Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #9

[Ontario Mom]

I realized we were not living in a world where those were commonplace anymore when it was kindly pointed out which made me feel very foolish for asking about one.

No need to feel foolish, we're all in the same boat.
Same concept as when the power goes out and we go in the next room to locate the flashlight, and what's the very first thing we do?
Reach for the light switch, so we can see to find the flashlight.
Then have that "oh yeah, duh" moment.

 

[Hoosierfan72]

Just an observation, but I see a lot of discussion that BM was controlling. That might be true, but I also find it a significant leap to take a statement from one (not very close) relative that BM "has been in charge of what happens for a long time" to making him out to be a domineering/controlling/dangerous person. While I think all (hopefully) would agree that every spousal relationship, if healthy, is an equal partnership - I also think in most cases one spouse has more of the "take charge" personality. The fact that BM, as a small business owner, is seen as someone "in charge" is hardly surprising, IMO. I personally don't feel that there's enough evidence to reasonably come to the conclusion that there was definitely a dysfunctional, domineering aspect to the marriage. MOO, JMO.

 

[Melrose]

“Protecting beautiful young girls who have suddenly become world famous (and motherless?) sounds like a sensible move IMO.” (Melrose)

But strange that neither teenager lived at home with parents ... I don’t get the impression that BM is the “protective” sort, not my definition of it anyway. I agree though that the girls need to be protected, without question.

Not strange where I live/lived for young people to start branching out on their own, some earlier than others. I left home at 17 and some friends left at 16. Depends on personality and circumstances. It doesn't necessarily mean you're having trouble with yr parents.

"he's not the protective sort" - how are members coming to these types of conclusions when so few details are available?



JMO. MOO.

 

[Melrose]

Just an observation, but I see a lot of discussion that BM was controlling. That might be true, but I also find it a significant leap to take a statement from one (not very close) relative that BM "has been in charge of what happens for a long time" to making him out to be a domineering/controlling/dangerous person. While I think all (hopefully) would agree that every spousal relationship, if healthy, is an equal partnership - I also think in most cases one spouse has more of the "take charge" personality. The fact that BM, as a small business owner, is seen as someone "in charge" is hardly surprising, IMO. I personally don't feel that there's enough evidence to reasonably come to the conclusion that there was definitely a dysfunctional, domineering aspect to the marriage. MOO, JMO.

Agreed! It's baffling how multiple comments are assuming things about the man, the marriage, their life, and their relationship with the children and more when there are no details available.

My father was in charge of our household, to put it mildly. He didn't kill anyone (that I know of).

JMO. MOO.

 

[Knox]

Stephanie (Butzer) Rose[URL='https://twitter.com/stephaniebutzer']@stephaniebutzer[/URL]
Authorities have not released any new information on the #SuzanneMorphew case since Tuesday afternoon. Here's the latest: http://bit.ly/3c7cbEh

The tip line is 719-312-7530.
https://t.co/iVc10I5upG?amp=1

 

[Spartygirl]

With the Covid, & SM's cancer, chemotherapy - her daughters (& anyone frankly) would be very cautious to not bring that into the home - SM would be in a high-risk group. Thus, she may have been distanced for her health.

I've zero doubt LE knew what had happened within 24 hours.

No doubt at all

The silence is comforting to me

They're getting their ducks in a row, so to speak

JMO

I tend to agree-- they know what happened, they know who is responsible, they are working on getting their ducks in a row and hoping to find her body.
There may be searches going on we don't know about, they may have found something during their search at the construction site at the home they were digging --we don't know.
They had to have sufficient evidence or show probable reason to obtain the search warrant at both SM' house and the work site.
We just have to patiently wait while they get all their forensics results back and once they have all of this, they can obtain a warrant, even if they don't find SM's Body.

 

[Feistyomi]

It's interesting to see their old house is also remote. Not as remote rural as in Colorado but we know they are not new too it. Imo

That is an interesting point!
Not sure if this created an ongoing vigilance or overconfidence carried over to the new house... there was a gate also in IN.

We have lived in our current house, 20 yrs, sort of a mini neighborhood...after a rash of somewhat comical thefts of items on common property, we have recently installed a common gate. I feel an extra layer of security, but not ready to slack up in our household.
Note, while we can install monitor cameras at gate, because fiber optic cable was extended to the rural road, we do not have upload speed or fiber optics to our home, necessary for cameras. We are in process of that. Do we know the Morphew had cameras?

