TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers, 45, killed in church/suspect in SWAT gear, 18 Apr 2016 #39

[PatTheRat]

What sealed affidavit were they given access to, while it was sealed? That would be an egregious act, violating the very point of an affidavit being sealed. I understand things being shared that should have been kept quiet or off-the-record because they'd rather not let it be known, but revealing information that has been legally sealed (by court order) is a different matter.

"The warrants — issued in late April and sealed since then — seek information including messages, photos, IP addresses and account access information for the couple's accounts."

Not egregious at all.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/crim...death-slowed-police-say-new-warrants-released

 

[No it's not]

So, I filtered and eliminated all State license tags not matching with the search criteria and this is the result:

State license plates without upper writings eliminates:

Colorado, new Mexico and Wyoming


State license plates without centered upper writing eliminates:

Montana, Washington and Wisconsin



State license plates with upper writing less than 1/3 of entire plate width eliminates:

All but Hawaii and Iowa.


Problem is, Hawaii and Iowa have more letters, than what seems to be the case with the target plate:

Debriefing.-Nin

 

[RagingClue]

If they have DNA, they know the gender...

Could it be possible the amount of DNA is so small that running several or even one test would ruin the specimen???

 

[Cannonball3804]

I've contacted them about it. I'll update when/if they respond. I don't see anything in any subsequent affidavits that conflict with this, but don't see any that confirm it, either. It's also possible this is from a sealed warrant/affidavit that was not intended for public consumption.

No, that's not possible. MPD has no SWs that haven't already been requested and released.

This is chasing rabbits, IMHO. The evidence is overwhelming that MB was in the church for a few brief minutes before the attack.

 

[liz b.]

Could it be possible the amount of DNA is so small that running several or even one test would ruin the specimen???

Hope not...

 

[arkansasmimi]

Quote Originally Posted by PatTheRat View Post
Happens all the time. Media was given access to the search warrants in this very case and then they were sealed for 2 months. Media also has folks inside the PDs who will give access to things that they later realize they should not have provided.

"The warrants — issued in late April and sealed since then — seek information including messages, photos, IP addresses and account access information for the couple's accounts."

Not egregious at all.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/crim...death-slowed-police-say-new-warrants-released

Respectfully, I think you are misunderstanding. Per Texas statutes under certain conditions an affidavit can be sealed for 30 days, and one 30 day extension. Then has to be filed with Clerk of Court for public viewing. That is what was done here.

Filed April 20, 2016
Request for sealing April 21, 2016
signed by judge to seal for 30 days, April 22,2016. https://www.scribd.com/mobile/document/317249202/Missy-Bevers-FB-Search-Warrant
For reference actual documents
May 19 request for second 30 day sealing...on same April Facebook SW's from April . after that 30 days to, by law had to be filed for public rec. And was reported on July 1 iirc. SW in the media thread, link on first page of EA thread. ***July 1 is date of article you referenced . JMHO....Read and rely on actual Search Warrants not media interpretation***

Media can not see anything sealed.Nor public until time up, whole purpose of being sealed.

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

TITLE 1. CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

CHAPTER 18. SEARCH WARRANTS

Art. 18.01. SEARCH WARRANT. (a) A "search warrant" is a written order, issued by a magistrate and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for any property or thing and to seize the same and bring it before such magistrate or commanding him to search for and photograph a child and to deliver to the magistrate any of the film exposed pursuant to the order.
(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.

I 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.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.18.htm

 

[Arrowhead]

Noticed something on the video. Before driver pulls around to a stop under the light, he/she drives down the side of the building nearest the road and brakes as he/she arrives at the spot where you can turn right to leave. After a brief pause, driver decides to continue forward and pull under the light. It strikes me that the driver was considering pulling out of the lot at that time, but for some reason decided to pull around and park and sit for 4 mins. If you accept the assumption that the brake was a consideration of leaving at that moment, it follows that parking was not part of original plan and thus something necessitated that decision.

I wonder what caused that driver to decide to pull around and park instead of leave? A phone call that was about to end that didn't so the driver decided to park to finish the call? Driver stopped to get a fix? (drugs would explain erratic behavior in the parking lot) I wonder what the driver was doing for that 4 minutes?

 

[MizKim]

So, I filtered and eliminated all State license tags not matching with the search criteria and this is the result:

State license plates without upper writings eliminates:

Colorado, new Mexico and Wyoming


State license plates without centered upper writing eliminates:

Montana, Washington and Wisconsin



State license plates with upper writing less than 1/3 of entire plate width eliminates:

All but Hawaii and Iowa.


