Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #14

[cattlekate]

Interesting. I am trying to figure out how to approach this post because in thinking about the timeline I am getting a little twisted up in the logic. So let me begin with a few important questions:

• according to BM, when did he leave for Denver? what did he tell LE on this point?
• according to BM, when did he last speak to, see or hear from SM? what did he tell LE on this point?
• is BM this last person to have "heard from" SM referred to in the quote above, or is that someone else?

Now a few points:

• if BM told LE that he left for Denver on Sunday morning, kissed his wife goodbye, etc. then the above would read "has not been heard from since May 10"; therefore BM must have told LE that he left for Denver on Saturday (I am ruling out Friday for reasons I will explain later)
• if BM told LE that he left for Denver on Saturday, then BM must be this "last person" to have "heard from her" (he presumably, supposedly would have spoken to her before going to bed on Saturday night; if he didn't say he spoke to his wife before going to bed on Saturday night, they would have had additional questions)
• except even the timeline above makes no sense, because LE would certainly have asked him if he called his wife on Sunday morning when he woke up; I guess it's possible that he said he didn't or that he did and got no answer, although the latter would prompt additional questions, e.g., weren't you a little concerned you got no response?
• I am going to go out on a limb and say that I am struggling so much with this timeline in part because there is something wrong with this timeline; further, that there is something wrong with this timeline might be one reason LE is looking at BM

Finally, here is what BM told Tyson Draper about his departure for Denver. You tell me what this tells us about the timeline.

TD: "You were in Denver, but how long before someone noticed she was gone?"

BM: "It was Mother's Day so...um...we uh...had two daughters that were coming home from the trip and I had that job in Denver that I wanted to get started on on Sunday set it up for my workers, my workers were coming in Sunday night. Normally I don't work Sunday night. I work Monday, but I being the owner I wanted to get everything lined up so that I didn't have to worry about Monday morning, just get busy working. So I told my wife, I said, 'Listen, the girls are gonna be home; they want to spend Mother's Day with you. Mind if I go get started with this?' She said, 'That's fine....'. She bikes ... She'd ride the bike ... The girls would get home; they'll be together. That's what we thought was gonna happen. The girls were running late so they texted Happy Mother's Day. She didn't text back. So we went to ... they called my neighbors. And said listen, it's Mother's Day, I'm a little worried and will you go check the house? And the neighbor went and checked the house. Saw that her car was there but the bike was gone. She called me in Denver and said, "Hey, we're just a little worried." And I go, "Well, I am too. Why don't we just call the police, just to be safe?"

There are many things to say about BM's answer above, but to me it sounds like his story is that he left for Denver on Saturday.

In some ways it sounds like his story is that he left for Denver on Sunday morning, but if that were the case, wouldn't he have told LE that he saw / spoke to SM on Sunday morning, and wouldn't the article above therefore say that SM "has not been heard from since May 10"?

Something is not right about the timeline.

This is such an excellent post. BM’s words are so.....evasive.

One thing really bothers me is how did the neighbor “see” that the bike wasn’t there? Did someone give her a garage code to enter the garage and specifically look for it? And give a description of what SM’s bike looked like, since BM and the kids may have had bikes in there as well.

It just seems so weird that SM’s not answering texts suddenly becomes “maybe she went on a bike ride.....please go in our garage and see if a bike is missing.”

 

[KLM6]

Exactly. He was asked a relatively simple question: "when did someone first notice she was gone?" But rather than answering that question --- e.g., "Well, my daughters texted her at such-and-such time and .." he gives us this long rambling explanation of why he wasn't there and why he was in Denver.

Even when he gets around to answering the question, his answer is a little odd. First, why doesn't he say what time the girls texted their mother and got no response? I mean, this is kind of important. Why is he so vague about this? Second, why does he say, "so we went to" when describing what the daughters did, then correct himself and say "they called my neighbors"? This pronoun / subject inconsistency is odd.

Cause he momentarily forgot his memorized lines? Jmho.

