Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o prejudice* *found in 2023* #114

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
50-50 feels about right to me too.

Of course a lot depends upon what the full details of the autopsy revealed..
We simply do not know but if, as you rightly say . the resources and staffing levels are not in place there is no chance it will succeed..
We know the full details of the autopsy, and that the results provided a smoking gun that no one thought existed, let alone would be found.

While we don’t know if those items found will be helpful, they’re not necessary to end any debate as to Barry’s guilt.

His attorneys tells us how desperate Barry’s situation is, by claiming that caffeine proved she had a coffee on Mother’s Day (not how it works), and gaslighting about the clothing recovered proving that she dressed herself that morning (not biking clothing, and you couldn’t say who dressed her, much less she dressed herself),

Iris did not dispute the presence of BAM, a chemical Barry owned, recently claimed to have used, and admitted to possibly disposing of. A chemical the prosecution long based their theory of the case around.

Instead, she claims a rancher or hunter used that chemical on a woman whose husband was the only one with motive, means, and opportunity.

You have a chemical used in a murder that almost certainly has no precedent in the history of American justice, and some other guy did it?

It is just a coincidence their marriage was collapsing, and Suzanne had just asked for a divorce.

It is just a coincidence that Suzanne went dark forever when Barry returned home that Saturday afternoon, breaking all known patterns.

It is just a coincidence that Suzanne’s phone last pinged when Barry was leaving that Sunday morning.

It is just a coincidence that Barry’s phone and truck show activity when he claimed to have been sleeping.

It is just a coincidence that Barry left the house over 12 hours early, for a job he couldn’t work, at a place he didn’t need to be that day.

It is just a coincidence that Barry pulled a Fotis Dulos, making 5 trash dumps.

It is just a coincidence that Barry lied about his movements, claiming he traveled back and forth from the wall all day, when he went there once for mere minutes, and spent the rest of the day in his hotel room.

It is just a coincidence that before Barry should have known any crime was committed, he lied to the Ritters about where he was and who he was with.

I could go on and on with these, but my point is that this case is simple in regards to who did it.

It’s a high profile, career making case for Anne Kelley, and all the pieces are there. There are obviously things that are going to delay the process (volume of evidence, making sure you have the resources, etc).

Personally, I believe the only way there’s not a round two is if Barry suddenly drops dead before then.
 
VRabbrevbm to save ink

Personally, I believe the only way there’s not a round two is if Barry suddenly drops dead before then.

Would not a deus ex machina-styled lightning bolt sort matters out exquisitely?
Too, striking from heaven, one could not rule out Suzanne having something of a hand in it...
As for The Eytan's unavoidable eulogy...well, I'd contentedly let it wash over me :)
 
Last edited:
In the Gilgo Beach case this was said on charging by County Deputy Police Commissioner Anthony Carter

I knew that this person was a demon,” Carter said. “The fact that we are able to bring some closure and some peace to the families as well as take a violent person off of the streets is rewarding, I think, for everyone.”

Again - not a fan of saying anything, but there is a bunch of handwringing going on about the title of the podcast IMO.

 
We know the full details of the autopsy, and that the results provided a smoking gun that no one thought existed, let alone would be found.

While we don’t know if those items found will be helpful, they’re not necessary to end any debate as to Barry’s guilt.

His attorneys tells us how desperate Barry’s situation is, by claiming that caffeine proved she had a coffee on Mother’s Day (not how it works), and gaslighting about the clothing recovered proving that she dressed herself that morning (not biking clothing, and you couldn’t say who dressed her, much less she dressed herself),

Iris did not dispute the presence of BAM, a chemical Barry owned, recently claimed to have used, and admitted to possibly disposing of. A chemical the prosecution long based their theory of the case around.

Instead, she claims a rancher or hunter used that chemical on a woman whose husband was the only one with motive, means, and opportunity.

You have a chemical used in a murder that almost certainly has no precedent in the history of American justice, and some other guy did it?

It is just a coincidence their marriage was collapsing, and Suzanne had just asked for a divorce.

It is just a coincidence that Suzanne went dark forever when Barry returned home that Saturday afternoon, breaking all known patterns.

It is just a coincidence that Suzanne’s phone last pinged when Barry was leaving that Sunday morning.

It is just a coincidence that Barry’s phone and truck show activity when he claimed to have been sleeping.

It is just a coincidence that Barry left the house over 12 hours early, for a job he couldn’t work, at a place he didn’t need to be that day.

It is just a coincidence that Barry pulled a Fotis Dulos, making 5 trash dumps.

