TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers, 45, killed in church/suspect in SWAT gear, Midlothian, 18 Apr 2016 #47

[TexasEx]

Exactly how do you unload yourself of a hammer and prybar, fumble for a gun and manage to pull off two shots?
Exactly how do you shoot a gun with chunky gloves on?
You've got to stick your chunky finger into the trigger and pull.
How do you do that in mere seconds?

Lying or crouching in wait in a darkened room? Put the tools on the floor, take off heavy gloves, maybe put on latex gloves and use the gun?

 

[Razz]

Exactly how do you unload yourself of a hammer and prybar, fumble for a gun and manage to pull off two shots?
Exactly how do you shoot a gun with chunky gloves on?
You've got to stick your chunky finger into the trigger and pull.
How do you do that in mere seconds?

Exactly. How could this have been a suprise encounter? SP knew she was coming and what he was going to do.

 

[SteveS]

Exactly. How could this have been a suprise encounter? SP knew she was coming and what he was going to do.

Yep it might not have been a surprise in the exact moment.

Of course "not a surprise" doesn't mean perp knew MB beforehand, or had any idea MB was going to enter that building that night. It includes the idea that perp became aware that MB had entered, perhaps still intended to pick up some loot before leaving, and as he waited and tried to hide, he began preparing for a possible encounter just in case.

Maybe he even set down tools, took off gloves, took off helmet, and tried to bluff her into leaving as a fake cop, and she didn't bite. So afraid he'd get arrested since she had seen him, he shot her.

There's still the possibility perp WAS surprised, of course, dropped the crowbar etc, and was wearing the sort of gloves with which he was able to shoot MB in a panic. Or maybe he had finished his use for crowbar and the like, and they were already discarded before the encounter began to unfold. With so little known (to us) detail, we can't discard any possibility.

 

[iamnotagolem]

Exactly. How could this have been a suprise encounter? SP knew she was coming and what he was going to do.

I totally agree, she was dead 2 minutes after she arrived. SP didn’t try to hide, didn’t try to run, he was ready and waiting for her.

 

[FromGermany1]

I totally agree, she was dead 2 minutes after she arrived. SP didn’t try to hide, didn’t try to run, he was ready and waiting for her.

Agree! Maybe, as a further thrill he showed his face without helmet to MB before the sudden murder. I think, he did.

 

[SteveS]

I totally agree, she was dead 2 minutes after she arrived.

"2 minutes" is one guess. But it's only a guess. It could have happened much later than that, maybe another 10 minutes later.

 

[iamnotagolem]

"2 minutes" is one guess. But it's only a guess. It could have happened much later than that, maybe another 10 minutes later.

What do you mean one guess? I thought that was verified information. She was wearing a smart watch (can’t remember the brand) that would have tracked her heart stopping. I’m assuming that’s how they got such a precise TOD.

 

[Ozoner]

The FACTS are, MB was killed by a gunshot, not by some other weapon.
. . .
The FACT is, when LE was asked for details of how MB died, they said they're aren't answering that now, and never came back to answering it later. Ever.

Snipped.

It's true that LE has been vague, so how can you state that Missy was killed by a gunshot? I consider it an open question.

 

[SteveS]

What do you mean one guess? I thought that was verified information. She was wearing a smart watch (can’t remember the brand) that would have tracked her heart stopping. I’m assuming that’s how they got such a precise TOD.

I've followed this case closely from day one, and I can certainly forget things or be mistaken like anyone else, but afaik that's just from "one speculative guess leads to another speculative guess" thinking. A maybe, followed by an if, succeeded by a therefore, with more if's and maybe's layered on top, and eventually there's a curated idea that gets cited as fact. And then the various pieces are assumed to be true.

In broad strokes, I think we have 4:15ish on one end, 4:30-ish on the other, that's about it, and being more precise depends on assumptions rather than known facts, assumptions that can be a bit wrong.

I'm only trying to identify facts as facts and guesses as guesses, and I don't want to make it difficult for facts to be used as facts. So if you have seen us being provided something more solid than that on the time this is probably a good opportunity to add any link and explanation, so that we're all working on the same page. Thanks.

 

[SteveS]

Snipped.

It's true that LE has been vague, so how can you state that Missy was killed by a gunshot? I consider it an open question.

It's known fact that Missy was killed by a gunshot, and there was a discussion and etc from where you quoted me. The source info has been provided and discussed here MANY times, including every few pages or so in this thread, and there's no point in doing it again. The FBI is the source of the info, provided them by MPD. If you want the facts, that's fact.

