TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers,45, murdered in church/person in SWAT gear,18 Apr 2016 #28

[marble]

Hi all, I'm way behind on catching up with these posts, so I apologize in advance.
BatBrat, I think you've done a tremendous job with analyzing the physical characteristics of the SP from the video.
Maybe I'm missing something and it's already been mentioned, but *why* is there such a large range of height estimates from LE?
I mean, if I were a detective trying to figure this out, rather than (or at the very least, in addition to) calling in the pros to analyze the videotape and angles, I'd film recreations of key moments when the SP was caught on tape -using the same camera angle/equipment and with people of various heights dressed in similar gear. Wouldn't that get them a lot closer to a realistic estimate?

(oh wait- on preview WannaBDetective asked the same thing)

 

[11frogs]

Then why all the focus on BB s alibi. I think We pretty well all agree already he wasn't there from the video. An alibi proves they weren't there.

Even though he is not SP does not mean he was not involved. Everyone on here can think up multiple scenarios. I have mine but hopefully one day soon the person(s) responsible will have a story.

An alibi is just that - an alibi.

 

[Sparky]

Looking at the avatar, wondering if it was a guy or gal, made me realize. I don't even know if Sparky is a guy or gal. At least give me A Little closure on that one.

Sparky is a View attachment 96818


Who's wanting to see justice for Missy and I believe we'll see it when LE is ready to show their hand. Jmo

 

[observation]

So far- **please vote*
8 male SP
12 female SP
11 undecided
Will update again. Hey, where is Covermecagney?? Miss you!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GA_Peach]

Of course. The discussion is over the ALIBI as to who was where at the time of the murder. My point is that it's absurd to keep arguing over whether BB or RB could have been in the video, and in Midlothian, when it is a verified dead end.

Unless you and others want to say that LE are incompetent, then RB and BB were elsewhere,and could not have been in Midlothian. Period.

I'm not sure why it's so hard to agree on the obvious, and then work from there. Instead of arguing over where RB and BB might have been, when that's already been figured out by LE, we should build on that as a fact and see where that does or doesn't take us.

LE did say that at this point, based on what they've found, none of the family (which would include RB and BB, contextually) are "at the focus of this investigation." It sounds clear to me like they have found nothing to link either to this crime.

I am certainly not arguing over whether it is RB or BB in the video. I do think that their alibis may be relevant to the solving the case, but LE clearly wants to keep that close to the vest. That's fine. I do think that the alibis of all of the people in the SW will be crucial to solving this case since I believe that SP is linked to at least one of them.

With respect to your comment about thinking LE is incompetent, it's actually quite the opposite. LE is quite calculating. I believe that they are making statements leading SP to believe that the are focusing on person A while they are really focusing on person B. They are waiting for person B to relax and slip up. There have been many seemingly inconsistent statements made by LE (no exterior cameras were working that morning but yet they have exterior footage from somewhere, height of SP - will mention later). On top of that, LE has released very little information through the press; most of our information has come from the SWs. It's a logical assumption, I think, for one to believe that each piece of information is being released for a specific reason.

How does what I mentioned above relate to the alibi(s)? In my mind, it is quite possible that LE is stating that the alibis are corroborated so as not to tip their hand. It is quite possible that RB and BB are not at the center of the investigation. I will freely concede that. However, when LE chose to use their limited information release to say that no person is completely off the table, it gives me pause. LE also clearly communicated this to BB because he parroted the same information after he met with them (shortly after the May 20 presser). If they are so sure that RB and BB are not involved, why not just clear them? LE is unwilling to do that at this point. That doesn't make RB or BB the SP, and it doesn't mean that they are involved. It simply means that they can't be taken off the table.... exactly as LE themselves stated!

I totally believe LE doesn't think either were in Mdln that day. BUT it's hard to show a connection if you don't even know who SP is.

Exactly. Alibis are important because it allows LE to make connections.

