TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers, 45, killed in church/suspect in SWAT gear, 18 Apr 2016 #38

[urtxtigress]

If SP is carrying her on his back, back down to where the glass table is in front hallway, I am assuming she was killed back by the kitchen area.

 

[Jethro4WS]

Ok Jethro4WS (I so want to add a Tull to your name)- why is it so important that this had to happen in front of the library in the South hallway? You've been saying this for a long time now so you obviously have a good reason. And even though I can't make sense of it, I'm hoping you will enlighten me.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

It isn't that it is important that it had to happen there. It is just what I get from what MPD said and their descriptions and my own interpretation of what SP was doing in their movements throughout the church based on the video we have. I can't get past the idea that Missy would ignore those Dutch Doors as they look like they were thrown open and not just opened. I could see her ignoring the door open in west hall as it would look like just an open door. There is more than enough glass there to meet the a lot of glass found around her body requirement considering the wall and doors to the library are glass and don't look all that different than the entry doors we see from that same camera view to the right (with the exit sign).

Because the Dutch Doors were open like that we know it affects just how far the camera there can detect motion anywhere down the hall where the top part of the open dutch door blocks the sight lines down the hall. We saw the camera cut off where SP was at the door just beyond the Dutch Doors (about 20 feet down the hall) but we see that when SP came back down that hall it picks SP up about 10-12 feet further down the hall. So, if Missy went down that hall and anywhere to the right of the middle of that hall the camera there would have lost her motion sooner.

Also I can't get past how it was described about Missy entered and then walked off camera - you have to watch and listen to it rather than read the transcripts - as it sounds to me like he is describing a single scene and I don't believe they would have been stitching video together by that time so that leads me to believe it came from a single camera view and that can only be the camera looking down the South hall.

I don't see how MPD doesn't have video of SP larger than life walking toward cameras in the NW or SW corners of the building getting to where Missy was killed if she wasn't killed where I think. Those kinds of videos should have at least provided a decent screen cap or three that might better help to identify SP or their gear and tools. I can't believe that if MPD had such things they wouldn't have released them instead of having people trying to identify a person by a gait.

That is where I start with this - where she was killed. And then work the crime backwards and forwards from there. It isn't the case of needing that specific location to be where Missy was killed to shoehorn some aspect of this crime or a POI. The specific location is, however, important to understanding the crime and who might have killed Missy no matter where that location is in the church.

If Missy were killed where I believe she was then that means SP was not only aware of the cameras but knew much more about them since getting out of the church from that location in the South hall would require knowing a lot more about the church as well. If she was not killed where I believe then I have to rework the entire crime from a blank slate.

I can only work with the same things that are available to everyone else. I just see them differently than many others. So I am stuck where I am at until I see some evidence that makes it not possible. I am quite okay with being wrong.

 

[liz b.]

I guess the big question really is - where and when was SP last seen. Depending on where that was we should be able to determine a few things such as whether or not SP was in a position to view Missy's arrival, whether or not SP had to not just be aware of the cameras but was actively determining which ones SP would be seen on, what other video should be available (MPD claims to have some), where Missy was killed, how SP could have gotten out of the church unseen.

We would definitely be able to determine quite a bit - such as where she was killed and/or how SP got out of the church unseen - if we had any footage from cameras at the NW and SE corners and most especially if anything was captured in the main entry area.

Unless the cameras at the NW corner were not working that night there should be video of SP getting to the main entry area, for example, because there isn't a way to get there the first time without tripping a camera. It may be possible to get there a second time unseen and thus out of there unseen via the Sanctuary due to the way the northern doors in the west hall to the sanctuary are set up. There is a folding type outer door there, unlike the other west hall entrance near Holy Grounds, before you get to the doors that open to the sanctuary. Of course it also depends on whether or not a camera viewing the main entry area would pick anything up with the darkness - even if nothing could clearly be discerned it should have at least tripped. I say that only because we can see from the SWFA cameras that the parking lot lights at Creekside were blazing away and there should have been ambient light getting into the main entry area.

In order to get to the bathroom area right at the SW corner we should have screen caps of SP bigger than life getting there. Why MPD would hold onto to those if they wanted any help identifying SP I don't understand so I am inclined to think SP did not go there given we know both cameras were working there. Likewise, we have the open door seen in the footage at the end of the long MPD video and unless there are two doors to the room SP came out of MPD should have a larger than life view of SP walking toward that camera and again I would question why they would hold onto that if they need any help in identifying SP.

So, if MPD would just cough up some more video of SP moving around - and they better not be lying about it - we could resolve more elements of this crime. We know if they release just one frame from the video where Missy was last seen we will be able to determine with high confidence where exactly she was killed.

