I’ve followed Missy Bever’s case on and off here and in the news. But with over a year now and 42 threads, I’m sure I’ve forgotten some things. I’m also trying to go over this and see what I come up with.
Questions that are still with me:
How well known was it that the outside cameras did not work? That is, were church members notified (e.g., church business announce during church services, announcement in church bulletin/news letter) that the cameras were not working and for the members to ensure their vehicles were locked and no valuables inside? Or, either because it was believed to not be important or they didn’t want it publicly known to potential thieves, it was not publicly stated? (I can’t find or remember any details on this aspect.)
Even though there are inside surveillance cameras there is no alarm system. How well known was this fact?
If this is a planned murder, why wander around the church especially if the presence of surveillance cameras is known? (That would seem to be a reason for the disguise.) Why not remain some place in hiding until your intended victim enters the church?
A hammer as a murder weapon? If one is going to murder someone inside a building (muffling gunshots and screams), early in morning when most folks are still in bed, in a building that is fairly isolated from residences and with rainy weather (further muffling gun shots and/or screams) why not use a small caliber gun like a .22, .32 or the like?
How well known was it that Missy was going to move the Camp Gladiator indoors at the church? (I believe this was a Facebook post if I remember correctly.)
I can understand a church having indoor surveillance cameras. I don’t know how many have outdoor cameras monitoring the parking lots. BUT if the church went to the expense of having them installed using funds that might have been used elsewhere they must have felt a strong need for them. If that is the case I’m wondering about the fact the outside cameras were not functioning was this known outside the minister and his staff. If this killer went to the effort to disguise their appearance from indoor cameras that would be for naught if their car is caught on video in the parking lot. Or was it just dumb luck that they picked a time when the outside cameras didn’t work? As far as the inside cameras go, this person would seem to have been in the church before to know of their existence. A member or someone who had been there on a few occasions?
Inside and outside surveillance cameras, but no alarm system. If I’m planning something like this and do some reconnaissance on the church and see inside cameras, I’m going to look for alarm panels near the entrances. Having a disguise isn’t going to do me any good if LE is going to be there in 5-10 minutes. This person wandered around for at least twice that long and didn’t seem to be in any hurry. Again, to me, that would seem to be someone who had been there. Or they weren’t very smart and this was an additional bit of dumb luck.
Wandering around the church and every now and then smacking something with a hammer? Even with a disguise the more you expose yourself the more clues you provide. Why leave damage that Missy might see and immediately leave the church to call 911? Even if you’ve done surveillance on her, you don’t know but what she might use a different entrance this time and see signs of damage before you get to her. You want to catch her by surprise. UNLESS, it is all part of the ruse to tell Missy to stand fast and that you are there to investigate a break in? (I have to come back to this later.) I’d almost say the person is there primarily to vandalize the church except in the video they don’t seem to be putting much effort into it. Were they there just to be seen on camera and trying to make a statement or have 15 minutes of anonymous fame? If the church reports a break-in, how ironic is it if LE sees the vandal dressed like a SWAT officer on the video – some twisted sense of humor? (Had there not been a murder, I could actually see the humor in doing something like that, but then I have been accused of having a sick sense of humor!) If the break-in was the primary reason, Missy may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time. Of course, if this was a planned murder that wandering around may have been nervous energy.
The murder weapon is likely a hammer or other blunt instrument. That would almost tie into the scenario that this was primarily a break-in and our SWAT person tried to stop Missy with whatever they had in their hand. If you’re trying to convince Missy you’re SWAT and when you are approaching she doesn’t see a gun on a SWAT officer isn’t that likely to cause her to be suspicious. There is speculation that our killer may have a problem walking. Whether that is true or not why risk having to run Missy down to kill her with a hammer? A handgun up to .32 caliber would not likely to cause any alarm given the time, location and weather. I might even be able to risk a .38 or 9mm in this case, so why a hammer? If you’ve ever been to a gun range the building muffles the sound fairly well. Even without soundproofing in this case, the distance from residences, weather and the fact that most of nearest residents are inside their home with their HVAC systems running is all going to muffle the sound of a gunshot.
Missy changed the venue for the CG to inside the church. Unless, someone is surveilling Missy, would they even know CG takes place? If the church minister allows Missy to use the church but really doesn’t consider it a church sponsored event would it be on the church bulletin or in announcements at a service? That is, what are the chances the killer checked the church sponsored events, missed the CG and Missy’s appearance was an unforeseen event?
