Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #62 *ARREST*

[borndem]

Yes - you are right, much better way of putting it. "If these facts are shown at trial, he did the crimes he is accused of."

But the Judge clearly felt that the facts sworn to by LE were super good enough for the purpose of arrest.



It can also be "I simply can't stand this person any more and would nearly anything to be away from them; in fact it would be better if they just died..." (then more thoughts enter in - that's premeditation as well).

Life insurance policy? No problem with selling the house -- if he anticipated that she would object.
So many law-breakers think they are smarter than LE -- the detectives, prosecutors, DNA results in many cases, cameras, etc., etc. The LE side -- the people with their tests and years of experience, and good-ol' common sense -- are usually no match for these law-breakers on all levels.

 

[Chelly]

The reminded me because I had exactly the same question.
But... apparently her house equity was about the size of a life insurance policy.

Sadly, I think SM's daughters did not/will not benefit from house equity. I had been ruminating about death benefits to the girls.

 

[Chelly]

Last day of exams was May 8 in 2020 for the older daughter. The timing made perfect sense to me but there is no way I can say who planned the getaway. Could have been the daughters just as easy as Barry or Suzanne. I think we'll find out eventually especially if the daughters "being away" is part of the circumstantial timeline for the prosecution.

Certainly! I believe BM encouraged or supported the girls absence that weekend and took advantage of his window of opportunity.

 

[nyvictoria]

I believe Judge Murphy’s concern for M & M (daughters) is genuine and valid:

“Hey Daughter! Daughter! Hi, I am from the Daily Mail of London. The police say your father hacked your mom to death and hid her body somewhere! Do you have any idea where your mon’s body might be? People want to know!” Etc etc.

Sure, we do want to know everything about a heart-wrenching case we have been sleuthing day and night for over a year!

But M&M are victims - their mother was hideously murdered!

They need time to reflect, plan, organize and put into place physical and emotional strategies to deal with the horrid new reality which has been thrust upon them.

Lawyers, psychiatrists and yes, publicists must be found, interviewed and hired.

Consider the post-revelation lives of Bernard Madoff’s sons. Both are now dead.

Let M&M have the seven weeks to circle their wagons in preparation for the onslaught of their sorrowful new lives at the center of a roman circus!

Yes, they’re definitely victims, but it shouldn’t be up to the court to protect them from the media.

 

[DizzyB]

Yes, they’re definitely victims, but it shouldn’t be up to the court to protect them from the media.

Dad should have considered how this would affect his daughters before he murdered Mom. The delay is only postponing the inevitable.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Sadly, I think SM's daughters did not/will not benefit from house equity. I had been ruminating about death benefits to the girls.

It would depend on if Suzanne had insurance and how she set up her beneficiaries. If Barry is found guilty I would assume through the slayer laws that insurance would pay out to whomever she listed second I would think. She may have something from the couple years she taught if they kept up the policy. I'm not too worried. Both those families, the Morphews and the Moorman's are going to be there for those girls and will help them sort through everything if their father goes to prison. The oldest finished college so theoretically would have been striking out on her own anyway. We really didn't financially "help" our kids once they graduated college and many parents do not "support" adult children once they graduate from college. The younger one will need help to get through college if only moral support and help with financial aid paperwork and perhaps some financial support from the families.

 

[windrower]

Yes and the defense will do one of two things, they will cast doubt on the circumstantial proof so that a conclusion cannot be drawn or they will show that even if the circumstantial evidence is true it can lead to two or more reasonable conclusions with one being consistent with being innocent.

Some evidence might be consistent with being innocent and also consistent with having a dead wife?

I’ll have to think on that. Or, I need more coffee.

I don't think they have to have a motive legally...but in a strange way I think they will have to at least give impression of a motive since I assume the number one question that will be in jurors minds is "why" a seemingly happy couple with a life that many would envy would suddenly murder his wife. I am very curious how the prosecution will get around it or address that particular monkey in the room so to speak.

I think SUZANNE’s sister, friend, and family will be able to speak about a motive.

Momofthreeboys, I appreciate your thoughtful posts and discerning questions, even if I don’t share your viewpoints.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Momofthreeboys, I appreciate your thoughtful posts and discerning questions, even if I don’t share your viewpoints.

Just think of me as Switzerland....I'm not making up my mind until I hear the evidence I can argue both sides....but in general, most of the forum is doing a bang up job supporting the prosecution and worrying about the girls, so I'm doing my best to keep some balance in the comments.

 

[MsBetsy]

They don't.
But Fallis case was lost by either corrupt or incompetent police detectives.
They went with Fallis statement that his wife committed suicide in front of him and conducted no interviews, no gun residue swabbing and no evidence collection.
Years later at trial it was possible to make witnesses look like fools.

