<modsnip>, in my opinion. He didn't choose the church for his attack because he didn't know that there was going to be an attack. In my opinion, he expected the church to be completely unoccupied during the time that he was there. He probably thought that he had until at least 6:00 A.M. or 7:00 A.M. because it is fairly unusual for most people to start work before that.
He would also have had to be a meteorologist to plan an attack on Missy inside the church. If it hadn't been raining, the class would have been outside and she wouldn't have needed to enter the building.
I remember, that it was said, that Missy always entered the building, at least for offering a visit of the toilet.
He would have had to be a fortune teller, too, because a couple of students from the class should have arrived around the same time as Missy but were delayed.
I remember, that it was said, Missy always arrived early and before the clients arrived.
It makes no sense for someone to plan at attack on Missy in a place when there could have been several people around at the time of the attack. It was blind luck that there weren't.
Because it was known, that clients would arrive, the attack didn't take place outside, IMO. The killer and his car, in case he had one, would have been seen possibly by one or more client/s. Without Missy, her clients waited outside. Maybe, the killer knew all of the habits.
The fact that he spent time in the kitchen argues against a planned attack, not for one. If he was planning an attack, he would have been watching out the window, waiting for her to arrive, not wandering around the building and messing around.
Maybe, the killer knew exactly, at which time Missy could be expected. Idk, whether the timeline fits, but perhaps his driver (if he had one) had the same time to drive around the parking lots at the SWFA (?) like lost and bored.
Actually, no one with any sense would have laid in wait for her inside the building, in my opinion. A professional hit man would never have entered the building; he would have picked a location that would have given him FAa clean shot. He could have shot her as she was getting out of her car and stolen her purse to make it look like a robbery.
Yes, that would be certainly the normal way to execute an order. BUT: somewhere there could have been a witness (just arriving around the corner) or the weapon could have been identified later (casings left in the dark) or the killer had a sense for a more evil surprise for LE. Maybe, LE should doubt it, if the option "hitman" was applicable.
In my opinion, people are trying to rationalize a situation where Missy was targeted because her marital infidelity has come to light. The fact is, most people who cheat are not murdered. She may not be a particularly sympathetic victim, but that doesn't mean that she was targeted.
Not her alleged infidelity, but mainly her marital and related (?) financial problems (incl. a "family business" in the play) formed my opinion/s, I think.
I have seen absolutely no evidence that she was targeted, and in my opinion, the perpetrator's behavior in the video is exactly the behavior of a burglar who thinks he has all the time in the world to explore every nook and cranny of the building looking for valuables without being disturbed.
I forgot, if we know, whether something of value was stolen or not. I only remember the room/office, where some disorder reigned after the killing. In this room letters from prison inmates were kept, who had gotten some religious training or similar. My thoughts wandered also to this reason for the killer, to enter the church.
My mind is open for all developments, which will hopefully come one day. Possible, that I will change my opinion to yours: Missy was no target.