 

[KLM6]

Agreed. That entire interview is a textbook example of deception. In terms of tactics, is strikingly similar to that of Letecia Stauch.

It’s not hard to answer a question directly, unless you are actually forced to think about that answer.

A lot of irrelevant information, speaking in generalities, and no cold, hard facts.

IMO, how could anyone who was hit with such trauma even remember all that detail if it wasnt rehearsed? My mind would be blank.

 

[KLM6]

Either LE told him not to disclose that info or he chose not to, although likely told him to keep mum; At the least his attorneys told him to zip it!
IMO

He probably should have listened.

 

[marylamby]

Exactly. He was asked a relatively simple question: "when did someone first notice she was gone?" But rather than answering that question --- e.g., "Well, my daughters texted her at such-and-such time and .." he gives us this long rambling explanation of why he wasn't there and why he was in Denver.

Even when he gets around to answering the question, his answer is a little odd. First, why doesn't he say what time the girls texted their mother and got no response? I mean, this is kind of important. Why is he so vague about this? Second, why does he say, "so we went to" when describing what the daughters did, then correct himself and say "they called my neighbors"? This pronoun / subject inconsistency is odd.

I caught that "so we went to" too and it also bothers me why, according to him, his daughters didn't call BM before calling the neighbor ~ unless they did and HE suggested they call the neighbor.
None of his word salad makes any sense to anyone.

 

[GordianKnot]

Interesting. I am trying to figure out how to approach this post because in thinking about the timeline I am getting a little twisted up in the logic.
Finally, here is what BM told Tyson Draper about his departure for Denver. You tell me what this tells us about the timeline.

TD: "You were in Denver, but how long before someone noticed she was gone?"

BM: "It was Mother's Day so...um...we uh...had two daughters that were coming home from the trip and I had that job in Denver that I wanted to get started on on Sunday set it up for my workers, my workers were coming in Sunday night. Normally I don't work Sunday night. I work Monday, but I being the owner I wanted to get everything lined up so that I didn't have to worry about Monday morning, just get busy working. So I told my wife, I said, 'Listen, the girls are gonna be home; they want to spend Mother's Day with you. Mind if I go get started with this?' She said, 'That's fine....'. She bikes ... She'd ride the bike ... The girls would get home; they'll be together. That's what we thought was gonna happen. The girls were running late so they texted Happy Mother's Day. She didn't text back. So we went to ... they called my neighbors. And said listen, it's Mother's Day, I'm a little worried and will you go check the house? And the neighbor went and checked the house. Saw that her car was there but the bike was gone. She called me in Denver and said, "Hey, we're just a little worried." And I go, "Well, I am too. Why don't we just call the police, just to be safe?"

There are many things to say about BM's answer above, but to me it sounds like his story is that he left for Denver on Saturday.

In some ways it sounds like his story is that he left for Denver on Sunday morning, but if that were the case, wouldn't he have told LE that he saw / spoke to SM on Sunday morning, and wouldn't the article above therefore say that SM "has not been heard from since May 10"?

Something is not right about the timeline.

RSABBM:

It ain't you who's getting twisted up.
The timeline itself is completely twisted.
It's fudged.

That's what's wrong with the timeline.

The reason we're struggling to make sense of this narrative is because it doesn't make any sense.

I think the timeline BM sketched is one of a plethora of red flags that LE saw flying at full staff from the beginning.

If that's how he outlined the events leading up to her disappearance in his account to LE, I can't imagine it didn't raise their eyebrows considerably.

JMO.

 

[Dave F.]

