youarentsilly
Former Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2022
- Messages
- 400
- Reaction score
- 1,723
DBM
Last edited:
Certainly true. Thanks for the response.The evidence has not changed just because the case was dismissed w/o prejudice. He is still guilty, IMO
Not everyone. Just the ones who cared enough to answer. Justice for Suzanne is paramount. Don’t you want same thing?
Acknowledged, though I think it was clear what I meant. It would be helpful, if that is the goal, to supply the correct word. Hearing?FYI There was no trial.
I actually started this case not thinking Barry was involved. Initially, I leaned towards Suzanne having been hit by a vehicle, perhaps picked up, and the driver panicked and ditched her body. But the damage to the bike was not consistent with a vehicle hit. I also considered suicide, but her vehicle was at home, the area was thoroughly searched, and dead people don’t bury themselves.Certainly true. Thanks for the response.
I was curious if anyone had stopped to reconsider their suspicions or whether they had, perhaps, jumped to a conclusion too early. One would think that if the evidence existed and was so clear that BLM would be tried and convicted already. No evidence that such reconsideration happened in this forum, though. Its easy for a person to say BLM is guilty when she can make the judgment based on anything. Or nothing.
^^RSBMThis was after Murphy determined that a random partial DNA profile found in Suzanne's glove compartment was means to grant bail and create this random abduction theory that was not represented by any evidence. Really weird
If one is guilty of a homicidal act, a guilty verdict in a court of law does not always follow.Certainly true. Thanks for the response.
I was curious if anyone had stopped to reconsider their suspicions or whether they had, perhaps, jumped to a conclusion too early. One would think that if the evidence existed and was so clear that BLM would be tried and convicted already. No evidence that such reconsideration happened in this forum, though. Its easy for a person to say BLM is guilty when she can make the judgment based on anything. Or nothing.
Judge Murphy , imo, was swayed by Iris's introduction of this partial DNA found solely in the glove box- no where else. He took the bait- and made a bad judgement. That suspected person has now been ruled out. No such thing as a partial match for DNA. There was no evidence in the case that pointed to a random abduction by a repeat sex offender. There was volumes of evidence that pointed to Barry Morphew IMO^^RSBM
IMO, OP's post misrepresents the facts from the PH.
After prosecution witness Jospeh Cahill testified other than he'd been prepared by the DA's office, it was the DNA witness that created a 50/50 chance to the Court that dna could belong to an unknown perp responsible for SM missing.
In other words, Judge Murphy followed the law after the prosecution failed the test to prohibit bond for a defendant charged with first-degree murder: the prosecution failed to prove that the proof was evident or the presumption great that the defendant committed first-degree murder, a burden of proof greater than probable cause but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. MOO
Judge Murphy , imo, was swayed by Iris's introduction of this partial DNA found solely in the glove box- no where else. He took the bait- and made a bad judgement. That suspected person has now been ruled out. No such thing as a partial match for DNA. There was no evidence in the case that pointed to a random abduction by a repeat sex offender. There was volumes of evidence that pointed to Barry Morphew IMO
IMO Judge Murphy should not have allowed bail based on evidence presented in the PH. He made a bad judgement, based on this partial DNA. Now it is known the DNA had nothing to do with Suzannes disappearance, so theoretically if the case was brought again today Barry would be in jail waiting for trial with proof great.To be clear, OP first implied Judge Murphy improperly granted BM bail when the prelim with Judge Murphy was factual and clear. This was also what my response was directed to.
It was long after the PH and BM granted bail that Iris re-introduced the subject of DNA, subpoenaed Cahill, and others and where Iris took it up with Judge Lama as soon as he was appointed the case. It was also Judge Lama that failed to familiarize himself with the PH, and IMO, bought every word spoken by Iris.
I didn't say the statistics were biased. Just the interpretation. In particular this statement "the most dangerous place for women is the home."No, I do not think the statistics are biased. Other agencies, including the CDC, FBI, DOJ, NCBI have reported similar findings.
Homicide is one of the leading causes of death for women aged ≤44 years, and rates vary by race/ethnicity. Nearly half of female victims are killed by a current or former male intimate partner.
Racial and Ethnic Differences in Homicides of Adult Women...
Homicide is one of the leading causes of death for women aged ≤44 years.www.cdc.gov
Domestic violence is the leading cause of injury to women aged 15 to 44.
Domestic violence is the leading cause of injury to women aged 15 to 44.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
The first bar graph provides a breakdown of the 1,809 familial relationships of victims to offenders based on supplementary homicide data from 2018: 119 husbands were killed by their wives, 519 wives were slain by their husbands.
American women are killed by intimate partners (husbands, lovers, ex-husbands, or ex-lovers) more often than by any other type of perpetrator.2–4 Intimate partner homicide accounts for approximately 40% to 50% of US femicides but a relatively small proportion of male homicides (5.9%).
Was there to be more to your post?
