Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #85

[al66pine]

dbm

 

[Cindizzi]

It is not the same DNA though.
The DNA on the glovebox isn’t the same DNA that was found on the bike, helmet etc, etc.
Again, imo the DNA in this case is a distraction, non-starter, red herring and which team BM is using to try and muddy the waters/sway public opinion.

As has been discussed previously, the random DNA could’ve been deposited on those items any number of innocent ways, no need to keep repeating how, read posts upthread. Anyway, the theory being pushed by team BM has been that SM disappeared from a bike ride, not from her vehicle or home. Since their big concern of late appears to be focused mostly on the partial match to SA DNA found on the glovebox, seems team BM’s new theory is going to be the SODDI abducted SM from her vehicle and decided to stage her bike and helmet?? Has to be because if they want to say that SODDI took her from her car they have to also assert/explain that he staged the bicycle and planted the helmet, which leads to also have to explain how SODDI managed to get his DNA on the glovebox of car but not on the bike and helmet. So are they going to want people to believe he wasn’t wearing gloves when he grabbed her from her car but managed to remember to put on gloves before staging the bike and planting helmet?? Besides that idea of an abductor only wearing gloves for part of the crime defying logic and making no sense whatsoever, again, what abductor is going to ambush and abduct someone in broad daylight from one location and decide to also take the time to stage a second crime scene and plant something at 3rd location???

The whole idea of abducting someone and especially in broad daylight, is an enormous risk to take. The MO of most abductors is to get in to wherever as fast as they can, grab their target/victim, and get outta dodge just as fast. They do not hang around burning things in fireplaces, or staging and planting items in other various locations. Again, the risk factor of getting caught/seen is enormous, and no abductor is going to hang around taking time to do all those other things. No way. Even if team BM were to focus on the random unknown DNA in the home and say SODDI abducted her from home, same as above applies i.e., have to explain the staged bike and helmet, sticking around burning things etc., etc, etc.

At any rate, the random DNA doesn’t negate the evidence against BM nor can any SODDI abduction scenario be reconciled against or explain BM sketchy actions/behaviors, lies and inconsistent statements after the fact. Why all the inconsistencies and lies if he did nothing wrong? Innocent people with nothing to hide, hide nothing. Period.

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne

Excellent summation! I would also add that Some Other Dude left her purse, cash and credit cards in the vehicle, took the towel she was pictured sun bathing on, took her phone charger, and turned off or destroyed her phone about 15 hours before her husband left her sleeping in bed.
JMO

 

[al66pine]

@MassGuy An urgent message for you.

People who believe this nonsense either are completely ignorant of the case facts, to include the entire preliminary hearing, or they must fall for a lot of phone scams.

Please answer your phone or call us back immediately.
We want to let you know your car warranty is about to expire./sarc

 

[al66pine]

Jeff Lindsey.

.... Conveniently, the lead investigator, Jeff Lindsay who was the one who did the follow up on the DNA, moved onto another case in another city right before this lawsuit appeared....

@genuineusa77 sbm rbm When following multiple cases, I'm not always good w keeping names and titles straight, so I doubled checked.
FWIW
"Deputy District Attorney Jeff Lindsey is leaving the 11th Judicial District Attorney's Office to take a job in Pueblo at the 10th Judicial District Attorney's Office. His last day is November 5, 2021. Lindsey handled much of the Morphew case during previous hearings. Oct 16, 2021" * bbm

"Deputy District Attorney Jeff Lindsey's last day with the district is Friday, Nov. 5...."** bbm
___________________________
* Lead prosecutor in Barry Morphew murder case resigns | FOX31 Denver.
** Barry Morphew case: Lead prosecutors resigns for new job | 9news.com

 

[Area52]

It is not the same DNA though.
The partial match SA DNA found on the glovebox isn’t the same DNA that was found on the bike, helmet, etc.
Again, imo the DNA in this case is a distraction, non-starter, red herring, which team BM is using to try and muddy the waters and sway public opinion/future jury pool.

