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

[MizStery]

Vipate,from crime scene to impound, evidence i.e. 'vehicle' chain of custody protocol.

Tow truck driver headed for LE impound w/ Jessica's vehicle stopped at M&M for 1)!cigs or 2)in video clip,DA Champon mentioned driver stopped to gets a cold drink?(I think?). While tow/vehicle parked at the M&M (this is verified in video w/local reporter that AA posted photos of Jessica's vehicle in Mainstrean Media) Don't have video link handy. MOO

If LE quickly loaded up the car, I think they probably realized it did not contain any useful evidence. The photos show an interior totally destroyed by the inferno. In cases of arson, the ashes aren't entered into evidence it is the testimony of arson investigators and photographs entered into evidence.

Ah,but~at trial an attorney can plant/introduce a mere seed of doubt i.e. while in route from crime scene was vehicle chain of custody protocol followed until evidence was transferred to a secure LE impound area'.If not,then the defense attorney has an opening in court to allege tainted evidence & 'to potentially poison the well'. But,I am not a lawyer so I may be way off in my post. MOO

I hope I am worrying too much and I am wrong. MOO

 

[FindHG]

a screen grab from most recent search here

and more from WMCActionnews' video clips

 

[Foxfire]

I don't want to give him too much credit but I really think he's holding everything close to the vest. And I'm not surprised that they will be taking it to a grand jury. My gut tells me that they have a pretty good idea, if not exactly, of what happened to Jessica and are just waiting for those lab results to come back.

Also, it occurred to me just now that maybe he is continually saying that there is no chatter on the streets for a couple of reasons. One, to give the perps (and I do mean plural) a false sense of security. And secondly, to avoid harm to someone else who knows too much. At least this is what I am hoping. I do find it odd that he has said publicly on several occasions that people aren't talking and I just have to think that there's an ulterior motive.

I've known quite a few lawyers like him. I'm a retired court reporter. They want people to think that they are incompetent but they are far from it. It's simply an act. That act often gets people to talk, makes them more comfortable, and sometimes lulls them into a false sense of security so that mistakes are made. He's wants everybody to believe he is just a good ol boy. It works. I've witnessed it.

< BBM for Focus >

Well, distracted, from where I am sitting, 'seems that Big John Champion has perfected the art of making people think that they are incompetent'... Prolly should win an Oscar for his performance...

 

[FindHG]

more...

Jessica legs walking toward store from the car
Gas jug guy walking out with female
Guy bending down by pump as Jessica Chambers is about to enter store in opposite corner

 

[wfgodot]

I would not term the actions of LE thus far in this matter as seeming particularly competent.

 

[FindHG]

more...

At the pump in the background, then
Gas jug guy seen leaving pump area through the window
not there in seconds as Jessica enters
or exists, later

 

[RANCH]

I've seen some post's about the car being towed too soon and the tow driver stopping at the convenience store. I doubt that towing the car destroyed any evidence that was left after the fire.

Is the concern about the stop at the store about planting evidence on/in the car or something else? If someone planted evidence how would they know the driver would stop there? JMO.

 

[cady]

Ok, first off, great post, and you have done a great job of creating this list. This case involves so many people, it is so easy for me to get confused!! I do have a couple of questions/comments:
1) When referring to Charlotte Wilkerson, I don't see how she could be his aunt, aside from by marriage or adoption, as she is white and he is black. She did refer to herself as 'auntie Sha Sha' in her interview outside of the M&M. The only aunt of Bryan Rudd that I have seen mentioned in MSM is Sandy Rudd.
2) Cassandra Markett is in fact Sandy Rudd, yes, one in the same. She just gave the name Cassandra Market, for whatever reason, when she was interviewed outside of M&M and admitted to being the one who asked Jessica for a cigarette shortly before Jessica met her fate. She is also the one who was driving the car that Bejaun Byers rode in that night, seen on the video filling up a gas can, shortly before Jessica was murdered. (http://www.msnewsnow.com/story/2764...tation-video-speak-about-chambers-murder-case).
3) When mentioning the Rudd's, it's worth mentioning Theresa Rudd Flemming, who is Bryan Rudd's mother. She was interviewed (not outside of the M&M, for once) by MSM as well. Jessica lived with Bryan and Theresa for some time prior to her death.
4) It can be noted that George Mister has a lengthy criminal history, including gang activities and an active case against him for kidnapping and robbing a local woman (http://www.panolian.com/v2/content....&Title=home&SiteSearch=1&Search=george+mister). Give this link a look and help yourself to some of his many recent criminal mishaps in Panola County. Bringing us to Rachael Tutor...
5) Rachael Tutor has a child/children by George Mister. Not sure if this matters whatsoever, but it does bring some insight into their relationship.
6) Bejuan Byers (or Buyers, depending on the source), gas can man, who's live in girlfriend is Teanna Rudd.
This is just some input that I think makes a good addition to your list. There sure seems to be a lot of Rudd's in that town...