The only thing that concerns me about anything MPD said early like what you mention is that subsequent to that they were saying they didn't understand the movements of SP in the church either.

RBBM : Agree. LE did say that he spent much time in the kitchen area. They seemed genuinely not to understand his movements prior to MB arriving in the church. jmo Maybe he got high in the kitchen area, and his subsequent wanderings around the church were meaningless...jmo

 

[Lanesmommy]

Moving right along...

Since the release of this new information, it seems likely that many of us are settling in on our POI. I think it's wise at this point not to name anyone at all-by initials or location.

I also believe the car in the SWFA parking lot is related to the murder. It's easy to overthink something like this crime, and it's all beginning to come into focus at last.

I feel like a good good review of my notes (discarding many old theories) and highlighting others might bring clarity. I must admit I was way off on the cause of MB's murder. That said, I feel like the current theory that the POI has a connection to LE just feels right. It makes sense.

i wonder why the family is so worried there may be more murders? Presumably they mean themselves, but perhaps not. What do they know? They have been asked not to speak out anymore by the police. The NG podcast was very interesting and informative.

I have a fairly good memory as far as most of this case in the beginning and I'm caught up til now. But you mention you now have a good idea about the POI. Was this from your own research or has it been discussed here in these threads? TIA.

 

[TeaTime]

In the photo in post 970 of the previous thread, I can see the driver's head very clearly. Light skinned person with brown hair that looks to be a short over the ear hairstyle. Pug nose. Someone zoom up on that, I don't know how.

 

[arkansasmimi]

In the photo in post 970 of the previous thread, I can see the driver's head very clearly. Light skinned person with brown hair that looks to be a short over the ear hairstyle. Pug nose. Someone zoom up on that, I don't know how.

If it the one I posted, I just ss it not sure how to do the edits and it wasn't my orig work, but it is from the video. Drivers head is clearer and light skin. Dark looking hair unsure of "color". About all I could see. I feel sure that SWFA/LEO can get a good photo ss from frames of orig. JMHO

 

[Amateurpi1]

In the photo in post 970 of the previous thread, I can see the driver's head very clearly. Light skinned person with brown hair that looks to be a short over the ear hairstyle. Pug nose. Someone zoom up on that, I don't know how.

Interesting take because from this new pic on this page, I think the person might have a helmet on because it is very shiny where the person’s head would be… I think no helmet would show up just dark and muted like the rest of the pic… but I’m going to go look at post 970 now.

 

[Inthedetails]

In the photo in post 970 of the previous thread, I can see the driver's head very clearly. Light skinned person with brown hair that looks to be a short over the ear hairstyle. Pug nose. Someone zoom up on that, I don't know how.

Can someone pull the photo forward to this thread?

 

[Inthedetails]

Looking at the lengthy video of the COI (car of interest!) in the parking lot in the rain, it occurs to me that the driver was driving around the lot in a very similar way as the perp wandered around the church. Surely the driver would expect the lot to have security video? Yet, s/he drove around the lot as if to make sure to get on camera. What other purpose would there be? Maybe nervous energy? IDK, but the movement of the car reminded me of the movement in the church.

And, I noticed when the car pulled out of the lot, the driver used the blinker. I thought that was telling. It was the middle of the night with little traffic (though there was indeed some traffic)....to me, that shows an otherwise law-abiding citizen. It was not a "reckless" driver tearing around the parking lot or zooming out of the lot to the road, but a careful driver. Even when parked in the lot for a few minutes, the driver pulled into a designated space when s/he could've just parked anywhere in any fashion.

FWIW, JMO.

 

[rodee34]

In the most recent Altima photo:

The driver seem to be leaning forward, kinda of scrunched down, talking on a device.
Has hat/ head gear on, perhaps just the balaclava on?
In the front of the "costume" the word "POLICE" should be glowing under those lights. Perhaps pre-jacket or??
Something is in the driver's side back seat. Notice the lighting doesn't go all the way across.
Something, maybe papers are on the front drivers side dash.

 

[SandyQLS]

delete not sure I should show who it is

THAT looks like a helmet on the driver - note the top is reflective like the car surfaces and that is not hair. Left arm reaching out to steering wheel, left hand on steering wheel. Does not appear to be a very tall person either.

ETA: I didn't say so months ago when we only had the released grainy still photos of the Altima exiting the driveway... but I thought I saw a helmet in there on the driver. Other posters were very negative that anyone could see anything inside that interior, so I stopped short then regarding it looking like a helmet head, and it was very blurry. jmo.

