Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #13

[Itsapuzzle]

Perhaps someone was hired to get Suzanne out of the picture while BM was away ..... just a thought ... in exchange for money?

<modsnip: Surveillance cams not working is social media rumor>

 

[Barry]

Yes it is obvious to me he did not have a current POA and why? We can list a whole bunch of reasons IMO but the fact that they had one for a specific transaction shows they know what they are and how they work
JMO

I am wondering what happens to POA, if it’s not known if the individual is deceased or not. In that context, maybe the POA was not valid, prompting the court action. MOO - IANAL

 

[10ofRods]

Are we allowed to post anything about a parent? Or rather step parent? I am relatively new to this and don't want to get into trouble. I should have not said anything, eh? I am no super sleuther but learned this from another member, who did the hard work. I can post a link if it is allowed.
And I really need to change that to IF he was taken care of by her parents, then she would be likely to take care of her kids.
I am so sorry if I violated any rules.

Most parents take care of their kids, whether or not their own parents took care of them. But we have no reason to believe that anyone in this story lacked parental care.

Suzanne seems, from all her SM, to be a great mother who adored her daughters, so of course she would "take care" of them. I wouldn't post anything about Suzanne's family members - I believe that sleuthing any of them is against TOS, although not sure if this extends to deceased people - you can always message a mod and they will get back to you.

I am not sure what your second paragraph means. Are you speaking about BM being taken care of by SM's parents? Pretty sure that would be off limits and you were right to state it as an hypothesis.

Right now, Suzanne isn't able to take care of anyone.

Suzanne has been missing for 28 days, by end of day today and tomorrow marks the 29th day of the search for Suzanne.

I personally am very concerned that there has been no further wilderness/locale searching for about 22 days. If Suzanne had a head injury and wandered off, it might take a lot of searching to find her.

 

[10ofRods]

This post lands at random with a view to addressing questions we have received regarding sleuthing of property documents that contain Suzanne's name and the names of others.

As Suzanne is the victim in this case, sleuthing her background information IS allowed. BM has not been officially named a POI so sleuthing him is not allowed.

As there are strong indications that LE considers BM to be a POI, Tricia made a thread specific decision to allow discussion (not sleuthing) of BM based on those indication.

We understand this can be confusing when it comes to sleuthed documents that contain both names.

In sleuthing Suzanne (which is allowed) BM's name and others may appear in the results.That's okay as long as it was arrived at via sleuthing Suzanne and contains her name. If names other than Suzanne's appear, please just link to the documentation and use initials for all others in the discussion.

If/when LE officially names a POI or suspect, then their name can be used.

Hope that clarifies.

It truly does clarify - thank you.

 

[Seattle1]

Are we allowed to post anything about a parent? Or rather step parent? I am relatively new to this and don't want to get into trouble. I should have not said anything, eh? I am no super sleuther but learned this from another member, who did the hard work. I can post a link if it is allowed.
And I really need to change that to IF he was taken care of by her parents, then she would be likely to take care of her kids.
I am so sorry if I violated any rules.

As WS is a facts-based forum, posting statements as fact requires a link to the verified source and/or approved MSM both to post and discuss on the main thread. Sleuthing family members also violates WS TOS. In other words, I don't think you learned this info on the main thread or MSM. There are about 59 minutes allowed to edit your posts here or you can self report your post and request a Moderator delete or modify your post to comply with TOS.

 

[TKG]

I was just perusing NAMUS and looking at SM’s entry. The map included as last seen location looks like a restaurant? Anyone know anything about this info?

خرائط ‪Google‬‏‏
Edited to add: I just did a street 360 view and I’m not sure what I’m looking at. Fire station? Garage of some sort? @Dave F. Any ideas on this map that is listed on SM’s NAMUS page? GM has the GPS coordinates at La Beca Cafe Take Out..

