TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers,45, murdered in church/person in SWAT gear,18 Apr 2016 #24

[TTF14]

How/why in the world is this thread moving so fast with absolutely zero new information? I keep seeing it at the top of the list and open it with hopeful eyes and....nothing .

 

[dub]

Sorry if this has been discussed but I haven't seen anything about it recently... My biggest issue with a burglary is, if this truly was a happenstance encounter and the burglar had no idea MB would be there, why wouldn't the would-be burglar just drive their car up to either a.) their entry point, or b.) under the covered area exactly where MB parked? [edit: I realize now that b.) would be much less likely due to visibility from the road]

It would minimize the distance they would have to carry everything they took, plus it was pissing rain which could be problematic if electronics were on the "list". If they were concerned about exterior cameras they could just cover their license plate and would probably be fine, I'm pretty sure cops wouldn't search the ends of the earth for a random small town church robber. (the main exception with the car is if the "burglar" happened to have a VERY distinct vehicle that could be narrowed down very easily even without a plate).

To me the above also mostly applies to a vandalism scenario, except that allows a greater likelihood (albeit still pretty small) of a dropoff or arriving on foot.

 

[Bella15]

I can't see the killer taking the clothes off in the kitchen or bathroom as this might increase the chance of leaving trace evidence. (I believe LE stated that they didn't have the killer on video during or after the murder so if the killer did do that LE probably would not know. But if the killer knew there were cameras inside they would probably operate on the assumption that they were always being recorded and were less likely to take the clothes off inside the church.) I don't see them doing it outside either as the priority would be to leave the area ASAP to decrease the chance of their vehicle being seen leaving. In any event, though, I agree that the clothing and helmet ended up in garbage bags, deposited in a dumpster somewhere and are now in a landfill hidden inside those bags.

I also think the killer changed out of the clothes after s/he left the church. I think they either still have the clothes, or the clothes were dumped far away. It's common for LE to search dumpsters in the area near a crime scene, and since this killer seems so prepared, he/she probably figured local dumpsters would be searched. JMO

 

[Cannonball3804]

I am presuming that investigators have scientifically enhanced pics of SW peeps...............or anyone else that they are interested in looking at and into. We don't know what they have. But if they think perp is female, as they have obliquely said, they can enhance pics from FB's too.............they don't need search warrants for public pictures. JMO

LE has not said or implied that the perp is female. They have said that they don't know.

 

[moonchild7]

Drilling down on the object seen in the left hand. Here are some points to ponder:

Shape: Rectangular prism, solid?
Approx. Size: 2 ½” x 2 ½” x 8-10”

Weight: Less than 5 lbs. (based on ease of carry)
Color: White, silver, dark interior

Material: Metal, plastic, cardboard

Picked up (or) Brought in: Not seen in some video footage; possibly picked up in one of the rooms: sanctuary, kitchen, classroom, office (or) Could it have been stored in perp’s clothing?
Use: Tool, weapon, electronic device, clean-up, storage (ie, perp picked up box of gallon size baggies from kitchen to put tools, weapons in to prevent contamination, or roll of garbage bags)

Reason: Burglary: Object for later personal use, object to pawn

Murder: Object for use as weapon, defense

 

[liz b.]

Is it possible there's video of two perps spliced on the LE official video or flipped the video? not sure why they do that though.

I've thought there were two people on the video. The person showed hammering the wall at the end looks so different from the figure seen at the beginning. slimmer, more agile. walks more decisively. But, that would mean that two people dressed mostly alike in that strange costume... Perhaps it's just the camera angle. Just another reason I wish we could see more of the video. jmo

 

[rodee34]

Right now I lean more toward burglary. Backup theory is a thrill kill from someone who surveilled her but didn't know her. I don't think it was someone she knew, though I admit it's possible.

There is nothing in the media or on here that has eliminated the possibility of burglary. LE has presented that theory and then your theory, and then said they're not committed to any one theory.

Another possibility is vandalism without burglary. He could have wanted to tear crap up and wore the outfit for disguise, DNA containment, protection from rain, and to guard against injury from the damage he was inflicting on glass and metal.

IMO - Targeted murder.. Some of the reasons:
The fact that Missy was acting strange two weeks prior, according to her close friends and trainees.
She all but stopped going to her previous gym, according to an interview with the owner there.
The fact that she received a "creepy message" and showed it to her friend.
I believe I read on here that BB had warned her to be careful.
Then the SIL announces after the murder they thought the LE had the killer in mind, but later they decided it wasn't that person. Something wasn't right...
There is a HUGE difference between a church burglar and a cold blooded killer.