 

[rodee34]

The "papers" are probably the mirror... oops

 

[No it's not]

Can someone pull the photo forward to this thread?

quoted arkansasmimi post (blue by me):

Originally Posted by arkansasmimi

Morning!
RBBM, This is not my original thought and I do not like taking credit for something not mine.

But if you watch the video and look at Google arial view, there are cameras that we do not see video to match that angle. SWFA answered on their comments section a few questions. They stated they posted the video on their own and that they had some (cant remember if video or ss) that were grainy. I sure the rain hurt the visibility, some. But these are very high powered video cameras. *again not my orig thought but was a good one - watch the coyote video how far it zoomed across the highway into the field. IIRC it was last summer.

Vehicle is at rear by loading dock with lights off then turns back on. I haven't sit down and figured total time at each area but I may. Here is a ss someone did and it pretty clear. I asked NIN if he/she could see anything since NIN has the expertise I do not lol To see how awesome these cameras are and blows my mimi mind, NIN said at the "second mark" for this particular spot there are 14 FRAMES. My understanding is this was just zoomed in on and nothing done.
SWFA 2:36

I go back and forth on if car was related to murder. I see people saying there was over xx time before murder. JMHO depends on what was done or needed to be done prior to first seen on camera at 3:50. I just trying to keep open mind. One thing is also someone thinks there was some sort of device on dash. I remember that being a topic when we only had the 2 still shots on leaving. That is interesting if it were a cell phone. BUT the tower dump SW that we have seen start at 3 and end at 5 am. JMHO so if the Altima was tied to murder MPD would have to tie cell phone data to that veh or I would think. JMHO


Except it is 2:56 and the car is in on the East side of the SWFA property facing the highway:

 

[arkansasmimi]

It isn't that it is important that it had to happen there. It is just what I get from what MPD said and their descriptions and my own interpretation of what SP was doing in their movements throughout the church based on the video we have. I can't get past the idea that Missy would ignore those Dutch Doors as they look like they were thrown open and not just opened. I could see her ignoring the door open in west hall as it would look like just an open door. There is more than enough glass there to meet the a lot of glass found around her body requirement considering the wall and doors to the library are glass and don't look all that different than the entry doors we see from that same camera view to the right (with the exit sign).

Because the Dutch Doors were open like that we know it affects just how far the camera there can detect motion anywhere down the hall where the top part of the open dutch door blocks the sight lines down the hall. We saw the camera cut off where SP was at the door just beyond the Dutch Doors (about 20 feet down the hall) but we see that when SP came back down that hall it picks SP up about 10-12 feet further down the hall. So, if Missy went down that hall and anywhere to the right of the middle of that hall the camera there would have lost her motion sooner.

Also I can't get past how it was described about Missy entered and then walked off camera - you have to watch and listen to it rather than read the transcripts - as it sounds to me like he is describing a single scene and I don't believe they would have been stitching video together by that time so that leads me to believe it came from a single camera view and that can only be the camera looking down the South hall.

I don't see how MPD doesn't have video of SP larger than life walking toward cameras in the NW or SW corners of the building getting to where Missy was killed if she wasn't killed where I think. Those kinds of videos should have at least provided a decent screen cap or three that might better help to identify SP or their gear and tools. I can't believe that if MPD had such things they wouldn't have released them instead of having people trying to identify a person by a gait.

That is where I start with this - where she was killed. And then work the crime backwards and forwards from there. It isn't the case of needing that specific location to be where Missy was killed to shoehorn some aspect of this crime or a POI. The specific location is, however, important to understanding the crime and who might have killed Missy no matter where that location is in the church.

If Missy were killed where I believe she was then that means SP was not only aware of the cameras but knew much more about them since getting out of the church from that location in the South hall would require knowing a lot more about the church as well. If she was not killed where I believe then I have to rework the entire crime from a blank slate.

I can only work with the same things that are available to everyone else. I just see them differently than many others. So I am stuck where I am at until I see some evidence that makes it not possible. I am quite okay with being wrong.

The part where Suspect is walking back up the South hallway. We do not know that this was not spliced / different time stamp.

And reading this, just make me think. Suspect would have to know some of MB routine to know where to be when she entered. How would Suspect know or not know that possible open Dutch Door would cause her to stroll down that South hall? We do not even know that the doors were still open when MB arrived. Routine would dictate where MB would go jmho. Those Dutch doors are not far to be going all the way down that hall. JMHO.