 

[CronesEye]

I do agree that nobody is sharing info on the last time they saw or even spoke with Suzanne. I don't know about the FB rumor. I think it is possible the kidnapper(s) have been in contact with BM.

Crazy passerby is definitely a possibility in my opinion. Sherry Papini style is also a possibility.

Obviously, most people posting here think it is similar to other cases in CO, but I am not getting the husband is guilty vibe. Of course, I am probably slower than others on making that determination. You are correct - it is hard to sleuth without any info whatsoever.

It is strange how crime, abduction, murder and violence evolves over time. It seems to have it's own subculture. In this it isn't always the act of an individual but an individual in a community. Both the individual's and the community's pathos evolves and changes. In learning about stalking I saw how notoriety was sometimes pursued and achieved by those stalking famous people like Jodi Foster, that being John Hinckely Jr. and now we have a whole new kind of notoriety stalker, with modern media, a new generation etc. It's quite a study.
Regardless, I am sure it would help to understand Colorado's unique culture. I am sure Chaffee does. I have been there but don't really know the dynamics. Regardless of who dunn it, they dunn it in Colorado and if they are going get away with it, they need to successfully maneuver in and around Colorado culture and Colorado LE.

 

[kkdj]

MOO seems likely while getting cancer treatments she may have signed POA.

I think so too.
If she did there will be a notary public with record of it, her signature and fingerprint.

 

[BeckyF]

If in fact BM wanted his wife dead and it was not a crime of passion, but planned, he seems to me to be the kind of person who would hire someone to do the dirty work. I have nothing to base this on, just an impression. JMO.

 

[10ofRods]

I am wondering what happens to POA, if it’s not known if the individual is deceased or not. In that context, maybe the POA was not valid, prompting the court action. MOO - IANAL

Isn't that the whole point of a POA? That no matter what happens to you, someone has the right to complete transactions on your behalf?

If I took off for the highlands of Chiapas, where there were no phones and my family had no clue when they'd hear from me again, I would indeed execute a POA. So many things that could need attending to. I might not think of myself as missing (I'd be out in some village with no phones). But my family might. And my DH might need my signature on various things. I'd want him to be able to take care of things legally.

We need more attorneys here!

 

[K9Enzo]

I wonder if SM ever packed a lunch to enjoy while on a bike ride? Did she ever stop to cool off, stop for a long drink, take a break, eat? Would that lake been a location she was drawn to? Is there a trail she would have traveled alone to get off her bike to pee out of sight?

But as soon as I start thinking about these possibilities of a unknown person happening upon her or her having some sort of accident- that worksite dig & house search is front and center again. Then I’m back to was she was murdered by someone she should have trusted the most with her life or murdered by someone else she knows, maybe well or not so much.

 

[Seattle1]

Most parents take care of their kids, whether or not their own parents took care of them. But we have no reason to believe that anyone in this story lacked parental care.

Suzanne seems, from all her SM, to be a great mother who adored her daughters, so of course she would "take care" of them. I wouldn't post anything about Suzanne's family members - I believe that sleuthing any of them is against TOS, although not sure if this extends to deceased people - you can always message a mod and they will get back to you.

I am not sure what your second paragraph means. Are you speaking about BM being taken care of by SM's parents? Pretty sure that would be off limits and you were right to state it as an hypothesis.

Right now, Suzanne isn't able to take care of anyone.

Suzanne has been missing for 28 days, by end of day today and tomorrow marks the 29th day of the search for Suzanne.

I personally am very concerned that there has been no further wilderness/locale searching for about 22 days. If Suzanne had a head injury and wandered off, it might take a lot of searching to find her.

Hope this helps to clarify: based on my experience, no sleuthing family includes the deceased family. For example, we could not post or discuss on the main thread that SM's mother was deceased until after it was reported in MSM --albeit many read the obituary weeks earlier.

 

[AugustWest]

Welcome to WS @AugustWest and thanks for sharing your valuable, and everso timely experience with us!

