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

[NoSI]

Another one... view from gate...


Source of photo: Taken by me on 9/18/21

 

[NoSI]

@NoSI, what does the yellow road sign say?

Just curious.

Hi @Megnut, here we go...

 

[windrower]

One off the gates is on Monarch Estates Drive... GDs home is down the road i believe ...

Source of photo: Taken by me on 9/18/21

I may be wrong, but I don’t believe GD lives in any of the Monarch Estates subdivisions. If I read the Chaffee County Assessor website info properly, GD’s home is close to the junction of Hwy 50 and Hwy 240 at Maysville.

qPublic.net - Chaffee County, CO - Search

 

[NoSI]

DBM. Will continue to try and figure this out.

 

[NoSI]

I may be wrong, but I don’t believe GD lives in any of the Monarch Estates subdivisions. If I read the Chaffee County Assessor website info properly, GD’s home is close to the junction of Hwy 50 and Hwy 240 at Maysville.

qPublic.net - Chaffee County, CO - Search

This location is before getting to 225/US 50 turnoff coming from Poncha. Let me see if i can find address/coordinates of pics.

 

[Cindizzi]

OK, not Denver CBS/4 but a viewer did phone the newsroom at KKTV 11 this morning to complain when their meteorologist called a baby elephant ugly.

https://twitter.com/KasiaKerridgeTV/status/1458445068000399365

I love that viewer! How dare that weather geek call that baby ugly and stinky!

 

[NoSI]

I may be wrong, but I don’t believe GD lives in any of the Monarch Estates subdivisions. If I read the Chaffee County Assessor website info properly, GD’s home is close to the junction of Hwy 50 and Hwy 240 at Maysville.

qPublic.net - Chaffee County, CO - Search

You are 100% correct. I apologize. Got confused. GD lives on north side of US50. This is a vacation rental. Owners live in CO Springs. I am so sorry.

 

[NoSI]

The "left turn" not to be confused with "the last house on the left". It's not the best video, but may give you an idea... Just remember bull elk with antlers in May... and in the pitch dark...

20210918_094121.mp4

 

[NWLady]

Easily confused. In older pics in the DM etc, it was the younger daughter (M2) who had the blonde hair and the older daughter (m1) who had medium brown colored hair. Now, M1 is blonde and M2 is dark brunette.

Thank you!

 

[coastal]

Can someone tell me who is MM1 and who is MM2?

TIA

From your link, Lauren Scharf said:

BM's attorneys said today there is a black hole when it comes to any evidence pointing away from Barry Morphew killing his wife Suzanne...

Um, well...that's because there isn't any. Probably not the sound bite they were hoping for...IMO

 

[Born2BWild]

Meanwhile , back at the ranch...

Why is Barry dressed like he's going to a rodeo? A hoe down? A 4-H Club meeting?

LOL! And the buttons are being pulled in the front. And he’s only buttoned half way up. And the hair. He is a hot mess going to a tractor pull.

 

[DBLG]

hands shoved in pockets all the time. I find that odd.... No arms around shoulders or holding hands? Just always shoved in pockets.... It seems deliberate and "on purpose" JMO

 

[Seattle1]

What more could LE do to follow through on the partial match? They contacted the Arizona man and he declined to speak with them as far as we know. He isn't the man whose DNA is in the car, so can't be treated as a suspect or even a material witness. He can't provide exculpatory evidence because the DNA was not found on anything associated with SM's disappearance, like the bike or the helmet or the home, and because there is no reason to believe the person who left DNA in the car was anything other than a mechanic who serviced it. How would withholding the name of the Arizona man materially affect the outcome of the case in BM's favor, assuming that it was not disclosed with the terabyte of data everyone seems to be sorting through - still?

Further, assuming that the allegation is true, that the prosecution didn't offer testimony about this in the PH, where is the obligation to do that? And how would non-disclosure if it happened as alleged, have prevented the judge from finding probable cause?

If we are claiming misconduct by the prosecution, we need facts and analysis, don't you think?

Came across this fact sheet on partial matches, and more specifically:

31. How successful are partial matches at locating potential suspects?

As explained in SWGDAM’s recommendations “Moderate stringency CODIS matches, in general, have very low efficiency in locating true relatives in offender databases.

There is little useful probative value in the majority of partial matches using the current CODIS searching rules and algorithms.

There are two main reasons for this: (1) true siblings will very rarely share alleles at all CODIS core loci; (2) as offender DNA databases get large, the number of unrelated people that do share at least one allele at all loci increases very rapidly.

The original intent for allowing moderate stringency CODIS searches was the realization and acknowledgment that crime scene profiles often may be partially degraded and/or contain DNA from more than one contributor.

