Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #78 *ARREST*

[OldCop]

To me, this defense team is like being surrounded by a swarm of little gnats while you are sitting outside reading a book. They keep flying in taking little bites until you are so distracted you can’t follow the story.

 

[Deleted member 222031]

Yes, taking a line from @MassGuy, he’s a controlling controller who controls.

Reminds me of this judge. Unless, of course, the Defense is speaking.
MOO

 

[Love Never Fails]

Great questions. That's why I'm not at 100%. But I've been complaining about this judge since he sealed the AA with a whine about how time consuming and what a burden for the defense to redact it at that time. Really? As the MSM appeal said, it's your JOB to redact & release. Of course it takes time and resources but you have a constitutional responsibility to the public with a process laid out clearly in Rule 55.1. Do your JOB!
JM(not so)HO[/QUOTE]


I have to agree with you. I didn't think it was a big deal at the time but it did make me wonder. I thought maybe he was pro-defense at the time. The whining I can agree with.

 

[Scootie98]

Regarding the chlorine smell in the room, and the statement that it was from the pool.

I just read Colorado Covid timeline and came to the conclusion that the state responded fast. Schools were closed on March 16, ski resorts and gyms, in March. Given this, I seriously doubt that the swimming pool in Broomfield, CO, stayed open in May as it would be a violation of Covid policies given that the gyms were closed at that time. If the hotel closed the pool, though, and pumped out the water, the smell of chlorine for 4 months in a room below would indicate serious violation of building codes, or leaks. Having stayed in multitude of hotels, and motels, and inns, in the country and all over the world, I never heard of such a situation, the smell of chlorine in a room above the pool. It would be interesting to see if the pool is even below the rooms, but if it is, as it sometimes happens, there is additional insulation.
P.S. read reviews about the inn on Travelocity and some on Hotels.com. Mostly, positive; people would mention slow room cleaning service. No one said a word about the smell.

Wasn't it reported that the other room also smelled of chlorine? That would be a game changer if true..but a very small one. The real issue with Barry and the room was the time he spent in it yet said he was working.

 

[Love Never Fails]

To me, this defense team is like being surrounded by a swarm of little gnats while you are sitting outside reading a book. They keep flying in taking little bites until you are so distracted you can’t follow the story.

Old Cop! Glad to see you are here. I want to know what you thought of the last day of the PH? How about the way the judge handled it?

 

[Deleted member 222031]

Surely JM's easiest route out of this, would be to have a trial?

I think in rejecting a trial the judge will write at length about burden of proof & all the ways the prosecution hasn't met it, even though that is not the standard and even outsiders can see the proof is circumstantial but quite strong. I wish I could believe otherwise.
MOO

 

[pseudo_hum]

Here is where LS said it would be: FOX21 News Colorado | Colorado Springs News & Weather | KXRM

Thanks so much. I will take a look.

I still couldn’t find it. that’s ok.
must not have been that good anyway.[/QUOTE]
She did say in her yesterday tweet "One night only" but I was hoping they may have a linked copy. Obviously not.

 

[Diddian]

my understanding is a proof evident/presumption great hearing means prosecution has to prove via evidence that murder 1 happened. that's different than probable cause for obtaining an AA. since i'm assuming both the prosecution and defense know what's in AA and supporting evidence i would expect the prosecution to use the most damning evidence during the hearing. if that is in fact what they have presented during this 4 day hearing then either something got lost in the reporters tweets to those not viewing the hearing or i'm not comprehending totally what the prosecutions game plan was. i'd guess the defense would argue that the prosecution did not meet the bar required no matter what the prosecution laid out so the fact they made that point does not mean much to me. and i'm satisfied the judge did the proper thing in reserving judgement until next month. MOO.

I wonder if any attorneys might answer:
The prosecution and defense met with the judge privately before any visitors were allowed into the courtroom. After they met, visitors were allowed in and the hearing began. Also, during the hearing the judge made a comment to Lindsey (prosecution team) to the effect of "it's already been demonstrated SM was unhappy with the marriage."

The prosecution, defense, and judge are all familiar with the AA, which the judge sealed and has ordered remain sealed until at least that time he issues his decision about whether he binds BM over for trial.

Say the AA includes some kind of shocking or inflammatory information that the judge believes could be prejudicial to a future jury OR could drive an overwhelming public reaction if BM decides to plea to a lesser charge (say, in exchange for revealing location of remains). If the judge indicated to the defense that he was very heavily leaning in the "bind BM over for trial" direction but was concerned about the prosecution presenting that information in court at this time (during the PH) - could the defense make an agreement with the prosecutor and judge to allow that information to be considered by the judge in his decision while omitting presentation of that information from the PH and that having doing so would not be later grounds for appeal by the defense?

 

[but maybe]

What if the unspent .22 casing is our clue to look at the .22 as the weapon that fired the dart. Also, SM may have been able to grab the dart and pull it out before she ran for the bedroom? That would be my reflex action, if possible. Anyway, it may be possible that she could have pulled it out or that it wasn't a great shot and so didn't have the complete intended effect.
Just MOO

 

[Nikynoo]

I think in rejecting a trial the judge will write at length about burden of proof & all the ways the prosecution hasn't met it, even though that is not the standard and even outsiders can see the proof is circumstantial but quite strong. I wish I could believe otherwise.
MOO

I'm not so sure - I think he will take the path of least resistance. One of us will be right

 

[Nikynoo]

I wonder if any attorneys might answer:
The prosecution and defense met with the judge privately before any visitors were allowed into the courtroom. After they met, visitors were allowed in and the hearing began. Also, during the hearing the judge made a comment to Lindsey (prosecution team) to the effect of "it's already been demonstrated SM was unhappy with the marriage."

The prosecution, defense, and judge are all familiar with the AA, which the judge sealed and has ordered remain sealed until at least that time he issues his decision about whether he binds BM over for trial.

Say the AA includes some kind of shocking or inflammatory information that the judge believes could be prejudicial to a future jury OR could drive an overwhelming public reaction if BM decides to plea to a lesser charge (say, in exchange for revealing location of remains). If the judge indicated to the defense that he was very heavily leaning in the "bind BM over for trial" direction but was concerned about the prosecution presenting that information in court at this time (during the PH) - could the defense make an agreement with the prosecutor and judge to allow that information to be considered by the judge in his decision while omitting presentation of that information from the PH and that having doing so would not be later grounds for appeal by the defense?

I can't answer your question - but it does not seem very transparent to me.

 

[Deleted member 222031]

I'm not so sure - I think he will take the path of least resistance. One of us will be right

Indeed!

 

[Diddian]

I can't answer your question - but it does not seem very transparent to me.

It doesn't to me either, but after sealing the AA (and the reasons given) as well as so tightly limiting access to the Preliminary Hearing, that seems the way this judge operates.

 

[steeltowngirl]

@SydneeStelle

Replying to
@SydneeStelle
A hotel manager later address the chlorine smell in Barry's room to investigators, saying that his room was directly above the pool and that's why it smelled like that.

https://twitter.com/SydneeStelle/status/1429912512561131533

The hotel manager may not want to get involved, so he or she sent a plausible reason. I can’t see how an email from the manager months later proves much of anything. Didn’t investigators visit the hotel and room when Suzanne went missing?

 

[jondaba]

There is no chance at all whatsoever of Barry Morphew taking the stand in the upcoming trial. As we say in New York: fugeddaboudit!

 

[jondaba]

A dart shot from a .22 uses a blank. Possible a live round already chambered would need to be taken out.

Like the round on the floor of the bedroom?

 

[Seattle1]

To me, this defense team is like being surrounded by a swarm of little gnats while you are sitting outside reading a book. They keep flying in taking little bites until you are so distracted you can’t follow the story.

Lol -- and as some locals have expressed, it's not a good look when you unleash a swarm of gnats on your own witness (i.e., IE examining CBI Cahill)!

 

[jondaba]

@10ofRods when you said you turned off GPS, is that the same thing as turning off Location Services?

I want to be sure I grok which terms mean what. Thanks!

grok is short for "Groucho Marx"

 

[Gardenista]

If he gets bound over for trial, my guess is the defense's next step will be invoking his right to a speedy trial. Anybody know when that clock starts or if it already started?

 

[jondaba]

Agree.
Couldnt keep order in the court either.
Let D have all tbe opening hits.
Taking so much time sounds like he needs to write a defense of why the case is not advancing to trial, and the real reason he did not release the AA was he knew he was not going to send it to trial a long time ago.

Disagree. Judge Murphy has been in the business 30 years. Ol' Barry does not fool him. He is knows BM killed SM. However, he has "appealophobia" - he's not worried about an appeal from his old Salida court cronies who will have to keep appearing before him. He's worried abut E&N taking up an appeal when he sends BM to prison pending trial.
He would like to advance in the judiciary, not be publicly embarrassed on appeal.