TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers,45, murdered in church/person in SWAT gear,18 Apr 2016 #10

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Waxahachie Media Publisher's Scott Brooks says,
in the 050516 The True Crime Show,
that the local buzz is that there likely is a suspect.

http://www.spreaker.com/user/triciag (starting at about 26:20 with the key points at around 27:00).
 
Few great snipped reads on police tactics (sorry it's long) [emoji53]

"If it's a suspect and you say 'person of interest,' you're using the euphemism to avoid problems down the line," says Kouri, a former New York housing police officer. What problems? Police sometimes "try to maintain that the person really isn't a suspect" in order to get him to agree to questioning without Miranda warnings, Kouri says. "You don't want the guy to lawyer up."

Kouri says across the country, "it's the legal counsel telling police chiefs that they should instruct their officers and train them to use that term."

<snip>

Headline: Publicly Identifying "Persons of Interest" Is As Destructive as Publicly Identifying "Suspects"

The Department of Justice has long maintained strong policies against identifying suspects in pending investigations. One major reason for this policy is lots of "suspects" turn out, to be perfectly innocent - yet the stigma of the "suspect" label may linger after they are publicly exonerated.

Or, worse, these "suspects" may never be publicly exonerated, even though internally, the investigators have come to believe they are innocent.

There's no DOJ policy, to my knowledge, against identifying a "person of interest." Yet the public is well-aware that "person of interest" is just a euphemism for "suspect." As a result, the use of this term, especially in high-profile cases, has already caused serious harm and is sure to do so again in the future. DOJ should expand its policy to encompass "person of interest" - not just "suspect" - designations - and state, city and local police should follow suit.

Failing that, the Attorney General and his state counterparts should exercise their discretion to either stop or, at a minimum, severely limit the "person of interest" designation to those cases where public dissemination of a name serves an extremely compelling investigative function.

Public pressure on investigative agencies seems to grow by the day. With a non-stop 24-hour cable news cycle focused heavily on crime stories, it is perfectly natural that police officials want to appear as though they are getting closer to solving whatever crime has most recently gained media attention.

But naming a "person of interest" is a cheap and destructive way out of this predicament. The power of government brings with it the obligation of restraint.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Littletipsy said:
it doesn't seem like a good place if you are going to be committing vandalism and murder. It could fall out.
Click to expand...

It seems like it may have...in another still I took of that same pocket--it looks like it is not there anymore..
 
Sparky395 said:
It sounds like he made a business merger with CG, an already established business. The wording is off just enough to make it sound like he created CG. More appealing to a customer who's not going to question the fine print. MOO
Click to expand...
these exaggerations and his seeming willingness to use this tragedy to promote his "self defense" business make me suspect him less. it attracts too much attention. the murderer would never do that.
 
BigCityAccountant said:
It seems like it may have...in another still I took of that same pocket--it looks like it is not there anymore..
Click to expand...

Do you think there's any possibility it could be a white shirt, partially untucked? Maybe the XXL white shirt that had to get sent to the dry cleaners?
 
RubyRed said:
The way I read it those campers were from his group. He said something like ..I see you. The camper responded I will always rep. Choose fit or something similar. Which in turn led me to searching him out . The more I discovered I just thought possibly jealousy in the workplace.Still not convinced he did it
He was posting that because of what happend women should sign up for his self defense classes..


I think it is going to come down to money either work related or immediate family . Then we have the infidelity. A lot of hate happening. Moo
Click to expand...

i thought he was talking to that women who was wearing a tank top with (i) on it. Possibly from his ichoosefit line??
she in turn was just saying you know I'll always represent your company.....sounded like it was all in good fun and not jealousy
JMO:)
 
Littletipsy said:
it doesn't seem like a good place if you are going to be committing vandalism and murder. It could fall out.
Click to expand...
exactly. the person who planned so efficiently their attire and timing would not put the phone there. its not a phone. its a screenshot of one moment- blurry and its not a phone IMHO. however, it would explain why LE keeps saying they think the perp had a phone. HOWEVER, we don't know if LE has shown us all of the video. or even best quality video. as a matter of fact, the odds are they HAVE NOT. there's likely more video and likely better quality or FBI expert enhanced video. they know lots more than we do. anything they release is designed to send a message and elicit a response from their suspect.
 
Breck80 said:
I need all you couch PIs (in my case, bed PI) to help me think of LE strategy on this one.

All of those names in search warrants released have children. That means a lot of lives are affected by the release of these documents today, especially in a small town. LE could have easily sealed them or blacked out the names, which they did not. I just feel like there's some reasoning behind why they chose to show everything in full. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Please dont take this as being snarky.