By taking all that into consideration, it might lead a reasonable person to think that this wasn't a random. IMO.

I really hope I'm wrong. I don't want this to be family, friends or work related, for everyone's sake.

 

[Inthedetails]

I've thought there were two people on the video. The person showed hammering the wall at the end looks so different from the figure seen at the beginning. slimmer, more agile. walks more decisively. But, that would mean that two people dressed mostly alike in that strange costume... Perhaps it's just the camera angle. Just another reason I wish we could see more of the video. jmo

I haven't given up on the idea that there could be two perps as well.

I haven't given up the idea of one perp either.

With this case, there is absolutely nothing firm. I still think an arrest is coming sooner rather than later, though.


jmopinion.

 

[Cannonball3804]

Sorry if this has been discussed but I haven't seen anything about it recently... My biggest issue with a burglary is, if this truly was a happenstance encounter and the burglar had no idea MB would be there, why wouldn't the would-be burglar just drive their car up to either a.) their entry point, or b.) under the covered area exactly where MB parked?

It would minimize the distance they would have to carry everything they took, plus it was pissing rain which could be problematic if electronics were on the "list". If they were concerned about exterior cameras they could just cover their license plate and would probably be fine, I'm pretty sure cops wouldn't search the ends of the earth for a random small town church robber. (the main exception with the car is if the "burglar" happened to have a VERY distinct vehicle that could be narrowed down very easily even without a plate).

To me the above also mostly applies to a vandalism scenario, except that allows a greater likelihood (albeit still pretty small) of a dropoff or arriving on foot.

I'm confused by the question in your first paragraph about entry point. If the killer drove, do we have any reason to believe that he didn't drive around to the North side and then enter the building from there?

As for electronics and the rain... If you've parked on the N side near a door that you've broken into, you are maybe a foot or two from car to building. Not going to get very wet in that short space.

Plus you have a vest that you could shield items under. And the church's lost and found probably had umpteen umbrellas that he could have used.

 

[Bootsctr]

Okay... I've seen about 3 or 4 people here mention this... can you tell the rest of us - WHO it might be?? Or is that not allowed? :thinking: I personally don't know "what" all these people look like that are on the SW list.

TIA! :wave:

The person who did the eye picture - have you sent that to MPD, maybe it will help them, if they have not already done this themselves... (you would think!)


:seeya:

okay - back to reading... still on page 5 cguru:

Have you seen the SW with the initials or the one with the actual names? I would skip ahead to about thread #10 which is here:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...T-gear-18-Apr-2016-10&p=12528313#post12528313

This is where discussion of the search warrants pretty much starts.

The media thread is here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...2016-Media-amp-Timeline-*NO-DISCUSSION*/page2

Much appreciation to the folks who update the Media thread. Good way to catch up quickly.

 

[Cannonball3804]

Sorry if this has been discussed but I haven't seen anything about it recently... My biggest issue with a burglary is, if this truly was a happenstance encounter and the burglar had no idea MB would be there, why wouldn't the would-be burglar just drive their car up to either a.) their entry point, or b.) under the covered area exactly where MB parked? [edit: I realize now that b.) would be much less likely due to visibility from the road]

It would minimize the distance they would have to carry everything they took, plus it was pissing rain which could be problematic if electronics were on the "list". If they were concerned about exterior cameras they could just cover their license plate and would probably be fine, I'm pretty sure cops wouldn't search the ends of the earth for a random small town church robber. (the main exception with the car is if the "burglar" happened to have a VERY distinct vehicle that could be narrowed down very easily even without a plate).

To me the above also mostly applies to a vandalism scenario, except that allows a greater likelihood (albeit still pretty small) of a dropoff or arriving on foot.

One more reply to you, as to why the perp didn't park where MB parked. That spot would have been visible from the road.

 

[lemon3bars]

Especially a Texas jury. We don't take well to bullsh** defense theories.

Respectfully, even in TX juries fall for bullsh** defenses when the defendant has a lot of money to spend. Durst chopping up his neighbor and the "Affluenza" kid come to mind; both in TX. But I don't anticipate SP being someone with those kind of financial resources.