Debbie Chambers is Ben chambers's wife. Bens son, not Debbie's, was killed in an auto accident. Debbie is formerly a McClenic (sp). She has children named McClenic. Ben Allen, who was killed, has a mother who is NOT Lisa Chambers. Lisa talked to Jessica, reportedly, for 20 minutes. No idea how all the pastors enter the picture. JMO

 

[cady]

Also, the person who called about the "loud pipes" was a McClenic. Brother, ex husband , or somehow related to Debbie McClenic Chambers ?? If I recall correctly, when Ben Chambers was busted for the meth related charge, so was his girlfriend, Debbie McClenic, and his son, Ben Allen Chambers. JMO

 

[PeterThomasFan]

If LE quickly loaded up the car, I think they probably realized it did not contain any useful evidence. The photos show an interior totally destroyed by the inferno. In cases of arson, the ashes aren't entered into evidence it is the testimony of arson investigators and photographs entered into evidence.

BBM

That statement is preposterous in and of itself.

I don't claim to be an expert but, in order to conduct a proper fire investigation (back me up here @Foxfire), LE should have left the car in place until they were able to determine the origin of the fire. How can they possibly say that they figured that out in less than an hour, without taking trace evidence, photographing the scene, and collecting ILR (ignitable liquid residue) samples &#8211; all in the dark? :thinking:

Or maybe LE broke our the gas chromatography&#8211;mass spectrometer that was in their trunk. I dunno?

 

[PeterThomasFan]

I've seen some post's about the car being towed too soon and the tow driver stopping at the convenience store. I doubt that towing the car destroyed any evidence that was left after the fire.

Is the concern about the stop at the store about planting evidence on/in the car or something else? If someone planted evidence how would they know the driver would stop there? JMO.

BBM

How can anyone be 100% sure now?

If Mr. Tow Truck Driver would have driven the car straight to the impound lot, this would not become a question. Plus, any possibility of this evidence being thrown out because the Defense challenges its integrity (if someone planted evidence or altered it somehow).

Just imagine if an Investigator had a drinking glass with fingerprints all over it and told someone helping at the scene to take it back to the office. But, instead of going straight to the office, the helper stops at the bar for a "cold one". He sits the glass down on the bar-top while he drinks his Bud Light. Unbeknownst to him, someone picks up the glass and adds their fingerprints to the mix! How responsible is that?

 

[imkeylime]

But had the entire scene been cleared, is my question? Or, rather, how could the entire scene have been cleared at that point? Unless the car was elevated from it's very spot and lifted from the scene, it would have to be pulled or dragged across the ground. My point is, in doing so, evidence could have been lost, destroyed, or overlooked.

I'm curious as to when her cell phone was found and why the battery was out of it. It was apparently found outside her car (on or off the road?). I specifically wonder if 1) JC was the last to touch the phone and it dropped from her hands while she exited the car, dislodging the battery or 2) someone else disposed of the phone after removing the battery so she couldn't make a call. If 2), would it suggest that the person had no fear of being traced via the phone or was in such a rage that he/she didn't think about it?

Also, in the following article (hope this is a legitimate link, most of the material is quoted from BC), it specifies that her dad said that doctors told him an accelerant had been put down her throat and that she was found walking with her hands up. He also speculates that a car might have pulled up beside her. That said, I'm not sure why she'd have been parked there or even on that road. It seems like if that was the case, she might have been there with someone else ... and then a car pulled up, putting an additional person on the scene. I suppose that could the loud car that RM heard.

http://www.people.com/article/missi...death-jessica-chambers-told-police-who-did-it

Anyhow, one concern I have about the crime scene is the tow truck disturbing tracks (shoe or vehicle) that might have not been visible in the dark. JMO.