There was a significant period of several years that thefts were down for the entire rural community, we probably were less conscientious about arming system. They were on the rise before covid and now gates on other rural driveways popping up every where.
Do we know whether Morphews security was simply disarmed or not working.

we do have a new system on our home, operated by phone app, disabled and armed remotely, but this creates a very real internet trail, still getting use to it... not sure if this helps, not sure if it narrows suspect pool.
I will add that we were somewhat casual about arming until approx ten years ago, incident changed that.
So, possible if Morphews had not had any
incidents, they may have also been a bit casual.
I am comparing rural to remote, tho.
For someone to break in and abduct SM, it would have been well planned, at any rate.
MOO Satellite images are almost too clear, but not really current, drone observation, is this the new criminal tool?
I am not tech savvy.

Additionally, there is also a touch of the randomness safety net, that I unconsciously subscribe to in my own situation... why choose my home?

 

[manit]

I tend to agree-- they know what happened, they know who is responsible, they are working on getting their ducks in a row and hoping to find her body.
There may be searches going on we don't know about, they may have found something during their search at the construction site at the home they were digging --we don't know.
They had to have sufficient evidence or show probable reason to obtain the search warrant at both SM' house and the work site.
We just have to patiently wait while they get all their forensics results back and once they have all of this, they can obtain a warrant, even if they don't find SM's Body.

I don't believe anyone ever reported there was a search warrant for the jobsite. There was definitely a sealed warrant for the family home, but I only ever saw that the property owner at the jobsite was "fully cooperative", they may not have needed a warrant to search there.

 

[payitforward3000]

Has anyone here watched Ozarks on Netflix? From the family photos it seems they go on lavish vacations pretty often. Completely a stretch obviously but with his emotional plea right away as if she has been taken just gives me weird Ozark vibes.

 

[Shiloh28]

I don't know. Even though I don't agree with everything posted here, I like hearing people's opinions and often their life experiences help me look at the case in a new way.

Hoping we at least get an update today.

 

[Madeleine74]

The main thing that helps me look at a case is evidence., which means waiting until such time facts and evidence become available. A jury is given evidence to consider and that's what matters to me.

There are many cases that can be learned about besides this one, so waiting for resolution in this particular case doesn't preclude following one or more others.

 

[Knox]

<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

I really don't have opinions on Mother's Day, cancer, or finances, although all could play a part in what happened to Suzanne. I do understand your point in making assumptions about Suzanne's life.

I do strongly suspect BM, largely due to the actions of LE. We all know they won't outright say someone is a suspect, heck they are still calling this is an "open missing persons investigation". Meanwhile they are cutting up concrete and screening dirt in a place BM recently worked. It's more about the actions of LE, than their words. Is that open to interpretation, sure is. That's what we do here. Google missing adults, stranger abduction does happen, but is rare in Suzanne's age range. Kidnapping, which BM seems to favor, even more rare. I'll add that Suzanne appears to have a very low risk factor in terms of lifestyle.

So to say posters who suspect BM are viewing him through "their dirty lens of assumed guilt" seems a little extreme, IMO.

 

[Knox]

I don't believe anyone ever reported there was a search warrant for the jobsite. There was definitely a sealed warrant for the family home, but I only ever saw that the property owner at the jobsite was "fully cooperative", they may not have needed a warrant to search there.

I guarantee you LE obtained a warrant for that search. Any evidence found without a warrant could be excluded at trial, they would not risk that.

 

[Alethea]

I don't believe anyone ever reported there was a search warrant for the jobsite. There was definitely a sealed warrant for the family home, but I only ever saw that the property owner at the jobsite was "fully cooperative", they may not have needed a warrant to search there.

IMO you don't break up someone's foundation without a warrant. For the sole reason that if you're operating on consent, the homeowner could revoke consent once they see what a mess it's making and then LE would have to go for a warrant anyway.

 

[oviedo]

I guarantee you LE obtained a warrant for that search. Any evidence found without a warrant could be excluded at trial, they would not risk that.

ITA - it really makes one wonder what they heck they thought was buried beneath all that concrete (and which apparently they found nothing..) hmmm
JMO

 

[riolove77]

I don't believe anyone ever reported there was a search warrant for the jobsite. There was definitely a sealed warrant for the family home, but I only ever saw that the property owner at the jobsite was "fully cooperative", they may not have needed a warrant to search there.

I guarantee you they had a SW for the dig. Searches like that based on just consent are super risky. The homeowner has the control and power to completely call it off mid-search and say he's done consenting. Then what? They'd have to stop, go get a SW, etc. and even if that was okay, you then face a defense attorney fighting in court to say evidence item x or y was actually pulled from the home after the consent was withdrawn and therefore should be tossed, etc. A warrant is the safest way to go.

