TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers, 45, killed in church/suspect in SWAT gear, 18 Apr 2016 #42

Status
Not open for further replies.
She also had a life style that that is capable of generating extremely violent emotional driven responses in some people. Though murder is rare, it has been connected with that interest in various ways for a very long time.
Cryptic---I wasn't aware of Missy having a lifestyle that would generate a violent response in some people. Could you please elaborate? Would love to hear your thoughts...

Sorry for the veiled reference. The forum is victim friendly, so I"ll keep it general:

- The victim apparently was engaged in a pattern of extra marital affairs. Some of her partners may have been married themselves, others not. Then factor in that her husband possibly had the same lifestyle to a degree and motives can get complex.
 
Sorry for the veiled reference. The forum is victim friendly, so I"ll keep it general:

- The victim apparently was engaged in a pattern of extra marital affairs. Some of her partners may have been married themselves, others not. Then factor in that her husband possibly had the same lifestyle to a degree and motives can get complex.

Thanks, I understand now.
 
If they were able to collect a DNA sample that was worth anything, we wouldn't be asking whether SP was male or female. We would know with certainty.

Given the time it took to clear the scene, I am not confident in the initial processing of the CS.
 
Was it determined that the church video was not normal speed? That what was released to us from MPD was slowed down?

I thought I remembered Jethro or someone saying that. Makes me wonder if all the speculation about SP's nonchalance is misplaced. Viewing at normal speed would probably change our perception of the movements to be a lot less casual, I would think.
 
Cannonball,
This may not answer the question regarding the speed of the video. However, I found it be a keen observation of SPs activities as observed in the video. It is a helpful composition posted during the immediate months following MBs murder, as well. It is rather lengthy yet worthy of reflection.


Bringing forward Post # 237 Dated July 13, 2016 Thread 32
Composed by WS member Jethro4WS

Okay. But very briefly I believe that the SP did not think they would be seen on camera and what they were doing after leaving the door from room 12. That combined with the item in their left hand creating additional motion and bad timing on their part it was all actually caught on video. But here comes the long winded version. It is long.

The one mistake, I believe was the last piece of the long video MPD released. I don't believe that they thought they would be seen on video. And it is my belief that instead of simply smashing the glass inward on the door they were breaking they were cracking it and making a small hole and then pulling the glass back into the hall they were standing in. We saw them simply break a similar window in the main hall without getting any glass in the hall and in less time (even though MPD did slow the video at the end).

I believe that if they had not been standing left of the window they were breaking and they especially did not have that item in their left hand moving about they wouldn't have been seen on that camera because there wouldn't be enough movement to get the camera to start recording.

The way these kinds of cameras are set up is by defining the field of view to "watch" for "movement". That is usually done by having a view of the empty hall as it should normally appear when you don't expect anyone there and then drawing a rectangle across the view of what the camera sees and setting a threshold for "movement". The problem is rectangles have straight lines and right angles. There is a white line across the floor from left to right in the view of that camera just past the door the SP comes out of. If the camera was straight that line would also appear straight but as you see in the video it angles from the left "up" to the right. So if you were to take a still shot of that and bring to a drawing program and place a rectangle, or square across it you will see that the camera can "see" behind the line but only to the right of the camera and only if there is enough movement. Incidentally, that is why it appears SP moves leftward out of that door even though they are going straight across the hall.

"Movement" is detected by determining the number of pixels that have changed from some reference image of that hall and if enough of them have (perhaps as a percent) you meet the threshold to begin the process of detecting movement. After that there is a series of these comparisons to see that not only that the change from the reference meets the threshold but that the parts of the reference image that have changed are different from image to image i.e motion. Having done that it has to meet one more threshold which is some defined period of time - a few seconds - over which this occurs to have the camera decide there is "movement". Only then will it start sending frames of video over the cables in the building to the machine that records it. When the amount of movement no longer meets that threshold the camera will stop sending the frames. These cameras usually have a few seconds of stored frames that get sent to the recorder after the movement ended.

So, when we see SP in the opening sequence of the long MPD video they are last seen at a kitchen door - in my opinion attempting to enter it. However, we only see that because it was part of the few seconds after last movement was detected. That is, somewhere before that SP was out of range. When they are in the south hall and go to the door after the dutch double doors recording stops after a few seconds because the open dutch doors (that are no longer moving) are effectively blocking the movement detection. We know that camera "sees" farther because when they appear coming back down the hall they are about 10 feet or so further down the hall than the location of the door they previously were at.