At the very beginning I thought this was a premeditated murder. I haven’t ruled that out, but now I’m not as sure as I was in the beginning. But in any event, I’ve rambled on far too long already.
Questions that are still with me:
How well known was it that the outside cameras did not work? That is, were church members notified (e.g., church business announce during church services, announcement in church bulletin/news letter) that the cameras were not working and for the members to ensure their vehicles were locked and no valuables inside? Or, either because it was believed to not be important or they didn’t want it publicly known to potential thieves, it was not publicly stated? (I can’t find or remember any details on this aspect.)
Even though there are inside surveillance cameras there is no alarm system. How well known was this fact?
If this is a planned murder, why wander around the church especially if the presence of surveillance cameras is known? (That would seem to be a reason for the disguise.) Why not remain some place in hiding until your intended victim enters the church?
A hammer as a murder weapon? If one is going to murder someone inside a building (muffling gunshots and screams), early in morning when most folks are still in bed, in a building that is fairly isolated from residences and with rainy weather (further muffling gun shots and/or screams) why not use a small caliber gun like a .22, .32 or the like?
How well known was it that Missy was going to move the Camp Gladiator indoors at the church? (I believe this was a Facebook post if I remember correctly.)
I can understand a church having indoor surveillance cameras. I don’t know how many have outdoor cameras monitoring the parking lots. BUT if the church went to the expense of having them installed using funds that might have been used elsewhere they must have felt a strong need for them. If that is the case I’m wondering about the fact the outside cameras were not functioning was this known outside the minister and his staff. If this killer went to the effort to disguise their appearance from indoor cameras that would be for naught if their car is caught on video in the parking lot. Or was it just dumb luck that they picked a time when the outside cameras didn’t work? As far as the inside cameras go, this person would seem to have been in the church before to know of their existence. A member or someone who had been there on a few occasions?
Inside and outside surveillance cameras, but no alarm system. If I’m planning something like this and do some reconnaissance on the church and see inside cameras, I’m going to look for alarm panels near the entrances. Having a disguise isn’t going to do me any good if LE is going to be there in 5-10 minutes. This person wandered around for at least twice that long and didn’t seem to be in any hurry. Again, to me, that would seem to be someone who had been there. Or they weren’t very smart and this was an additional bit of dumb luck.
Wandering around the church and every now and then smacking something with a hammer? Even with a disguise the more you expose yourself the more clues you provide. Why leave damage that Missy might see and immediately leave the church to call 911? Even if you’ve done surveillance on her, you don’t know but what she might use a different entrance this time and see signs of damage before you get to her. You want to catch her by surprise. UNLESS, it is all part of the ruse to tell Missy to stand fast and that you are there to investigate a break in? (I have to come back to this later.) I’d almost say the person is there primarily to vandalize the church except in the video they don’t seem to be putting much effort into it. Were they there just to be seen on camera and trying to make a statement or have 15 minutes of anonymous fame? If the church reports a break-in, how ironic is it if LE sees the vandal dressed like a SWAT officer on the video – some twisted sense of humor? (Had there not been a murder, I could actually see the humor in doing something like that, but then I have been accused of having a sick sense of humor!) If the break-in was the primary reason, Missy may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time. Of course, if this was a planned murder that wandering around may have been nervous energy.
The murder weapon is likely a hammer or other blunt instrument. That would almost tie into the scenario that this was primarily a break-in and our SWAT person tried to stop Missy with whatever they had in their hand. If you’re trying to convince Missy you’re SWAT and when you are approaching she doesn’t see a gun on a SWAT officer isn’t that likely to cause her to be suspicious. There is speculation that our killer may have a problem walking. Whether that is true or not why risk having to run Missy down to kill her with a hammer? A handgun up to .32 caliber would not likely to cause any alarm given the time, location and weather. I might even be able to risk a .38 or 9mm in this case, so why a hammer? If you’ve ever been to a gun range the building muffles the sound fairly well. Even without soundproofing in this case, the distance from residences, weather and the fact that most of nearest residents are inside their home with their HVAC systems running is all going to muffle the sound of a gunshot.
Missy changed the venue for the CG to inside the church. Unless, someone is surveilling Missy, would they even know CG takes place? If the church minister allows Missy to use the church but really doesn’t consider it a church sponsored event would it be on the church bulletin or in announcements at a service? That is, what are the chances the killer checked the church sponsored events, missed the CG and Missy’s appearance was an unforeseen event?
At the very beginning I thought this was a premeditated murder. I haven’t ruled that out, but now I’m not as sure as I was in the beginning. But in any event, I’ve rambled on far too long already.
