Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #79 *ARREST*

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #121
I 100% agree with this. A big chart with lies on one side and proven evidence of that lie on the other. Barry said X, we saw a video showing Y, etc. One right after the other. That will be a very powerful visual to a jury and will be hard for the defense to counter.
A big chart with lies on one side and proven evidence on the other and another with BM's behavior on one side and a sincerely loving, Godly Christian husband and father's behavior toward those he is in relationship with on the other (his wife, his daughters, those who help him make his living - associates AND subcontract workers).

Guess which side "absent on Mother's Day after his wife had just survived and come out the other side of another bout of cancer" and which "celebrating having his loved one and the mother of his children survive a deadly threat" would be on? ETA: And that's the least of the differences regarding Mother's Day weekend.

You can love people or you can use or possess people. BM's a user and a possessor and SM had withdrawn her utility to him and told him he didn't possess her. How dare her? So, he got rid of her and denied all who love her a chance to say goodbye or to even know for certain how that happened.
 
Last edited:
  • #122
@Tiff23fr Thanks for asking about my (amateur) game plan. I'd love to bounce my ideas off of you (we're in similar fields) and also off the legal eagles here.

(TL;DR - DV; timeline; witness will show motive, means and opportunity to commit the crime of murdering Suzanne Morphew).

Domestic violence and the danger of divorce would be my first topic, with all the evidence of Barry's pre-disappearance control (an expert witness on DV; Barry controlling the money; SO's and Suzanne's sister's testimony about a violent marriage; probably put the daughter who recommended a restraining order on the stand (gently) and I'd also ask her if the door frame had been broken the last time she was at the house; the nose clipping event; the times he pinned her down to the bed; the time he threw her into a closet and held a gun to his head; all his suicide messages; then put the expert back on the stand to give a statement about how suicidal controlling spouses often turn homicidal. The fact that women are most vulnerable to murder (femicide) when they try to leave would get hammered home. I'd also have a chart of all the things that constitute DV (it's not just punching people, shoving and blocking exits and "clipping" in the face while making wild hand gestures, getting in someone's face, yelling, threatening, financial control, sexual control, implicit threats of violence - such as "bumping" one's big muscular body up against someone to herd them around as if they are a deer, religious control, gaslighting, blaming the victim - all of that needs to be discussed and good graphics made). How abusers try to isolate the victim more and more, to control and to silence them.

Then I'd start the timeline of how Suzanne planned to leave (starting with her financial moves to try and get some money to go, constantly reiterating how secretive she needed to be). Starting May 6, the timeline will ramp up and begin to include Barry Morphew's opportunity (daughters gone, Suzanne alone, poor cellular connection, distance between houses in that area;) and his motivation (financial and she's leaving). I'd go into Barry Morphew's financial patterns (including his dependence on Suzanne for big sums of money). Barry's actions from May 6-11th would be combed over with a fine tooth comb. He has no alibi. I'd try to establish that his financial motivation was huge, that he carried a gun around the house, that he admitted shooting the gun on May 9th, and I'd introduce the broken door frame. I'd have a map of the larger area and another of the PP house. I'd include the elk head with flesh attached outside the house to attract mountain lions, I'd include his rapid move to get conservatorship, his getting rid of Suzanne's things, his bizarre statement about saving just one person, his exchange of his truck for a new one, and his selling of the RR (maybe two RR's) and his sale of the Indiana house. I'd hope that SO has information about Suzanne wanting to move back to Indiana. I'd bring in any witnesses who could explain that Barry believed only death could end a marriage and Suzanne's statements about Barry permitting no discussion of divorce ("because it will never happen.") Here, I believe it's tricky. Surely JL can testify to Suzanne's reasoning about divorce, at least to some degree. Anyway, this would be the timeline section (I'm really good at drawing timelines myself, with color coding and I would have slides and when all the timeline was put together, it would be highly incriminating). Barry had opportunity, he had means, he had motive. The scratch marks would be presented in this part. I'd probably also have a local LE witness talk about how it's a small town and many already knew Barry and that his reputation as a friendly, God-loving man made them reluctant to draw the conclusion that he was a murderer, and have that person tell why their mind changed. I'd include his attempt to influence MG as a witness. I'd include the lies he told to his nephew (put the nephew on the stand).

