Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #61 *ARREST*

[10ofRods]

I actually disagree with the 1st paragraph of the analysis. I lean strongly toward the AA being public information (with redactions, as deemed necessary by both sides). I have posted my opinion several times so I won't elaborate here. I understand many vital interests are at play, I just think it is a public document and 90% of the judge's legal objections are specious. Release it, already! MHO, as always.

Personally, I feel the Court was correct to deem the redaction process so time-consuming and onerous (and unlikely even to be completed by August) that it's just best to go through preliminary hearing and determine more about what will be allowed into evidence.

Why spend everyone's time and money on a process that would likely delay the preliminary? Chaffee County is probably already stretched by this case, and the judge may also want to keep the private attorneys from draining the defendant's funds unnecessarily. Having things be efficient and expedient is part of the judge's job.

The time it would take to agree on each redaction (and who would represent the daughters in this process? The judge surely doesn't have time or standing to do that). Each side would have to propose their redactions (by then, nearly the entire thing would probably be redacted) and then argue in a formal process about the redactions (or just agree to accept each others' redactions; the prosecution would have to be instructed to perform redactions based on victims' rights laws and concerns...) I really do believe so much would be redacted that it might even appear that the State had no evidence against Barry Morphew and that's absolutely prejudicial.

 

[MsBetsy]

BBM. I am curious. What specific factual or legal conclusions did the judge make with respect to the daughters would you contest if you were in the Media's position. I don't see any that are out of line. In fact, I don't see any issues in the order that are worthy of an appeal. Please elaborate on your point.

The media already petitioned for the affidavit to be released and the judge has explained why it should remain sealed. I don't see any reason why they would appeal either, other than they want to publish all the details.

National media outlets have not reported on Suzanne's case very much, probably because LE has not revealed any details about the investigation. So of course they want the AA to be released. The judge has ruled that allowing the parties time to review and understand the amount of information in the case, and the accused rights to a fair trial, overrides the public's access to the AA at this time. I don't think there is anything left to argue. Imo

 

[CGray123]

I didn't recall the judge saying the AA was full of inflammatory language, etc. as bolded above, so I had to go read it again. From the document: https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/11th_Judicial_District/Chaffee/cases of interest/21CR78/21CR78 Order Limit Public Redacted.pdf

"First, the Court has concerns about the amount of information contained in the 130-page Affidavit. The Affidavit is, by far, the lengthiest and most detailed affidavit the Court has ever seen in almost 30 years of experience with criminal cases. A significant portion of the information in the affidavit was not relevant to the Court's finding of probable cause, and possibly not admissible at trial under the Colorado Rules of Evidence."
(bolded by me, as those are the parts that seem to be the most important)

This is an interesting observation! The judge first recites the defense's argument that release of the un-redacted affidavit would disclose "inflammatory information" but then makes findings that stop short of that conclusion. This discrepancy does not seem to undermine his conclusion, which is that it will take the parties time to make the redactions necessary in such an extensive affidavit, to avoid unfair harm to BM's ability to prepare his defense. IMO, totally.

 

[10ofRods]

I actually disagree with the 1st paragraph of the analysis. I lean strongly toward the AA being public information (with redactions, as deemed necessary by both sides). I have posted my opinion several times so I won't elaborate here. I understand many vital interests are at play, I just think it is a public document and 90% of the judge's legal objections are specious. Release it, already! MHO, as always.

Personally, I feel the Court was correct to deem the redaction process so time-consuming and onerous (and unlikely even to be completed by August) that it's just best to go through preliminary hearing and determine more about what will be allowed into evidence.

Why spend everyone's time and money on a process that would likely delay the preliminary?

 

[MsBetsy]

MOO They can read it after Aug 24th. Lots of time to harden opinions.

I hope they won't wait that long. I think it's fair that the judge is giving them time to review the case before the details become public. It's certainly no fault of their own if they believed what their father has told them. This way they can learn all the evidence LE has against him, and have the summer to form their own opinions. Imo

 

[Boxer]

I hope they won't wait that long. I think it's fair that the judge is giving them time to review the case before the details become public. It's certainly no fault of their own if they believed what their father has told them. This way they can learn all the evidence LE has against him, and have the summer to form their own opinions. Imo

I must be behind or missed something.
Do they get the AA now? I thought they had to wait till 8/24.
Do the siblings get the AA now too?

