Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o Prejudice* #101

[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 Thread #88 Thread #89 Thread #90 Thread #91 Thread #92 Thread #93 Thread #94
Thread #95 Thread #96 Thread #97 Thread #98 Thread #99 Thread #100

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[Abraham Cab]

Barry Morphew accused of voting for missing wife Suzanne Morphew | 9news.com

Of course of course of course. No surprise.
The best people right?
Every article like this seems to have the same little details. Projection at its finest.
Wonder if he was a conspiracy theorist too, wonder if that could factor into this.

 

[LandManatee]

Here ya go @LandManatee. It is Station #5. Remember when the PE guys kept hinting that the number 5 had big significance in the case?

IIRC, it’s Chaffee County Firehouse #5 and it’s right in Maysville off Hwy 50.

Here is a link that contains a map of the location.

Station 5 | Chaffee County Fire

Thank you both for the information! Appreciate it. Now off to do some research.

 

[Seattle1]

From BM's criminal complaint of May 18, 2021:



This count was severed from the murder case once it was stated that the short-gun could not fire tranquilizer darts.

Standing alone, seems to me that BM has many options for his defense including that the weapon is not illegal in Indiana and he was not a felon in possession.

Nonetheless, as a felony charge in Colorado, I see this charge as more important to BM than his wife!

(Even though recent House Bill 1298 does not prohibit people from continuing to possess firearms they owned before they were convicted of a misdemeanor that temporarily blocks them from purchasing a gun)

Colorado lawmakers blocked some misdemeanor offenders from buying guns. They also made it OK for some felons to own them.

What weapons are illegal in Colorado? (18-12-102 CRS)

 

[DizzyB]

Now that I have calmed down a bit, I do have to give it to Linda Stanley. She had the guts to proceed and pursue a case against Barry Morphew. He could have been living the high life, flush with cash, hunting to his heart’s content in the knowledge that he got away with murder. Linda Stanley unmasked him. So there’s that.

 

[fcavanaugh]

The below is from CO Attorney and defense specialist, H. Michael Steinberg’s website:

The When of the Violation
If a failure to disclose evidence occurs at a pretrial stage of a Colorado criminal case, judges simply order that disclosure and there is no perceived need for a sanction to further remedy the situation.

BUT, if the failure to disclose becomes known either during or just before the start of a trial that the state had material that should have been produced – then Rule 16 gives a Colorado judge much broader discretion in deciding what should then be done.

The judge will balance several issues in this context:

1. The reasons why the disclosure was not made;
2. The extent of the prejudice, if any, to the opposing party,
3. The feasibility of rectifying that prejudice by a continuance, and any other relevant circumstances.

Among the options open to the judge are the following – a judge may:

1. Order the noncomplying party to permit the discovery of the material and information not previously disclosed;
2. Grant a continuance (if possible); or
3. Enter such other order as it deems just under the circumstances;

ABA Standards for Criminal Justice

Colorado Crim.P. 16(III)(g) provides:

Failure to Comply; Sanctions.

If at any time during the course of the proceedings it is brought to the attention of the court that a party has failed to comply with this rule or with an order issued pursuant to this rule, the court may order such party to permit the discovery or inspection of materials not previously disclosed, grant a continuance, prohibit the party from introducing in evidence the material not disclosed or enter such other order as it deems just under the circumstances.

Whether the judge imposes a sanction of the extreme side of its’ power may well depend on whether the prosecutor willfully violated the rule or order.

The “Tailoring” of the Sanction to Remedy the Discovery Violation
Judges are guided by another important principle in deciding how to remedy a discovery violation. That principle is this – in the judge’s role to remedy the prejudice to the defense if the trial judge finds a violation of discovery under Crim P. 16, they are directed to do so while trying to promote “compliance with the discovery rules while affecting the evidence at trial and the merits of the case as little as possible.'”