Just My Honest Opinion.... The reason (s) that these Search Warrants are being released, is because they were filed and are Public Records. They were obtained because as each one says the reason for Probable Cause to obtain whatever the Search Warrant is for. If they don't have valid Probable Cause they would not apply for one nor should a Judge sign off if it isn't sufficient. Unless the case is sealed, then all the documents are a matter of public record. Media whomever released them paid for those copies, obtained from the courthouse under Freedom of Information Act. (FOIA) JMHO That NBC affiliate has people camped out at the courthouse so when docs are filed they know right away.
 
BigCityAccountant said:
OH WOW! White Cell Phone in Pocket!!!!
attachment.php
Click to expand...

If that's a white cell phone, I call 'female'. Call me sexist, but I have yet to see any man with a white cell phone.

One more reason that I think it's female is that this video shows it walking down the hall touching the wall as it walks - it's another form of balancing yourself. Wearing unfamiliar and bulky clothing and shoes could make anyone a little less stable while walking, but it's an especially female behavior. We also saw this balancing behavior in surveillance video of another disguised murderer in a stairwell - turned out to be female.

In the very beginning, upper left portion of screen, very briefly starting at :07.

[video=youtube;ePS8TJ6UAqY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePS8TJ6UAqY[/video]

ETA: lol, as usual, in the time it took me to write my post, y'all have said it already! :D white phones = girls. Mine's white, too.
 
Breck80 said:
Few great snipped reads on police tactics (sorry it's long) [emoji53]

"If it's a suspect and you say 'person of interest,' you're using the euphemism to avoid problems down the line," says Kouri, a former New York housing police officer. What problems? Police sometimes "try to maintain that the person really isn't a suspect" in order to get him to agree to questioning without Miranda warnings, Kouri says. "You don't want the guy to lawyer up."

Kouri says across the country, "it's the legal counsel telling police chiefs that they should instruct their officers and train them to use that term."

<snip>

Headline: Publicly Identifying "Persons of Interest" Is As Destructive as Publicly Identifying "Suspects"

The Department of Justice has long maintained strong policies against identifying suspects in pending investigations. One major reason for this policy is lots of "suspects" turn out, to be perfectly innocent - yet the stigma of the "suspect" label may linger after they are publicly exonerated.

Or, worse, these "suspects" may never be publicly exonerated, even though internally, the investigators have come to believe they are innocent.

There's no DOJ policy, to my knowledge, against identifying a "person of interest." Yet the public is well-aware that "person of interest" is just a euphemism for "suspect." As a result, the use of this term, especially in high-profile cases, has already caused serious harm and is sure to do so again in the future. DOJ should expand its policy to encompass "person of interest" - not just "suspect" - designations - and state, city and local police should follow suit.

Failing that, the Attorney General and his state counterparts should exercise their discretion to either stop or, at a minimum, severely limit the "person of interest" designation to those cases where public dissemination of a name serves an extremely compelling investigative function.

Public pressure on investigative agencies seems to grow by the day. With a non-stop 24-hour cable news cycle focused heavily on crime stories, it is perfectly natural that police officials want to appear as though they are getting closer to solving whatever crime has most recently gained media attention.

But naming a "person of interest" is a cheap and destructive way out of this predicament. The power of government brings with it the obligation of restraint.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

There are a LOT of LE agencies working this case. I have to believe that they are assisting MPD with the timing of the release of these warrants, as well as helping them craft their statements to the press. JMO
 
d4j said:
Waxahachie Media Publisher's Scott Brooks says,
in the 050516 The True Crime Show,
that the local buzz is that there likely is a suspect.

http://www.spreaker.com/user/triciag (starting at about 26:20 with the key points at around 27:00).
Click to expand...

I only listened to that part (around 27:00), but it sounds like he knows less than we do here on WS (or what has been speculated on and sleuthed here, that is). He has the 'suspect' as an African American female, with a gait problem from a foot injury?
 
arkansasmimi said:
Please dont take this as being snarky.

Just My Honest Opinion.... The reason (s) that these Search Warrants are being released, is because they were filed and are Public Records. They were obtained because as each one says the reason for Probable Cause to obtain whatever the Search Warrant is for. If they don't have valid Probable Cause they would not apply for one nor should a Judge sign off if it isn't sufficient. Unless the case is sealed, then all the documents are a matter of public record. Media whomever released them paid for those copies, obtained from the courthouse under Freedom of Information Act. (FOIA) JMHO That NBC affiliate has people camped out at the courthouse so when docs are filed they know right away.
Click to expand...
i'm unsure about texas- but all warrants in my jurisdiction are not public record. they are very often and MOST often (when LE so desires, for purposes of an investigation) sealed. this one wasn't. intentionally. it was thought out and for strategic reasons not sealed.
 
As well the Warrants should have been released because there is a killer out there.

JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 229 more.
Total: 3,970 (members: 230, guests: 3,740)

Online statistics

Members online
230
Guests online
3,740
Total visitors
3,970
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,250
Messages
17,966,003
Members
228,732
Latest member
FrnkKrcher
Back
Top