At the ending sequence we notice that the camera already is recording before the SP comes out of the door. How can that be? Well, only if there had been prior movement and it was long enough for the camera to determine it should record but that when it did all it saw was an empty hall - it was already just sending the last few seconds stored - until SP came out of room 12. If SP had been probably 2 seconds or so later opening the door of room 12 into the hall the camera would have already stopped recording and already have sent the last few seconds and the camera would have had to start the process all over again.

I know, long winded, but almost done. Since I believe that the burglary gone wrong scenario was staged, SP needed to have MPD believe that they broke through the door (at the end of the long MPD video) heading out after the murder - not before it. Seeing the SP breaking into that door, and making sure the glass was in the hall rather than inside the room behind that door allows MPD to know it was staged to look that way. The outer doors of the Northeast rear vestibule were smashed - all of them to one degree or another since they were all boarded up. No way to know where the glass was unless MPD tells us but my expectation is that it was mostly outside on the concrete.

We never see SP come towards the camera we see in the opening sequence - the vestibule doors smashed are right behind that camera. Nor do we see them come toward the camera we see at the end of the video - the vestibule doors are right around the corner to the right. So, when did those doors get smashed? I believe that was the point of entry and the point of exit. I base that on the fact that at the end opening sequence we see SP starting to enter a kitchen door. If they had entered through the kitchen in the first place, why go back there? MPD stated that the SP spent some time in the kitchen. That must be based on how long it was from when they entered the kitchen until we see them again in the main hall. Otherwise, how would they know? I truly don't believe that we are seeing the video out of sequence.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...T-gear-18-Apr-2016-32&p=12688377#post12688377

[video=youtube;ePS8TJ6UAqY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePS8TJ6UAqY[/video]
 
Bringing forward Post # 237 Dated July 13, 2016 Thread 32
Composed by WS member Jethro4WS

Okay. But very briefly I believe that the SP did not think they would be seen on camera and what they were doing after leaving the door from room 12. That combined with the item in their left hand creating additional motion and bad timing on their part it was all actually caught on video. But here comes the long winded version. It is long.

The one mistake, I believe was the last piece of the long video MPD released. I don't believe that they thought they would be seen on video. And it is my belief that instead of simply smashing the glass inward on the door they were breaking they were cracking it and making a small hole and then pulling the glass back into the hall they were standing in. We saw them simply break a similar window in the main hall without getting any glass in the hall and in less time (even though MPD did slow the video at the end).

I believe that if they had not been standing left of the window they were breaking and they especially did not have that item in their left hand moving about they wouldn't have been seen on that camera because there wouldn't be enough movement to get the camera to start recording.

The way these kinds of cameras are set up is by defining the field of view to "watch" for "movement". That is usually done by having a view of the empty hall as it should normally appear when you don't expect anyone there and then drawing a rectangle across the view of what the camera sees and setting a threshold for "movement". The problem is rectangles have straight lines and right angles. There is a white line across the floor from left to right in the view of that camera just past the door the SP comes out of. If the camera was straight that line would also appear straight but as you see in the video it angles from the left "up" to the right. So if you were to take a still shot of that and bring to a drawing program and place a rectangle, or square across it you will see that the camera can "see" behind the line but only to the right of the camera and only if there is enough movement. Incidentally, that is why it appears SP moves leftward out of that door even though they are going straight across the hall.

"Movement" is detected by determining the number of pixels that have changed from some reference image of that hall and if enough of them have (perhaps as a percent) you meet the threshold to begin the process of detecting movement. After that there is a series of these comparisons to see that not only that the change from the reference meets the threshold but that the parts of the reference image that have changed are different from image to image i.e motion. Having done that it has to meet one more threshold which is some defined period of time - a few seconds - over which this occurs to have the camera decide there is "movement". Only then will it start sending frames of video over the cables in the building to the machine that records it. When the amount of movement no longer meets that threshold the camera will stop sending the frames. These cameras usually have a few seconds of stored frames that get sent to the recorder after the movement ended.

So, when we see SP in the opening sequence of the long MPD video they are last seen at a kitchen door - in my opinion attempting to enter it. However, we only see that because it was part of the few seconds after last movement was detected. That is, somewhere before that SP was out of range. When they are in the south hall and go to the door after the dutch double doors recording stops after a few seconds because the open dutch doors (that are no longer moving) are effectively blocking the movement detection. We know that camera "sees" farther because when they appear coming back down the hall they are about 10 feet or so further down the hall than the location of the door they previously were at.