ABA Standards for Criminal Justice

The dismissal of a case, or even the less severe suppression of the withheld evidence as a sanction for a violation of discovery, is not favored by the law in this area.

The reasons are based on the policies underlying the purpose of a trial as “a search for the truth.”

Most courts across the country that have ruled in this area on appeal have found that an exclusion of prosecution evidence produces “a disproportionate windfall for the defendant.”

The Least Severe Sanction for a Violation of the Rules of Discovery
Colorado Courts of Appeal have also found that the purpose of the discovery process, including the imposition of sanctions, is to advance the search for truth.

When a violation is found and analyzed, those courts have instructed the Colorado trial judge to impose “the least severe sanction that will accomplish the desired result prompt and full compliance with the court’s discovery orders.”

BBM above from the link below.
IANAL and still trying to understand the legalese and why the Judge ruled as he did with regard to striking prosecution’s experts’ from being able to testify as such, effectively crippling/gutting the prosecution’s case. Given that Judge L stated that he felt the prosecution’s missteps were not willful and given what I understand from the above, the law frowns upon and cautions trial Judge’s against issuing severest of sanctions - disallowing prosecution’s evidence - in favor of the search for the truth, I can’t help but wonder did Judge L issue the severe sanction due to asking the prosecution twice to submit the experts’ testimony and cv’s and basically was annoyed that they didn’t do it after allowing them a second chance, or what??

Don’t get me wrong, I’m as disappointed as anyone that the prosecution ‘blundered’ in the pre-trial proceedings but it still confuses me that the Judge stated he didn’t feel the missteps by the prosecution were willful but decided to issue severe sanction of striking expert witnesses which to my understanding, the law and legal higher ups advise trial Judge’s against doing. So I say again, all considered, Judge L’s ruling seems overly punitive to me, almost as though, had the trial proceeded as scheduled, instilling reasonable doubt before the jury is even seated. Could he not have fined the actual prosecutor/s at fault, and/or called LS into chambers and counseled her about the thin ice she was skating on and demand she turn over the info or else….(can/do trial Judge’s ever do that?).

I mean, this is about protecting the People of the State of Colorado and the search for the truth in pursuit of justice for the victim, Suzanne Renee Moorman Morphew, and so I can’t help but feel the Judge either felt he needed to punish the prosecution after granting them more time to produce and/or was afraid the defense would file an appeal if he didn’t issue a severe sanction.

At any rate, I suppose it’s water under the bridge at this point, but can I just say that if new evidence comes to light/Suzanne’s remains are found and BM is re-arrested and charges re-filed (hopefully, fingers crossed), I think it would be best if a Special Prosecutor, the likes of a Dan May or Matt Murphy is assigned to the case to ensure the case/the evidence in it’s totality, is presented correctly at a future trial so that Suzanne ultimately receives the justice she so rightfully deserves.

When the Colorado District Attorney Fails to Turn Over Key Evidence – What Will Happen?


All of the above IMHOO

#FINDSUZANNE
#BRINGSUZANNEHOME
#JUSTICEFORSUZANNE

ETA-clarity

 

[Scootie98]

It would appear that BM is basking in a false sense of security. The prosecution has emphasized its intentions to try this case. They get a do-over on establishing a case that is winnable. Add to that the potential for a body to be found...and there is, in one sense, a reason for more optimism ahead than before. Now...I see pitfalls...if Suzanne's body is not found, the maneuvering and legal mud-wrestling they will employ is nauseating to consider....but it is what it is. The case, imo, will be retried either way...Its just that one way is much better...and would include that missing element, physical evidence.

 

[justtrish]

RBBM And it kills me to even type this....

He has unfortunately been smart enough to hide Suzanne's remains from LE/CBI/FBI and numerous searches, public and private, over that vast area so far. Let's hope that changes soon.

He did not leave one shred of physical evidence of a murder at PP. I guess his true crime fascination and preplanning paid off for him here.