I'd include the financial forensics in the timeline section. This would include all the evidence the Suzanne did not voluntarily leave.

There'd be quite a bit of testimony, but I'd boil it down to a simple timeline and that timeline would be there at the summation. Obviously, the trash dump would be a big part of it.

Then I'd do all his lies in a big chart (how his story changed many times). The reset of the truck's GPS would be part of this (another set of experts here - to do car and phone GPS, including from a third phone which I believe he used in this crime and evidence of Suzanne's phone from the Cloud). I know Barry made more than just trash run stops and that LE has evidence of him out and about on May 9-10 (the evidence that caused Monarch Pass highway to be shut for a day - even if they didn't find much, they had reason to believe Barry had been in certain places - where Suzanne's body may still be hidden). I'd describe the searches for Suzanne and why Barry was excluded from official searches and how he behaved when Andy tried to search. I'd put Andy on the stand. His lack of cooperation and lying to the investigators needs to be strongly emphasized (not just because of that one charge, but for the whole case). He had knowledge of his own guilt. He also lies. I'd include lies told to the Moorman family about not being part of the loan (despite borrowing money to invest in community property). I'd include his lying about working on Sunday in Broomfield. The reset of the GPS would be emphasized as evidence that Suzanne was disposed of. I'd certainly mention the tranquilizer material, of course and bring in an expert to tell how that would help Barry avoid certain kinds of forensic evidence.

Then I'd wrap up with witnesses who could speak for Suzanne in some way. If that one pastor can be brought to the stand to repeat what Barry said to her, that'd be great too. But I'd have SO back on the stand, Suzanne's sister, one or both of the daughters, anyone who could read out Suzanne's grievance list, the texts between Suzanne and her supporters. If necessary, I'd address the issue of why they left Indiana (if defense claims it's due to the affair, I'd counter with it was due to Barry becoming increasingly violent - even in the workplace, of which there are two examples where there are witnesses). I'd imply that Suzanne wanted out, but that Barry had cornered her.

(And then I think about getting lucky...does the prosecution have witnesses from the gym who might know if Barry used steroids? Because I think he did...did Suzanne reveal anything to the Ritters about the state of the marriage - that would a lucky break; what about that DV group? etc What does SD know? )

I'd take the risk of putting one or both daughters on the stand, or at least Macy (I believe she really did advise her mother to get out and get a restraining order and I believe she's seen way more than we know). I don't think Macy will lie on the stand.

I'm stumped as to whether Barry actually had affairs. We all thought he did, but so far, no evidence that he did - except that he's with SD within two months after Suzanne disappears and SD's BF seems to believe she was already involved with Barry at the time of Suzanne's disappearance - that's just an intuition of mine after seeing his picture in the crowd at the first presser - but I think he knows when they got together).

At any rate, I'd make this trial about the dramatic story of a beautiful young woman who marries a man who truly believes he's in charge of her and that physical intimidation is just how he roles. If Barry is acquitted (by those 1-2 jurors who deep inside agree with him), at least the story of Suzanne's life, her endurance of DV, and the fact that apparently happy, well-to-do families may not actually be happy. That "Godly" men are capable of deception and I'd want to leave the jurors with a strong notion of Barry Morphew as deceptive and the exact opposite of what some members of his community thought him to be.

And I"d fervently hope that he was found guilty of all the charges, but if not, at least of felony possession of an illegal weapon and felony deception of the 8 LE/public officials. Because I do not want Barry to own any guns or be in possession of any guns for the rest of his life.

No more hunting for Barry.

Thanks for sharing your perspective

I think my big chart and anchor would be a timeline with the digital data for both BM and SM. I would emphasize the time and location of the truck reset as the key big bolded center of the board and build out from there.

Using that as my anchor, I would build out from it with context of the relationship. I would start with her text planning to leave to set that as the stage. I would then amplify the risks associated with leaving at that point in a marriage by adding the (wait there is more….) and introduce any documented references of DV. That would then follow with any other added motives financially of SM leaving: spousal support, life insurance if any existed, anything nefarious she may have had on him regarding business dealings and book keeping (if any was discovered during the investigation).