I've posted dozens of diagrams that illustrate my estimations of what the person's height and body are. If you've noticed any of my posts, you'll know I believe LE has released inaccurate height numbers - for whatever reason. I also don't exactly know what others are seeing when they look at the video, but in my opinion what I am seeing excludes others on the list. Finally, I won't really comment here on whether I believe someone was or wasn't caught on camera.

RBBM

This was the point I was making above. This seems to be a theme in this case. What are the reasons?

 

[WannaBDetective]

rsbm

Justified by what, exactly? I don't think an assertion based only on assumptions, and refuted by all known facts, counts as a 'justified' statement or opinion. It's nothing more than an assumption, a prejudgment.

To me this is bloody shirt part II.

 

[observation]

I really enjoy looking at our votes so far. Also, I really don't think that alibis really solve cases- it's the MOTIVE. The alibis are a crucial piece of the puzzle and helps to rule-in or rule-out persons of interest. But that motive=guilty party (parties). IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GA_Peach]

I really enjoy looking at our votes so far. Also, I really think that alibis don't really solve cases- it's the MOTIVE. IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Being able to poke holes in a person's alibi often leads to the perp. Once the perp is identified, the motive will abundantly obvious IMO.

 

[arkansasmimi]

13 pages behind and Google search no arrest. 2 days will be 2 months since MB murder. This last month went by fast.. off to catch up

 

[zoeneli]

rsbm

Justified by what, exactly? I don't think an assertion based only on assumptions, and refuted by all known facts, counts as a 'justified' statement or opinion. It's nothing more than an assumption, a prejudgment.

No assumptions. All I am saying is this. Some on here use logic (or claim physics) to state the following:

1. RB and BB gave an alibi
2. LE said their alibis have been verified.
3. LE can not lie
Therefore: RB or BB can not possibly have committed the crime.

There is a flaw in that logic as statement 3 is false. Do I think statement 3 is the case. NO, I do not think LE is telling a lie when they say that they validated their alibis, but they are legally allowed to do that. There are also several scenarios around what LE is saying to the public that can be debated (carefully worded, not giving updates in new information differs). The bottom line is, I know many think differently than me on several issues. It doesn't make me right. I think it is VERY unlikely this was just a robbery gone wrong. I think there is strong evidence against that. It is however, still possible, so I feel it is only fair to respect the opinion of those who feel that may be the case. That is all I was trying to state. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[11frogs]

Since LE stated that they did not capture the crime on video and that SP was not seen afterwards. My point is someone else could have there. SP may have been a diversion for the real killer. SP could have taken the first blow and let the real killer in the door away from cameras. And that's why they see no one during murder of MB or after. JMO.

 

[WannaBDetective]

I really enjoy looking at our votes so far. Also, I really don't think that alibis really solve cases- it's the MOTIVE. The alibis are a crucial piece of the puzzle and helps to rule-in or rule-out persons of interest. But that motive=guilty party (parties). IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree Motive is paramount. Trying to make the connection between alibi and motive. BB says he was fishing in MS. RB was golfing and RV-ing in San Diego. How does that give them or relate to motive?

 

[observation]

I agree Motive is paramount. Trying to make the connection between alibi and motive. BB says he was fishing in MS. RB was golfing and RV-ing in San Diego. How does that give them or relate to motive?

IMO- guilty parties to crime do not have to be present, so an iron clad alibi would be quite meaningless. It relates back to motive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[arkansasmimi]

Should clarify "What I've seen." What I've seen is that they went from very visible - public comments/postings to completely shutting down the public communication and page. That is the first step attorneys take. She got as SW. She's a savvy business woman. I see your point that step does involve some speculation.

Respectfully but isn't that the same as BB did? CW and others on the SW? zipped up their social media pages? Couple have JMHO.

 

[Montjoy]

No assumptions. All I am saying is this. Some on here use logic (or claim physics) to state the following:

1. RB and BB gave an alibi
2. LE said their alibis have been verified.
3. LE can not lie
Therefore: RB or BB can not possibly have committed the crime.

