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

[SteveS]

I think he/she didn't kill her outside when she arrived because they wanted to terrorize her. This almost seems like something from a horror movie where the killer is sort of toying with the victim. I think this was extremely personal to this person and just shooting her wouldn't satisfy them. This would explain the complex disguise and unconventional murder weapon. When I first watched the video, I was instantly reminded of the killer from the movie 'The Prowler'. It's just extremely creepy. I really believe this person had a dark and sinister intention of doing more than just a one and done murder.

The whole setup was certainly consistent with terrorizing Missy, if that's what they wanted to do. We don't know what sort of confrontation and interaction occurred, and there's plenty of room for it to have been something that took a bit of time and included something personal.

But, the setup doesn't really tell us that's what they MUST HAVE had in mind. It could also mean they wanted to do a robbery and not be caught, and they took burglar tools, as well as a gun in case they were caught in the act and needed it to get away - and Missy walked in on them, and was killed as a result.

 

[JnRyan]

The more I read, the less I feel this was targeted or meant to be a murder at all, until it happened. Especially if he was carrying tools that are more common to thieves/housebreakers and used one of those as a weapon. But am still undecided overall...

I'm right there, too. It seems any scenario I look at I can think of an argument against it.

 

[JnRyan]

I wasn't saying that media didn't use "unknown instruments." It's in their article. Instead, I was inquiring if you had looked to see if that wording was actually in a warrant, but apparently the answer is no. That's fine, just asking.

THE POINT IS - just from reading the article, we can't know whether "unknown instruments" was something taken from the warrant wording, as there were no quotation marks, and it could have merely been the reporter's personal wording or thinking.

Also: Unknown to whom - to the warrant writer, or to the reporter? Unknown in what way - as to what TYPE of weapon, or what exact weapon?

I find the wording interesting for lack of a better word. I know of cases, such as the Delphi murders, where LE won't tell us the weapon or the means. But except in the case where the body wasn't found for an extended period of time, I can't recall where the wording "unknown instrument" was given as the murder weapon. If she was hit with the hammer or prybar, I would expect to hear "blunt instrument" or "blunt force trauma". If it was a gun shot, I would expect to hear that term.

 

[SteveS]

I find the wording interesting for lack of a better word. I know of cases, such as the Delphi murders, where LE won't tell us the weapon or the means. But except in the case where the body wasn't found for an extended period of time, I can't recall where the wording "unknown instrument" was given as the murder weapon. If she was hit with the hammer or prybar, I would expect to hear "blunt instrument" or "blunt force trauma". If it was a gun shot, I would expect to hear that term.

But, we don't have any reason to think LE used the wording "unknown instrument," do we? That was a reporter's words, but doesn't seem to be theirs. There's no reason for us to wonder why LE would be using such words, if we don't have an instance where they used them.

 

[JnRyan]

But, we don't have any reason to think LE used the wording "unknown instrument," do we? That was a reporter's words, but doesn't seem to be theirs. There's no reason for us to wonder why LE would be using such words, if we don't have an instance where they used them.

I don't believe we have any idea who originated the wording. I agree, I can't see LE stating this as I don't recall seeing it anywhere else. I just think it adds confusion to an already strange crime.

 

[Lhughessk]

if we can skip ( a puncture wound ) how do you deal with ( compatible with tools the suspect was seen with ) .. cause rationally this is what ties this suspect to the crime ? he wasnt seen with a gun

We can’t know for sure that the killer was not seen with the gun, because we haven’t seen all the video. I’m thinking police may have video of the killer leaving the church

I don't see a warrant that uses the words "unknown instrument" - do you have a link? I wonder if maybe that's just the reporter's thinking rather than the warrant's wording.

The warrant wording that has led us to the idea it was something other than a gun is probably this, in the very first warrant: "Terri Bevers’ had multiple puncture wounds found on her head and chest are consistent with the tools the suspect was carrying throughout the building." We see the words "puncture wounds" and think of a knife or a crowbar; whereas technically she could have been "punctured" by multiple bullets, which would satisfy the language in the warrant.

