TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers,45, murdered in church/person in SWAT gear,18 Apr 2016 #28

[rodee34]

Well I'm working on that at the moment. It's very slow going because the footage of the subject walking toward the camera is quite a distance away. So the data points are far fewer. I'm also currently back to my real work, which takes priority. Hopefully I'll have something soon.

BBM I totally understand. This case has us chasing our tails for lack of "facts." But we do appreciate your time consuming work, and everyone else's! Thank you Batbrat.

 

[Sillybilly]

Folks, as per Tricia's instructions set out in the OP of this thread, you can speculate on the individuals named in the warrant, but you cannot sleuth them. This includes their social media accounts.

from:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...T-gear-18-Apr-2016-28&p=12627138#post12627138

* YOU CAN SPECULATE ABOUT PEOPLE IN THE SEARCH WARRANTS AS LONG AS YOU USE THEIR INITIALS ONLY. This overrides an earlier decision I made. My apologies for the confusion. It is 100 percent my fault.

*if you do speculate please do not make comments on their personal appearance. That’s just rude. You can speculate on their behavior but if you want to post something unkind about their looks please don’t.

*Speculation is allowed if it involves someone who has been named in the mainstream media and you can logically put this person at the scene of the crime or can suggest they were somehow involved. Speculation has to be based on some semblance of fact. In other words, you can’t speculate that the dry cleaning people killed Missy. The police have confirmed they believe Missy was targeted. That’s a good place to start.

*Speculation does not mean you can sleuth any of these people. Their lives have been turned upside down and the last thing they want to see is something personal and embarrassing posted on websleuths for the world to see. No sleuthing aka no digging into their backgrounds and posting what you find.

 

[Eloise]

I did at one point think there was possibility SP could be CT.
But I've seen a recent full body pic of her and she's not the right body type. SP is top heavy - a man shape, or a woman with an 'apple' body type, but really too masculine in the body.
CT's body shape is more pear. She's not a small woman, she's "thick", but she's carrying weight in her lower half. SP is not.

Her centre of gravity would be a lot lower than the silhouette of SP posted by Batbrat.

 

[SKresearch]

I'm not sure you really understand digital photography/forensics.

I sure don't. (That is why I have been trying to "read-up" on it, to try to better understand it.) The information you provided is quite helpful. Thank you very much, for taking the time to post it.

 

[abstr]

Has anyone here ever broken their foot or know anyone who has?

In your opinion, could a foot broken in 3 places about 3 years ago cause a gait/walk similar to SP?

I had stress fractures from running in my right foot and it definitely causes me to walk a little differently. I am not singling anyone out because my belief is we will all be surprised when the arrest comes.

 

[SKresearch]

Thanks for this, SKresearch. To me (JMO), what some are seeing as 'writing' appears to be indention, instead - when we first looked at this in the early threads, I remember thinking maybe it was a trifolded piece of paper (floorplan?), because his thumb appears to go into the object a bit.

But in context, I really do think this was some sort of tool with indentions...something he kept attached to his SWAT vest when not in use, and pulled out occasionally to use. It appears it was something he may have used in Rm 12, since he exits the door with it still in his left hand. (Room 12 is a kids' classroom according to the church website, also used for ladies' Bible study.) For this reason, even though I'd considered weapon, I'm leaning more towards tool than weapon - he'd have no cause to use a taser, gun, or silencer in that classroom. But he may have used a breaching or multi-tool to enter the classroom or to inflict damage in that room.

So I'm still googling breaching and multi-tools...

Well here is the interesting part:

I thought it might be some type of "tool".

(And then, I noticed, it might have some type of writing on it.)

(And, I thought what I was seeing, might have an "M" in it.
* However, I did not post that.)

Then, someone else posted: Does it possibly have an "M"?
(I did not reply to that person, because I am not sure, what the deal is with this.)

[But that right there told me, that at least one other person, believed (as I do) that what they were seeing, might possibly be: some type of writing.]

``````
Anyway, in reply to what you stated,

what if it is "both"?

Some type of tool
AND
there is something stated on it.