There is a flaw in that logic as statement 3 is false. Do I think statement 3 is the case. NO, I do not think LE is telling a lie when they say that they validated their alibis, but they are legally allowed to do that. There are also several scenarios around what LE is saying to the public that can be debated (carefully worded, not giving updates in new information differs). The bottom line is, I know many think differently than me on several issues. It doesn't make me right. I think it is VERY unlikely this was just a robbery gone wrong. I think there is strong evidence against that. It is however, still possible, so I feel it is only fair to respect the opinion of those who feel that may be the case. That is all I was trying to state. Nothing more, nothing less.

Their alibis were independently corroborated. Neither alibi relies on the person in question being alone or unseen by others -- quite the contrary. So to suggest that LE is lying implies that there is a vast conspiracy of silence surrounding RB and BB. I find that totally implausible, and it would be extremely irresponsible for LE to perpetuate such a conspiracy based lie, as it could put the lives of others at risk, since they could presumably refute the alibi and send someone to prison at a moment's notice. So, it is totally implausible, hence unjustifiable.

eta: your theory also would presume that the media are complicit in perpetuating the lie. Perhaps some media might fall for it -- but certainly not all, and the truth would come out, since there are certainly many sources that have corroborated their alibis.

 

[observation]

Respectfully but isn't that the same as BB did? CW and others on the SW? zipped up their social media pages? Couple have JMHO.

So, maybe CW, BB and CT all have legal representation. If I was named in a SW as a communicator with a homicide victim, you better bet I would have an Esq.
Justice for MB.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[roadrunnermt]

Respectfully, you are wrong on your assumptions about LE on Chambers case. He was NOT on radar until his DNA from his second killing was put in the Codis database and got a match on Chambers perp DNA.

This is a prime example of how LE can and will say and/do anything they wish whether truthful or not. Know any lawyers? Any investigators? Any LE? Deceitfulness helps them solve crimes. It's part of their tools. I'll never comprehend why some people believe 100% fact just because the law said it.

Imo. The best way to have the most likely known suspect arrested. Is by us voicing our opinions of how the Midlothian police department and the feds are not as equipped as we thought. Jmo.

In Jessica Chambers case. The law knew who the perp was. But it took him to kill another female a year later to finally try to get him indicted in Jessicas case.

But now after the other female was killed a year later; Then this is when the local cops decided to push things forward on a perp that was supposedly in their sights for a while. Jmo.

Now Heather Ciccone has been dead for 6 months after getting a call from a friend to pick her up. Then 2 hours later. Heather Ciccone was found dead in her car after getting shot in the back of the head by someone in the backseat.

Now the small town Virginia cops found 2 cell phones and did forensics.

But no one has been arrested yet for Heather Ciccone murder.

Are they waiting for the person to kill again. The same way that Jessicas murderer killed again before making an arrest of a perp that they already know is guilty?

So my main question on this case is. Does the Midlothian police department know who the perp is. But need more to indicte the perp?

And is it going to take another person getting killed from another town before they realize that this is the perp?

 

[Seriously?]

At least you tried... :cheers:

Indeed!!! This is the best post I've read so far! Sitting outside trying to catch up on this - and now literally laughing out loud!!!!
You're the best!

 

[arkansasmimi]

Originally Posted by CorallaroC View Post
With having respect for both posters above, as I am sure ya'lls intentions are good, I would highly recommend that SAFETY comes FIRST before anything else

RSBM

I stand beside CorallaroC on this statement of safety. I feel this has the potential to be a very dangerous case. For all we know, the SP was dressed in his/her own SWAT gear due to their occupation. You know what that means. Let us take the possible danger in Midlo very seriously, please.

From personal experience, I was run out of town by a fast-driving black SUV with tinted windows while I was snapping pics of, nearby and around the area of an unsolved murder victim's CS last year.

Agree... especially with the Suspect still at large... we sure don't need someone being questioned by LE as to why taking photos.

 

[bluesneakers]

So, maybe CW, BB and CT all have legal representation. If I was named in a SW as a communicator with a homicide victim, you better bet I would have an Esq.
Justice for MB.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In a minute. I would have one before the SW even came out.