Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #84
- Thread starter Mysti88c
- Start date
- Status
There is legal liability exposure for the homeowner for anyone on her property who might get hurt. I could easily see a "slip and fall" claim happening in this scenario. If the cameras and signs aren't there...its even bigger exposure. On every level, the homeowner's property rights were violated....and the criminal has to pay.
Love Never Fails
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2013
- Messages
- 12,718
- Reaction score
- 80,502
Considering HER recent history, I would conclude she is not harmless.
Intention here is really important.
So are the key players.
You aren’t getting it, for reasons only known to you.
There is legal liability exposure for the homeowner for anyone on her property who might get hurt. I could easily see a "slip and fall" claim happening in this scenario. If the cameras and signs aren't there...its even bigger exposure. On every level, the homeowner's property rights were violated....and the criminal has to pay.
not so sure tampering with FedEx is quite the same as tampering with the US Mail. One is private one is government....unless FedEx is contracted to carry the US Mail. Meaning...one might be a state crime, while the other is federal. Speculating.
Bethlamb16
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Messages
- 65
- Reaction score
- 215
Topppps
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2019
- Messages
- 672
- Reaction score
- 5,200
What intention? Taking a piece of property that belongs to you? That's not really bad intentions.
Bethlamb16
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Messages
- 65
- Reaction score
- 215
I actually meant petty of law enforcement more than anything else. I think LE could have given a warning and been done with it but instead made this a bigger deal than need be. I think most LE wouldn't even answer a call like this or if they did they would issue a warning but in this case because of who it is it got this reaction and I think at the end of the day the entire thing will end up dismissed if the package was in fact addressed to BM. This is all IMO!!!
Kind of like Barry didn't have bad intentions by voting for Suzanne....since she was going to vote for Trump anyway...and, the other side cheated too. Right?
MrX
Former Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
- Messages
- 1,008
- Reaction score
- 4,704
Sorry to backtrack, if this has been covered, but reading the AA, along with marking locations on Goodge Earth, I get the impression that there wasn't a huge LE ground search for Suzanne - that most of the searches were by concerned citizens. Was that the case? With no footage of Barry driving anywhere on the night of 9th/10th, and his seeming insistence that they would have caught him if he dumped the body on the way to Broomfield, it seems logical that the body is either near the home, or was dumped during the 30 minute jaunt to toss the helmet.
Cindizzi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2019
- Messages
- 10,524
- Reaction score
- 146,273
From the first press release by the Sheriffs Office on May 11, 2020.
Missing Person - Chaffee County Sheriff
Sheriff personnel called members of Chaffee County Search and Rescue South and North and a search began immediately. The Department of Corrections was contacted and a request was made for tracking dogs to assist. They responded and joined the search. The search continued into the early morning hours with no results.
The search resumed in the early morning hours of May 11 with Search and Rescue. They once again scoured the area. Members were then called from the Chaffee County Tac Team along with search parties from the Department of Corrections and the area was once again scoured.
In all over 100 personnel were used during the search, however by late afternoon on May 11 Ms Morphew had not been found.
Megnut
A piece of peace is peace enough.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 10,807
- Reaction score
- 192,361
Can you throw a basketball into someone's bushes so that you can go on the property?
Pressing charges is the right thing to do, IMO. Innocent until proven guilty, let the court sort it out.
Something is skeevy here.
It's bad optics to get in trouble on Week 1.
So two adults decided it needed to be done, was a good idea, all things considered. And two people decided which person should do it.
You decide to cross a no trespassing sign, you make EVERY effort IMO to alert the homeowner to your presence. You ring the doorbell, you wait, you ring it again, you knock...
But honestly, you don't do it. Not here, not under these circumstances.
Package had been there what, a long hour? Nice and protected from the elements, from all the other nontrespassing people in the universe.
And no traffic in or out, you'd have to know there's a good chance no one is home, package is going nowhere, unless an angry deer seeks weird revenge. So you reorder or you call your realtor and you handle it through the squeaky-cleanest means you can. Because bail. Because jail. Because notoriety. Because decency. That house languished on the market until a good faith buyer came along and hoped to breathe fresh life into the place, hoped the history would fade and took measures to keep unwanted foot traffic off their newly-aquired private property.
I think we may be missing the worst point, however.
They had other means to right a legitimate wrong.
And didn't.
Which forces me to consider there was something else in play.
If you want access to a property where you know you shouldn't go, you toss your basketball into the bushes....
So.... did they order something, purposefully had it delivered there, to gain access to the property?
