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

[Lizzysun]

SP reminds me of Bobby Hill.

https://fattylane.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/bobby.jpg

I love Bobby! This made my weekend.

 

[TeaTime]

My gut says SP is female but the only thing that stops me is the calmness. To me that leads more to men....there to do a job, firm focus, it's done. Women I tend to think go a little crazier with rage. We work ourselves into a frenzy. We lay in wait. We don't "hunt". SP to me is hunting..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SWARTPERP was just being nosy, looking around in the church to pass the time. All that prowling around happened long before MB pulled her truck under the awning and SP did, in fact, lay in wait. (interpretation mine) SP has a lot of self-discipline, albeit short term, and I think we start to see SP's loss of rage control at the end of the video where SP appears to be breaking a glass pane in a door. That whole scene to me looks like SP is snuggling the door, half-heatedly swinging a hammer into it, while holding on for dear life to a box of cookies with the left hand.

Or, maybe it is the lovely Cotes du Rhone tonight and I am seeing Virginia Wolfe and Blanche DuBois drama where it is not.

I see female.

I completely believe 100% that BatBrat is a brilliant wizard and am also sure that his/her scientific approach trumps my gut reaction, as is should. But, if I go only on BratBat's interpretation based on science and things like math and all, I see someone who could not have physically been at CoC at that time. BatBrat's science tells us SP is a slim built, 6' tall male, (or is it 6'2" male?) with splayed feet who walks like he is in pain. Ouch.

What is that about an object not being able to be in two places at the same time? Oh, yeah some physicist said that.

Namaste in denial for now.

 

[Montjoy]

I want to throw a shout-out to those who have not committed to implicating any particular person yet. I know, in general, that it's often seen as a sign of weakness to be non-committal, but I would strongly dispute that tendency in situations where we have insufficient information. When we're talking about real people and consequential situations, JMO, but I don't buy into intuition, "hunchology", or hinky meters. I'm a social scientist by training, occupation, and perhaps by my personal inclinations, and so I prefer to make decisions on an event based primarily on the evidence at hand. And so when I read that so many folks here are undecided if the SP is male or female, my first thought is something like "great, there are plenty of people who aren't going to rush to judgment".

Let me be clear -- I'm not at all criticizing anyone who votes in any way on that poll. But beyond the poll, I do worry sometimes that people in general are too quick to be certain about some things (or some people) in criminal investigations. Myself, I did start out assuming that BB would be the most likely potential suspect, as any husband would be, until I was convinced that his alibi had placed him far away from the crime (and this doesn't mean that he couldn't have been indirectly involved, though I tend to doubt that). And so now I'm in what would seem to many to be an uncomfortable position...I don't know who is responsible, and though I've followed the case from the start, I'm not sure who to suspect.

If you are in the same position as I am, I don't think you should be hard on yourself for being unsure. I know that many people have suggested that LE have a suspect and are sure about him/her, but I do not know if this is the case...I think it's optimism at play. I do believe that this case is being actively investigated by people who are frustrated by a lack of evidence, however, and so I'm somewhat optimistic that the truth will out. But, long post short, I want to say that if you're unsure, don't hold it against yourself. I think that being certain when you have insufficient evidence about something like this, being triumphant to be certain about someone being guilty when you have no firm ground to stand on, is worse than admitting you are not sure.

 

[Waxmom]

I love Bobby! This made my weekend.

I agree, definitely a Bobby hill vibe in movement, too bad didn't have the disposition. I just spent a great deal of time looking at Missy's Facebook remembrance page. First time to really delve in, though have a couple of friends that knew her quite well. So very depressing, all those fam shots, such a relatable person makes it even harder to try and understand the aggression/violating nature of the murder. I'm still stuck on the same perp, a gal who is awkward socially and body exhibits it, but may have similar body movements of a Bobby hill type-she's awkward, but may swagger in the way observed in the videos if feeling confident and untouchable-still awkward, but in an odd state of mind, confident feeling folks have moves like that, which I know doesn't make a great deal of sense-I'm a therapist, primarily crisis trained, and that's just my impression for whatever it is worth. Poor Missy and her kids. The girls are at such a vulnerable age for such a loss. I hope there is at least closure-a villain unknown to all would be best, but afraid it may actually be just a sad, perp family loses, type thing. IMHO. Jmo. Not much other than gossip to back up.

