Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #99

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1509279426663616525?s=21&t=KyxF3Rftc6toP3tDj0daYQ

The judge says it is the prosecutions job to produce all evidence and reports from anyone who helped investigate this case, including Spence.

He did note that this was not a willful mistake on the prosecutions part since they did not know a report existed.

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1509279633623113732?s=21&t=KyxF3Rftc6toP3tDj0daYQ
The expert witnesses thrown out will still be allowed to testify they just can not be identified or used as an expert in the case.

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1509283962031587340?s=21&t=KyxF3Rftc6toP3tDj0daYQ

Something I forgot (sorry brain fog)
I’m talking about Doug Spence- he and his K9 were used to help search for #SuzanneMorphew the night she was reported missing.
Spence gave his dog one of Suzannes shirts to use to pick up her scent…

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1509284362315042819?s=21&t=KyxF3Rftc6toP3tDj0daYQ
It was revealed that as the dog was searching along the creek near where Suzanne’s bike was found he did not show any negative hits meaning he was following a scent, possibly Suzannes.
Spence says the dog only showed a negative when they came to a log laying across the trail.

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1509284710844878860?s=21&t=KyxF3Rftc6toP3tDj0daYQ
He also was sniffing across the creek to the other side.
Spence said if the scent was strong enough the dog would’ve run through the water to the other side- he didn’t.
Spence says they did go to the other side of the creek but the dog didn’t indicate he found anything.

 

[katydid23]

What a tangled mess.... I swear, this is just my luck, as I am experiencing the same thing now, being a Lakers fan....

 

[Seattle1]

I definitely think it’s normal to sell your wife’s vehicle weeks after she went missing.

The house too -- shades of Scott Peterson. In their minds, why the heck not -- the "missing person" will never ever return!

 

[abams]

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1509277028696178693?s=21&t=KyxF3Rftc6toP3tDj0daYQ

On the topic of Doug Spence-
He generated a report from the search with his K-9.
He says prosecutors never asked for it so he didn’t give it to them.
Prosecutors didn’t know about the report until today.
Defense says they knew about it but never got a copy

Uhhh, they never thought to seek out any report from their own witness they want to call and designate as an expert?

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Uhhh, they never thought to seek out any report from their own witness they want to call and designate as an expert?

Wow shaking head again. I am beginning to think the greatest gift the judge could give prosecution is to dismiss and give the prosecution team another shot at it but it is still moving along apparently. The dog following her scent near the bike scene is not a positive for prosecution. I don’t know how long scent stays so perhaps they hiked there but wow.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Wow shaking head again. I am beginning to think the greatest gift the judge could give prosecution is to dismiss and give the prosecution team another shot at it but it is still moving along apparently. The dog following her scent near the bike scene is not a positive for prosecution. I don’t know how long scent stays so perhaps they hiked there but wow.

I’m more concerned with how the prosecution will follow up when the defense tries to make a big deal of this. In fact, I’m concerned with the way the prosecutor will handle every issue.

I know BM is guilty but the jury likely has never read the AA. I like following cases but my husband would just as soon eat nails as to voluntarily read an AA. And if the jury listens to the media, well let’s just say their reporting seems to favor the defense. That might be because the defense is having so many wins lately. Ugh..

 

[susiQ]

Personally, the fact that the dog meandered around a wee bit means squat to me. The dog didn’t lead it’s handler anywhere other than immediately around where the bike was found. Well, isn’t that to be expected since that was Suzanne’s bike? Surely it had her scent.

 

[waldojabba]

Personally, the fact that the dog meandered around a wee bit means squat to me. The dog didn’t lead it’s handler anywhere other than immediately around where the bike was found. Well, isn’t that to be expected since that was Suzanne’s bike? Surely it had her scent.

Agree -Per Ashley's tweet, the dog handler said the dog was possibly following SM's scent and you are correct it should be on her bike too. I don't think the dog handler's testimony impacts anything. It's the idea that the prosecution did another belly flop and did not follow up.

 

[DizzyB]

I cannot imagine why anyone would think a vet could be considered an expert in how a tranquilizer can affect a human. That one was pretty simple. Sounds like a housekeeping situation to me-but of course it’s all in how it plays out in a courtroom and how the defense handles the witness.

 

[Pyrite]

Agree -Per Ashley's tweet, the dog handler said the dog was possibly following SM's scent and you are correct it should be on her bike too. I don't think the dog handler's testimony impacts anything. It's the idea that the prosecution did another belly flop and did not follow up.

If I was the defense I think I would want to be sure this report was in evidence. As it at least shows the possibility that SM was there.

Why would the defense try and keep the handler out as an expert? Is it because an expert can give an opinion (I don’t think SM was there based on my dogs actions) but a regular witness can only state facts (my dog was following a scent from the bike. I used SM’s shorts to give the dog the scent I wanted my dog to find. The dog followed the scent to the river.)

 

[susiQ]

I’m more concerned with how the prosecution will follow up when the defense tries to make a big deal of this. In fact, I’m concerned with the way the prosecutor will handle every issue.

I know BM is guilty but the jury likely has never read the AA. I like following cases but my husband would just as soon eat nails as to voluntarily read an AA. And if the jury listens to the media, well let’s just say their reporting seems to favor the defense. That might be because the defense is having so many wins lately. Ugh..