``````
And then what is also interesting is: Someone then posted a photo regarding a forced-entry tool (advertisement in which it also depicts fireman/firewoman), and on that tool, is the brand name of that tool.

````````
I think what some people might be missing is:
Some things, "might" be, "both".

For example:
Some people might look at the following as, "multiple choice".
(choose, one "or" the other)
But what if it was "both":

Was out to get Terri Bevers

AND

played a cat & mouse game with police.

Some (if not most) "multiple choice" tests even have "both", as a choice.
A. .....
B. .....
C. "Both", A & B

("Both" may not be the correct answer, in regard to this.
But I would imagine you see what I'm saying.)

 

[SKresearch]

Give me a bit, to try to find the exact "still" shot I am referring to, and I will post it for you. (I have to find what thread it was in.) Thank you.

(I am still looking for it. And I just saw the photo, right before I posted about the "Halligan".) (The shot is probably in thread 25, 26, or 27.) It is the shot of: The person is prying the door, has hammer in left hand. (and tool they are prying with, in right hand.) (Perp's head is tilted/neck bent - to the right.) And the posters are discussing, what type of hammer, they believe it is. (I will find it, it just might take me a little while.)

Ok, I found it.
The surveillance camera video "still shot", that is shown at:
thread 25 (Page 19; posting # 271)

(When I was researching and came across the info. regarding "Halligan",
it then made me think of, the thing that this perp was using to pry the door open with.)

(I was thinking it possibly had two prongs, but then I could not find the video "still shot" again, in which to actually compare the two.)
Now that I have that cleared up,

I am wondering what this perp was using, to pry open that door.

````````
You know, I was thinking:
Although it is not "impossible" that it was a female, who was "prying open doors",

I find it sort of hard to believe that, a female would do that (unless they did have some type of training, in regard to 'something'.)

(Even if it is a male. Did 'he' have some type of training.)

````````
It's not every day that you come across a case in which a "female", is prying open doors.

`````````
I wonder if police were able to ever determine,
if this person was a male or female?
(Do they still "not" know???)

 

[abstr]

SK....Only my opinion but when things are posted in a way that you can't easily read, I skip over them. Might be just me....but....


(I was thinking it possibly had two prongs, but then I could not find the video "still shot" again, in which to actually compare the two.)
Now that I have that cleared up,

I am wondering what this perp was using, to pry open that door.

````````
You know, I was thinking:
Although it is not "impossible" that it was a female, who was "prying open doors",

I find it sort of hard to believe that, a female would do that (unless they did have some type of training, in regard to 'something'.)

(Even if it is a male. Did 'he' have some type of training.)