 

[Batbrat]

SWARTPERP was just being nosy, looking around in the church to pass the time. All that prowling around happened long before MB pulled her truck under the awning and SP did, in fact, lay in wait. (interpretation mine) SP has a lot of self-discipline, albeit short term, and I think we start to see SP's loss of rage control at the end of the video where SP appears to be breaking a glass pane in a door. That whole scene to me looks like SP is snuggling the door, half-heatedly swinging a hammer into it, while holding on for dear life to a box of cookies with the left hand.

Or, maybe it is the lovely Cotes du Rhone tonight and I am seeing Virginia Wolfe and Blanche DuBois drama where it is not.

I see female.

I completely believe 100% that BatBrat is a brilliant wizard and am also sure that his/her scientific approach trumps my gut reaction, as is should. But, if I go only on BratBat's interpretation based on science and things like math and all, I see someone who could not have physically been at CoC at that time. BatBrat's science tells us SP is a slim built, 6' tall male, (or is it 6'2" male?) with splayed feet who walks like he is in pain. Ouch.

What is that about an object not being able to be in two places at the same time? Oh, yeah some physicist said that.

Namaste in denial for now.

Thanks for commenting, TeaTime. My evaluations, while solidly based in science, are only estimations. I have stated I believe the subject to be close to 72-73" tall with shoes and helmet, or 5'9"-5'11". I believe he is lean. Other than those minor quibbles, yes you've accurately outlined my current assessments.

I have never disputed anything LE has publicly said (with exception to height estimates). Regarding alibis and Schrödinger: until we have better detail regarding anyone's alibi, or until LE has officially cleared people, any alibi claims, interpretations, etc, from anyone except LE will continue to have absolutely no affect on my own opinions or on the focus of my work. I am well aware this dismissal might irk some and confuse others, but it is certainly not my goal. My goal is to compile my own observations based on what LE has released, then posit for consideration. I do not expect anyone here to agree with me, take me seriously, or even bother to read my posts. But I do appreciate those who do and those who take the time to comment either way. So, thank you!

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Thanks for commenting, TeaTime. My evaluations, while solidly based in science, are only estimations. I have stated I believe the subject to be close to 72-73" tall with shoes and helmet, or 5'9"-5'11". I believe he is lean. Other than those minor quibbles, yes you've accurately outlined my current assessments.

I have never disputed anything LE has publicly said (with exception to height estimates). Regarding alibis and Schrödinger: until we have better detail regarding anyone's alibi, or until LE has officially cleared people, any alibi claims, interpretations, etc, from anyone except LE will continue to have absolutely no affect on my own opinions or on the focus of my work. I am well aware this dismissal might irk some and confuse others, but it is certainly not my goal. My goal is to compile my own observations based on what LE has released, then posit for consideration. I do not expect anyone here to agree with me, take me seriously, or even bother to read my posts. But I do appreciate those who do and those who take the time to comment either way. So, thank you!

My vote: Female if dressed with SWAT gear - rather male if without SWAT gear like in the video (the green figure walking through the pic). That doesn't help, I know.
Besides this I think the person is drunken but only as much as is necessary to be indifferent and cool and be able to attack/murder later on.
When the person is walking near the wall one sees propping up to the wall, only slightly but the person does along the way.. I think the person doesn't prop to find the way in semidarkness but to have less pain with the right foot. Maybe to stay a little bit more upright despite in a tipsy state while walking slowly.
When the person is swinging a tool to crash glass or similar then it looks like a slightly uncontrolled hit without real power. If the person doesn't hit the target at the first time the person would set the blow once more; it seems to be not important or urgent.
The gait seems to be verrry special and verrry unique - to me it isn't reasonable at all why nobody recognizes the person and does a call to police! The way the person sets the right foot looks to me like the person has great pains to put this foot on the floor, sometimes more sometimes less.
That are my observations based only on the video (that I would like to have as an avatar btw ).
-.-.-.-

