TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers,45, murdered in church/person in SWAT gear,18 Apr 2016 #34

[Mistree]

JMHO it saying Affiant believes and charges that at the time of the commission of the offense of murder that the Suspect dressed in Swat gear, was in possession of a cellphone and had been in contact in some manner with Target numbers identified above.<< Target numbers identified above remember were all those people listed, MB being one of them. BB & VB had it appears 2 numbers as their redacted number lines were longer than the others. JMHO simple as possibly saying the Suspect had had contact with MB... OR anyone else on that Target list. Remember too they allegedly just got the Cell Tower info within days of releasing the prior sealed SW

Excellent post, and I must say contributes to my hinker meter going off like crazy to this day in regards to phone call made to BB from a ?????(CG) person. (BEFORE MD PD called him).

 

[Razz]

Just so I understand. In laymen ' s terms:

After they extracted info from BB phone and MB phone and I pad, they came up with Target #s that the Police deemed important to the investigation whether it was about financial issues marital issues , affairs, and people who walked funny. (from leads given to them from interviews of friends etc.), They covered themselves by adding in the warrant any other cellphone # they may come across that could be construed as vital to the case.

So, I wonder if all those numbers and owners of said #s have passed muster? Maybe? Maybe not.?

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 172065]

Creekside didn't reopen until Wednesday evening per this news story.
http://dfw.cbslocal.com/video/categ...e-churchs-exterior-cameras-off-day-of-murder/

It could be from just fixing all that was broken, maybe some clean-up and the story says elders prayed in each room of the church.

2 days after murder before FBI was involved....

 

[liz b.]

And that was said under oath (SW). Our course, its worded to leave an "out" BUT. That means LE has a second perp (inside or outside - either close or far away) in their scenario. How'd we miss that.

I believe there was another perp in the church. Always have. jmo, and fwiw.

 

[observation]

Do you think he may have been including Missy???

I don't think it has been verified that BB says four vs poor, people heard it differently.

May I ask how you have speculation that THE FORTH CHILD is involved/motive for Missy's death.

I have searched and researched and to no avail have I been able to pass along information about another child.

Please share [emoji846]

Thanks

jmo [emoji202]

See post 325 by Tricia, owner of WS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[observation]

I would love to know what kind of progress has been made with the stingray tower dumps with NYPD. Are they 1/2 done nearing completion? I'm doubtful SP video recorded but most humans walk around attached to their cell phone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 172065]

That has been my concern, too. I felt a bit better after realizing that MPD called in the Ellis Co. Sheriff's Dept to process the crime scene (mentioned in either 1st or 2nd presser). They have a lot more experience with that than MPD does.

Still, 7 hours was unusually fast. I read something from a veteran detective with decades of experience - he said typically the range is 8 hours to 20 hours.

Oh, I didn t know it normally took 8-20 hrs to process, and that an experienced county did it. Of course there's not much I know about crime-type stuff. Thx for info. Someone said the church wasn t open til wed so maybe 'all good.'

 

[GA_Peach]

Just so I understand. In laymen ' s terms:

After they extracted info from BB phone and MB phone and I pad, they came up with Target #s that the Police deemed important to the investigation whether it was about financial issues marital issues , affairs, and people who walked funny. (from leads given to them from interviews of friends etc.), They covered themselves by adding in the warrant any other cellphone # they may come across that could be construed as vital to the case.

So, I wonder if all those numbers and owners of said #s have passed muster? Maybe? Maybe not.?

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

Razz, I think that you are exactly correct. In addition to the information extracted from MB's personal devices, I am sure that the "Targeted Numbers" were also based on LE's in-person interviews.

The affidavit for the SW states, "Affiant has further probable cause to believe that during the specified date range the "Target Numbers" did in fact have contact with Ms. Bevers." Based on information that can be independently verified, the "Target Numbers" do not represent every person who was in contact with Missy in the days leading up to her death. For example, we know that Missy was in Austin. The only other person from the Austin CG gathering listed in the SW was AT, but he obviously was not the only person with her in Austin (pictures from the Austin CG event can be found on MB's FB page). None of MB's family is listed in the SW. Missy's friend, who she saw immediately before she left for Austin and was later interviewed, was not included. However, RB & VB, who were in California for at least the week leading up to MB's death, were included as "Targeted Numbers." With all of that information, it is logical to conclude that the "Targeted Numbers" were not selected solely because the POI had been in contact with MB. There were clearly other things at play.

Razz, I agree with your assessment that they wanted to further invest things "that could be construed as vital to the case." In other words, LE wanted to investigate those with motive IMO. LE either needed to rule out the people with "Targeted Numbers" or investigate any leads that may be generated based on information unearthed on their devices. And that leads to the $64,000 question - did these people with "Targeted Numbers" pass muster?

ETA - It's interesting to note that LE stated that the "Target Numbers" were imperative in identifying the suspect.

 

[Razz]

Excellent post, and I must say contributes to my hinker meter going off like crazy to this day in regards to phone call made to BB from a ?????(CG) person. (BEFORE MD PD called him).

I can understand this IF she thought he was in town and at home. If she knew he was out of town and called, that was weird.

