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

[lonetraveler]

That picture gives me chills.

I know many people have analyzed the car at the SWFA and think it's a thief casing the store. Could be! But I think it's SP (and perhaps a partner) who stopped by that parking lot to "regroup" and go over the plans, etc. before heading to the church.

When the car turns off the lights upon entering the lot, I think it was to be less noticeable. When the car then encounters vehicles by the loading dock and turns on the headlights, there is speculation I've seen that the person is then trying to look "normal," not like a sneaky thief.

As someone who is not a thief, I think the headlights were turned on out of habit to see better, to see what the other cars were, etc. I see the headlights as the opposite of someone being stealth, but someone who doesn't have criminal habits.

Same with sitting under the lamplight in the parking lot. I would park there if I had to read something, look at a map, list of items, check messages, etc. I'd rather sit under the light than turn on the dome light. Parking under the lamplight doesn't seem like something an experienced criminal would do.

When the driver turns on the blinker out of habit when exiting the lot when a blinker wasn't necessary, that seems, imo, more likely to be a woman and likely not a criminally-minded one. speculation.

I do think the person at the store could very well be SP, but I don't think it's a perp spending time in the rain looking for a place to burglar. Speculation, of course.

Brainstorming.

jmo

I've always thought that they parked under the parking lot light in order to finish putting their costume on. Finding black items in the dark is difficult but turning on the inside car light would not work, so park under the light.

 

[lonetraveler]

What is extreme to me with that outfit for committing a crime is that it is so cumbersome. It doesn't seem like an outfit of choice if you had to hurry away. Does that mean the perp was very confident s/he wouldn't have to rush or run to make an escape?

jmo

I think that you just hit the nail on the head. With the gun in hand the perp felt very confident that the element of surprise and the gun was all they needed to do the deed.

 

[lonetraveler]

We’ve seen how those cameras operate. Plus police told us there were issues with them shutting off prematurely/not activating soon enough. If the NW corner camera coverage is today the way it was then, I’ve only been able to identify ONE camera, and it points East. So it wouldn’t be unlikely at all for the killer to run North, turn East, and move beyond that camera’s operation. Keep in mind, too, that “activation” and “recording” are two separate functions.

Also, the NE could have been an exit point that the killer had already broken through prior to the murder. In other words, breaking and exiting weren’t necessarily done consecutively.

I think it’s possible that if the killer DID leave through a different door than they entered, that could be exactly the kind of detail that police might want to guard as “guilty evidence” that only the killer would know. Spann might have even thrown in that term “presumably” deliberately. But I think the truth comes down to where the killer parked. They would want to exit post-murder at a point that would put them closest to their vehicle, I believe.

I'm thinking that the perp would have to just go to the nearest exit door, unlock it and just walk right through.

 

[SteveS]

We’ve seen how those cameras operate. Plus police told us there were issues with them shutting off prematurely/not activating soon enough. If the NW corner camera coverage is today the way it was then, I’ve only been able to identify ONE camera, and it points East. So it wouldn’t be unlikely at all for the killer to run North, turn East, and move beyond that camera’s operation. Keep in mind, too, that “activation” and “recording” are two separate functions.

Also, the NE could have been an exit point that the killer had already broken through prior to the murder. In other words, breaking and exiting weren’t necessarily done consecutively.

I think it’s possible that if the killer DID leave through a different door than they entered, that could be exactly the kind of detail that police might want to guard as “guilty evidence” that only the killer would know. Spann might have even thrown in that term “presumably” deliberately. But I think the truth comes down to where the killer parked. They would want to exit post-murder at a point that would put them closest to their vehicle, I believe.

Sorry, but the farther you depart from old Occam, the less it adds up to me.

Now we have
1 perp wants to fiddle around outside in the rain to breach NE door to gain passageway, and THEN go breach the kitchen door too from the outside, rather than simply walking in the first breach and - if concerned about egress points later - explore to see how easy it is to exit elsewhere if needed (which would not only be easier, but also way more time efficient)
2 the interior cams don't work like cams work, but only see slow movement
3 theorizing NW cam might not work, or is deficient, when its a convenience rather than deriving from anything we have been told about NW cams
4 now NE cams suddenly don't work at just the wrong moment, despite working earlier
5 and to cover all the holes, the old 'conspiracy theory' explanation -- LE might have been fibbing (wherever we need to discount what they said) because they are trying to create a hoax narrative to hide a NE exit from us

 

[gliving]

To me, the SUV seen leaving at the church at 0430 is more interesting than the Nissan at SWFA.