As has been discussed previously, the random DNA could’ve been deposited on those items any number of innocent ways. No need to keep repeating how, read posts upthread. Anyway, the theory being pushed by team BM has been that SM disappeared from a bike ride, not from her vehicle or home. Since their big concern of late appears to be focused mostly on the partial match to SA DNA found on the glovebox, seems team BM’s new theory is going to be SODDI abducted SM from her vehicle and decided to stage her bike and helmet?? Has to be all that, because if they want to say that SODDI took her from her car, they have to also assert/explain that he staged the bike and planted the helmet. Which leads to also having to explain how SODDI managed to get his DNA on the glovebox of car but not on the bike and helmet. So are they going to want people to believe he wasn’t wearing gloves when he grabbed her from her car, but managed to remember to put on gloves before touching and staging the bike and planting the helmet?? Besides the idea of an abductor only wearing gloves for part of the crime defying logic and making no sense whatsoever, what abductor is going to ambush and abduct someone in broad daylight from one location and decide to also take the time to stage a 2nd crime scene and plant something at 3rd location???

The whole idea of abducting someone and especially in broad daylight, is an enormous risk to take. The MO of most abductors is to get in to ‘wherever’ as fast as they can, grab their target/victim, and get outta dodge just as fast. They do not hang around burning things in fireplaces, or staging and planting items in various other locations. Again, the risk factor of being seen/getting caught is enormous, and no abductor is going to hang around taking time to do all those other things. No way. Even if team BM were to focus on the random unknown DNA in the home and say SODDI abducted her from the home, same as above applies i.e., have to explain the staged bike and helmet, sticking around burning things etc., etc, etc.

At any rate, the random DNA doesn’t negate the evidence against BM, nor can any SODDI abduction scenario be reconciled against or explain BM sketchy actions/behaviors, lies and inconsistent statements after the fact. Why all the inconsistencies and lies if he had no involvement/didn’t do anything wrong? Innocent people with nothing to hide, hide nothing. Period.

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne




ETA-clarity

Thank you @fcavanaugh for this post. It certainly makes me feel more confident of an eventual conviction for BM. Your explanation is as plain as day, and easy to follow. I hope the prosecution will do as well as you in laying out their case. Well done and thank you!

 

[marylamby]

Excellent summation! I would also add that Some Other Dude left her purse, cash and credit cards in the vehicle, took the towel she was pictured sun bathing on, took her phone charger, and turned off or destroyed her phone about 15 hours before her husband left her sleeping in bed.
JMO

Hah, I was going to reply how it just so happened that BM was home at the time of the last known contact from Suzanne ergo at the time of the 'abduction'. Then there's that last ping on her phone which coincidentally happened on BM's travels (must've been sleep-driving) to the non-existent job - for which the equipment necessary wasn't provided nor was there a work permit/order for.
Dear geebus, the list goes on and on and on. Someone should compile a comprehensive list, or maybe someone already has? Knowing you guys, I bet you have.
How anyone can take a blind eye to all all of the evidence and latch onto a notice of intent to sue is beyond me.
That notice is a load of accusations (bet you thought I'd say something else there) which hasn't been proven, even though it's been bantered about how it IS the truth.
Why haven't the defense filed a motion to dismiss, if they have proof of these 'allegations'. Will they again drone on about sanctions at the upcoming hearing, again?
Isn't the next hearing early November, maybe the 7th? That date stood out in my mind but I may be way off.
IMO, it's all a bunch of hooey and as many of us have said, all to influence the press (which worked, just look at the DM garbage article who probably got a heads up by the defense), the public and the potential jury.

IMO

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

Excellent summation! I would also add that Some Other Dude left her purse, cash and credit cards in the vehicle, took the towel she was pictured sun bathing on, took her phone charger, and turned off or destroyed her phone about 15 hours before her husband left her sleeping in bed.
JMO

I like your point.

Also, this “Other Dude”, while apparently making a random abduction of Suzanne, decided to look through her personal belongings located in the upstairs area of her home. After rifling through her books and things this other dude made the decision to go ahead and take the time to build a fire in the home’s fireplace, then he burned her journal in the fire...you know, how random kidnappers so often like to do.

 

[marylamby]

It is not the same DNA though.
The partial match SA DNA found on the glovebox isn’t the same DNA that was found on the bike, helmet, etc.
Again, imo the DNA in this case is a distraction, non-starter, red herring, which team BM is using to try and muddy the waters and sway public opinion/future jury pool.

As has been discussed previously, the random DNA could’ve been deposited on those items any number of innocent ways. No need to keep repeating how, read posts upthread. Anyway, the theory being pushed by team BM has been that SM disappeared from a bike ride, not from her vehicle or home. Since their big concern of late appears to be focused mostly on the partial match to SA DNA found on the glovebox, seems team BM’s new theory is going to be SODDI abducted SM from her vehicle and decided to stage her bike and helmet?? Has to be all that, because if they want to say that SODDI took her from her car, they have to also assert/explain that he staged the bike and planted the helmet. Which leads to also having to explain how SODDI managed to get his DNA on the glovebox of car but not on the bike and helmet. So are they going to want people to believe he wasn’t wearing gloves when he grabbed her from her car, but managed to remember to put on gloves before touching and staging the bike and planting the helmet?? Besides the idea of an abductor only wearing gloves for part of the crime defying logic and making no sense whatsoever, what abductor is going to ambush and abduct someone in broad daylight from one location and decide to also take the time to stage a 2nd crime scene and plant something at 3rd location???

