TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers, 45, killed in church/suspect in SWAT gear, 18 Apr 2016 #41

[Cannonball3804]

I totally disagree that LE concluded that the murder was a targeted hit from a 'knee jerk' reaction. The murderer most likely disabled and murdered MB immediately by puncturing her head with a pointed, pick hammer. Following the coup de gras, the murderer took the time to beat her repeatedly in the face and breast area. I would not be surprised to eventually find that a photo was taken to prove to someone that, as directed, they inflicted the most 'up close and personal' injuries possible that the time frame allowed.

Absolutely nothing was gathered from the church to carry out to a waiting vehicle. The murderer walked non-chalantly around the church just killing time until their intended target arrived. The injuries inflicted indicates, IMO, that a female desired the end result. Doesn't necessarily mean a jealous person, could be someone who despised her and thought MB only thought about her looks and her body and put herself first instead of her husband and children.

Sent from my HTCD100LVWPP using Tapatalk

My reference to knee-jerk reaction" didn't have to do with LE. It had to do with former LE. Talking about the two consultants who were interviewed for media stories and were asked for their thoughts after viewing the same video that the rest of us saw.

As for your detailed description of the attack, there is no evidence to back any of that up. We have the initial report that she died of a head wound, followed by the report that she had puncture wounds to the head and chest. That's it. Anything else is rumor. I could say that MB was found in a bathroom stall, wrapped up in a rug with a note pinned to it saying "Hasta la vista, baby." But that would be totally unverified and nobody could do anything with it.

Your comments at the end of your post - that is certainly the kind of thing that people were calling MPD about in the first month or so of the investigation. "Look into so-and-so - she was hateful toward MB one time." Or similar.

But hopefully you would agree that it is a big leap to go from "despised her and thought MB only thought about her looks and her body and put herself first instead of her husband and children." to "I want her dead, and her children to be left without a mother at all."

 

[Cannonball3804]

What do you make of the probably cause affidavits for the search warrants for Missy's truck (after Spann spoke. 4/18) and for the forensic extractions of her iPhone and iPad (after Spann spoke. 4/19) where it is stated that neither the victim nor SP were seen again after Missy had gone out of range. I would think if they knew otherwise they couldn't state what they did, correct?

I speak to this in another post - those early SW affidavits are a real mess, as you know. Lots of crossing out and other verbiage scribbled in with a pen. And dubious language referring to SP being seen "going through offices" and such. So I think that 4/19 SW affidavit is not a shining example in which we should hang on every word. I also think it's mostly referring to events leading up to the murder, not necessarily what might have occurred afterward. I know that it's a sworn affidavit for a judge, but I still put more stock in what Spann said. Unless, of course, he saw segments of video out of sequence and only THOUGHT he saw the perp walking down a hallway after the murder, when it could have actually been before.

 

[DeDee]

Doesn't seem like a mistake to me. It was Spann that said it, during that first presser on 4/18, and it was in answer to a direct question about whether the perp is seen after the assault:

RSBMFF

*****

[/FONT][/COLOR][/INDENT]

(I'm skipping one unrelated question and answer. BBM below)

Female Reporter: And is he seen fleeing? Is he seen after the assault?

Captain John Spann: Again, we see him walking down one
of the hallways, but presumably he went out the way he came
in, which was through a metal door that had a glass window
that was broken out. And, again, this is all speculation on our
part that he broke the window and reached inside to open
the door, but we also have a second and third windows that
were broken, but we don't have any evidence that anybody
ever went through them. They were just broken.
​

*****Awesome*****Cannonball. :fireworks:

SP was seen after the murder walking down the hall probably leaving the way SP entered via the metal door.

 

[Cannonball3804]

Since the press conferences are being dissected again, I'll mention something that bothered me when about a month ago I listened to the initial press conference again. Spann states he had not yet seen the video when he was answering questions. He referenced stills from the video he had seen, but he had not seen the video when he was speaking.

[video=youtube;XNLtwTK2hq8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNLtwTK2hq8[/video]

~8:58 - 9:05.

I'm going to post this and then be gone for awhile. Have more than met the daily quota. And I have an inversion table waiting to be put together.

Just before the 9:00 mark, Spann makes a reference to "when we first saw the video." Notice the "we". Then he says, "I haven't had a chance to look at the video that we're going to upload."

So is he simply saying that he hasn't seen the short little snippet of edited video that was put together to be released to the media? Or is he saying he hasn't seen any of the video at all? This was immediately preceded by "when we saw the video", so I lean toward him meaning that he hasn't seen the edited version for release - not that he didn't see anything except still shots.

If you read the whole transcript, he knows a lot about the video footage. He knows that there is video of MB entering the church. At around 12 minutes or so he goes into great detail about what is seen on the video of MB at 4:18 and how the camera shuts off as she gets out of range. Multiple references to "we see _______ in the video".