Also they said she first walks in at 4:18 a.m. and 4:20 a.m. is on the Official Timeline from MPD. So we do not know that she didn't come in then go back out and reenter at 4:20. JMHO

IF Suspect was not targeting MB would be the only reason not to know MB routine. With info we have from MPD, I can not reconcile personally this not being a targeted murder. I personally do not feel was a robbery gone wrong.
Targeted would know that others were showing up and need to get out of there fast. If burglary would not know that but would know no alarms. JMHO and how would other LEO showing up with a person in SWAT gear there look? JMHO

 

[verbonica]

Looking at the lengthy video of the COI (car of interest!) in the parking lot in the rain, it occurs to me that the driver was driving around the lot in a very similar way as the perp wandered around the church. Surely the driver would expect the lot to have security video? Yet, s/he drove around the lot as if to make sure to get on camera. What other purpose would there be. Maybe nervous energy? IDK, but the movement of the car reminded me of the movement in the church.

And, I noticed when the car pulled out of the lot, the driver use the blinker. I thought that was telling. It was the middle of the night with little traffic (though there was indeed some traffic)....to me, that shows an otherwise law-abiding citizen. It was not a "reckless" driver tearing around the parking lot or zooming out of the lot to the road, but a careful driver. Even when parked in the lot for a few minutes, the driver pulled into a designated space when s/he could've just parked anywhere in any fashion.

FWIW, JMO.

Yes, the whole thing is just very odd. As near as I can tell the driver did not use the blinker while leaving the hwy entering the parking lot, though. I've noticed that my blinker light helps to illuminate around the side of the hood so I can see curb or whatever is over there better. I wonder if the driver was ever looking at the building, or just kept looking straight ahead?

 

[Amateurpi1]

In the photo in post 970 of the previous thread, I can see the driver's head very clearly. Light skinned person with brown hair that looks to be a short over the ear hairstyle. Pug nose. Someone zoom up on that, I don't know how.

Whoa! I went back and looked and now see what you are talking about. If we can see that much I would hope LE can pinpoint the person (even if it clears the person from MB’s investigation) but yes, I saw the profile and hair. Creepy! It gave me chills!:scared:

 

[No it's not]

In the photo in post 970 of the previous thread, I can see the driver's head very clearly. Light skinned person with brown hair that looks to be a short over the ear hairstyle. Pug nose. Someone zoom up on that, I don't know how.

Zooming in the "nose" would be in-proportionally large for the face. Looks more like clouding to me possible caused by moisture on surveillance camera:

 

[SandyQLS]

In the most recent Altima photo:

The driver seem to be leaning forward, kinda of scrunched down, talking on a device.
Has hat/ head gear on, perhaps just the balaclava on?
In the front of the "costume" the word "POLICE" should be glowing under those lights. Perhaps pre-jacket or??
Something is in the driver's side back seat. Notice the lighting doesn't go all the way across.
Something, maybe papers are on the front drivers side dash.

The word 'POLICE' is small on the front upper left of SP's outfit in the videos inside the church. The large lettering is on the back. In the new photo, I think the left arm is extended forward to the left hand on the steering wheel, so that would obscure the front lettering. That said, there is a white or bright blurry glow about where the front lettering would be... nice catch.

 

[TenaciousTBacon]

Looking at the lengthy video of the COI (car of interest!) in the parking lot in the rain, it occurs to me that the driver was driving around the lot in a very similar way as the perp wandered around the church. Surely the driver would expect the lot to have security video? Yet, s/he drove around the lot as if to make sure to get on camera. What other purpose would there be. Maybe nervous energy? IDK, but the movement of the car reminded me of the movement in the church.

And, I noticed when the car pulled out of the lot, the driver use the blinker. I thought that was telling. It was the middle of the night with little traffic (though there was indeed some traffic)....to me, that shows an otherwise law-abiding citizen. It was not a "reckless" driver tearing around the parking lot or zooming out of the lot to the road, but a careful driver. Even when parked in the lot for a few minutes, the driver pulled into a designated space when s/he could've just parked anywhere in any fashion.

FWIW, JMO.

Driving around the lot carefully (and walking around the church) could simply be reconnaissance, checking to see who and what is nearby. I agree that the driver is careful and law abiding at the time. That can also be insurance against being pulled over/checked on by routine patrol. A car parked carefully near the street in a rainstorm, in a space, isn't going to raise red flags. However, not using a signal is a good excuse to pull over a driver, and a driver seen pulling out of a gun store parking lot in the middle of the night might be interesting. Driver was taking no chances.

 

[rodee34]

Zooming in the "nose" would be in-proportionally large for the face. Looks more like clouding to me possible caused by moisture on surveillance camera:

I don't see the hair, but perhaps the balaclava, and a big nose.. Of course later, it will look different to me.