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

Status
Not open for further replies.
<modsnip - quoted post removed>
Apropos burner phone: He might have had an accomplice, probably outside the church, like a get-away-driver or something, someone who wasn't involved in the act of murder himself. IMO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apropos burner phone: He might have had an accomplice, probably outside the church, like a get-away-driver or something, someone who wasn't involved in the act of murder himself. IMO

Agree! SP must have had some accomplice in the transportation realm, unless the car seen leaving at 4:30 was, indeed, driven by SP. LE didn't seem very interested in pursuing that tip. The car may have subsequently driven past the gun shop and been on surveillance camera. If it turned right, though, I guess there were no cameras to spot it. Frustrating, because it could be clincher evidence. UGH. JMO ETA, even if the tipster was off on timing, that wouldn't matter much because NO ONE should have been exiting the church parking lot at that hour..only entering it. JMO
 
Last edited:
I'm not exactly sure how I got here, but I'm here. Did my best to catch myself up as best I could, reading the opinions and interpretations of those on this topic. My 2 cents:

Was this supposed to be a burglary or a murder? Seems to be the most prevalent question here.

It was a burglary, you say!

Then why be so nonchalant? Why not act with purpose? The attire of the criminal suggests to me that they don't want to get caught or recognized. Why take such care with a disguise but then linger at the church giving yourself more time to be caught in the act? You would expect a burglar to be in and out, not casually enter a room, take a peak inside, and then enter the next room. And this burglar seems to have as much experience with a pry bar and hammer as my accountant would. Doesn't strike me as an experienced thief.

If this was supposed to be a burglary and the SP was looking to take things of value, how were they going to remove them from the church? Where is the backpack or duffle bag? Were they planning on being able to carry these things out just with their hands? Did they not think there could be multiple things of value that would potentially interest them? What if they found a lock box they needed to break into later or a bag of money? Wouldn't they want to take it out in a bag or backpack?

So then the SP's plan all along was to kill the victim. They targeted her and knew where she was going to be that morning.

Okay, fine. Then why not just hideout, wait for the victim and kill her? Why go thru all this stuff with the hammer and pry bar? Was this just a ruse to confuse LE? If the SP was smart enough to try to confuse LE, you would think they would try to do a better job of making it look like a burglary gone bad. If this was an act to somehow cover a motive it seems they are only doing a cursory job at deception.

And what of the purported info about the SP being relatively short in stature? Short enough that some consider the possibility that this is a female? If your original plan is to kill the victim, who is a fitness instructor, it isn't obvious that the SP has a physical advantage over the victim. Particularly if you believe that the limp is real. If you don't have a physical advantage, even if you have the confidence of carrying a weapon, it seems to me that the SP would like to maintain the element of surprise. So why go banging around and breaking things before hand to increase the possibility that you alert the victim that something is amiss when they enter the church?

And why not just a ski mask? Maybe its someone who is familiar with the church. A member, someone peripherally affiliated with the church, or someone in the community who is afraid that they will be recognized or identified despite something like a simple ski mask. Someone recognizable in the community with some unique physical feature or something else recognizable that requires clothing that allows more deception.

Okay, but then why a police officer? Why not a construction worker or a janitor? Not sure, maybe as odd as it might be, this clothing was easily available to them, for whatever reason. Didn't have to run the associated risk of acquiring a disguise or uniform. Something they just had or could easily take.

And if the get up is just for an additional potential surprise factor or to confuse the victim, again, why go thru the trouble? Just hide, wait, and do what you came to do.

My thought is that this individual was indeed there as a burglar. But not in the traditional sense of someone looking for laptops, jewelry or cash but isn't quite sure what they will find.

Maybe this individual doesn't have a backpack to take out valuables and is taking his/her time because he knows exactly what he is looking for. Knows that whatever it is, it can easily slip into his pocket. An expensive watch? A cashiers check? An incriminating letter?

They know what they want to take, but don't exactly know where it is so they have to go room to room to find it. They will know it when they see it but maybe it isn't necessarily something that would be hidden away in a room, requiring a thorough search, because it isn't something of general value, like a diamond ring would be, but only something of value to this one individual or just a few individuals.

