TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers, 45, killed in church/suspect in SWAT gear, 18 Apr 2016 #43

[lstiff]

As someone who has believed it was untargeted, I have to admit the Jeremiah 4:18 Bible verse gives me pause. She was murdered on 4/18. She got to the church around 4:18. The verse talks about one's own deeds and conduct lead to consequences, and how the punishment pierces the heart.

Some coincidences are hard to ignore...

Agree. I know some things can be a coincidence but not many things that are so exact. IMHO

 

[lstiff]

To us it might be odd but ppl grieve and conduct life differently than another human might. I admit there are so many ppl that had motive but I do not think BB played any part even though he had a motive, JMO. In regards to ppl not screaming for justice, things are corrupt over there. The murder didnt happen in Ellis county but I think Missy had connections with LE over there through her daily life.

This. I agree 100% with the rest too.

JMO

 

[lstiff]

No offense taken as I do have a habit of over thinking things.

But, maybe you're not thinking enough. [emoji848][emoji4]

Imagine seeing the actual murder on video. The brutality would be too much and wouldn't sit well with the jurors.

And why take the chance of MB possibly getting the upper hand and
ripping off part of the outfit before he/she hightailed it out of there.

The only reason SP came into the church to be on video (while disguised head to toe) was because it was important to make this look like a burglary gone wrong.

And, had the actual murder been on video, I believe it would have been apparent that SP was waiting for MB and that SP made the 1st brutal hit.
Therefore, possibly a murder for hire.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

I just typed out a reply basically saying the same thing but then saw this. We don't know if LE has video of the actual murder or 2 people entering the same room and only 1 coming out or nothing at all. *IF* there is video of the murder, it's a lot harder to find reasonable doubt vs only being linked to the disguise, no alibi, motive, GPS etc. IMHO

 

[Cannonball3804]

I just typed out a reply basically saying the same thing but then saw this. We don't know if LE has video of the actual murder or 2 people entering the same room and only 1 coming out or nothing at all. *IF* there is video of the murder, it's a lot harder to find reasonable doubt vs only being linked to the disguise, no alibi, motive, GPS etc. IMHO

We DO know that LE does NOT have video of the murder. They swore to it in SW affidavits before a judge.

And for the same reason, we also know that one and only one perp is seen on video.

 

[Razz]

We DO know that LE does NOT have video of the murder. They swore to it in SW affidavits before a judge.

And for the same reason, we also know that one and only one perp is seen on video.

I just went back to the beginning of this thread (Great place to refresh and renew) to find where LE said (my rendition) MB was seen walking down the hall to where the suspect was last seen on video. ( Unfortunately I can't find it nor can I open the Drop Box with written transcripts of both LE pressers shortly after the murder). Neither MB or the perp were seen again after that. (Police advised they didn't show the video of MB walking down the hall out of respect for the family).

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[lstiff]

I just went back to the beginning of this thread (Great place to refresh and renew) to find where LE said (my rendition) MB was seen walking down the hall to where the suspect was last seen on video. ( Unfortunately I can't find it nor can I open the Drop Box with written transcripts of both LE pressers shortly after the murder). Neither MB or the perp were seen again after that. (Police advised they didn't show the video of MB walking down the hall out of respect for the family).

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

Thanks! It's been a while so my mind is probably frazzled. I guess they really aren't holding back very much and don't have much to solve this case or make it stick. That is disappointing, IMO

 

[Razz]

Dear Mr. Holiness- That's meant for all those wholes you punched in your head the other day. [emoji16]

Well, that was exactly my point. I think it's someone who is very familiar with the church and it's workings. Someone who knew where the dead spots were and what cameras didn't work. So it didn't really take a lot of intelligence or
imagination....just a little luck and a lot of gaul.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

Sorry to reference my own post, but ASSUMING it is someone who knows that cameras weren't working whittles down the list. So, who would know this? Just some examples:

1). The person(s) maintaining the cameras
2). The person(s) who reviewed video
(if that ever happened on a regular basis)
3). Someone w/in the church who knew about the cameras and dead spots.
4). Another Gladiator instructor who taught there.