Yes MPD has been vague and guarded in what they tell the public/media about the details of MB's death. They were required to give the data to the FBI (and did so), FBI is required by law to make their compiled info on crime (obtained from MPD and everyone else) available to the public to examine (and did so), and that's how it has come to be known. But MPD hasn't ever handed those facts directly to the media or the public, or publicized it, which they have the right to do if that's what they prefer.

 

[Ozoner]

You must bear with me. I've worked as a liaison between the mental health community, the courts and our local police. I've had the opportunity to speak with incarcerated people, people found to be NGBRI, ex-prisoners who counsel inmates both in jail and in prison, people associated with N.A.M.I and the Forensic Fact Program. Most criminals understand the system very well. They know the risks involved by degree. They understand the court system. They know the strata of possible penalties. There are criminals alive who know who they are, what their level of ability is, what their criminal expertise is, what their level of acceptable risk is and they choose not to go beyond those self-imposed limitations. They aren't necessarily dumb. They don't refer to the prison system as "college" for no reason.

Crime is poor decision making from the outset. That's a given, but it also involves a level of self-preservation maintained by the individual during the act. Criminals are of all stripes, not necessarily ignorant or totally lacking in self-control. They operate from a foundation of experience and know the difference between misdemeanor crime and heavier stuff. Many of them won't do the crime, because they're unwilling to do the time. Others know when to back off in the heat of the moment. I'm not insinuating that criminals suspend time to make quick assessments of their status. I'm saying many of them have a limit going in and will go no further should the situation demand more of them. If this mindset was not possible, or negotiable, police agencies would not even entertain CIT training rather than going in guns blazing. The last thing a fully disguised trespasser, with no stolen property (swag) on their person wants to do is kill someone over a misdemeanor.

The problem with this case is the incongruity between the threat level imposed by the supposed unsuspecting victim and the overwhelming response of the murderer. SP had little to lose if caught, any number of ways to back off, and anonymity on their side, yet they murdered her. If there is a glaring WHY it is to be found there. SP is a completely unsuccessful trespass/burglar, but a very successful murderer. MS is dead. Cosplay is assuming the outward character of someone you are not. In this case it provided successful anonymity, associated cop behaviors unnecessary. We have found some common ground.
Thank you for your insight. I appreciate your thoughts and know we both want to see this young woman's family receive a just outcome.

Since when is malicious destruction of property a misdemeanor? This was not simple trespassing; the perp had deliberately damaged the building. I knew someone who did five years for MDOP—and the destruction was much less than what this perp had done.

If you have to rely on a false premise in order to support your argument, then your argument is not very sound.

I don't know whether this was an interrupted burglary situation or interrupted MDOP situation, but your line of reasoning has failed to prove that it wasn't.

 

[JosieMae]

Lying or crouching in wait in a darkened room? Put the tools on the floor, take off heavy gloves, maybe put on latex gloves and use the gun?

Or perhaps s/he had the latex gloves on under the heavy gloves. IMO, this murderer was devious enough to think of that.

 

[al66pine]

Property Damage in TX. Misdemeanor or Felony? Yes.
In my cursory online search re TX crim law, I did not find any property damage offense delineated as "Malicious" Destruction of Property but could have missed.
In breaking window/door glass, if SP "intentionally or knowingly" caused property damage SP's actions seem fall within Texas Penal Code § 28.03* imo.
Can be a Class A, B, or C misdemeanor or first, second, or third degree felony. Depends on several factors, including value of property damaged & nature of damage.
FWIW, if SP had acted "recklessly" the offense would be a class C misdemeanor, under section 28.04.*
^^^ @Ozoner @SteveS FYI.^^^

* ARSON, CRIMINAL MISCHIEF, AND OTHER PROPERTY DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 28. ARSON, CRIMINAL MISCHIEF, AND OTHER PROPERTY DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION
______________________________________________
Not so briefly
A TX. law firm website says TX law defines criminal mischief as "a crime in which vandalism or damage to someone else’s property occurs" and
You “intentionally” or “knowingly”
- "damaged property that belongs to someone else.
- "tampered with another person’s property, causing him or her substantial inconvenience or loss.
- "made marks, inscriptions, or drew graffiti or drawings on another person’s property."
Classifications include auto, business, school, etc and -
"Destruction or defacement of private or public property
Spray painting a wall, breaking a window, tearing down a face, or breaking a fixed structure may be considered criminal mischief actions."
Information following ^ sets forth the various misdemeanor & felony criteria.
^ 5 Examples of Criminal Mischief Laws in Texas | Lawyer Brett Podolsky | Brett A. Podolsky

