TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers, 45, killed in church/suspect in SWAT gear, 18 Apr 2016 #37

[arkansasmimi]

Yes, WH did post on BB's FB during his trip to Oregon with the girls which occurred after MB's murder. That is what I have been saying. A member sent me a screenshot of that FB post when they were all in Oregon. I really don't see that as a big deal.

But if WH replied to his FB post while he was in Mississippi (which I do not think ever happened and I cannot find evidence of it) would be a big deal. (to me anyway). So if you have a screenshot of that, would you please PM me with it?

And anyone who vaguely recalls my theory, will understand why I feel this would be a big deal if it actually occurred. Thanks!



Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

WH most certainly did make a comment on his Facebook post of his arrival. That is why so many were/are still speaking of possible special relationship, plus that WH and MB had been FB friends prior to murder announced. I have no way to know when the unfriend came. There is an unknown reason (to the general public)for certain why she is included in the ATT Target Numbers SW, but that could be a possibility or one.

My mother had a total knee replacement Dec 1 and I am at my parents house helping her so I don't have access to my ss at present the...But... I do know that that post and comments have been posted in the earlier threads multiple times. I will look to see if can find when get a few free moments lol we at therapy now :blushing:

 

[northXnorthwest1]

Regarding WH, the widow of BB's friend Brad...

While there is no public evidence that BB ever cheated on MB or had an inappropriate relationship with WH, I am reminded that BB is on record saying that he thinks the perp is a woman who knew his wife.

I guess the possibilities are that he is right and it's someone who was either angry at MB or else infatuated with BB.

Or he could be wrong, and the perp could be someone random who broke into the church and ran into MB by chance.

Or he could be involved, which would mean that his public theory would be as far away from the truth as possible - instead of a woman who knew MB, it would be a man who didn't know her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[R@ngers#1]

This crime was a very violent personal attack. IMO a person who really knows how to fight is the most logical suspect based on the information out there. Only 1 person on the SW fits that description.

 

[Thekt]

The fact is I can't see anything, that's what was significant to me.

If you go through that whole post what I said stood out to me was the fact that it is blurred out in the first place. If you go throughout the area (Midlothian, Waxahachie, Red Oak, Ovilla, etc) 99.99% are not. For example with Midlothian, when I had been going through all the streets with Street View - I have been looking for the same Altima elsewhere - you can count them on one hand.

It just so happens that the who I landed on as a POI is one of the 00.01%. I had seen the blurred house early in my sleuthing but it held no significance to me at all until I had seen the Altima in StreetView at a specific location associated with the POI when going there just to examine how concealed the dumpster area is at that location. It may not mean anything. Then again it might. I didn't post about it at all until over 6 weeks after I tipped it.

As for degrees of separation, what I have said is that who I have settled on is very, very close (at least SP's spouse) to MB. Keep in mind, I could be very wrong.

Thanks for explaining, I understand better now. Would be interesting to know the date that the homeowner requested to be removed from the google view and have it show as blurred.

 

[SteveS]

<modsnip>

All I'm asking is that we don't make false claims about someone. And in this instance, yes I'm questioning whether what was said in this forum really reflects the truth, because I don't recall seeing any report or interview to support it.

What was said here, that I responded to, was "it was BB who gave direction to MPD about KC and CW regarding affairs. (While also admitting he too had committed transgressions.)"

I am questioning: where and when did BB "admit" he had also "committed transgressions" of a similar sort? As far as I know, he didn't, and making conclusions based on transgressions and/or admissions that did not happen is neither fair, nor taking us in a direction of better understanding.

I'm not trying to pick on you or anyone else, but rather trying to keep our "facts in evidence" from being littered with fiction, for future benefit of all of us and our discussions..

 

[TexasEx]

I tried to go back and look at early threads to see where people may have discussed WH commenting on FB on BB arriving safely in Mississippi. (It must have been discussed.) Didn't have the patience to keep looking but did find an interesting tidbit that I wonder if anyone remembers from the earliest pages of the first thread.

Someone found that one of Missy's FB "friends" had unfriended her the day of or after the murder. This was based on # of friends, not on a specific name. I wonder if the police looked into that.

