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
That “allegedly” comment came from Jane, who is Iris’ partner in crime here. And lol, yeah, allegedly BAM but definitely had coffee that morning.

I mean, she would have had coffee that morning, just not the morning Iris and Jane are referring to.

And don’t forget the biking clothes that she “dressed herself in.”

The fact that the sweatshirt wasn’t “biking clothes,” notwithstanding.
I was trying to find the original quote but good catch I had forgotten it was her associate with the allegedly thingy.

And everyone wears a hoodie while biking as it helps with the aerodynamics... LOL

Investigators need to focus on the people who have access to those drugs — veterinarians, wildlife officers, ranchers — rather than her client, Eytan said.

“My hope is investigators are tracking down veterinary records,” she said.

Suzanne Morphew’s bicycling clothes were found with her body, according to the autopsy report. A bullet also was found near her remains, Eytan said
.

The autopsy also confirms that she put on her mountain bike clothes and was either getting ready for, or was already on her morning bike ride, when she was abducted, allegedly drugged, and buried 50 miles south of their home.
 
I don't think it would be stupid IF their case supports manslaughter "better" and they feel it would more likely end in a conviction. I suggest prosecution's main intent is to convince all the jury members to vote guilty and to get BM in prison. In Colorado manslaughter occurs when someone recklessly causes another person's death. We have no idea if BM injected Suzanne with BAM through her port -- that is speculation on how one way BAM may have gotten into her system.
Well, the way he injected her doesn’t matter. It was reckless yes. But also intentional and premeditated. A prosecutor charging only manslaughter is not worth their pay.
 
Exactly, he even admitted it made him look bad, and it helped form the theory that he tranquilized Suzanne.

I’m just glad that Iris can’t claim it was planted anymore. I mean she can, and I’m sure she will, but it’s beyond silly based on the autopsy results, which even she is not disputing.
BM's attorney is going to use the 3rd party culprit defense. This defense is especially effective when police don't follow up on inconsistencies that don't point to the obvious subject, where police work is sub-par or incompetent, there is a conflict of interest or conspiracy, or when the evidence needed to tell their story is complex to present and allows the defense to easily confuse. Several of these elements are at play here.

The new DA must address all of those avenues before brining this back to court.

While I personally feel the evidence is overwhelming, a lot of what we know about this case may not be admissible in the next trial. This could be difficult to re-try so I hope they take their time.
 
Barry's depo is going to be lit!

Of course that's pure fanfic by me. He can never give any depo now. That 10% chance he'd be stupid enough is down to 0%. He'd have to plead the 5th but then much of the case collapses - IMO
Yes!!
Obviously his attorneys knew that before Suzanne’s body was even found, so was their end game a settlement or what?

I don't think this got much media attention in April 2023 but this was probably the most desperate move yet by the defense:

IE filed a Motion last spring requesting the court to limit public access to the evidence and seal the documents, pursuant to Rule 55.1.

Nearly a year after the case was dismissed without prejudice, 11th Judicial District Court Judge Amanda Hunter denied the motions to limit public access, unsealing the documents.

“While it may be legally possible for Mr. Morphew to be tried in this matter, whether and when he will be tried is a matter of speculation,” Hunter said in her court order. “The arguments advanced by Mr. Morphew that relate to the proximity of trial and the ability to impanel a jury are significantly weakened by the dismissal of charges.”

IE then asked for a hearing, and this is where she went off the rails: IE somehow came up with the notion that Judge Lama's Order dismissing BM's case without prejudice, (i.e., can be retried), had an expiration date!

Here, IE wanted the Court to somehow change BM's dismissal from without prejudice to with prejudice--(i.e., cannot be retried), in a move to protect BM's civil rights!

Filing the civil suit wasn't going to come without any risk to BM or the accusations thrown at him in a case that has been dismissed without prejudice! I dunno but it seems to me that IE may have let her ego and personal agenda ("PEP"), get in the way of exercising sound judgment.

