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

[Midwestmom2019]

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 Is there a lawyer who can weigh in on family member rights and legal norms when it comes to sharing unpublished evidence and arrest documents?

Check back a few posts. Someone quoted the Colorado statutes with a definition of “victim” as it applies in paragraph 3? as I recall. Limits it to homicide cases that family has a right to see it. Easy to read statute. Sometimes, the statutes are difficult to interpret.

 

[Error505]

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."

#WarwickBAM

 

[Deleted member 222031]

All I can say is, the court cites statutes and substantial legal precedent to support his reasoning, and I haven't heard any alternative cases or arguments that the statutes precedents don't apply. And, importantly I think, the People deferred to his judgment. I favor public disclosure too, but to me temporary closure seems justified if it precludes a successful appeal of a conviction.

Can you or any of our lawyers here cite a case where problems with public release of an AA before the prelim was cited in an appeal for 1st degree murder? Your justification seems like a reach to me unless there is precedent. As a former journalist, I will always lean toward public disclosure. After all, they can redact pages & pages of what the judge considers not probative if both sides agree to do that.

 

[Gigi3]

In the Kelsey Berreth case, this is what the prosecutor said about the judge’s decision to keep the AA sealed-

Senior Deputy District Attorney Jennifer Viehman said at a news conference that followed Friday’s court hearing that the investigation was still active and ongoing and that the affidavit will remain sealed to the public “so that law enforcement can contact those witnesses before all of that information is made public, so it will be uncontaminated, if you will.”

So, to me, it’s about protecting witnesses, as well as, tainting a jury pool. I may not like it, but it’s good to be precautious. We don’t want ANY mistakes for an appeal. JMO!

(and I give credit to Massguy for reminding me of this)

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Can you or any of our lawyers here cite a case where problems with public release of an AA before the prelim was cited in an appeal for 1st degree murder? Your justification seems like a reach to me unless there is precedent. As a former journalist, I will always lean toward public disclosure. After all, they can redact pages & pages of what the judge considers not probative if both sides agree to do that.

What if it doesn't make it to trial? That is the elephant in the room. Trials are covered by Supreme Court rulings so the trial is what the trial is and I'm sure there will be access of some sort for the media. I personally think the judge set the date to ensure it didn't get out until after the preliminary and until Barry was formally bound over for trial. For the record I do think it will make it to trial, but I can't foretell the future either.

 

[Deleted member 222031]

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.

I understand your reasoning except for the judge trying to save the defendant money. Not to be rude, but that is absurd. The rest we can just agree to disagree on. It's good to hear other's opinions. I am definitely not an unbiased observer here! I have been told I am opinionated to a fault, so there's that MOO

 

[MsBetsy]

In the Kelsey Berreth case, this is what the prosecutor said about the judge’s decision to keep the AA sealed-

Senior Deputy District Attorney Jennifer Viehman said at a news conference that followed Friday’s court hearing that the investigation was still active and ongoing and that the affidavit will remain sealed to the public “so that law enforcement can contact those witnesses before all of that information is made public, so it will be uncontaminated, if you will.”

So, to me, it’s about protecting witnesses, as well as, tainting a jury pool. I may not like it, but it’s good to be precautious. We don’t want ANY mistakes for an appeal. JMO!

(and I give credit to Massguy for reminding me of this)

Yes, the judge said the same thing in this case. The investigation is still ongoing and he wants to insure the accused right to a fair trial by a panel of impartial jurors. I didn't get the impression he was giving any one reason more importance than the others, rather it is the combination of factors that are relevant. Imo

 

[Deleted member 222031]

In the Kelsey Berreth case, this is what the prosecutor said about the judge’s decision to keep the AA sealed-

Senior Deputy District Attorney Jennifer Viehman said at a news conference that followed Friday’s court hearing that the investigation was still active and ongoing and that the affidavit will remain sealed to the public “so that law enforcement can contact those witnesses before all of that information is made public, so it will be uncontaminated, if you will.”

So, to me, it’s about protecting witnesses, as well as, tainting a jury pool. I may not like it, but it’s good to be precautious. We don’t want ANY mistakes for an appeal. JMO!

(and I give credit to Massguy for reminding me of this)

But the law allows release of AAs, which means arguments to open or seal must be heard from all sides. I would think every AA has the potential to taint a jury pool & jeopardize witnesses but if the law was written to protect those interests above all others then all AAs in serious cases like murder one would be protected from public release by law. We live in an open society where the media (rightly or wrongly) is a party with interests on behalf of all citizens. I believe that is why the law demands weighing all interests rather than sealing AAs as a matter of course.

 

[MsBetsy]

But the law allows release of AAs, which means arguments to open or seal must be heard from all sides. I would think every AA has the potential to taint a jury pool & jeopardize witnesses but if the law was written to protect those interests above all others then all AAs in serious cases like murder one would be protected from public release by law. We live in an open society where the media (rightly or wrongly) is a party with interests on behalf of all citizens. I believe that is why the law demands weighing all interests rather than sealing AAs as a matter of course.

What could the media possibly argue that would override the right to a fair trial, the need to protect victims and witnesses, and the need to preserve the integrity of the case?

 

[Error505]

I wonder if Suzanne kept a personal journal she had hidden from BM, possibly even online?

Her religious faith, a couple of references she made regarding quotes on social media, being a former teacher, a member of Al-Anon, away from her closest friend and a 2 time cancer survivor, all lead me to think she may have been one who would be disciplined and enjoyed journaling. Wouldn’t that be something if LE came across “her inner most thoughts?” Speculation MOO

 

[Momofthreeboys]

But the law allows release of AAs, which means arguments to open or seal must be heard from all sides. I would think every AA has the potential to taint a jury pool & jeopardize witnesses but if the law was written to protect those interests above all others then all AAs in serious cases like murder one would be protected from public release by law. We live in an open society where the media (rightly or wrongly) is a party with interests on behalf of all citizens. I believe that is why the law demands weighing all interests rather than sealing AAs as a matter of course.

Yes and that is why I think the Supreme Court left the decision regarding public access other than trials to the lower courts. Each case comes with it's own unique situations. AAs aren't sealed "as a matter of course" I don't believe....generally there are motions etc. and the decision is weighed by the judge. In this case, the judge sealed them and took 6 pages to explain exactly why and cited other cases. He was quite thorough.

 

[Deleted member 222031]

What could the media possibly argue that would override the right to a fair trial, the need to protect victims and witnesses, and the need to preserve the integrity of the case?

Ask the lawmakers. They have left it an open question, not me. AAs are public documents. Their release relies on weighing of interests. If lawmakers don't want the media to be a party of interest in release, they can rewrite the laws to prevent that. But, woe be into all of us if our justice system is changed so all AAs are withheld rather than being questioned and interests weighed.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Ask the lawmakers. They have left it an open question, not me. AAs are public documents. Their release relies on weighing of interests. If lawmakers don't want the media to be a party of interest in release, they can rewrite the laws to prevent that. But, woe be into all of us if our justice system is changed so all AAs are withheld rather than being questioned and interests weighed.

I don't see that day coming especially at the Supreme court level.

 

[MsBetsy]

Ask the lawmakers. They have left it an open question, not me. AAs are public documents. Their release relies on weighing of interests. If lawmakers don't want the media to be a party of interest in release, they can rewrite the laws to prevent that. But, woe be into all of us if our justice system is changed so all AAs are withheld rather than being questioned and interests weighed.

I think it is mainly in high profile cases that Affidavits are sealed and gag orders are issued.

There has already been so much speculation by the few media sources that have covered the case. I can imagine what it will be like when the affidavit is released and it will be covered by national news. Why give the defense a reason to claim the defendant doesn't have a chance at a fair trial? Or give them grounds for an appeal?

 

[Megnut]

Are there any boots on the ground in Salida? I'm most curious about what can be seen -- from public roads -- no trespassing -- where tree clusters sprung up. The ones with oddly arranged memorial rocks. I'm curious about depressions in the soil, mushrooms sprouting from the soils, and signs of distress with the trees or surrounding grass.... looking for any signs of chemicals.... chlorine, lime, etc....

Same question for casual kayakers.... how are all the beach areas holding up....

I need some real time satellite imagery!

Methinks the Colorado landscape wants to yield its secrets..... if only we knew where to look....

JMO

 

[Skigh]

Adding to my previous post regarding Scott bicycle repair shop
CO - CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #53

Snipped for focus @OldCop’s post

“The notes I have state the following:

Wed 5/6 Housecleaner spoke to both when she was emptying trash at the neighborhood dumpster on Puma Path

Thursday 5/7 SM allegedly went to Scott the bike repair guy in Salida”

As BM had very recently met the housecleaner ,he would have known that the holiday homes she had just been cleaning would have been unoccupied. I wonder if the land around these houses has been searched.

 

[girlhasnoname]

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?

Yeah, I don't think good ole' Dad Barry would be willing to share the AA with his daughters. He cannot stand for anyone to say anything derogatory about him, yet he has no qualms calling people 'meth heads', losers, etc. Such a two faced lying liar who lies IMO.

At this point, I don't believe the girls would even want to read the AA.

JMO

 

[SouthAussie]

Ask the lawmakers. They have left it an open question, not me. AAs are public documents. Their release relies on weighing of interests. If lawmakers don't want the media to be a party of interest in release, they can rewrite the laws to prevent that. But, woe be into all of us if our justice system is changed so all AAs are withheld rather than being questioned and interests weighed.

I don't know that public documents have to be released to the public immediately, though.

We can file to see the public documents, but they won't be released until the sub judice period is over. (sub judice = the period between charging the defendant and commencement of the trial)

It seems that all western places might have temporary suppression of public documents. It is just that the US must do this on a case by case basis.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Dan May!!!

Yes, Dan the Man May, he was just awesome in the KB case. I think he even contributed somewhat in the Gannon Stauch case.

 

[SouthAussie]

Yeah, I don't think good ole' Dad Barry would be willing to share the AA with his daughters. He cannot stand for anyone to say anything derogatory about him, yet he has no qualms calling people 'meth heads', losers, etc. Such a two faced lying liar who lies IMO.

At this point, I don't believe the girls would even want to read the AA.

JMO

I have been thinking that he might introduce them to the material in the AA.
So that he can spend some time preparing them.

"Look at this, it says I did this!!! We know that is when I was doing that, so I couldn't possibly have done this. It's all a bunch of lies. They don't have anyone else so they want to hang me for this. You know I loved your mother."