Anyhow, the FBI said the weapon was "Handgun -pistol, revolver, etc". That's definitive.

Only LE knows what's what. And they do know the answer. But for us, there are lots of ways we can try to justify this to make sense, if we want to know. For example ....

*The warrant doesn't actually say that the perp is 'seen on video' with "tools" that caused her death, only that he/she had them.
*Or, if we want to align the video with the warrant wording, here's one guess: perhaps somewhere in the security video (which we have only been given part of) a handgun was seen, but we either haven't recognized it, or the public hasn't been given that section of the video.
*There's another explanation, of course, which is that that perhaps there were knife or crowbar injuries too.
*Important point - The warrant doesn't say the puncture wounds are the COD.
*Or, perhaps at the time of the early warrants they thought some puncture wounds were the COD, and then the autopsy found there were gun wounds as the real COD.
*But perhaps no such crowbar/knife type wounds even exist - it could just be speaking of bullet holes..

BBM. The first warrant in Missy Bevers case was the truck warrant. It was from the evening of the murder and was the only warrant issued prior to the autopsy which took place the next day. It said that Missy was “deceased from a head wound”. Nothing about puncture wounds and nothing about the chest. That wording came only in a few later warrants. Then police stopped describing her injuries at all.

 

[SteveS]

The warrant my quote came from ("Terri Bevers’ had multiple puncture wounds found on her head and chest are consistent with the tools the suspect was carrying throughout the building.") was issued the day after the crime. If it wasn't the first warrant, it was very early and one of the earliest.

 

[Lhughessk]

The warrant my quote came from ("Terri Bevers’ had multiple puncture wounds found on her head and chest are consistent with the tools the suspect was carrying throughout the building.") was issued the day after the crime. If it wasn't the first warrant, it was very early and one of the earliest.

My point remains, the first warrant, the truck warrant, was 6 pm Monday and was the only pre-autopsy warrant. It said simply “deceased from a head wound.” The warrant you cited was post-autopsy. I’ve stated before, my belief is that after police confirmed gunshot in the autopsy, they decided to protect the gunshot info and amended their description of her injuries accordingly so that it was less precise about what the fatal wound actually was.

 

[SteveS]

Maybe so. Do we know exactly when they first had the autopsy results?

In the media thread, I don't see any obvious references or links to that warrant you mention - do you have a link to where it can be seen?

It makes me wonder - when BB said he knew some things that hadn't been made known, was he perhaps alluding to the fact that Missy had been killed with a gun, whereas the media and the public thought something very different?

 

[Lhughessk]

Maybe so. Do we know exactly when they first had the autopsy results?

In the media thread, I don't see any obvious references or links to that warrant you mention - do you have a link to where it can be seen?

It makes me wonder - when BB said he knew some things that hadn't been made known, was he perhaps alluding to the fact that Missy had been killed with a gun, whereas the media and the public thought something very different?

 

[Detective Willy]

The suspect was walking around carrying the "tool" in their left hand from the footage that I have seen. I wonder how many of the persons of interest walk with a limp and are the same height and are left handed?

 

[DeDee]

I find the wording interesting for lack of a better word. I know of cases, such as the Delphi murders, where LE won't tell us the weapon or the means. But except in the case where the body wasn't found for an extended period of time, I can't recall where the wording "unknown instrument" was given as the murder weapon. If she was hit with the hammer or prybar, I would expect to hear "blunt instrument" or "blunt force trauma". If it was a gun shot, I would expect to hear that term.

If the hammer's hit, by example, was exerted with a powerful force, then the portion of the hammer that was in contact with the skin, could cause an open wound, or puncture wound.

A hammer striking unprotected skin could crush bones, and, if the strike is powerful enough, the pressure from the force onto the contact could cause the skin to rupture simultaneously.

A wooden hammer would not cause as much tissue damage because wood gives somewhat against the stretching skin; whereas, steel has no give in it.