The whole idea of abducting someone and especially in broad daylight, is an enormous risk to take. The MO of most abductors is to get in to ‘wherever’ as fast as they can, grab their target/victim, and get outta dodge just as fast. They do not hang around burning things in fireplaces, or staging and planting items in various other locations. Again, the risk factor of being seen/getting caught is enormous, and no abductor is going to hang around taking time to do all those other things. No way. Even if team BM were to focus on the random unknown DNA in the home and say SODDI abducted her from the home, same as above applies i.e., have to explain the staged bike and helmet, sticking around burning things etc., etc, etc.

At any rate, the random DNA doesn’t negate the evidence against BM, nor can any SODDI abduction scenario be reconciled against or explain BM sketchy actions/behaviors, lies and inconsistent statements after the fact. Why all the inconsistencies and lies if he had no involvement/didn’t do anything wrong? Innocent people with nothing to hide, hide nothing. Period.

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne


ETA-clarity

Thank you so much for this, @fcavanaugh!
Care to take a job at the Chaffee Cty DA office? I hear there's an opening!

 

[Auntie Cipation]

Did we ever learn whether Suzanne's current Range Rover had gps tracking?

Because if such gps showed that her vehicle did not go anywhere since 2pm-ish on Saturday when she was last known to be alive, wouldn't that shut down any thought that the DNA on the glovebox had anything to do with her disappearance/murder?

 

[DeDee]

It is not the same DNA though.
The partial match SA DNA found on the glovebox isn’t the same DNA that was found on the bike, helmet, etc.
Again, imo the DNA in this case is a distraction, non-starter, red herring, which team BM is using to try and muddy the waters and sway public opinion/future jury pool.

As has been discussed previously, the random DNA could’ve been deposited on those items any number of innocent ways. No need to keep repeating how, read posts upthread. Anyway, the theory being pushed by team BM has been that SM disappeared from a bike ride, not from her vehicle or home. Since their big concern of late appears to be focused mostly on the partial match to SA DNA found on the glovebox, seems team BM’s new theory is going to be SODDI abducted SM from her vehicle and decided to stage her bike and helmet?? Has to be all that, because if they want to say that SODDI took her from her car, they have to also assert/explain that he staged the bike and planted the helmet. Which leads to also having to explain how SODDI managed to get his DNA on the glovebox of car but not on the bike and helmet. So are they going to want people to believe he wasn’t wearing gloves when he grabbed her from her car, but managed to remember to put on gloves before touching and staging the bike and planting the helmet?? Besides the idea of an abductor only wearing gloves for part of the crime defying logic and making no sense whatsoever, what abductor is going to ambush and abduct someone in broad daylight from one location and decide to also take the time to stage a 2nd crime scene and plant something at 3rd location???

The whole idea of abducting someone and especially in broad daylight, is an enormous risk to take. The MO of most abductors is to get in to ‘wherever’ as fast as they can, grab their target/victim, and get outta dodge just as fast. They do not hang around burning things in fireplaces, or staging and planting items in various other locations. Again, the risk factor of being seen/getting caught is enormous, and no abductor is going to hang around taking time to do all those other things. No way. Even if team BM were to focus on the random unknown DNA in the home and say SODDI abducted her from the home, same as above applies i.e., have to explain the staged bike and helmet, sticking around burning things etc., etc, etc.

At any rate, the random DNA doesn’t negate the evidence against BM, nor can any SODDI abduction scenario be reconciled against or explain BM sketchy actions/behaviors, lies and inconsistent statements after the fact. Why all the inconsistencies and lies if he had no involvement/didn’t do anything wrong? Innocent people with nothing to hide, hide nothing. Period.

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne


ETA-clarity

.
This diction clearly sets out to respond to the DNA in this case plus so much more.

I should hope that the entire post is emailed to Officials in CC, CO. Took the liberty of locating some email addys for ya!

Touche' @fcavanaugh !