In all fairness, I think any angst you sensed from WS'ers about BM filing a petition for Guardianship for his missing wife can best be explained as our shock and dismay to learn BM filed the petition in the state of Indiana after residing in Colorado for more than two years.

Without any details about the petition, all we could do was speculate about a probable property or business transaction yet baffled why BM would be using the Probate court of Indiana versus a POA as they evidentially used not so long ago.

Regarding Guardianship, my personal experience was the recently confirmed Guardianship (Missing Persons) Act of 2017 in UK to make a provision for missing persons property and finances under Guardianship practice without a 7-year wait period. Coupled with the professional experience of other members where UAGPPJA has not been adopted, as well as others that have petitioned for Guardianship of living family members, we had many hours to share experience and worry about SM's interest.

It wasn't until Friday (June 5) that we learned for the first time that the petition was actually regarding jointly owned real estate in escrow set to close today. Again, we had much more time to share concerns than comprehend the temporary grant issued by the court pursuant to IC and the UAGPPJA.

Thanks again for the UAGPPJA and insight, and perhaps you'll consider becoming a verified attorney for the WS forum community. Please find more details at the link below.

Verification Process for Professional or Insider Posters

I appreciate the warm welcome and thank you for the reply!

As previously stated, I understand the concern; that a spouse could "game the system" by catching the benefit of his/her preferred forum, even while causing the misfortune of his/her significant other. I totally get it. I simply wanted people to understand the rationale of why the law is the way it is. Uniform laws are a good thing. It takes away a tool that many unsavory attorneys use to abuse the law to their ends. Also, as previously noted, we all should understand that law is imperfect. It would be hard to tailor a suitable wall of words to cover the fact pattern discussed here. And this is an extreme example. Uniform guardianship laws benefit a far greater swath of people than they fail. That was my main concern when crafting my earlier response; we have come a long way in guardianship issues, and I want the general public to understand this.

This is a tough example. I don't have the answer as to what forum would be best suited to address Ms. Morphew's guardianship. I do believe, however, that Indiana is as proper a venue as Colorado. It is much more convenient, in my opinion, to be heard there. She was raised and lived there for most of her life. Her family is there, so notice is better achieved there. How convenient would it be for a possible dissenter to travel to Colorado to voice their opinion on the guardianship and her wishes? When you think of these things, and also remember that the court doesn't view Mr. Morphew any differently than another law abiding citizen, it makes sense. Her husband wants it there, and her closest adult blood relative doesn't object (even though she is a young whippersnapper ). I really don't know what more the judge could do in this instance. Not an easy decision by any means.

I have read over the Guardianship (Missing Persons) Act of 2017. It is always cool to read UK law, with reference to the Queen in the legalise ("Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty"). American law is so dull, comparatively speaking. And I think it a well reasoned approach to distinguish missing persons versus, say, medically incapable persons. However, I still feel that U.S. law has done a good job on the matter also, and is consistent with the notion of common law shared by the British, its Commonwealth, and us, the rebellious colonies!

I will consider becoming verified, however, I like lurking. You guys think up some pretty good stuff, and I like to see your thoughts unbridled by us stuffy lawyers. I have been lurking since the Casey Anthony trial...long time ago (what a sorry conclusion that was). I simply wanted to say my piece regarding the UAGPPJA, as I know it pretty well. I live in Texoma, the area between Texas, Oklahoma and Arkansas, so these "forum shopping" issues commonly arise. I generally practice medical malpractice defense, with a side in estate planning. That's my background, and in the chance I don't become verified, you can take that as truth or leave it

Great discussion all, keep it up!

 

[pocketaccent]

I see the bike as being thrown down there, either by BM or other, I wonder tho, could it have been walked down there, foot prints, etc?
If walked, points to staging IMO doubtful Suzanne would not have tried to escape if given chance.

Did we ever find out how BM knew (per TD video) that the bike was found with its wheels pointing up? Maybe LE showed him photos?
Did he know because he placed it that way?