Yes, I've only read a little bit about that case but it seems that comparatively, this investigation has been incredibly thorough. The DA described investigators as "meticulous" in putting it together.

It will be interesting to see how the defense presents their version of the case.

 

[10ofRods]

Last I checked, the had collected $200,000...you can go look at it to see the terms and who is in charge of it (not Barry).

 

[TKG]

Last I checked, the *** had collected $200,000...you can go look at it to see the terms and who is in charge of it (not Barry).

33,552 as of May 5th, the arrest date of BM. BM however, is still a "team member". It is no longer open to donations.

As for the search effort *** set up by PE to assist AM in his search, is 21,418.00

Where did you find $200,000? I'd be interested to see any additional collection sites benefiting a part or parts of this tragedy.

 

[MsBetsy]

33,552 as of May 5th, the arrest date of BM. BM however, is still a "team member". It is no longer open to donations.

As for the search effort *** set up by PE to assist AM in his search, is 21,418.00

Where did you find $200,000?

$200,000 was the reward money, but I think it was a little more than that. Not that it was ever going to be necessary for finding Suzanne. Maybe Barry can ask his friend to donate his share to the defense.

 

[Scootie98]

It would depend on if Suzanne had insurance and how she set up her beneficiaries. If Barry is found guilty I would assume through the slayer laws that insurance would pay out to whomever she listed second I would think. She may have something from the couple years she taught if they kept up the policy. I'm not too worried. Both those families, the Morphews and the Moorman's are going to be there for those girls and will help them sort through everything if their father goes to prison. The oldest finished college so theoretically would have been striking out on her own anyway. We really didn't financially "help" our kids once they graduated college and many parents do not "support" adult children once they graduate from college. The younger one will need help to get through college if only moral support and help with financial aid paperwork and perhaps some financial support from the families.

There's been alot of commentary on "life insurance"...and I would like to help clear up some of the misconceptions that may be out there. First, after 5 to 7 years following the first episode of cancer...a clear medical exam and certification from the doctor that SM is "cancer free"....then she would have been eligible for life insurance by many carriers. Some would have "rated" her...i.e. added premium surcharge...others would have limited the benefit amount available...and others would have underwritten her as fully insurable....as long as other underlying medical conditions did not apply. Secondly, the "named insured" and the "policy owner" do not have to be the same person. My guess is that SM was an insured, and BM owned the policy. Only the policy owner can name or change beneficiaries, and make any other policy changes for that matter. The insured has no rights to the policy unless he or she were also the owner of the policy. There can be "co-owners", where both BM and SM own the policy, but both would have to sign off on changes. Third, privately owned life insurance policies are "non-cancellable, and guaranteed-renewable" as long as the premium is paid, subject to the terms and conditions of the contract. The insurance company cannot arbitrarily change the terms of the policy; and changes must be made by the policy owner. Finally, a return of cancer would have again adversely affected SMs insurability...and she would not have acquired life insurance after a cancer diagnosis unless and until that 5 to 7 year window of "cancer free" life followed. Note: a policy in force after a first bout of cancer cannot be affected by a new bout of cancer. They are mutually exclusive. The only exception to the information above is that there are "guaranteed issue life insurance policies" out there but the limitations, and costs render them marginally useful...so I won't dwell on them. I have no idea about the Morphew's life insurance assets...I can only speculate that Barry would be the driving force in acquiring it, how much, who is insured, beneficiary designations, etc...It would fit his profile, otherwise. As an insured, but not a policy owner...it is also possible that SM was insured, and unaware of how much coverage on her life was in force. That is a possibility.

 

[10ofRods]

33,552 as of May 5th, the arrest date of BM. BM however, is still a "team member". It is no longer open to donations.

As for the search effort *** set up by PE to assist AM in his search, is 21,418.00

Where did you find $200,000?

Read it here on WS. I do know that some people were seeking refunds - so maybe that happened?

(I also read it elsewhere, but I do think that I am not the only one confusing the ^^^ for the reward money).

 

[Deleted member 222031]

Yes, I've only read a little bit about that case but it seems that comparatively, this investigation has been incredibly thorough. The DA described investigators as "meticulous" in putting it together.

It will be interesting to see how the defense presents their version of the case.

@Boxer - The set of facts in the Fallis case is so different from this one.

Yes, his lawyers are BM's defense team but his wife was legally drunk, angry, off her meds for serious mental health issues & had her own gun readily available. It wasn't that hard to establish reasonable doubt, in my view. A juror felt the expert for the prosecution did not give concrete evidence, while the defense's expert did.

To assume BM's lawyers put a murderer back on the streets is a big stretch IMO. It also impugns that jury as triers of the evidence. Again, JMO.