At 0435 the first camper arrives...

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachments/darksuv-jpg.125285/

 

[Gumshoe Stories]

I'm thinking that the perp would have to just go to the nearest exit door, unlock it and just walk right through.

Exits on commercial buildings can’t be locked. It’s a fire code thing. So they have the panic bars and you can always push to exit even if it’s locked from the outside.

Why would a bloody murderer go out the nearest exit, into the rain and facing the highway, when their car is on the other side of the building?

 

[No it's not]

Exits on commercial buildings can’t be locked. It’s a fire code thing. So they have the panic bars and you can always push to exit even if it’s locked from the outside.

Why would a bloody murderer go out the nearest exit, into the rain and facing the highway, when their car is on the other side of the building?

Less evidence, panic, got lost?

-Nin

 

[SteveS]

Exits on commercial buildings can’t be locked. It’s a fire code thing. So they have the panic bars and you can always push to exit even if it’s locked from the outside.

Exactly. So there's no purpose to beat in multiple doors to create multiple potential exits for later, as you can exit from ANY after gaining access elsewhere.

Which points to the idea that the perp tried to gain access in the NE unsuccessfully before finally having better success at the kitchen door. And exited via kitchen opening also, as LE has told us.

 

[SteveS]

To me, the SUV seen leaving at the church at 0430 is more interesting than the Nissan at SWFA.

At 0435 the first camper arrives...

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachments/darksuv-jpg.125285/

Bingo. Makes way more sense to me as well, as I find the time of day incredibly relevant.

 

[Gumshoe Stories]

Exactly. So there's no purpose to beat in multiple doors to create multiple potential exits for later, as you can exit from ANY after gaining access elsewhere.

Which points to the idea that the perp tried to gain access in the NE unsuccessfully before finally having better success at the kitchen door. And exited via kitchen opening also, as LE has told us.

There is room for speculation, which is all I was trying to say before. Kitchen door, window with bent screen, a NE entrance all busted up. Perp could have done all three all at once while outside and then left to wait for alarm response. Or might have done some of that damage later while leaving.

Bingo. Makes way more sense to me as well, as I find the time of day incredibly relevant.

Here is the inside story on this SUV you love so much. A guy driving to work believed that he saw a small dark SUV leaving the church around 4:30. It was sometime later when this was brought up to police. The guy thought it was Monday the 18th when it happened. He remembered absolutely nothing else. Police wanted to try hypnosis. He refused, because hypnosis is of the devil. Eyewitness testimony - the most unreliable form of testimony.

 

[Gumshoe Stories]

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

Dropbox - Geofence Search Warrant.pdf - Simplify your life

 

[SteveS]

A guy driving to work believed that he saw a small dark SUV leaving the church around 4:30. It was sometime later when this was brought up to police. The guy thought it was Monday the 18th when it happened. He remembered absolutely nothing else.

I get it. He could have been mistaken a bit on either day or time.

OTOH - I see other factors that help me think it reasonably deserves more weight.
1 CCOC is isolated from everything else on that side of the road, and a car exiting the church at THAT hour would be most unusual. It's only traffic in and out of CCOC on that drive, nothing else. So to me, that helps support the idea that he would remember the fact that he saw a vehicle exiting CCOC, which made an impression.
2 If he saw one, and only one, car leaving CCOC at that hour, in weeks or months (or ever), which seems incredibly likely, it's not unlikely that he might have remembered generalities (like dark, and SUV) because it was so very very odd.
3 Since he's driving to work, the 4:30 time of day is probably pretty close. Anyone who commutes knows right about where they are on the highway at the usual time. I drive about 45 minutes and without looking at a clock know what time it should be within just a few minutes when I pass every exit on the way, if I leave at the usual time and there's not unusual traffic. Maybe it was not exactly 4:30, but it would have been close.
4 If he had the wrong day, he probably didn't miss it by much. He can narrow it down to the days he works. And logically, what are the odds that some other vehicle was exiting CCOC at about 4:30 on a different work day around that date?