Do you think SM did this route often? Since it led to her doorstep almost? It is a bit extreme, the descent. One could easily get injured and a bike damaged, even the younger guys. Wouldn't be good to go alone on that trail.
The trail seems good for younger thrill seekers. Thinking of all that adrenaline rush I am reminded of a gambler that goes for the high of a win. The win being to not wipe out. I imagine those bikers come down that descent either exhausted or charged up. Don't know I would want a house at the end of that trail. I'm just extrapolating but it would be kind of like living next to a bar, casino or drug dealer if someone was looking to get a rush from a ride. Don't listen to me though, I am just a feeble old one eyed crone, those young whipper snappers, it's good healthy exercise but just a bit too charged for me. Risk takers, eh?
Good research Dave F. Very insightful. I have learned a lot.

I read that book at the beginning on Flow, "...at great cost..." Yup

I totally agree. I would never have a house there, myself. Just living in that location and spending a lot of time alone is a risk, I would think; but then again I've never lived like that, so what would I know about it?
The sheriff confirmed, in his first news conference, that SM was "an avid biker" and that "she rode pretty often". There is really only one direction to ride from SM's house, and that is "up". There is really only one direction to get back home, and that would be "down". The logical choices of that return direction would be back down Highway 50, which in my opinion would be no fun at all after the first time; Fooses Creek, or Green's Creek.............which comes out well below SM's house and requires a pretty steep ride back up US 50 to get home. I think she took it often, but I caution that the Colorado Trail and the Fooses Creek descent run very close together. When ascending on the Colorado Trail, there are plenty of opportunities to cut the ride short of the top, making the descent much less adrenalin-pumping; but still a great ride for fresh mountain air and quality exercise. IMO

 

[al66pine]

Texas Equusearch?

This begs the question:
Why hasn't the family representative contacted Texas EquuSearch???

@Warwick If SM's fam requested help directly from TE, we would not necessarily know. But even if fam did, there may be other issues, like this from TE website, w bbm: "... If the family requests our help, law enforcement MUST approve our assistance after the request is made by the family."

I remember a couple cases where the MP's fam requested TE's help but did not receive it. Looking in the rearview mirror - after trials - seems likely LE likely informed TE that a recovery of remains was imminent.
Now in light of Covid-19, TE's budget may be stretched tight at the moment, ditto its wonderful volunteers who participate w horses, 4 wheelers, or on foot.

 

[KLM6]

Exactly. He was asked a relatively simple question: "when did someone first notice she was gone?" But rather than answering that question --- e.g., "Well, my daughters texted her at such-and-such time and .." he gives us this long rambling explanation of why he wasn't there and why he was in Denver.

Even when he gets around to answering the question, his answer is a little odd. First, why doesn't he say what time the girls texted their mother and got no response? I mean, this is kind of important. Why is he so vague about this? Second, why does he say, "so we went to" when describing what the daughters did, then correct himself and say "they called my neighbors"? This pronoun / subject inconsistency is odd.

Unless, in that moment he was referring to, he wasnt alone, and he caught himself too late. Maybe?

 

[TKG]

Exactly. He was asked a relatively simple question: "when did someone first notice she was gone?" But rather than answering that question --- e.g., "Well, my daughters texted her at such-and-such time and .." he gives us this long rambling explanation of why he wasn't there and why he was in Denver.

Even when he gets around to answering the question, his answer is a little odd. First, why doesn't he say what time the girls texted their mother and got no response? I mean, this is kind of important. Why is he so vague about this? Second, why does he say, "so we went to" when describing what the daughters did, then correct himself and say "they called my neighbors"? This pronoun / subject inconsistency is odd.

Exactly what struck me in the video, that line “so we went to”... I thought that was so telling.

 

[Hoosierfan72]

Interesting. I am trying to figure out how to approach this post because in thinking about the timeline I am getting a little twisted up in the logic. So let me begin with a few important questions:

• according to BM, when did he leave for Denver? what did he tell LE on this point?
• according to BM, when did he last speak to, see or hear from SM? what did he tell LE on this point?
• is BM this last person to have "heard from" SM referred to in the quote above, or is that someone else?