Whatever this was about, the new owners bought that house and have every right to expect and enjoy a fresh start -- and the former owner and his paramour put the address back in the news, front and center.
This smells.
JMO
Pressing charges is the right thing to do, IMO. Innocent until proven guilty, let the court sort it out.
Something is skeevy here.
It's bad optics to get in trouble on Week 1.
So two adults decided it needed to be done, was a good idea, all things considered. And two people decided which person should do it.
You decide to cross a no trespassing sign, you make EVERY effort IMO to alert the homeowner to your presence. You ring the doorbell, you wait, you ring it again, you knock...
But honestly, you don't do it. Not here, not under these circumstances.
Package had been there what, a long hour? Nice and protected from the elements, from all the other nontrespassing people in the universe.
And no traffic in or out, you'd have to know there's a good chance no one is home, package is going nowhere, unless an angry deer seeks weird revenge. So you reorder or you call your realtor and you handle it through the squeaky-cleanest means you can. Because bail. Because jail. Because notoriety. Because decency. That house languished on the market until a good faith buyer came along and hoped to breathe fresh life into the place, hoped the history would fade and took measures to keep unwanted foot traffic off their newly-aquired private property.
I think we may be missing the worst point, however.
They had other means to right a legitimate wrong.
And didn't.
Which forces me to consider there was something else in play.
If you want access to a property where you know you shouldn't go, you toss your basketball into the bushes....
So.... did they order something, purposefully had it delivered there, to gain access to the property?
Whatever this was about, the new owners bought that house and have every right to expect and enjoy a fresh start -- and the former owner and his paramour put the address back in the news, front and center.
This smells.
JMO
Last edited:
Carloss and other Fourth Amendment cases involve the question whether the actions of POLICE in entering property and GATHERING EVIDENCE were reasonable under applicable law of search and seizure.
They refer to the states' common law in general but do not address the specific right of an individual citizen to enter another's property in order to retrieve a ball or for any other purpose, in the face of properly posted no trespass signs.
Also of interest is Judge (now Associate Justice) Neil Gorsuch's dissent, which calls into question the continuing viability of the holding in Carloss.
In any case, it will be of interest whether SD claims she had a Constitutional right to do what she did. My guess is that she will plead guilty quickly and preclude the filing of other potential charges. Or, that she will enter a cooperation agreement to testify against BM>
swedeheart
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2016
- Messages
- 3,114
- Reaction score
- 48,165
Yes!
I swear, last night before I fell asleep this was heavy on my mind. If Barry did premeditate this murder, likely further in advance than most of us want to believe, is it possible that he found a few local "actors" to confuse the narrative? I truly don't want to believe that he could have intentionally befriended SD, for future plans of killing his wife, or chosen another possible look-alike scapegoat, JP (who could look like Barry on a hotel camera). He cannot be that deranged, could he? It all sounds so far-fetched, and my mind goes to all sorts of dark places and tells me I'm being ridiculous. But it sure is interesting that we have 2 characters in this saga that are so well-suited to play practical body doubles (at a distance/on camera) of the 2 main players (the killer and the victim)!
Did Barry plan it this way to confuse things? We know he insisted that Morgan get Jeff to that hotel on Sunday. Why Jeff, who Barry didn't even know? And had he seen (or even met) Shoshana at his neighbors, well in advance of the murder, and befriended her because she could possibly pass as Suzanne?
Y'all, I know it sounds nutty, but just how many times in this case have you asked yourself, "Did that really just happen?!"
Anyway, I'm glad you thought about it too, @Megnut, confirming I have not completely lost my mind. (Or have I lol?)
Last edited by a moderator:
One of the questions that can be considered is....Would the property owner have pressed charges if the person identified was somebody else, not connected to Morphew? We don't know....and frankly, it is irrelevant. But it seems to be a point of separation for those who think that this woman is going overboard. I do not.
Topppps
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2019
- Messages
- 672
- Reaction score
- 5,200
Regarding Carloss:
EBEL, Circuit Judge.
In this direct criminal appeal, Defendant–Appellant Ralph Carloss contends that two police officers violated the Fourth Amendment by knocking on his front door, seeking to speak with him. Ordinarily a police officer, like any citizen, has an implied license to approach a home, knock on the front door, and ask to speak with the occupants.
SD had an implied license to approach the Puma Path home. And it's not stealing if she took a package that belonged to her. Approaching a home is not illegal regardless of the no trespassing signs.
Last edited by a moderator:
Cameras could have caught her just walking onto the property and set the alarm off. The Homeowner may not have known they were retrieving a package, but knew someone had trespassed.
- Status