 

[Jethro4WS]

I'm not saying your theory is incorrect but....if this was a close friend, certainly others would recognize that not all is right w/ this friend's hubby. How could this POI convince his wife that MB had to die much less having her help him? And if she didn't assist, she must suspect something is amiss about her husband.

If this person is so smart (And I realize smart people do dumb things) how can he justify that getting rid of MB is the answer? It seems to me he could end all problems with his wife following "bad people" by eliminating her, his wife. Unless, of course, MB rebuffed him and he wants revenge.

And how do we really know MB was such a "bad influence?". We only know that from the SW, what the police have said about her Linked In messaging and...that it was BB who gave direction to MPD about KC and CW regarding affairs. (While also admitting he too had committed transgressions.) So why her and not him?



Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

I would suggest that SP would have those answers. You are getting into the realm of how someone else perceives reality and unless science figures that out we only have our own reality and we each can only go so far in trying to figure out how another perceives it. So honestly it doesn't matter what we think at all about any of it because Missy was murdered only because of what ONE person thought of it.

I am not convinced that a spouse even knows or was a part of this so there wouldn't be a need to convince anyone. In all my postings on that topic I have only ever said IF there were more than one involved in this crime knowingly it would have to be SP's spouse. And the basis of that is because I believe that this murder was very personal and that means that SP (or the spouse of SP) has to be close to Missy. And maybe that when I parenthetically say "or the spouse of SP" people get the wrong impression in that meaning that implies they are knowing co-conspirators. If possible I would like to try to clear that up so people understand what I am implying when I write it the way I do.

What I am implying is that SP through their spouse establishes that closeness by proximity alone and not necessarily in the sense that they also have a closer bond and share personal information. However, if the closeness of the spouses is such that they don't hide things or especially if one of them is bad with keeping secrets thinking they are safe to tell their spouse with the expectation they also keep it secret. The possibility then exists for someone that in all other respects is an outsider either has or can obtain insider information.This possibility becomes much stronger if SP is a sociopath and I believe this to be highly likely.

Sociopaths have a phenomenal ability to read people and ascertain lies and in particular lies of omission (they detect or sense something else is afoot) which is coupled with a phenomenal ability to extract such information without having to resort to arguments, confrontations, threats, or violence and all without the person holding such information being aware of the manipulations (which can be quite complex) that went on to extract the "voluntary" sharing of information. On the other hand the sociopath is extremely skilled at not giving up information. Not even the slightest hint would be there since they create the reality and how those that perceive it all around them.

With that said it is my belief that when evaluating all of the options available to dealing with whatever problem Missy was causing in SP's world SP assessed that murder was the one that would have the least impact over time for them. Let me put it this way. If SP did not have the confidence in themselves to plan this murder, this way, and have an expectation of getting away with it then Missy would be alive today as SP would have chosen one of the other options not the least of which would have been to do nothing about it.

I may very well be wrong about who I specifically think it is. But I believe that someone like this exists very close to Missy.

 

[flourish]

I tried to go back and look at early threads to see where people may have discussed WH commenting on FB on BB arriving safely in Mississippi. (It must have been discussed.) Didn't have the patience to keep looking but did find an interesting tidbit that I wonder if anyone remembers from the earliest pages of the first thread.

Someone found that one of Missy's FB "friends" had unfriended her the day of or after the murder. This was based on # of friends, not on a specific name. I wonder if the police looked into that.

I remember some discussion about the unfriended person. Someone could disappear from a person's friend list not only if one of them unfriended the other, but also if someone deactivated their account. For example, one of my nieces is a drama queen. She regularly deactivates her facebook accounts and starts new ones. Her paternal aunt is not very bright and can't remember her facebook password to save her life, so she has like 7 profiles and then she'll find or remember the password and then deactivate one or more of her superfluous accounts.

So it's entirely possible and not far fetched to consider that the drop in the amount of friends had nothing to do with Missy but someone just happened to be messing with their own account and it's not nefarious at all.

 

[Jethro4WS]

I'm not saying your theory is incorrect but....if this was a close friend, certainly others would recognize that not all is right w/ this friend's hubby. How could this POI convince his wife that MB had to die much less having her help him? And if she didn't assist, she must suspect something is amiss about her husband.