Now a few points:

• if BM told LE that he left for Denver on Sunday morning, kissed his wife goodbye, etc. then the above would read "has not been heard from since May 10"; therefore BM must have told LE that he left for Denver on Saturday (I am ruling out Friday for reasons I will explain later)
• if BM told LE that he left for Denver on Saturday, then BM must be this "last person" to have "heard from her" (he presumably, supposedly would have spoken to her before going to bed on Saturday night; if he didn't say he spoke to his wife before going to bed on Saturday night, they would have had additional questions)
• except even the timeline above makes no sense, because LE would certainly have asked him if he called his wife on Sunday morning when he woke up; I guess it's possible that he said he didn't or that he did and got no answer, although the latter would prompt additional questions, e.g., weren't you a little concerned you got no response?
• I am going to go out on a limb and say that I am struggling so much with this timeline in part because there is something wrong with this timeline; further, that there is something wrong with this timeline might be one reason LE is looking at BM

Finally, here is what BM told Tyson Draper about his departure for Denver. You tell me what this tells us about the timeline.

TD: "You were in Denver, but how long before someone noticed she was gone?"

BM: "It was Mother's Day so...um...we uh...had two daughters that were coming home from the trip and I had that job in Denver that I wanted to get started on on Sunday set it up for my workers, my workers were coming in Sunday night. Normally I don't work Sunday night. I work Monday, but I being the owner I wanted to get everything lined up so that I didn't have to worry about Monday morning, just get busy working. So I told my wife, I said, 'Listen, the girls are gonna be home; they want to spend Mother's Day with you. Mind if I go get started with this?' She said, 'That's fine....'. She bikes ... She'd ride the bike ... The girls would get home; they'll be together. That's what we thought was gonna happen. The girls were running late so they texted Happy Mother's Day. She didn't text back. So we went to ... they called my neighbors. And said listen, it's Mother's Day, I'm a little worried and will you go check the house? And the neighbor went and checked the house. Saw that her car was there but the bike was gone. She called me in Denver and said, "Hey, we're just a little worried." And I go, "Well, I am too. Why don't we just call the police, just to be safe?"

There are many things to say about BM's answer above, but to me it sounds like his story is that he left for Denver on Saturday.

In some ways it sounds like his story is that he left for Denver on Sunday morning, but if that were the case, wouldn't he have told LE that he saw / spoke to SM on Sunday morning, and wouldn't the article above therefore say that SM "has not been heard from since May 10"?

Something is not right about the timeline.

Good post. I wonder what all is involved with "getting everything lined up" for a job that starts on Monday? I thought he implied he left Sunday ( that's how I interpreted his comments), possibly in the am. With Denver only 2 hours away, it seems odd to me that he would leave on Saturday as "getting things lined up" doesnt sound like a two day ordeal, JMO.

 

[CronesEye]

I caught that "so we went to" too and it also bothers me why, according to him, his daughters didn't call BM before calling the neighbor ~ unless they did and HE suggested they call the neighbor.
None of his word salad makes any sense to anyone.

The way BM talks is definitely a red flag however many things can make one babble and not make sense, being tired, stressed, ill, brain injury or damage, confusion, blood pressure, poor nutrition. I am not trying to make excuses, I wholly get the deleted pronoun thing and sentences aren't finished so it is a specific alarming language pattern IMO. But it isn't enough to prove anything. That wheel orientation though....where did that come from, how does he know how the wheel was oriented unless LE told him or he was present. Someone pointed out he couldn't have been there to see the bike when it was found. But was he? Or did someone leak it to him?
What comes to mind also is that sometimes under duress, when being interviewed over and over it's easy to get into a word salad. Yes, I am playing the devils advocate. Because proof is needed and if it was someone else. Well the only one we have to look at is BM, so we are not seeing other possibilities and we don't want to miss what really happened because we are only looking through a pinhole with such limited information. I thought for sure when they were digging up that building site they had something definitive. I don't know about anyone else but I think that situation really gave me the idea this was solvable. But now I really have to let go. Need definitive proof. It may take years. I do like that word salad idea though. But does he talk like that anyway?

