Noura Jackson: Matricide?
48 Hours Mystery ran the story of Jennifer Jackson, who was murdered in her home as she slept in 2005. The show was titled “My Mother’s Murder“. Her only child, Noura Jackson, was eventually tried and convicted of her murder.
The case takes many twists and turns, and definitely makes people question what the truth is. Noura is a baby-faced teenager at the time of the murder, whose DNA was not found at the scene, even though she lived with her mother. Some say it was sloppy police work. There was hair found in Jennifer’s hands that could be a match to Jennifer, but excluded Noura in preliminary tests. No conclusive tests were ran. It surely must point to someone involved in the murder. I am surprised it hasn’t been tested and more surprised that Noura hasn’t insisted it be tested and run into any DNA database available, as it should be.
Read moreYet when we watch Noura and listen to what she has to say, she is does one thing that concerns me the most. She says everyone else is lying, but her. What are the odds? It doesn’t bode well for Noura.
If we listen to Noura’s story of events, she wants us to believe in one-in-a-million odds, not just once, but over and over and over again. It is precisely this, to me, that gives away Noura’s secrets. I can see unusual odds once, twice, maybe even three times, but after that, it becomes ridiculous.
When I watched 48 Hours, these are some of things that I found noteworthy about Noura:
- In the 911 call, the operator asks her, did you see what happened, and Noura says, “No, no. I just got home.” Her voice sounds whiny to me here. There doesn’t seem to be any fear, terror or urgency, whatsoever, which is a red flag to me. Feelings of terror, urgency or fear don’t turn on and off like a light switch.
- The 911 operator asks Noura, “Is she breathing?” Noura says, “No, no. She’s not breathing, she’s not breathing, she’s not breathing.” Noura sounds like she is whining to me. Her voice just trails off into a soft pitch. It’s notable.
- More than that, if she knew her mom wasn’t breathing, how did she check? Did she check for her mom’s pulse? If so, did she have blood on her? Was any blood ever found on Noura? If she touched her mom in anyway, we would expect to find it. If she spent any time in the room with her mother, if the blood was everywhere, we would have expected to see it on Noura, or on her shoes, or in footprints she left behind. Was there any of this?
- When Noura says, “I didn’t do this, I loved my mom”, she shakes her head no. She does this head shake side-to-side (like she is saying no) frequently. I personally can’t put much weight into this as a subconscious leak because she does this frequently when she talks.
- What are the odds that person who broke in–got into a locked garage first? Noura told a neighbor that someone broke in. That makes me curious, how did Noura enter the house when she found her mom? Through the front door or the garage? If she didn’t go into the garage, how did she know someone broke in?
- Noura says, “Their painting me, like, gosh, I don’t know….a monster, a wild-child, a raving drug addict.” Why doesn’t she say “murderer”, if that’s what she feels they are calling her? Why can’t she say it? Is this a form of distancing? If you were being wrongly accused of murder, wouldn’t you say it? Wouldn’t you also say, “They’ve got the wrong person!”, “We need to find the real killer!” Why isn’t Noura? It’s notable.
- Why did Noura tell several different stories about how she got the cut on her hand? She told one friend said she cut it on a beer bottle, she told another that she got it while trying to get her cat out of the garage, and another friend that it was a burn from cooking mac and cheese. Noura, of course, when questioned on 48 Hours says she told police what really happened. She essentially denies that these people are being honest. What are the odds that all these people would lie?
- Why did Noura change into long-sleeves when she was seen at the Walgreens wearing a tank top and skirt just an hour before? Was that outfit at Walgreens different than what she was wearing with her friends that evening at the party she went to? If so, why did she change two or three times in one evening? I wonder if the police tried to find the outfit her friends said she had on at the party that night or did that go missing?
- Why would Noura forget to tell the police she stopped at Walgreens? What are the odds, if she was totally innocent?
- Why did she go to a Walgreens at 4:00 a.m., and ask for a paper towel to wipe a cut, if she told the police and other people the cut occurred the night before? What are the odds?
- Why did Noura have no phone calls between 1:00 – 3:00 when Jennifer is thought to be murdered and make calls from the house when she said she was not there? What are the odds a friend of Noura would testify that she called after 1:00 a.m. from her home phone?
- How come Noura was quick to respond that no one was shot. How did she know that her mother wasn’t shot? Wouldn’t most people say they have no clue? What are the odds?
- Why did Noura tell her neighbor that “My mom, my mom…someone’s breaking into my house?” Why present tense, if she had already supposedly been in the house and knew her mom was “not breathing”?