In the process of looking for it the SP and victim surprise each other. Neither knows the other will be there. For some reason, I can't help but think that when the two meet each other in that church, the victim ultimately, somehow, ends up recognizing the SP. Maybe she surprises him and he tries to explain what he, as a police officer, is doing there by himself early in the morning and in the process she recognizes his voice or something else that identifies the SP. The SP never goes in with the explicit intent to kill, but when recognized has to make a choice.

Or perhaps the victim surprises the SP and a physical confrontation occurs, but because the SP isn't physically stronger or is taken by surprise loses the initiative and has to resort to using the gun.

The whole thing is confusing because elements sometimes make it seem like it was a routine B&E but it doesn't quite fit. Other elements make it seem like a targeted murder, but that doesn't quite fit either.

Hence, my idea that it was a B&E, but not in the traditional sense of a common criminal looking for money. They are somewhat familiar with the church, but not overly familiar and are a member of the community that wouldn't be hard to recognize. The SP was prepared to kill if need be, but the wasn't necessarily the primary aim.


Then again, maybe this is just my imagination getting the best of me.
 
I'm not exactly sure how I got here, but I'm here. Did my best to catch myself up as best I could, reading the opinions and interpretations of those on this topic. My 2 cents:

Was this supposed to be a burglary or a murder? Seems to be the most prevalent question here.

It was a burglary, you say!

Then why be so nonchalant? Why not act with purpose? The attire of the criminal suggests to me that they don't want to get caught or recognized. Why take such care with a disguise but then linger at the church giving yourself more time to be caught in the act? You would expect a burglar to be in and out, not casually enter a room, take a peak inside, and then enter the next room. And this burglar seems to have as much experience with a pry bar and hammer as my accountant would. Doesn't strike me as an experienced thief.

If this was supposed to be a burglary and the SP was looking to take things of value, how were they going to remove them from the church? Where is the backpack or duffle bag? Were they planning on being able to carry these things out just with their hands? Did they not think there could be multiple things of value that would potentially interest them? What if they found a lock box they needed to break into later or a bag of money? Wouldn't they want to take it out in a bag or backpack?

So then the SP's plan all along was to kill the victim. They targeted her and knew where she was going to be that morning.

Okay, fine. Then why not just hideout, wait for the victim and kill her? Why go thru all this stuff with the hammer and pry bar? Was this just a ruse to confuse LE? If the SP was smart enough to try to confuse LE, you would think they would try to do a better job of making it look like a burglary gone bad. If this was an act to somehow cover a motive it seems they are only doing a cursory job at deception.

And what of the purported info about the SP being relatively short in stature? Short enough that some consider the possibility that this is a female? If your original plan is to kill the victim, who is a fitness instructor, it isn't obvious that the SP has a physical advantage over the victim. Particularly if you believe that the limp is real. If you don't have a physical advantage, even if you have the confidence of carrying a weapon, it seems to me that the SP would like to maintain the element of surprise. So why go banging around and breaking things before hand to increase the possibility that you alert the victim that something is amiss when they enter the church?

And why not just a ski mask? Maybe its someone who is familiar with the church. A member, someone peripherally affiliated with the church, or someone in the community who is afraid that they will be recognized or identified despite something like a simple ski mask. Someone recognizable in the community with some unique physical feature or something else recognizable that requires clothing that allows more deception.

Okay, but then why a police officer? Why not a construction worker or a janitor? Not sure, maybe as odd as it might be, this clothing was easily available to them, for whatever reason. Didn't have to run the associated risk of acquiring a disguise or uniform. Something they just had or could easily take.

And if the get up is just for an additional potential surprise factor or to confuse the victim, again, why go thru the trouble? Just hide, wait, and do what you came to do.

My thought is that this individual was indeed there as a burglar. But not in the traditional sense of someone looking for laptops, jewelry or cash but isn't quite sure what they will find.