I would then introduce the extramarital affair as an outlet and emotional coping mechanism for what was being experienced in the marriage. I would want it to come out as part of her story before the defense introduces it. I would also highlight at this point, a belief BM may have come upon her while engaged in an intimate conversation in the very hours of the timeline highlighted. Then introduce the presumed fingernail scratches and the fact that very phone has not been located.

I would then overlay everything laid out with any and all lies that BM may have told. I would also identify and highlight behavior patterns that may have shifted in that week of her text and disappearance. (This would be info co-workers, LE, daughters, etc. would have provided during the investigation and then mapped together.)

Examples might include:
-When was the hotel booked? Was the timeline in sync with the typical timeframe he booked hotels in past?
-Was there anything different about the time he texted SM Mothers Day morning? Was it later than the normal morning text to her when he traveled?
-What was his behavior and demeanor toward her family after she disappeared as compared to before?
-Spending habit changes? Liquidation of Assets? Before knowing she was not returning….
-The behavior of visiting 5 trash disposal locations would be explored. If there was no real activity that occurred in this time window, why dispose at 5 trash locations?

Regarding the daughter: I personally would ONLY put her on the stand if she confirmed the suggested restraining order. If the daughter has stated differently since the investigation, I would not go that path. The daughters I think will be a fine balance. If jurors on the fence are fathers they may be sensitive to the use of the daughters. (Just my personal opinion)

This is my non-attorney, quick in the moment, and limited knowledge of the parties perspective. All just personal opinion of course…
 
Last edited:
  • #123
Everyone remember when BM was verbally attacking AM? Stating the search for Suzanne was a publicity stunt etc? Wasn't this around the time where he claimed Suzanne would often cry on his shoulder, as she couldn't understand 'why her siblings refused to show her love'? I just find that strange in ĺight of Suzanne's sister’s view on their relationship, Suzanne appeared to trust her enough to confide in her, intimate details and information about the marriage and BM's (alledged) behaviours the day/2 days before she disappeared, I'm sure there was spats/bickering etc. between Suzanne and her siblings, but what if he was recalling an argument that he and Suzanne had, and she used that phrase in relation to him.
It feels like he bases things on truth such as incidents/events but lies about the details. IDK.
Make sense?

moo

Again BM covering for the DV (isolation), making misleading statements, attempting to deceive/influence public officials.

Pretty common for the abuser in a DV situation to frighten off the people closest to the DV victim. Family and friends give up, back off. Who can blame them? But sadly when something catastrophic happens to the DV victim those said people often blame themselves.

Victim blaming, I've heard about enough.

Thanks @Lyanna for your great post! Sorry for the rant.
 
  • #124
“Shoelaces”…why does one keep shoelaces? If I missed something, my apologies.
Perhaps they were fairly new (perhaps recently replaced) or perhaps were in good condition and would be useful as a spare? BM did say he was a tightwad.
 
  • #125
Oh I don’t believe he ever moved the body. That would be a major risk of getting caught.
So who did? Or what happened to the body in your opinion? Genuinely interested to hear your thoughts.
 
  • #126
Yes, that comes from a lifetime of using lies and being charming to get away with anything and everything. Only his father seems to have tried to reign him in (but only while heavily stroking his narcissism by believing Barry could make it to the Big Leagues - and that Barry ought to make it to the Big Leagues).

Otherwise, Barry was able to lie his way out of many things, all his life. He told the person who gave him the Broomfield wall contract that of course he knew what he was doing (a lie), but in fact he didn't really know Colorado standards for highway-side retaining walls, their design, function and how to execute the plans provided. The wall was pronounced defective. He had to fix it for free and in the end, another company fixed it (and it now looks like a typical, smoothly and well made highway side retaining wall, instead of cinder blocks raggedly put together).

Barry told Gene that "Suzanne borrowed the $100,000," not him when he knew full well that he shared that debt with his wife, legally. He acted as if he was responsible for the wealth that bought the PP house, but it was really Suzanne's parents (in for $600,000 that we know about, with the previous owners accepting a balloon payment later on - for which they needed to sell the Indiana house, which Suzanne's parents had also helped them buy).

