TX TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers, 45, killed in church/suspect in SWAT gear, Midlothian, 18 Apr 2016 #49

[arielilane]

April 18 is quickly approaching and marks nine years since Missy Bevers' murder, and there are still no answers. I really hope for Missy's family 2025 will be the year there's a break in the case. jmo

 

[somequestions]

If there is one clue pointing towards this case being a burglary interrupted, it is the surveillance footage from SWFA of a 2010 - 2012 Nissan Altima driving around the parking lot.

If that was the car of the burglar who murdered Missy Bevers at Creekside Church, it was not smart to drive around SWFA to possibly have their vehicle identified if it was the same vehicle that went to Creekside Church 20 minutes later. Since there is no indication the surveillance cameras were working at Creekside Church, driving around SWFA did not help this person get away with the crime.

I have always thought there could be a third possibility in this case. Maybe this burglar was someone familiar with Creekside Church who targeted it for some reason, but was seen by Missy Bevers and had to be murdered? In this scenario, whoever it was knew Missy Bevers but only as an acquaintance who she saw from time to time at Creekside Church in the morning. They targeted the church and not Missy Bevers specifically.

I still think it was probably a targeted murder in some way because I have not seen many burglars who get into such a specific uniform to burglarize. I think the burglar knew they were on surveillance camera inside the church, but if they did know then they also knew that they would most likely never be able to use that police uniform ever again even if all they wanted to do was burglarize the church. The uniform is too unique.

Even this theory does not make sense because if it was someone who was affiliated with the church who goes there in the morning, they probably would not have broken in. I think they would have probably used a key.

 

[somequestions]

It is interesting that the burglar broke in at the door to the kitchen area on the side of the building where there is only road and no parking. If you did not want to break the glass at the entrance or the side of the building Missy Bevers came in because you do not know which entrance she will choose, this would be appropriate, so she does not immediately recognize there has been a break-in at the church before she even enters the building and calls the police. If there was a break-in who is the first person at the church who gets contacted about it or would have noticed it if Missy Bevers had not been the first person to arrive that Monday morning?

There will always be debate about whether this was a burglary interrupted or a targeted murder.

I wondered too if maybe the reason Missy Bevers had to be murdered was because the murderer had to take off the police uniform? After researching the weather for the night and early morning of April 18, 2016, it rained continuously from after midnight to almost 6 am. Yet in the Creekside Church surveillance video, there are no rain spots on the helmet.

There is the part of the video where the burglar tries to get into a door but uses so little effort that it made me wonder if they actually wanted to get into that room. But they used their left hand to try to hit the wedge tool so maybe it was very awkward if they are right-handed?

Why does a burglar check nearly all the doors in the interior of the church, but not on the exterior? What if a door on the exterior had been open to walk in? Why not at least check the same entrance Missy Bevers ended up walking into as that appears like it is the main entrance?

The walking gait of the person is interesting, but when I look closely at the surveillance video, it looks like the person could be wearing boots. Maybe the boots did not fit properly, or they had an ankle holster on their leg where they kept their gun?

I think police should release the rest of the Creekside Church surveillance video in this case. It might help the case get solved.

 

[SteveS]

It is interesting that the burglar broke in at the door to the kitchen area on the side of the building where there is only road and no parking. If you did not want to break the glass at the entrance or the side of the building Missy Bevers came in because you do not know which entrance she will choose, this would be appropriate, so she does not immediately recognize there has been a break-in at the church before she even enters the building and calls the police. If there was a break-in who is the first person at the church who gets contacted about it or would have noticed it if Missy Bevers had not been the first person to arrive that Monday morning?

--------------------------

I wondered too if maybe the reason Missy Bevers had to be murdered was because the murderer had to take off the police uniform? After researching the weather for the night and early morning of April 18, 2016, it rained continuously from after midnight to almost 6 am. Yet in the Creekside Church surveillance video, there are no rain spots on the helmet.

--------------
Why does a burglar check nearly all the doors in the interior of the church, but not on the exterior? What if a door on the exterior had been open to walk in? Why not at least check the same entrance Missy Bevers ended up walking into as that appears like it is the main entrance?

This post has conjecture that's very unlikely, or supposing an angle that has different explanation that's way better, or misses some relevant facts, and I want to address those items to prevent forum confusion later.

