TX - Terri 'Missy' Bevers,45, murdered in church/person in SWAT gear, 18 Apr 2016 #35

[Scout]

Quite a bit of your post is local rumor, which may or may not be true. If it isn't linked in MSM or from LE, we aren't supposed to talk about it. Yet you are drawing conclusions ("these things make it apparent") without corroboration. We don't know if CT was ever questioned.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We know that she was investigated and that locals, including the family, believed she was about to be arrested. I don't believe police neglected to interview her as part of their investigation. The family's belief (at that time) that she was the killer lends credence to the statement that a family member was the one who initially suggested her as a suspect. Yes, I am drawing conclusions, but they are not baseless.

 

[GA_Peach]

We know that she was investigated and that locals, including the family, believed she was about to be arrested. I don't believe police neglected to interview her as part of their investigation. The family's belief (at that time) that she was the killer lends credence to the statement that a family member was the one who initially suggested her as a suspect. Yes, I am drawing conclusions, but they are not baseless.

Can you please link to a MSM article where the family believes CT is SP?

 

[Scout]

Hearing backhanded comments about MB is only from ones individual interpretation that can be received with the help of "just looking to find something wrong" in the wording. We're all capable of it but I personally can't say I gathered that from anything the family said.

Same here. I would also add that there's nothing abnormal about feeling some anger at the deceased if you think their actions, decisions, or lifestyle may have contributed to their death. It might seem illogical, uncaring, or misplaced from the outside, but those who have been there know it happens and it in no way means you hated or resented that person.

 

[Scout]

Can you please link to a MSM article where the family believes CT is SP?

No. I'm looking at the statements of MT and KS in the context of all that was going on at the time. You're free to draw your own conclusion.

 

[ocgrad]

What I am saying (can't speak for anyone else) is that in my research I came across someone who was going to join CG and even had a photo taken with MB...he is on my list but when she was killed I forgot about him as a someone to take a look at...romantic or otherwise...

I have looked at him also. Unfortunately I never see anything in the enhanced eyes and faces but I'm not sure with him. The bridge of his nose seems to fit. He has a Go-Pro and uses it extensively as well as a motorcycle. But I find nothing about their relationship.

 

[janesmith787]

I have my opinions about the family and their involvement, but regardless of what happened, it was tragic that 3 girls lost their mom at such a young age. I think that they're doing the best they can to "continue on" without their mom and have to live their life. I would imagine not a day goes by that they don't think of her and everyone grieves differently, but I don't think you can judge someone for going about their routines....
Missy wouldn't have wanted them to sit at home mourning all the time. Someone posted it earlier, but with their faith being important to them, I can see why they would continue on with their routines. I'm NOT saying they didn't care about MB and aren't grieving, but at some point you have to choose to press forward..They're not in control of the outcome of this, and justice rides a slow horse, but it always arrives.ALL JMO

 

[janesmith787]

As far as the class action against CG...there are many many many trainers who make great money. But, you have to put in a TON of work and self-marketing. It's not an easy start, but you can be very successful.

 

[zoeneli]

I in no way suggested that LE should have a hands-off approach to the victim's family. On the contrary, I believe the family and others close to Missy have been thoroughly investigated and rightfully so. That part of the investigation did not pan out. Unfortunately, police have admitted they are running out of leads and have publicly expressed their frustration. Some wish to believe they are only pretending as an investigative strategy. I do not.

Police have confirmed the alibis of BB and RB/VB. Therefore they cannot be the person in SWAT gear unless one assumes that investigators don't know how to confirm an alibi. I haven't seen anyone try to virtually dress MT up in that gear. Are you suggesting she would have the same appearance as the suspect if she were dressed in that gear?

I wouldn't say I think LE is pretending, I just don't think they are doing a stellar job with their comments and statements to the public. I personally take your comment that police have admitted they are running out of leads and are frustrated with a grain of salt. The same dept apparently told People Magazine the case was not stalled less than a month ago.


Midlothian Assistant Police Chief Kevin Johnson, meanwhile, says that while there's "nothing new" to report at the moment, the case is far from being stalled.

"Our guys aren't getting murders by the week," he tells PEOPLE, describing the quiet suburb of Dallas. "If we need to spend the time on it for months to come, we have the people to work on it for months to come."

 

[Batbrat]

Same here. I would also add that there's nothing abnormal about feeling some anger at the deceased if you think their actions, decisions, or lifestyle may have contributed to their death. It might seem illogical, uncaring, or misplaced from the outside, but those who have been there know it happens and it in no way means you hated or resented that person.