Barry lied about his employees being "meth heads." And in addition to lying, he's amazingly unethical. Sure, JP had a criminal record (which is why Barry wanted him along that day - trying to think of a way to throw JP under the bus), but announcing that to the world (as Barry did) was cruel and unnecessary.

I think Barry lied about not knowing about the affair. I wonder what Barry said when LE asked him about the broken door frame. "A bull moose came in the house about a week before..."

BTW, I believe at least one reporter tweeted that the State said the doorframe was broken and there were "shards" of wood. Shards of wood from broken doors gradually break off, as people continue to pass through the door. Most people would sand that down, if only to avoid snagging their clothes on the shards. I'm betting some were on the carpet (indicating it was very recent...)

I wonder what Barry said about the GPS reset on the truck. "Oh, that truck just does that...on its own...disconnects its own battery somehow and somehow resets itself, that's why I wanted a new truck."

I also believe he lied about the shoelaces (and did so because he thought the boots might still be found and be laceless - the laces were almost certainly involved in the crime somehow and will never be found). He lied about going to the Spa store on Saturday afternoon, he lied about the one plate steak dinner, he lied to the Registrar of Voters when he signed that ballot envelope, he lied to the people at the Poncha Springs store about why he was digging through the trash, and he lied when he said "I don't recall" 95 times.

Yep. This.
And it was her wealth that they lived on and BM was the ATM. How's that for DV?
 
  • #127
Anyone know if BM is right handed or left handed?
 
  • #128
Re: shoelaces
Here’s my thing. If someone can set me straight, please do.
Were shoelaces recovered? Barry stated that he took the boots with holes to Broomfield to save the laces. Footage shows that the boots were tossed in a trash dump? Were they laceless for sure?
If the laces were in his truck, recovered, and tested, that’s one thing. If there were no laces found in his truck, that is definitely another thing. If LE did not look for laces, or did not inventory all items when he came back in his truck, that’s on them. If they started writing the AA on May 10 or 11, it sounds like they knew what was up and should have started preserving evidence. I’d like to know where the mystery shoelaces are today. The answer would matter if I was on a jury.

THIS^^^^
 
  • #129
  • #130
I wonder if we actually saw the boots without the laces or if it is just another excuse that Barry made up to cover his butt.

He seems to think quick on his feet to come with an answer for everything he is asked whether it is the truth or a lie.
My opinion, but I feel the majority of Prosecution’s case is based on BM’s lies and the multiple times he changed his answers from interview to interview. The DA would have a harder time even bringing charges if the guy would have lawyered up day one! But he’s a cheapskate! Thank Goodness! MOO
 
  • #131
“Shoelaces”…why does one keep shoelaces? If I missed something, my apologies.
My boys and husband pull the laces when tossing work boots if the laces are in good shape.
 
  • #132
Apologies if this was posted earlier.

Assuming

I hate typing this, but I'm wondering if SM ever saw a doct0r for any injuries BM inflicted upon her before she went missing.

If so, obviously there would be medical records, and the doctor who treated her could testify.

JMVHO.
 
  • #133
Yep. This.
And it was her wealth that they lived on and BM was the ATM. How's that for DV?
I don't really agree with this - that it was her wealth they lived on.

AM and others described BM as very driven. And it was apparently a problem between SM and BM that he was ALWAYS working. I think BM worked hard - physically and to keep a pipeline of work ahead of him.

So, they both brought financial resources into their family. BM through hard work, utilization of his network of contacts built over a lifetime, and his utilization of laborers who'd work as independent subcontractors even though BM in fact exercised quite a bit of control over them. SM through teaching in the early years of the marriage and later through work associated with the family businesses (the tree farm, the landscaping company, the rental properties). She reportedly did the invoicing and I would bet quite a few other administrative tasks. She also served as a stay at home mother and managed the household, which aren't paid duties, but if she hadn't been doing them, they'd have had to pay others to do so. And SM also brought financial resources in through her inheritance from her mother.