1 "It is interesting that the burglar broke in at the door to the kitchen area on the side of the building where there is only road and no parking." ... [This is partly true, however there is lots of parking on that side of the building.] The choice of where Loser Perp broke in is better explained that he wanted an access point unseen from the highway, rather than anything to do with MB.

2 "If you did not want to break the glass at the entrance or the side of the building Missy Bevers came in because you do not know which entrance she will choose, this would be appropriate..." ... There is no evidence that LP expected MB or anyone else, in that middle-of-the-night hour he chose to be there, and therefore no reason to think the choice of access had anything to do with that. As already noted, the access choice is easily understood as opting for a door out of sight of the highway.

3 "in the Creekside Church surveillance video, there are no rain spots on the helmet" ... The heavy rain that night was discussed extensively in these forums. By the time we first see LP on video, he has had opportunity to dry off out of sight, as he happened to come in through the kitchen which presumably had towels, paper towels, etc, and presumably did so. The idea he would have taken off his disguise while still in the building makes no sense, since doing so would have exposed his identity, erasing the whole reason he wore that costume in the first place.

4 "Why does a burglar check nearly all the doors in the interior of the church, but not on the exterior?" ...Are you sure? We've never been told that, and as a matter of fact, the kitchen door he entered appeared to be the SECOND door he tried to access. For all we know, he checked every door before he tried to enter any. (BTW the other place he tried to access had two layers of doors, which apparently stymied him, and only the kitchen door had just a single layer. That may have been another factor in where he eventually entered.)
..."What if a door on the exterior had been open to walk in?" ...Even though the LP may have tried every lock, the idea that any was not locked was unlikely to the point of virtual certainty. The Church had an electronic lock system for all the doors, and it would have been the same preset EVERY day, with an automated control and a timer, and the same doors (ie, all of them) automatically locked every night at a certain hour.

 

[FromGermany1]

I think police should release the rest of the Creekside Church surveillance video in this case. It might help the case get solved.

bbm
This!

 

[somequestions]

This post has conjecture that's very unlikely, or supposing an angle that has different explanation that's way better, or misses some relevant facts, and I want to address those items to prevent forum confusion later.

1 "It is interesting that the burglar broke in at the door to the kitchen area on the side of the building where there is only road and no parking." ... [This is partly true, however there is lots of parking on that side of the building.] The choice of where Loser Perp broke in is better explained that he wanted an access point unseen from the highway, rather than anything to do with MB.

2 "If you did not want to break the glass at the entrance or the side of the building Missy Bevers came in because you do not know which entrance she will choose, this would be appropriate..." ... There is no evidence that LP expected MB or anyone else, in that middle-of-the-night hour he chose to be there, and therefore no reason to think the choice of access had anything to do with that. As already noted, the access choice is easily understood as opting for a door out of sight of the highway.

3 "in the Creekside Church surveillance video, there are no rain spots on the helmet" ... The heavy rain that night was discussed extensively in these forums. By the time we first see LP on video, he has had opportunity to dry off out of sight, as he happened to come in through the kitchen which presumably had towels, paper towels, etc, and presumably did so. The idea he would have taken off his disguise while still in the building makes no sense, since doing so would have exposed his identity, erasing the whole reason he wore that costume in the first place.

4 "Why does a burglar check nearly all the doors in the interior of the church, but not on the exterior?" ...Are you sure? We've never been told that, and as a matter of fact, the kitchen door he entered appeared to be the SECOND door he tried to access. For all we know, he checked every door before he tried to enter any. (BTW the other place he tried to access had two layers of doors, which apparently stymied him, and only the kitchen door had just a single layer. That may have been another factor in where he eventually entered.)
..."What if a door on the exterior had been open to walk in?" ...Even though the LP may have tried every lock, the idea that any was not locked was unlikely to the point of virtual certainty. The Church had an electronic lock system for all the doors, and it would have been the same preset EVERY day, with an automated control and a timer, and the same doors (ie, all of them) automatically locked every night at a certain hour.

The case does look like a burglary interrupted. There is nothing to suggest Missy Bevers was targeted that I am aware of. It is sort of surprising police even considered it.

The person driving around SWFA is not suspicious if they keep their lights on. There is no law against driving around a parking lot late at night and leaving. It is turning the headlights on the car on and off that makes it suspicious.