 

[Alethea]

Has anyone here watched Ozarks on Netflix? From the family photos it seems they go on lavish vacations pretty often. Completely a stretch obviously but with his emotional plea right away as if she has been taken just gives me weird Ozark vibes.

My husband and I were debating this yesterday. I do white collar defense for a living - fraud, business disputes, counterfeiting, soured business partnerships. I think there's no way a small business landscaper has $1.75 million in cash to buy that house. Small businesses are cash-heavy and service businesses like landscaping are equipment heavy - you usually have loans since those purchases are "assets" and not "expenses" to write off like expensive staplers. My hinky meter went way up. Mortgage rates are so low that financially most people IMO would take a mortgage and use the cash in their business, in other investments. EVEN IF you received a substantial inheritance financially it makes sense to invest that money in literally anything that has a higher than 3% return and take out the mortgage. I think there are only a few reasons you'd put that much cash down and it's because your money has not been reported as income so you wouldn't qualify for the mortgage (no tax filings, etc.) or it's crime proceeds and you do not want the scrutiny that comes from the loans.

My husband disagrees and thinks it's definitely possible for a successful landscaping company owner to have that much cash, particularly if there are corporate contracts - office buildings, plazas. He agrees with me that it's a bad investment but pointed out that there are still rich people who are Dave Ramsey types who even if financially you could make a better return elsewhere, they prefer to have no or low debt. Point taken!

 

[?mysterian?]

Discussion of a sexually violent predator with criminal history in the area, with an arrest warrant out for failure to appear in the county, which the judge said was "a cause for fear for community safety" is not allowed here?

From a moderator's post earlier today:

"
Missing Persons Center is not NAMUS and it is not an approved source. They are not a government agency, we do not know anything about them and therefore cannot verify their sources. Am in the process of removing related posts (including discussion about the bike photo).

There are many groups that have sites related to missing people, but not all of them are approved here (and for good reason due to some past experiences too long to go into here).

Stick to MSM, LE and other WS approved sources (and NAMUS if/when the file is available there)

Also, still cleaning up here, but want to add the following at this point:

There is nothing in MSM to justify speculation on specific individuals just because they have been involved with the criminal justice system in Colorado. Think of it this way – if we discuss 20 random individuals as possible POIs in any case and if 1 of them does end up being the actual perp, that is 19 other innocent people who had nothing to do with a case who have their images splashed all over Websleuths. We don't allow that. Wait for MSM or LE to release related information before bringing possibly unrelated people into this discussion.

There is also nothing in MSM to indicate that Suzanne was medically fragile. It is not known what type of cancer Suzanne had. For all we know it could have been a mild case of skin cancer due to sun exposure. We just don’t know so please stop judging the girls or the family dynamics based on an unknown.



Click here for The Rules
Click here to support WS via Patreon or PayPal
sillybilly, Today at 1:54 AMReport
#327Like+ QuoteReply"

The pertinent information is here:

"There is nothing in MSM to justify speculation on specific individuals just because they have been involved with the criminal justice system in Colorado. Think of it this way – if we discuss 20 random individuals as possible POIs in any case and if 1 of them does end up being the actual perp, that is 19 other innocent people who had nothing to do with a case who have their images splashed all over Websleuths. We don't allow that. Wait for MSM or LE to release related information before bringing possibly unrelated people into this discussion."

 

[riolove77]

I want to make a general point of saying that this case is nowhere near cold. Folks, we don't even refer to a case as cold until it's hitting the six month point. This is, what, under three weeks old? I think people are equating a lack of info from LE as them not having any. Quite the contrary - often when police and prosecutors aren't talking, it's because they have so much to say that they can't or won't. Trust me - I know.

 

[DizzyB]

I want to make a general point of saying that this case is nowhere near cold. Folks, we don't even refer to a case as cold until it's hitting the six month point. This is, what, under three weeks old? I think people are equating a lack of info from LE as them not having any. Quite the contrary - often when police and prosecutors aren't talking, it's because they have so much to say that they can't or won't. Trust me - I know.

I agree that the case itself is not cold. LE is doing their job and they are properly not out there spilling info. I assume it’s because they know enough that they do not need the public’s help at this time. Do you find it odd that there has been no outcry on the family or community’s part on behalf of a seemingly beloved member who is missing out there? Could they also be mum because they know or sense more than what is being portrayed?