TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers, 45, killed in church/suspect in SWAT gear, 18 Apr 2016 #40

[janesmith787]

The discussion began in terms of how clean the Church was at TOD in an effort to determine how much cross contamination to expect. When was the last time the floors were buffed and bathrooms sanitized?

There was never speculation that a member of the Church's cleaning crew murdered Missy.

That's what I get for reading while distracted...y'all can ignore my post. [emoji23][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[arkansasmimi]

I'm not clear on where the picnic tables are located, but the first picture in your post appears to be the treed area between the two parking lot wings north of the church. That area and the roadside area could both be considered potential areas of egress for the killer. With what little video is available to us, there's no way to know if the dog was used to search the entire church grounds.

RBBM, Agree.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Shoe prints and tool marks are of evidentiary value only if they have shoes and tools to compare them with.

Agree, that why I was saying short of someone coming in with the Suspect attire or someone turning someone in it is going to be hard. And without that it, will be lots of room for a Def Attorney to raise reasonable doubt.

As far as the tools, from search warrants there was stated some tools were left behind. My point on tools were if they matched the tool marks and paint that could prove that brought the tools with them, not got from inside afterwards. Unless the person was in fact a LEO then they were impersonating one which is a Class B misdemeanor and breaking and entering, and Murder.
JMHO And if they do not have shoe prints they couldn't compare if they ever came across the real ones. JMHO, I thinking those prints near NE busted doors, if they found some prints in kitchen, some around the area where body was... and rooms where Suspect was known to be by video, if all matched, and possibly matched the boots size/type/shape (in video) circumstantial evidence if nothing else.

 

[iluvmua]

I believe that whoever killed her either knew her personally or knew of her.

I am a local and I really want this case solved.

 

[arkansasmimi]

I thought we settled this matter of the gloves many moons ago. They are tactical gloves. Rubber gloves must fit tightly to stay on. Easy to snag a hole in them, too. We could see the outline of their hand if SP wore tight fitting rubber gloves. SP had no need for welder's gloves.

As WannaBDetective mentioned, welder's gloves are heavy and fireproof. SP is dressed in SWAT gear; not necessarily in welder's attire.
It is interesting about your thoughts that SPs gloves may be elbow length. :thinking:

Respectfully BBM,
While someones opinion may have been settled, factually we do not know many things.
Gender, race (other than Asst Chief Johnson stated that does not appear to be dark skinned), what type helmet actually is, if the SWAT vest is real or just made to look like is. Nothing factual about type of boots or gloves. MPD has a better quality of video and more that public has seen and better forensic equipment. And anything they know they have not shared for good reason, jmho.

So factually, we can not state that anything "has been settled on many moons ago" other then speculation on any of the outerwear the Suspect is wearing. Or for that matter also how the Suspect got there and left.

Big Hugs De! :loveyou:

 

[Scout]

Agree, that why I was saying short of someone coming in with the Suspect attire or someone turning someone in it is going to be hard. And without that it, will be lots of room for a Def Attorney to raise reasonable doubt.

As far as the tools, from search warrants there was stated some tools were left behind. My point on tools were if they matched the tool marks and paint that could prove that brought the tools with them, not got from inside afterwards. Unless the person was in fact a LEO then they were impersonating one which is a Class B misdemeanor and breaking and entering, and Murder.
JMHO And if they do not have shoe prints they couldn't compare if they ever came across the real ones. JMHO, I thinking those prints near NE busted doors, if they found some prints in kitchen, some around the area where body was... and rooms where Suspect was known to be by video, if all matched, and possibly matched the boots size/type/shape (in video) circumstantial evidence if nothing else.

Evidence of what though?

My point is that the tool marks on the door and any shoe prints found at the scene aren't going to lead police to Missy's killer. Identifying the killer is what is lacking in this case. I don't think there's any question that the person seen dressed in tactical police clothing in the church video is the person who broke in to the church and murdered Missy. The question is: Who is that person?

 

[Tippy Lynn]

Evidence of what though?

My point is that the tool marks on the door and any shoe prints found at the scene aren't going to lead police to Missy's killer. Identifying the killer is what is lacking in this case. I don't think there's any question that the person seen dressed in tactical police clothing in the church video is the person who broke in to the church and murdered Missy. The question is: Who is that person?

I'm not sure why you think tool marks and foot prints wouldn't give police a lead. There have been many cases where shoe prints have led police to killer/s.