I absolutely agree with this. In no way do remarks about the deceased (regardless of how they're interpreted by me or anyone else) indicate hatred or resentment toward the victim or a desire to see them dead. I merely brought my observations up in the context of why people might look toward family members rather than dismiss them entirely.

 

[Camerabug]

It's funny how two people can look at the same information and data and arrive at two very different conclusions. We do agree on one point - RB, BB, & VB are not SP. However, there is nothing to say that they are not involved in a murder-for-hire plot.

You conclude that the family is not involved because they have escaped detection, but I would assert that no one has escaped anything at this point in time. While it seems like this case has been going forever, just over three months is not a long time to unravel a murder-for-hire plot. In the Teresa Sievers case, LE said that they had identified the key players by the time of TS's funereal. However, it took LE nearly 4 months to arrest the murderers and another 3 months to arrest the husband. In the Dan Markel case, it was two years before the family was implicated in his death. In my humble opinion, I don't think that the lack of arrests means that anyone has gotten away with anything at this relatively early stage of the investigation. (I did not go back and confirm the exact timing of arrests in the TS and DM cases so I could be off my a month or so in either direction. Please accept my apology if that is the case.)

Unlike you, I see plenty to suggest that the family is happy that MB is dead. Did you see RB gloating about the dog blood on his shirt? "You better believe" that I did. Did you see the picture of MB's three girls posed and smiling as they stood over their mother's grave? That image shows the disconnect between the reality of what happened and what the family thinks happened. Have you listened to any of the MT or KS interviews? I am referring to the ones where they confirm MB's extramarital relationship(s)/affair(s) and shortcomings. Nothing represents a grieving family more than victim shaming on a national stage.

Although you view my thoughts as "absurb," I still believe that the family was involved. I want this case solved just as much as you do. Justice for Missy!

Well said!

 

[MrsPC]

I know ....it's distorted... but here's another right eye pic after prying that door. Still looks like CT to me.

 

[Camerabug]

Yes, I've seen and read all those things -- clearly, not through a jaundiced eye. And I'm quite familiar with the Sievers case. It bears no resemblance to the Bevers case. It was clear throughout the Sievers investigation that investigators were onto Mark Sievers. In this case, police have made it clear that the family is not involved. And, no, I don't believe they are just saying that as some sort of investigative strategy. It's clear that the Bevers family is no longer being looked at by legitimate investigators. IMO, this is because they have been thoroughly investigated and nothing to indicate their involvement was found.

Are you able to share how you know this? no snark..I am genuinely interested. I must have missed something somewhere...

 

[Scout]

I wouldn't say I think LE is pretending, I just don't think they are doing a stellar job with their comments and statements to the public. I personally take your comment that police have admitted they are running out of leads and are frustrated with a grain of salt. The same dept apparently told People Magazine the case was not stalled less than a month ago.


Midlothian Assistant Police Chief Kevin Johnson, meanwhile, says that while there's "nothing new" to report at the moment, the case is far from being stalled.



"Our guys aren't getting murders by the week," he tells PEOPLE, describing the quiet suburb of Dallas. "If we need to spend the time on it for months to come, we have the people to work on it for months to come."

That's fair. I don't doubt they have the manpower to work the case. It appears the investigation has slowed dramatically and as of the last press conference, they were very frustrated. It's been too quiet since then. In my eyes, that looks like it's stalling.

 

[Scout]

Are you able to share how you know this? no snark..I am genuinely interested. I must have missed something somewhere...

Press conferences.

 

[ocgrad]

Can I ask respectfully - what is to be gained by micro-analyzing MT's words? She's never been a POI, never been named in a SW, correct? I can see it more with BB as he was the spouse and was named in SWs. But even he is not a focus of the investigation as far as LE is concerned. So MT would be even further removed.

I realize she has made public comments and so there is stuff out there on the record. But if there's zero to indicate her involvement, then what good does it do? Please don't think I'm attacking or being snarky - just asking the question and maybe you have a different angle on it that I'm not thinking of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can say she hasn't been named in a SW. Only that she hasn't been named in a SW that has been released to the public. Perhaps the SW for her and her husband and their business have remained sealed due to their business. I mean if LE is investigating BB since he's the spouse, wouldn't they want to get his computer and phone from work? Maybe know more about the vendor who paid for his expensive trip? I don't think you can assume MT is not being looked at just because you haven't seen her in an unsealed SW. And even if she is not involved I would be interested to know who she thinks did it and I can't just call her up. I agree with other posters that she seems to have written this to someone specific. And alot of these Sleuthers are pretty good, so it should be possible to look over her words and get an idea of some of the characteristics of who she thinks did it. Or analyze the type of person who would write such a letter in the first place.