Problem is, Hawaii and Iowa have more letters, than what seems to be the case with the target plate:

Debriefing.-Nin

Is it possible that the angle of the photo can make the printing look longer or shorter? In the Brain Scratch video the top line appears to take up more space.

See at about 16:10 mark
[video=youtube;mZI33Mh-8hY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZI33Mh-8hY[/video]

 

[arkansasmimi]

Could it be possible the amount of DNA is so small that running several or even one test would ruin the specimen???

You can bet your cowboy boots that if they use up all DNA the Def Attorney will file motions about not having samples for their own experts to test. See in in cases a lot.

 

[SteveS]

"The warrants — issued in late April and sealed since then — seek information including messages, photos, IP addresses and account access information for the couple's accounts."

Not egregious at all.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/crim...death-slowed-police-say-new-warrants-released

Well no, that wasn't egregious ...but it also wasn't a situation where media got the contents of a sealed affidavit WHILE IT WAS SEALED! That was your claim, that such had happened and you had an example. But what you cite is simply a report of an affidavit's contents that had been learned and was being reported on AFTER it was unsealed. That particular affidavit and ensuing media reports, and others like them, have been well discussed here long long ago. (The one you mention here was made and sealed in late April as I recall, unsealed in late June, and known to us by early July from media reports that ensued from the unsealing.)

 

[Razz]

Noticed something on the video. Before driver pulls around to a stop under the light, he/she drives down the side of the building nearest the road and brakes as he/she arrives at the spot where you can turn right to leave. After a brief pause, driver decides to continue forward and pull under the light. It strikes me that the driver was considering pulling out of the lot at that time, but for some reason decided to pull around and park and sit for 4 mins. If you accept the assumption that the brake was a consideration of leaving at that moment, it follows that parking was not part of original plan and thus something necessitated that decision.

I wonder what caused that driver to decide to pull around and park instead of leave? A phone call that was about to end that didn't so the driver decided to park to finish the call? Driver stopped to get a fix? (drugs would explain erratic behavior in the parking lot) I wonder what the driver was doing for that 4 minutes?

I remember seeing that and thinking the driver was braking because it was an "intersection" where if they didn't stop and check, they could be broadsided by a car turning in from the road.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[ocgrad]

Noticed something on the video. Before driver pulls around to a stop under the light, he/she drives down the side of the building nearest the road and brakes as he/she arrives at the spot where you can turn right to leave. After a brief pause, driver decides to continue forward and pull under the light. It strikes me that the driver was considering pulling out of the lot at that time, but for some reason decided to pull around and park and sit for 4 mins. If you accept the assumption that the brake was a consideration of leaving at that moment, it follows that parking was not part of original plan and thus something necessitated that decision.

I wonder what caused that driver to decide to pull around and park instead of leave? A phone call that was about to end that didn't so the driver decided to park to finish the call? Driver stopped to get a fix? (drugs would explain erratic behavior in the parking lot) I wonder what the driver was doing for that 4 minutes?

Could be that some of the erratic moves were due to having the seat back too far. I was with someone years ago who quickly moved the seat back when driving by an ex so they were partially hidden by the door frame. If the driver was doing the same thing it could explain some erratic moves.

 

[ocgrad]

Is it possible that the angle of the photo can make the printing look longer or shorter? In the Brain Scratch video the top line appears to take up more space.

See at about 16:10 mark
[video=youtube;mZI33Mh-8hY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZI33Mh-8hY[/video]

I sort of see Wyoming. It's a short name and also has a bronco on the left side. I agree in the Brainscratch video the word looks a little longer but in yours NIN it seems compressed. In Brainscratch I also think California and Mississippi are possibilities. Someone last night said Indiana and that is a small name and they also have a 200 yr symbol on the left side that is common. One thing that seems sure is its not Texas. And another thing quite possible it is a fake, borrowed or stolen plate. Could a person with LE connections easily use cars from impound?