 

[jamiefind]

I've known quite a few lawyers like him. I'm a retired court reporter. They want people to think that they are incompetent but they are far from it. It's simply an act. That act often gets people to talk, makes them more comfortable, and sometimes lulls them into a false sense of security so that mistakes are made. He's wants everybody to believe he is just a good ol boy. It works. I've witnessed it.

Great to hear your opinion. I'm an attorney in Jackson. You've surely seen many more "performances" than me, but I'll throw my two cents in as well. I know lawyers who use the good ol boy routine, too. Some use it as a tactic to lull the opposing side into false confidence. I've done that with contract negotiations with Northern attorneys. Others use it to distract from their...well...having less competence than they would like to have. Put simply, if the legal arguments get too complicated or don't go their way, that type will crank up the routine so as to appeal to their audience's folksy sensibilities. That effectively shifts the argument away from the letter of the law to the intent of the law, or what the law "should" be to "regular country folk." My impression is that the DA falls into the latter category, ESPECIALLY since he is elected by a rural population.

None of this is legal advice or statements as to another attorney's competence or level of skill. All IMO. Etc.

 

[MSCJgrad]

The concern (from my standpoint) is that there was a stop made while towing the evidence (car). It doesn't matter if the tow truck stopped at the white house or the M&M convenience store. The fact that there was a stop made, period, allows for a defense attorney to argue to have the evidence (car) thrown out of court, due to the fact that it was not handled properly, therefore it could have been tainted in some way. If for some reason any evidence derived from the car was to make it into court, it could easily draw reasonable doubt from a judge or jury, as the defense could argue that anything could have been removed, planted, or altered.

I've seen some post's about the car being towed too soon and the tow driver stopping at the convenience store. I doubt that towing the car destroyed any evidence that was left after the fire.

Is the concern about the stop at the store about planting evidence on/in the car or something else? If someone planted evidence how would they know the driver would stop there? JMO.

 

[MSCJgrad]

"I don't claim to be an expert but, in order to conduct a proper fire investigation (back me up here @Firefox), LE should have left the car in place until they were able to determine the origin of the fire. How can they possibly say that they figured that out in less than an hour, without taking trace evidence, photographing the scene, and collecting ILR (ignitable liquid residue) samples – all in the dark"...
This has been my point all along. Amen!

BBM

That statement is preposterous in and of itself.

I don't claim to be an expert but, in order to conduct a proper fire investigation (back me up here @Firefox), LE should have left the car in place until they were able to determine the origin of the fire. How can they possibly say that they figured that out in less than an hour, without taking trace evidence, photographing the scene, and collecting ILR (ignitable liquid residue) samples – all in the dark? :thinking:

Or maybe LE broke our the gas chromatography–mass spectrometer that was in their trunk. I dunno?

 

[ZOOL]

I respectfully disagree not with your conclusion, but with the confidence you place in your conclusion. I will recite a bit of criminal law for our fellow WS'ers' benefit even though you may know all of this.

A police search and seizure of the shirt---without voluntary consent---would require a search warrant (not a subpoena as no formal proceeding has been instituted), and such a warrant would require the police to show probable cause to a judge (as you correctly stated). Probable cause can be based on personal observation or even hearsay, having less stringent requirements than for admissibility of evidence at trial. The bar is to show that sufficient evidence to convict "could" be found. Most importantly, and to your credit, probable cause means that there exists a reasonable belief that the person was indeed involved in a crime. Probable cause does not exist when police just want to access an object "just to see" whether the person was involved in a crime.

I think a judge COULD be within its rightful discretion in finding probable cause to issue a search warrant to seize the shirt from this man since: (1) he WAS seen filling a gas can beside JC's car minutes before her and her car's incineration via accelerant, but (2) was NOT seen acknowledging her presence, although (3) he DID comment via MSM that he knew JC and "looked up" and noticed her there, and (4) considering Cassandra/Sandy Ruddmarket's MSM assertions that she actively interacted with JC at the gas station AND drove off with the gas can man from whom such clothing would be sought.

If a judge found probable cause, even incorrectly, I do not think it would be considered an abuse of discretion, the standard needed for reversal/quashing.

All MOO. No claims of guilt on anyone. No legal advice here...consult your own attorney.

jamiefind, Excellent points!

I am still confident in my position though. Since there has been no confirmation that gasoline was the accelerant, IMO a circuit court judge would have looked up from the affidavit for the search and said, "The video stays in...but bring me evidence that gasoline was used in the crime, and I'll give you your warrant."