Now a real crime story (another case on WS):

A husband and father of 2 adult sons - pastor in Alabama - one day notes he is affected to men. He has liaisons (last time with at least 2 men simultaneously) and they are writing ca. 3000 emails to one another. The wife finds out the secret and sometime tells her husband he can't have both, his lovers AND his family. The pastor wants to begin a new life in another country and hopes his wife dies an early death because of her Diabetes - he tells to one of his partners.
When the pastor leaves his home for several days he allegedly is underway to help one of his sons to move. The pastor drives with his car into the neighbouring state.
When he is gone, next day the wife returns from her work in the evening. The next morning she doesn't show up at her work place and her collegues fear some misfortune. Police is called and checks the home. They find the wife very brutally murdered (!) in her home, pyjamas on and sitting in an armchair. Neighbours heard loud noises the evening before at ca. 10.45pm. A window is broken. Semen is found on her clothing.
Neighbours or friends call the husband and drive to the address at one of his sons in the neighbouring state to carry him and his car back home.
The pastor is being interrogated by police for 48 hours. Then they have to release him. The murder occured in July.
On the 31. December police arrest him at the Nashville Airport when he just wants to leave the country forever to marry a lover overseas. He had said "goodbye" to his family and now he was awaiting a new life without old burdens.
The pastor is accused of murder of his wife Karen. For now he is under house arrest and living with his mother.
Nobody knows exactly before the trial but the accused didn't drive directly to his son's address but stayed in a hotel somewhere and did some errands. It is possible re the time he secretly returned to his home and murdered his wife and then drove to his "alibi"-son.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...usband-charged-Homewood-23-July-2013-2/page39

Quite a bit of the crime story I find comparable to Missy's crime story - I can't help. Maybe the pastor had an accomplice - maybe someone in Missy's case had an accomplice too.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

If this was supposed to be a staged burglary, the perp slipped IMO by passing by the 'Holy Coffee Grounds' not attempting to open up the accordion door or the door adjacent to it. S-he looks at it, but keeps walking by. Chances are, there may have been some petty cash/ change. They didn't even bother looking - further.

-Nin

Hi Nin!!! You bring up a good point that I haven't considered before. Why did that perp pass up that door?? Perp had to know that was the sanctuary. Which then means perp WAS familiar with the church! and to add to that--the perp DID NOT want MB to see that area disturbed. A lot of posters have said MB was lured and IMHO that leads me to believe perp wanted to lure her there without her knowing anything was amiss. Just a thought or theory.

 

[dub]

Thanks for commenting, TeaTime. My evaluations, while solidly based in science, are only estimations. I have stated I believe the subject to be close to 72-73" tall with shoes and helmet, or 5'9"-5'11". I believe he is lean. Other than those minor quibbles, yes you've accurately outlined my current assessments.

I have never disputed anything LE has publicly said (with exception to height estimates). Regarding alibis and Schrödinger: until we have better detail regarding anyone's alibi, or until LE has officially cleared people, any alibi claims, interpretations, etc, from anyone except LE will continue to have absolutely no affect on my own opinions or on the focus of my work. I am well aware this dismissal might irk some and confuse others, but it is certainly not my goal. My goal is to compile my own observations based on what LE has released, then posit for consideration. I do not expect anyone here to agree with me, take me seriously, or even bother to read my posts. But I do appreciate those who do and those who take the time to comment either way. So, thank you!

I'm with you batbrat.

My "evaluation" left me with a man 5'9"-5'10" without gear and average to slightly overweight build, and I'm not going to bend on that easily. But my approach was far, far less scientific than yours haha so it's good to see some level of evidence that I'm not totally crazy on this.