 

[pocketaccent]

Interesting. I am trying to figure out how to approach this post because in thinking about the timeline I am getting a little twisted up in the logic. So let me begin with a few important questions:

• according to BM, when did he leave for Denver? what did he tell LE on this point?
• according to BM, when did he last speak to, see or hear from SM? what did he tell LE on this point?
• is BM this last person to have "heard from" SM referred to in the quote above, or is that someone else?

Now a few points:

• if BM told LE that he left for Denver on Sunday morning, kissed his wife goodbye, etc. then the above would read "has not been heard from since May 10"; therefore BM must have told LE that he left for Denver on Saturday (I am ruling out Friday for reasons I will explain later)
• if BM told LE that he left for Denver on Saturday, then BM must be this "last person" to have "heard from her" (he presumably, supposedly would have spoken to her before going to bed on Saturday night; if he didn't say he spoke to his wife before going to bed on Saturday night, they would have had additional questions)
• except even the timeline above makes no sense, because LE would certainly have asked him if he called his wife on Sunday morning when he woke up; I guess it's possible that he said he didn't or that he did and got no answer, although the latter would prompt additional questions, e.g., weren't you a little concerned you got no response?
• I am going to go out on a limb and say that I am struggling so much with this timeline in part because there is something wrong with this timeline; further, that there is something wrong with this timeline might be one reason LE is looking at BM

Finally, here is what BM told Tyson Draper about his departure for Denver. You tell me what this tells us about the timeline.

TD: "You were in Denver, but how long before someone noticed she was gone?"

BM: "It was Mother's Day so...um...we uh...had two daughters that were coming home from the trip and I had that job in Denver that I wanted to get started on on Sunday set it up for my workers, my workers were coming in Sunday night. Normally I don't work Sunday night. I work Monday, but I being the owner I wanted to get everything lined up so that I didn't have to worry about Monday morning, just get busy working. So I told my wife, I said, 'Listen, the girls are gonna be home; they want to spend Mother's Day with you. Mind if I go get started with this?' She said, 'That's fine....'. She bikes ... She'd ride the bike ... The girls would get home; they'll be together. That's what we thought was gonna happen. The girls were running late so they texted Happy Mother's Day. She didn't text back. So we went to ... they called my neighbors. And said listen, it's Mother's Day, I'm a little worried and will you go check the house? And the neighbor went and checked the house. Saw that her car was there but the bike was gone. She called me in Denver and said, "Hey, we're just a little worried." And I go, "Well, I am too. Why don't we just call the police, just to be safe?"

There are many things to say about BM's answer above, but to me it sounds like his story is that he left for Denver on Saturday.

In some ways it sounds like his story is that he left for Denver on Sunday morning, but if that were the case, wouldn't he have told LE that he saw / spoke to SM on Sunday morning, and wouldn't the article above therefore say that SM "has not been heard from since May 10"?

Something is not right about the timeline.

From your post:

TD: "You were in Denver, but how long before someone noticed she was gone?"

BM: "It was Mother's Day so...um...we uh...had two daughters that were coming home from the trip and I had that job in Denver that I wanted to get started on on Sunday set it up for my workers, my workers were coming in Sunday night. Normally I don't work Sunday night. I work Monday, but I being the owner I wanted to get everything lined up so that I didn't have to worry about Monday morning, just get busy working. So I told my wife, I said, 'Listen, the girls are gonna be home; they want to spend Mother's Day with you. Mind if I go get started with this?' She said, 'That's fine....'. She bikes ... She'd ride the bike ... The girls would get home; they'll be together. That's what we thought was gonna happen. The girls were running late so they texted Happy Mother's Day. She didn't text back. So we went to ... they called my neighbors. And said listen, it's Mother's Day, I'm a little worried and will you go check the house? And the neighbor went and checked the house. Saw that her car was there but the bike was gone. She called me in Denver and said, "Hey, we're just a little worried." And I go, "Well, I am too. Why don't we just call the police, just to be safe?"
---------------------------------------------------
Well, he lied a lot but the most important lie of all is:
....She bikes. She'd ride the bike...