````````
It's not every day that you come across a case in which a "female", is prying open doors.

`````````
I wonder if police were able to ever determine,
if this person was a male or female?
(Do they still "not" know???)[/QUOTE]

 

[liloleme]

I thought MB & BB only had three children?

In this video, at 8:00, he says "four children".

"Sunday evening after church was the first opportunity that I've been able to spend with my four children, alone."

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Mi...-to-Dry-Cleaner-Search-Warrant-377343901.html

Apparently they are all girls, from 8:40:

"I'm 100% confident that you girls...I'm going to make my wife proud."

Just trying to get clarification on the number of children he has.

 

[Eloise]

I thought MB & BB only had three children?

In this video, at 8:00, he says "four children".

"Sunday evening after church was the first opportunity that I've been able to spend with my four children, alone."

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Mi...-to-Dry-Cleaner-Search-Warrant-377343901.html

Apparently they are all girls, from 8:40:

"I'm 100% confident that you girls...I'm going to make my wife proud."

Just trying to get clarification on the number of children he has.

I think someone here said he actually says poor children, not four children, but it's easily misheard

 

[okie_dokie]

Surely the driver of the car - if they're trying to hide something and not just innocent and oblivious - would have taken the sticker off by now.

I see three possibilities.
1. Driver/owner is unaware
If I had not been following this case closely I'm not sure I'd know LE is looking for a car. 287 is a bypass around Dallas for traffic from Ft. Worth to Houston. In this scenario there is a strong possibility that car is not local. Sticker is still there.
2. Driver is involved.
Sticker is gone. Some one familiar with the car may notice that though. Also, stickers can leave a residue outline when removed.
3. Driver is afraid
In this scenario, driver knows LE is looking for them but have something to hide (illicit meeting, etc.) or doesn't want to get involved. Sticker is probably gone. Driver is more likely local.

I lean towards option 1. Unfortunately, every day that passes the less likely the driver will remember anything useful from over a month ago.

 

[dizzychick]

I ran across this company that does surveillance sattelite cams, they were flying over some refugee camp and then again later to show how much it had grown.

Gave me the idea could we contact them and ask if they had views of the highway 287 on 4/18 at 2 3 4 and 5 a. central time with a zoom good enough to see any cars in the lot ? Just wondering, if they charge I would be willing to chip in if it was not too much as I am flat stumped for more clues...

http://www.digitalglobe.com/customer-service

 

[Nehemiah]

I think someone here said he actually says poor children, not four children, but it's easily misheard

I think it may have just been stress related, but unless he has a speech impediment, his lips/mouth say "four". He may have meant to say the "four" of us, to include himself. As in, it was the first time the four of us got to talk etc. But he definitely says 'four'.

 

[Eloise]

I think it may have just been stress related, but unless he has a speech impediment, his lips/mouth say "four". He may have meant to say the "four" of us, to include himself. As in, it was the first time the four of us got to talk etc. But he definitely says 'four'.

Agree with you. I don't think anyone has ever uncovered any reason for it other than what you say.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[Not_Enough_Sundays]

I read up on the murder of Betty Gore at the hands of her husband's ex-lover back in the 80s (someone in the last thread mentioned it).

It thoroughly creeped me out and made me think about how sometimes the last person you expect to be guilty has done unthinkable things. The fact that Candy Montgomery cleaned herself up in BG's bathroom and then went on to teach a vacation bible school class after brutally attacking her with an axe 41 times is beyond disturbing.

The fact that a jury found this woman not guilty and believed her nonsense story about self-defense and hypnosis is even more disturbing than that.

I read that story when pp posted it a few weeks ago. It made me sick to my stomach. so much wow!

 

[Sparky]

Hey Folks,

The photo has been determined it came from Mary Kay.

Let's please move away from it now.

Thanks!

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

I have only recently begun to wonder if it could be a teenage girl, with a teen boy driving the getaway vehicle. Any thoughts on that?

I in no way can see a teenager in gait nor smarts nor money to pull something of this magnitude off.

I'm leaning toward teenage boy due to strength involved in removing panic hardware, and also Batbrat's video analysis--agree that torso looks more male, proportionately.

I have seen teenagers with both a hunch and that turnout gait; in fact, I raised one. Even a teenage boy can have a hunchback if he is a gamer and/or inherits a propensity to that condition. Also speaking from experience, it doesn't necessarily mean such a person is nonathletic or clumsy. After watching the slow-motion video and several freeze-frames, I'm attributing that gait to a developmental condition, such as the orthopedist's opinion upthread (pelvic tilt) - he throws oddly from the hip when walking; it's not simply a foot issue, IMO. It doesn't take a whole lot of smarts to kill someone in a SWAT suit, nor money, necessarily, especially if someone is provided the SWAT outfit as well as background info, tools, and know-how. This person is not below-average in intelligence, probably, but I haven't seen anything to make me think he's a genius, either. And I do think he is not involved in this alone,

Which leads me to another point...the kitchen door. After mulling this over, I've decided that SP would have to be positively moronic to spend that much time removing the handle of the fire door if he were also going to break the back double doors (which he did). There's no reason for it except if the double doors were NOT a point of entry but were broken LATER, to vandalize and possibly also to try to confuse LE as to point of entry.

So breaking down the kitchen door had to be critical, in other words, as to his point of entry. Which begs the question, why?And the only reason I can come up with for that is:

1) he didn't want video of his entry into church (hall exits had cameras). This was important, somehow.

(Why? - was he NOT in disguise when he first broke in? Or was he in the SWAT disguise but needed dry off his clothes with kitchen towels?)

2) he needed to use the kitchen - something in or about the kitchen was absolutely essential to his plan prior to entering the rest of the church.

I've been assuming SP maybe used kitchen towels to dry off with, but now I'm wondering...someone upthread mentioned that a small group had met in the kitchen at 5:00pm that Sunday evening before the murder. Could an accomplice have left the SWAT gear in a bag in that kitchen? If so, it doesn't necessarily point the finger at that lifegroup...there was kitchen access earlier that day, too, when church was open to the public for services. The blood drive on Saturday might have also provided access if the building were unlocked. In any case, a complete stranger could've walked into that church and conceivably have made a package drop in the kitchen, with the SWAT gear inside. He could've tucked it away out of sight if hidden earlier, or even left it in full view if disguised in a box that looked kitchen-related (eg. Coffee pot box, paper products box, etc.). For that matter, it could've been hidden innocuously in a large kitchen trash bag...did SP find the SWAT gear in that large wheeled trash receptacle by the kitchen door?

Just wondering if LE made a thorough search of the kitchen (they probably did), and if they noticed any larger empty boxes there that would've been big enough to have hidden the SWAT gear in prior to her murder. (I'm thinking the gear was not likely left behind if SP had a modicum of intelligence...though maybe a search of large kitchen boxes wouldn't hurt.) IF gear had been left earlier in a trash bag for SP, it would be a convenient bag to take with him on the way back out after the murder ("he presumably left by the same way he entered")...he could strip off the SWAT gear and hide it in that same trash bag for prompt disposal (whether dumpster, private burning, or tossed in the reservoir north of the church).

*It should be noted that a reservoir and some private ponds as well as a fire station and high school are north of the church (about 3 miles).

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

Well here is the interesting part:

I thought it might be some type of "tool".

(And then, I noticed, it might have some type of writing on it.)

(And, I thought what I was seeing, might have an "M" in it.
* However, I did not post that.)

Then, someone else posted: Does it possibly have an "M"?
(I did not reply to that person, because I am not sure, what the deal is with this.)

[But that right there told me, that at least one other person, believed (as I do) that what they were seeing, might possibly be: some type of writing.]