Jennifer Davis
County Attorney
719.530.5564

Daniel Tom
Assistant County Attorney
719.530.5563

Miles Cottom
Assistant County Attorney
Human Services Specialist

John Spezze
Sheriff
jspezze@chaffeesheriff.org

John Spezze, Sheriff
Andy Rohrich, Undersheriff

641 West 3rd Street
PO Box 699
Salida, Colorado 81201

Non-Emergency: 719-539-2596
Communications Center Fax:
719-539-3648
Records:719-539-2814
Records Fax: 719-539-1077
Email: records@chaffeesheriff.org

MHOO TY VHO

 

[MassGuy]

Did we ever learn whether Suzanne's current Range Rover had gps tracking?

Because if such gps showed that her vehicle did not go anywhere since 2pm-ish on Saturday when she was last known to be alive, wouldn't that shut down any thought that the DNA on the glovebox had anything to do with her disappearance/murder?

I don't think we know, but good point. Also, what random abductor enters the car, doesn't drive the car (or returns it)?

He of course left her purse, with cash, as one does.

It makes sense on absolutely no level. Hell, I'm probably a partial match to sex offenders.

 

[Cindizzi]

Hah, I was going to reply how it just so happened that BM was home at the time of the last known contact from Suzanne ergo at the time of the 'abduction'. Then there's that last ping on her phone which coincidentally happened on BM's travels (must've been sleep-driving) to the non-existent job - for which the equipment necessary wasn't provided nor was there a work permit/order for.
Dear geebus, the list goes on and on and on. Someone should compile a comprehensive list, or maybe someone already has? Knowing you guys, I bet you have.
How anyone can take a blind eye to all all of the evidence and latch onto a notice of intent to sue is beyond me.
That notice is a load of accusations (bet you thought I'd say something else there) which hasn't been proven, even though it's been bantered about how it IS the truth.
Why haven't the defense filed a motion to dismiss, if they have proof of these 'allegations'. Will they again drone on about sanctions at the upcoming hearing, again?
Isn't the next hearing early November, maybe the 7th? That date stood out in my mind but I may be way off.
IMO, it's all a bunch of hooey and as many of us have said, all to influence the press (which worked, just look at the DM garbage article who probably got a heads up by the defense), the public and the potential jury.

IMO

Next hearing is November 9th. Here are the Motions by Defense:

https://twitter.com/laurenscharftv/status/1438994795737800705?s=21
Iris Eytan is telling the Judge that the prosectors with the D.A. office have been participating in interviews, podcasts and fueling the media frenzy. She is asking for a gag order for them.

https://twitter.com/laurenscharftv/status/1438994942957957122?s=21
Judge is not ruling on the motion. He said if there is a violation it is a self-inflicted wound.

https://twitter.com/laurenscharftv/status/1438995712000331776?s=21
There will be a motion hearing for #BarryMorphew on Nov. 9 at 1:30 p.m. - 3:30 p.m. one is discovery violation and motion of violation of the court order to limit pretrial publicity.

 

[steeltowngirl]

I don't think we know, but good point. Also, what random abductor enters the car, doesn't drive the car (or returns it)?

He of course left her purse, with cash, as one does.

It makes sense on absolutely no level. Hell, I'm probably a partial match to sex offenders.

Don’t give the defense attorneys any ideas. We would hate to see the name “MassGuy” turn up on their next set of alternate theories!

 

[marylamby]

Next hearing is November 9th. Here are the Motions by Defense:

https://twitter.com/laurenscharftv/status/1438994795737800705?s=21
Iris Eytan is telling the Judge that the prosectors with the D.A. office have been participating in interviews, podcasts and fueling the media frenzy. She is asking for a gag order for them.

https://twitter.com/laurenscharftv/status/1438994942957957122?s=21
Judge is not ruling on the motion. He said if there is a violation it is a self-inflicted wound.

https://twitter.com/laurenscharftv/status/1438995712000331776?s=21
There will be a motion hearing for #BarryMorphew on Nov. 9 at 1:30 p.m. - 3:30 p.m. one is discovery violation and motion of violation of the court order to limit pretrial publicity.