- Why would Noura, if she believed an intruder was in the house, go inside before the neighbor who was holding the gun? What are the odds? This shows absolutely no fear, which we would expect if someone else killed her mother and she didn’t know who it was. What are the odds someone who saw and knew what Noura did would have no fear?
- Noura says, “Well I know I don’t really know what happened. I wasn’t there.” Why would she say the world “really“? Is she hedging on us? Is the word “really” a subconscious slip? If she is definitive in her statement, I wouldn’t expect to see a hedge word such as “really”.
- What are the odds that no one from Noura’s own family supported her in the trial, if she was innocent?
- Noura’s uncle testified that Noura seemed unusually interested in what she might inherit if Jennifer died. What are the odds that this would happen within a week of Jennifer’s death?
- Noura says her uncle is a liar. Noura says, “That’s really hard to do, because, um…I love him.” It appears to me she is thinking on her feet here. What are the odds that her own uncle would lie about this? She points the finger at everyone else, but herself.
- Noura’s friend testified that she heard Noura say to her mom the night she was murdered, “My mom’s a bitch and she needs to go to hell.” Her friends didn’t support her either. What are the odds?
- Noura says she didn’t get home until 5:00 a.m., but phone records show otherwise. What are the odds that a 17 year old girl would get home at 5:00 a.m. on the night her mom was murdered? How many 17 year old girls stay out until 5:00 a.m.?
Noura supporters argue that whoever killed her father may have killed her mother. I don’t think the two killings shared any similarities, did they? Second, why would a stranger who wanted revenge on Noura’s dad do an “overkill” stabbing on Jennifer? I could see shooting her, but stabbing her dozens of times? Why? A stranger who just wanted money from Jennifer wouldn’t put a basket over Jennifer’s head. That doesn’t make sense. Furthermore, some speculated that since Jennifer inherited her ex-husband’s estate that perhaps his killers wanted money from Jennifer. If this is true, they would have taken things, but from what we know nothing was taken. They would have had nothing to gain by killing Jennifer, so I think those scenarios are unlikely.
I think this case comes down to the basics. When things seems to be unlikely to be true, they probably are. Noura wants us to believe in unrealistic odds here, and offers no good explanation for any of it. She just wants us to believe she is honest and the rest of the world is lying. I’m not buying it. This is classic behavior of a sociopath, though I am not saying Noura is one (I’m not a medical expert). If you notice though, Noura has very little emotions and never says anything loving about her mother whatsoever. She actually complains that her mother embarrassed her, when she talks about the “bond” between them. It’s kind of ironic.
Do I believe Noura killed her mom? I do not know, but I think Noura knows a heck of a lot more than she is telling us. I also wonder if someone else could have been involved. I’d really like to see that hair tested. There are still plenty of questions in this case that need answers, to say the least.
Not saying she isnt guilty as she very well may have been but the lack of evidence is pretty staggering. The detectives clearly dropped the ball in this case, they had a suspect in mind and they were blind to everything else. In our society you are innocent until proven guilty and i dont feel that there was any real proof showing her guilt just a lot of circumstantial evidence and unanswered questions. The cut on her could have come from any of thousands of things….i cant even count the amount of times that i have noticed a cut on my own hands hours after the fact and i have no idea where it came from. If this girl was all party then its very feasible that she cut herself at a party and didn’t even realize it. The police said that in the call to 911 the operator asked if she had been shot and nora responded with no. The police find this suspicious because “you dont know the difference” Well im sorry but when someone has been stabbed over 50 times you tend to notice that the wounds arent consistent with a 9mm or any other type of arms except a rocket launcher. Furthermore she very well could have thought the operator was asking if she (Nora) shot her in which she responds no. This confusion is understandable in the situation if nora comes home to see her mother brutally massacred. the whole aspect of Noura arguing with her mom and saying she should go to hell….well i have told my parents off thousands of times and my kids have told me off in turn….doesn’t mean anything besides that we are people. Yes there are issues with the night as to Nouras whereabouts as to her cut and going to wall-greens and going into the house before the man she got help from and yes its even suspicious that her phone was inactive for just over 2 hours. But just because the whole picture hasn’t been reviled doesn’t mean you just assume that this girl did the crime. Im saying this as a person who believes in harsher punishments and someone who 9999 times out of a 10,000 will agree with police the fact that the lack of forensic evidence has been completely dismissed is appalling to say the least. This case should have never gone to trial due to a lack of physical evidence. once again i am not saying she isnt guilty as she very well may have been but think about this. We are talking about a 18 year old girl who the prosecution claimed was acting with rage and exploded, she isnt a girl who is trained at covering up murders especially ones that are clearly done in such a brutal fashion. This girl was deemed a witch from day one and the hunt was on.
