Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #88

[Mysti88c]

A Chaffee County woman is missing after a neighbor said she went out for a bike ride Sunday and never returned
Chaffee County woman missing since Sunday after neighbor said she went out for bike ride

List of Case Players and Their Relationship to Discussion (Post #440)

————————————-
MEDIA, MAPS & TIMELINE *NO DISCUSSION*
Detailed timeline of events in the Morphew case:
CO - CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 , MEDIA, MAPS &TIMELINE *NO DISCUSSION*
Arrest Affidavit
—————————————
Suzanne Morphew Case Archive (developed and maintained by WS member AmandaReckonwith)
—————————————
Hearing Notes (Compliments of @NoSI)
Preliminary:
Day 1


————————————-
Suzanne Morphew FB page
Suzanne Morphew Twitter page


Verified Experts/Professionals/Insiders posting in this thread:

10ofRods is a Verified Anthropologist
Angleterre is a Verified LE from England
riolove77 is a Verified Attorney (prosecutor)
Alethea is a Verified Attorney (defense)
otto is a Verified Expert
Chomsky is a Verified Attorney
angelainwi is a Certified Trauma Counselor
gitana1 is a Verified Attorney
Cassidy is a Verified Attorney
lamlawindy is a Verified Attorney (former Prosecutor, now Defence)
NatureLover (Verified friend of the Moorman family)

Thread #41 Thread #42 Thread #43 Thread #44 Thread #45 Thread #46 Thread #47 Thread #48 Thread #49 Thread #50 Thread #51 Thread #52 Thread #53 Thread #54 Thread #55 Thread #56 Thread #57 Thread #58 Thread #59 Thread #60 Thread #61 Thread #62 Thread #63 Thread #64 Thread #65 Thread #66 Thread #67 Thread #68 Thread #69 Thread #70 Thread #71 Thread #72 Thread #73 Thread #74 Thread #75 Thread #76 Thread #77 Thread #78 Thread #79 Thread #80 Thread #81 Thread #82
Thread #83 Thread #84 Thread #85 Thread #86 Thread #87

 

[Sillybilly]

Please continue discussion here in accordance with The Rules:

Quick rundown of reminders from prior threads:

Rumors are not allowed.

Barry Morphew has been charged with Suzanne's murder and he and his businesses are open to sleuthing.

Do not sleuth or make accusations against anyone who is not an officially named POI/suspect.

If an approved source discusses rumors or family members, it is still NOT allowed to do so at Websleuths. WS has different standards.

Preview your posts to avoid broken quotes.

Lengthy personal anecdotes are off topic. Stay on topic.

Discuss the case and not each other; state your opinion and move one without arguing or bickering.

Random youtube videos or blogs are not allowed unless approval is given by Tricia or Admin.

Approved sources are MSM, LE, Profiling Evil podcast, Lauren Scharf podcast or social media, Investigation Discovery, Crimeonline, Tyson Draper (only the interview with Barry Morphew), public documents.

Do not discuss removed posts or question/challenge moderation on the thread. Doing so is subject to an automatic Time Out.

 

[Tiff23fr]

Mod Reminder - Plunder Court Transcript Episodes

The Transcripts from the Preliminary Hearing being shared by Plunder have been approved. This approval only applies to the Plunder episodes specific to the court transcripts. The transcripts shared across the episodes may not be copied and posted in entirety to WS as a single document or post replicating the documents that the content creator purchased.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN REMINDER:

By Websleuths standards the Morphew daughters are victims. Posts trashing them or demeaning them will be removed and members who post in that regard are subject to a loss of posting privileges.

Read The Rules (TOS) and post accordingly.

Thanks.

 

[Sillybilly]

<modsnip: This post has been removed. It is a violation of the law to broadcast this recording.>

ADMIN NOTE:

Thanks to Seattle1, a reminder that Colorado Court has strict policy that court proceedings including WEBEX cannot be filmed/recorded/rebroadcast or face contempt charges.

 

[Tiff23fr]

Welcome to Thread #88. Please continue here…

 

[Seattle1]

I hear what you’re saying. It IS quite ironic that he is now being controlled after he tried to control SM her whole life with him.

It’s said that he has been spoiled, coddled and protected by his Mother and sisters his whole life.

Sadly, I don’t think he has a problem with all of the women in his current life ( mom, sisters, daughters and lawyers) telling him how to act now. They are all helping him portray an image. A fake image.
We know from Suzanne’s own words that IMAGE is what has always mattered to him. That’s why he could not stand to have her tell her friends that they did NOT have a perfect marriage and why he said that Divorce would never happen.
I hope he’s miserable in knowing that his own words and actions have exposed his fake image of God fearing, loving husband and Father.
JMO

^^bbm

Absolutely agree with OP that BM doesn't have difficulty with the women above as they are indeed the narc's primary supply -- his reinforcers, the very objects that he harvests from!
Females outside the primary including SM that confront him and are not fooled by his masked, false self are who he dislikes and disrespects most. After all, they're responsible for triggering his need to constantly seek out more primary supply and it's exhausting for BM to keep his narc mask tight, be nice and play nice.