Those two short sentences that he squeezed in his blether don't belong there. Read his vague, incoherent rambling again. It doesn't flow.

He doesn't say when he left, when he saw his wife last, how long she really was missing..
He basically just wants to highlight that "She bikes. She'd ride the bike"
He really didn't want to say anything else, just those.

 

[Feistyomi]

It doesn't need to have been an "abusive" relationship. It could have actually been a reasonably good relationship until relatively recently. All of their photos certainly suggest that it was. (Yes, I know they're only photos.)

However, a man's feelings can change relatively quickly, and I can think of at least two scenarios in which BM might have killed SM despite never having been abusive. Both involve him having an affair, and both involve his quality of life depending to some extent on SM's money or SM's family's money. Scenario one is this: SM finds out about the affair, confronts him and tells him she is leaving him. BM sees that he will have to move out and live on a fireman's/dirt-layer's salary. BM can't conceive of giving up the life he is currently leading, and only sees one way out. He kills Suzanne. In scenario two, SM doesn't find out about the affair, but BM is so "in love" with the new (younger) woman that he decides to kill SM because this is the only way he will be able to lead the life he wants to lead, i.e., have the younger woman and the affluent lifestyle afforded by SM's or SM's family's money.

Neither of these scenarios require BM to have been "abusive".

I totally agree w/ everything you say...I am not really a contrarian, I just feel we have put so much focus on the husband, that we overlooked the possibility of any other . IMO LE May have a reason to continue silence other than BM.
Abduction by a person w/ possible mental instability would be one. Larry Gene Bell was very unstable. It was a very intense effort to bring Shari home. Kidnapper actually contacting family is another. They could actually be about to arrest someone else. I would like to rule out abduction and I am sure others have better skills than I do. I also find it challenging to work my way backwards and I thought some members might find that a good exercise. I keep trying to stress this—LE has to be right, I can be wrong and not affect LE efforts at all!
I also actually got on google earth today and finally got the street view up to the smaller roads and I realized just how close the RV camp is to Puma Path. I am sure these people would have been questioned. Perhaps they came forward w/ info that lead away from BM. He is relatively easy to read, random stranger is a lot harder. Statistically? That has to be the hardest to solve and also the majority of cold cases JMO

 

[gamma gal]

From your post:

TD: "You were in Denver, but how long before someone noticed she was gone?"

BM: "It was Mother's Day so...um...we uh...had two daughters that were coming home from the trip and I had that job in Denver that I wanted to get started on on Sunday set it up for my workers, my workers were coming in Sunday night. Normally I don't work Sunday night. I work Monday, but I being the owner I wanted to get everything lined up so that I didn't have to worry about Monday morning, just get busy working. So I told my wife, I said, 'Listen, the girls are gonna be home; they want to spend Mother's Day with you. Mind if I go get started with this?' She said, 'That's fine....'. She bikes ... She'd ride the bike ... The girls would get home; they'll be together. That's what we thought was gonna happen. The girls were running late so they texted Happy Mother's Day. She didn't text back. So we went to ... they called my neighbors. And said listen, it's Mother's Day, I'm a little worried and will you go check the house? And the neighbor went and checked the house. Saw that her car was there but the bike was gone. She called me in Denver and said, "Hey, we're just a little worried." And I go, "Well, I am too. Why don't we just call the police, just to be safe?"
---------------------------------------------------
Well, he lied a lot but the most important lie of all is:
....She bikes. She'd ride the bike...

Those two short sentences that he squeezed in his blether don't belong there. Read his vague, incoherent rambling again. It doesn't flow.

He doesn't say when he left, when he saw his wife last, how long she really was missing..
He basically just wants to highlight that "She bikes. She'd ride the bike"
He really didn't want to say anything else, just those.