I tend to be shy about exercising in front of cameras. If it were me, I'd have to ask if the cameras were working or not and not because I'm planning on doing something skullduggerous but because I don't want my half toned body being on video...ANYWHERE.


Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[JnRyan]

This may have been posted before since it is from September, but I just found it while doing an internet search on Missy. "True Crime Garage" podcast discussion of Missy's murder. Nothing earth shattering or new, but what is interesting is their debate as to whether it was a break-in with Missy in the wrong place, wrong time OR a planned murder. Episodes 138 and 139.

https://truecrimegarage.podbean.com/page/4/

I did spot one mistake and that is I remember LE stating they know of an unidentified vehicle leaving the area after the murder. But LE stated they didn't have enough to know what type of vehicle it was, let alone a plate.

 

[Cannonball3804]

I just went back to the beginning of this thread (Great place to refresh and renew) to find where LE said (my rendition) MB was seen walking down the hall to where the suspect was last seen on video. ( Unfortunately I can't find it nor can I open the Drop Box with written transcripts of both LE pressers shortly after the murder). Neither MB or the perp were seen again after that. (Police advised they didn't show the video of MB walking down the hall out of respect for the family).

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

It's in the SW for Missy's iPhone and iPad, which also states that suspect and victim are not seen again on video after she walks down the hallway:

And it's the AT&T Tower SW in which it is stated that only the one suspect is seen in the building during that 30 minute period:

 

[dub]

SP was wearing a helmet. Underneath the helmet, SP had on a balaclava. He wasn't wearing a "mask" that MB could grab from the front and pull off.

So with that off the table, is there any other reason why it would be in SP's best interest to commit the murder off camera?

Have you ever worn a balaclava?

With a balaclava its actually EASIER to have your face exposed in a face to face fight because it can be exposed by pulling downward, which is a more natural motion in close quarters than a mask that you'd have to lift upward.

It's true that having your entire head exposed with a balaclava/helmet may be less likely than with a lot of masks, I'll give you that.

I can say though that I wear a balaclava and helmet when I snowboard, and it really isn't a complicated or forceful process for both of those things to be completely removed.

I don't care either way how you feel about all this, but maybe others arent so eager to wipe it so quickly "off the table".

 

[dub]

SP was wearing a helmet. Underneath the helmet, SP had on a balaclava. He wasn't wearing a "mask" that MB could grab from the front and pull off.

So with that off the table, is there any other reason why it would be in SP's best interest to commit the murder off camera?

An alternative possibility: no specific reason, just basic logic of committing a crime.

If I was going to do anything criminal from murder on down, and I had a choice of doing it on camera vs off camera, my response definitely wouldn't be "eh, doesn't matter, I'm cool either way".

 

[Cannonball3804]

Have you ever worn a balaclava?

With a balaclava its actually EASIER to have your face exposed in a face to face fight because it can be exposed by pulling downward, which is a more natural motion in close quarters than a mask that you'd have to lift upward.

It's true that having your entire head exposed with a balaclava/helmet may be less likely than with a lot of masks, I'll give you that.

I can say though that I wear a balaclava and helmet when I snowboard, and it really isn't a complicated or forceful process for both of those things to be completely removed.

I don't care either way how you feel about all this, but maybe others arent so eager to wipe it so quickly "off the table".

I've worn them and i've sold them in a retail establishment, so I'm very familiar with them. You can feel how you like about it, but I don't believe it's likely that a female is going to have success pulling a balaclava out from under a helmet, and/or knock off a helmet that may well be chin-strapped (both of which would, I believe, have to happen in order for identity to be revealed). Especially not when the killer has a hammer in his hand. And your argument about pulling the balaclava downward doesn't make sense because the helmet prevents it from being pulled downward - the best that Missy could have done would be to get ahold of the edge of the facial opening and try to pull it outward.

https://wool.minus33.com/midweight-wool-balaclava/720/product/

As for the camera, I just don't think SP cares one way or the other about where they are, because he has dressed himself so well that ID is not possible. Just as when he is walking down the hall grazing his hand against the wall - he doesn't worry about fingerprints because he knows he has gloves on.