 

[Itsapuzzle]

Spontaneous random part 3 .... I now believe the driver is wearing a v-neck top, I think they were a bit side-on looking at building .... h'mm ... I put the magnified glasses on and it does seem to be so. The only thing is it looks to be a short sleeved top. Are there any pics in the previous threads that show the driver more clearly?

 

[Gumshoe Stories]

I get it. He could have been mistaken a bit on either day or time.

OTOH - I see other factors that help me think it reasonably deserves more weight.
1 CCOC is isolated from everything else on that side of the road, and a car exiting the church at THAT hour would be most unusual. It's only traffic in and out of CCOC on that drive, nothing else. So to me, that helps support the idea that he would remember the fact that he saw a vehicle exiting CCOC, which made an impression.
2 If he saw one, and only one, car leaving CCOC at that hour, in weeks or months (or ever), which seems incredibly likely, it's not unlikely that he might have remembered generalities (like dark, and SUV) because it was so very very odd.
3 Since he's driving to work, the 4:30 time of day is probably pretty close. Anyone who commutes knows right about where they are on the highway at the usual time. I drive about 45 minutes and without looking at a clock know what time it should be within just a few minutes when I pass every exit on the way, if I leave at the usual time and there's not unusual traffic. Maybe it was not exactly 4:30, but it would have been close.
4 If he had the wrong day, he probably didn't miss it by much. He can narrow it down to the days he works. And logically, what are the odds that some other vehicle was exiting CCOC at about 4:30 on a different work day around that date?

I just have to point out that the approach you are taking consistently gives every possible benefit of the doubt to the SUV while at the same time explaining away every new connection involving the Altima, no matter how compelling.

 

[zee007]

I would say the outfit does indicate that they’re doing more than just casing. I don’t think you’d take the risk of either wearing or carrying such an outfit with you (awkward if stopped by a cop) unless you thought you’d need it that night.

Possibly the perp could have been communicating with others while parked, discussing whether it was a good target and how many accomplices might be needed. If such communication occurred, you’d think the geofence warrant in 2019 would have picked that up.

Makes sense.

Regarding the geofence warrant, yes something should've been picked up if there were communications.

According to this video:

they think that a notebook may have been used by the Altima driver and they can allegedly see them tossing it on the dashboard just before they leave the SWFA store.

If this was true, then it may explain the following:

1. Why there was nothing picked up in the geofence warrants (no electronics/mobile communication used).
2. Why the Altima driver parked underneath the light (so that they can see/write some notes on their pad).
3. Why they parked for a couple of minutes before leaving (taking/reviewing notes).

Not saying that this will be the only explanation for the above observations but it could be a piece to the puzzle.

 

[Inthedetails]

I've always thought that they parked under the parking lot light in order to finish putting their costume on. Finding black items in the dark is difficult but turning on the inside car light would not work, so park under the light.

Apparently criminals know to park under lights. Who knew?

jmo

 

[Mistree]

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

Dropbox - Geofence Search Warrant.pdf - Simplify your life

Hey GS,
On page 3 and the 2nd timing listed did you notice how it was worded?
“Entering and walking throughout the building “,
Does this mean they have footage now of SP breaking INTO the building?

 

[gliving]

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

Dropbox - Geofence Search Warrant.pdf - Simplify your life

Thanks Gumshoe Stories! As there was a bit of a thread cleanup last night so would you please mind posting again what you thought was important regarding the SUV seen leaving the church and this warrant? tia I've slept since then and lost my train of thought.

 

[gliving]

Apparently criminals know to park under lights. Who knew?

jmo

It isn't like the driver is doing anything clandestine in the dark as it appears most of the parking lot is lit up like daylight even when the car has it's headlights off. Plus every time they hit their brakes, the bright taillights come on. Maybe they pulled in to wait out a rain downpour. jmo

 

[Curious21]

That's certainly possible. But we really don't have any certainty that she was beaten with anything. All we know for sure is that the weapon used was a gun -- and it's possible that she was simply shot and LE kept silent about that fact, thereby letting public misconceptions arise that it was a physical attack, as a means to keep the facts of an ongoing investigation away from public knowledge. As lhughessk has noted, LE's "descriptions" of the attack and cause of death were completely reined in (and somewhat adjusted) once they got the autopsy results, with fuzzier wording, rather than being made more explicit and clearer.

She wasn't killed with a gun, wounds to the head and chest can be confirmed and they weren't with a gun.