Of course, up until then, BM has had the right to remain silent throughout this entire process. However, when he brings a lawsuit, he's giving up that right to remains silent, and even more charges being filed going forward.

Loew says it's entirely possible that each defendant hires a different attorney, and if Barry Morphew has to go through multiple different depositions, his story will have to stay the same through all of them.

"If they named 50 people, that's 50 depositions that his story has to remain consistent, accurate and foolproof," Loew said.

The idea of BM sitting for 30+ depositions, and remaining consistent, accurate, and foolproof is laughable!

Now, in a motion filed on April 18, elected District Attorney Linda Stanley states that Morphew's Attorney Iris Eytan is asking for a judge to set a date when this dismissal ruling can be changed. Stanley argues in the motion that, "Crim. P. Rule 55.1(7) in no way states a court can change a dismissal without prejudice to a dismissal with prejudice at a date certain," Stanley's motion reads.

13 Investigates spoke with Colorado Springs attorney Jeremy Loew, who states this kind of change in ruling would be "almost unheard of."
 
Remarkable that a detective would plant a sheath but not bother to roll it around on a sweaty muscle tank of Barry's before thinking to plant it in the dryer while simultaneously having the powers of divination to know Suzanne's body would be recovered and contain BAM.

What a ridiculous claim by IE! What would the motivation be? I know IE would have said something about "supporting their theory" but that only works of Suzanne's body is never recovered and the Toxicology report from her bone marrow doesn't make IE look really stoopid for asserting it was planted.

JMO
What is even more incroyable, if the investigator planted the sheath in the dryer, he would have had to have been an accomplished, gold medal level, clairvoyant to foresee that 3 and a half years later Suzanne’s remains would show the presence of animal tranquilizers in her bone marrow.
 
Just finished watching closing arguments for the KR trial and knowing BM's defense has no burden to prove anything (as with KR's defense), I can't help wondering if BM's defense will intentionally go after the investigators and prosecutors-- using the allegations from their Civil lawsuit as their guide, all designed to promote reasonable doubt. It's not like they can promote proving BM being is innocent.

What will they do -- all in the name of promoting reasonable doubt:
  • Call defense witnesses to promote distrust of the investigators, prosecutors, and "planted" evidence. There's at least one Brady letter I know of-- i.e., Cahill.
  • IF LS is disbarred and resigns as DA, call witnesses about the OARC investigation, because IE is really going to want to take credit here.
  • Call defense witness to support unknown DNA is the SODI.
While I know that the defense can't call witnesses to testify about evidence not in the trial, I don't know how this works under a once dismissed case.

More than anything, I can't help thinking that IE has had an idea about how she would tie the Civil lawsuit to BM's criminal trial, given she filed it so soon after the dismissal. It's really bugging me!

I mean, IE had to know that SM's body could/would be discovered at any time since it was in the Motion to dismiss -- albeit the location was incorrect.

I just don't think IE would have gambled on the spot she's in right now where BM is exposed to being called for 30+ depositions, if she didn't already have a plan in place for if/when SM's remains recovered.

And if it was only about the money, I still can't see where there would be a settlement offer without first deposing BM. MOO
 
Just finished watching closing arguments for the KR trial and knowing BM's defense has no burden to prove anything (as with KR's defense), I can't help wondering if BM's defense will intentionally go after the investigators and prosecutors-- using the allegations from their Civil lawsuit as their guide, all designed to promote reasonable doubt. It's not like they can promote proving BM being is innocent.

What will they do -- all in the name of promoting reasonable doubt:
  • Call defense witnesses to promote distrust of the investigators, prosecutors, and "planted" evidence. There's at least one Brady letter I know of-- i.e., Cahill.
  • IF LS is disbarred and resigns as DA, call witnesses about the OARC investigation, because IE is really going to want to take credit here.
  • Call defense witness to support unknown DNA is the SODI.
While I know that the defense can't call witnesses to testify about evidence not in the trial, I don't know how this works under a once dismissed case.