I missed it if this was discussed. I'm a page skipper when catching up.

 

[Barry]

Isn't that the whole point of a POA? That no matter what happens to you, someone has the right to complete transactions on your behalf?

If I took off for the highlands of Chiapas, where there were no phones and my family had no clue when they'd hear from me again, I would indeed execute a POA. So many things that could need attending to. I might not think of myself as missing (I'd be out in some village with no phones). But my family might. And my DH might need my signature on various things. I'd want him to be able to take care of things legally.

We need more attorneys here!

I believe POA goes away at TOD. I’m not sure what happens if it is uncertain if the person is deceased.

 

[Itsapuzzle]

Here is the link to the video interview by Greg Nieto with the mountain biker that reported a “car that was suspicious” that MD.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=240130987293405

That is interesting, thanks for putting it up TKG, hadn't heard that before .... h'mm, the biker would be able to say around what time he saw the suspicious car there.

 

[osu]

SM’s Twitter feed. Her last tweet was April 2017.

SM reminds me so much of Kelsey Berreth in the hot tub photo.

https://twitter.com/srmorphew/status/785341078249410560?s=21

 

[curiousgene]

The guardianship issue is huge.

- SM/BM owns several properties. Multi million dollars worth all together (I'm guessing only)
- SM disappears into thin air
- We don't know what, how, where, when, who, why, motive.
- BM wants permanent guardianship now.

It's huge. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Exactly!! This is huge. That is why I am very keen on knowing how the Judge is going to look at the Guardianship as it points towards a financial gain motive in her disappearance.

 

[AugustWest]

I have a question and you can give a general reply as an attorney. What constitutes best interest in case of Guardianship of a missing person? I am trying to understand the factors a Judge has to keep in mind before deciding on a case like this. This is a great platform to learn and having an attorney like you contributing in the discussion forum is great. Thank you!

Sorry it took so long to reply, I just wrote an essay for Seattle1!

I am a little confused about your question, but I think you are referring to a legal standard some courts use to determine a respondent's decision-making. There are two schools of thought in U.S. jurisprudence. One is the doctrine of substituted consent, the other best-interest.

Substituted consent would make a decision consistent with an individual's wishes. Or what we usually think of as autonomous "intent." What the respondent intended to mean when they conveyed their wishes.

A best-interest standard would require that the guardian look at the pros and cons of the procedure or situation and determine what is in the individual’s best interest.

Hope this is what you were asking, and thanks for the reply!

ETA: I'm not sure which standard Indiana uses. And it's the weekend, so I'm gonna be lazy and not look it up!

 

[MassGuy]

IMO considering cases such as SM's - what otherwise might be considered 'harmless' 'innocent' or otherwise innocuous.....is under the microscope

LE has not treated SM as a missing person

LE does not believe an animal attacked her

IMO LE had something very very specific to go on within the first 24 hours

Couple this with BMs real estate transactions, the timing of said transactions & the pursuit of guardianship of his 'missing' wife....

And LE digging up & sifting with a fine tooth comb (with FBI in cahoots if not mistaken) BMs previous worksite......

I'm just waiting for the arrest of BM

It could be awhile - but if they had such definitive information as I suspect LE did from the get-go: it WILL happen

JMO

I’ll add a couple things that add to the suspicion:

BM has never spoken to the media, or been publicly involved in the search effort. In fact, when given the opportunity to utilize the media to get the word out, he responded with words to the effect of “it’s too soon.”

In a suspicious disappearance, families across the country frequently express frustration when they aren’t afforded such an opportunity.

BM had it, and passed.

He then waited a week, and devoted an astounding 26 seconds in the form of a recorded video. I have never seen anything like that before.

I believe that when the sheriff said that Barry had been cooperative and expressed hope that he would continue to be cooperative, he was sending a message.

The silence that is surrounding this entire thing, is something I have only seen in homicide investigations. That is exactly what I believe this to be.