TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers, 45, murdered in church/suspect in SWAT gear, 18 Apr 2016 #36

[Amateurpi1]

The Altima has it in car before they got to church.

How do you know? The pics of that car are too dark to tell anything IMO…

 

[urtxtigress]

 

[SteveS]

LE - who has seen more of the video than anyone here, and who has the ability and opportunity to access and fiddle with the original in ways we cannot - says it's only one perp seen in the video. I trust the advantage that comes from having much more info, and their ability to discern. One person on video.

 

[ezrah]

LE - who has seen more of the video than anyone here, and who has the ability and opportunity to access and fiddle with the original in ways we cannot - says it's only one perp seen in the video. I trust the advantage that comes from having much more info, and their ability to discern. One person on video.

Respectfully, At the 4/22 MPD press conference aprox 5:50 mark they state they do not know if it's a man or woman. At aprox 6:15 mark female reporter asks if they can rule out more than one perp. MPD spokesperson says paraphrasing: uh, uh, everything's on the table. We simply don't know. All we know is we want to find them whether it's one person, two, three or four.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dFyae4KYe74


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WannaBDetective]

LE - who has seen more of the video than anyone here, and who has the ability and opportunity to access and fiddle with the original in ways we cannot - says it's only one perp seen in the video. I trust the advantage that comes from having much more info, and their ability to discern. One person on video.

I look at how much clarity some of our guys have been able to get and wonder how much more using originals, giant HD screens and the full resources of the FBI, technologically and expertise, and gotta think they've got some details we don't even know about on video.

Having said that, I'm little surprised we haven't seen any of those pictures posted soliciting the publics help again.

 

[SteveS]

Respectfully, At the 4/22 MPD press conference aprox 5:50 mark they state they do not know if it's a man or woman. At aprox 6:15 mark female reporter asks if they can rule out more than one perp. MPD spokesperson says paraphrasing: uh, uh, everything's on the table. We simply don't know. All we know is we want to find them whether it's one person, two, three or four.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dFyae4KYe74

No sir, you are twisting their words into things they did not say. They said they do not know if there were more people than the single videoed person involved (such as outside conspirators). But in saying that, they made it clear there is exactly ONE person seen on video. (Keep in mind that by having full access and exact layout of both the church and the cams for each shot, with in-between video that we haven't seen, it's easy for them to put it all together in ways we cannot.)

 

[khaki]

A little off topic, but in light of the recent posts and the possibility of more than one person seen on video inside the church ( I now see two), I think it would be interesting to know from which phone BB's sister was called to come to the home for the girls. Was she called from the house phone or from a cell. If a cell, where did it ping at the time of that call?

 

[ezrah]

No sir, you are twisting their words into things they did not say. They said they do not know if there were more people than the single videoed person involved (such as outside conspirators). But in saying that, they made it clear there is exactly ONE person seen on video. (Keep in mind that by having full access and exact layout of both the church and the cams for each shot, with in-between video that we haven't seen, it's easy for them to put it all together in ways we cannot.)

I get your point and agree they can enhance the video and have. I suppose you are focusing on the one perp with the outward turned legs and that does seem to be the one perp they are trying to get help in IDing. I am not twisting their words as their words are what they said. We have all pointed out the ever changing height references such as BB says perp about 6ft tall, KS states initially LE said perp about that height but says BB 6'2", LE says they'll do video reconstruction and can get ht within an inch, after video reconstruction LE says perp between 5'2- 5'7". So as you can see it isn't totally off the mark for one to consider there MIGHT be more than one perp in that church. It's just MY opinion and that is all. Hopefully arrests will be made and we all can be in the know. I'm a she btw.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ezrah]

A little off topic, but in light of the recent posts and the possibility of more than one person seen on video inside the church ( I now see two), I think it would be interesting to know from which phone BB's sister was called to come to the home for the girls. Was she called from the house phone or from a cell. If a cell, where did it ping at the time of that call?

I believe she stated her mother MT called her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cannonball3804]

No sir, you are twisting their words into things they did not say. They said they do not know if there were more people than the single videoed person involved (such as outside conspirators). But in saying that, they made it clear there is exactly ONE person seen on video. (Keep in mind that by having full access and exact layout of both the church and the cams for each shot, with in-between video that we haven't seen, it's easy for them to put it all together in ways we cannot.)

I agree, Steve, that is certainly what they said.

However, with that said, it should be noted that it's possible for LE to make up their minds early on and then have tunnel vision about it from that point forward. Once that train gets rolling down one track, it's hard to switch it over to another.

So certainly they believe they only see one perp on video. And there is other video out there that they will not let us see. I still lean toward it being one perp on video, but we should keep in mind that there's a possibility they're wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SteveS]

I am not twisting their words as their words are what they said.

Respectfully, to the extent that you are making a claim that they expressed an uncertainty about how many they saw IN THE VIDEO, then yes you are twisting their words. They said explicitly there was ONE person in the video. ONE. And it was said in a way that cannot be taken any other way, in fact saying that to them it was OBVIOUS that it was one. Then, in that context, they went on to clarify that they couldn't close the door on involvement of others NOT SEEN on video (ie, conspirators numbering one or more), which was the point in which they said they don't know how many are involved.