Well, it may look bad at this point, but the truth of the matter is, the defence has to attack everything that was missed by the prosecution. It’s all they have. There is NO exculpatory evidence to spring on the jury at trial. If there was, they would have had the case thrown out by now. What the defence does have, is a mountain of incriminating circumstantial evidence provided by the prosecution that does not need an expert witness to testify to. I think that is why they are fighting so hard on this other “stuff.” They need to earn their shekels. If there was some big bombshell wouldn’t they use that now to have it dismissed? Surely they would, otherwise they would just be stringing BM along. <modsnip> All MOO as IANAL.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Well, it may look bad at this point, but the truth of the matter is, the defence has to attack everything that was missed by the prosecution. It’s all they have. There is NO exculpatory evidence to spring on the jury at trial. If there was, they would have had the case thrown out by now. What the defence does have, is a mountain of incriminating circumstantial evidence provided by the prosecution that does not need an expert witness to testify to. I think that is why they are fighting so hard on this other “stuff.” They need to earn their shekels. If there was some big bombshell wouldn’t they use that now to have it dismissed? Surely they would, otherwise they would just be stringing BM along<modsnip> All MOO as IANAL.

Thanks SusiQ. Reassurance is welcomed!
I can absolutely see how the defense would string BM along and take his money. Fine with me.

I don’t know though. They could use some bombshell in court just to increase their fame.

Thinking your way works for me. They know he is guilty and they have nothing to offer.

They are earning their pay either way. BM was reportedly all smiles leaving court today. He must think he will be a free man soon.

 

[Seattle1]

I’m more concerned with how the prosecution will follow up when the defense tries to make a big deal of this. In fact, I’m concerned with the way the prosecutor will handle every issue.

I know BM is guilty but the jury likely has never read the AA. I like following cases but my husband would just as soon eat nails as to voluntarily read an AA. And if the jury listens to the media, well let’s just say their reporting seems to favor the defense. That might be because the defense is having so many wins lately. Ugh..

I especially agree @Love Never Fails that we've all had the advantage of scrubbing the AA from top to bottom, sometimes twice or more!

I also think a large number of jurors expectations in a criminal trial are influenced by what they've seen on network television (crime shows). (My personal experience of small towns is cable tv is a staple product that can even come before groceries)!

In other words, I think jurors are often reliant to hear from expert witnesses to validate their own leanings towards subject evidence -- serves to remove any doubt. This is a murder one trial after all!

While I'm fairly confident that the E & N team (big money, City Lawyers) will probably rub the locals of Fremont County the wrong way, a benefit to the prosecution, I also won't be distraught if the case is dismissed and the prosecution able to refile.

The prosecution will already have first-hand experience of E & N's tactics and better prepared to respond.

Last but equally important, I do think Judge Lama has demonstrated that he's probably a bit intimidated by BM's defense, and that is already proving not a good thing for this no-body, no forensic crime-scene prosecution. MOO

 

[mainemom376]

Still at a complete loss here. Aside from the legal stuff going on, I cannot get past this-Don’t the daughters want to know what happened to their Mom? Don’t they want to find her? I. Just. Don’t. Get. It. JMO

 

[justtrish]

I would like to hear from the dog handler how things usually go. When tracking a scent for a person that was known to walk a certain path does the dog follow it continuously along the same path that person would have walked?

I would imagine if she really wrecked there her scent would be very strong. Think of hitting things, the ground, shrubs, trees, or rocks on that hillside. She likely would lay there a minute checking herself over to see what hurts. Get up walk the easiest path toward the road and wander off. So her scent should be very clear with a trail leading away from the wreck site. In the case of her being there at very morning less than 12 hours prior, what is the chase she was there, wrecked, walked off, and the dog didn't follow her scent away?

 

[Spartygirl]

Prejudice? It's looking like everything important to this prosecution is prejudicial in this judge's eyes.

When BM is convicted, he won't be able to say it was due to prejudicial evidence because the prosecution isn't allowed to present basic explanatory information about evidence.

I look forward to the defense's courtroom victories causing PTSD for BM for the rest of his life. I know, that's unrealistic since he's a narcissist. Watching years of appeals go nowhere will be sweet justice, though.
JMO

I agree...everything seems prejudicial.

NO tranquilizing animals experts allowed,
NO DV discussion.

I mean, this is what makes Bare, well, Barry,

He lives to hunt and he abused Suzanne

Yet this is not allowed in court.

Sheesh... I guess the positive outlook is he is definitely having a Fair trial and should not have anything to appeal once he is convicted.

 

[Pyrite]

Still at a complete loss here. Aside from the legal stuff going on, I cannot get past this-Don’t the daughters want to know what happened to their Mom? Don’t they want to find her? I. Just. Don’t. Get. It. JMO

IMO the daughters think they know what has happened to their mom. They just don’t think BM has anything to do with it.

we don’t know if they read the aa. We don’t know if growing up with BM as their father they have know he lies even when the truth will serve him better, so don’t put as much weight on his lying about where he was and what he was doing as most every one on this thread.

We don’t know if proof coming out about SM having a long term affair has made them feel betrayed. If so this may open them to believing BM’s side of the story.

Just judging from their appearances with BM, I have a hard time believing the daughters think he had anything to do with SM’s disappearance. I’m sure they would like proof of what happened to SM, because in the daughter’s mind, this would clear their father. They just think they haven’t seen the proof.

just my opinion.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Still at a complete loss here. Aside from the legal stuff going on, I cannot get past this-Don’t the daughters want to know what happened to their Mom? Don’t they want to find her? I. Just. Don’t. Get. It. JMO

Finding her is a separate issue in my opinion. No doubt for me they would like her found. Right now they are more concerned about losing another parent I suspect.

 

[susiQ]

Maybe I’m just dreaming of a “pie in the sky,” but I have to believe the prosecution has something more than what was revealed in the AA and that “something” is a doozie. Like @Seattle1, I wouldn’t be too disappointed if the case is dismissed and the prosecution gets a do-over, but I’d much prefer it go ahead an we get treated to BOMBSHELL instead!
Ed:
OMGoodness I typed defence when I meant prosecution. Brain fail.