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

[JnRyan]

I completely agree with the first half of your post. I think this was an aimless individual meandering and enjoying rambling around and being destructive in the church. A step up from graffiti, but similar mind set. Then we have the added psychological wrinkle of the combat gear.

Everything about this Perp's affect, their movements, and aimlessness suggest someone with limited acuity.

Aside from what has already been dissected and discussed, I find two other aspects of this Perp very intriguing, and will dwell on more:

1. They didn't use a gun (at least that I have heard reported). That is notable. Why not?
2. They were seen on video reorganizing the "tools" they were using from part of their get up. What other profession would commonly do something similar? Have tools on them in this manner, and reorganize them?

I like those two questions. On #1 I believe it is likely -IF Missy wasn't targeted - that SP used what he had to try to incapacitate Missy so he could make his exit without anyone to ID a vehicle or other means of escape. Still I believe the choice of murder weapon is a telling point whether she was targeted or not.

On #2, I can see that point. I don't know if I would use the word 'organize'. But someone who uses tools in a trade such as a carpenter is accustomed to reaching for tools from a tool belt sometimes without even looking. One might be able to make the point that this might be someone who wears a tool belt in their 'day job' and is used to reaching for and returning them just out of habit. Makes me have another purpose to look at the video again.

 

[Razz]

I have no criminal investigative or profiling experience, so what I have is only my gut feelings about this individual. I tend to think this individual is in their late teens to early 20's. This is partially because I believe this may have been a vandalism that went bad. Also partially because the person just looks like someone just doesn't have any particular purpose once inside the church. The biggest thrill for them may have just been getting in to start with and once in just going about looking for someway to leave a sign they were there. I'd love to know what this person did in the kitchen - if they did anything at all. In fact, in my opinion, vandalism may have not even been an objective. Had Missy not entered the church they may have just walked all through the church and waved at the security camera on the way out. The thrill was just getting in, just like some computer system hackers don't really plan any theft but rather enjoy the challenge of getting into a system.

Of course, if this was a planned murder then the above is all out the window. In that case it could be anyone from the early 20's to mid 40's. I don't rule out a planned murder, I just tend to believe it is less likely than a vandalism or simple break in. If it was a planned murder, I could see a small caliber gun being used. If that is well planned such as the murderer picking up their empty casings before leaving the scene there is nothing to trace back to the gun except the bullet(s) in the victim. There is no guarantee the bullet will be in good enough condition to ID a particular barrel and if the killer disposes of the gun or changes the barrel there is nothing left to trace anyway.

If it was just a vandalism, why did SP take the time to dry off? The helmet was dry and shiny. Why go out on such an awful night just to get wet and soggy and troll around the hallways and take nothing?

SP was killing time, playing to the camera making it look like he was going to pry open a door. All he gave it was a less than half hearted attempt.
SP didn't"t want to leave busted glass along the main hallway where he knew MB would be walking down. That would have alerted her right away that something was amiss.

SP knew what he/she was doing.
Just killing time waiting for his prey"s entry.




Sent from my REVVLPLUS C3701A using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I completely agree with the first half of your post. I think this was an aimless individual meandering and enjoying rambling around and being destructive in the church. A step up from graffiti, but similar mind set. Then we have the added psychological wrinkle of the combat gear.

Everything about this Perp's affect, their movements, and aimlessness suggest someone with limited acuity.

Aside from what has already been dissected and discussed, I find two other aspects of this Perp very intriguing, and will dwell on more:

1. They didn't use a gun (at least that I have heard reported). That is notable. Why not?
2. They were seen on video reorganizing the "tools" they were using from part of their get up. What other profession would commonly do something similar? Have tools on them in this manner, and reorganize them?

I would have another question:
Who would crash the glass in the door in the complicated manner to have the glass fallen out to the outside (hall) and not to the inside (room) if he is only haphazardly destroying things?

 

[Brazenkane]

I have no criminal investigative or profiling experience, so what I have is only my gut feelings about this individual. I tend to think this individual is in their late teens to early 20's. This is partially because I believe this may have been a vandalism that went bad. Also partially because the person just looks like someone just doesn't have any particular purpose once inside the church. The biggest thrill for them may have just been getting in to start with and once in just going about looking for someway to leave a sign they were there. I'd love to know what this person did in the kitchen - if they did anything at all. In fact, in my opinion, vandalism may have not even been an objective. Had Missy not entered the church they may have just walked all through the church and waved at the security camera on the way out. The thrill was just getting in, just like some computer system hackers don't really plan any theft but rather enjoy the challenge of getting into a system.