Maybe this individual doesn't have a backpack to take out valuables and is taking his/her time because he knows exactly what he is looking for. Knows that whatever it is, it can easily slip into his pocket. An expensive watch? A cashiers check? An incriminating letter?

They know what they want to take, but don't exactly know where it is so they have to go room to room to find it. They will know it when they see it but maybe it isn't necessarily something that would be hidden away in a room, requiring a thorough search, because it isn't something of general value, like a diamond ring would be, but only something of value to this one individual or just a few individuals.

In the process of looking for it the SP and victim surprise each other. Neither knows the other will be there. For some reason, I can't help but think that when the two meet each other in that church, the victim ultimately, somehow, ends up recognizing the SP. Maybe she surprises him and he tries to explain what he, as a police officer, is doing there by himself early in the morning and in the process she recognizes his voice or something else that identifies the SP. The SP never goes in with the explicit intent to kill, but when recognized has to make a choice.

Or perhaps the victim surprises the SP and a physical confrontation occurs, but because the SP isn't physically stronger or is taken by surprise loses the initiative and has to resort to using the gun.

The whole thing is confusing because elements sometimes make it seem like it was a routine B&E but it doesn't quite fit. Other elements make it seem like a targeted murder, but that doesn't quite fit either.

Hence, my idea that it was a B&E, but not in the traditional sense of a common criminal looking for money. They are somewhat familiar with the church, but not overly familiar and are a member of the community that wouldn't be hard to recognize. The SP was prepared to kill if need be, but the wasn't necessarily the primary aim.


Then again, maybe this is just my imagination getting the best of me.

Welcome! You provide an interesting analysis and some really great questions. I wish we had more answers to this complex puzzle of a case.
 
Voxel welcome. Your analysis is very good. I have mentioned before, and see the real possibility, that MB was killed due to a freak recognition of the perp, who wasn't there to kill but then felt a need to cover their tracks. All of what you say is good stuff.

One added note of a general nature to everyone ...

In the last 2 weeks, I have gone down highway 287 that passes in front of the church 3 times, with a general awareness of the church's presence. Each time it was mid-afternoon with some degree of trafiic, and a bright sunny day. I was traveling from Midlothian to Waxahachie, NW to SE

And in so doing, I only actually "saw" CCOC one time, when I specifically decided to keep looking until I saw I was going by. That one time, it was somewhat obvious to see, because it's not small, but not a real standout to notice. The other times, it was not noticed by me at all, as you do when driving down a highway - I went right on by and had no awareness it was there at all, when not specifically looking. It is set back off the road a bit, and you just don't notice it.

The point is that if we think that people driving by in the dark, with rain coming down, might have noticed someone going in and out of that place, or noticed things through the doors, it seems way unlikely. It's just not a place you notice, set back off the road imo.
 
I'm not exactly sure how I got here, but I'm here. Did my best to catch myself up as best I could, reading the opinions and interpretations of those on this topic. My 2 cents:

Was this supposed to be a burglary or a murder? Seems to be the most prevalent question here.

It was a burglary, you say!

Then why be so nonchalant? Why not act with purpose? The attire of the criminal suggests to me that they don't want to get caught or recognized. Why take such care with a disguise but then linger at the church giving yourself more time to be caught in the act? You would expect a burglar to be in and out, not casually enter a room, take a peak inside, and then enter the next room. And this burglar seems to have as much experience with a pry bar and hammer as my accountant would. Doesn't strike me as an experienced thief.

If this was supposed to be a burglary and the SP was looking to take things of value, how were they going to remove them from the church? Where is the backpack or duffle bag? Were they planning on being able to carry these things out just with their hands? Did they not think there could be multiple things of value that would potentially interest them? What if they found a lock box they needed to break into later or a bag of money? Wouldn't they want to take it out in a bag or backpack?

So then the SP's plan all along was to kill the victim. They targeted her and knew where she was going to be that morning.

Okay, fine. Then why not just hideout, wait for the victim and kill her? Why go thru all this stuff with the hammer and pry bar? Was this just a ruse to confuse LE? If the SP was smart enough to try to confuse LE, you would think they would try to do a better job of making it look like a burglary gone bad. If this was an act to somehow cover a motive it seems they are only doing a cursory job at deception.