 

[gamma gal]

Yes!!! His entire discourse is nonsensical. But, especially what you point out here. This screams of his guilt. But, what did he do with her.... moo

 

[gamma gal]

delete

 

[Feistyomi]

The way BM talks is definitely a red flag however many things can make one babble and not make sense, being tired, stressed, ill, brain injury or damage, confusion, blood pressure, poor nutrition. I am not trying to make excuses, I wholly get the deleted pronoun thing and sentences aren't finished so it is a specific alarming language pattern IMO. But it isn't enough to prove anything. That wheel orientation though....where did that come from, how does he know how the wheel was oriented unless LE told him or he was present. Someone pointed out he couldn't have been there to see the bike when it was found. But was he? Or did someone leak it to him?
What comes to mind also is that sometimes under duress, when being interviewed over and over it's easy to get into a word salad. Yes, I am playing the devils advocate. Because proof is needed and if it was someone else. Well the only one we have to look at is BM, so we are not seeing other possibilities and we don't want to miss what really happened because we are only looking through a pinhole with such limited information. I thought for sure when they were digging up that building site they had something definitive. I don't know about anyone else but I think that situation really gave me the idea this was solvable. But now I really have to let go. Need definitive proof. It may take years. I do like that word salad idea though. But does he talk like that anyway?[/QUOTE
Ditto ditto ditto ITA please give us a tidbit tomorrow?

 

[Dre]

BBM You’re correct in that we don’t know if they have or haven’t. They could be reviewing camera footage this entire time but aren’t going to tell the public about it. It’s a very time-consuming process. If they obtained camera footage from a particular home or business, I’m sure they told the homeowners not to speak about it. MOO

This is how I feel about it, they HAVE to have more evince or they'd be approaching this way differently. Silence sometimes means they know exactly what happened but need more pieces to put the charge/arrest/prosecute process into motion.. they don't want the suspect to know any info, and I imagine they hope he keeps talking on his own. I too think some of the elements of this case really remind me of the case against Leticia Stauch..

Good post. I wonder what all is involved with "getting everything lined up" for a job that starts on Monday? I thought he implied he left Sunday ( that's how I interpreted his comments), possibly in the am. With Denver only 2 hours away, it seems odd to me that he would leave on Saturday as "getting things lined up" doesnt sound like a two day ordeal, JMO.

I also took it to mean he went up Sunday morning to set up in the evening, and got called home early.
I personally theorize that he did do some setup task in the afternoon/eve for the future job site in Denver to have that as an alibi, but that in reality he could have had plenty of time to take care of some other tasks on the way to Denver...

 

[TKG]

The way BM talks is definitely a red flag however many things can make one babble and not make sense, being tired, stressed, ill, brain injury or damage, confusion, blood pressure, poor nutrition. I am not trying to make excuses, I wholly get the deleted pronoun thing and sentences aren't finished so it is a specific alarming language pattern IMO. But it isn't enough to prove anything. That wheel orientation though....where did that come from, how does he know how the wheel was oriented unless LE told him or he was present. Someone pointed out he couldn't have been there to see the bike when it was found. But was he? Or did someone leak it to him?
What comes to mind also is that sometimes under duress, when being interviewed over and over it's easy to get into a word salad. Yes, I am playing the devils advocate. Because proof is needed and if it was someone else. Well the only one we have to look at is BM, so we are not seeing other possibilities and we don't want to miss what really happened because we are only looking through a pinhole with such limited information. I thought for sure when they were digging up that building site they had something definitive. I don't know about anyone else but I think that situation really gave me the idea this was solvable. But now I really have to let go. Need definitive proof. It may take years. I do like that word salad idea though. But does he talk like that anyway?

Beyond his bizarre verbiage “we went to”, he had the neighbor call 911. BM didn’t even make the call himself. Imagine you are in his shoes. I’d be on the phone in a flash. Today with the arrest of CD, I took pause. This man has a history of carnage and is absolutely crazy. It took almost 9 months to arrest him and he made it easy.