It's the other events-strength needed for door bashing etc but women do have good planning skills which def were at work here.
Sent from my SM-G530W using Tapatalk
I'm an old bat and I could pull it off.....lol. JMO
It's the other events-strength needed for door bashing etc but women do have good planning skills which def were at work here.
Sent from my SM-G530W using Tapatalk
It's the other events-strength needed for door bashing etc but women do have good planning skills which def were at work here.
Sent from my SM-G530W using Tapatalk
Me too lol maybe you're right😒I'm an old bat and I could pull it off.....lol. JMO
And may have even expected that the actual killing would be captured on camera....but still would not be identifiable because of the costume. If the killing HAD been caught on camera, we would probably be just as perplexed. The motions may have said more about perp, but not necessarily....possibly a better idea of gender. LE said that perp did not disturb cameras, so obviously they were not worried about the cameras. JMO
And may have even expected that the actual killing would be captured on camera....but still would not be identifiable because of the costume. If the killing HAD been caught on camera, we would probably be just as perplexed. The motions may have said more about perp, but not necessarily....possibly a better idea of gender. LE said that perp did not disturb cameras, so obviously they were not worried about the cameras. JMO
You make a good point. SP is not dressed correctly for a robbery and then again, not dressed correctly for a murder either. A person could dress to disguise themselves and shoot MB in the back as she walked by down the hall. There really was no reason MB had to know she was in danger and about to be murdered. I haven't thought this all the way through but, is it possible that one of the objectives to accomplish that night was to be seen on camera which was the major motivating factor for using the church at all? The only reason I can see for wearing that SWAT-thing is because it REALLY does hide who is wearing it in spite of all the video obtained. Was that the motivation for wearing it? Objective: Be filmed and be in perfect disguise. It's almost like a cruel taunting aimed towards someone. For me, something is just not right... something is off with this whole picture. I see no need and no good reason for going to all this "trouble" and danger of being caught to kill someone. She could have been shot the moment she got out of her car in the car port if someone simply wanted her dead... and had no other objective than just that alone. Unless, the person is really much weaker than he/she knew MB was (?)
Do you know when/where LE said there was no video of the perp after the attack?
A search warrant for Bever's cell phone and iPad was released Tuesday evening and included more details..."
The video does not show the attack or the suspect after the attack, the release said."
http://tinyurl.com/hpsawfk
If you are replying to a post, please use the Reply With Quote option, otherwise it is hard to follow the conversation. Thanks!!!
It really is confusing, because there are actually two different responses made by the MPD about whether the perp was seen or not after the attack. We talked about this a lot at the beginning of this thread, in fact (see page 5). In the first presser - the day of her murder - Spann seemed to say perp was seen "walking down the hallway" and said that presumably SP left the same way he entered. But in the same breath he admitted they weren't actually sure of the point of exit--there was "no evidence." Then later on there were firm MPD statements that 1) there was no video of the attack or any interaction between MB and SP, and 2) there was no video of SP after the attack. In 30 threads we haven't been able to resolve those conflicting statements, except to acknowledge that we are of split opinion concerning if SP was seen going anywhere after the attack.
At the initial 4/18 press conference, as Spann fielded reporters' questions on this, he spoke in incomplete phrases, and said "and again" referencing his previous response -- which was that they were still putting together and trying to order all the footage they'd just gotten hold of that same day. So, just my take (expressed on page 5 of this thread), but it's possible Spann wasn't as sure on the day of her murder as he is now concerning whether or not there is footage of SP after the attack. IOW, (my interpretation), answering that SP was seen walking the hallway, but due to still ordering the clips, couldn't be sure if that was before or after the murder, nor was there any "evidence" as to his exit (only a presumption).
If you study the highlighted portion in the screenshot below of the 4/18 press conference transcription by WS member Galadriel, you can see Spann's answers in context to the media questions. To me it appeared to be a very speculative response (which was understandable for the day of the murder). So in the end, until we're told the confirming facts, it appears to boil down to personal opinion on how each of us wants to reconcile the conflicting statements:
![]()
Source: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=95546&d=1464467808
To me, the next question to ask is how did SP know about the cameras and where to enter? It seems to indicate a specific knowledge about this church and its workings..I don't know offhand, but that all is where I would look...
OR what if the SP already had a key? Smashed the doors and did damage as a red herring? The card slot (which the card is a key imho) might keep track of time of entry swipes hence the need to break in the kitchen door..
Have always believed that the person in the video is a late teens male. How would a woman like MB have any connection with a teen guy who she had apparently made angry enough to brutally kill her ? Or was he not connected to her at all ?
"Speculation on our part that he BROKE THE WINDOW..." BBM
JMO
"And again, this is all speculation on our part that he broke the window and reached inside to open the door, but we also have a second and third windows [sic] that were broken, but we don't have any evidence that anybody ever went through them. They were just broken."
If you are replying to a post, please use the Reply With Quote option, otherwise it is hard to follow the conversation. Thanks!!!
Thank you!
absolutely agreed and not just following public FB posts.
Well, I don't hold to the first sentence of your post because of my belief this was a botched B&E. I don't think perp intended to encounter anyone, nor did he think anyone would try very hard to solve his crime because it wasn't intended to be murder - just B&E with vandalism and (perhaps) theft.
Perp IMHO entered on the N side. I'd be interested to know if there were any signs in the kitchen of fridges and pantries being gone thru? I still think he entered on the N side because it was unseen from the road, but that just happened to be the kitchen. I think he spent who knows how long there looking for something to eat.
Then he happened to work his way slowly toward the S side, and that is where he happened to be when she arrived.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.