TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers,45, murdered in church/person in SWAT gear,18 Apr 2016 #12

lstiff said:

That one where:

We were all sitting around enjoying pictures of our childhoods and celebrating our moms when we decided to FB steuth the peeps we think are involved. The mods reminded us that we can't post SS from SM and can't talk about their kids, we have lots of new posters so we oldies need to help lead them to answers & TOS so they can become mega sleuths too. There is still is no agreement on swatperp's gender or identity and some people think it may not be anyone on our radar. Others are convinced they have the perp nailed down & that LE is waiting for proof to make an arrest. Someone thinks CW was taken off the list far too quickly and others say he was not involved in the murder. Still no clearing for RB-BB. It's all still very complicated and I propose we day drink and work together in honor of our beautiful victim who was known as a loving mother and find the evil person who took her from those who love her! Back to the basics friends. What are the facts, what do we know?

Here's a glass, have a seat.:loveyou:

JMO

Click to expand...

arkansasmimi said:

:thinking: Check this out.... If ya think they aren't working and writing many Search Warrants!! Just figured this out by accident. I thinking they have a bunch under seal JMHO

7 Search Warrants have been filed with the District Clerk office, only 3 of the 7 have the hand written Search Warrant # sheet *THAT WE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED.They are as listed. Meaning that the last number is for that particular SW....


1) Filed 4/21 SW16-050 Is to go into the 2012 Ford F150 at MPD & get personal items from veh (iPad and other financial paperwork) ***iPhone was NOT listed so it had to be w/ MB
4/18 Affidavit
4/18 Warrant
4/18 Warrant Execution
?? can not see the Notarized date on the end of page on media page
* truck was released back to BB View attachment 94079

2) Filed 4/27 SW16-059 Dry Cleaner warrant
4/22 Affidavit
4/22 Warrant
4/22 Execution of Warrant
4/27 Notarized View attachment 94080

3) Filed 5/3 SW16-060 MB iPhone & iPad for Forensic Extraction
4/19 Affidavit
4/19 Warrant
4/20 Execution
4/28 Notarized View attachment 94081

4) Filed 5/3 NO SW# Written on copy LinkedIn
4/26 FAXED Emergency Data Preservation for MB account
4/27 Affidavit EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES
4/27 Warrant EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES
*no Execution form JMHO is because this was sent to the Company is in Mountain View, CA

5) Filed 5/3 NO SW# Written on Copy LinkedIn for Casey Williams account
4/26 FAXED Emergency Data Preservation for Casey Williams account
4/27 Affidavit EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES
4/27 Warrant EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES
*no Execution form JMHO is because this was sent to the Company in CA

6) Filed 5/3 No SW# Written on Copy AT&T Cell Tower Dump
4/21 Affidavit
4/21 Warrant
*no Execution form JMHO is because this was sent to the Company is in North Palm Beach, FL 

7) Filed 5/3 NO SW# Written on Copy AT&T Target Numbers
4/25 Affidavit
4/25 Warrant
*no Execution form JMHO is because this was sent to the Company is in North Palm Beach, FL

JMHO, but according to Texas Statutes

(b) No search warrant shall issue for any purpose in this state unless sufficient facts are first presented to satisfy the issuing magistrate that probable cause does in fact exist for its issuance. A sworn affidavit setting forth substantial facts establishing probable cause shall be filed in every instance in which a search warrant is requested.Except as provided by Article 18.011, the affidavit is public information if executed, and the magistrate's clerk shall make a copy of the affidavit available for public inspection in the clerk's office during normal business hours.
MORE at link http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u.../htm/CR.18.htm