If this person is so smart (And I realize smart people do dumb things) how can he justify that getting rid of MB is the answer? It seems to me he could end all problems with his wife following "bad people" by eliminating her, his wife. Unless, of course, MB rebuffed him and he wants revenge.

And how do we really know MB was such a "bad influence?". We only know that from the SW, what the police have said about her Linked In messaging and...that it was BB who gave direction to MPD about KC and CW regarding affairs. (While also admitting he too had committed transgressions.) So why her and not him?



Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

BBM

I forgot to address this. As you know, I don't believe that BB had anything going on at all. But regardless of that, the answer is the same. The connection between SP and MB is indirect via SP's spouse. With that connection broken how much continued involvement with BB or the family (unless children are connected) continues? Is BB going to start hanging around with SP's wife? Is BB going to be taking the place of MB in that one circle of MB's friends?

So, if hypothetically BB was running around as well how would eliminating BB help SP at all? There would be still a strong connection between MB and SP's spouse. That is, killing BB would change nothing in the best case but could very well make things worse by SP's spouse spending more time perhaps with MB or having her at SP's house or otherwise making their connection even stronger than it already was regardless of MB's transgressions. Removing the strongest link makes the rest of the chain irrelevant.

 

[Razz]

All I'm asking is that we don't make false claims about someone. And in this instance, yes I'm questioning whether what was said in this forum really reflects the truth, because I don't recall seeing any report or interview to support it.

What was said here, that I responded to, was "it was BB who gave direction to MPD about KC and CW regarding affairs. (While also admitting he too had committed transgressions.)"

I am questioning: where and when did BB "admit" he had also "committed transgressions" of a similar sort? As far as I know, he didn't, and making conclusions based on transgressions and/or admissions that did not happen is neither fair, nor taking us in a direction of better understanding.

I'm not trying to pick on you or anyone else, but rather trying to keep our "facts in evidence" from being littered with fiction, for future benefit of all of us and our discussions..

Yes, I agree. I'm not sure where I read the transgressions part but it may have been during an interview.
I will find it and if I don't or can't, I will apologise.

I am trying hard to be fair. But I do feel that this sometimes becomes a forum for those who support BB and that any talk of his possible involvement is immediately shut down even when there are legitimate arguments why he could be.

I want to be fair to all involved but this really is about MB and why she
was cut down in a most heinous way.

I have no problem with BB telling MPD about those she was or may have been having "affairs"with.
If this was the case, they are legitimate people to look at. But BB is a legitimate one to look at too.
He was married to her and I don't think I've heard him say anything about loving her.

And I know you feel strongly that he's not involved and I'd like to know why you are so certain.

I'm trying hard to keep an open mind.











Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[Razz]

BBM

I forgot to address this. As you know, I don't believe that BB had anything going on at all. But regardless of that, the answer is the same. The connection between SP and MB is indirect via SP's spouse. With that connection broken how much continued involvement with BB or the family (unless children are connected) continues? Is BB going to start hanging around with SP's wife? Is BB going to be taking the place of MB in that one circle of MB's friends?

So, if hypothetically BB was running around as well how would eliminating BB help SP at all? There would be still a strong connection between MB and SP's spouse. That is, killing BB would change nothing in the best case but could very well make things worse by SP's spouse spending more time perhaps with MB or having her at SP's house or otherwise making their connection even stronger than it already was regardless of MB's transgressions. Removing the strongest link makes the rest of the chain irrelevant.

Zow, Jethro4WS. I will reread your explanation again tomorrow. I'm too tired and maybe not bright enough to get a good handle on what you've written.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[DeDee]

RS&BBM

What I am implying is that SP through their spouse establishes that closeness by proximity alone and not necessarily in the sense that they also have a closer bond and share personal information. However, if the closeness of the spouses is such that they don't hide things or especially if one of them is bad with keeping secrets thinking they are safe to tell their spouse with the expectation they also keep it secret. The possibility then exists for someone that in all other respects is an outsider either has or can obtain insider information.This possibility becomes much stronger if SP is a sociopath and I believe this to be highly likely.