 

[TheGardener]

I've been giving this perp more thought lately. This unknown person. Because of all the media hype and discussion, we have given this person a name: Swat Perp. By choosing to create a name for this loser, we may have unknowingly created an aspect of their character they themselves may find to be quite important. Should they have a moment of introspection that even nears remorse, well - they can blame it on "the other guy", the aspect of their personality that expunged an innocent life, the Swat Perp. A name widely accepted assigns a whisper of humanity and agreement to our perception of him and may well have impact on the way they view themselves...a person worthy of a pseudo name, which they are not. They are worthy of a lifetime of incarceration, nothing more. Ideally, whatever lives inside their brain will go with them into the petri dish of a lockup somewhere. Its up to us not to be absorbed into their gimmick.

FBI profilers prefer to call these perps "UNSUB". Unknown subjects. By relegating them to just the facts of their being, these perps are stripped of the notoriety they relish. They join the ranks of broken nobodies that came before them. As they go about reigning supreme in their own minds, we have the option of busting them of their rank and reminding them of it often. You have no name. You are unsub...all small letters. Not a molecule of singular importance other than being the failed human being who left wreckage behind.

So, I've decided to refer to this guy as unsub in my future posts.

 

[cady]

Your unsub may not be a "guy" as you insist. And could well be an otherwise regular person who had an all-consuming rage and hatred toward Missy. They could well be remorseless, justifying the deed as an unfortunate necessity, and may be relieved of the rage and hate. Could be enjoying their life with family and friends and attending weddings, funerals and other social events. Not necessarily a practiced thief. (swatperp was not a big media nickname, it is a websleuths original) PatPerp was another nick that didn't take off. (Pat, because of the unknown gender of the Pat character from SNL.) JMO What's their connection to THAT place, at THAT time on THAT day?

 

[SteveS]

This perp is a major loser. This is the most substantial thing they have ever done in their whole life, which earned them nothing, and ending someone else's life only served to make their own miserable life even more crappy. They can't even tell anyone what they did, or get any credit for any of it, trapped into silence forever.

 

[cady]

OH, I agree with LOSER, but lots of losers still have friends and fans and families. They may actually enjoy the negative notoriety. But I think that they had assistance from someone, so someone else knows, probably. And that person is not about to spill the beans for obvious reasons.!! jmo

 

[JnRyan]

I've been giving this perp more thought lately. This unknown person. Because of all the media hype and discussion, we have given this person a name: Swat Perp. By choosing to create a name for this loser, we may have unknowingly created an aspect of their character they themselves may find to be quite important. Should they have a moment of introspection that even nears remorse, well - they can blame it on "the other guy", the aspect of their personality that expunged an innocent life, the Swat Perp. A name widely accepted assigns a whisper of humanity and agreement to our perception of him and may well have impact on the way they view themselves...a person worthy of a pseudo name, which they are not. They are worthy of a lifetime of incarceration, nothing more. Ideally, whatever lives inside their brain will go with them into the petri dish of a lockup somewhere. Its up to us not to be absorbed into their gimmick.

FBI profilers prefer to call these perps "UNSUB". Unknown subjects. By relegating them to just the facts of their being, these perps are stripped of the notoriety they relish. They join the ranks of broken nobodies that came before them. As they go about reigning supreme in their own minds, we have the option of busting them of their rank and reminding them of it often. You have no name. You are unsub...all small letters. Not a molecule of singular importance other than being the failed human being who left wreckage behind.

So, I've decided to refer to this guy as unsub in my future posts.

I can see that. I look at it from a different viewpoint. In the military, we had 'call signs'. To be sure not everyone had one and they were more prevalent in certain communities such as aviation and special operations. But if you had one it was given to you by your team mates and a sign you were part of the team. Respect. I said this before in the Delphi Murders thread where I refuse to call the killer by the name assigned to him. I simply refer to him by the generic term "killer" because he has not earned any respect from me. I try to avoid doing it here, too.

 

[SteveS]

I said this before in the Delphi Murders thread where I refuse to call the killer by the name assigned to him. I simply refer to him by the generic term "killer" because he has not earned any respect from me. I try to avoid doing it here, too.

When you use the name "killer" it makes me think of a mangy, scrawny, mutt of a dog, riddled with ticks and fleas, and given the name for being so worthless, not even worth petting or feeding. I hate to even compare this perp to a dog, it's such an insult to dogs.

 

[cady]

True. SP's mission was accomplished sans selfies. JMO

Unless there was a burner phone involved that the public remains unaware of, in addition to the gun. JMO