At the ending sequence we notice that the camera already is recording before the SP comes out of the door. How can that be? Well, only if there had been prior movement and it was long enough for the camera to determine it should record but that when it did all it saw was an empty hall - it was already just sending the last few seconds stored - until SP came out of room 12. If SP had been probably 2 seconds or so later opening the door of room 12 into the hall the camera would have already stopped recording and already have sent the last few seconds and the camera would have had to start the process all over again.

I know, long winded, but almost done. Since I believe that the burglary gone wrong scenario was staged, SP needed to have MPD believe that they broke through the door (at the end of the long MPD video) heading out after the murder - not before it. Seeing the SP breaking into that door, and making sure the glass was in the hall rather than inside the room behind that door allows MPD to know it was staged to look that way. The outer doors of the Northeast rear vestibule were smashed - all of them to one degree or another since they were all boarded up. No way to know where the glass was unless MPD tells us but my expectation is that it was mostly outside on the concrete.

We never see SP come towards the camera we see in the opening sequence - the vestibule doors smashed are right behind that camera. Nor do we see them come toward the camera we see at the end of the video - the vestibule doors are right around the corner to the right. So, when did those doors get smashed? I believe that was the point of entry and the point of exit. I base that on the fact that at the end opening sequence we see SP starting to enter a kitchen door. If they had entered through the kitchen in the first place, why go back there? MPD stated that the SP spent some time in the kitchen. That must be based on how long it was from when they entered the kitchen until we see them again in the main hall. Otherwise, how would they know? I truly don't believe that we are seeing the video out of sequence.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...T-gear-18-Apr-2016-32&p=12688377#post12688377

[video=youtube;ePS8TJ6UAqY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePS8TJ6UAqY[/video]

But how do you account for all that racket s/he was making if it was a planned murder?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I am glad you guys are still willing to wrestle over such issues. But I think the answer won't be solved by a video that is what it is, and no more. What we can't be certain of, by examining the video, is going to always stay that way, and we really have nothing that will definitively narrow the pool of potential perps, because we have to include all the ones who can fit the maybe not's as well as the maybe's when we can't be sure. The why's are going to be impossible to know for sure, without first knowing who did it.
 
But how do you account for all that racket s/he was making if it was a planned murder?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Churches that have any concern with exterior noise (like the nearby freeway) would double down on sound-proofing/insulating. There aren't any people within a couple hundred yards of the building, and it was storming outside. No one heard anything IMHO
 
But how do you account for all that racket s/he was making if it was a planned murder?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thank you for asking this great question, Aydrianna. Watch the video, please, beginning at the 00:32 mark.

SP performs what appears to be an attempt to pry open the door. That is what we call staging. SPs actions are cleverly deceptive.

SP was staging "an attempted breaking and entering" by leaving pry marks on the door and door frame.

* That is not stated as a fact but an opinion based on observing the possible motive for SP in using the pry bar in what appears to be an unsuccessful attempt. SP is not weak. SP could have easily forced the door open but there was no need for SP to do so.

Just as Jethro4WS clearly explained, when SP is busting the glass near the end of the video, SP was not pounding, with a hard force, but rather was tapping the glass. SP is not weak though. SP is "staging" a breaking and entering event. Hence, SP was creating an illusion of a B&E.

The reason LE knows that event was staged is because that one mistake was captured by the surveillance camera.
 
Thank you for asking this great question, Aydrianna. Watch the video, please, beginning at the 00:32 mark.

SP performs what appears to be an attempt to pry open the door. That is what we call staging. SPs actions are cleverly deceptive.

SP was staging "an attempted breaking and entering" by leaving pry marks on the door and door frame.

* That is not stated as a fact but an opinion based on observing the possible motive for SP in using the pry bar in what appears to be an unsuccessful attempt. SP is not weak. SP could have easily forced the door open but there was no need for SP to do so.

Just as Jethro4WS clearly explained, when SP is busting the glass near the end of the video, SP was not pounding, with a hard force, but rather was tapping the glass. SP is not weak though. SP is "staging" a breaking and entering event. Hence, SP was creating an illusion of a B&E.

The reason LE knows that event was staged is because that one mistake was captured by the surveillance camera.

So the SP was unaware that they were on video ? Even though they looked directly at the camera at one point ?
 
If they were able to collect a DNA sample that was worth anything, we wouldn't be asking whether SP was male or female. We would know with certainty.

Given the time it took to clear the scene, I am not confident in the initial processing of the CS.

I now firmly believe MPD knew who the killer was and has known all along.