I've not been one to dwell on the sight of Missy's condition as seen that morning, ie., how many wounds, where, how deep, to the face? Rather, I prefer remembering smiling photos of her instead. God bless her. She had to be terrified out of her wits.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

The whole setup was certainly consistent with terrorizing Missy, if that's what they wanted to do. We don't know what sort of confrontation and interaction occurred, and there's plenty of room for it to have been something that took a bit of time and included something personal.

But, the setup doesn't really tell us that's what they MUST HAVE had in mind. It could also mean they wanted to do a robbery and not be caught, and they took burglar tools, as well as a gun in case they were caught in the act and needed it to get away - and Missy walked in on them, and was killed as a result.

When Missy walked in, it was at the South West end, where her car was parked, IMO. The Swat Gear man must have been near the West entrance, not to be seen by the CCTV. He could have fled in direction of the door/window he came in, when Missy entered the hallway. If he was only a (unpowered) burglar, he didn't have to violently murder her. Why should he have done that? He was disguised from head to toe; she wouldn't have been able to identify him, IMO.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

The suspect was walking around carrying the "tool" in their left hand from the footage that I have seen. I wonder how many of the persons of interest walk with a limp and are the same height and are left handed?

Maybe, he is not left handed, but had to use his right hand for different tools. IMO

 

[cady]

Maybe so. Do we know exactly when they first had the autopsy results?

In the media thread, I don't see any obvious references or links to that warrant you mention - do you have a link to where it can be seen?

It makes me wonder - when BB said he knew some things that hadn't been made known, was he perhaps alluding to the fact that Missy had been killed with a gun, whereas the media and the public thought something very different?

Agree. Also, it was after BB had seen more video than we ever did, that he said he believed the killer to be a woman. Possibly, he recognized the woman. I suspect that he knows who killed Missy and will never say who it was. I don't think he knew, until he saw the video. So, I doubt that this case will ever be solved. JMO JMO JMO....lol

 

[ilovewings]

Agree. Also, it was after BB had seen more video than we ever did, that he said he believed the killer to be a woman. Possibly, he recognized the woman. I suspect that he knows who killed Missy and will never say who it was. I don't think he knew, until he saw the video. So, I doubt that this case will ever be solved. JMO JMO JMO....lol

Who is BB? her husband? if so, and he could identify the woman, why would he not say who she was ? (because he was having an affair with her?)- Just asking cause I don't know a whole lot about this case.

 

[cady]

Who is BB? her husband? if so, and he could identify the woman, why would he not say who she was ? (because he was having an affair with her?)- Just asking cause I don't know a whole lot about this case.

Yes, her husband. I don't think it was a girlfriend, but someone he knows well, and at the time of his interview w People mag, he said publicly to the killer "Turn yourself in" "Do the right thing". jmo

 

[ilovewings]

Yes, her husband. I don't think it was a girlfriend, but someone he knows well, and at the time of his interview w People mag, he said publicly to the killer "Turn yourself in" "Do the right thing". jmo

If he does know who it is, you would think his love for his wife would trump any other concerns he might have, and he would divulge the name of the person. It is hard to believe this case cannot be solved with the killer on video!!!

 

[cady]

If he does know who it is, you would think his love for his wife would trump any other concerns he might have, and he would divulge the name of the person. It is hard to believe this case cannot be solved with the killer on video!!!

Maybe he loves the killer, too. Or did. That would make it very difficult for BB to be the finger-pointer. Maybe why he begged the person to turn" YOURSELF" in. Always JMO.

 

[cujenn81]

I watched the video once and thought female. Then asked my husband to watch without saying my opinion and he said female too. It really seems like the killer is a woman.

I remember watching the video and clearly seeing a brown ponytail swish over the suspect’s shoulder when he/she/it rounded the corner. Then I read the news article and LE referred to the suspect as a man. I thought... “Now, wait just a doggone minute! That was clearly a female.” So, I went back and watched the video again. As you all well know, there is no ponytail.

I still think it’s a female — ponytail or not. There was just something about the gait / mannerisms / posturing that is so typical of a female swishing her ponytail that I actually thought I’d seen one. The simple fact that LE went on to clarify that it could be a woman tells me that I’m far from the only one that disagreed with their initial assessment.