TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers,45, murdered in church/person in SWAT gear,18 Apr 2016 #15

[SteveS]

Sorry if this has been mentioned....Tricia's guest said that CT posted that her kids stayed at Grandmas house the night of murder. I think one of our fabulous WS posters debunked this several threads ago. CT posted back in March that the kids stayed overnight at Grams not on the night of the murder. When I heard the guest state that as fact I listened to every else she said very cautiously.

Great point. It was a fun listen with lots of gossipy innuendo, but no hard facts revealed, sloppiness on details, and mostly just her impressions from talking to people rather than some sort of razor-sharp analysis. If she was answering to a MSM boss, this sort of "reporting" would not pass muster in the least.

 

[FelicityLemon]

What does "turned intimate mean" ?

Different meanings to different people I imagine, but it still doesn't mean an affair or physical contact in my definition unless they are discussing what they've done to, or even want to do to or with each other.

I want to be clear though, that I'd have a huge problem (or rather DH would have a huge problem: me) if I learned my DH was communicating intimately in any definition with another woman. Not cool. There could still be no physical affair, but I'd consider it intimate if A and B were talking about their respective marriage privacies like complaining about not enough sex, spouse's hygiene, etc. That kind of conversation could lead to physical.

I'm not making excuses, just explaining my view.
Flirtatious: I'd be greatly POd and as I said DH would have biiiiiig problems, but Intimate: there'd be talk of divorce because that kind of talk doesn't happen by accident or overnight.

 

[Snow Flower]

I bet her husband would adamantly disagree with this. Loss of wife, loss of mother to his kids, loss of income, loss of partner in life, whole world turned upside down, there's NOTHING in this event that is a plus for him.

Well, it would depend on the truth of how the marriage really was. You are assuming that the marriage was a good one. In that case I would agree with you. But things we have read in the search warrants might make one wonder. Financial problems and intimate text messaging, plus the many, many hours MB worked away from home (according to the MIL in the people magazine article) all these things MIGHT have indicated the marriage was in trouble. IF divorce was imminent it could have been a motive. It has been in other murders.

 

[sunsetbeach]

With all due respect, this is way too nitpicky. And simply wrong. If a MSM reporter (who has to answer to an editor, a legal team, and whose reputation is on the line) tells us "The MPD said such and such" then it's silly to demand a video of the MPD saying it, the name of the MPD spokesman, and/or a transcript of the conversation, before accepting it as having been said.

We can question motives of MPD offering up such info to mainstream media, and perhaps speculate misdirection motives. Maybe. And we can wonder if the info is accurately being relayed (ie, did MSM actually say this?) if it's on TV rather than in print. But the idea that MSM is simply making it up as they go along? That's the exact opposite of what their job is, and just silliness.

ETA - someone posted the following that I hadn't read before I stated the above, and that adds further light - "One article released by the non-specific "Fox News Staff" on their website stated that LE said some things to them. Apparently it was ONLY to them, because none of the other MSM repeated it. Only Fox." So we do know that this info is accurately related here, it has been vetted by Fox, it is being owned by them, and it's in print. And it's a scoop. Given the fact that news organizations priority is their credibility, and that Fox is taking pains to make sure it's out there under their name, it's a lock MPD indeed said this.

Your free to have your opinion, I can respect that. I don't believe everything I hear from reporters and will leave it at that. ☺

 

[Estelle]

BBM. This I agree with. Tricia has made clear what and who was acceptable to sleuth and discuss. Further, this is her website, and the guest on her show was someone she trusts as a reliable journalist who is reporting the local scuttlebutt and possibly insider information. No one is asking or expecting the participants on WS to take anything as gospel truth.

For many reasons, my initial belief was RB was the perp. Since he has an alibi I suppose that is not possible. My mind is open, and I hope everyone else's is too. More than anything, I hope this monster is brought to justice in a swift manner. And though I am an opponent of the death penalty, I really hope in this case Texas justice is served.

BBM If RB's only alibi is the golf photo, then the timestamp on the photo needs scrutiny. I am very suspicious of RB.