Thanks, Cindizzi! Above and beyond as usual.
Being that the 'proposed' civil suit is brought by a different firm with whom his defense isn't associated with in any way whatsoever *cough*, I don't suppose his defense lawyers will bring up the accusations... or will they?
Should be interesting.
Also, doesn't a gag order go both ways? More than one way to skin a chipmunk?
eta: which might have a lot to do with the timing of the notice to file, before the hearing?
Just pondering the possibilities.
IMO

 

[Cindizzi]

Thanks, Cindizzi! Above and beyond as usual.
Being that the 'proposed' civil suit is brought by a different firm with whom his defense isn't associated with in any way whatsoever *cough*, I don't suppose his defense lawyers will bring up the accusations... or will they?
Should be interesting.
Also, doesn't a gag order go both ways? More than one way to skin a chipmunk?
eta: which might have a lot to do with the timing of the notice to file, before the hearing?
Just pondering the possibilities.
IMO

First of all, Defense is saying Prosecution has violated a Court Order to limit Pre-Trial Publicity. Did anyone here know there was such an order? No? How WOULD we know since every motion, response and order for the past six months has been SUPPRESSED!!

And yes, a gag order would go both ways. ALL parties.

Here is such an order for the L.Stauch case. Items 2a through 2g are things they CAN comment on. Seems like a low bar and I doubt has been violated here. ( at least I hope not ). JMO

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/04th_Judicial_District/El_Paso/20CR1358/001/O1 Order Re Pretrial Publicity.pdf

 

[sk716]

I don't think we know, but good point. Also, what random abductor enters the car, doesn't drive the car (or returns it)?

He of course left her purse, with cash, as one does.

It makes sense on absolutely no level. Hell, I'm probably a partial match to sex offenders.

If a forensic team swabbed anybodies cars they would be covered in way weaker partials than what might come up as a familial match to me in Baltimore. Knowing some of my distant cousins, it might close a few cold cases if I did 23andme.

 

[sk716]

First of all, Defense is saying Prosecution has violated a Court Order to limit Pre-Trial Publicity. Did anyone here know there was such an order? No? How WOULD we know since every motion, response and order for the past six months has been SUPPRESSED!!

And yes, a gag order would go both ways. ALL parties.

Here is such an order for the L.Stauch case. Items a through g are things they CAN comment on. Seems like a low bar and I doubt has been violated here. ( at least I hope not ). JMO

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/04th_Judicial_District/El_Paso/20CR1358/001/O1 Order Re Pretrial Publicity.pdf

That one is all about objecting to DA Stanley talking to the press. The defense wants to control the narrative and so far, they're doing a great job of it.

 

[marylamby]

That one is all about objecting to DA Stanley talking to the press. The defense wants to control the narrative and so far, they're doing a great job of it.

Other than the one interview I saw, which I believe was prior to the preliminary hearing (please do correct me if on wrong on any account), in which Linda didn't divulge anything that I could tell, has the DA done anything to violate such an order - one that I've never heard of before (meaning the gag order)? I thought that was one of the motions before the hearing yet to be decided?

 

[MassGuy]

Ok. This didn't occur to me until now, although I've mentioned it in past cases.

Genetic genealogy works by uploading offender DNA to a public genealogy website, like the most popular one, GED Match. That particular database includes DNA that people have uploaded from other services, which law enforcement cannot access (AncestryDNA for example).

From there, partial matches may be found which can then be used to develop a family tree, leading to the offender.

CODIS on the other hand, typically works on complete matches. That system is looking for the exact offender DNA, as opposed to a relative.

In most states, it is illegal for law enforcement to search CODIS for partial matches. Several states however, have no such restrictions.

Colorado is one of them.

Why searching a database like CODIS can be so helpful, is because crime tends to run in families. The offender may not be in there, but his father or brother might.

So our friend in Arizona did not leave that DNA, but someone related to him in some way did.

I imagine it's going to be time consuming and expensive to find someone who is ultimately irrelevant, but I guess it may be worthwhile in case the jury isn't capable of thinking on an average level.

Find him, and you shut another door to the defense, and it's "Gone Girl" again.

 

[Cindizzi]

Other than the one interview I saw, which I believe was prior to the preliminary hearing (please do correct me if on wrong on any account), in which Linda didn't divulge anything that I could tell, has the DA done anything to violate such an order - one that I've never heard of before (meaning the gag order)? I thought that was one of the motions before the hearing yet to be decided?

Other than the one interview I saw, which I believe was prior to the preliminary hearing (please do correct me if on wrong on any account), in which Linda didn't divulge anything that I could tell, has the DA done anything to violate such an order - one that I've never heard of before (meaning the gag order)? I thought that was one of the motions before the hearing yet to be decided?

This was August 30 after the Prelim had ended on the 24th, but before the Judge ruled on going to trial. I don’t think she said anything out of line, but would have to watch it again. It starts around 30 minutes in.
I will say I was surprised at her sparring with a couple of people in the comments. JMO