It is just a coincidence that Barry lied about his movements, claiming he traveled back and forth from the wall all day, when he went there once for mere minutes, and spent the rest of the day in his hotel room.

It is just a coincidence that before Barry should have known any crime was committed, he lied to the Ritters about where he was and who he was with.

I could go on and on with these, but my point is that this case is simple in regards to who did it.

It’s a high profile, career making case for Anne Kelley, and all the pieces are there. There are obviously things that are going to delay the process (volume of evidence, making sure you have the resources, etc).

Personally, I believe the only way there’s not a round two is if Barry suddenly drops dead before then.
I suppose Barry could kill himself. Fotis Dulos did. Somehow I can’t imagine BM doing that. I think he would rather spend every last dollar on his high priced lawyer. Fotis didn’t have money, only the illusion of it.
 
In the Gilgo Beach case this was said on charging by County Deputy Police Commissioner Anthony Carter



Again - not a fan of saying anything, but there is a bunch of handwringing going on about the title of the podcast IMO.

@mrjitty
Indeed. So much hand wringing. Over the title of a podcast. As if..
I appreciate the sample you cited and would venture a guess there are many more examples out there very similar.
I am also not a fan of people in positions of power over sharing - but C’mon.
I am also not a fan of “what aboutism”
But in this case I am jumping on the bandwagon.
Closer to me iirc the DA in the Karen Read case has also said things I would deem prejudicial. I will confirm when in front of the computer. JMO.
 
In the Gilgo Beach case this was said on charging by County Deputy Police Commissioner Anthony Carter



Again - not a fan of saying anything, but there is a bunch of handwringing going on about the title of the podcast IMO.

Absolutely mrjitty!!!!..… IMO let the court filings and court record and docket (sealed and otherwise) and evidence in court speak for itself. Nothing more! No one needs to send anything by smoke signals or otherwise to IE or any other defense counsel in this case.

And when I heard recently that someone for the state of NY was going to speak on a radio interview about the RH and LISK case I cringed. By example we need only look to the SM death and the BM case in CO and what occurred there. What is the old adage: ‘loose lips sink ships’? Sounds right to me. MOO
 
@mrjitty
Indeed. So much hand wringing. Over the title of a podcast. As if..
I appreciate the sample you cited and would venture a guess there are many more examples out there very similar.
I am also not a fan of people in positions of power over sharing - but C’mon.
I am also not a fan of “what aboutism”
But in this case I am jumping on the bandwagon.
Closer to me iirc the DA in the Karen Read case has also said things I would deem prejudicial. I will confirm when in front of the computer. JMO.

it’s a tricky area IMO. LS already filed charges that flat out say BM murdered his wife with animal tranqs. that’s pretty evil so i am not sure she added much if anything.

this is kind of why i think the state should say nothing other than we’ve charged this guy and thanks for all the hard work.

the difficulty is these days that we have defence teams out their trying to contaminate the jury pool with conspiracies while the state is not supposed to say anything.

MOO
 
@mrjitty
Indeed. So much hand wringing. Over the title of a podcast. As if..
I appreciate the sample you cited and would venture a guess there are many more examples out there very similar.
I am also not a fan of people in positions of power over sharing - but C’mon.
I am also not a fan of “what aboutism”
But in this case I am jumping on the bandwagon.
Closer to me iirc the DA in the Karen Read case has also said things I would deem prejudicial. I will confirm when in front of the computer. JMO.
Shhh-- it's Colorado that is bursting at county lines with corrupt DA's and Prosecutors! Best don't go shining light beyond the 303. 1719081958147.png
 
As I said, simple logic. He controlled, manipulated, gaslighted, abused and then murdered his wife.

And still doesn't see what he did wrong.

Struck her down because she wasn't right on the head.

Done it his whole life. Deer, dear. Never misses.

I'm telling you -- he's a dime a dozen -- she wouldn't listen to his reason so he silenced her.

Not a unique storyline.

What's unique is BAM.

The very thing he had access to and knew how to use.

But permanently silencing a partner? He's got a lot of company there.

Sadly.

JMO
 
it’s a tricky area IMO. LS already filed charges that flat out say BM murdered his wife with animal tranqs. that’s pretty evil so i am not sure she added much if anything.

this is kind of why i think the state should say nothing other than we’ve charged this guy and thanks for all the hard work.

the difficulty is these days that we have defence teams out their trying to contaminate the jury pool with conspiracies while the state is not supposed to say anything.