Key words NOW it is known.IMO Judge Murphy should not have allowed bail based on evidence presented in the PH. He made a bad judgement, based on this partial DNA. Now it is known the DNA had nothing to do with Suzannes disappearance, so theoretically if the case was brought again today Barry would be in jail waiting for trial with proof great.
It was not my own interpretation. It was a quote from the study, on Pg 18. Here is the full quote.I didn't say the statistics were biased. Just the interpretation. In particular this statement "the most dangerous place for women is the home."
Again, imo placing significance to unknown partial DNA not found in any crime scene, or multiple locations was bad judgement and granting bail because of it was a bad judgement by Judge Murphy.Key words NOW it is known.
Again, the prosecution failed to meet the test set forth in the Colorado Constitution which governs when a defendant charged with murder is granted bail. Granting bail for 1st-degree murder is a very rare event by the court, and the prosecution messed up, it happened. They relied on the wrong witness (Cahill) here.
Why blame the Judge for the prosecution's failure? This makes no sense to me. MOO
Suzanne Morphew Murder to Proceed to Trial, Barry Morphew Bail set at $500,000 - by Jan Wondra - Ark Valley Voice
On Friday afternoon, Sept. 17, a series of decisions by District 11 Judge Patrick Murphy set the course of the murder trial for Barry Morphew, in thearkvalleyvoice.com
9/18/21
[..]
Of the three possible scenarios, the judge said that it was possible that either Morphew murdered her and disposed of the body, or that someone unknown took Suzanne and murdered her. “I think it is unlikely that she intentionally disappeared.”
He pointed out that “I find the evidence and presence of unknown DNA in the glove box of her car, and that this person has committed other sexual assaults to be important.” He noted that the DNA found is linked to three other sexual assaults; two in Arizona and one in Chicago.
“This is particularly significant – it’ doesn’t prove that he is innocent, or that someone else did it. Therefore: “proof is not evident, nor is the presumption great. Because I have found the prosecution has not met their burden, the court is obligated by the Colorado Constitution to set bail.”
I’m basing my opinion on what was presented in the arrest affidavit and multiple observations of BM’s behavior both before and after his wife’s disappearance. So that isn’t’nothing’.Certainly true. Thanks for the response.
I was curious if anyone had stopped to reconsider their suspicions or whether they had, perhaps, jumped to a conclusion too early. One would think that if the evidence existed and was so clear that BLM would be tried and convicted already. No evidence that such reconsideration happened in this forum, though. Its easy for a person to say BLM is guilty when she can make the judgment based on anything. Or nothing.
Again, imo placing significance to unknown partial DNA not found in any crime scene, or multiple locations was bad judgement and granting bail because of it was a bad judgement by Judge Murphy.
They relied on the wrong witness (Cahill) here.
Why blame the Judge for the prosecution's failure? This makes no sense to me. MOO
IMO there is partial DNA in every vehicle and home. For a Judge to take a partial (no such thing) DNA match found only in a vehicle, no matter who presents such "evidence", place significant weight on that DNA. Disregard loads of forensic, data, vehicle, and phone data, and state that 2 situations are likelyThe problem is the possibility that the DNA was that of the offender was raised via the prosecutions own witness / discovered materials
Prosecution needed to have a better witness for this aspect, but you can also argue this was beyond the scope of a Prelim.
This is important. History cannot be rewritten. This was the first significant legal event. From this point prosecution started making errors in meeting deadlines set by the court and agreed to by both defense and prosecution that dragged the case down to the end.Key words NOW it is known.
Again, the prosecution failed to meet the test set forth in the Colorado Constitution which governs when a defendant charged with murder is granted bail. Granting bail for 1st-degree murder is a very rare event by the court, and the prosecution messed up, it happened. They relied on the wrong witness (Cahill) here.
Why blame the Judge for the prosecution's failure? This makes no sense to me. MOO
Suzanne Morphew Murder to Proceed to Trial, Barry Morphew Bail set at $500,000 - by Jan Wondra - Ark Valley Voice
On Friday afternoon, Sept. 17, a series of decisions by District 11 Judge Patrick Murphy set the course of the murder trial for Barry Morphew, in thearkvalleyvoice.com
9/18/21
[..]
Of the three possible scenarios, the judge said that it was possible that either Morphew murdered her and disposed of the body, or that someone unknown took Suzanne and murdered her. “I think it is unlikely that she intentionally disappeared.”
He pointed out that “I find the evidence and presence of unknown DNA in the glove box of her car, and that this person has committed other sexual assaults to be important.” He noted that the DNA found is linked to three other sexual assaults; two in Arizona and one in Chicago.
“This is particularly significant – it’ doesn’t prove that he is innocent, or that someone else did it. Therefore: “proof is not evident, nor is the presumption great. Because I have found the prosecution has not met their burden, the court is obligated by the Colorado Constitution to set bail.”