Additionally, different primer sets may have been used between profiles. Allowing the detection of partial matches can help accommodate these two scenarios and allow the ultimate detection of full, high-stringency matches that might otherwise not have been found."

CODIS and NDIS Fact Sheet — FBI

 

[Cindizzi]

I’m thinking of Barry tonight.

I spent the afternoon helping my husband get his gear ready for elk hunting. He and his buddies leave Friday morning to drive up to Kremmling Colorado for a week.
I know a lot of you find hunting barbaric and I don’t blame you. My husband is 67 and still has his Hunter’s Safety card he earned when he was 14. It was an annual tradition to hunt with his Dad. When his Dad passed away in 2001 he asked his Mom if he could have Dad’s “ hunting pants”. They are green woolen pants with suspenders ( probably from WWII)and it’s rarely cold enough to wear them, but he takes them with him every year because it makes him feel like Dad is with him. He really misses him and those trips. He has never hunted for trophies or antlers. He’s never been disappointed if he doesn’t “ take an animal”. It’s more the enjoyment of being in Nature and hiking and tracking. He looks forward to it all year.

So yeah, I’m thinking tonight of Barry and all the times in the Affidavit where he said that “ hunting is all he has left” and all the times he said the most important thing to him was to have his guns , scopes and cameras back. And knowing that he can’t leave the County or have firearms makes me glad that something he loves that much has been taken away from him.

JMO

 

[FromGermany1]

LOL! And the buttons are being pulled in the front. And he’s only buttoned half way up. And the hair. He is a hot mess going to a tractor pull.

I tried to recognize a bullet vest. Not sure, if he is wearing one or not.

 

[FromGermany1]

hands shoved in pockets all the time. I find that odd.... No arms around shoulders or holding hands? Just always shoved in pockets.... It seems deliberate and "on purpose" JMO

Maybe, he doesn't know, what to do with his hands, if he's not holding a weapon or the control stick of his bobcat.

 

[LietKynes]

The "left turn" not to be confused with "the last house on the left". It's not the best video, but may give you an idea... Just remember bull elk with antlers in May... and in the pitch dark...

20210918_094121.mp4

Thanks for the updated information, @NoSI !

 

[Cindizzi]

Maybe, he doesn't know, what to do with his hands, if he's not holding a weapon or the control stick of his bobcat.

Head down, hands in pockets.

https://twitter.com/laurenscharftv/status/1440018361539309570?s=21
Here are photos from the surveillance footage of one of #BarryMorphew trash runs. On May 10, 2020, at 12:38 p.m. Barry placed bags, a black container, and clothing from his truck, a small item from inside his truck, coat and walked to the dumpster at the end of the parking lot.

 

[Seattle1]

hands shoved in pockets all the time. I find that odd.... No arms around shoulders or holding hands? Just always shoved in pockets.... It seems deliberate and "on purpose" JMO

I recall in prep school, guys were told hands in pockets were allowed only to retrieve something. Wasn't the same said for the Military?

Hands in pockets when standing is a no-no in the body language literature.
Vanessa van Edwards says that hands in your pocket murders rapport, makes you come across as unconfident and is associated with lying and defensiveness.

And she’s is right.

Mark Bowden author of “Winning Body Language” says that showing our hands is one of the most crucial aspects of building trust with the people around.

MOO

 

[Auntie Cipation]

What more could LE do to follow through on the partial match? They contacted the Arizona man and he declined to speak with them as far as we know. He isn't the man whose DNA is in the car, so can't be treated as a suspect or even a material witness. He can't provide exculpatory evidence because the DNA was not found on anything associated with SM's disappearance, like the bike or the helmet or the home, and because there is no reason to believe the person who left DNA in the car was anything other than a mechanic who serviced it. How would withholding the name of the Arizona man materially affect the outcome of the case in BM's favor, assuming that it was not disclosed with the terabyte of data everyone seems to be sorting through - still?

Further, assuming that the allegation is true, that the prosecution didn't offer testimony about this in the PH, where is the obligation to do that? And how would non-disclosure if it happened as alleged, have prevented the judge from finding probable cause?

If we are claiming misconduct by the prosecution, we need facts and analysis, don't you think?

If (speculation/pondering) LE got DNA swabs from all the likely people who might leave fingerprints on SM's car's glove box -- oil change person, tire change people, Range Rover dealership staff, car wash folks, etc -- would they be able to affirmatively match the DNA found with the person giving the swab?

And if so, shouldn't they have done that, so the glovebox DNA can be definitively ruled out?

Or maybe they have identified the person but don't need to make that known yet?