If you look at this case at face value it is a burglary interrupted. The burglar is walking around the church and not waiting for Missy Bevers to arrive. In order for it to be a targeted murder, the whole Creekside Church surveillance video would have to be staged and the SWFA surveillance video would have to be staged or what purpose did it serve? The murderer would have to be pretending to be a burglar going around opening doors inside Creekside Church and driving around parking lots late at night turning their headlights on and off.

The theory about the killer choosing the kitchen door to enter was my theory regarding it being a targeted murder, but it is probably a lot more probable that is just the door the burglar chose to enter since it was on the opposite side of the building away from the main foot traffic of the main doors that most people would enter through. If the police costume was not put on inside the church, then the burglar put it on at home and drove around with it on. My point was that if it was a targeted murder, it appears to be very well planned.

If you were an investigator, how would you investigate this case? I would approach it as a targeted murder and focus on the people who worked at the church, especially if they worked in the kitchen. But if that did not solve it, I would probably come to the conclusion that without any sort of new evidence about a strange burglar wearing a police uniform costume in the area, the Missy Bever's case is going to be a very tough case to solve.

 

[FromGermany1]

I think, the driver on SWFA surveillance was the getaway driver for Missy's killer, and how the driver behaved at that location (in the middle of the night and in storms and rain) isn't really important, only interesting. Maybe, it would help to know, if the driver had a passenger and if it was a blonde woman or possibly a fuzzy big dog. Maybe, it would help to know, whether he operated something technical like a laptop from the driver's seat or not.
MOO

 

[somequestions]

I was interested in why the murderer chose the kitchen door entrance to get into the building. I know there are various reasons, but according to my research it was raining and may have been raining hard. According to wunderground, it rained from after midnight to almost 6 am in the Creekside Church area. At the approximate time the murderer would have broken into the church, there may have been heavy thunderstorms in the area.

The reason I thought the other entrances were better to enter is because they are covered and get the burglar out of the rain. There is a small overhang on that side of the building over the kitchen area door that would have gotten the burglar out of the rain too, but not by much.

The burglar in the Creekside Church video looks so dry to me compared to what I would have thought their clothes and helmet should look like if all they did was quickly wipe the helmet and come out of Room 8 next to the kitchen, if I remember correctly.

It is my opinion that people do not like to do things in the rain and that if they do, they are usually wet for some time afterwards until they dry off. Maybe it is the surveillance camera angles or maybe it happened to not be raining at the precise time the burglar broke into the church, but the person on that surveillance video does not look like they were out in the rain at all.

About the only clue to possibly look for inside the church might be any drops of water or wet footprints. Only the police know what they found.

 

[somequestions]

After 9 years this case is still not solved. It shows that even with video surveillance evidence it can be very difficult to solve a case sometimes. In the video below, the news report says the police do not believe it was random.

 

[dotr]

April 18 2025 Ryan Osborne rbbm, lengthy.

8 years since Missy Bevers' murder: Everything we know about the North Texas case

The case spawned thousands of tips, but few solid leads, and still, eight years later, Bevers' murder remains unsolved, according to Midlothian authorities.

www.wfaa.com

''No arrests. No suspects. No persons of interest named.
A candlelight vigil in Bevers' honor was planned for Thursday night at 7 p.m. at Kimmel Park in Midlothian. Last year, Bevers' supporters planted a tree and set a memorial at the park to keep her memory alive.
Bevers, a 45-year-old mother of three, died of puncture wounds to her head and chest, officials said. Few other details about her killing have been released through the years.
Midlothian police Chief Carl Smith told WFAA in 2021 that investigators have released most of the information about the case, including the surveillance video of a person in tactical gear inside the church when Bevers was killed. But Smith also said police are still protecting some evidence, as it could help them down the road when an arrest is made.''

''Analysis estimated the height of the person – from the top of their headwear – to be about 5-foot-8, police said. As for the gear, police aren't sure if it was authentic.
The person on the video also appeared to have a unique walk, with their feet turned outward, "more predominantly on the right foot," police said. Investigators are interested in people "who fall within or near this height range, and have a similar walk or gait or may have had a similar walk or gait" at the time of the Bevers' killing. Police noted that it's possible the person's unique walk was caused by a temporary condition.''

 

[lonewanderer]

Please look very, very closely at the :43 second mark.

I believe this person is using a phone. Using it for a quick moment and then placing it back in their gear.