I think the perp had a car nearby simply because he wasn’t expecting anyone to show up. Having a car sadly changes this persons reaction to being confronted at 4.20 in the morning. I know people hypothesised the perp May have gotten there on foot, but appearing dry on a wet night suggests a car was used. Plus the odd footage of the Altima and the report of a SUV.

He cant leave the car there as that will identify him, he can’t outrun an extremely fit personal trainer to the car and even if he does she could still identify it as he drives off.

 

[rosesfromangels]

I would have another question:
Who would crash the glass in the door in the complicated manner to have the glass fallen out to the outside (hall) and not to the inside (room) if he is only haphazardly destroying things?

Very observant. Now I must watch that video for the 900th time. Someone who installs windshields?

 

[rosesfromangels]

If it was just a vandalism, why did SP take the time to dry off? The helmet was dry and shiny. Why go out on such an awful night just to get wet and soggy and troll around the hallways and take nothing?

SP was killing time, playing to the camera making it look like he was going to pry open a door. All he gave it was a less than half hearted attempt.
SP didn't"t want to leave busted glass along the main hallway where he knew MB would be walking down. That would have alerted her right away that something was amiss.

SP knew what he/she was doing.
Just killing time waiting for his prey"s entry.




Sent from my REVVLPLUS C3701A using Tapatalk

I was having dinner with a Detective friend one night when it was pouring rain. I made some casual remark that the criminals would stay home because of the rain storm. He corrected me by saying they love the rain because it covers up the sounds of their criminal activity.

 

[MittenScarpetta]

I would have another question:
Who would crash the glass in the door in the complicated manner to have the glass fallen out to the outside (hall) and not to the inside (room) if he is only haphazardly destroying things?

Interesting observation! I never even considered the way the glass was struck.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MittenScarpetta]

I was having dinner with a Detective friend one night when it was pouring rain. I made some casual remark that the criminals would stay home because of the rain storm. He corrected me by saying they love the rain because it covers up the sounds of their criminal activity.

I’ve heard that too. And it’s also good for destroying evidence outside, IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Razz]

I was having dinner with a Detective friend one night when it was pouring rain. I made some casual remark that the criminals would stay home because of the rain storm. He corrected me by saying they love the rain because it covers up the sounds of their criminal activity.

That wasn't my point.

Why not just go in wet? What does he care if he's dry or not? But it does appear from the videos that he is dry.
Specifically, the helmet. I think he dried off and changed clothes. And I believe he brought the helmet with him. He's smart enough not to leave wet tracks
from his shoes. He may have mopped up a bit in the kitchen.

And who"s going to hear anything? He"s in the middle of nowhere.

SP had to go out that night. This was the opportune time to murder Missy.
He knew she would be all alone in the church, her husband was away, and her kids were snug in bed at home.

Sent from my REVVLPLUS C3701A using Tapatalk

 

[J.M. Bee]

This was clearly a planned and premeditated murder. I am surprised, though, that between (i) the height of the POI, (ii) the likelihood that the POI is a woman, (iii) the video of the Nissan Altima, (iv) the fact that the culprit would have to have known Missy's schedule and the layout of the building, and (v) the fact that there couldn't be too many people with a motive to kill Missy Bevers, the police haven't solved this.

 

[Boudy]

I have always believed he brought the vest, helmet, gloves, and maybe the shoes into the church kitchen in a bag. He already had the other clothes on because IMHO he’s a security guard. I’m not understanding the questions about the glass. He was just trying to get his arm through the door to unlock it. He didn’t care where the glass went.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JnRyan]

I think the perp had a car nearby simply because he wasn’t expecting anyone to show up. Having a car sadly changes this persons reaction to being confronted at 4.20 in the morning. I know people hypothesised the perp May have gotten there on foot, but appearing dry on a wet night suggests a car was used. Plus the odd footage of the Altima and the report of a SUV.

He cant leave the car there as that will identify him, he can’t outrun an extremely fit personal trainer to the car and even if he does she could still identify it as he drives off.

Good point. I believe SP walked in the building dressed like that if they knew of the surveillance cameras. I don't believe they changed into that attire once inside.

 

[Sailor Haumea]

This was clearly a planned and premeditated murder. I am surprised, though, that between (i) the height of the POI, (ii) the likelihood that the POI is a woman, (iii) the video of the Nissan Altima, (iv) the fact that the culprit would have to have known Missy's schedule and the layout of the building, and (v) the fact that there couldn't be too many people with a motive to kill Missy Bevers, the police haven't solved this.