So all in all, he seems like someone who has looked at video footage, not still shots. And if I were him, and I were doing my best to get Carl Smith off the podium so that I could then serve as the mouthpiece and answer more detailed questions, I would want to actually see the video myself - all of it - before getting up in front of the crowd for the first time.

 

[lonetraveler]

My reference to knee-jerk reaction" didn't have to do with LE. It had to do with former LE. Talking about the two consultants who were interviewed for media stories and were asked for their thoughts after viewing the same video that the rest of us saw.

As for your detailed description of the attack, there is no evidence to back any of that up. We have the initial report that she died of a head wound, followed by the report that she had puncture wounds to the head and chest. That's it. Anything else is rumor. I could say that MB was found in a bathroom stall, wrapped up in a rug with a note pinned to it saying "Hasta la vista, baby." But that would be totally unverified and nobody could do anything with it.

Your comments at the end of your post - that is certainly the kind of thing that people were calling MPD about in the first month or so of the investigation. "Look into so-and-so - she was hateful toward MB one time." Or similar.

But hopefully you would agree that it is a big leap to go from "despised her and thought MB only thought about her looks and her body and put herself first instead of her husband and children." to "I want her dead, and her children to be left without a mother at all."

I stated that the murderer "most likely" murdered her by a blow to the head. Stated that there were puncture wounds to her face and breast area. I will venture that a woman's chest area is also the breast area. I also gave my opinion as to how she died as well as to maybe WHY she was murdered by someone. And yes, I can definitely see where some psychopath could reason and justify to themselves that MB needed to die and that the children, in their eyes, would be better off without her.

Sent from my HTCD100LVWPP using Tapatalk

 

[Jethro4WS]

I speak to this in another post - those early SW affidavits are a real mess, as you know. Lots of crossing out and other verbiage scribbled in with a pen. And dubious language referring to SP being seen "going through offices" and such. So I think that 4/19 SW affidavit is not a shining example in which we should hang on every word. I also think it's mostly referring to events leading up to the murder, not necessarily what might have occurred afterward. I know that it's a sworn affidavit for a judge, but I still put more stock in what Spann said. Unless, of course, he saw segments of video out of sequence and only THOUGHT he saw the perp walking down a hallway after the murder, when it could have actually been before.

Yes. caught that after I posted. Which I shouldn't have because that truck warrant does not have the " neither the victim or SP" stuff in it. I just started off this day with trying to correct things I have said and here I am again. Ugh. Not gonna be a good day for me to keep things straight.

 

[DeDee]

In re-reading Capt. Spann's comments on 4/18 about the kitchen and why it's thought that the metal door was the point of entry and presumably also the point of exit, there is something interesting to me in what he said. I'd like to know what you guys make of it.
bbm

Captain John Spann: Again, we see him walking down one of the hallways, but presumably he went out the way he came in, which was through a metal door that had a glass window that was broken out. And, again, this is all speculation on our part that he broke the window and reached inside to open the door, but we also have a second and third windows that were broken, but we don't have any evidence that anybody ever went through them. They were just broken.

Hmm. So they don't "have any evidence" that the perp went through the second and third windows. Well, what kind of evidence would he leave even if he did go through one of those windows? He is covered head to toe. He wouldn't leave fingerprints or blood, presumably. You would think the glass would break into small enough pieces that they wouldn't pierce the clothing and cause him to drip blood.

So I'm guessing the perp either dripped water in from the rain or else tracked some mud in. LE would have seen the mess in front of the door, but no mess in front of the two windows. Therefore, he came in through the door.

Also guessing here that the kitchen had either cloth or paper towels. Perp doesn't indicate being wet at all in any of the video (that was released, anyway). So I assume he cleaned himself up with the towels before going further.

And that's interesting behavior, which I don't know what to make of. If you're going to go thru the building smashing windows and prying doors open, why do you care whether you track water or mud around? Unless you're just concerned about slipping and falling.

I also wonder, if he cleaned himself in the kitchen with paper towels, did he just throw them on the floor or did he find a trash can and throw them away? Because those types of things should help the FBI construct a profile of this person.

Those two windows are on the North end of the Church building. From the exterior, they are located very high off the ground. Someone could hurt themselves from jumping to the ground from the height of those windows. It is comical, really, and one mistake that SP made when staging the burglary. SP could not reach those windows from the exterior without using a ladder.

 

[Seriously?]

Re: Spann's statements (not taking up all the space with quoting the posts)

Or he's been briefed extensively by his staff, which we would expect. He's absolute about seeing stills. I'm listening to what he said. Most likely multiple tasks for him since this case came in that morning. However, I agree - would want to see the entire video before speaking at the initial press conference. I'm thinking he hadn't, because that's what he said.