Absolutely 100% agree!
The cut COULD have come from a thousand things, yes. And according to Noura, it DID come from about a thousand things. Noura told about 5 different stories as to how she got that cut, and tried to hide it from police. Why would an innocent person do this? There would be no reason. I don’t agree there is a lack of evidence. There is a lack of PHYSICAL evidence only. The circumstantial evidence, which by the way most cases are built upon, and when there is enough of it, is better than an eye witness, is very strong proving her guilt.
Ok its been two years since i posted this so i had to think about the case a bit. Regardless, when police are asking anyone, nonetheless a scared 18 year old where she got the cut (likely in a very hostile and accusing way) in which the person doesn’t actually know where the cut came from and feels that they have to come up with an answer its understandable as to why someone might just make something up. A lack of physical evidence is exactly the problem here, they wanted a conviction but had no way of providing any reasonable proof so they piled up a bunch of seemingly convincing arguments that are circumstantial. Someone should not be found guilty of a crime if there is any reasonable doubt and it is immensely clear that there is reasonable doubt in this conviction….case in point that so many people are arguing about this.
“Seemingly” convincing? That’s what circumstantial evidence is. And like I said, a mountain of circumstantial evidence is often better than physical evidence. NO ONE’S DNA or fingerprints were found…so that means the killer should get rewarded by going free?? No, you find circumstantial evidence that all points to one person and amass enough of it that there isn’t a reasonable doubt, and you convict that person. It would be foolish to think that ALL of those circumstances were just coincidences. How do you possibly explain the phone call from her home phone, and then, seconds later, a call to the same person from her cell phone after her mother was killed?? There is no innocent explanation for that. None.
Just watched 48 hrs. Noura is a pretty bad actor who actually thinks she’s good. That’s the thing that makes her look guilty and the thing that gives me the gut-feeling that she did it! No reason for subterfuge or bad acting if you’re innocent!
Bottom line, the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Noura killed her Mother, period. All else is speculation. Teenager murderers are notorious for leaving a massive trail of DNA. I doubt an experienced serial killer could have stabbed the Mother that many times and not left a trail. Usually when murderers are cut, it is in the palm of the hand, because the knife gets slippery and their hand slides across the blade. The cut was on the back of her hand, and was quite insignificant. I can’t tell you how many times I have cut myself and didn’t know it for as much as a day. I have even thought, “What is that red stuff”, only to discover it was my blood, from something as simple as cutting open a package, or cooking. The burden of proof was NOT on the daughter. I personally didn’t like her, but would NEVER have convicted her based on anything the prosecution had. It was a pure joke. This verdict frightens me on what mental faculties people use to arrive at the so called truth. Look at the human logic used at witch trials!
My husband and I totally agree with all of your points of contention.
Teenaged murderers aren’t all Sociopaths. 1 in 25, not 25 in 25. There is a huge difference! They are definitely cold enough to remove the dna. I grew up with one, they can do it and they rely on suckering you in this way. This is not what was used at the witch trials, they used ‘astral evidence’ in those, not human logic and those two things are not even remotely the same. Whether she’s guilty or not, these facts are what they are. There are great books and transcripts available on the witch trials which explain astral evidence and great ones on Sociopathy. There are several teen killers who do not fit your ideas, you can read up on that, too.
Wait a minute, you say not even a “serial killer could have stabbed her Mother and not left a trail”?? Huh?? Then who killed her?? Someone DID stab her and didn’t leave a trail, so that makes no sense. Noura probably got lucky not leaving a “massive” trail of DNA. But think about it- Noura lives in the house. The hair and DNA they probably did find in her mother’s bedroom was likely either hers or her mother’s. Her DNA SHOULD be there- she lives in the home. But if no one else’s was there (aside from one tiny speck of SOMETHING belonging to a man on the sheets), doesn’t that point to Noura? MOST murder cases are tried without having physical evidence. The general public doesn’t seem to realize this. They also don’t seem to realize that DNA does NOT prove that the person who left it killed the victim. If their fingerprint is left in blood, THAT physical evidence proves guilt. If the hair of a person is found on the floor of the room the victim was murdered in, that is nearly worthless evidence and circumstantial evidence (such as the staggering circumstantial evidence in this case against Noura) is much stronger.
I just watched this 48 hr mystery and I find it incredibly hard to believe Noura did this. The DNA found in the bedroom needs to be investigated! Just wait a few years down the road this DNA will be linked to a serial killer. Noura will be let go and sue the pants off the state for wrongfully convicting her. The tax payers will pay the price in the end all because the police and prosecutor were lazy and didnt follow down all the leads… Very sad…
Nora is Not Guilty, what a Damn Shame, no evidence and they took the easy and lazy way out.