 

[cady]

AHA! Umbrellas!......................there's your burglary! JMO

 

[ZacksDad]

Drilling down on the object seen in the left hand. Here are some points to ponder:

Shape: Rectangular prism, solid?
Approx. Size: 2 ½” x 2 ½” x 8-10”

Weight: Less than 5 lbs. (based on ease of carry)
Color: White, silver, dark interior

Material: Metal, plastic, cardboard

Picked up (or) Brought in: Not seen in some video footage; possibly picked up in one of the rooms: sanctuary, kitchen, classroom, office (or) Could it have been stored in perp’s clothing?
Use: Tool, weapon, electronic device, clean-up, storage (ie, perp picked up box of gallon size baggies from kitchen to put tools, weapons in to prevent contamination, or roll of garbage bags)

Reason: Burglary: Object for later personal use, object to pawn

Murder: Object for use as weapon, defense

I lean to trashbags from the kitchen. Possibly to put clothes and tools in after they murder her. Keep their car clean of DNA evidence.

Looks like a cardboard box they are squeezing.

 

[Lacyanna]

I'm seeing these kinds of things...

 

[Bootsctr]

Respectfully, even in TX juries fall for bullsh** defenses when the defendant has a lot of money to spend. Durst chopping up his neighbor and the "Affluenza" kid come to mind; both in TX. But I don't anticipate SP being someone with those kind of financial resources.

Sadly, yep that's the truth! The lead detective in Durst's case is still highly upset Durst got off for murdering his Galveston neighbor. Durst claimed self-defense to a guy who was chopped up and dead and never got to tell his side of the story. :notgood: And the "Affluenza" kid.... there are no words. These are 2 good reasons that LE is crossing their T's and dotting their I's very carefully in Missy's case.

 

[dub]

I'm confused by the question in your first paragraph about entry point. If the killer drove, do we have any reason to believe that he didn't drive around to the North side and then enter the building from there?

As for electronics and the rain... If you've parked on the N side near a door that you've broken into, you are maybe a foot or two from car to building. Not going to get very wet in that short space.

RSBM

re: driving around the building to the north, I was under the impression that the car would have been picked up by the camera(s) at the sporting goods store. If that's not the case, then you're right, we'd have no reason to believe he didn't do that.

re: the north side by the entry point, yes you're correct, that was my point--as you said, it would be an optimal parking spot for a robber. I was going by my (possibly incorrect) rationale that a car would have been seen on the sporting goods store camera at some point if it headed to that point. If there could easily have been a totally undetected car at that entry point, then my post can be disregarded.

 

[rsd1200]

If this was someone robbing and vandalizing the church, they'd do it quickly, get in, get out, not stand around, look through stuff, and wander around the halls. They actually stand and look at the camera at one point. They already knew before hand that those cameras were there and did not mind one bit b/c this is why they dressed like they did, they think they've figured out the perfect disguise. They're nonchalantly wandering around looking at the camera almost like an "in-your-face" action.

This person scoped this church out in advance, and knew that the cameras in this parking lot were out, what kind of cameras were inside, and they knew that there was no alarm to go off when they broke out the windows, (not only not an audible one, but nor one that was silent but alerted straight to a 911 service). That's just too many coincidences in their favor especially combined w/the fact they happened to pick the perfect attire.

They very well could have parked a dark car, on the backside of the building, and drove out w/o any lights, just seconds/minutes before the first person got there. It's rainy, dark, who's going to notice them? Even if they do, what kind of description would they be able to give?

 

[cady]

I need to defend defense attorneys here. I'm not a lawyer, but worked in paralegal internship for a public defender (not in TX, thank the stars). Defenses are built on prosecutorial overreach, beginning with the charges. They are based on legal technicality errors and even judicial errors. Usually, they wind up in a plea deal between attorneys. The purpose of the defense is to legally speak for the client. If anyone in TX or anywhere else hates defense attorneys, they had better hope that if they are accused of a crime that they did not commit, based upon the elements of the crime, they will have intelligent representation. Prosecutors always overcharge , expecting that there will probably be a reduction of charge down the road. A defense attorney needs to know what a prosecutor is thinking, in order to frame their defense. It is based on law. Not on nonsense. JMO

 

[dub]

One more reply to you, as to why the perp didn't park where MB parked. That spot would have been visible from the road.

Yep, I realized that about 1 minute after I posted haha my bad and edited to reflect that.