 

[No it's not]

• What would a burglar be looking for breaking into a church on a Monday night/early morning? $$$($)?
• Look at the directory sign showing OFFICES to the South
• Look at the point of entry at the OPPOSITE side
• All outside breakage for what? At least 2 glass doors, 2 window frames and the lookout glass of the outer kitchen door. MPD clearly states only one point of entry.
• MB was found in the SW corner (either room/alcove or inside auditorium). SP did not have to kill MB. SP was fully dressed in tactical POLICE outfit from head to toe and could have easily fled the scene. He could have ordered MB to stay low. Who would have dared to attack him?

All IMO of course.

-Nin

 

[arkansasmimi]

Evidence of what though?

My point is that the tool marks on the door and any shoe prints found at the scene aren't going to lead police to Missy's killer. Identifying the killer is what is lacking in this case. I don't think there's any question that the person seen dressed in tactical police clothing in the church video is the person who broke in to the church and murdered Missy. The question is: Who is that person?

LOL Agree, but when they find that Suspect (and could be anyone far as I know because I personally know nothing) they have to have any evidence from the crime scene that morning. So none of that can be discounted. And again, we do not know that anything from the crime scene will not lead to the Suspect. We do not know if any DNA or what if anything was left at the scene. JMHO We do not know anything as far as evidence they have or don't. Just discussing stuff that could have or could have happened. For all we know MB could have scratched the suspect face. Glove came off... We know nothing...

BUT, if your going to arrest someone, and charge them with Murder (or any crime) better dang well have evidence to support your charges. (could happen to anyone). And in the U.S. even if arrested, innocent until proven guilty. eace:

 

[MrsPC]

You know I keep working on screen captures from the MPD surveillance video - getting as many shots as I can of the killers eyes. And I have quite a few. I don't understand why lots of others aren't studying the killer's eyes like I am. I mean, it's the *only* identifiable feature of the killer in the video. The killer went to extraordinary lengths to cover up every other part of her body - but her eyes *are* visible and uncovered in lots of frames. And I realize many of you may not be working on desktops or have good graphics or whatever...but I can clearly see the killer's eyes and have studied the eyes of MB family, FB friends and specifically those individuals listed as Target interests on the phone warrant, and to me it's almost a slam dunk as to who those eyes belong to. And, I feel certain that since MPD enlisted the aid of the Tarrant County Digital Forensic unit that surely they have the ability to see those eyes too, but apparently just don't have enough other evidence to tie that person to the murder. I've also been reading about the FBI use of Iris recognition and newer studies related to that type of evidence. I wonder if law enforcement/FBI could try and glean a clear enough image of the killer's eyes from the video and compare to a real image of potential suspects eyes? Does that sound crazy?

 

[arkansasmimi]

I'm not sure why you think tool marks and foot prints wouldn't give police a lead. There have been many cases where shoe prints have led police to killer/s.

:thinking:
OJ Simpsons, shoes and prints from the murder scene come to mind. How FBI figured out type of shoe, and OJ swore he never had those type til a photo surfaced with him wearing a pair. (paraphrasing)

AND no clean up done by the Suspect, MPD stated they never stated anyone cleaned up anything. Church did clean up after crime scene was released. *(check media thread for documentation of that)
....
LOS ANGELES, June 19— An expert from the Federal Bureau of Investigation testified today at O. J. Simpson's trial that the person who left a trail of bloody shoe prints along the walkway in front of Nicole Brown Simpson's home last June wore size 12 shoes, the same size worn by Mr. Simpson.

The witness, William J. Bodziak, an authority on shoe prints and tire treads, retraced his quest to track down the model of the shoes that left the prints, which took him to two factories in eastern Italy. He said the make, distributed only in 1991 or 1992, was Bruno Magli, a model he described as "high-end" -- that is, costing roughly $160 a pair. http://www.nytimes.com/1995/06/20/u...-prints-left-crime-scene-fbi-expert-says.html
....
“I know that Bruno Magli makes shoes that look like the shoes they had in court that’s involved with this case, I would have never worn those ugly-*advertiser censored* shoes,” Simpson, who was found not guilty of the murders in criminal court, says in the deposition.

The shoes were a key piece of evidence in the murder case – the killer left a bloody size 12 Bruno Magli shoeprint at the scene of the crime. Attorney Daniel Petrocelli notes during the deposition that only 299 pairs of Bruno Magli shoes in that size have ever been sold in the United States.

Still, Simpson insists that he would never wear them. “They were ugly to me. Aesthetically, I felt that they were ugly and I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and to me they were ugly shoes,” he says.

Except Simpson was photographed wearing Bruno Magli shoes nine months before the murders in a picture first published by The National Enquirer. During the deposition, after Simpson says the shoes were “ugly,” Petrocelli produces this photo and asks if the man in the photo is him.
“It appears to be me, yes,” a stunned Simpson answers.
http://people.com/crime/oj-simpsons-reaction-to-photo-of-bruno-magli-shoes-in-deposition-tapes/

 

[JnRyan]

I believe that whoever killed her either knew her personally or knew of her.

I am a local and I really want this case solved.

I suppose there is a possibility the killer was someone vandalizing property and stumbled upon her - purely random. But I also tend to believe that the most likely possibility involves someone who knew her or at least knew of her. And, if it was someone who knew her, this was premeditated.

 

[arkansasmimi]

You know I keep working on screen captures from the MPD surveillance video - getting as many shots as I can of the killers eyes. And I have quite a few. I don't understand why lots of others aren't studying the killer's eyes like I am. I mean, it's the *only* identifiable feature of the killer in the video. The killer went to extraordinary lengths to cover up every other part of her body - but her eyes *are* visible and uncovered in lots of frames. And I realize many of you may not be working on desktops or have good graphics or whatever...but I can clearly see the killer's eyes and have studied the eyes of MB family, FB friends and specifically those individuals listed as Target interests on the phone warrant, and to me it's almost a slam dunk as to who those eyes belong to. And, I feel certain that since MPD enlisted the aid of the Tarrant County Digital Forensic unit that surely they have the ability to see those eyes too, but apparently just don't have enough other evidence to tie that person to the murder. I've also been reading about the FBI use of Iris recognition and newer studies related to that type of evidence. I wonder if law enforcement/FBI could try and glean a clear enough image of the killer's eyes from the video and compare to a real image of potential suspects eyes? Does that sound crazy?

No snark intended... but it could be anyones eyes. Can not just arrest someone because eyes look like someone elses. Defense attorney could parade 50 people in that "eyes look like those".

What if the Suspect who is eventually arrested, is not your POI. Will you still think they are not the suspect? Suspect could be someone who targeted MB for some reason and no one knows anything about. That is why to me personally, motive could be anything as well as Suspect. Heck it could have stemmed from a road rage incident and the Suspect stalked her down. JMHO

But it is interesting and I appreciate your ability to do what your doing as I do not have that talent.

 

[wgram]

https://www.facebook.com/1950470073...1462364174./10154082916172359/?type=3&theater


Updated Timeline:
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 3:50 A.M. – Suspect first appears on video surveillance camera at Creekside Church of Christ
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 4:16 A.M. – Mrs. Bevers’ pickup truck is shown on video surveillance driving into the church parking lot.
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 4:20 A.M. – Mrs. Bevers appears on video surveillance camera walking into the church building.
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 4:35 A.M. – Participant in Camp Gladiator arrives at location
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 5:00 A.M. – Two 911 calls received from location
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 5:01 A.M. – Fire Department dispatched
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 5:03 A.M. – Initial Patrol Officers dispatched
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 5:07 A.M. – Fire Department arrives at the location
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 5:10 A.M. – Officers arrive at the location


Grabbed this from the media/timeline thread. Hope that's OK.

BBM I wonder why the person who arrived didn't see anything? Did they lay back in their seat and take a nap? Could they have seen something from where they were parked? Lastly did they get cleared from the police? Just asking. I would hate to have been that person. Male or Female? IDK but is it possible that they were involved? I highly doubt it cause of course they would be the first suspicion. Any number of participants wouldn't think anything of a car driving in the parking lot. The SP could have even been in the lot when they were entering the church and then slip out while all the commotion was going on. 4:35 am - 5:00 am gives a 25 minute window for anything to have occured. of course there were more participants arriving all along. I may be overthinking all this. Was the first participant seen arriving on video. Do we know for sure that is when they arrived?

 

[wgram]

Most churches are closed on Friday's since they work weekends. If they have people working on Friday, it's usually office staff...all that to say majority of the churches I know have their cleaning crews come in Friday. JMO

--
Hi Janesmith...For some reason, my computer is being wonky about quoting other members. Weird. Anyhow...

I am not sure if you're thinking of smaller churches. Perhaps not. But, FWIW, churches like CCOC typically have cleaning staff daily due to the constant flow of events, meetings, classes and activities in the church, 6-7 days a week. Looking at Creekside, it's busy almost every day with groups and meetings. Also, members hold private family events at the church. Of course, weddings are held, funerals, baptisms, on and on...

