Since I'm an Occam's Razor guy, I simply assume it was what we have almost every reason to believe it was, which is a death by hammer blows. If it was NOT a hammer, but rather another tool, I think my point is even more underscored. A blunt force trauma death, by some sort of tool (by a hammer, or by a tool even less apt for such a job), IMO seems like way more of a masculine deed in nature and necessity, for the vast majority of the population.
(It was stated by LE)
injuries
are consistent with
tools the suspect was carrying throughout the building.
[That the suspect (killer) WANTED TO BE SEEN on surveillance camera video carrying throughout the building].
To try to get police to believe, that this was "not" a premeditated murder.
[Yet, again: trying to "stage" this case as, a burglary (gone wrong)]
This person WANTED TO BE SEEN on the video,
carrying around "tools" and using them. (prying open doors, etc.)
(and person already knew, what they were going to kill her "with")
(and it will be: "tool") (and WANTED TO BE SEEN, carrying "it" around the building.)
``````
a "large hammer"
was found
"near
her body"
(> Of course it was <)
(WANTED it to be found
near
the body.)
, "and other tools"
`````
I have got to tell you:
(This person did a "dumb thing", doing this case.)
However, this person is not actually, dumb. (They are somewhat, intelligent.)
````````
I can pretty much 'read' this person (what they did), like a "book".
(This is not some...'theory', of mine.)
(It is a fact.)
(It is, what it is.)
This person WANTED TO BE SEEN, carrying those "tools".
(This person was trying to "stage" the scene.
Trying to make it "look like",
a burglary (gone wrong)
This is a "fact".
[Don't believe, what you (first) SEE]
[I think police know that, "now".
At first, they thought it may have been, a burglary (gone wrong.)
[That usually is what police "first" think,
when they see a "staged" case (burglary, gone wrong)]
But now they say:
They believe she was targeted.
[Well I hope they also see the rest of it.
How this person
WANTED TO BE SEEN carrying "tools".
Because, they "staged" (tried to, anyway) this case.] (burglary, gone wrong)
(In essence, they actually tried to use the surveillance camera, to their "benefit".
They WANTED TO BE SEEN carrying "tools",
and prying open doors, etc.)
I hope police are now "tuned in" to this.
This person went there to kill her.
(You're darn right, she was targeted.)
And this person gave it some "thought". (Exactly how long, I don't know - but they gave it 'some' thought, before they did it. And, in 'somewhat' great "detail".)
It's hard for me to swallow that the perp was estimated at approx 6' tall... then could be as short as 5'2". I wish I dared go in the COC to measure the doors for Batbrat... but I just can't. SteveS went and took photos and has a really good idea. Batbrat (that does this sort of analyzing at work) has given us the best clues yet. Especially since we aren't privy to much and that's ok.... when you are local, it takes a toll on you when this KILLER is on the loose and your family lives here.
Yes, there was quite some planning behind all that, whether it was a burglary or a targeted hit. In that regards I am wondering, if and how often the Creekside Church has travelers or tourists joining their services or events. Is the CC somehow connected to any other church(es) in other states? Does anyone know?
-Nin
LE has stated it was a targetted killing --------- No burglary. Only attempts to stage it as if it were.
A stranger in a uniform that resembled the clothing of special forces and the inscription "police" had on the chest and on the back has the fitness trainer Terri Leann Bevers front of a church town Midlothian, Texas killed, as the television channel WFAA reported.
The 45-year-old woman came in the early morning to the church building to conduct the sports trainer. She was at that moment killed when she took their sports equipment out of the car. According to the video recordings of the killer was a half hour previously come to the church.
Not MSM, German newspaper 19.4.16 (I didn't know before)
http://de.sputniknews.com/panorama/...t-gekleideter-ermordet-fitness-trainerin.html
Ein Unbekannter in einer Uniform, die der Kleidung von Spezialeinheiten ähnelte und die Aufschrift „Polizei“ auf der Brust und auf dem Rücken hatte, hat die Fitnesstrainerin Terri Leann Bevers vor einer Kirche der Kleinstadt Midlothian, Bundesstaat Texas, getötet, wie der Fernsehsender WFAA berichtete.