The immediate public outcry over the SP appearing to possess "feminine qualities" when the cctv video was released, allowed MPD to state that they were not sure if SP was male or female.

SP was thrilled by MPDs announcement. SP felt SP totally tricked MPD, and of lesser importance, duped the public; thereby, leading SP to believe that SP made a good crook.

This is so obvious to me now. Lady Justice is coming!
 
I now firmly believe MPD knew who the killer was and has known all along.

The immediate public outcry over the SP appearing to possess "feminine qualities" when the cctv video was released, allowed MPD to state that they were not sure if SP was male or female.

SP was thrilled by MPDs announcement. SP felt SP totally tricked MPD, and of lesser importance, duped the public; thereby, leading SP to believe that SP made a good crook.

This is so obvious to me now. Lady Justice is coming!

If you think they have known SP's identity the entire time what do you think is taking them so long to make an arrest? What are they waiting for?
 
I now firmly believe MPD knew who the killer was and has known all along.

The immediate public outcry over the SP appearing to possess "feminine qualities" when the cctv video was released, allowed MPD to state that they were not sure if SP was male or female.

SP was thrilled by MPDs announcement. SP felt SP totally tricked MPD, and of lesser importance, duped the public; thereby, leading SP to believe that SP made a good crook.

This is so obvious to me now. Lady Justice is coming!
Wow Dedee-I'm surprised to "hear" you say this. If I'm not mistaken, wasn't your prime suspect a man? What else has changed your mind? And was SP known to MB? Intriguing to say the least!

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk
 
Churches that have any concern with exterior noise (like the nearby freeway) would double down on sound-proofing/insulating. There aren't any people within a couple hundred yards of the building, and it was storming outside. No one heard anything IMHO

But if the perp knew missy might be outside, how did the perp know missy wouldn't hear and take off? Very narrow time frame there. How many murderers would be making lots of noise while their victim was arriving? Ever hear of any?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
MOO Iirc Much focus was on a woman listed on the MPD target numbers. We even had a reporter do an interview w Tricia and stated sources inside LE were telling her an arrest of the woman was imminent. Of course there was much suspicion on others on the target list as well. If Swat Perp wasn't on that list then I'm sure he/ she did enjoy all eyes elsewhere. Hopefully LE has figured out the real killer(s) by now. JMOO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Glad to see Missy's threads active again. Praying for answers soon.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J320A using Tapatalk
 
But if the perp knew missy might be outside, how did the perp know missy wouldn't hear and take off? Very narrow time frame there. How many murderers would be making lots of noise while their victim was arriving? Ever hear of any?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
If you look at MPD timetables, there was ample time to create the mess and then get into position. IMO, she had to have been taken by surprise (to neither run or ward off her attacker.)
 
If you look at MPD timetables, there was ample time to create the mess and then get into position. IMO, she had to have been taken by surprise (to neither run or ward off her attacker.)

I suppose that depends on what the cops see on the video. Is the perp appearing to have a planned out attacking position?
Staging usually happens after. Right? I don't know if there is another case similar. Staging in a public facility shortly (within a half hr) b4 a planned murder and planning to escape minutes b4 the next person's arrival must be rare. But I suppose he.she could be that bold.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I suppose that depends on what the cops see on the video. Is the perp appearing to have a planned out attacking position?
Staging usually happens after. Right? I don't know if there is another case similar. Staging in a public facility shortly (within a half hr) b4 a planned murder and planning to escape minutes b4 the next person's arrival must be rare. But I suppose he.she could be that bold.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Honest question : why would SP "stage a breakin " if he/she knew they were on camera ? It defeats the purpose ? jmo
 
I suppose that depends on what the cops see on the video. Is the perp appearing to have a planned out attacking position?
Staging usually happens after. Right? I don't know if there is another case similar. Staging in a public facility shortly (within a half hr) b4 a planned murder and planning to escape minutes b4 the next person's arrival must be rare. But I suppose he.she could be that bold.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Since the murder wasn't caught on tape, one thing that I think could have happened was that SP staged the scene in part to subdue MB. SP could have accused MB of being the burglar and pretended to place MB under arrest or otherwise make MB an easy target by ordering compliance. The SP outfit is very useful for both not leaving any DNA around and also for at least temporarily disorienting MB to give time to strike a blow that would prevent MB from being able to flee. It seems like MB should have got away unless she was ambushed or was temporarily subdued.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
138
Guests online
4,178
Total visitors
4,316

Forum statistics

Threads
592,386
Messages
17,968,264
Members
228,764
Latest member
GreyFishOmen
Back
Top