Since the Panola County Sheriff's Department has a 28-year, Memphis fire investigator on its staff, it would be my opinion that the department knew what the accelerant was within 48 hours of the crime. By Dec 9-10, I would guess that if they had had confirmation that gasoline was used, then an affidavit for a search of the GasMan's shirt would have been granted.

Yet by this date (Dec 31), finding GasMan's shirt could prove fruitless, and I should point out that he has been "cleared" for the moment.

Thus my confidence is based upon the need for proof that gasoline was used.

Then probable cause would seem much stronger.

 

[jamiefind]

Since there has been no confirmation that gasoline was the accelerant, IMO a circuit court judge would have looked up from the affidavit for the search and said, "The video stays in...but bring me evidence that gasoline was used in the crime, and I'll give you your warrant."

True. Agreed.

 

[FindHG]

more... 4 people seem to exit the car that pulls up on the other side of pump from Jessica's. A younger man stays and gets set to pump gas, the lady in white crosses paths with Jessica on her way to the store, but she's preceded by 2 men who split up, with one going to the store, and the other to the dark corner.

The last shot is the most sad or haunting for me, up to now. It gives the sense you can see her thinking about how she will deal with something. I have about 500 of them from the videos, so let me know if there's some shot you may want.

Jessica walks back to her car past the two men who came from the white pickup area, then past the lady in white.

 

[FindHG]

jamiefind, Excellent points!

I am still confident in my position though. Since there has been no confirmation that gasoline was the accelerant, IMO a circuit court judge would have looked up from the affidavit for the search and said, "The video stays in...but bring me evidence that gasoline was used in the crime, and I'll give you your warrant."

Since the Panola County Sheriff's Department has a 28-year, Memphis fire investigator on its staff, it would be my opinion that the department knew what the accelerant was within 48 hours of the crime. By Dec 9-10, I would guess that if they had had confirmation that gasoline was used, then an affidavit for a search of the GasMan's shirt would have been granted.

Yet by this date (Dec 31), finding GasMan's shirt could prove fruitless, and I should point out that he has been "cleared" for the moment.

Thus my confidence is based upon the need for proof that gasoline was used.

Then probable cause would seem much stronger.

Again, at your own leisure, look at the videos and/or screen grabs of gas jug guy, posted up thread. He doesn't look like BB to me. The guy in the video looks shorter, stockier, different hair, but of course that could all just be my poor eye sight . In the end, there were many eyes around Jessica Chambers at the station that night, probably where ever she went next too, during the following hour or so. In addition to sec cam footage, phone info, it seems impossible that more people didn't see things that would be good leads. Maybe these good folks just haven't put two and two together. A more detailed timeline from LE as to where Jessica Chambers may have gone may also inspire more specific leads. Ground truthing any information always pays off.

It seems to me, from the start of this investigation, when the fire chief and the other first responders, got Jessica help, secured the crime scene, and then LE documented it and left, they may have been cognizant, at the time; of whatever they thought they had learned from Jessica, herself, about whomever did it; that the person/s could be watching them gather evidence, to some extent, until daylight; and, that what the talk of the town would be as soon as the tow truck and as well as the deputies went by AAs that same night. However it may seem to us in terms of competence, I'm not sure you can assume anything was lost by the way things went.

 

[tlcya]

Great to hear your opinion. I'm an attorney in Jackson. You've surely seen many more "performances" than me, but I'll throw my two cents in as well. I know lawyers who use the good ol boy routine, too. Some use it as a tactic to lull the opposing side into false confidence. I've done that with contract negotiations with Northern attorneys. Others use it to distract from their...well...having less competence than they would like to have. Put simply, if the legal arguments get too complicated or don't go their way, that type will crank up the routine so as to appeal to their audience's folksy sensibilities. That effectively shifts the argument away from the letter of the law to the intent of the law, or what the law "should" be to "regular country folk." My impression is that the DA falls into the latter category, ESPECIALLY since he is elected by a rural population.

None of this is legal advice or statements as to another attorney's competence or level of skill. All IMO. Etc.

Thanks for your impressions on this. I will go one further and add my :twocents: This is what we call in my office, turning on the "aw shucks, small town, country boy" charm

And you assessment of the reasons and strategic advantages behind that maneuver are dead on IMO