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

 

[Camerabug]

Ok. I just reread part of the ATT SW and I'm confused. It reads:
" Affiant believes and charges that at the time of the commission of the offense of murder that the unknown suspect was in possession of a cellphone and had been in contact in some manner with Target numbers identified above."

What?!! Does this mean an unknown cellphone and cellphone number OTHER THAN the targeted numbers?

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

That's my take. I think that's why MPD borrowed a Stingray from NYPD. The police don't have to remain stationary to use those either. They can drive around and everyone's cellphones will ping off them just as if a tower was close by. (That's why so many folks object to the use of warrant less searches of this nature.) My guess is a Trac-phone or a similar burner was used but has probably been disposed of. We can only hope MPD got some good pings first...

 

[arkansasmimi]

Originally Posted by WannaBDetective View Post
And that was said under oath (SW). Our course, its worded to leave an "out" BUT. That means LE has a second perp (inside or outside - either close or far away) in their scenario. How'd we miss that.

We didn't miss anything. Just like the "firearm", this is simply LE wording to create the strongest possible argument for probable cause so that the judge would sign the warrant. MHO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RBBM, I agree

 

[arkansasmimi]

JMHO the unreleased video is with purpose, just like the 2:27 min release of gait and mannerism was released. Just as they said not releasing the Mechanism of Injury, as that was something only the Suspect would know.

Quote from SW Affidavit for Probable Cause on a few by this Affiant:
Your Affiant's Probable Cause
The recitation of facts contained in this Affidavit is not meant to be a complete narrative of all information that is known to Your Affiant, but only a summary of facts, to necessitate the establishment of sufficient probable cause, in support of this affidavit, for the issuance of this Evidentiary Search Warrant.


JMHO, I believe this to also be true with the other SW Affidavit that we all turn to, the iPhone & iPad. I believe it to be factual, it has to be, but it is only a " to necessitate the establishment of sufficient probable cause, in support of this affidavit, for the issuance of this Evidentiary Search Warrant"

When the Press Conf was given at approx 3:30pm on April 18, Captain of CID Spann, had been to the scene, spoken to or knew what the CG Campers told Investigators, had went over the video (probably more than a couple times) knew what the crime scene looked like, spoke with the Ellis County Sheriff's Dept property evidence collection team that helped that came out to assist in collecting evidence, Spoken with or someone had spoken with BB. He did not just off the cuff state unfactual information. It was very calculated and with purpose. JMHO have to look at everything as a whole and not pick and choose, because none of it states same facts, yet states facts know to them.

In the iPad & iPhone SW Affidavit signed April 19 556 pm , it states

April 18 at approx 0506 hours --The caller advised a female subject (later identified as the victim Terri Bevers) was at the location and was not breathing and was deceased.
** Official Time line provided by MPD states 2 calls at approx 500, so is this a 3rd? 1 min prior to the FD arriving on scene... this 0506am call states that she not breathing and deceased..

As first responders arrived on scene they observed several exterior and internal doors with extensive damage to them as well as broken glass throughout the inside of the church
**this would be the LEO who arrived after the FD
**no mention of glass around the victim - yet in Official Press Release read by Chief Smith it reads diff than the various SW Affidavits*
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...eline-*NO-DISCUSSION*&p=12523272#post12523272

Investigators arrived on scene and were able to access the video surveillance recordings within the church
**when did Investigators arrive?

Investigators reviewed the video of the incident which shows a subject wearing a black helment, black balaclava, dark pants, dark long sleve shirt, black gloves, and a black vest with Police in white lettering on the front and back.
**true

The subject is seen walking throughout the building holding a hammer, breaking windows and going through offices.
** same as Capt Spann stated

At approximately 0418 hours, the victim Terri Bevers is observed entering the building through the main door under the awning area.
**same as Capt Spann stated

The video shows Terri Bevers walking toward where the suspects location.

Neither the suspect nor victim, were seen again on the video.

** he knows the time marker suspect last seen **JMHO AND NOT SEEN AGAIN after last time seen on video**, he knows the time marker MB last seen on video, he knows when the campers came into the building they also have not stated if they are seen on video together - just that the assault is not seen on video

The victim was later found deceased at the south west corner of the interior of the building.
**later as in after the video and when CG campers found her.


April 22 Updated Timeline: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...eline-*NO-DISCUSSION*&p=12523292#post12523292
4:16 a.m. Mrs. Bevers' pickup truck is shown on video surveillance driving into the church parking lot

***** why not put 4:18 a.m. did MB go in and then out and return Back in a 2nd time at 4:20 ???

4:20 a.m Mrs. Bevers appears on video surveillance camera walking into the church building
5:00 a.m Two 911 calls received from location
5:01 a.m. FD dispatched
5:03 a.m. Initial Patrol Officers dispatched

*******5:06 a.m. no mention of the call listed on the iPhone & iPad SW Affidavit stating "The caller advised a female subject (later identified as the victim Terri Bevers) was at the location and was not breathing and was deceased."
5:07 a.m. FD arrives at the location
5:10 a.m. Officers arrive at the location

 

[11frogs]

I doubt a money problem, of whatever sort, was primarily tax related. If they made less the tax was less. If the tax was bigger, so was the income to pay it with. Sometimes people just spend too much (if you have 3 kids, money can get tight), and when they do taxes will be a part of a picture, but not the picture itself. imo

Not necessarily - if they had stock or options and sold them and didn't pay taxes at the time it was sold this could put them in a world of hurt. If they took out monies in a 401k could be reason for large tax bill. Missy might not even know that he had sold off anything if it's in his name because he wouldn't need her permission or signature.