For what it's worth, I don't have a particular person in mind.

 

[wildebeest]

Thanks for commenting, TeaTime. My evaluations, while solidly based in science, are only estimations. I have stated I believe the subject to be close to 72-73" tall with shoes and helmet, or 5'9"-5'11". I believe he is lean. Other than those minor quibbles, yes you've accurately outlined my current assessments.

I have never disputed anything LE has publicly said (with exception to height estimates). Regarding alibis and Schrödinger: until we have better detail regarding anyone's alibi, or until LE has officially cleared people, any alibi claims, interpretations, etc, from anyone except LE will continue to have absolutely no affect on my own opinions or on the focus of my work. I am well aware this dismissal might irk some and confuse others, but it is certainly not my goal. My goal is to compile my own observations based on what LE has released, then posit for consideration. I do not expect anyone here to agree with me, take me seriously, or even bother to read my posts. But I do appreciate those who do and those who take the time to comment either way. So, thank you!

Count me as among those who enjoy your posts, and computer skills! :clap:

 

[Scout]

I want to throw a shout-out to those who have not committed to implicating any particular person yet. I know, in general, that it's often seen as a sign of weakness to be non-committal, but I would strongly dispute that tendency in situations where we have insufficient information. When we're talking about real people and consequential situations, JMO, but I don't buy into intuition, "hunchology", or hinky meters. I'm a social scientist by training, occupation, and perhaps by my personal inclinations, and so I prefer to make decisions on an event based primarily on the evidence at hand. And so when I read that so many folks here are undecided if the SP is male or female, my first thought is something like "great, there are plenty of people who aren't going to rush to judgment".

Let me be clear -- I'm not at all criticizing anyone who votes in any way on that poll. But beyond the poll, I do worry sometimes that people in general are too quick to be certain about some things (or some people) in criminal investigations. Myself, I did start out assuming that BB would be the most likely potential suspect, as any husband would be, until I was convinced that his alibi had placed him far away from the crime (and this doesn't mean that he couldn't have been indirectly involved, though I tend to doubt that). And so now I'm in what would seem to many to be an uncomfortable position...I don't know who is responsible, and though I've followed the case from the start, I'm not sure who to suspect.

If you are in the same position as I am, I don't think you should be hard on yourself for being unsure. I know that many people have suggested that LE have a suspect and are sure about him/her, but I do not know if this is the case...I think it's optimism at play. I do believe that this case is being actively investigated by people who are frustrated by a lack of evidence, however, and so I'm somewhat optimistic that the truth will out. But, long post short, I want to say that if you're unsure, don't hold it against yourself. I think that being certain when you have insufficient evidence about something like this, being triumphant to be certain about someone being guilty when you have no firm ground to stand on, is worse than admitting you are not sure.

We are in the same boat on this, Montjoy. Like you, I initially considered BB the most likely suspect, but it didn't take long for me to change my mind. This is a very unusual case. I think that's what is giving investigators so much trouble. Looking at the usual suspects is not panning out for them. I thing the guilty party is someone who has not been named in the warrants. And I'm not at all confident that police will solve this crime.

 

[SteveS]

They will issue a preliminary death certificate with COD and MOD noted as pending. The preliminary death certificate can be used to notify banks and deed recorders so joint owners can remove the name of the decedent, and it needs to be presented to SSA to inform them of the death, etc. A final death certificate is issued when COD and MOD are finalized.

Respectfully, no, a DC cannot remove an owner's name from an asset and erase them from ownership. At least, not in Texas (but not anywhere else that I know either). That is what a probate court does, via the probate process (where the DC is merely used to establish that we have a deceased person), and the probate court has to legally determine who receives ownership of what the deceased used to own. In general, the DC is simply used as proof that Joe Smith has actually died, and is most useful in relation to assets that have some sort of "pay on death" aspect (such as life insurance), or to remove a deceased from a recurring billing account (such as electric bill, phone, etc).

