TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers,45, murdered in church/person in SWAT gear,18 Apr 2016 #10

[Breck80]

i'm unsure about texas- but all warrants in my jurisdiction are not public record. they are very often and MOST often (when LE so desires, for purposes of an investigation) sealed. this one wasn't. intentionally. it was thought out and for strategic reasons not sealed.

Completely agree! Every investigation I've worked on typically seals this information, especially in what could be a capital murder charge. Strategic 100%.

 

[SandyQLS]

Sparky, can you post your enhanced video again?

I think it was Kodiak who posted this, in my notes it says "enhanced"

https://youtu.be/mSWD1TvaGZ4


Sparky posted the color inverted face thread 8, p.17, post#243. She may have reposted Kodiak's video in some post somewhere iirc.

 

[arkansasmimi]

TITLE 1. CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

CHAPTER 18. SEARCH WARRANTS

Art. 18.01. SEARCH WARRANT. (a) A "search warrant" is a written order, issued by a magistrate and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for any property or thing and to seize the same and bring it before such magistrate or commanding him to search for and photograph a child and to deliver to the magistrate any of the film exposed pursuant to the order.
(b) No search warrant shall issue for any purpose in this state unless sufficient facts are first presented to satisfy the issuing magistrate that probable cause does in fact exist for its issuance. A sworn affidavit setting forth substantial facts establishing probable cause shall be filed in every instance in which a search warrant is requested. Except as provided by Article 18.011, the affidavit is public information if executed, and the magistrate's clerk shall make a copy of the affidavit available for public inspection in the clerk's office during normal business hours.
MORE at link http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.18.htm

Art. 18.011. SEALING OF AFFIDAVIT. (a) An attorney representing the state in the prosecution of felonies may request a district judge or the judge of an appellate court to seal an affidavit presented under Article 18.01(b). The judge may order the affidavit sealed if the attorney establishes a compelling state interest in that:
(1) public disclosure of the affidavit would jeopardize the safety of a victim, witness, or confidential informant or cause the destruction of evidence; or
(2) the affidavit contains information obtained from a court-ordered wiretap that has not expired at the time the attorney representing the state requests the sealing of the affidavit.
(b) An order sealing an affidavit under this section expires on the 31st day after the date on which the search warrant for which the affidavit was presented is executed. After an original order sealing an affidavit is issued under this article, an attorney representing the state in the prosecution of felonies may request, and a judge may grant, before the 31st day after the date on which the search warrant for which the affidavit was presented is executed, on a new finding of compelling state interest, one 30-day extension of the original order.
(c) On the expiration of an order issued under Subsection (b) and any extension, the affidavit must be unsealed.
(d) An order issued under this section may not:
(1) prohibit the disclosure of information relating to the contents of a search warrant, the return of a search warrant, or the inventory of property taken pursuant to a search warrant; or
(2) affect the right of a defendant to discover the contents of an affidavit.

Added by Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 355 (S.B. 244), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2007. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.18.htm#18.011

 

[lawbelle]

Very funny! The user name has nothing to do with booze unfortunately! LOL
:laughcry:

MS or something similar like me? these days i'm a little teapot- no, i'm a BIG teapot. tip me over and watch the seismograph.

 

[Littletipsy]

exactly. the person who planned so efficiently their attire and timing would not put the phone there. its not a phone. its a screenshot of one moment- blurry and its not a phone IMHO. however, it would explain why LE keeps saying they think the perp had a phone. HOWEVER, we don't know if LE has shown us all of the video. or even best quality video. as a matter of fact, the odds are they HAVE NOT. there's likely more video and likely better quality or FBI expert enhanced video. they know lots more than we do. anything they release is designed to send a message and elicit a response from their suspect.

I seem to recall reading they have 30 minutes of video, but just released those few minutes.

 

[al66pine]

I don't recall a woman killing another woman in such a brutal way. Strikes me as odd.

"Karla Faye Tucker (...1959 – ...1998) was the first woman to be executed in the United States since 1984, and the first in Texas since 1863. She was convicted of murder in Texas in 1984 and put to death fourteen years later." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karla_Faye_Tucker

This example may already have been given (I'm hours behind in reading thread, sorry). Oh, just noticed her last name. Hmm.