Art. 18.011. SEALING OF AFFIDAVIT. (a) An attorney representing the state in the prosecution of felonies may request a district judge or the judge of an appellate court to seal an affidavit presented under Article 18.01(b). The judge may order the affidavit sealed if the attorney establishes a compelling state interest in that:
(1) public disclosure of the affidavit would jeopardize the safety of a victim, witness, or confidential informant or cause the destruction of evidence; or
(2) the affidavit contains information obtained from a court-ordered wiretap that has not expired at the time the attorney representing the state requests the sealing of the affidavit.
(b) An order sealing an affidavit under this section expires on the 31st day after the date on which the search warrant for which the affidavit was presented is executed. After an original order sealing an affidavit is issued under this article, an attorney representing the state in the prosecution of felonies may request, and a judge may grant, before the 31st day after the date on which the search warrant for which the affidavit was presented is executed, on a new finding of compelling state interest, one 30-day extension of the original order.
(c) On the expiration of an order issued under Subsection (b) and any extension, the affidavit must be unsealed.
(d) An order issued under this section may not:
(1) prohibit the disclosure of information relating to the contents of a search warrant, the return of a search warrant, or the inventory of property taken pursuant to a search warrant; or
(2) affect the right of a defendant to discover the contents of an affidavit.
Added by Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 355 (S.B. 244), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2007. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u....18.htm#18.011

Click to expand...

Secrett said:

Regarding the proverbs 19:21 banner picture on CT's FB page.. if you click the banner and get the actual photo to show up, it says "January 14th" as the upload date.

This doesn't mean she hasn't changed it recently, taken it down before and reposted it, etc. but the first time she uploaded the photo to her FB page for whatever reason was Jan. 14th.

JMO and perhaps I'm not understanding FB upload dates correctly, but that's what I think.

Click to expand...

BluSkies said:

I agree canceling on Mother's Day is very odd, particularly when participants signed up in advance. I have personally found group sessions held on holidays such as Thanksgiving or Mothers Day have a high turnout. Besides the camaraderie, many want to get a workout in before festivities that often include a lot of food! Also, would think if classes were already paid for then clients were expecting to be there. Makes no sense unless it was something agreed upon as a group earlier.

Click to expand...

DaleTray said:

If I had just quickly cancelled classes at last minute disrupting 12 ladies Mother's Day schedules and simultaneously know all the flying speculation the last thing I would want to do is personally talk to each lady. Now texting all 12 is another option. I doubt there is much rational thinking in certain households today.

Click to expand...

MzOpinion8d said:

If that guy on the podcast was posting here, his posts would get deleted or snipped for their inaccurate info! Guess it's not possible to modsnip the podcast.

Click to expand...

Curious72 said:

First time poster... My only thought is that he may have had a significant number of class members drop out, despite having already paid, possibly due to the scuttlebutt around town. It may save face to cancel the remaining classes today due to the holiday rather than hold a class with only a few individuals there. Just my opinion.

Click to expand...

cattlekate said:

Some of these observations have crossed my mind as well...










<snipped for focus>

2) The April 30 reminder states two years prior she quit her finance job to be a stay at home mommy. Who would need such a reminder? Who is this directed to? Why would such a thing even be important to mention?

Click to expand...

Curious72 said:

First time poster... My only thought is that he may have had a significant number of class members drop out, despite having already paid, possibly due to the scuttlebutt around town. It may save face to cancel the remaining classes today due to the holiday rather than hold a class with only a few individuals there. Just my opinion.

Click to expand...

arkansasmimi said:

:thinking: Check this out.... If ya think they aren't working and writing many Search Warrants!! Just figured this out by accident. I thinking they have a bunch under seal JMHO

7 Search Warrants have been filed with the District Clerk office, only 3 of the 7 have the hand written Search Warrant # sheet *THAT WE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED.They are as listed. Meaning that the last number is for that particular SW....