 

[dotr]

Please look very, very closely at the :43 second mark.

I believe this person is using a phone. Using it for a quick moment and then placing it back in their gear.

Certainly possible, maybe a quick look at the time, a prompt of some kind, or even a walkie-talkie in keeping with the (imo. raunchy bridal shower get up). speculation.

 

[itsdev]

Certainly possible, maybe a quick look at the time, a prompt of some kind, or even a walkie-talkie in keeping with the (imo. raunchy bridal shower get up). speculation.
View attachment 580055

BBM

I am not as well versed in this case as others, would you mind elaborating on "or even a walkie-talkie in keeping with the (imo. raunchy bridal shower get up)"

Thanks!

 

[dotr]

BBM

I am not as well versed in this case as others, would you mind elaborating on "or even a walkie-talkie in keeping with the (imo. raunchy bridal shower get up)"

Thanks!

The cop/security 'costume' worn by the suspect, reminded me of something a male dancer might wear to perform at a pre-wedding bash. A walkie-talkie might be part of that illusion. imo,

 

[lonewanderer]

Between :50-:56 their is the illusion of a dark, somewhat curly/flowy ponytail. It appears as the subect walks closer with their back to the camera and stays up until the last frame where it looks like its on their neck still. I believe this is an illusion but interesting all the same.

 

[itsdev]

The cop/security 'costume' worn by the suspect, reminded me of something a male dancer might wear to perform at a pre-wedding bash. A walkie-talkie might be part of that illusion. imo,

Ohhh I see now. Thank you!

 

[Mandala]

I can’t rule out that it could be female.
Whether male or female, this person had an abnormal gait. Could it be someone jealous of Missy and her physique/fitness? Someone who felt rejected or didn’t fit in?. Just speculation.

 

[Chypre]

So there was DNA at crime scene???

 

[Deleted member 364183]

Between :50-:56 their is the illusion of a dark, somewhat curly/flowy ponytail. It appears as the subect walks closer with their back to the camera and stays up until the last frame where it looks like its on their neck still. I believe this is an illusion but interesting all the same.

What I thought to be very strange, it's pouring rain outside and we see no signs of water falling off her swat gear. If she changed inside the church there would be some dead skin cells where she changed clothes or near missys body. Dead skin always falls off our bodies. It's actually gross to see how much.

Another, I believe the woman knew Missy had a gun. She wore the gear encase she had the gun and shot back. But why did missy not go and grab her gun from the truck? I wish they would show the other video footage.

I know they said she heard something and quickly moved her head. I personally think someone called her name. (a woman's voice) She recognized the voice. Seeing the rest of the videos might bring more hope to solving the case.

People close to missy suspect it's a female. I personally believe the police know the woman's name, but don't have enough evidence to convict. Waiting on the one piece to appear. ;;;;;;;


I know without a doubt the killer reads these forums. When your kids grow up they will hear theories about you and eventually realize their moms a murderer. We won't let this go away. What will your kids think of you.

 

[FromGermany1]

I was interested in why the murderer chose the kitchen door entrance to get into the building. I know there are various reasons, but according to my research it was raining and may have been raining hard. According to wunderground, it rained from after midnight to almost 6 am in the Creekside Church area. At the approximate time the murderer would have broken into the church, there may have been heavy thunderstorms in the area.

The reason I thought the other entrances were better to enter is because they are covered and get the burglar out of the rain. There is a small overhang on that side of the building over the kitchen area door that would have gotten the burglar out of the rain too, but not by much.

The burglar in the Creekside Church video looks so dry to me compared to what I would have thought their clothes and helmet should look like if all they did was quickly wipe the helmet and come out of Room 8 next to the kitchen, if I remember correctly.

It is my opinion that people do not like to do things in the rain and that if they do, they are usually wet for some time afterwards until they dry off. Maybe it is the surveillance camera angles or maybe it happened to not be raining at the precise time the burglar broke into the church, but the person on that surveillance video does not look like they were out in the rain at all.

About the only clue to possibly look for inside the church might be any drops of water or wet footprints. Only the police know what they found.

I'm remembering, that it was said, the SP stayed in the kitchen for a while after breaking in and before walking the hallways. What can you do in a professional kitchen to dry your outfit, I wonder. Putting the gear into a warm oven perhaps? Idk.