Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #82

Status
Not open for further replies.
Don't worry. I've been sitting here refreshing the site every 5 mins for hours now. Lol. I will be busy later, but I am confident y'all will have all the info, ready and waiting, when I get home tonight.

I also suspect Lauren will be on top of it, so maybe watch for her to tweet.

I don't think Lauren will be in Chafee today. It wouldn't surprise me if she's a little frightened, to be honest. BM's sister made it clear they blame her (absurd.).
 
People v. Morphew: For those of you asking/wondering, aside from setting the bond amount and time it may be posted (today at noon), the Court does not have anything to do with the bonded release of the defendant. The timing of the release is up to @ChaffeeSheriff
https://twitter.com/cocourts/status/1439981613186650117?s=21

People v. Morphew: The affidavit in this case is still scheduled to be released at noon today. A link from this feed will be distributed once the affidavit is posted.

https://twitter.com/cocourts/status/1439981902446821379?s=21
 
Great, I hope it's not redacted beyond belief and I still can't get over the Defense wanting 'their' redaction published. :p

What I found interesting in one of the follow up tweets or recaps, it was reported there was a text between MM2 and her boyfriend Sunday around noonish saying she was worried about her Mom not answering her calls or texts for Happy Mothers Day.

Just the fact that the defense wanted a different version released, tells me there's going to be some really creepy stuff in there about Barry.

Yes, even creepier than the stuff we already know.

They really don't want the public to read what's in that AA. o_O

jmo
 
Can you post a topo map indicating this location?

Can do, my friend. Used ArcGIS. I'm supposed to be able to get the ArcGIS overlay to work in Google Earth, but not so far. When I do I might be able to get a better angle.

I see the word "Mine" along the trail, but I would hope that was the first place searchers sent a drone.

ScreenHunter 1011.png
 
STUPID QUESTION ALERT!! (Still not well, and brain exceptionally fuzzy today, took the leek and potato soup into the bathroom to put in fridge, then I realised the fridge doesn't live there o_O)

BM waiving his right to a speedy trial, am assuming this is under advisement of his defence team, I imagine that BM himself would prefer 'this whole thing' that's probably the 2nd 'worst thing to have happened' to him to be over and done with pretty quickly and 'no questions asked' as he probably 'can't recall'.
Could this indicate that the defence has a HUGE amount of work to do to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that BM is (not (moo) ) innocent - or, is this typical in a trial, for speedy trial to be waived?

Thanks for your patience with me - it's very much appreciated :)
 
I agree with you, I think the state's biggest problem is that the alternative theory for Murder 2 would be very plausible to a jury. A husband walking in on his wife of many years sending bikini pictures to another man is a Lifetime Murder Mystery plotline. I think the challenge will be convincing the jurors that this was planned before he walked in on her texting. It will be interesting to see if the defense is going to stick with the idea that he has no idea what happened or if they will directly address some type of heat-of-passionate explanation to help the jurors away from Murder 1.

I think the state needs to spend this time walking through a very smooth, very comprehensive theory. The presentation can't be disjointed or haphazard. They need the story to flow enough for the jurors to truly believe them that this is exactly what happened.
Yeah, I was sort of flabbergasted that the state didn't bring up BM disabling the game cameras before the alleged murder on Saturday until their summation on the 17th. That would seem like the strongest evidence of premeditation by far and like it should have featured prominently in the 4 days of the hearing. I can only think of a few possible explanations for that:
  1. They actually did present this during the main part of the preliminary hearing and none of the reporters tweeted about it for some reason. That seems unlikely though.
  2. The evidence for the cameras being disabled isn't very strong and they didn't want to bring it up in a context where the defense could cross-examine their witness. So they tried to sneak it in during their closing statement when it couldn't be contested and hope it influenced the judge.
  3. They really were sandbagging the PH for some reason and held that evidence back. But then why mention it in the closing? And why would you sandbag the PH? It just means that Barry will get bond, and they have to hand over the evidence to the defense anyway.
  4. The prosecution is disorganized and didn't have a good sense of what their most important evidence was. That would be concerning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
177
Guests online
3,501
Total visitors
3,678

Forum statistics

Threads
591,818
Messages
17,959,579
Members
228,620
Latest member
ohbeehaave
Back
Top