More than anything, I can't help thinking that IE has had an idea about how she would tie the Civil lawsuit to BM's criminal trial, given she filed it so soon after the dismissal. It's really bugging me!

I mean, IE had to know that SM's body could/would be discovered at any time since it was in the Motion to dismiss -- albeit the location was incorrect.

I just don't think IE would have gambled on the spot she's in right now where BM is exposed to being called for 30+ depositions, if she didn't already have a plan in place for if/when SM's remains recovered.

And if it was only about the money, I still can't see where there would be a settlement offer without first deposing BM. MOO

I'm with you on all that.

Maybe she thought she could continue to shock and awe, get settlements which she could conflate with truth, and then use all of it to somehow get 'out' of 'without' out of 'without prejudice' so Barry could never be tried again. That would have been quite the coup.

JMO
 
Yes!!


I don't think this got much media attention in April 2023 but this was probably the most desperate move yet by the defense:

IE filed a Motion last spring requesting the court to limit public access to the evidence and seal the documents, pursuant to Rule 55.1.

Nearly a year after the case was dismissed without prejudice, 11th Judicial District Court Judge Amanda Hunter denied the motions to limit public access, unsealing the documents.

“While it may be legally possible for Mr. Morphew to be tried in this matter, whether and when he will be tried is a matter of speculation,” Hunter said in her court order. “The arguments advanced by Mr. Morphew that relate to the proximity of trial and the ability to impanel a jury are significantly weakened by the dismissal of charges.”

IE then asked for a hearing, and this is where she went off the rails: IE somehow came up with the notion that Judge Lama's Order dismissing BM's case without prejudice, (i.e., can be retried), had an expiration date!

Here, IE wanted the Court to somehow change BM's dismissal from without prejudice to with prejudice--(i.e., cannot be retried), in a move to protect BM's civil rights!

Filing the civil suit wasn't going to come without any risk to BM or the accusations thrown at him in a case that has been dismissed without prejudice! I dunno but it seems to me that IE may have let her ego and personal agenda ("PEP"), get in the way of exercising sound judgment.

Of course, up until then, BM has had the right to remain silent throughout this entire process. However, when he brings a lawsuit, he's giving up that right to remains silent, and even more charges being filed going forward.



The idea of BM sitting for 30+ depositions, and remaining consistent, accurate, and foolproof is laughable!
BBM. He couldn't even get through a 26-second self-produced and self-determined-when-ready-to-be-released-for-publication video without seriously screwing up.

"OH, Suzanne (shakes head)."

God's watching, Barry. And he's not pleased.
 
Just finished watching closing arguments for the KR trial and knowing BM's defense has no burden to prove anything (as with KR's defense), I can't help wondering if BM's defense will intentionally go after the investigators and prosecutors-- using the allegations from their Civil lawsuit as their guide, all designed to promote reasonable doubt. It's not like they can promote proving BM being is innocent.

What will they do -- all in the name of promoting reasonable doubt:
  • Call defense witnesses to promote distrust of the investigators, prosecutors, and "planted" evidence. There's at least one Brady letter I know of-- i.e., Cahill.
  • IF LS is disbarred and resigns as DA, call witnesses about the OARC investigation, because IE is really going to want to take credit here.
  • Call defense witness to support unknown DNA is the SODI.
While I know that the defense can't call witnesses to testify about evidence not in the trial, I don't know how this works under a once dismissed case.

More than anything, I can't help thinking that IE has had an idea about how she would tie the Civil lawsuit to BM's criminal trial, given she filed it so soon after the dismissal. It's really bugging me!

I mean, IE had to know that SM's body could/would be discovered at any time since it was in the Motion to dismiss -- albeit the location was incorrect.

I just don't think IE would have gambled on the spot she's in right now where BM is exposed to being called for 30+ depositions, if she didn't already have a plan in place for if/when SM's remains recovered.

And if it was only about the money, I still can't see where there would be a settlement offer without first deposing BM. MOO

Yes - I've think we are seeing this in other big cases ripe with conspiracy. Defences are looking to Iris and at the KR trial to see how you can mobilise a broader public support if you have the right case

Key to it, is to use your filings and pressers (if not gagged) but especially surrogates to drive a broader narrative about the case - even if you can't ultimately get this evidence in at trial.