 

[Megnut]

^^bbm

Absolutely agree with OP that BM doesn't have difficulty with the women above as they are indeed the narc's primary supply -- his reinforcers, the very objects that he harvests from!
Females outside the primary including SM that confront him and are not fooled by his masked, false self are who he dislikes and disrespects most. After all, they're responsible for triggering his need to constantly seek out more primary supply and it's exhausting for BM to keep his narc mask tight, be nice and play nice.

He can't even keep a covid mask on.

JMO

 

[fcavanaugh]

Apologies, I don’t know how to quote a post from previous thread.

Well said as usual MassGuy, I 100% agree.
Well educated doesn’t always equate to Intelligence . Intelligence is a broad term and encapsulates many areas. There’s a reason someone somewhere at some point in time coined the phrase ‘well educated idiot’. You know, those that may have skated by because they were an athlete and/or cheated their way through college, or those that have high IQ or are considered ‘book smart’ but lacking in other areas of intelligence, emotional, social, etc. and completely lacking in common sense, self awareness, character and integrity. There are many well educated idiots out there and most of us have probably run across these types a time or two. I know I have. Met many in college myself and have worked with some over the years as well. Anyone following the Alex Murdaugh case can see it on full display.
Anyway, I really don’t care if BM went to college is a college graduate or not, it’s really neither here nor there. The point is there are good people and bad people everywhere in this world regardless of level of intelligence or education level attained. IMO, BM is neither intelligent nor a good person. IMO, BM is a bad person, and worse.

Just because BM knew enough about Horticulture/Landscaping to get by, imo he’s totally lacking in the areas of emotional and social intelligence, lacks common sense, self awareness, character and integrity. One need look no further than the AA to see his ever changing inconsistent, ridiculous statements, his demeaning and shaming Suzanne and what he says about women in general, all exposes him for the lying liar he is, con man, controller, user, abuser, and complete morally bankrupt individual, and insult to women everywhere.

The only thing this Neanderthal got ‘right’, was thanks to his hunting and landscaping knowledge and skills, hid Suzanne well. SMDH. Sad enough that he controlled and abused her in life that he continues to do so in death by keeping the location of her remains hidden from her family, his own daughters even, not allowing them peace and closure of putting her to rest properly.

The man is grotesque and epitome of evil.

All of the above IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne

 

[charminglane]

From Tumbleweed at end of last thread:
"BM above. I respectfully disagree. I was just looking at the telematics data on page 128 of the AA, and the last entry states that the truck moved 96.8 feet from the garage to the driveway. So that is the 2nd reference in the AA that refers to the truck being in the garage. I think he pulled the truck into the garage with the trailer sticking out into the driveway. Yes, it's totally bizarre and why the heck would he do that? "

If there was space amongst the rafters in the garage - above the cars - for storage (such as where the missing coolers were kept?) could BM have not gotten out a ladder but just used the trailer to stand on and reach up for something?

 

[Puzzles8]

From Tumbleweed at end of last thread:
"BM above. I respectfully disagree. I was just looking at the telematics data on page 128 of the AA, and the last entry states that the truck moved 96.8 feet from the garage to the driveway. So that is the 2nd reference in the AA that refers to the truck being in the garage. I think he pulled the truck into the garage with the trailer sticking out into the driveway. Yes, it's totally bizarre and why the heck would he do that? "

If there was space amongst the rafters in the garage - above the cars - for storage (such as where the missing coolers were kept?) could BM have not gotten out a ladder but just used the trailer to stand on and reach up for something?

You've highlighted a really good point.

I would be curious to know which bay of the three car garage he pulled into. Especially in relation to where he kept his dart supplies, gun/s, tools, coolers, safe, rafter access, etc.

Most people don't leave their garage doors open when they are away. So, I'm curious when exactly was the garage door left open that day? Maybe intentionally left open after their "vegetable soup" lunch.

Normally, garage door openers have a deep rumble to them. If he did ambush SM, IMO the garage door had to have been left open earlier in the day.

The more puzzling question is why he felt the need to get his truck into the garage before ambushing SM?

JMO, MOO

 

[mrjitty]

BM claimed to believe a husband could vote for his wife (after murdering her).

This is not a man that respects women.

 

[mrjitty]

to me "from the garage" doesn't mean "in the garage"

He could have just been parked in front of it.