 

[okie_dokie]

Batbrat,
I thoroughly enjoy your posts and insights. You've added alot to help keep the discussion lively. Your video of the green perp is an incredible blend of science and art. When you are removing the costume, and eliminating areas that are anatomically impossible, it seems you would have to work within a framework of possible body builds (both male and female). The build you arrived at is masculine. At what point in the process did you eliminate the feminine builds? Wider hips (pear), larger chest (apple), etc.
Thanks again for such great work!
P.S. I lean towards male, 51%, lol.

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

Respectfully, no, a DC cannot remove an owners name from an asset. At least, not in Texas (but not anywhere else that I know either). That is what a probate court does, via the probate process. The DC is simply used as proof that Joe Smith has actually died, and is most useful in relation to assets that have some sort of "pay on death" aspect (such as life insurance).

If ownership is held as joint tenants with rights of survivorship (Which is common with marital assets), then they pass directly and do not go through probate.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/avoid-probate-with-joint-ownership-30125.html

ETA also, many/most? states have a minimum requirement for an estate to go through probate (ie, over 50,000 as an example). If an estate is too small for probate, then all ownership is changed pretty much with just a DC)

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[SteveS]

If ownership is held as joint tenants with rights of survivorship (Which is common with marital assets), then they pass directly and do not go through probate.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/avoid-probate-with-joint-ownership-30125.html

Yes, as I mentioned, a DC can be used for "pay on death" assets, of which a JTWROS asset is one example. However, it should be understood that such designations, while not necessarily rare, are not the norm by any means, and sharing ownership as a married couple is not at all the same thing as a JTWROS designation. Such an added instruction would have to be specifically requested, when the deed is originally prepared, and few do that. If it exists, such a designation in Texas is typically noted on taxing entity public records, and I see no evidence of it in this case.

Also, you added a note about the ability to avoid probate in certain states if there are less than 50,000 in assets under consideration. In Texas, that can apply if there is no real estate owned. But there is certainly real estate in play here, and the house alone is worth more than 50,000.

Hope that helps.

 

[Cannonball3804]

My vote: Female if dressed with SWAT gear - rather male if without SWAT gear like in the video (the green figure walking through the pic). That doesn't help, I know.
Besides this I think the person is drunken but only as much as is necessary to be indifferent and cool and be able to attack/murder later on.
When the person is walking near the wall one sees propping up to the wall, only slightly but the person does along the way.. I think the person doesn't prop to find the way in semidarkness but to have less pain with the right foot. Maybe to stay a little bit more upright despite in a tipsy state while walking slowly.
When the person is swinging a tool to crash glass or similar then it looks like a slightly uncontrolled hit without real power. If the person doesn't hit the target at the first time the person would set the blow once more; it seems to be not important or urgent.
The gait seems to be verrry special and verrry unique - to me it isn't reasonable at all why nobody recognizes the person and does a call to police! The way the person sets the right foot looks to me like the person has great pains to put this foot on the floor, sometimes more sometimes less.
That are my observations based only on the video (that I would like to have as an avatar btw ).
-.-.-.-

Now a real crime story (another case on WS):

A husband and father of 2 adult sons - pastor in Alabama - one day notes he is affected to men. He has liaisons (last time with at least 2 men simultaneously) and they are writing ca. 3000 emails to one another. The wife finds out the secret and sometime tells her husband he can't have both, his lovers AND his family. The pastor wants to begin a new life in another country and hopes his wife dies an early death because of her Diabetes - he tells to one of his partners.
When the pastor leaves his home for several days he allegedly is underway to help one of his sons to move. The pastor drives with his car into the neighbouring state.
When he is gone, next day the wife returns from her work in the evening. The next morning she doesn't show up at her work place and her collegues fear some misfortune. Police is called and checks the home. They find the wife very brutally murdered (!) in her home, pyjamas on and sitting in an armchair. Neighbours heard loud noises the evening before at ca. 10.45pm. A window is broken. Semen is found on her clothing.
Neighbours or friends call the husband and drive to the address at one of his sons in the neighbouring state to carry him and his car back home.
The pastor is being interrogated by police for 48 hours. Then they have to release him. The murder occured in July.
On the 31. December police arrest him at the Nashville Airport when he just wants to leave the country forever to marry a lover overseas. He had said "goodbye" to his family and now he was awaiting a new life without old burdens.
The pastor is accused of murder of his wife Karen. For now he is under house arrest and living with his mother.
Nobody knows exactly before the trial but the accused didn't drive directly to his son's address but stayed in a hotel somewhere and did some errands. It is possible re the time he secretly returned to his home and murdered his wife and then drove to his "alibi"-son.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...usband-charged-Homewood-23-July-2013-2/page39