MOO
For those of you following the Karen Read trial here is a clip of my Norfolk County DA Michael Morrissey, talking about that case and the different players. Some of what he says has been shown to be untrue during trial but if you are looking for prejudicial this is what it looks like IMO.
What Linda did was go on a podcast -she said nothing to prejudice the case - very bad optics. These Bad optics were not prejudicial imo. Optics have become reality and that concerns me.
Her second transgression was not to understand that the reporter she was dealing with was a snake. That her comments were not going to be off record. She did not read the situation clearly or understand the value of alliances. The reporter made a choice that he should regret forever, to put his scoop and his career before Justice for a baby and publish what Linda said “off record”.
I call that bottom feeding. Some might call it strategic and/ or capitalizing on an opportunity which of course it is for this one reporter but where’s the right or wrong or greater good? The choices we make shape our lives.
Win at all costs and let a killer go free?
Gives me the ick.

Evidently this reporter was well schooled in board games growing up. I bet he also watched a lot of reality tv.
JMO.
https://www.nbcboston.com/news/loca...s-video-statement-on-karen-read-case/3121535/
 
Understood. Just wanted to point out that she does have supporters. Grosgebauer is another.

It does stink. While everyone is drooling over the investigation into LS, she’s not the one who ultimately failed and betrayed Suzanne. That would be Barry.

While all eyes are on LS, Suzanne Morphew gets lost in the dust.

I will just have to wait for the right Felony Friday to start talking again about justice for Suzanne. Actually, any day that ends in Y works for me.

jmo
LS failed to hold BM to account and according to posters on this thread, on a pretty clear cut case. Ultimately, LS is the reason that justice has not been served for Suzanne
 
@MassGuy mentioned yesterday that Barry didn't even NEED an operable gun to deliver BAM. The smoking gun here is that there maybe wasn't a gun at all.

And THAT might best explain Barry's ridiculous antler story.

And it aligns better with the evidence.

Barry uses a syringe to extract BAM from the vial. Puts the syringe sheath back on it until just prior to use. Sheath goes in the pocket....

No one else from the home ever saw the state of the home to identify what may have been missing or out of place. We believe the sheets in the laundry belonged to MM1's bed but we don't know that for sure, don't know what size bed everyone had or whether Barry had to wash sheets, switch sheets, replace sheets, make beds, but it's not impossible that the sheath did get caught up in sheets too, from one of those beds.

Hope we eventide get to see that moment in the interview when LE tells Barry they found something. Then, while he must have been visiting his memory in frames, he had to start talking so he wouldn't, you know, "look guilty". He covers running around the house from point of entry to point of entry with the chipmunk tale including A GUN, covers tranq debris with the antler story including A GUN, avoiding anything to do with Suzanne and his bare hands.

Because that's where the truth sits.

JMO
 
In the Gilgo Beach case this was said on charging by County Deputy Police Commissioner Anthony Carter



Again - not a fan of saying anything, but there is a bunch of handwringing going on about the title of the podcast IMO.

Different states have different standards and enforcement policies. We have yet to see how the prosecutor's public statements will play out, both with respect to the case and its venue, and with respect to ethics enforcement. From what we have seen, this public statement by the prosecutor would have crossed lines in Colorado.
 
Shhh-- it's Colorado that is bursting at county lines with corrupt DA's and Prosecutors! Best don't go shining light beyond the 303. View attachment 512383
If we were to shine a light on other states, I don't doubt that we'd find much the same issues with discovery, poor leadership, unethical and illegal efforts to taint the jury pool. IMO, it's not OK to mock Colorado for doing something about these problems.
 
For those of you following the Karen Read trial here is a clip of my Norfolk County DA Michael Morrissey, talking about that case and the different players. Some of what he says has been shown to be untrue during trial but if you are looking for prejudicial this is what it looks like IMO.
What Linda did was go on a podcast -she said nothing to prejudice the case - very bad optics. These Bad optics were not prejudicial imo. Optics have become reality and that concerns me.
Her second transgression was not to understand that the reporter she was dealing with was a snake. That her comments were not going to be off record. She did not read the situation clearly or understand the value of alliances. The reporter made a choice that he should regret forever, to put his scoop and his career before Justice for a baby and publish what Linda said “off record”.
I call that bottom feeding. Some might call it strategic and/ or capitalizing on an opportunity which of course it is for this one reporter but where’s the right or wrong or greater good? The choices we make shape our lives.
Win at all costs and let a killer go free?
Gives me the ick.

Evidently this reporter was well schooled in board games growing up. I bet he also watched a lot of reality tv.
JMO.
https://www.nbcboston.com/news/loca...s-video-statement-on-karen-read-case/3121535/
Morrissey-- "... hear the evidence at trial...," as he goes on to discuss findings by the ME. He called this presser in August 2023? Wow.
 