 

[dizzychick]

Imo. I think they chose it to hurt MB. They wanted her to suffer and hurt. A gun would have been too quick. That's why we know this was personal. However, we have had rumors long ago of a gun. Also, I started reading on some murders and I was very surprised to realize how many perps used hammers!!! I had no clue and most were all men.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh lord I had some questions as to why the perp chose this method and there was talk that the perp recorded the crime too so what are the reasons for that ? I made a list:

1. To prove to the client the job was done as they asked, a copy is given to this client so he/she could bask in watching it and get whatever kicks they get from this horrific act;

2. To keep for themselves for kicks, some psychos like to keep momentos and this would rank top shelf if you hated her that much;

3. Is there a market like the " snuff" films for this type of crime? Surely it would most likely not be sold in this country, but somewhere far away I would guess?

What other possible reasons is there to film the criminal act ? It sure seems risky to me to record the evidence that would surely convict you ?

 

[dizzychick]

I have also heard that the do have DNA from SP and I couldn't figure out how, but this might explain it. I have further heard that the DNA was used to rule out a good number of people as being the SP, but that there were two on the original SW who declined the DNA test and so LE was leaning towards them as suspects and that LE tried hard to make a case for them but when they turned everything over to the FBI, the FBI told them they were wrong. By that time, those two people had been already tried in the court of public opinion and had their names and private info splashed all over the place, so they lawyered up. There was a person interviewed on True Crime Radio who implicated these people so I think that rumor maybe true. She also revolked any mention of being on the show on her blog. Of course Tricia can say if anyone reached out to her via a lawyer. So that put them back at square 1 and feeling pretty discouraged. I guess one might turn down a DNA if they knew they were innocent out of fear of being framed/fear of LE? I don't know.

and fear of haviing a copy of your DNA for their records, I think I might even be nervous if they had my DNA, who knows what someone with nefarious intentions could do with it if they got a notion to frame me. I understand fully but yes it makes you look suspicious. If this is true and cops have DNA then they kow a lot more than we do including race, sex etc. and I bet they do not want that out in public as it would make the perp take cover and be less likely to get comfy and possibly make a mistake.

 

[dizzychick]

Noticed something on the video. Before driver pulls around to a stop under the light, he/she drives down the side of the building nearest the road and brakes as he/she arrives at the spot where you can turn right to leave. After a brief pause, driver decides to continue forward and pull under the light. It strikes me that the driver was considering pulling out of the lot at that time, but for some reason decided to pull around and park and sit for 4 mins. If you accept the assumption that the brake was a consideration of leaving at that moment, it follows that parking was not part of original plan and thus something necessitated that decision.

I wonder what caused that driver to decide to pull around and park instead of leave? A phone call that was about to end that didn't so the driver decided to park to finish the call? Driver stopped to get a fix? (drugs would explain erratic behavior in the parking lot) I wonder what the driver was doing for that 4 minutes?

one silly thought crossed my mind if it turns out this driver just pulled in the lot cause they were worried about their brakes being wet and not working. The turning of the lights off as they pull in could have been a mistake as they were attempting to turn off the anti lock brakes maybe? I just wondered that as I thought I saw the car making some short swift stops while going slow in the lot as if they were testing the brakes. Wondered if maybe they pulled over to just let the brakes drain or make a phone call etc.

 

[TexasEx]

The more info that comes out about this case, the more confusing it seems, mainly because we civilians don't have enough info to draw clear conclusions. Who knows whether the SWFA car was involved and, if so, why the driver did what (s)he did in the parking lot? Therefore, I have to think about what's simple and seems to make sense, based on our limited information and the big picture.

IMO, the crime was carried out and/or planned by someone close to Missy who knew her schedule, knew she would be alone to set up that morning and knew his or her way around the church, including security camera placement. I suspect at least two people were involved. It involved love gone wrong and/or money and/or secrets of someone close to Missy. Hard to say whether someone hired a hitman, since we don't know how much evidence SP left. If two or more perps are amateurs at this kind of crime, are close to each other and shared a motive, it may be hard to get anyone to break and confess.

It's possible that a jealous spouse/partner of someone close to Missy could have done this, or maybe someone she had rejected. I think it's more likely, however, that someone closer to her planned and/or carried out the crime.

A random vandal who freaked out when encountering MB unexpectedly seems like an unlikely scenario. Why would someone dress up like a cop in the middle of the night to vandalize and poke around a church, not take anything, and then happen to murder someone off camera, and happen to leave unnoticed by anyone? That would be a lot of luck in terms of non-detection for a random homicidal vandal, and there's too much that doesn't make sense. I'd think a burglar wouldn't seem so nonchalant and leisurely, and (s)he didn't seem to be looking for loot.