And what of the purported info about the SP being relatively short in stature? Short enough that some consider the possibility that this is a female? If your original plan is to kill the victim, who is a fitness instructor, it isn't obvious that the SP has a physical advantage over the victim. Particularly if you believe that the limp is real. If you don't have a physical advantage, even if you have the confidence of carrying a weapon, it seems to me that the SP would like to maintain the element of surprise. So why go banging around and breaking things before hand to increase the possibility that you alert the victim that something is amiss when they enter the church?

And why not just a ski mask? Maybe its someone who is familiar with the church. A member, someone peripherally affiliated with the church, or someone in the community who is afraid that they will be recognized or identified despite something like a simple ski mask. Someone recognizable in the community with some unique physical feature or something else recognizable that requires clothing that allows more deception.

Okay, but then why a police officer? Why not a construction worker or a janitor? Not sure, maybe as odd as it might be, this clothing was easily available to them, for whatever reason. Didn't have to run the associated risk of acquiring a disguise or uniform. Something they just had or could easily take.

And if the get up is just for an additional potential surprise factor or to confuse the victim, again, why go thru the trouble? Just hide, wait, and do what you came to do.

My thought is that this individual was indeed there as a burglar. But not in the traditional sense of someone looking for laptops, jewelry or cash but isn't quite sure what they will find.

Maybe this individual doesn't have a backpack to take out valuables and is taking his/her time because he knows exactly what he is looking for. Knows that whatever it is, it can easily slip into his pocket. An expensive watch? A cashiers check? An incriminating letter?

They know what they want to take, but don't exactly know where it is so they have to go room to room to find it. They will know it when they see it but maybe it isn't necessarily something that would be hidden away in a room, requiring a thorough search, because it isn't something of general value, like a diamond ring would be, but only something of value to this one individual or just a few individuals.

In the process of looking for it the SP and victim surprise each other. Neither knows the other will be there. For some reason, I can't help but think that when the two meet each other in that church, the victim ultimately, somehow, ends up recognizing the SP. Maybe she surprises him and he tries to explain what he, as a police officer, is doing there by himself early in the morning and in the process she recognizes his voice or something else that identifies the SP. The SP never goes in with the explicit intent to kill, but when recognized has to make a choice.

Or perhaps the victim surprises the SP and a physical confrontation occurs, but because the SP isn't physically stronger or is taken by surprise loses the initiative and has to resort to using the gun.

The whole thing is confusing because elements sometimes make it seem like it was a routine B&E but it doesn't quite fit. Other elements make it seem like a targeted murder, but that doesn't quite fit either.

Hence, my idea that it was a B&E, but not in the traditional sense of a common criminal looking for money. They are somewhat familiar with the church, but not overly familiar and are a member of the community that wouldn't be hard to recognize. The SP was prepared to kill if need be, but the wasn't necessarily the primary aim.


Then again, maybe this is just my imagination getting the best of me.

HI! And thanks for your thoughts. We have such a dearth of evidence as to who SP is that everyone interested in the case has to rely on imagining the scenario and motive. One thing we do know is that NOTHING was taken from the church except Missy's life. At least, nothing was reported to have been missing. It is possible, as you suggest, that there was something specific that SP was there to abscond with, but if they knew the "thing(s)" were there, how did they know that? Could it have been some item that didn't belong to the church, but was personally owned by a church member.......who did not report that it was missing? I have wondered if the gun used to kill Missy didn't arrive with SP, because it was already at the church in which case only the owner and SP knew where it was located. Of course, the owner would never say that it was missing. It does the job of killing Missy, leaves the church with SP and is promptly disposed of. (There's some imagination for ya!) I believe that Missy was the target. Someone wanted her dead. WHY is the $64,000 question.......but it leaves lots to the imagination. JMO
 
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?

A husband having an affair and his PO'd wife with money problems!
 
