the investigation was blown at the beginning. Crime scene was cleared way too soon. Tow truck driver, ugh.

I agree Ms Pragmatic. I was concerned from the get go at the brevity of the forensic examination at the crime scene. Obviously, at this point, ATF, MBI & FBI were not involved so the examination would have been carried out by local resources. I have seen cases both in my area and elsewhere where a crime scene is taped off and secured for more than a day and quite often longer. In addition, IMO the burned out vehicle should have been covered by a tarp and driven directly to the forensic lab for examination. I couldn't believe that the tow truck driver left the vehicle (almost on display) while he went into the gas bar for whatever. After all, this vehicle is a critical piece of evidence. I remember following the Audrey Gleave murder case. They took that poor soul's car from her garage and towed it away in a covered trailer just in case it would provide any evidence. I hope I'm not making a mountain out of a mole hill but I fear that there were flaws in the infancy of this investigation.

 

[Leischa]

The gas was supposed to be purchased for a generator ..... does anyone know if GasMan even owns a generator .... that would be one of the first questions out of my mouth if I were LE or DA.

Yesterday I watched a video in which they show the generator so yes, he does have a generator at home.

 

[MSCJgrad]

So you have ruled out completely that she was unconscious as opposed to restrained? Is it because you are thinking that she would have came to? Just curious... TIA

Only in the regard that it would have made keeping her ablaze damned near impossible if she weren't. It has not been confirmed in MSM. As my signature states MOO. I don't see how the crime as reported would have been possible otherwise.

 

[MizStery]

BBM.

Do you mean acetone, or the more stinky less acrid currently found in stores version. I thought the acetone version was harder to come by nowadays for safety reasons. How would you come by that particular accelerant in volume? I'm not baiting you, I'm exploring the logistics.

You can buy 100% pure acetone at beauty supply stores in volume. I can buy smaller bottles at my local drug store and grocery store.

Grilled Cheese just before I posted I saw that you can get large quantities in beauty supply. That got me thinking gosh there are lots of people who have state licenses who probably can get discounts. For example a nail/piercing/tattoo business. Thanks,you got me thinking!

My husband uses acetone to clean excess toner after completing the transfer of his circuit board design. He mentioned that acetone can be an ingredient in making meth. He just buys his acetone at Home Depot. Acetone also has a higher flash point than mineral spirits or alcohol.

Now,if a person were employed in a legit manufacturing job often large industrial quantities of acetone are stored. Perhaps,it would be possible to occasionally take/siphon off some. :moo:

 

[flatfootjoe]

I am with you when you say that this is one instance that you wish you were wrong. I am one of those people that sincerely likes to be proven wrong-I love a good discussion, and I enjoy being educated by others while taking in new information, new perspectives, etc. Unfortunately, the mishandling of this particular crime scene is nothing that we can wish away.
I am keeping my fingers crossed that Jessica's body preserved some type of evidence-beacuse the entire scene of the fire as well as her car can pretty much be written off as a bust, IMO. What wasn't ruined by LE and first responders was tainted by the complete lack of protocol. However the increased tip $ from the FBI did put a damper in my vibe as far as hoping for evidence to have came from her body. While trying my very hardest not to be pessimistic, I am currently of the opinion that aside from either a direct confession from a perp or somebody snitching with VERY persuasive information-along with some type of evidence-be it shoes/clothing from the night of the murder, the container of accelerant used, a video, or some other sort of physical evidence tying said persons directly to the crime; this is going to be an extremely difficult case to prosecute. This is clearly JMO, and it is subject to change in the morning, and I sincerely hope that what my gut is telling me, is wrong.

While I think we can all logically find fault with local LE regarding "chain of custody" conduct, you can't say the same of a volunteer fire company. One is a county compensated employee with (one would assume) adequate education and training to perform the job they hold, the other, simply volunteers trying to get a job done. The vfc did everything they could to assist Jessica and extinguish the blaze. That's what they were taught to do.