 

[Littletipsy]

With all due respect, this is way too nitpicky. And simply wrong. If a MSM reporter (who has to answer to an editor, a legal team, and whose reputation is on the line) tells us "The MPD said such and such" then it's silly to demand a video of the MPD saying it, the name of the MPD spokesman, and/or a transcript of the conversation, before accepting it as having been said.

We can question motives of MPD offering up such info to mainstream media, and perhaps speculate misdirection motives. Maybe. And we can wonder if the info is accurately being relayed (ie, did MSM actually say this?) if it's on TV rather than in print. But the idea that MSM is simply making it up as they go along? That's the exact opposite of what their job is, and just silliness.

ETA - someone posted the following that I hadn't read before I stated the above, and that adds further light - "One article released by the non-specific "Fox News Staff" on their website stated that LE said some things to them. Apparently it was ONLY to them, because none of the other MSM repeated it. Only Fox." So we do know that this info is accurately related here, it has been vetted by Fox, it is being owned by them, and it's in print. And it's a scoop. Given the fact that news organizations priority is their credibility, and that Fox is taking pains to make sure it's out there under their name, it's a lock MPD indeed said this.

I agree with you on certain aspects, but Fox News is no longer a trusted news source.....They operate now off of their own agenda without regard for truth or consequences. We need to be careful with Fox in my opinion.

 

[1&2&3]

If CT is innocent, why is she not making lots of noise, shouting from the roof tops so to say, to dispute it? I would want air time like BB and RB have had, so the reporters could question me.

Even if CW is a shy person, with the fingers pointing in my direction, I would have to find the gusto to defend myself to the public.

 

[SuzDuJour]

Odd that they would carry the box though. :waitasec:

Maybe it was church owned and kept in the box.

 

[mountainguy777]

If CT is innocent, why is she not making lots of noise, shouting from the roof tops so to say, to dispute it? I would want air time like BB and RB have had, so the reporters could question me.

Even if CW is a shy person, with the fingers pointing in my direction, I would have to find the gusto to defend myself to the public.

She's probably in shock that anyone could even consider her. She's a mom of 4 doing her thing.

 

[Littletipsy]

Interesting. Maybe they have a suspect after all.

I hope they do because saying "we now have a detailed description, and then not releasing it to the public raises eyebrows and makes them look silly.

 

[ArianeEmory]

If CT is innocent, why is she not making lots of noise, shouting from the roof tops so to say, to dispute it? I would want air time like BB and RB have had, so the reporters could question me.

Even if CW is a shy person, with the fingers pointing in my direction, I would have to find the gusto to defend myself to the public.

Probably being advised by a lawyer.

Besides, these "unofficial" POIs are always damned if they do, damned if they don't. If she made public appearances, different people would criticize THAT. They would say she wasn't upset enough, or she was too upset, or they just had a "gut feeling" she was guilty from the look on her face.

If this was happening to me, I'd be getting a lawyer, shutting off my social media, and staying at home--ESPECIALLY if I was being falsely accused. Probably because I've been on WS too long and I know how "unofficial" POIs are treated.

 

[Cannonball3804]

With all due respect, this is way too nitpicky. And simply wrong. If a MSM reporter (who has to answer to an editor, a legal team, and whose reputation is on the line) tells us "The MPD said such and such" then it's silly to demand a video of the MPD saying it, the name of the MPD spokesman, and/or a transcript of the conversation, before accepting it as having been said.

We can question motives of MPD offering up such info to mainstream media, and perhaps speculate misdirection motives. Maybe. And we can wonder if the info is accurately being relayed (ie, did MSM actually say this?) if it's on TV rather than in print. But the idea that MSM is simply making it up as they go along? That's the exact opposite of what their job is, and just silliness.

ETA - someone posted the following that I hadn't read before I stated the above, and that adds further light - "One article released by the non-specific "Fox News Staff" on their website stated that LE said some things to them. Apparently it was ONLY to them, because none of the other MSM repeated it. Only Fox." So we do know that this info is accurately related here, it has been vetted by Fox, it is being owned by them, and it's in print. And it's a scoop. Given the fact that news organizations priority is their credibility, and that Fox is taking pains to make sure it's out there under their name, it's a lock MPD indeed said this.

Respectfully, I'm the "someone" you quoted above. I have a degree in Journalism. I have worked in both print and online media in my life. So it isn't a completely uninformed opinion when I state that the Fox affiliate's article is suspect.