Sociopaths have a phenomenal ability to read people and ascertain lies and in particular lies of omission (they detect or sense something else is afoot) which is coupled with a phenomenal ability to extract such information without having to resort to arguments, confrontations, threats, or violence and all without the person holding such information being aware of the manipulations (which can be quite complex) that went on to extract the "voluntary" sharing of information. On the other hand the sociopath is extremely skilled at not giving up information. Not even the slightest hint would be there since they create the reality and how those that perceive it all around them.

RS&BBM

This is absolutely correct about sociopaths. You must have worked with prisoners or otherwise known of this type personality. A wise professor once offered sage advice, by saying, "Sociopaths know before you know, about what you are thinking or planning, and, more importantly to them, is how it will affect them."

A sociopath's perception is keen. Now, I understand why you've placed the SP in the 99 percentile. Usually sociopaths are entrepreneurs and CEOs b/c they don't mind taking someone's last dollar as long as they are making money or profit from it. In fact, they may rub their hands together and slightly grin with duping delight while doing it.

You have more data today. Correct? You can modify the tip and represent or submit an updated version to the proper authorities. Correct?

I would like to know if there's a way that we can determine if the blur has been on google since it is a [custom] built.

Justice for Missy

 

[SteveS]

Yes, I agree. I'm not sure where I read the transgressions part but it may have been during an interview.
I will find it and if I don't or can't, I will apologise.

I am trying hard to be fair. But I do feel that this sometimes becomes a forum for those who support BB and that any talk of his possible involvement is immediately shut down even when there are legitimate arguments why he could be.

I want to be fair to all involved but this really is about MB and why she
was cut down in a most heinous way.

I have no problem with BB telling MPD about those she was or may have been having "affairs"with.
If this was the case, they are legitimate people to look at. But BB is a legitimate one to look at too.
He was married to her and I don't think I've heard him say anything about loving her.

And I know you feel strongly that he's not involved and I'd like to know why you are so certain.

I'm trying hard to keep an open mind

I understand that BB would seem to have the obvious motivation greater than anyone - a husband being cheated on, until he gets sick of it. So I understand what fuels the suspicions. Those are fair as a STARTING place, from which to look for evidence.

But I don't think it's fair to go where the evidence isn't taking us.
....He was not SP. Despite many attempts to make him so, he was elsewhere.
....Except for the attempts to twist almost anything said into something that the reader wants it to be, to my knowledge he's done nothing but tell the truth and try to put the pieces of his life back together after his wife was butchered by an unknown person.
....We still have no actual EVIDENCE to say he's involved, even after him being under a microscope. It is only those who work backwards, who start with the assumption that he was a bad guy, did bad things, and then work full circle where their assumptions supposedly "prove" his involvement. But assumptions are not proof - it takes actual evidence. So far, zip.
....LE has said they are looking elsewhere, and that there's no double-talk in that. I know some want to ignore their words, but in no event can we say LE has made any claim that there's evidence or suspicion on him.

All of that having been said, I wouldn't say he couldn't have been involved. But truth, not fiction or wild rumor with no real basis, needs to fuel any ideas against him, and I'm pushing back when I think I see pure fiction or rumor being passed along as fact. He's only a victim as far as we know, and my sense of right and wrong is that it's not justice or kindness to abuse victims with made up stuff.

 

[arkansasmimi]

I tried to go back and look at early threads to see where people may have discussed WH commenting on FB on BB arriving safely in Mississippi. (It must have been discussed.) Didn't have the patience to keep looking but did find an interesting tidbit that I wonder if anyone remembers from the earliest pages of the first thread.

Someone found that one of Missy's FB "friends" had unfriended her the day of or after the murder. This was based on # of friends, not on a specific name. I wonder if the police looked into that.

There were many who did...one was a prominent attorney IIRC from Dallas...lot of speculation on that one due to specialized practice..but could have been a camper or friend, jmho I can't see for any professional reason

 

[ardenmost]

She isn't with us any more. They are. She can't read what we write, but they can. We're supposed to be victim-friendly.

EXACTLY! SHE is the victim of the crime! Others are affected by the crime, not the actual victim/victims.