Good luck with that table!!

 

[ocgrad]

Also, at one point didn't they first release a pic of MB walking inside the church or was that just my imagination??

No, from the first they said, out of consideration for the family they would not be releasing any video of MB.

 

[ocgrad]

Agree that it's confusing. But I'm inclined to go with what he says in the first sentence after her direct question on whether the perp is seen after the assault. "Again, we see him walking down one of the hallways." It seems to me, IMHO, that he then starts to ramble after that when he gets into the description of the kitchen and leaving the way he came in. I think Spann just lost track of the question and was thinking more about how the perp came into the building. But I lean toward the beginning of his response being accurate to the question. That's not definitive, though, certainly.

Edited to add: Rather than Spann being confused, I actually think he was just trying to clarify why it is that they think the metal door in the kitchen was the point of entry, since he had just said that they presumed the perp went out the way that he came in.

And if you act like everything after the first sentence of his response isn't there, then it seems crystal clear - to me, at least - that he means to say that the perp is seen walking down a hallway after the assault occurred.

I think also why it was confusing at that time is that they were not familiar with the inside of the church. Granted they were there that morning but just seeing a video of the SP walking down a hall and through a door into a room without the aid of a map/layout to follow it would be difficult to know from the first morning which rooms he was coming and going from.

 

[gliving]

BBM
If it was an intended theft, I would think they would have taken her rings. They were reportedly still on her finger. I think it was a target. JMO

Targeted or not, I think SP would have to take at least one of their gloves off, in order to remove her rings. I don't see that happening.

:fence:

 

[ocgrad]

Thanks! But I remember the West main entrance first mentioned by media (rather not NG). AND I remember also our endless WS discussion re the actual entrance (which changed IMO). I remember how I feared for MB to be forced going around the building in the pitch dark night and during severe storm/rain to open the SW doors from inside.

Maybe, you are right and I do remember very wrong. Then okay, we will concentrate on the SW door as always.

LE made it confusing because they referred to the SW entrance under the awning as the "main" entrance. I guess because they also were parked there and were using that entrance.

 

[al66pine]

I stated that the murderer "most likely" murdered her by a blow to the head. Stated that there were puncture wounds to her face and breast area. I will venture that a woman's chest area is also the breast area.....
Sent from my HTCD100LVWPP using Tapatalk

^sbm^ I may be splitting hairs (again) re ^, but IIRC, LE stmt referred to injuries to "head" (not face) and to "chest" (not breasts).
I've forgotten when LE made stmt - day of death? before autopsy? after autopsy? It's possible her injuries were in fact to face & breasts, but it's just not what I recall from LE stmt. Sorry, no link & I could be wrong. Maybe someone can verify one way or another w a link w direct quote. Anyone?

lonetraveler -- agreeing w your ^ post (my interp) that an attack injuring the face & breasts comes from a certain special mindset/motive different from that of someone who just wants to kill victim any ol' which way. JM2cts.

 

[Seriously?]

^sbm^ I may be splitting hairs (again) re ^, but IIRC, LE stmt referred to injuries to "head" (not face) and to "chest" (not breasts).
I've forgotten when LE made stmt - day of death? before autopsy? after autopsy? It's possible her injuries were in fact to face & breasts, but it's just not what I recall from LE stmt. Sorry, no link & I could be wrong. Maybe someone can verify one way or another w a link w direct quote. Anyone?

lonetraveler -- agreeing w your ^ post (my interp) that an attack injuring the face & breasts comes from a certain special mindset/motive different from that of someone who just wants to kill victim any ol' which way. JM2cts.

Here you go:
First SW and affidavit states "deceased from a head wound".

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/He...-Seized-Search-Warrant-376599651.html#warrant

IIRC subsequent affidavits after autopsy said injuries to head and chest.

Look in Media Thread.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Since the press conferences are being dissected again, I'll mention something that bothered me when about a month ago I listened to the initial press conference again. Spann states he had not yet seen the video when he was answering questions. He referenced stills from the video he had seen, but he had not seen the video when he was speaking.

[video=youtube;XNLtwTK2hq8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNLtwTK2hq8[/video]

~8:58 - 9:05.

He is speaking of not seeing what portion of video that is going to be released (at that time). He spoke of the stills iirc those had been released? May be wrong on that part or was with the first video..He tells how those look like LEO. This is when they released the 7 sec video, then on the 20 or 22nd is when they released the extended 2:27 min video JMHO and I may be wrong, but I can not see Capt of CID speaking as he did and answering questions if he had not seen the videos. I just don't see it.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/m2ykkazqapxcvrm/MB 4-18-16.protected.pdf?dl=0
Captain John Spann:Again, my name is John Spann, Captain,with command over our Criminal Investigation Division, and like I said, I can take a couple more questions, but a lot of this stuff we'll put out in an expanded press release that it'll be on our police department Facebook page along with a link that'll allow you to go to YouTube and see the video footage of the suspect in the building

then
Male Reporter:Any concern this guy's dressed up in tactical gear? Any concern that [unintelligible 00:08:47]?