For one thing, local TV affiliates aren't exactly known for their accuracy in investigations. That is more the realm of print journalists. Remember the plane that crash-landed in San Francisco, and the TV station that broadcast fake pilot names that were all racist Asian names? Yeah, that's the kind of careful "vetting" to which I refer. And dare I mention Dan Rather and Tom Brokaw?

In the MB case, the TV station posted something online without direct quotes, and without naming the source. They could have at least stated that they spoke to an unnamed source at the MPD who didn't have permission to go on record but who was in position to have knowledge of the investigation, blah blah blah. Instead they just said "Midlothian police said...". That's just sloppy. And the story isn't even attributed to a specific news reporter. Also very sloppy. Even if some reporter did get a scoop, we have no idea if they accurately relayed the information they received, because they didn't bother to quote it word for word and they didn't have the courage to put their byline on it.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

If CT is innocent, why is she not making lots of noise, shouting from the roof tops so to say, to dispute it? I would want air time like BB and RB have had, so the reporters could question me.

Even if CW is a shy person, with the fingers pointing in my direction, I would have to find the gusto to defend myself to the public.

I don't see LE accusing her of anything, but instead it coming from gossip. I also don't think BB/RB's airtime exactly helped them.

 

[MargeGunderson]

If CT is innocent, why is she not making lots of noise, shouting from the roof tops so to say, to dispute it? I would want air time like BB and RB have had, so the reporters could question me.

Even if CW is a shy person, with the fingers pointing in my direction, I would have to find the gusto to defend myself to the public.

Because that kind of public decrying of innocence never convinces anyone of your innocence and usually has the opposite effect, causing people to say 'she protests too much'.

 

[mountainguy777]

I don't think they have a suspect. Just a basic description. They aren't gonna taunt or infer "we are coming for you!", they would just make an arrest and then tell the public why.

 

[iluvmua]

You can tell the perp is a female. IMO, the bevers family have nothing to do with this. jmo

if LE is focusing on CT, there must be a reason why. jmo

 

[Cannonball3804]

I hope they do because saying "we now have a detailed description, and then not releasing it to the public raises eyebrows and makes them look silly.

Here's what I think. They now have a detailed physical description - vetted by experts in the field - as to height, weight, perhaps gender, perhaps info having to do with a reason for the distinctive walk, etc. They know of someone who fits that profile. They could be planning on getting a search warrant for items/data pertaining to that person, and the expert description that was just completed is going to give them the probable cause that they need for a judge to sign the SW.

LE wouldn't want to go ahead and tell us the detailed description and have the perp hear that info prior to the SW being executed.

 

[mountainguy777]

You can tell the perp is a female. IMO, the bevers family have nothing to do with this. jmo

if LE is focusing on CT, there must be a reason why. jmo

LE is focusing on CT?

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

I am not knowledgable about mace and what physical damage and evidence it would leave behind, but I do wonder if this was used to initially subdue MB.

Coincidentally, a social media image from one of the target numbers, shows another name on that list demonstrating what appears to be a pink mace canister. It could also be a personal alarm, I'm not sure.

Anybody else see this that can identify the pink canister please?

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

While not searching SM for the photo, I can tell you that if it is a 3-1/2 " long pink canister, with a 1" pink elastic with Velcro closure wrapping around the hand, that could likely be "Sabre Red - Maximum Strength Pepper Spray." Mine was bought at the gun range, and does not include a personal alarm.

And I'd hope no one would think I was a murderer for carrying it.

 

[shefner]

I still think I see a man in that SWAT suit...but what throws me off is that crazy walk and that swinging of the arms. Like others have said, its very hard to watch the surveillance because that is Missy's killer...just walking up and down the halls waiting for her to arrive. And while I wonder why the person wore that suit, as it would be a challenge to move around in it without experience doing so, I also realize that all the perp's DNA is contained inside that gear. There wouldn't even be a hair that would be at the scene of the crime.

Big questions for me, other than who is that, is how did they get there and get away....and how did they get away with a bloody SWAT suit? You would think that just walking through the church and walking out the door would leave a bloody impression everywhere. What did they do with that attire when they were done? So many questions but no answers.