 

[SteveS]

There were many who did...one was a prominent attorney IIRC from Dallas...lot of speculation on that one due to specialized practice..but could have been a camper or friend, jmho I can't see for any professional reason

The "prominent" attorney from Dallas isn't really "prominent" here. He lands on TV at times, opining on cases, but (based on my own personal observation) it's rarely if ever due to him having any inside knowledge or research, but more because he's willing to talk about any local case with any media who wants an "attorney's opinion," a go-to lawyer available to give a "legal" view for a reporter. Unfortunately that means he's willing to opine with only a cursory knowledge (or less) of cases he talks about. So if you're getting your "facts" of a case from him, it's likely to be a few facts sprinkled with mistakes and rumors and assumptions, but all offered as facts.

 

[SteveS]

She isn't with us any more. They are. She can't read what we write, but they can. We're supposed to be victim-friendly.

EXACTLY! SHE is the victim of the crime! Others are affected by the crime, not the actual victim/victims.

I understand what you're saying, but even our courts identify a "victim" more broadly than simply the person who was murdered, and that's because we as a society have recognized it first. Kids who will never have the loving guidance and support of that parent again, a husband or wife who loses their partner/best friend/lover, parents who have to bury a child and all their hopes and dreams, all of them have their lives changed and shattered in ways we can't imagine. They too are victims of what the perp did, in a different way, and to such a degree that our courts let them sue for financial compensation from the perp if they wish.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I would like to be able to follow: Initial of blurred house owners= what number in alphabet ...? :angel:

 

[TexasEx]

Just found this, perhaps the first time Terri Leann Strickland was on a newspaper front page, and for a sweet reason -- her first Christmas. Lower right side of page. She was someone's newborn baby.

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth732862/m1/1/

 

[Jethro4WS]

This is absolutely correct about sociopaths. You must have worked with prisoners or otherwise known of this type personality. A wise professor once offered sage advice, by saying, "Sociopaths know before you know, about what you are thinking or planning, and, more importantly to them, is how it will affect them."

A sociopath's perception is keen. Now, I understand why you've placed the SP in the 99 percentile. Usually sociopaths are entrepreneurs and CEOs b/c they don't mind taking someone's last dollar as long as they are making money or profit from it. In fact, they may rub their hands together and slightly grin with duping delight while doing it.

You have more data today. Correct? You can modify the tip and represent or submit an updated version to the proper authorities. Correct?

I would like to know if there's a way that we can determine if the blur has been on google since it is a [custom] built.

Justice for Missy

I don't think that SP is quite that high in intelligence but above 90th percentile for sure.

I have an opinion or view, if you will, of sociopaths. One thing I will note about sociopaths is that not all of them are harmful or out to exploit people just because they can. Much of their use of their abilities is for self protection as that wise professor indicates. Though they can also extend this protection to their spouse, children, family, friends or co-workers. They often use their abilities to have every advantage when competing, for example in the workplace. While they can be ruthless they often do no more than they have determined to be necessary to achieve whatever outcome they prefer. This can be also be achieved with positive things, even offering gifts or favors to achieve a particular outcome - and I believe this is the case more often than not. After all, manipulation is manipulation. The point of the manipulation is to get others to actually do most or almost all of the work or to use someone as a shield or make someone else a target so they can pursue riskier activities if they have someone else positioned to take any repercussions should failure occur. That isn't to say they are incapable of doing some of the things they have others do. Because in many cases they can but they would rather not show their cards.

In a lot of ways I liken them to the terminator. Since they are mimics and do not possess such things as love or hate or compassion (one would have to care to possess such things) I can imagine the computer screen in their head evaluating the proper response to a given situation. Like I said before while not exactly harmless they aren't usually a danger to your physical safety. At the same time, when motivated enough that the best option is to kill and they possess the confidence in their ability to do so then they are very much like what the character Kyle Reese in that movie said - "Listen, and understand! That Terminator is out there! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop... ever, until you are dead!"

That is, in part, what I think of when it comes to sociopaths.

As for the tip. It was very explicit and not limited to just the vehicle.
As for the blur. That only happens when you contact Google and prove to them it is your property and request it be done.