I'd prefer to be educated, rather than walk through life ignorant to folly. We share that thought as well.

 

[Yvettea]

I asked because you said it seriously.

I'm in partial agreement. I believe Jessica wasn't in the car at all. I find a problem with that though. How do you control someone who's on fire. I'm guessing restraints. Maybe that's why LE ruled it a homicide so quickly, she had some sort of ligature, or evidence of ligatures even though they were destroyed by fire. I guess you could use large wire wraps like LE do in mass arrest situations. How long would those last directly exposed to flame though? I guess you could use metal cuffs, but assuming they were trying to make it look like an accidental car fire, those would really stand out. I think there were at least three people there though. I can't see Jessica being contained by Just two people if she were struggling for her life. That level of adrenaline would have afforded her the strength I think to at least break free from her assailants. One perp manages the car, another manages Jessica, the third acts a lookout and also as a failsafe to restrain, or recapture the victim.

If I were going to attempt such a crime the minimum people I'd have is 4. Two for the main crime, two shooters in case anyone stops by to assist the victim or to act as backup or lookouts.

All MOO.

I think she was probably secured to the gate or the tree. At least for a short time. Ugh, I didn't really want to think that, or to type it out.

 

[flatfootjoe]

So you have ruled out completely that she was unconscious as opposed to restrained? Is it because you are thinking that she would have came to? Just curious... TIA

Do you see any possible way that you could be set on fire and not regain consciousness? Assuming you weren't already completely gassed by CO? Why would you regain consciousness afterwards?

 

[MSCJgrad]

A IMO, to make a point. To illustrate to others, 'see what I can do'. It's like a sociopath's version of a toddler showing you 12 times that they can jump on one foot. Except the toddler has good intentions, wanting to show off their new ability. The sociopath(s), on the other hand, is making an example out of JC, showing others, 'you see what happens when you cross me (or us, as many of us are speculating it was in fact 2-5 perps). BGetting rid of evidence comes to mind as well, but I am leaning towards A, if not a combination of the 2. MOO

I'll bite. Why set someone on fire when you could be discovered? What is the motive other than punitive?

 

[flatfootjoe]

I asked because you said it seriously.

I can appreciate that. Can you give me an alternative for controlling Jessica assuming she is conscious that doesn't require the assistance of restraints? Or possibly one that insures the safety and absence of serious burns on the individual tasked with managing her?

 

[flatfootjoe]

A IMO, to make a point. To illustrate to others, 'see what I can do'. It's like a sociopath's version of a toddler showing you 12 times that they can jump on one foot. Except the toddler has good intentions, wanting to show off their new ability. The sociopath(s), on the other hand, is making an example out of JC, showing others, 'you see what happens when you cross me (or us, as many of us are speculating it was in fact 2-5 perps). BGetting rid of evidence comes to mind as well, but I am leaning towards A, if not a combination of the 2. MOO

I thought I said symbolism like 20 posts ago... :thinking:

 

[SteveP]

She was tied to a fence?

Before this becomes repeated as fact a page from now, the thought that she was restrained in any fashion was just speculation by a poster who did not present it as substantiated fact.

 

[Yvettea]

You're seriously asking that question, or is that rhetorical.

Why would someone do that? My brain isn't wired that way, I can't imagine any possible combination of events that would make me set another human being on fire. I'm not a crazy homicidal psychopath though, I don't even know any personally. If it wasn't a matter of symbolism, or a means of punishment, I can't imagine a motive, assuming she were alive.

I can't imagine any other possibility than her being restrained if she was found outside the vehicle. She would have at very least extinguished herself, or at most set the perpetrators or more of the scene on fire trying to.

There was a case I heard where young man was doused with an accellerant and set on fire. He was burned over 98% of his body. He was not tied to a gate or tree. And he didn't set anyone else on fire.

As are matter-of-fact they didn't discover who did this for many years; the perp had no burns. The victim survived initially. But when he was dying years later he finally revealed the name of the person who burned him. For him justice came very late.

ETA: Yes I knew him.