 

[Starry Night]

I seem to recall reading they have 30 minutes of video, but just released those few minutes.

Could you please post a link for what you recall reading? Thanks!

 

[rgrace7475]

best response all night! made me go mix a tottie (and littletipsy's user name already had me considering it- i'm weak)

I hear ya! Just made myself a grilled cheese to go with my fav beer Lagunitas.

 

[TeaTime]

Great link Snow Flower.

"Midlothian police clarified no one in the new documents was ever considered a suspect. They say they now have several new persons of interest they are pursuing not named in the documents."

So, move along. No one named is currently being considered.

Currently, no.

 

[worknout77]

From what I heard, they are the parents of one of their daughters friends and they couldn't figure out why they were on there.

 

[MathildaM]

I am trying to catch-up so apologies if this has already been posted. In response to the very good idea that where the murderer touches the wall on the video, could be post the murder and due to them being shaken, LE confirmed no video exists post the murder.

"At approximately 0418 hours, the victim Terri Bevers is observed entering the buildingthrough the main door under the awning area. The video shows Terri Bevers walkingtoward where the suspects location. Neither the suspect nor victim, were seen again onvideo. The victim was later found deceased at the south west comer of the interior of thebuilding."

 

[SandyQLS]

There are a LOT of LE agencies working this case. I have to believe that they are assisting MPD with the timing of the release of these warrants, as well as helping them craft their statements to the press. JMO

I agree. And there is no reason to believe that they have not got 10 more warrants for 10 other cell phones belonging to 10 more people, and for Sprint, Verizon or whichever companies. arkansasmimi found all the cell towers near Creekside and it was more than just AT&T. The one warrant only talks about LinkedIn - they haven't released one addressed to Mr. Zuckerberg. How would the killer, if a close person to MB, be feeling today seeing those detailed warrants and not seeing themselves on the list? Overconfidant or paranoid? They are smoking someone out. All MOO.

JMO - but remember when we had a one-legged ballerina? Perhaps CT is such obvious pick with the previously broken ankle; this is all part of the suspect's elaborate disguise, walk like a duck, walk like someone with an injured foot, walk like a man, walk like a woman, walk so oddly that LE will wonder if it two different people, walk like a one-legged ballerina - because the suspect does walk differently at different points in the videos. And all that disguise and acting manages to cast aspersions on certain select people. I hope they found some DNA.

 

[Littletipsy]

If that's a white cell phone, I call 'female'. Call me sexist, but I have yet to see any man with a white cell phone.

One more reason that I think it's female is that this video shows it walking down the hall touching the wall as it walks - it's another form of balancing yourself. Wearing unfamiliar and bulky clothing and shoes could make anyone a little less stable while walking, but it's an especially female behavior. We also saw this balancing behavior in surveillance video of another disguised murderer in a stairwell - turned out to be female.

In the very beginning, upper left portion of screen, very briefly starting at :07.

[video=youtube;ePS8TJ6UAqY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePS8TJ6UAqY[/video]

ETA: lol, as usual, in the time it took me to write my post, y'all have said it already! white phones = girls. Mine's white, too.

Could very well be. I think it's a flask. When "it" comes out of the very first room on that video and is steadying itself on the wall, "it" looks tipsy. A few cocktails in you before doing something as treacherous as that could be a possibility.

 

[lawbelle]

TITLE 1. CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

CHAPTER 18. SEARCH WARRANTS

Art. 18.01. SEARCH WARRANT. (a) A "search warrant" is a written order, issued by a magistrate and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for any property or thing and to seize the same and bring it before such magistrate or commanding him to search for and photograph a child and to deliver to the magistrate any of the film exposed pursuant to the order.
(b) No search warrant shall issue for any purpose in this state unless sufficient facts are first presented to satisfy the issuing magistrate that probable cause does in fact exist for its issuance. A sworn affidavit setting forth substantial facts establishing probable cause shall be filed in every instance in which a search warrant is requested. Except as provided by Article 18.011, the affidavit is public information if executed, and the magistrate's clerk shall make a copy of the affidavit available for public inspection in the clerk's office during normal business hours.
MORE at link http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.18.htm