If it was a hit from someone not close to Missy, someone who had stalked her to get to know her routine, who wanted to kill her for not-so-personal reasons, they could have done it more efficiently.

Just my two cents.

 

[Jovi Girl]

Does anyone know the approx size of the congregation at the church where this happened ? If it's not too big I wonder if there were visitors in the weeks prior to the murder, who never really joined the church and then stopped going.

 

[Blue Skies]

I'm still hung up on WTF that driver was doing in the SWFA lot. Possible scenarios:

1 - Driver is SP and is a hired hitman
2 - Driver is SP and is someone Missy knew personally or knew of her and targeted her
3 - Driver is SP and is just a psycho who randomly encountered her later in Church
4 - Driver is not SP but is otherwise engaged in nefarious activity
5 - Driver is not SP and is not engaged in nefarious activity

Scenario 1 - Seems unlikely. If this was a pro, why take so many unnecessary risks. You put your car and parts of your identity on 17 cameras that from his vantage point could expose him. You do about as much as possible to draw attention to yourself once in the lot - lights off, flashing lights, slowing creeping around the building, etc... Then you sit and wait for 4 minutes under a light, possibly the most visible spot in the lot for you to sit. You do this all with 2 cars in the lot and a TV on upstairs. Why take any of these risks? Why pull into SWFA in the first place? If it's a pro, I don't buy some convoluted plan where he had to pull into SWFA lot and meet with someone or signal someone. That seems way too risky and uncessary, and does not fit the profile of a hired gun imo.

Scenario 2 - All of the above in Scenario 1 applies here as well. Why does someone that knows her pull into that lot and act so strange? If this is someone that knows her and has planned this out so carefully, why the need to stop at the SWFA? They know where the church is right? Again, the signaling or meeting up seems far too risky and uncessary for even a non-pro to think up. Surely if you have planned to kill someone together, you just do it together. Why come up with some weird plan to meet separately and signal each other from a lot with 17 cameras?

Scenario 3 - This fits better imo. A psycho can easily be given credit for irrational thinking and also different motives, which may explain the video. This psycho was thnking of breaking into SWFA, cased the joint, decided not worth it, and moved on to check out the church. I still don't understand waiting for 4 mins after you've acted so strangely in a lot where people are possibly in the building, but if it's just some psycho, perhaps they just didn't care or were planning on killing anyone who approached them. Even a cop maybe? Perhaps this psycho was on a suicide mission and just never got caught.

Scenario 4 - This scenario is problematic b/c this nefarious person is not psycho, so even if not SP we are assuming rational actor again. Even if you are simply planning or possibly robbing SWFA, why are you sitting in the lot doing nothing for several minutes after rolling through the lot like that?

Scenario 5 - This doesn't seem to fit at all. Any reason a law-abiding citizen would have to pull in there does not lend itself to turing lights off, rolling slowly around the lot, flashing lights, etc... If the rain is too heavy or you are eating something or making or taking a call, you pull in under the lamp and stop. You don't do all the other weird stuff first imo.

Conclusions - At this point, I think the video dispells (to me at least) the notion that this was a well-planned crime. Well planned crimes do not involve putting yourself uncessarily on 17 cameras and risking encounters with people at SWFA or cops if they are called. Remember, from SP's perspective, there is no way he or she could be certain those camera wouldn't pick up on plates or their identity in the vehicle, so why risk it? Even if plates are fake and driver is disguised, the actions in the lot do not lend credence to the idea of a well-planned crime. If you get approached or cops get called, it doesn't matter what the cameras picked up. Once you are encountered, even if you are let go, you have been seen. You can't then complete the crime because you will be easily identified. If this was a well-planned crime to kill her in that church I just fail to see how involving SWFA and their army of cameras in any way is a good idea.

So, if it wasn't well-planned, and the driver is SP, I think random Psycho and incredibly stupid acquaintance are the frontrunners.

Nothing about the behavior of the driver makes sense in any scenario, IMO. Even if they are psycho, why do this? Even if they have nothing to do with the crime, what would make someone drive around a parking lot in that manner? Psychotic angry person....maybe, maybe in a rage contemplating what they might be about to do. Nobody in MB family seems angry. Who does that leave? Hhhhhmmm


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Blue Skies]

I'm so confused about the license plates! I think I missed something....but I'm also thinking I'm okay with missing that info.

You are


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk