TX - Elizabeth Barraza, 29, murdered setting up garage sale, Harris County, Jan 2019 #2

[JnRyan]

I've considered the killer may have been a younger adult, possibly still living at home, who borrowed his parents truck. When LE came calling, the parents hired an attorney and the investigation stalled. Related to something to do with Star Wars group.

JMO, just one theory.

I think that is possible, not likely, but possible. (One of my theories on the Missy Bevers case is that it is a younger adult.) But to add to your theory, what if we have a young adult, 18-19 yo, who has graduated HS and living at home. His parents go on a cruise or other such getaway and junior has a job so he stays at home while their gone. He uses the truck and his father's .357 (or .38 spl or other such caliber) revolver. Might the parents come back and not be any wiser? My own father had 2-3 handguns, but some he had not fired in 5-10 years. As long as the guns were cleaned and reloaded he might not pick them up or look at them for another 2-3 years.

I don't think it is likely, but with what few details we have I can't rule it out.

 

[BaffleMe]

I've considered the killer may have been a younger adult, possibly still living at home, who borrowed his parents truck. When LE came calling, the parents hired an attorney and the investigation stalled. Related to something to do with Star Wars group.

JMO, just one theory.

It might stall, but would it stop? LE can get around that with search warrants, subpoenas, IMHO

 

[MimosaMornings]

Not sure why it’s not coming up for you, could be an issue with the link? Idk. See attached. this is for a data reporter, not analyst.

Thank you!
Probably operator error on my part.

 

[spivey]

I’m one of those that believes the killer was wearing a disguise. I further believe that there is at least a possibility that the vehicle was disguised as well. Maybe they swapped out the license plate for a stolen one. Maybe they skinned the truck to change the color. I admit that changing the color and/or logo seems far-fetched, but for the killer, a successful disguise may mean the difference between freedom and a life behind bars. And since this is Texas, the difference between freedom and a date with Old Sparky.

In this scenario where the killer and their vehicle are both disguised, not only might the killer have confidence that they won’t be ID’d, they may even want to appear on video in an effort to throw off the investigation. MOO

 

[PrairieWind]

I haven't really followed this case much, so I apologize for maybe sounding ignorant. But when I watched the video of the shooting, as the shooter walks up, the first thing I thought was "its a woman." Has that been discussed?

 

[iamnotagolem]

I haven't really followed this case much, so I apologize for maybe sounding ignorant. But when I watched the video of the shooting, as the shooter walks up, the first thing I thought was "its a woman." Has that been discussed?

Yes, extensively.

 

[PrairieWind]

Yes, extensively.

Ok. Thank you.

 

[Ursamajr]

Here it is:

I'm so behind so my apologies if this discussion is over - I hear:
1:25 Shooter: You were right. Sorry. I can't. (unintelligible).

If there is any possibility this is the case, there might have been a recent conversation/confrontation that took place elsewhere. It could have been a log term issue or a recent short one. An ultimatum or decision could have been reached where he was unable to handle or live with the outcome/final decision she made. (i.e. "leave your husband" "no, move on" "okay" and then next day "I can't").

I have always been on board with the theory this is a man wearing a disguise. I know there were some people that still thought there was a possibility that shooter is a woman, but I think that this video almost totally rules that out.

 

[canteloupe]

I'm so behind so my apologies if this discussion is over - I hear:
1:25 Shooter: You were right. Sorry. I can't. (unintelligible).

If there is any possibility this is the case, there might have been a recent conversation/confrontation that took place elsewhere. It could have been a log term issue or a recent short one. An ultimatum or decision could have been reached where he was unable to handle or live with the outcome/final decision she made. (i.e. "leave your husband" "no, move on" "okay" and then next day "I can't").

I have always been on board with the theory this is a man wearing a disguise. I know there were some people that still thought there was a possibility that shooter is a woman, but I think that this video almost totally rules that out.

I also heard the shooter say "You were right," though was less sure of the words that came after.

I similarly concur with an intentionally non-gender-conforming disguise assessment. Tone of voice, wig malfunction, and gait lead me to believe this is an individual assigned male at birth.

 

[Ursamajr]

Tone of voice, wig malfunction, and gait lead me to believe this is an individual assigned male at birth.

Exactly what I was thinking. Also, her cheerful greeting makes me think she didn't immediately recognize him until he got closer or spoke. I do think she did at some point but that's just IMO.

 

[Justiceforelizabeth]

I'm so behind so my apologies if this discussion is over - I hear:
1:25 Shooter: You were right. Sorry. I can't. (unintelligible).

He says “you were right. Sorry. I have the <unintelligible> To shoot you.”

the “shoot you” part is VERY clear. The only thing clearer than “good morning”

I want to say, and it makes the most sense, that he says “I have the order to shoot you” but it seems like that word is too long to fill in that blank. It seems like it would be a one syllable word. Or two syllable phrase, because I think he does say “the.”

Listen to the clip that Locomule graciously made louder.
https://www.reddit.com/user/Locomul...urce=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

At around 1:19 the shooter sounds like he says “give it to me” and she says “no!”

maybe this wasn’t a hit. Maybe Liz had something this guy wanted and she knew it and didn’t want to give it up. Maybe it was an ongoing conflict. Maybe she had said “look the only way I’m giving it to you is if you shoot me.” And maybe this is why he’s saying “you were right. Sorry. I’m gonna have to shoot you.”

Maybe he doesn’t say “I have the order to shoot you.” Maybe he tried to say something like “I have the right to shoot you” or “I’m gonna have to shoot you” and he misspoke and tripped over his words. Maybe he actually said “I have the nerve to shoot you” after she might have jokingly said “if you have the nerve.” I think these words in this audio are key to figuring out what happened

 

[canteloupe]

Many threads ago, I mentioned in passing my curiosity about the yard sale signage. I rewatched the helicopter footage, then scanned through news photos and can't make out any signs at all on corners or street posts. It just strikes me as super odd, as 1.) that's a terribly convoluted neighborhood and 2.) signage seems like ideal subject matter for photojournalists.

Another thing caught my attention while reviewing the helicopter footage: of the two street lights on that road, one is directly in front of their driveway. This compounds the brazenness of the shooter, but I'm not sure if the street light is on when the shooter approaches. The garage lights are certainly on, as are the truck's headlights. I don't see the same halo under the street light. Waiting for the street light to turn off would help obscure identity. Is that one of the reasons for the four-minute delay?

I also wanted to entertain the idea that the garage sale is a red herring all together. What if her typical departure for work was sometime after her husband's? Perhaps she worked closer to home and therefore had an opportunity to walk the dog from 645 to 7am. Or if she always kept her vehicle parked at the curb, perhaps intercepting her on the path from the front door to her car was the original plan.

 

[BaffleMe]

Many threads ago, I mentioned in passing my curiosity about the yard sale signage. I rewatched the helicopter footage, then scanned through news photos and can't make out any signs at all on corners or street posts. It just strikes me as super odd, as 1.) that's a terribly convoluted neighborhood and 2.) signage seems like ideal subject matter for photojournalists.

Another thing caught my attention while reviewing the helicopter footage: of the two street lights on that road, one is directly in front of their driveway. This compounds the brazenness of the shooter, but I'm not sure if the street light is on when the shooter approaches. The garage lights are certainly on, as are the truck's headlights. I don't see the same halo under the street light. Waiting for the street light to turn off would help obscure identity. Is that one of the reasons for the four-minute delay?

I also wanted to entertain the idea that the garage sale is a red herring all together. What if her typical departure for work was sometime after her husband's? Perhaps she worked closer to home and therefore had an opportunity to walk the dog from 645 to 7am. Or if she always kept her vehicle parked at the curb, perhaps intercepting her on the path from the front door to her car was the original plan.

When you say "four minutes," the only four I know of is from time husband left, until the shooter appeared. Is that what you are referring to?

 

[Ursamajr]

He says “you were right. Sorry. I have the <unintelligible> To shoot you.”

the “shoot you” part is VERY clear. The only thing clearer than “good morning”

I want to say, and it makes the most sense, that he says “I have the order to shoot you” but it seems like that word is too long to fill in that blank. It seems like it would be a one syllable word. Or two syllable phrase, because I think he does say “the.”

Listen to the clip that Locomule graciously made louder.
https://www.reddit.com/user/Locomul...urce=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

At around 1:19 the shooter sounds like he says “give it to me” and she says “no!”

Thanks for the link!! I'm trying to hear the "shoot you" but I just can't. Not saying he doesn't say it but I just can't hear it. I really wish this sound clip had the video to go with it. Even though I know the general time, It's hard to place exactly when the car shows up when it's just sound.

Some things I hear in this enhanced clip:

:28 - EB "it's too much time"

:42 - "what do you know, you slept/stepped in/on it"

:45 EB - "you did"'

:48 EB - no idea but whatever is said seems extremely significant. She places the accent on it and raises her voice.

1:04 Shooter - "I TOLD YOU, YOU SLEPT/STEPPED ...(unintelligible)... I TOLD YOU"

1:15 - "WHAT?!"

1:20 shooter - "you took off"

1:22 EB - "I did"

1:25 Shooter - "You were right. Sorry. I can't. OK.

I'm not saying any of this is what was actually said, it's just what I'm hearing.

 

[Justiceforelizabeth]

Thanks for the link!! I'm trying to hear the "shoot you" but I just can't. Not saying he doesn't say it but I just can't hear it. I really wish this sound clip had the video to go with it. Even though I know the general time, It's hard to place exactly when the car shows up when it's just sound.

Some things I hear in this enhanced clip:

:28 - EB "it's too much time"

:42 - "what do you know, you slept/stepped in/on it"

:45 EB - "you did"'

:48 EB - no idea but whatever is said seems extremely significant. She places the accent on it and raises her voice.

1:04 Shooter - "I TOLD YOU, YOU SLEPT/STEPPED ...(unintelligible)... I TOLD YOU"

1:15 - "WHAT?!"

1:20 shooter - "you took off"

1:22 EB - "I did"

1:25 Shooter - "You were right. Sorry. I can't. OK.

I'm not saying any of this is what was actually said, it's just what I'm hearing.

 

[Justiceforelizabeth]

I think you’re hearing parts of a radio she has on? She doesn’t start talking to the shooter until after she greets him with “good morning”

 

[canteloupe]

When you say "four minutes," the only four I know of is from time husband left, until the shooter appeared. Is that what you are referring to?

Yes. There's a very narrow window between street lights turning off (on or before ~6:45), the husband leaving (~6:48), the encounter/shooting (~6:52), and full dawn (~7:17am). I'm also fairly certain there are school bus stops that overlap with these times within the neighborhood. Margin of error is razor thin.

Broken record, I know, but I also think it would be really interesting to see the neighbor's footage for the entirety of those four minutes. I'd wager that there's a reason HCSO is withholding and why there's no public interrogation of the possibility that the husband made visual contact with the shooter/vehicle.

To be crystal clear, I'm absolutely not suggesting compliticity; rather, I'd be concerned with his safety if he did indeed get a glimpse of the shooter. Radio silence on the part of LE about this potential sighting would be rightly warranted.

On another note, while I'm less convinced there's a 501st connection, I'm confident this is an angle that HCSO has covered. There's at least one, if not more, local members who are current LEOs.

 

[Ursamajr]

I think you’re hearing parts of a radio she has on? She doesn’t start talking to the shooter until after she greets him with “good morning”

I was wondering this. Podcast/radio possibly.

 

[Ursamajr]

I think you’re hearing parts of a radio she has on? She doesn’t start talking to the shooter until after she greets him with “good morning”

Sorry, forgot to address this - what I did hear in the original clip I don't hear now. What I thought was "good morning" (I think this at :49) now sounds like an exclamation of shock or anger of some sort. Again, just to me. There's no way to be sure.

 

[Justiceforelizabeth]

Sorry, forgot to address this - what I did hear in the original clip I don't hear now. What I thought was "good morning" (I think this at :49) now sounds like an exclamation of shock or anger of some sort. Again, just to me. There's no way to be sure.

no she says good morning at 1:13 and he answers back “morning!”