 

[mrjitty]

Regards the application for recusal - it is most likely a delaying tactic.

This is a common strategy for older defendants who are not held on remand. Might as well try and stay free for as long as possible, kick the can down the road, hope something turns up etc.

e.g if the trial can be delayed 6mths, that time at this end of his life, is worth more than any time he might get if he were every released from prison on parole for example

 

[mrjitty]

From the last thread, the prosecution abandoning the trespass case does not help with the recusal issue.

The witness would still presumably have the same lawyers and it is the perception of bias vis-a-vis the lawyers which is the issue.

Personally I think this application is a nonsense, and a back door attack on the judge's history with the witness in the other case - which of course is not a ground for recusal.

 

[mrjitty]

Thinking further about the motion for recusal, I feel the "360 lines of discovery" is illustrative of how the defence is trying to blur the line between how this might be a bad witness for them (where the judge OKed the warrant) and the supposed grounds for recusal (the law firm connection).

A search warrant was executed, and the state must disclose everything - that doesn't mean there are 360 lines of items of evidence that will be introduced in respect of this witness. And in any case, it is the defence that can/will contest that evidence - not the witness?

Remember this is a prosecution witness, so therefore it will be the state that will attempt to introduce search warrant evidence. The defence is the party that can certainly oppose it. It would seem odd to me that a prosecution witness would lead arguments by independent counsel against the prosecution's evidence - does she have standing to do this? I don't know.

I rather get the feeling this is an attempt via the backdoor to suggest the Judge has a bias based on the granting of the warrants rather than on the actual grounds for recusal in the other case.

The defence claims that the Judge will supposedly have to rule on all kinds of issues where the SD's counsel will be an active participant, but I do wonder how real that is. Won't those issues come from the defence?

I guess the judge will be looking into rules of procedure and precedent here

ETA: as I understand it, as a witness before a federal grand jury, you cannot have counsel present (i.e they are an adviser only). At trial, it's an open proceeding so the witness may have counsel present for advice (e.g taking the 5th) but I don't see that counsel could object to a question for example.

We'll need the actual Colorado procedure i guess.

 

[Lyanna]

@CGray123 thank you for your response to my question
Sorry for the delay in reply, get flustered sometimes and need a while to figure out what to say

I genuinely don't have a clue when it comes to legal eagle things, but it does seem 'fair' to me that the marriage of DN and TW should also open the door for prosecution to be able to say there is grounds for conflict of interest or something similar, at the very least be able to question it.
If a friendship is under question, then to me a marriage should be too, but, I suspect I am missing a vast amount of facts, info and general common sense surrounding this.
BTW - think you'd make a great lawyer.

 

[mrjitty]

@CGray123 thank you for your response to my question
Sorry for the delay in reply, get flustered sometimes and need a while to figure out what to say

I genuinely don't have a clue when it comes to legal eagle things, but it does seem 'fair' to me that the marriage of DN and TW should also open the door for prosecution to be able to say there is grounds for conflict of interest or something similar, at the very least be able to question it.
If a friendship is under question, then to me a marriage should be too, but, I suspect I am missing a vast amount of facts, info and general common sense surrounding this.
BTW - think you'd make a great lawyer.

I don't think the lawyer has to bow out here.

Chinese Wall is common on this stuff. It's not like her husband is acting for the witness. He just should not discuss the case with the lawyer(s) at his firm who are acting on it. Here we are only talking about the lawyers so I don't see what the actual conflict or bias would be?

Even where her husband's former law firm colleague was the trial judge - i still don't really see an issue?

Where I know this does come up is a trial lawyer from a big firm becomes a judge, then his former law partners get a case in front of him. There you can see you need to recuse.

 

[mrjitty]

Re SYNC, GPS and POWER REMOVED event

I will be fascinated to see if we get detailed evidence on this. Thinking about it a bit, if the system could log "power removed' event that means there must still be power to log it? (unless using some stored power in the circuitry). So does this even mean some systems were depowered (i.e fuse(s) removed) rather than an entire battery disconnection?

That might lean towards BM having the (stupid) idea to disable the SYNC thinking that the events would not be logged. But of course they were still logged locally on the truck, including GPS.

Looking at that list - did he ever reconnect whatever he de-powered?

 

[Lyanna]

I don't think the lawyer has to bow out here.

Chinese Wall is common on this stuff. It's not like her husband is acting for the witness. He just should not discuss the case with the lawyer(s) at his firm who are acting on it. Here we are only talking about the lawyers so I don't see what the actual conflict or bias would be?

Even where her husband's former law firm colleague was the trial judge - i still don't really see an issue?

Where I know this does come up is a trial lawyer from a big firm becomes a judge, then his former law partners get a case in front of him. There you can see you need to recuse.

Thanks