Also, (vi) the culprit seems to be aware enough of how the FIL walks to be able to mimic it.

Either the perpetrator personally knew Missy, or he/she had been stalking her for a while.

 

[JnRyan]

If it was just a vandalism, why did SP take the time to dry off? The helmet was dry and shiny. Why go out on such an awful night just to get wet and soggy and troll around the hallways and take nothing?

SP was killing time, playing to the camera making it look like he was going to pry open a door. All he gave it was a less than half hearted attempt.
SP didn't"t want to leave busted glass along the main hallway where he knew MB would be walking down. That would have alerted her right away that something was amiss.

SP knew what he/she was doing.
Just killing time waiting for his prey"s entry.




Sent from my REVVLPLUS C3701A using Tapatalk

It may have not been vandalism. The thrill to this person may have simply been to break in. Then play to the camera, walk all around the church and walk out waving at the camera.

It still may have been a planned murder and Missy was the target. I think it is possible, but the least likely - to me anyway.

 

[JnRyan]

This was clearly a planned and premeditated murder. I am surprised, though, that between (i) the height of the POI, (ii) the likelihood that the POI is a woman, (iii) the video of the Nissan Altima, (iv) the fact that the culprit would have to have known Missy's schedule and the layout of the building, and (v) the fact that there couldn't be too many people with a motive to kill Missy Bevers, the police haven't solved this.

I'd add another to that list. The outside surveillance cameras were not working. So SP could have driven up, done the deed and drove out without being recorded. If SP did the planning to include a clever disguise because of the inside cameras they had to have seen the ones outside in doing their research and planning. They seem to have known they didn't work. If knowledge was not widely known we have a small number of POI right there.

 

[Bobbyshortcakes]

I believe they change into the swat perp outfit in the car,hence the seat right back

 

[Boudy]

Good point. I believe SP walked in the building dressed like that if they knew of the surveillance cameras. I don't believe they changed into that attire once inside.

If he had been driving through the parking lot frequently and hadn’t been reported he would know the cameras weren’t working. If he was a security guard he could just say that he was driving by and thought he saw something to make him check out the church.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RagingClue]

Hi guys happy 2018. Glad to see thread open. Praying this will be the year for missy!!!!!!

 

[KaaBoom]

That wasn't my point.

Why not just go in wet? What does he care if he's dry or not? But it does appear from the videos that he is dry.
Specifically, the helmet. I think he dried off and changed clothes. And I believe he brought the helmet with him. He's smart enough not to leave wet tracks
from his shoes. He may have mopped up a bit in the kitchen.

And who"s going to hear anything? He"s in the middle of nowhere.

SP had to go out that night. This was the opportune time to murder Missy.
He knew she would be all alone in the church, her husband was away, and her kids were snug in bed at home.

First point. Sound does carry, at night. Breaking glass could potentially be heard from some distance away. The rain would muffle the sound. More important rain would reduce visibility, and reduce the chances of somebody seeing the suspect outside the church, and calling police.

Second point, respectfully I'm sorry but that logic is totally faulty. First, if MB was targeted, which I don't think there is any evidence she was. Why would the suspect care if her husband was away, or home with the kids? If he wasn't planning to kill MB at home, why would it make a difference of her husband was out of town or not?

Second, how would the suspect know that MB would be alone? She almost wasn't. What if one of the campers arrived before MB? What if another instructor showed up to help MB, for some reason? That would be a terrible plan. That window of opportunity would be way too small. The suspect would be racing against time, hoping that MB wasn't running a few minutes late, or one of the campers didn't show up a few minutes earlier. If any of them did, he would be going to prison for a long time. Does that really sound like a chance the suspect would take?

Third, the only person who would be able to carry out such an elaborate plot would be someone not only with intimate knowledge of MB's work schedule and work routine, but also her entire family's schedule. Only a few people could possibly been privy to all that knowledge, and they have all been cleared of possible involvement a long time ago.

The targeting theory is far fetched to begin with. Ad in the incredible amount of detailed knowledge the suspect would have to have had about MB's personal life, it becomes an impossibility IMHO.

 

[KaaBoom]

This was clearly a planned and premeditated murder. I am surprised, though, that between (i) the height of the POI, (ii) the likelihood that the POI is a woman, (iii) the video of the Nissan Altima, (iv) the fact that the culprit would have to have known Missy's schedule and the layout of the building, and (v) the fact that there couldn't be too many people with a motive to kill Missy Bevers, the police haven't solved this.

If all of that was true, how could this case not have been solved already, with so few suspects?