Quite a bit of the crime story I find comparable to Missy's crime story - I can't help. Maybe the pastor had an accomplice - maybe someone in Missy's case had an accomplice too.

I think perps are going to find this type of alibi establishment to be more and more difficult to pull off. Why? Because of license plate readers. In this day and age, eyes are on us everywhere we go. It goes far beyond the occasional surveillance camera outside a business. License plate readers on major thoroughfares can catch every vehicle that passes through an intersection. So someone who thinks they can drive many miles to commit a murder and not leave some trace of their travels somewhere is in for a surprise.

 

[SteveS]

Nobody knows exactly before the trial but the accused didn't drive directly to his son's address but stayed in a hotel somewhere and did some errands. It is possible re the time he secretly returned to his home and murdered his wife and then drove to his "alibi"-son.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...usband-charged-Homewood-23-July-2013-2/page39

In relating that case to this case, it should probably be mentioned that the accused's "false location" in that case was only a couple hours or so away from the murder scene. A bit closer than Austin TX from Midlothian, and connected entirely by interstate highway (I-65).

 

[SKresearch]

I started to think it was a male based on the video. Now I am just back to who I originally thought might have hated MB enough to do something this horrible. The woman is very smart but brains only get you so far for so long.

In regard to the perp, I don't know how "smart" they are
(I believe they at least, "think" they are smart),
but "if" they are, smart / they also: (obviously) do some "dumb" things.
This was a "dumb" thing to do.

- MURDERing someone is a "dumb" thing to do

- This person
was, at the time of planning this, facing the possibility of getting the "death penalty" - if they go through with it, and when they are caught.

- This person
did it, and is facing the possibility of getting the "death penalty".
How "smart" is that.

Not to mention, it doesn't matter how 'smart' you are during the "sentencing" phase.
They couldn't care less, if you are 'smart' (or "think" you are).

```````
At the least, they will more than likely spend the rest of their natural life in prison.

(Which also means: and die there.)
(and if noone claims the body for burial, they will be buried among other convicts.)

 

[No it's not]

I think perps are going to find this type of alibi establishment to be more and more difficult to pull off. Why? Because of license plate readers. In this day and age, eyes are on us everywhere we go. It goes far beyond the occasional surveillance camera outside a business. License plate readers on major thoroughfares can catch every vehicle that passes through an intersection. So someone who thinks they can drive many miles to commit a murder and not leave some trace of their travels somewhere is in for a surprise.

..unless you have someone approximately your size and looks (constantly wearing a cap for example) traveling for you. They use your ID etc.. Just saying.

-Nin

 

[Montjoy]

..unless you have someone approximately your size and looks (constantly wearing a cap for example) traveling for you. They use your ID etc.. Just saying.

-Nin

That would presume that you are around people who don't know you (or are basically conspirators, willing to lie for you) the entire time. That wasn't the case for either RB or BB

 

[No it's not]

That would presume that you are around people who don't know you (or are basically conspirators, willing to lie for you) the entire time. That wasn't the case for either RB or BB

True. I know it is farfetched and I am not pursuing that switchero direction. We'd have to have at least one more conspirator ( traveling family member) and that's when it gets murky. I just thought I'd mention the possibility.

-Nin