In some way the civil suit already did it's job, as well.

She's managed to elevate what are relatively boring (serious) administrative failings into allegations of corruption and fitting up. She directly accused the FBI especially of using 'fabricated' evidence to stitch Barry up. We know if isn't true, but it requires reading all the pleadings in detail which we know the media mostly won't do.

I think you are correct that she will be all in on it now. What else does she have?

IMO
 
I'm with you on all that.

Maybe she thought she could continue to shock and awe, get settlements which she could conflate with truth, and then use all of it to somehow get 'out' of 'without' out of 'without prejudice' so Barry could never be tried again. That would have been quite the coup.

JMO

She was probably correct she could get a settlement out of the state given LS vulnerability IMO.
 
She was probably correct she could get a settlement out of the state given LS vulnerability IMO.
The gist of the OARC charges against Stanley seem to be about neglect and malfeasance, not the kind of willful and malicious behavior that would abrogate her immunity from civil claims. Claims against the other defendants are very weak: they won't survive the motions to dismiss, either. As we have seen, the allegations are elaborate sophistries, intended to create the illusion of a corrupt investigation. If the judge is paying attention, he could dismiss them for failing to state a claim.

Even if some defendants remain in the civil case after the MTDs are decided, they can point to the empty chairs (Grusing and Harris) as the culpable ones, among many other defenses.

Despite its length and detail, Morphew's lawsuit is very weak IMO. I think any hope for an early settlement offer vaporized with the discovery of Suzanne's remains. But I think the lawsuit was part of a Morphew's PR strategy, to change the narrative about him that was created by the publication of the arrest affidavit. It has served that purpose even if there is no settlement offer from the defendants.
 
Quick question, would DNA survive a wash and dry cycle?
I recall from other cases that DNA sometimes can be recovered from fabric after washing, but it depends on the fabric type, and what detergent was used. As @GatorFL points out, bleach would destroy the DNA. Fabric absorbs DNA with perspiration and body oils, but I am sure plastic does not. I doubt the DNA on the syringe cap survived the wash. It's most likely touch DNA from the gloves of the officer who found it IMO.

All MOO
 
DBM. question already answered.
 
Last edited:
I was trying to find the original quote but good catch I had forgotten it was her associate with the allegedly thingy.

And everyone wears a hoodie while biking as it helps with the aerodynamics... LOL

Investigators need to focus on the people who have access to those drugs — veterinarians, wildlife officers, ranchers — rather than her client, Eytan said.

“My hope is investigators are tracking down veterinary records,” she said.

Suzanne Morphew’s bicycling clothes were found with her body, according to the autopsy report. A bullet also was found near her remains, Eytan said
.

The autopsy also confirms that she put on her mountain bike clothes and was either getting ready for, or was already on her morning bike ride, when she was abducted, allegedly drugged, and buried 50 miles south of their home.

Iris’s directives to LE to investigate any and all men who live in Chaffee County, along with any and all shirttail relatives of the glovebox mechanic for the murder of SUZANNE instead of her client BM who had the means (BAM in his garage), motive (SUZANNE had one foot out the door to leave him, and he couldn’t afford that), and opportunity (home alone with SUZANNE part of that Mother’s Day week and all of the weekend) are getting VERY tiresome.

I keep hearing blah blah blah.

I have followed this case from the beginning and to my eyes, LE has consistently followed the evidence, the trail of which keeps leading to BM. Hard to follow evidence to anyone else when it doesn’t lead to anyone else.

IMO
 
I just keep thinking what a shame it is that Suzanne's murder has taken so many legal digressions, having nothing to do with her actual murder.
Hopefully competent legal minds will soon prevail, Barry will get a fair trial and be sent away to prison forever.