 

[Jackeee]

Marking my spot. I know some posters don't like this, but I don't know a quick way to get back here from my iPad. I end up taking the scenic route, but this time I'm marking my spot. I'm such a rebel. :shame:

 

[privateaye]

"Your own emotions are as destructive, and perhaps more so, than a bullet, or a blade, or a bottle of poison." - Lt. Joe Kenda

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 

[ardenmost]

Razz, I think that you are exactly correct. In addition to the information extracted from MB's personal devices, I am sure that the "Targeted Numbers" were also based on LE's in-person interviews.

The affidavit for the SW states, "Affiant has further probable cause to believe that during the specified date range the "Target Numbers" did in fact have contact with Ms. Bevers." Based on information that can be independently verified, the "Target Numbers" do not represent every person who was in contact with Missy in the days leading up to her death. For example, we know that Missy was in Austin. The only other person from the Austin CG gathering listed in the SW was AT, but he obviously was not the only person with her in Austin (pictures from the Austin CG event can be found on MB's FB page). None of MB's family is listed in the SW. Missy's friend, who she saw immediately before she left for Austin and was later interviewed, was not included. However, RB & VB, who were in California for at least the week leading up to MB's death, were included as "Targeted Numbers." With all of that information, it is logical to conclude that the "Targeted Numbers" were not selected solely because the POI had been in contact with MB. There were clearly other things at play.

Razz, I agree with your assessment that they wanted to further invest things "that could be construed as vital to the case." In other words, LE wanted to investigate those with motive IMO. LE either needed to rule out the people with "Targeted Numbers" or investigate any leads that may be generated based on information unearthed on their devices. And that leads to the $64,000 question - did these people with "Targeted Numbers" pass muster?

ETA - It's interesting to note that LE stated that the "Target Numbers" were imperative in identifying the suspect.

N

OMG! Thank u!

 

[Camerabug]

Just a few odds and ends to throw out for feedback. All are jmo, and I don't get offended by alternate viewpoints or I wouldn't join a forum...just saying

1) a lawyer was saying that he was appalled at how much information was included in MPD's SWs. He said it was way more than was necessary, and his thinking was they may have given too much info to the perp which in turn has made their job much harder. (I'm not a lawyer, but I can see where he's coming from)

2) he also said he was appalled at the number of informational pressers for the same reason.

3) I wonder if search warrants are being requested by the Feds now for wire taps etc based on the tower dump-if this has been determined to be a capital case and so it appears to be slowing but in reality it has gone "underground ". I'm not in law enforcement either, so I don't know how these things work..sheesh!

4) I do think the Nissan was somehow related to this case...I just can't quite figure out how. The gym just down the road where MB worked out was open 24-7. She was avoiding that gym where she used to work out in the early morning before her kids got up (my working theory-no proof just yet but it seems likely given her usual schedule on M-W-F) My theory is that somebody took her bubbly, kind, encouragement (and maybe a touch of flirtation) as something more than MB intended. I have two specific suspects in mind. Was she on someone's mind? One suspect works or worked (not sure of current status)at that gym and one is a camper. MT has stated that MB was a bit naive. Perhaps she misread this fellow and things were getting bothersome. I'm not there yet..work-in-progress...jmo

5) question: could one obliterate traces of human blood with dog blood? Wash a garment several times and then introduce dog blood to muddy the waters and get inconclusive tests from certain spot tests while getting positive for dog blood in others. Overall scoring as dog blood?

 

[SteveS]

I think that's why MPD borrowed a Stingray from NYPD. The police don't have to remain stationary to use those either. They can drive around and everyone's cellphones will ping off them just as if a tower was close by. (That's why so many folks object to the use of warrant less searches of this nature.) My guess is a Trac-phone or a similar burner was used but has probably been disposed of. We can only hope MPD got some good pings first...

I can't imagine how this sort of device would be relevant to the MB case or how they might have gotten some "good pings" with one for this case. When you have one, you can go to an area and capture cells there. But you can't go there with one and use it to time travel back to the past to discover what cells were in that area at a possibly-incriminating time.

 

[tazman1160]

Marking my spot. I know some posters don't like this, but I don't know a quick way to get back here from my iPad. I end up taking the scenic route, but this time I'm marking my spot. I'm such a rebel. :shame:

Try bookmarking it. That's what I do and it works well.

 

[observation]

I can't imagine how this sort of device would be relevant to the MB case or how they might have gotten some "good pings" with one for this case. When you have one, you can go to an area and capture cells there. But you can't go there with one and use it to time travel back to the past to discover what cells were in that area at a possibly-incriminating time.

Can you possibly explain why this information was shared with the public after the crime against MB was committed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk