Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #86

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I haven't yet read today's posts here, but I have viewed tweets and the motions released etc., and I know I am a worry-wart but I don't have a good feeling about all of this and am having doubts that there will ever be Justice For Suzanne. I'm hoping there are lots of you feeling more confident than I am right now?!
 
Love Never Fails said:
Ha!
Think about that one. Who does that? No one! I am not sharing a good steak with anyone.
He needs to eat all he can between now and the trial. After that it is peanut butter.
Maybe he can spend his time with Frazee and the two of them can decide who is the dumbest.
Click to expand...
Two people with forks and steak knives sharing a steak on one plate. What an image.
 
O.Incandenza said:
I would guess it was Dan Edwards. He seems to have been the one signing all the recent motions. Though I would also be interested in knowing for sure.

I just searched online for him and I believe he actually works for the Colorado Attorney General's office, not the Chaffee County DA. I thought he was just one of the other DDAs when I saw his name at first, since that's how he's been signing. But I guess that's why the defense mentioned someone being deputized from that office.
Click to expand...
Actually, Edwards attended the PH and I believe he did the closing argument.

I'm not so sure that these sites still listing Edwards employment are current. It will be interesting if/when DA's office officially announces Edwards as their Sr Deputy DA. Perhaps now that J Lindsey's official resignation date has passed (Nov 5), we will hear something.

IMO, I think Edwards was most likely one of DA Stanley's law professors that came to her aid. He's no spring chicken!

ETA: I know for certain that Edwards was teaching 2021 summer session at DU Law School (Sturm College of Law).
 
Last edited:
ar3593 said:
After scouring through all the new documents, no doubt BM is getting his money's worth out of I and D. They are relentless! JMOO
Click to expand...

Well, their paralegals are, anyway.

Most of it is standard types of pleadings, customized for this case. And they are making a tactic of over-papering the case with frequent, vague demands (BM wants to see something happening, of course - such as the case getting dismissed, which isn't going to happen).

The People of Colorado have to pay for the responses to all of this and the Judge still has to tell them what an affidavit is.
 
NWLady said:
I haven't yet read today's posts here, but I have viewed tweets and the motions released etc., and I know I am a worry-wart but I don't have a good feeling about all of this and am having doubts that there will ever be Justice For Suzanne. I'm hoping there are lots of you feeling more confident than I am right now?!
Click to expand...

I was nervous after the prelim and Barry being released on bond. After today I’m feeling optimistic. Today’s hearing felt to me like his defense team is angry that the prosecution didn’t hand them some inconclusive DNA evidence they can use to bolster a shoddy SODDI defense. Defense is miffed and stomping their feet because the stuff they have obtained on their own isn’t going to work. And they know it, and they are grasping at straws.
 
10ofRods said:
Well, their paralegals are, anyway.

Most of it is standard types of pleadings, customized for this case. And they are making a tactic of over-papering the case with frequent, vague demands (BM wants to see something happening, of course - such as the case getting dismissed, which isn't going to happen).

The People of Colorado have to pay for the responses to all of this and the Judge still has to tell them what an affidavit is.
Click to expand...

Didn’t the judge say the prosecution’s affidavit was the lengthiest he’d ever seen?

In come I & D... with one sentence.

Quite the study in contrasts.
 
Last edited:
It was so embarrassing for the defense today, I wonder if BM has been haranguing them to do something. Today has the same feeling as the ridiculous civil lawsuit. I can't decide if it feels more like they are taking advantage of him or if he is the instigator.
 
rainbowshummingbird said:
What happened to all of the exculpatory evidence that the prosecution withheld and destroyed? Hadn’t the prosecution violated the law in keeping all of this crucial information from the defense?

It’s weird. It’s almost as if absolutely nothing happened in court today. Barry back to square one.
Click to expand...

And the money is dwindling!:p
 
Cindizzi said:
https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1458208955381993472?s=21

Rogers says she tested DNA found in #SuzanneMorphew car and listed it as "foreign" and that she believed the car to be connected to the incident and left from the perpetrator of the crime. @KKTV11News #BarryMorphew
Click to expand...
I think that's one hell of a presumption. I haven't cleaned the interior of my car in over a year, I keep it very clean - except for the steering wheel, shift gear and the door handles inside and out due to covid. No idea how many people test drove my car or which salesmen showed it and quite a few people had access during a scheduled oil change etc. and my care wasn't even preowned.
 
marylamby said:
I think that's one hell of a presumption. I haven't cleaned the interior of my car in over a year, I keep it very clean - except for the steering wheel, shift gear and the door handles inside and out due to covid. No idea how many people test drove my car or which salesmen showed it and quite a few people had access during a scheduled oil change etc. and my care wasn't even preowned.
Click to expand...
She was a DNA analyst, as opposed to an investigator. I think she was merely recounting what she initially believed, based on what little she was told early on.

No one believes that vehicle is connected in any way, and that includes the defense (who are just using the DNA for reasonable doubt).
 
GatorFL said:
Sorry, I disagree. Thankfully the Brady rule exists. Circumstantial cases are tough, I still think the evidence is highly favorable for Barry.
Click to expand...
"The Brady Rule, named after Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), requires prosecutors to disclose materially exculpatory evidence in the government's possession to the defense. ... The defendant bears the burden to prove that the undisclosed evidence was both material and favorable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 170 more.
Total: 3,285 (members: 171, guests: 3,114)

Online statistics

Members online
171
Guests online
3,114
Total visitors
3,285
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,127
Messages
17,963,635
Members
228,689
Latest member
Melladanielle
Back
Top