 

[ocgrad]

Can I ask respectfully - what is to be gained by micro-analyzing MT's words? She's never been a POI, never been named in a SW, correct? I can see it more with BB as he was the spouse and was named in SWs. But even he is not a focus of the investigation as far as LE is concerned. So MT would be even further removed.

I realize she has made public comments and so there is stuff out there on the record. But if there's zero to indicate her involvement, then what good does it do? Please don't think I'm attacking or being snarky - just asking the question and maybe you have a different angle on it that I'm not thinking of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can't say she hasn't been named in a SW. Only that she hasn't been named in a SW that has been released to the public. Perhaps the SW for her and her husband and their business have remained sealed due to their business. I mean if LE is investigating BB since he's the spouse, wouldn't they want to get his computer and phone from work? Maybe know more about the vendor who paid for his expensive trip? I don't think you can assume MT is not being looked at just because you haven't seen her in an unsealed SW. And even if she is not involved I would be interested to know who she thinks did it and I can't just call her up. I agree with other posters that she seems to have written this to someone specific. And alot of these Sleuthers are pretty good, so it should be possible to look over her words and get an idea of some of the characteristics of who she thinks did it. Or analyze the type of person who would write such a letter in the first place.

 

[ardenmost]

If you're asking do I think MT had anything to do with the crime, my answer is no. In my opinion, she is also not SP.

But LE has not cleared anyone, nor have they confirmed any alibis. They have stated that alibis for BB and RB were independently corroborated, which is different. Just because I have receipts or someone claiming to have seen me where I claim to be does not necessarily make it so. Let's say I have an alibi and a credible person claims they saw me there around that time, or I produce a receipt showing I was where I claimed to be - that is an independent corroboration. However, if there is anything that weighs against my alibi, other evidence may be necessary to confirm it. Video evidence, cell phone records, exact times, additional eyewitness accounts, etc.

Receipts and witnesses are alibi corroborations. I know for certain LE knows how to confirm an alibi, whether it's been independently corroborated or not. I have no doubt whatsoever they are doing/have done just that.

You are totally correct, Batbrat about LE saying the alibis for RB and BB were independently "corroborated", NOT confirmed. We have no knowledge of how the alibis were attained!

 

[GA_Peach]

Yes, I've seen and read all those things -- clearly, not through a jaundiced eye. And I'm quite familiar with the Sievers case. It bears no resemblance to the Bevers case. It was clear throughout the Sievers investigation that investigators were onto Mark Sievers. In this case, police have made it clear that the family is not involved. And, no, I don't believe they are just saying that as some sort of investigative strategy. It's clear that the Bevers family is no longer being looked at by legitimate investigators. IMO, this is because they have been thoroughly investigated and nothing to indicate their involvement was found.

Are you able to share how you know this? no snark..I am genuinely interested. I must have missed something somewhere...

Press conferences.

Camerabug, I have repeatedly listened to all of the press conferences, and I didn't hear any of what Scout did. In fact, I heard LE doing everything in their power to hedge their bets with respect to the Bevers. I also heard LE say that nobody has been taken off the table. BB parroted the same thing the very next day when he said, "No one has been eradicated from the investigation." You can feel free to join me in the jaundiced-eye club where we subscribe to "absurd" theories!

 

[Cannonball3804]

You can't say she hasn't been named in a SW. Only that she hasn't been named in a SW that has been released to the public. Perhaps the SW for her and her husband and their business have remained sealed due to their business. I mean if LE is investigating BB since he's the spouse, wouldn't they want to get his computer and phone from work? Maybe know more about the vendor who paid for his expensive trip? I don't think you can assume MT is not being looked at just because you haven't seen her in an unsealed SW. And even if she is not involved I would be interested to know who she thinks did it and I can't just call her up. I agree with other posters that she seems to have written this to someone specific. And alot of these Sleuthers are pretty good, so it should be possible to look over her words and get an idea of some of the characteristics of who she thinks did it. Or analyze the type of person who would write such a letter in the first place.

The point is, we can't talk on here about things that aren't public knowledge. Posts have been deleted and admins have reminded us that we need to back information up with links to MSM or LE.

In your scenario of a POI being named in a sealed SW, that might or might not be the case with that person but the end result would be the same - we only sleuth those named publicly, and she hasn't been.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DesiredJustice]

What I am saying (can't speak for anyone else) is that in my research I came across someone who was going to join CG and even had a photo taken with MB...he is on my list but when she was killed I forgot about him as a someone to take a look at...romantic or otherwise...

Especially since you wouldn't have been doing research or looking at anyone UNTIL she was killed. Or were you doing research for another reason?