I'd even venture to say that had he shut his big trap, instead of giving 30+ hours of interviews, he might have gotten away with murder. Of course, LE and John Q Public would know that he was guilty, but I don't think they'd have had enough evidence without his mountain of lies and stupid trash runs.

So BARE can now sit out there realizing that HE shot himself in the proverbial foot. HE made a way for the State to come after him again, and this time nail his lying, misogynistic, narcissistic and fake religion spouter self to the wall.

Tick Tock BARE...

MOO

I think lucky might be a better word than smart. One reason I keep coming back to her being tranquilized is because there was no evidence at the house. I do not think he was good enough to clean up completely a crime scene. I think the murder was either not messy at all (strangulation) and/or he took her sedated, but not dead to another location where he killed her and then he had nothing to clean up. He seemed to know enough since he used airplane mode, he tried to erase truck data, he didn't use her phone after 430am.. I wonder if her phone is with her because he seemed so concerned about LE having her phone.. if they had her phone and he buried it with her, then he would know they had her.

He thought he was smart though. He thought he could talk his way out of this by talking to LE so many times. He thought they were buddies, he was upset when LE betrayed him and he was arrested. He really did think he was out smarting police.

I think he did use the skills he had from his job and from his hunting hobby to commit this crime in the way he did because he knows about digging, burying things, moving dirt, making an area look like it hadn't been touched, etc.. he knew about hunting, killing, cleaning up after processing his kill.. he likely used all those things he knew from past experiences, but I don't think I'd call him smart. This is a man that said all he needed was sex and for Suzanne to just be the way she used to be and it would be fine.

 

[girlhasnoname]

From BM's criminal complaint of May 18, 2021:

View attachment 340716

This count was severed from the murder case once it was stated that the short-gun could not fire tranquilizer darts.

Standing alone, seems to me that BM has many options for his defense including that the weapon is not illegal in Indiana and he was not a felon in possession.

Nonetheless, as a felony charge in Colorado, I see this charge as more important to BM than his wife!

(Even though recent House Bill 1298 does not prohibit people from continuing to possess firearms they owned before they were convicted of a misdemeanor that temporarily blocks them from purchasing a gun)

Colorado lawmakers blocked some misdemeanor offenders from buying guns. They also made it OK for some felons to own them.

What weapons are illegal in Colorado? (18-12-102 CRS)

If only this would prevent him from access to his most beloved possessions in the world, I'd be thrilled.

I believe in the right to bear arms, just not BARE's right to bear arms.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I think lucky might be a better word than smart. One reason I keep coming back to her being tranquilized is because there was no evidence at the house. I do not think he was good enough to clean up completely a crime scene. I think the murder was either not messy at all (strangulation) and/or he took her sedated, but not dead to another location where he killed her and then he had nothing to clean up. He seemed to know enough since he used airplane mode, he tried to erase truck data, he didn't use her phone after 430am.. I wonder if her phone is with her because he seemed so concerned about LE having her phone.. if they had her phone and he buried it with her, then he would know they had her.

He thought he was smart though. He thought he could talk his way out of this by talking to LE so many times. He thought they were buddies, he was upset when LE betrayed him and he was arrested. He really did think he was out smarting police.

I think he did use the skills he had from his job and from his hunting hobby to commit this crime in the way he did because he knows about digging, burying things, moving dirt, making an area look like it hadn't been touched, etc.. he knew about hunting, killing, cleaning up after processing his kill.. he likely used all those things he knew from past experiences, but I don't think I'd call him smart. This is a man that said all he needed was sex and for Suzanne to just be the way she used to be and it would be fine.

I've always thought he tranq'd her and took her from PP. To me that was a smart move on his part, no blood, no cadaverine, no obvious signs of a struggle (although I'd love to know when that MBR door was shattered), etc.

His Narcissism and Omnipotence is what lead him to believe he was the smartest man in any room, especially with his good buddy 'Johnny'. I thank the good Lord for that stupidity.