Art. 18.011. SEALING OF AFFIDAVIT. (a) An attorney representing the state in the prosecution of felonies may request a district judge or the judge of an appellate court to seal an affidavit presented under Article 18.01(b). The judge may order the affidavit sealed if the attorney establishes a compelling state interest in that:
(1) public disclosure of the affidavit would jeopardize the safety of a victim, witness, or confidential informant or cause the destruction of evidence; or
(2) the affidavit contains information obtained from a court-ordered wiretap that has not expired at the time the attorney representing the state requests the sealing of the affidavit.
(b) An order sealing an affidavit under this section expires on the 31st day after the date on which the search warrant for which the affidavit was presented is executed. After an original order sealing an affidavit is issued under this article, an attorney representing the state in the prosecution of felonies may request, and a judge may grant, before the 31st day after the date on which the search warrant for which the affidavit was presented is executed, on a new finding of compelling state interest, one 30-day extension of the original order.
(c) On the expiration of an order issued under Subsection (b) and any extension, the affidavit must be unsealed.
(d) An order issued under this section may not:
(1) prohibit the disclosure of information relating to the contents of a search warrant, the return of a search warrant, or the inventory of property taken pursuant to a search warrant; or
(2) affect the right of a defendant to discover the contents of an affidavit.

Added by Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 355 (S.B. 244), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2007. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.18.htm#18.011

the key wording here is "destruction of evidence." the whole purpose of a warrant is to obtain evidence. they are almost always sealed (and i mean nearly 100% of the time in my experience). LATER- when someone is arrested or has rights as a defendant, things change. there is no defendant. and until then, there will ALWAYS be potential "destruction of evidence" should the warrant be made public. This one was released strategically and for some reason to do with the profile of a specific suspect. There are other warrants that we do not know about.

 

[Littletipsy]

Could you please post a link for what you recall reading? Thanks!

i am searching for this now...

 

[FelicityLemon]

Completely agree! Every investigation I've worked on typically seals this information, especially in what could be a capital murder charge. Strategic 100%.

It's frustrating because of differences in location.

Florida Sunshine Law: Teresa Sievers - pretty much everything is public and published. We know some are being held back, but pages numbering in double digit thousands for this single case are available.

Somewhere upstream the question was asked: "What moron brings a cell phone to a murder?" Oh, stooges galore in Teresa Sievers' murder. One of the murderers turned on his cell and it synced with the GPS in the rental car and he had used his REAL full name as his email address log in.

:drumroll:

 

[rgrace7475]

Please dont take this as being snarky.

Just My Honest Opinion.... The reason (s) that these Search Warrants are being released, is because they were filed and are Public Records. They were obtained because as each one says the reason for Probable Cause to obtain whatever the Search Warrant is for. If they don't have valid Probable Cause they would not apply for one nor should a Judge sign off if it isn't sufficient. Unless the case is sealed, then all the documents are a matter of public record. Media whomever released them paid for those copies, obtained from the courthouse under Freedom of Information Act. (FOIA) JMHO That NBC affiliate has people camped out at the courthouse so when docs are filed they know right away.

Makes sense. So in your personal opinion, do you think they already know who did it?

 

[lawbelle]

Could very well be. I think it's a flask. When "it" comes out of the very first room on that video and is steadying itself on the wall, "it" looks tipsy. A few cocktails in you before doing something as treacherous as that could be a possibility.

don't judge it for it's cocktails!
judge it for it's murderous plan.
it did look tipsy. i agree. another reason to think it knew the victim. well.

 

[lawbelle]

Makes sense. So in your personal opinion, do you think they already know who did it?

i do.
just by how LE is releasing information. it seems so designed. they (at the very least) have one major suspect.
(i know the question was not directed to me)

 

[lawbelle]

It's frustrating because of differences in location.

Florida Sunshine Law: Teresa Sievers - pretty much everything is public and published. We know some are being held back, but pages numbering in double digit thousands for this single case are available.

Somewhere upstream the question was asked: "What moron brings a cell phone to a murder?" Oh, stooges galore in Teresa Sievers' murder. One of the murderers turned on his cell and it synced with the GPS in the rental car and he had used his REAL full name as his email address log in.

:drumroll:

it wasn't available 3 weeks after the murder. and you really don't know if its published- not if its sealed.