Captain John Spann: Well, of course, that concerns ––like I said, when we first saw the video, like Chief said, this is a subject that you would normally see doing some type of raid wearing the ––looks like a heavy vest with "POLICE"on the back, I believe "POLICE" on the front. Again, I haven't had a chance to look at the video that we're going to upload, but again, the still pictures that I saw, to look at it, I would say it was a tactical officer in the building [who] had the tactical stuff ––helmet, gloves, even looked like he possibly had shin guards on him, and,like Chief said, BDU–style pants

 

[DeDee]

I think also why it was confusing at that time is that they were not familiar with the inside of the church. Granted they were there that morning but just seeing a video of the SP walking down a hall and through a door into a room without the aid of a map/layout to follow it would be difficult to know from the first morning which rooms he was coming and going from.

Yes, of course, so it helped, during and after, LE had the reenactment performed using the video as a guide to SPs movements. MiMi might 100% can tell us when the reenactment took place. It was done stat.
:cow: To prep for the murder, SP could do exactly what MiMi and others did and study FB pages for CCoC and their website has the weekly bulletin. SP did their homework. SP was well-equipped and well-prepared. Nothing could stop the action. Nothing was a surprise for SP. It happened exactly according to plan as closely as humanly possible. About those high off the ground windows....

 

[Razz]

Okay, I found the SW affidavit concerning "neither the suspect nor victim is seen again on video." Here is the relevant part:

As arkansasmimi noted, this was from just the day after the murder. I can see some problems with it factually, indicating that it was hastily prepared. The perp was seen "going through offices" is poor wording. Unless he actually broke in to the church offices while inside and it's part of unreleased video, what we really see is him going through hallways and going in classrooms. "Offices" would apply more to a business, not a church.

So I think it would be hard to read thru this and accept it as the inerrant, infallible Word of MPD. But... again, the part about "not seen again on video" is mostly referring to what happens leading up to the murder. Not necessarily something that occurs afterward. I can see it going either way. Mimi, do you want to take a shot at asking MPD to clarify, or shall I?

Well, let me just say...if the perp was seen walking down a hallway and the police are referring to after the murder, that would pretty well blow the burglar caught in the act and murdered a woman in response, out of the water. What burglar, or person playing a SWAT game or whatever, not expecting to encounter anyone in the church, would be walking down the hallway? They'd be hauling you know what to get the heck out of there.

And if SP was seen after the murder walking down the hall? He is a stone cold killer who's mission he successfully completed.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[arkansasmimi]

I think also why it was confusing at that time is that they were not familiar with the inside of the church. Granted they were there that morning but just seeing a video of the SP walking down a hall and through a door into a room without the aid of a map/layout to follow it would be difficult to know from the first morning which rooms he was coming and going from.

JMHO, they had a very detailed layout of the church. Would have to have one for fire escape exits readily available. They had Church personnel to help with some aspects. They had exact camera locations. JMHO they had watched each video prior to the press conf, But it took time to get all the times and movements together/analyze them as a whole.

We also have no idea, some of those first responders or Investigators may have even been members of the church or been there prior. I do know from MB fb friends some first responders and 911 dispatchers were CG members.

 

[Cannonball3804]

Okay, I found the SW affidavit concerning "neither the suspect nor victim is seen again on video." Here is the relevant part:

As arkansasmimi noted, this was from just the day after the murder. I can see some problems with it factually, indicating that it was hastily prepared. The perp was seen "going through offices" is poor wording. Unless he actually broke in to the church offices while inside and it's part of unreleased video, what we really see is him going through hallways and going in classrooms. "Offices" would apply more to a business, not a church.

So I think it would be hard to read thru this and accept it as the inerrant, infallible Word of MPD. But... again, the part about "not seen again on video" is mostly referring to what happens leading up to the murder. Not necessarily something that occurs afterward. I can see it going either way. Mimi, do you want to take a shot at asking MPD to clarify, or shall I?

Ok, I went ahead and reached out to MPD asking for clarification. Turns out I was wrong - Spann was incorrect and the search warrant was correct. The suspect is NOT seen on video after the murder:

 

[nearsouth]

Ok, I went ahead and reached out to MPD asking for clarification. Turns out I was wrong - Spann was incorrect and the search warrant was correct. The suspect is NOT seen on video after the murder <snipped>

Woah... Thx for doing that and clarifying!