Agree! SP must have had some accomplice in the transportation realm, unless the car seen leaving at 4:30 was, indeed, driven by SP. LE didn't seem very interested in pursuing that tip. The car may have subsequently driven past the gun shop and been on surveillance camera. If it turned right, though, I guess there were no cameras to spot it. Frustrating, because it could be clincher evidence. UGH. JMO ETA, even if the tipster was off on timing, that wouldn't matter much because NO ONE should have been exiting the church parking lot at that hour..only entering it. JMO
I think this was a solo act...it was dark, take off the helmet and drive.
 
HI! And thanks for your thoughts. We have such a dearth of evidence as to who SP is that everyone interested in the case has to rely on imagining the scenario and motive. One thing we do know is that NOTHING was taken from the church except Missy's life. At least, nothing was reported to have been missing. It is possible, as you suggest, that there was something specific that SP was there to abscond with, but if they knew the "thing(s)" were there, how did they know that? Could it have been some item that didn't belong to the church, but was personally owned by a church member.......who did not report that it was missing? I have wondered if the gun used to kill Missy didn't arrive with SP, because it was already at the church in which case only the owner and SP knew where it was located. Of course, the owner would never say that it was missing. It does the job of killing Missy, leaves the church with SP and is promptly disposed of. (There's some imagination for ya!) I believe that Missy was the target. Someone wanted her dead. WHY is the $64,000 question.......but it leaves lots to the imagination. JMO

If the objective was indeed murder, then what do you make of all the nonsense with the pry bar and hammer etc?
 
If the objective was indeed murder, then what do you make of all the nonsense with the pry bar and hammer etc?
Perhaps SP had imagined a scenario for the sake of the cameras, but wasn't very good at acting it out.

There's an episode from an old comedy show where the store gets a video surveillance system, and various people show up to act out roles, trying to trick the owner when he'd later review the tape. But they're all terrible actors so it's obvious they're faking it.

Could it be SP was acting the part of a burglar/vandal for the sake of the camera, this was part of their audacious plan, but when it came down to it, they weren't very convincing. They didn't really want to get into those rooms, and it shows.

Whereas, they got the murder part right, in that they were seemingly more effective.
 
Checking and I notice we've been quiet in here for over two weeks. I wish we had some updates to this.

For a reportedly ACTIVE investigation, we haven't really heard a peep except for the fact that she was shot....and we did not hear that from investigators, but from tenacious websleuthers. I think they would like any interest in the case to dry up and blow away. jmo
 
For a reportedly ACTIVE investigation, we haven't really heard a peep except for the fact that she was shot....and we did not hear that from investigators, but from tenacious websleuthers. I think they would like any interest in the case to dry up and blow away. jmo

Sorry, but I don't put much stock in this idea at all. In a criminal investigation, LE is not going to report to the public what they are doing today, what they have found and know, what they are looking for, and so on. So to try to make a conclusion from "we have heard nothing" is way off base. Hearing nothing is to be expected, unless they have arrested someone, or from time to time they might offer a generic and generally unrevealing "update" (such as on the anniversary).

While it may be frustrating, that's just how it works. They don't feel a need to keep us informed, because we are not part of the investigation team. In fact, someone out here in the public is a murderer - and LE certainly has no desire that they know what's being done and where they are looking.
 
Sorry, but I don't put much stock in this idea at all. In a criminal investigation, LE is not going to report to the public what they are doing today, what they have found and know, what they are looking for, and so on. So to try to make a conclusion from "we have heard nothing" is way off base. Hearing nothing is to be expected, unless they have arrested someone, or from time to time they might offer a generic and generally unrevealing "update" (such as on the anniversary).

While it may be frustrating, that's just how it works. They don't feel a need to keep us informed, because we are not part of the investigation team. In fact, someone out here in the public is a murderer - and LE certainly has no desire that they know what's being done and where they are looking.
I agree, especially when sharing news with the public just seems to feed online vigilantes.

Internet Sleuths Muddy Waters and Wreck Lives in Missy Bevers’ Murder Investigation
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
147
Guests online
3,622
Total visitors
3,769

Forum statistics

Threads
592,295
Messages
17,966,780
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top