 

[brobradh77]

JMO

If we assume for a minute that this is a lovers triangle situation.

Then the perp could be either a mad female to keep her own male friend from ever seeing the person again or
If it was a male perp in the triangle situation then it could be either that they wanted to permanently stop their actions with their lover or it could be a jealous husband or boyfriend that found out their girl was cheating on them.

This is my belief. This is the act of a jealous woman. One that believes Missy is cheating with her man or this is a woman that has been cheating with/or wants Missy's husband. Either way this was just a murder to eliminate her from the picture. IMO.

 

[TexasEx]

Has this been posted already? It seems BB talked a bit after saying he was done talking, again.

http://abc13.com/husband-of-murdered-texas-trainer-feels-powerless-in-search-for-killer/2829674/

 

[Cannonball3804]

Question for the forum, especially for those who are very familiar with the church layout, may have been in the church before, etc.

If you're standing outside the entrance doors under the awning, or if you're just inside those doors, what can you see from there? Can you only see the hallway, or can you see into that alcove on the left that contains the bathrooms?

 

[Cannonball3804]

Question for the forum, especially for those who are very familiar with the church layout, may have been in the church before, etc.

If you're standing outside the entrance doors under the awning, or if you're just inside those doors, what can you see from there? Can you only see the hallway, or can you see into that alcove on the left that contains the bathrooms?

The church layout as done by Jethro4WS. I believe the red rectangle just inside the doors is now known to be a small vestibule where wheelchairs are stored.

 

[arkansasmimi]

It's in the SW for Missy's iPhone and iPad, which also states that suspect and victim are not seen again on video after she walks down the hallway:

And it's the AT&T Tower SW in which it is stated that only the one suspect is seen in the building during that 30 minute period:

The diff in those 2 is Cody Moon did the iPhone iPad SW and Cody McKinney put same language in the ATT Cell Tower and BWH SW in Dec 2016.

the SW's it states within 30 mins, as I have said long ago there are 2 - 30 min time frames. We the public only know the time of 1 section on video and that is because orig it was released with a time stamp on it. The other sections are spliced and shown from various cameras not all from the same camera/area of building.

Having said that, I personally don't know how many were in but that never been one of the things I have zoomed my interest in.
But from ATT Cell Tower SW on 4/21 to the one 12/12/16 Cody McKinney used the very same language in his Affidavit for Probable Cause.

MPD told us on their updated timeline on 4/22

Updated Timeline:
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 3:50 A.M. – Suspect first appears on video surveillance camera at Creekside Church of Christ
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 4:16 A.M. – Mrs. Bevers’ pickup truck is shown on video surveillance driving into the church parking lot.
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 4:20 A.M. – Mrs. Bevers appears on video surveillance camera walking into the church building.
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 4:35 A.M. – Participant in Camp Gladiator arrives at location
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 5:00 A.M. – Two 911 calls received from location
https://www.facebook.com/Midlothian...

**In SW's McKinney says that MB first seen at 4:18 a.m. this has always bugged me, did she come in and then go back out and reenter at 4:20? Spann said she was in process of unloading her truck. Affidavit Probable Cause is not all the info they have but as you say too, it has to be factual. Especially with McKinney using the very same info in his for BWH.
So think 418 was time maybe Spann said too. Odd that gave exact times for other calls if it is a typo.

In the BWH SW there is one paragraph that Cody McKinney posted twice but if you notice there are language changes an one has more information that the other.

While Johnson said on April 22 they were looking at all possibilities of more than one. But on May 20 when they gave the height range after the Tarrant Co agency,Johnson says only 1.
Jmho

 

[dub]

I've worn them and i've sold them in a retail establishment, so I'm very familiar with them. You can feel how you like about it, but I don't believe it's likely that a female is going to have success pulling a balaclava out from under a helmet, and/or knock off a helmet that may well be chin-strapped (both of which would, I believe, have to happen in order for identity to be revealed). Especially not when the killer has a hammer in his hand. And your argument about pulling the balaclava downward doesn't make sense because the helmet prevents it from being pulled downward - the best that Missy could have done would be to get ahold of the edge of the facial opening and try to pull it outward.

https://wool.minus33.com/midweight-wool-balaclava/720/product/

As for the camera, I just don't think SP cares one way or the other about where they are, because he has dressed himself so well that ID is not possible. Just as when he is walking down the hall grazing his hand against the wall - he doesn't worry about fingerprints because he knows he has gloves on.