Q: "Are you working from the theory that there's one perp involved, or could there be more?"
KJ: "You know, I don't know that we're working from, that we're committing to, any particular theory or lack thereof. Yeah, we acknowledge there COULD be more. There's obviously one person seen ON CAMERA; there could be more than one person INVOLVED, that's certainly possible."

Cannonball's point, that they might have goofed in interpreting what they see, is true. (I think it's more likely that we, looking at less footage and with far less knowledge, are goofing when we imagine more than one perp in the video, but I'll admit the hypothetical possibility that LE is stupid.)

But there was no fuzziness on what they said as to what they see. ONE. To me, that's an important distinction, to understand that if you think you see several, you should realize you are saying your limited view has it right and LE doesn't.

Oh, and as to Cannonball's point that they might have changed their minds when they looked closer, as of late May it was one perp they were seeing on video. That was 4-5 weeks after the crime, after separate outside LE orgs came in to take a look too, and certainly after the video would have been examined and re-examined many times.

 

[RagingClue]

I've said this before in this discussion - but I volunteer in women's prisons. That walk of the perp is the way prison GUARDS walk, in my experience. I don't know why they walk that way, but virtually all of them do. Prisoners, in my experience, shuffle around kind of humbly.

You totally reminded me of a lady I used to work with. She was a sheriff, ( I think they all start as jailers) and a coach.
Total outward splay. i would know her walk anywhere....very distinct hobble like motions. Old injury? Wearing the police belt?
over rotation of hips from coaching ....who knows????

 

[Cannonball3804]

[

The third pic from the top does not look like the original video. It seems to show what we see in the extended video at the 52 or 53 second mark. But it shows the full outline of a face with dark glasses on. That is not on the extended video. In fact, it's pretty clear from the rest of the video that you would never be able to see that much exposed skin of the facial area.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TenaciousTBacon]

I think it's this discussion that has run off the rails. I'm a firm believer in Occam's razor.

My opinion only. I'll step away from the thread for now.

 

[Cannonball3804]

Respectfully, to the extent that you are making a claim that they expressed an uncertainty about how many they saw IN THE VIDEO, then yes you are twisting their words. They said explicitly there was ONE person in the video. ONE. And it was said in a way that cannot be taken any other way. Then, in that context, they went on to clarify that they couldn't close the door on involvement of others NOT SEEN on video (ie, conspirators numbering one or more), which was the point in which they said they don't know how many are involved.

Cannonball's point, that they might have goofed in interpreting what they see, is true. (I think it's more likely that we, looking at less footage and with far less knowledge, are goofing when we imagine more than one perp in the video, but I'll admit the hypothetical possibility that LE is stupid.) But there was no fuzziness on what they said as to what they see. ONE. To me, that's an important distinction, to understand that if you think you see several, you should realize you are saying your limited view has it right and LE doesn't.

Oh, and as to Cannonball's point that they might have changed their minds when they looked closer, as of late May it was one perp they were seeing on video. That was 4-5 weeks after the crime, after separate outside LE orgs came in to take a look too, and certainly after the video would have been examined and re-examined many times.

Steve ole buddy, I never said LE was stupid, and I don't believe they are. It isn't stupid to land on a theory and then filter what you see through that lens, sometimes incorrectly. It's easy to do, and it happens in the justice system all the time.

Now, are they guilty of it with regard to this video? I have no idea - just allowing for the possibility, which would be a degree of probability above "LE is stupid."

As for outside LE orgs giving fresh eyes, I'll add this. We have had two articles I can specifically think of in which outside LE weighed in and were quoted after being shown the video. One was a female former police chief in the days immediately after the crime. The other was much more recent, and I believe he was a criminal justice professor but not sure on the exact role.

What they both said, and they expressed it quite strongly, was "this was a targeted hit - the perp planned this carefully".

They might end up being right, but you can't convince me that the video SHOWS that in any clear way. So that illustrates my point with regard to outside LE agreeing with MPD on the "one perp on video." Even if MPD is showing it to outside LE and they're agreeing, that doesn't make the case stronger if these orgs are pre-disposed to think similarly to one another in the first place.

 

[RagingClue]

The third pic from the top does not look like the original video. It seems to show what we see in the extended video at the 52 or 53 second mark. But it shows the full outline of a face with dark glasses on. That is not on the extended video. In fact, it's pretty clear from the rest of the video that you would never be able to see that much exposed skin of the facial area.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

is it possible that local Telly stations released different snippets????

 

[Cannonball3804]

is it possible that local Telly stations released different snippets????

No, they all had the same video. MPD when they have had media to release, they make it available to all media outlets to download from a link they provide.

What is much more plausible is that someone doctored a still shot from the video and then distributed it.

On my phone I played the Extended 2:11 video via YouTube til I got to about the same point as that photo. I captured the screen, and here it is:

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[urtxtigress]

Do you see the CBS banner at the bottom? That is the version they played on the news. Others were from MPD fb site video. LE verifyed they were.

 

[urtxtigress]

The banner tells you what station it was on. I only crop them down. No other editing. The others are off MPD fb page. LE verifyed they are originals.

 

[Amateurpi1]

The third pic from the top does not look like the original video. It seems to show what we see in the extended video at the 52 or 53 second mark. But it shows the full outline of a face with dark glasses on. That is not on the extended video. In fact, it's pretty clear from the rest of the video that you would never be able to see that much exposed skin of the facial area.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, I think one or more of these photos were doctored.