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

@Seattle1 <snipped & bbm from your post #1000 on the last thread>

The defense also requested release of Morphew’s property gathered as part of the investigation.

Lama asked defense attorneys to work with the DA’s office and detail what specific items might be released and what would continue to be held as part of the investigation.

@FOX21News April 19, 2022

Can you even begin to imagine how that meeting might go??!

 

[Twolabs]

I never thought this was a strong case but never saw this coming!

 

[nrbc4]

Oh Suzanne, if you can hear me, please don't let them find your body. You know what a good person I am...you pushed me to do what I did. Doing so, isn't going to bring you back. It will only make life harder for me and the girls. I imagine something similar going through BM's mind.

 

[WingsOverTX]

The below is from CO Attorney and defense specialist, H. Michael Steinberg’s website:

The When of the Violation
If a failure to disclose evidence occurs at a pretrial stage of a Colorado criminal case, judges simply order that disclosure and there is no perceived need for a sanction to further remedy the situation.

BUT, if the failure to disclose becomes known either during or just before the start of a trial that the state had material that should have been produced – then Rule 16 gives a Colorado judge much broader discretion in deciding what should then be done.

The judge will balance several issues in this context:

1. The reasons why the disclosure was not made;
2. The extent of the prejudice, if any, to the opposing party,
3. The feasibility of rectifying that prejudice by a continuance, and any other relevant circumstances.

Among the options open to the judge are the following – a judge may:

1. Order the noncomplying party to permit the discovery of the material and information not previously disclosed;
2. Grant a continuance (if possible); or
3. Enter such other order as it deems just under the circumstances;

ABA Standards for Criminal Justice

Colorado Crim.P. 16(III)(g) provides:

Failure to Comply; Sanctions.

If at any time during the course of the proceedings it is brought to the attention of the court that a party has failed to comply with this rule or with an order issued pursuant to this rule, the court may order such party to permit the discovery or inspection of materials not previously disclosed, grant a continuance, prohibit the party from introducing in evidence the material not disclosed or enter such other order as it deems just under the circumstances.

Whether the judge imposes a sanction of the extreme side of its’ power may well depend on whether the prosecutor willfully violated the rule or order.

The “Tailoring” of the Sanction to Remedy the Discovery Violation
Judges are guided by another important principle in deciding how to remedy a discovery violation. That principle is this – in the judge’s role to remedy the prejudice to the defense if the trial judge finds a violation of discovery under Crim P. 16, they are directed to do so while trying to promote “compliance with the discovery rules while affecting the evidence at trial and the merits of the case as little as possible.'”

ABA Standards for Criminal Justice

The dismissal of a case, or even the less severe suppression of the withheld evidence as a sanction for a violation of discovery, is not favored by the law in this area.

The reasons are based on the policies underlying the purpose of a trial as “a search for the truth.”

Most courts across the country that have ruled in this area on appeal have found that an exclusion of prosecution evidence produces “a disproportionate windfall for the defendant.”

The Least Severe Sanction for a Violation of the Rules of Discovery
Colorado Courts of Appeal have also found that the purpose of the discovery process, including the imposition of sanctions, is to advance the search for truth.

When a violation is found and analyzed, those courts have instructed the Colorado trial judge to impose “the least severe sanction that will accomplish the desired result prompt and full compliance with the court’s discovery orders.”

BBM above from the link below.
IANAL and still trying to understand the legalese and why the Judge ruled as he did with regard to striking prosecution’s experts’ from being able to testify as such, effectively crippling/gutting the prosecution’s case. Given that Judge L stated that he felt the prosecution’s missteps were not willful and given what I understand from the above, the law frowns upon and cautions trial Judge’s against issuing severest of sanctions - disallowing prosecution’s evidence - in favor of the search for the truth, I can’t help but wonder did Judge L issue the severe sanction due to asking the prosecution twice to submit the experts’ testimony and cv’s and basically was annoyed that they didn’t do it after allowing them a second chance, or what??