1) Filed 4/21 SW16-050 Is to go into the 2012 Ford F150 at MPD & get personal items from veh (iPad and other financial paperwork) ***iPhone was NOT listed so it had to be w/ MB
4/18 Affidavit
4/18 Warrant
4/18 Warrant Execution
?? can not see the Notarized date on the end of page on media page
* truck was released back to BB View attachment 94079

2) Filed 4/27 SW16-059 Dry Cleaner warrant
4/22 Affidavit
4/22 Warrant
4/22 Execution of Warrant
4/27 Notarized View attachment 94080

3) Filed 5/3 SW16-060 MB iPhone & iPad for Forensic Extraction
4/19 Affidavit
4/19 Warrant
4/20 Execution
4/28 Notarized View attachment 94081

4) Filed 5/3 NO SW# Written on copy LinkedIn
4/26 FAXED Emergency Data Preservation for MB account
4/27 Affidavit EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES
4/27 Warrant EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES
*no Execution form JMHO is because this was sent to the Company is in Mountain View, CA

5) Filed 5/3 NO SW# Written on Copy LinkedIn for Casey Williams account
4/26 FAXED Emergency Data Preservation for Casey Williams account
4/27 Affidavit EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES
4/27 Warrant EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES
*no Execution form JMHO is because this was sent to the Company in CA

6) Filed 5/3 No SW# Written on Copy AT&T Cell Tower Dump
4/21 Affidavit
4/21 Warrant
*no Execution form JMHO is because this was sent to the Company is in North Palm Beach, FL 

7) Filed 5/3 NO SW# Written on Copy AT&T Target Numbers
4/25 Affidavit
4/25 Warrant
*no Execution form JMHO is because this was sent to the Company is in North Palm Beach, FL

JMHO, but according to Texas Statutes

(b) No search warrant shall issue for any purpose in this state unless sufficient facts are first presented to satisfy the issuing magistrate that probable cause does in fact exist for its issuance. A sworn affidavit setting forth substantial facts establishing probable cause shall be filed in every instance in which a search warrant is requested.Except as provided by Article 18.011, the affidavit is public information if executed, and the magistrate's clerk shall make a copy of the affidavit available for public inspection in the clerk's office during normal business hours.
MORE at link http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u.../htm/CR.18.htm

Art. 18.011. SEALING OF AFFIDAVIT. (a) An attorney representing the state in the prosecution of felonies may request a district judge or the judge of an appellate court to seal an affidavit presented under Article 18.01(b). The judge may order the affidavit sealed if the attorney establishes a compelling state interest in that:
(1) public disclosure of the affidavit would jeopardize the safety of a victim, witness, or confidential informant or cause the destruction of evidence; or
(2) the affidavit contains information obtained from a court-ordered wiretap that has not expired at the time the attorney representing the state requests the sealing of the affidavit.
(b) An order sealing an affidavit under this section expires on the 31st day after the date on which the search warrant for which the affidavit was presented is executed. After an original order sealing an affidavit is issued under this article, an attorney representing the state in the prosecution of felonies may request, and a judge may grant, before the 31st day after the date on which the search warrant for which the affidavit was presented is executed, on a new finding of compelling state interest, one 30-day extension of the original order.
(c) On the expiration of an order issued under Subsection (b) and any extension, the affidavit must be unsealed.
(d) An order issued under this section may not:
(1) prohibit the disclosure of information relating to the contents of a search warrant, the return of a search warrant, or the inventory of property taken pursuant to a search warrant; or
(2) affect the right of a defendant to discover the contents of an affidavit.
Added by Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 355 (S.B. 244), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2007. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u....18.htm#18.011

Click to expand...

cattlekate said:

Thank you so much. I noticed the Jan 14 date as well but the selfie was taken April 18. So a "banner" is different than a "profile pic?" So a banner could be uploaded Jan 14 and new selfie May 1. Got it!

I so appreciate this input about social media. I really got an eyeful yesterday about LinkedIn.

Click to expand...

texasgirl2 said:

LOVE the Friends reference! You are the very best Cliff Notes updater lstiff! I so, so appreciate you!!



This is great information arkansas! I can't remember so I thought I would ask--if a search warrant is sealed, would we even know that there was a search warrant?

Click to expand...

zzz said:

To clarify though, Facebook suggests an old post or picture to the user, and you have to take further action to post it to your feed again.

Click to expand...

Breck80 said:

Oh, that reminds me. The day Missy passed away, at 8:08 pm she posted a selfie that she got her hair done & colored darker (it's the one she now has as her profile). However, she deleted the original upload on April 18. I did SS it for future reference.

Click to expand...