You must be working with different kinds of balaclavas than I am, but that's fine.

That one you linked is definitely different from mine, mine pulls down very easily under the chin (more often than not unless it's super cold that's how I wear it).

I see what you're saying though, I can agree to disagree on this no prob.

 

[drama_farmer]

It's in the SW for Missy's iPhone and iPad, which also states that suspect and victim are not seen again on video after she walks down the hallway:

And it's the AT&T Tower SW in which it is stated that only the one suspect is seen in the building during that 30 minute period:

"Neither the suspect nor the victim were seen again on video."

This begs the question: If the SP was able to leave the building from that particular location, without being detected on video, does that also mean that another person would be able to enter the building from that particular location, without being detected on video?

 

[Cannonball3804]

The diff in those 2 is Cody Moon did the iPhone iPad SW and Cody McKinney put same language in the ATT Cell Tower and BWH SW in Dec 2016.

the SW's it states within 30 mins, as I have said long ago there are 2 - 30 min time frames. We the public only know the time of 1 section on video and that is because orig it was released with a time stamp on it. The other sections are spliced and shown from various cameras not all from the same camera/area of building.

Having said that, I personally don't know how many were in but that never been one of the things I have zoomed my interest in.
But from ATT Cell Tower SW on 4/21 to the one 12/12/16 Cody McKinney used the very same language in his Affidavit for Probable Cause.

MPD told us on their updated timeline on 4/22

Updated Timeline:
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 3:50 A.M. – Suspect first appears on video surveillance camera at Creekside Church of Christ
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 4:16 A.M. – Mrs. Bevers’ pickup truck is shown on video surveillance driving into the church parking lot.
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 4:20 A.M. – Mrs. Bevers appears on video surveillance camera walking into the church building.
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 4:35 A.M. – Participant in Camp Gladiator arrives at location
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 5:00 A.M. – Two 911 calls received from location
https://www.facebook.com/Midlothian...

**In SW's McKinney says that MB first seen at 4:18 a.m. this has always bugged me, did she come in and then go back out and reenter at 4:20? Spann said she was in process of unloading her truck. Affidavit Probable Cause is not all the info they have but as you say too, it has to be factual. Especially with McKinney using the very same info in his for BWH.
So think 418 was time maybe Spann said too. Odd that gave exact times for other calls if it is a typo.

In the BWH SW there is one paragraph that Cody McKinney posted twice but if you notice there are language changes an one has more information that the other.

While Johnson said on April 22 they were looking at all possibilities of more than one. But on May 20 when they gave the height range after the Tarrant Co agency,Johnson says only 1.
Jmho

bbm

Just my speculation, but I think that she drove under the awning at either 4:16 or 4:18 and that a camera inside the church picked up the headlights and possibly the truck itself. Then probably the same camera picked up MB herself entering the building 2-4 minutes later. I doubt she went out and came back in.

And here's something else. I know MPD said on that first day that the class had been moved inside due to weather. I question that, though. MB on her FB the night before told her campers that they would have cover under the awning. I think it was the common practice at CofC during rain to do their camp under that awning, not inside the building. But I guess there are pictures we've seen of the campers inside the building, so I guess it wasn't unheard of.

I believe that she would have gone inside to use the bathroom, or turn on the bathroom lights for the others, or gone to the kitchen to get ice.

So a possible scenario is that MB was attacked in the alcove where the bathrooms are that are designated WB1 and WB2 on Jethro's map. Here is my edited version of his layout showing where I believe MB was, and showing camper field of view (as I understand it) from outside the 1st set of doors and just outside the 2nd set of doors. I think that the campers would have been able to see her body, or at least part of it, as they entered the building or possibly even before entering it.