Tom Fallis’ murder trial was an informational overload with an emotional cost for jury foreperson – Greeley Tribune

 

[JosieMae]

I agree with this....but with premeditation...there seems to be a need for motive, i.e. girlfriend, money or simply a new life. While motive does not in and of itself need to be proven, the act of planning to kill requires some specific reasoning to explain its existance. A 'heat of the moment" wouldn't include the same ingredients, imo..

ITA. Do you think the State will be able to supply motive?

(IMO, the odds are good.)

 

[10ofRods]

:

"not relevant to the Court's finding of probable cause" does not equal "irrelevant and/or inadmissable". It is specific to probable cause only, I would think. It doesn't eliminate redacted items from the trial entirely. I would expect anything redacted to be objected to by the defense if and when referenced or introduced in the trial...and the DA will need to present reasons to overrule in order to include certain facts. Being a circumstantial case, there are likely "circumstantial facts" redacted from AA that will find their way into the trial because they are relevant to timelines, physical and forensic evidence, testimony, etc. JMO. This is a case of connecting the dots. The defense wants fewer dots....the DA wants more dots.

Well, maybe. At trial, prosecution may be able to introduce evidence redacted from the AA, if a witness can be produced who will swear to some of it. Of course, my big worry is still about whether what Barry, himself, said, can get in (through the testimony of LE investigators). I've been assured here and on a couple of other forums that yes, that evidence can get in.

You're right - the Judge is speaking only about what he needed for "probable cause," regarding which he specifically says there was enough for probable cause and no reason to release the rest right now.

 

[Scootie98]

ITA. Do you think the State will be able to supply motive?

(IMO, the odds are good.)

the state can certainly describe BM's life with SM....and, based on changes he was making, describe what life facts existed after she disappeared and was presumed dead. That contrast alone suggests motives that that can be surmised. Cash flow is one fact that comes to mind.

 

[10ofRods]

ITA. Do you think the State will be able to supply motive?

(IMO, the odds are good.)

State doesn't need to - even for pre-meditation. A classic example of pre-meditation is strangulation. It takes about 10 minutes to kill a human with this method - and many a jury (or judge) has characterized this as plenty of time to realize what one is doing and cease doing it (as opposed to throwing something at someone in fury when you see them doing something awful or provocative). Going to get a gun, as opposed to already having one on one's person when the passion-inducing event occurs, is pre-meditation.

Going to buy bleach or some other needed component of a cover-up = pre-meditation. Motive is not the key factor in pre-meditation/deliberation.

Going to do a "mechanical thingie" to a Bobcat that is about to be used as part of a murder/cover up = pre-meditation.

I think there's a lot more, as well. As to jury's perceptions, well, if the DA loads the "premeditation bucket" with a bunch of stuff that only Barry could counter (that Barry created an opportunity for murder by sending the girls away, that Barry bought bleach ahead of time, that Barry set elements of his fake alibi in motion on Friday and Saturday morning...pretty bleak for Barry). If in addition, it turns out to be true that security cameras were turned off or that an extra bike was purchased for the staging...wow...jurors are going to look at that pile of stuff and I wouldn't be surprised if they conclude it's enough. If it turns out that Barry was mostly not living at home until that fateful weekend, that's bad too. There's so much that could come out - I'm confident in the DA's assessment of pre-meditation and think they have more than enough.

 

[Scootie98]

State doesn't need to - even for pre-meditation. A classic example of pre-meditation is strangulation. It takes about 10 minutes to kill a human with this method - and many a jury (or judge) has characterized this as plenty of time to realize what one is doing and cease doing it (as opposed to throwing something at someone in fury when you see them doing something awful or provocative). Going to get a gun, as opposed to already having one on one's person when the passion-inducing event occurs, is pre-meditation.

Going to buy bleach or some other needed component of a cover-up = pre-meditation. Motive is not the key factor in pre-meditation/deliberation.

Going to do a "mechanical thingie" to a Bobcat that is about to be used as part of a murder/cover up = pre-meditation.

I think there's a lot more, as well. As to jury's perceptions, well, if the DA loads the "premeditation bucket" with a bunch of stuff that only Barry could counter (that Barry created an opportunity for murder by sending the girls away, that Barry bought bleach ahead of time, that Barry set elements of his fake alibi in motion on Friday and Saturday morning...pretty bleak for Barry). If in addition, it turns out to be true that security cameras were turned off or that an extra bike was purchased for the staging...wow...jurors are going to look at that pile of stuff and I wouldn't be surprised if they conclude it's enough. If it turns out that Barry was mostly not living at home until that fateful weekend, that's bad too. There's so much that could come out - I'm confident in the DA's assessment of pre-meditation and think they have more than enough.

agree with this...one point of order, however...I tend to think the bleach was purchased after the fact. I don't think he needed it, or even thought about it, until the damage was done..and he decided...I need some bleach for this mess. But I speculate.