 

[Momofthreeboys]

I nust be behind or missed sonething.
Do they get the AA now? I thought they had to wait till 8/24.
Do the siblings get the AA now too?

I'm curious but I don't think so....I'd love for someone who knows legally to answer...but the siblings....oh goodness there are quite a few including the step brother if you think about the bigger extended family. I think the judge has isolated Suzanne's daughters personally since they are direct offspring and live in Colorado and were part of the nuclear family.

 

[Error505]

Agree especially if it is full of inflammatory language and things that will never see the light of day in the courtroom as the judge alluded to and it is not redacted before they view. That would be hard to read a bunch of opinions and such from people in their town about their parents and larger family and frankly, their thoughts are their own. No one is "entitled" to tell them what they should do or what they should believe about the situation and I think the judge has concerns about that also. The very fact that there continues to be "chatter" about them underscores the judges concerns.

The judge focused much of his decision based on the daughters. Of course we’re going to discuss them when discussing the decision of this court! Common sense really, imho. I think the AA is chockfull of damning evidence against the “man in the cage” (as the defense refers to him) and not merely “a bunch of opinions and such” from people! After all, DA & LE (FBI & CBI included) came up with premeditated murder one. Thats not a “throw it against the wall and see what sticks” kind of charge! IMHO. I’ll leave it at that.
MOO EBM typo Queen

 

[MsBetsy]

I nust be behind or missed sonething.
Do they get the AA now? I thought they had to wait till 8/24.
Do the siblings get the AA now too?

I would assume so. I don't know why else the judge would want to give them more time to process the information. He wrote, "these young women are in an unimaginable situation and should be given the time to process what has occurred and the time to review, or decide not to review, the evidence against their father."

How else would they be able to review the evidence against their father if they can't read the affidavit until it's released to the public?

 

[Colorado303]

I nust be behind or missed sonething.
Do they get the AA now? I thought they had to wait till 8/24.
Do the siblings get the AA now too?

I’m not sure the judge, DA or LE will share the AA with anyone they don’t have to in order to prevent leaks. But they have to give Barry a copy. It may be Barry and his lawyer’s decision as to who gets to see the AA. If that’s the case I can’t see him sharing it with anyone else in Susan’s family besides their daughters. Despite what the judge believes they may not even share it with them. Perhaps they’ve said they’re “willing” to, but plan to strongly discourage the girls from reading it.

The above is MOO. Is there a lawyer who can weigh in on family member rights and legal norms when it comes to sharing unpublished evidence and arrest documents?

 

[Error505]

The Friday food order was never confirmed.
Video at link below, Lauren confirms Scot, bike mechanic saw Suzanne on Thursday, May 7, 2020 and he worked on her bike that day.
Lauren goes on to state that a reported Mother’s Day Cambodian food order for someone named Suzanne was checked out and confirmed to have been for a different Suzanne, and states she was still working on confirming restaurants/food orders for that weekend, but couldn’t disclose any specifics to such at that time.
Scot and Bike repair on 5/7 starts @ 17:00 mark. Food orders starts @ 30:00 mark:

It was later later stated by Andy in his Dr. Phil interview in early October that SM & BM were seen out getting sandwiches around 4:00pm on Saturday. Andy doesn’t reveal source of the info, starts @ 4:20 mark:

Crime online article later reported the following BBM:
“She was last seen alive in the neighboring town of Salida the day before, when witnesses reportedly saw her and Barry out getting sandwiches.”

*has never been confirmed who the “witnesses” of the alleged Saturday sandwich sighting are.

BREAKING: Missing Suzanne Morphew husband Barry Morphew’s ‘alibi’ questioned as new details surface about landscaping job Mother’s Day weekend [VIDEO]

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne

^^^^ FC to the rescue. I’ve looked high and low for the bike repair report! Many many gracias


!

 

[10ofRods]

I nust be behind or missed sonething.
Do they get the AA now? I thought they had to wait till 8/24.
Do the siblings get the AA now too?

In my opinion, no, no one gets the AA except the Court, Court staff, and the "parties to the case" (who are Barry Morphew, the prosecution and the defense).

 

[PawneeDew]

lol, don't be sorry..Pragmatism is a good quality to have, I wish I wasn't so naive! (Sorry to sideline the convo)

 

[Error505]

I nust be behind or missed sonething.
Do they get the AA now? I thought they had to wait till 8/24.
Do the siblings get the AA now too?

I’m going to need a vacay after I get this “who can see the AA” through my head, and it’s my own darn fault. I asked pretty much the same question earlier. MOO

 

[PawneeDew]

Sorry I am probably the forum pragmatist.

lol..don't be sorry. Pragmatism is a good quality to have, I wish I wasn't so naive..(sorry to sideline the convo)

 

[Momofthreeboys]

In my opinion, no, no one gets the AA except the Court, Court staff, and the "parties to the case" (who are Barry Morphew, the prosecution and the defense).

That was how I originally read it also. But now I'm hearing a slightly different interpretation regarding the daughters. It's the state's job to protect them so it seems odd they would want to share a document that was unredacted. That serves no purpose and could be harmful for them and existing relationships, including with family members they may not know well but need support from in the future and community members they may have trusted depending on how much hearsay and opinion was contained in the original document. I am not one that thinks the document is "full" of damning first hand evidence, but I can certainly imagine in my head the type of conversations that took place with LE. The timing the judge determined is very telling....it is "after" the presumptive and preliminary hearings. And we don't even know if then it is guaranteed to be released. It seems like the prudent thing to do would be to have the conjecture deleted before it is given to the daughters.

 

[PawneeDew]

I see you guys have the same reading list as me. Linda Stanley won an election. This case can make her, but I think she needs direction from others far more experienced. If there are any big guns available, maybe someone willing to come out of retirement to assist with the prosecution, I think she should pull out all the stops to get the best on board.

Dan May!!!

 

[Error505]

I’m not sure the judge, DA or LE will share the AA with anyone they don’t have to in order to prevent leaks. But they have to give Barry a copy. It may be Barry and his lawyer’s decision as to who gets to see the AA. If that’s the case I can’t see him sharing it with anyone else in Susan’s family besides their daughters. Despite what the judge believes they may not even share it with them. Perhaps they’ve said they’re “willing” to, but plan to strongly discourage the girls from reading it.

The above is MOO. Is there a lawyer who can weigh in on family member rights and legal norms when it comes to sharing unpublished evidence and arrest documents?

Still scratching my head on this as well. I’m not sure the judge’s order was really clear (at least to me) on who can legitimately see the AA prior to unsealing. I’m thinking there will be closed court sessions/meetings btw Prosecution, Defense, & Judge Murphy to come to some initial agreements on redactions prior to the Prelim. Surely the defense is going to try to keep as much out as possible, and not wait until the day of the Aug hearing to weigh in. Just MOO

 

[MsBetsy]

In my opinion, no, no one gets the AA except the Court, Court staff, and the "parties to the case" (who are Barry Morphew, the prosecution and the defense).

They may not get a copy themselves but I don't see why it can't be explained or summarized for the family. It seems cruel to make them wait until the AA is released to the public for family to learn all the details about how their loved one was killed.

 

[Boxer]

That was how I originally read it also. But now I'm hearing a slightly different interpretation regarding the daughters. It's the state's job to protect them so it seems odd they would want to share a document that was unredacted. That serves no purpose and could be harmful for them and existing relationships, including with family members they may not know well but need support from in the future and community members they may have trusted depending on how much hearsay and opinion was contained in the original document. I am not one that thinks the document is "full" of damning first hand evidence, but I can certainly imagine in my head the type of conversations that took place with LE. The timing the judge determined is very telling....it is "after" the presumptive and preliminary hearings. And we don't even know if then it is guaranteed to be released. It seems like the prudent thing to do would be to have the conjecture deleted before it is given to the daughters.

Maybe the judge is giving BM time to consider what the trial is going to be like and plead guilty.

What can be in the AA to assail his character if he is the head of a "just a Godly family."