For those of you following the Karen Read trial here is a clip of my Norfolk County DA Michael Morrissey, talking about that case and the different players. Some of what he says has been shown to be untrue during trial but if you are looking for prejudicial this is what it looks like IMO.
What Linda did was go on a podcast -she said nothing to prejudice the case - very bad optics. These Bad optics were not prejudicial imo. Optics have become reality and that concerns me.
Her second transgression was not to understand that the reporter she was dealing with was a snake. That her comments were not going to be off record. She did not read the situation clearly or understand the value of alliances. The reporter made a choice that he should regret forever, to put his scoop and his career before Justice for a baby and publish what Linda said “off record”.
I call that bottom feeding. Some might call it strategic and/ or capitalizing on an opportunity which of course it is for this one reporter but where’s the right or wrong or greater good? The choices we make shape our lives.
Win at all costs and let a killer go free?
Gives me the ick.

Evidently this reporter was well schooled in board games growing up. I bet he also watched a lot of reality tv.
JMO.
https://www.nbcboston.com/news/loca...s-video-statement-on-karen-read-case/3121535/
Mr. Morrissey's comments would be allowed in Colorado. He was responding to harassing and prejudicial statements against witnesses in the pending case, as permitted by CRPC Rule 16(c) (see comment 7).

In contrast, Stanley's statements clearly went beyond what is allowed.

I think it's important to remember that Rule 16 is only one of seven professional standards that DA Stanley is alleged to have violated. It may well be that OARC would have sought a sanction less than disbarment if the public statements were the only issue. Most discipline of attorneys - including prosecutors, involves a negotiated private censure after a confidential complaint. This public hearing reflects both the seriousness of the charges in their totality and Stanley's obstinate refusal to accept responsibility. These factors, together with her past disciplinary history, make a serious sanction - suspension or worse - very likely IMO.

MOO.
 
Different states have different standards and enforcement policies. We have yet to see how the prosecutor's public statements will play out, both with respect to the case and its venue, and with respect to ethics enforcement. From what we have seen, this public statement by the prosecutor would have crossed lines in Colorado.

The Model Rules for Professional Conduct by ABA is used by states to adopt their own, and there's seldom little if any variance. Also, I don't think extrajudicial statements by former prosecutors live on in perpetuity. Following the re-arrest, prosecution of BM, that would really be a stretch -- even by BM's defense! MOO
 
I suppose Barry could kill himself. Fotis Dulos did. Somehow I can’t imagine BM doing that. I think he would rather spend every last dollar on his high priced lawyer. Fotis didn’t have money, only the illusion of it.

Anyone can, upon realization that’s “his last stand, nowhere to go”. He surely has the means. But not until he spends all his/Suzanne’s money on defense. JMO.
 
Mr. Morrissey's comments would be allowed in Colorado. He was responding to harassing and prejudicial statements against witnesses in the pending case, as permitted by CRPC Rule 16(c) (see comment 7).

In contrast, Stanley's statements clearly went beyond what is allowed.

I think it's important to remember that Rule 16 is only one of seven professional standards that DA Stanley is alleged to have violated. It may well be that OARC would have sought a sanction less than disbarment if the public statements were the only issue. Most discipline of attorneys - including prosecutors, involves a negotiated private censure after a confidential complaint. This public hearing reflects both the seriousness of the charges in their totality and Stanley's obstinate refusal to accept responsibility. These factors, together with her past disciplinary history, make a serious sanction - suspension or worse - very likely IMO.

MOO.
“Mr. Morrissey's comments would be allowed in Colorado. He was responding to harassing and prejudicial statements against witnesses in the pending case, as permitted by CRPC Rule 16(c) (see comment 7).”
Well DA Morrissey ( who did I mention is said to be under federal investigation ) started off as you say but went way beyond that with many many many other comments later in his rant. IMO.
 
“Mr. Morrissey's comments would be allowed in Colorado. He was responding to harassing and prejudicial statements against witnesses in the pending case, as permitted by CRPC Rule 16(c) (see comment 7).”
Well DA Morrissey ( who did I mention is said to be under federal investigation ) started off as you say but went way beyond that with many many many other comments later in his rant. IMO.
Absolutely. Offering up evidence of the ME and others had nothing to do with the after party witnesses, alleging the town looking at them sideways.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
131
Guests online
1,499
Total visitors
1,630

Forum statistics

Threads
599,280
Messages
18,093,768
Members
230,840
Latest member
Zoyasalas
Back
Top