Don’t get me wrong, I’m as disappointed as anyone that the prosecution ‘blundered’ in the pre-trial proceedings but it still confuses me that the Judge stated he didn’t feel the missteps by the prosecution were willful but decided to issue severe sanction of striking expert witnesses which to my understanding, the law and legal higher ups advise trial Judge’s against doing. So I say again, all considered, Judge L’s ruling seems overly punitive to me, almost as though, had the trial proceeded as scheduled, instilling reasonable doubt before the jury is even seated. Could he not have fined the actual prosecutor/s at fault, and/or called LS into chambers and counseled her about the thin ice she was skating on and demand she turn over the info or else….(can/do trial Judge’s ever do that?).

I mean, this is about protecting the People of the State of Colorado and the search for the truth in pursuit of justice for the victim, Suzanne Renee Moorman Morphew, and so I can’t help but feel the Judge either felt he needed to punish the prosecution after granting them more time to produce and/or was afraid the defense would file an appeal if he didn’t issue a severe sanction.

At any rate, I suppose it’s water under the bridge at this point, but can I just say that if new evidence comes to light/Suzanne’s remains are found and BM is re-arrested and charges re-filed (hopefully, fingers crossed), I think it would be best if a Special Prosecutor, the likes of a Dan May or Matt Murphy is assigned to the case to ensure the case/the evidence in it’s totality, is presented correctly at a future trial so that Suzanne ultimately receives the justice she so rightfully deserves.

When the Colorado District Attorney Fails to Turn Over Key Evidence – What Will Happen?


All of the above IMHOO

#FINDSUZANNE
#BRINGSUZANNEHOME
#JUSTICEFORSUZANNE

ETA-clarity

Brilliant job of pulling all this together. I very much agree with your analysis.

It's good to see common sense stated in the rules as preferred practice to ensure the search for truth is not impeded unfairly.

I'm for truth, no matter who tells it. I'm for justice, no matter who it's for or against. - Malcolm X

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

I cant imagine what he is telling his daughters,.

I can.

He’s telling them some combination of: your mom cheated on me and ran away with another man, your mom didn’t love us, your mom didn’t love god like I do, your mom ran away to Ecuador with the man she’s been cheating on me, someone abducted your mom and killed her, your mom was depressed and committed suicide in a location we haven’t yet found, your mom got into a bike accident and a predator picked her up on the road, the DA has dismissed my case, look, they know I’m innocent and that’s why they dismissed my case!

 

[WingsOverTX]

@Seattle1 <snipped & bbm from your post #1000 on the last thread>

The defense also requested release of Morphew’s property gathered as part of the investigation.

Lama asked defense attorneys to work with the DA’s office and detail what specific items might be released and what would continue to be held as part of the investigation.

@FOX21News April 19, 2022

Can you even begin to imagine how that meeting might go??!

Or which side brought the cookies and milk?

 

[Abraham Cab]

I can.

He’s telling them some combination of: your mom cheated on me and ran away with another man, your mom didn’t love us, your mom didn’t love god like I do, your mom ran away to Ecuador with the man she’s been cheating on me, someone abducted your mom and killed her, your mom was depressed and committed suicide in a location we haven’t yet found, your mom got into a bike accident and a predator picked her up on the road, the DA has dismissed my case, look, they know I’m innocent and that’s why they dismissed my case!

Vile

Very similar to alot of toxic ex's.

 

[susiQ]

What Bare hasn’t begun to realize is that his “heyday” is long past its’ best before date. He’s living a dream that has long since expired. He thinks he’s still “sexy” and some kind of “catch” in his high end macho truck. Ewww. Pass me a bag for the vomit please! What he is, is repulsive on every level to any rational, critical thinking woman. Which brings me to IE. What the heck was SHE thinking?? I get he’s her pay check but that obscene production was quite unnecessary.