I think the office is closed only on Fridays. I am from New England and growing up my church was unassuming and old-fashioned. When I moved to North Carolina at one point, I accompanied a friend to church. It was like no church I had ever seen or imagined. Large, beautiful, modern, and an active hub for the community. I called it a "TV church." I saw many in parts of the South.

I pulled a link from the CCOS site just to show a view of their Sunday worship service. As an aside, while the adults are in service on Sundays, there are children's groups, nursery care, and teen groups. If there is ever a day a cleaning is needed....

http://www.creeksidecc.com/gatherings/

Is it OK to post this link? I am never quite sure.


All IMO.

When I checked out the calendar, I didn't see that they had a blood drive that weekend. There was an event on Saturday at 11:30 but nothing else. Maybe its not on the calendar?

 

[arkansasmimi]

BBM I wonder why the person who arrived didn't see anything? Did they lay back in their seat and take a nap? Could they have seen something from where they were parked? Lastly did they get cleared from the police? Just asking. I would hate to have been that person. Male or Female? IDK but is it possible that they were involved? I highly doubt it cause of course they would be the first suspicion. Any number of participants wouldn't think anything of a car driving in the parking lot. The SP could have even been in the lot when they were entering the church and then slip out while all the commotion was going on. 4:35 am - 5:00 am gives a 25 minute window for anything to have occured. of course there were more participants arriving all along. I may be overthinking all this. Was the first participant seen arriving on video. Do we know for sure that is when they arrived?

First camper arrived at 4:35 a.m. is what has been provided by MPD in their Updated Timeline 4/22/16. We (public) do not know where that time comes from - video or campers statement or both)
JMHO we do not know what the first camper saw or didn't see, or any other campers that arrived. We have not been privy to the Witness Statements or any Incident/Offense Reports.

JMHO Suspect had until the Police arrived on scene at 5:10 to have left. So much commotion that could have just drove straight out. Parked on North side it slopes down and is not lit up as much on that side. Straight out and turn right on HWY 287 then turn on lights, *possible too that they have vehicle lights leaving from SWFA video and we not aware. JMHO

 

[2Hope4]

Please be kind as I haven't gone back through all 40 threads. On the timeline it says suspect first appears and then MB truck. So is the first sign of the suspect inside?

Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk

This is why I believe LE DOES know what type of vehicle the SP was using! There's video of Missy's truck entering, so there should be video of the perps vehicle, as well as the first campers that arrived.

All I know is that the perp got there somehow and they weren't dropped on the roof by a helicopter!

 

[arkansasmimi]

When I checked out the calendar, I didn't see that they had a blood drive that weekend. There was an event on Saturday at 11:30 but nothing else. Maybe its not on the calendar?

Creekside Church of Christ had a Carter Blood Drive as stated in their Bulletin. Have not seen anything saying they did not have it.

Carter BloodCare is here today.
9:15—1:00
Mobile units are in the parking lot. http://www.creeksidecc.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Creekside-Bulletin-04-17-16.pdf

 

[Peachykeen]

Evidence of what though?

My point is that the tool marks on the door and any shoe prints found at the scene aren't going to lead police to Missy's killer. Identifying the killer is what is lacking in this case. I don't think there's any question that the person seen dressed in tactical police clothing in the church video is the person who broke in to the church and murdered Missy. The question is: Who is that person?

If a person was arrested and they were in possession of shoes that matched prints the police have from the scene..... that would certainly be a good lead.

 

[2Hope4]

I agree, I wonder where this camera is bbm


"There’s one surveillance camera where you can see the car in the far corner of the frame, parked in the distance. You can't make out a plate, and we're not even comfortable releasing anything about a possible make or model,” Johnson said.

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Po...idlothian-Murder-Investigation-376269831.html

snipped from media/timeline thread.

• Monday, April 18, 2016: 3:50 A.M. – Suspect first appears on video surveillance camera at Creekside Church of Christ
• Monday, April 18, 2016: 4:16 A.M. – Mrs. Bevers’ pickup truck is shown on video surveillance driving into the church parking lot.

Her vehicle is seen on surveillance driving into the lot, yet suspects is not?

Is the camera that sees a car parked in the distance the same camera that sees her vehicle drive into the lot that doesn't see suspects vehicle drive in.?

At this point, if they really and truly aren't comfortable saying the make, model of vehicle, etc., then why not release it and let the public know?????? AND, just when did this vehicle FIRST appear in that video??? AND just when did it LEAVE??