``````
Anyway, in reply to what you stated,

what if it is "both"?

Some type of tool
AND
there is something stated on it.

``````
And then what is also interesting is: Someone then posted a photo regarding a forced-entry tool (advertisement in which it also depicts fireman/firewoman), and on that tool, is the brand name of that tool.

````````
I think what some people might be missing is:
Some things, "might" be, "both".

For example:
Some people might look at the following as, "multiple choice".
(choose, one "or" the other)
But what if it was "both":

Was out to get Terri Bevers

AND

played a cat & mouse game with police.

Some (if not most) "multiple choice" tests even have "both", as a choice.
A. .....
B. .....
C. "Both", A & B

("Both" may not be the correct answer, in regard to this.
But I would imagine you see what I'm saying.)

I agree, SKresearch, it could well be a labeled tool.

 

[SteveS]

I've decided that SP would have to be positively moronic to spend that much time removing the handle of the fire door if he were also going to break the back double doors (which he did). .

Have we seen what damage there was to these doors? I've heard it said here at WS that they were damaged, but haven't run across it in video or LE statements, much less have any idea of what extent. But I could have missed it.

The amount of damage matters, and whether that did or didn't offer access, and might offer an explanation of why access wasn't attempted there.

 

[Kamy]

I think someone here said he actually says poor children, not four children, but it's easily misheard

I heard four children. I went back and watched his mouth several times...after I sat here and said four and poor over and over and paid attention to
how the shape of my lips is when saying each word I noticed there is no "P" motion with his lips...rather than his lips closing or semi puckering
and coming together to make the "P" sound, his lips never close. IMO, he definitely says four. His lips don't come together, top lip goes up a tad
and bottom lip stays down.

Why? I don't know because we all know they have 3 girls.
Maybe this is just another anomaly, perhaps stress in being in front of media could cause that but then again he doesn't seem nervous
unless you count his hands being up at his mouth/chin the whole time.

I really don't think this matters much but it is another teaspoon of strange thrown into the mix.