The police investigation was beyond a joke here; it was plain corrupt and directed.
To not test the hair in the dead victim’s hand is the kind of thing that never happens unless someone in charge doesn’t want it tested. It’s also so absurd that it deserves to immediately be reversed on appeal and/or investigated by the Innocence Project. Nothing could be much worse to ignore and still proceed with a trial.
Whether or not she is guilty, which I believe she is (directly w/forensic suit or as co-conspirator), she is nonetheless Not Guilty under the law. Plain and simple, and based on so many factors, from the crime scene NON-investigation, the lack of evidence for the prosecution to legally proceed, the court’s acceptance of this as a PF case, the deep failure to meet the burden of proof required and the judge’s failure to reverse the verdict, as required under law in cases where the jury makes a decision of guilt without the BOP being met. The end.
I remember this case so well. Eyes, I think you did a good analysis of Noura and her mother’s murder. There are some things that go along with this case that causes me to realize that this is no ordinary family.
To start with, Noura’s father was into some illegal activities before his murder. I have to wonder how much of her father’s life-style and the people in his life affected Noura. I, also, have to wonder how much her father’s death affected Noura. In a lot of divorces, the child starts to resent the stricter parent.
The basket over the mother’s head, seemed to be the ultimate insult or sign of guilt. I wondered if Noura felt creepy about her mother’s eyes being uncovered, as she tried to do away with any sign of her involvement in the murder.
I don’t believe Noura was in this by herself, and that may be why Noura had only a small cut. When I looked up some of the trial transcript, I found that two knives were involved. , Some of the bloody evidence was carried from the house, because blood droplets were found on the porch steps. This struck me as odd, because no blood trail thru the house was found. I wondered if the evidence was carried out in a plastic bag, and the bag leaked onto the steps. No blood was found in Nora’s car, so someone had to take the bloody evidence away from the scene in another vehicle.
Noura may have agreed to pay someone off with her inheritance I wondered how many questionable people Noura came into contact with that was involved with Noura’s father. This was a strange case with a lot of unanswered questions.
It may seem obvious but what I don’t understand Eyes, is how after all the points you mention you keep an open mind that maybe she didn’t commit the murder. It makes sense from a keeping your mind open point of view but what else would you need? I guess you’re implying that there is nothing to convince you that she did do it, but there are lots of inconsistencies to imply that she was there earlier and that she isn’t innocent.
The circumstantial evidence in the case is what has me convinced. Noura does not seem genuinely emotional to me, no doubt, but the fact that she acted so unbelievably suspicious just puts the final nail in her coffin, so to speak. I get no feeling of sorrow from her, and when she said that she yelled “Go back! PLEASE go back!” to EMS as they wheeled the gurney out without her mother on it, it sounded as if she made it up on the spot. I would be interested to hear whether EMS workers actually corroborate this. I think the lack of PHYSICAL evidence is an issue for prosecution, but circumstantial evidence, to me, is strong proving she did this. No circumstantial evidence OR physical evidence points to anyone else in particular. ALL of the circumstantial evidence points to her. Definitive? Maybe not completely. But I think her guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Would you really say you loved a man who essentially helped put you in jail?? Also, look at the Walgreens surveillance- she was not staggering around, wasted from drugs and alcohol. In fact, she appeared totally steady and alert enough to ask for paper towel from the clerk to dab her wound, along with purchasing medical supplies to treat it. Noura was up all night, evidenced by her phone calls. She most likely smoked all night, not stopped smoking a few hours before the witnesses saw her in the morning. You also cannot explain away the fact that someone from the house called NOURA’S friend (not someone her mother would call, even if she were alive at the time) from the home phone, then hung up and Noura called directly after that on her cell phone- AFTER her mother was thought to have been murdered. And there was evidence, so to say there wasn’t any in 5 years is incorrect. There was a substantial amount of circumstantial evidence. The public wants to think every case is like an episode of CSI, where there is plenty of DNA and fingerprints in blood, making the case a cinch. The vast majority of crimes, even bloody ones, do not have that luxury. Circumstantial evidence is, in many way, stronger than physical evidence if there is enough of it.
The hair in her palm actually wasn’t tested, which is a terrible blunder, and Jennifer wasn’t ruled out as the donor, so she may have gotten her own hair pulled out in the struggle. Victims are often found this way, with their own hair in their hand.
the hole in the glass really bothers me