JMO
 
Last edited:
Also, while BM’s shorts (with pockets) were found in the dryer with the sheets from the older daughter’s bed, that does not necessarily mean those shorts (and the needle cap, if in the pocket of the shorts) went through a wash cycle before being placed in the dryer. For example, BM could have hand-washed or hand-rinsed them or even could have taken a shower with them on and then tossed them into the dryer with whatever was already sitting in the dryer.
If he hand-washed his shorts and used bleach or another strong cleaning agent to clear any spilled BAM or even blood, that might explain why his hotel room stunk of chlorine.

jmo
 
I suspect he used spa chemicals and wound up smelling like a swimming pool himself. What he used them on, we may never know. Himself intentionally, maybe. He was very likely the source of the cadaverine, transfered to his trailer and Bobcat. If Suzanne was murdered close to 3 pm, and he was in Moffat at 1-2am, pushing 3am, there's the 10, 11, 12 hours for cadaverine to develop. Maybe Barry, being true to his cheap self, tried to salvage a Yeti cooler. Bleach it real good.

He transferred her body to Moffat in the middle of the night -- reasonable to assume he transported her  in something.

He must have had quite a pile of items to dispose of once he got back to the house. I wonder if he stood right there by the trailer when he stripped off his boots and burial clothes. Camo jacket... and Suzanne's biking jacket, helmet, maybe the cooler coffin because he just couldn't trust it, tranq materials, who knows what all from the house, files certainly, the brown towel, maybe some sheets, dump it all in a nice 10 gallon pot.

Busy B Barry was surprisingly organized, and for 4 in the morning. Nearly thought of everything. Except dinner on Saturday. Except the door frame. Except the syringe cap. Except a credible narrative. Except CCTV. Except digital forensics.

All the things he tried so cleverly to do to cover for what he'd done become the very things which will so rightly convict him.

He told on himself.

JMO
 
Yes - I've think we are seeing this in other big cases ripe with conspiracy. Defences are looking to Iris and at the KR trial to see how you can mobilise a broader public support if you have the right case

Key to it, is to use your filings and pressers (if not gagged) but especially surrogates to drive a broader narrative about the case - even if you can't ultimately get this evidence in at trial.

In some way the civil suit already did it's job, as well.

She's managed to elevate what are relatively boring (serious) administrative failings into allegations of corruption and fitting up. She directly accused the FBI especially of using 'fabricated' evidence to stitch Barry up. We know if isn't true, but it requires reading all the pleadings in detail which we know the media mostly won't do.

I think you are correct that she will be all in on it now. What else does she have?

IMO
You are certainly right about the strategy.

I think it's important to note that this appears to have been Stanley's strategy as well. The extraordinarily long and detailed arrest affidavit includes a great deal of inflammatory information that would not be admitted in evidence at a trial, including but not limited to attacks on Morphew's character as a husband and as a businessman. Stanley's media comments took place in the context of this affidavit's release and the press coverage it generated.

Judge Murphy pointed out the potential downside early in the case, and offered the prosecution an opportunity to amend the affidavit before it's release, to mitigate the likelihood that he would have to change venue or even dismiss the case because the inevitable pre-trial publicity could so taint the jury pool that Morphew could not get a fair trial. Stanley declined, and her public comments in the context of the publicity and its effect on the local jury pool provided Lama with the grounds to change venue. The prosecutor's PR strategy provided Eytan with the opportunity ethically to wage her own public relations campaign, in order to counter the prosecution's. We can debate whether she went too far, but the prosecution opened the door.

We may be seeing the beginning of a shift away from this approach in the Idaho case of State v Kohberger, where the arrest warrant was concise but compelling, and where the prosecution and defense jointly have asked the court to limit public access to the documents and even some hearings in the case to protect the defendant's right to a fair trial and, from the prosecution perspective, to assure that the people of the community where the murders took place get a chance to judge the guilt or innocence of the defendant (to the extent possible in such a sensational case).
 
Last edited:

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
76
Guests online
1,912
Total visitors
1,988

Forum statistics

Threads
600,322
Messages
18,106,731
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top