Die 45-jährige Frau kam am frühen Morgen zu dem Kirchengebäude, um den Fitnessunterricht zu leiten. Sie wurde in dem Moment getötet, als sie ihre Sportausrüstung aus dem Auto holte. Laut den Videoaufzeichnungen war der Mörder eine halbe Stunde zuvor zu der Kirche gekommen.
(with Google translation)
When a cell phone activates call-fwd to another cell phone and is powered on all calls will be in the call history and on the detailed billing for both cell phones. However, if the cell phone that has call-fwd activated is powered off the call won't be in the call history, but it will be on the detailed billing. If the phone that is taking the forwarded calls answers the phone call it will reflect the location of the cell phone that is taking the call.
Holy Smokes Batman!!!
You never cease to amaze me with your skill and ability. This is incredible and very helpful. Many thanks for all the time and effort this took; we all appreciate it very much.
LE has stated it was a targetted killing --------- No burglary. Only attempts to stage it as if it were.
Two options: An average sized person wearing a jacket and tactical vest or a fat person wearing no tactical gear.
According to my estimates and measuring, I don't believe it can reasonably be both. So it must only be one or the other. I'm not trying to bend your mind - just trying to determine what people believe. If you're saying both fat and vest, where does the fat go when the vest is worn over it?
Two options: An average sized person wearing a jacket and tactical vest or a fat person wearing no tactical gear.
According to my estimates and measuring, I don't believe it can reasonably be both. So it must only be one or the other. I'm not trying to bend your mind - just trying to determine what people believe. If you're saying both fat and vest, where does the fat go when the vest is worn over it?
I call this gait bow - legged as you can clearly see the turn out of feet with walk as well as stance, and a person on SW matches.Very interesting article on MS. My mother had MS and her walk was definitely purposeful and rigid.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
Agree fully. From my understanding of the awesome maps/layouts it appears all hallways except the main entrance to side awning entrance had damage is that correct?(It was stated by LE)
injuries
are consistent with
tools the suspect was carrying throughout the building.
[That the suspect (killer) WANTED TO BE SEEN on surveillance camera video carrying throughout the building].
To try to get police to believe, that this was "not" a premeditated murder.
[Yet, again: trying to "stage" this case as, a burglary (gone wrong)]
This person WANTED TO BE SEEN on the video,
carrying around "tools" and using them. (prying open doors, etc.)
(and person already knew, what they were going to kill her "with")
(and it will be: "tool") (and WANTED TO BE SEEN, carrying "it" around the building.)
``````
a "large hammer"
was found
"near
her body"
(> Of course it was <)
(WANTED it to be found
near
the body.)
, "and other tools"
`````
I have got to tell you:
(This person did a "dumb thing", doing this case.)
However, this person is not actually, dumb. (They are somewhat, intelligent.)
````````
I can pretty much 'read' this person (what they did), like a "book".
(This is not some...'theory', of mine.)
(It is a fact.)
(It is, what it is.)
This person WANTED TO BE SEEN, carrying those "tools".
(This person was trying to "stage" the scene.
Trying to make it "look like",
a burglary (gone wrong)
This is a "fact".
[Don't believe, what you (first) SEE]
[I think police know that, "now".
At first, they thought it may have been, a burglary (gone wrong.)
[That usually is what police "first" think,
when they see a "staged" case (burglary, gone wrong)]
But now they say:
They believe she was targeted.
[Well I hope they also see the rest of it.
How this person
WANTED TO BE SEEN carrying "tools".
Because, they "staged" (tried to, anyway) this case.] (burglary, gone wrong)
(In essence, they actually tried to use the surveillance camera, to their "benefit".
They WANTED TO BE SEEN carrying "tools",
and prying open doors, etc.)
I hope police are now "tuned in" to this.
This person went there to kill her.
(You're darn right, she was targeted.)
And this person gave it some "thought". (Exactly how long, I don't know - but they gave it 'some' thought, before they did it. And, in 'somewhat' great "detail".)