I do think financial matters were a substantial motivator in these crimes. The inheritance and the the real property deals in Indiana and in Colorado were big dollar transactions that likely involved a substantial majority of the family's wealth. And the threat of divorce would split those dollar amounts in half for BM (who'd viewed the family wealth as "his" to be shared under his discretion with SM) and - for what sounds like the first time in SM's adult life - SM would have her true share separate from his true share (according to the law). BM did not want to lose control - of SM or of ANY SHARE of the family's holdings.
 
  • #134
@Warwick7

In the last thread (sorry, I wasn't fast enough to see it before the thread closed) you cited a bunch of examples of alleged DV. As I noted I am very far behind here so I have only see one factual source re: DV, the PH, which was something like Barry brushed against Suzanne's nose accidentally. Can you give me a few factual sources for the other stuff?

If you care to respond, if your whole list is factually established why do you think the prosecution chose such a lame example of DV to use in the PH? That was my original point, that if they had something more substantial then its curious (to me) that they didn't use it.

IMO

Since the PH they only used LE as witnesses, I wonder if they chose the examples they did because it was something Barry admitted to, they had text message verification of, or they had observed the evidence with their own eyes (photos). This would remove the he said she said angle that the defense could bring up and they can't call people to testify to what they saw or Suzanne said so it would be LE saying what someone else said. These incidents they presented were all things they could show, texts for, his own statements for or physical observation of.
 
  • #135
Barry Morphew’s Arms Covered In Possible Fingernail Cuts After Suzanne Morphew’s Disappearance; Someone May Have Burned Journal in Fireplace

Not for one second, do I feel Barry ever did without anything he wanted, physically or financially.

Driving new cars? Clarifications, please, Anyone!

Suzanne drove a 2015 Range Rover prior to her disappearance in 2020. I do not consider a 5 year old vehicle as being new. Especially one she more than likely personally drove 1220+ miles to Salida since antlers were inside the interior of Barry's truck leaving no room for her to ride inside. Plus his truck was already hauling a trailer so I'm not sure he could handle towing her 2015 Range Rover.

Further, it is my understanding that one of the daughters, MM2, inherited Suzanne's old vehicle, which was also a Range Rover, when SM got the 2015 RR. MM1 drove a truck but I don't know that year or the model of it.

Did Barry purchase a new truck in IN (or in CO) after Suzanne was no longer with us?
A used Range Rover, even one that is five years old, is still worth more than many brand new vehicles.
 
  • #136
  • #137
  • #138
It's always curious to me when we have a highly pixelated image here how folks can see all sorts of things in it, and others can't see a thing. I work with photoshop every day in my professional life, and that image wouldn't pass anyone's professional sniff test since it's at such a low resolution and clarity. There could be scratches on his arm, but I'm not seeing them in this image.

I see one and possibly more. If it helps, @Ontario Mom , these are (or at least what I see) are the small round bandaids, not the typical rectangular ones such as you might be looking for. See if that changes what you see?

I also believe he lied about the shoelaces (and did so because he thought the boots might still be found and be laceless - the laces were almost certainly involved in the crime somehow and will never be found).

Where my thinking snags on this is -- if the laces were used in the crime, that means they were no longer attached to the boots at the time. Meaning BM couldn't have been wearing those boots at the time (well, unless he was sloshing around in them laceless which seems unlikely).

Wasn't there a cctv image of him carrying the boots into the HIE? Why would he do that if they were both laceless and not dirtied during the crime? Wouldn't he just toss the boots in one of the dumpster runs?

The only reasons I can think of to bring a pair of boots into a hotel room would be: if he intended to wear them, or if he was actually intending to remove the laces, or to attempt to clean them.

He would have no need to clean about-to-be tossed-out boots except to try to hide evidence, which IMO wouldn't exist on the boots unless he was wearing them at the time of the crime.

Hmm, upon further thought, if he thought something evidentiary had gotten on the boots during the crime, wouldn't he think it might also be on the laces and just toss the whole thing, tightwad or not? Maybe the boots are not actually relevant at all. If he tied SM in any way, or tied up a bag etc she was in or related to the crime, especially at his own home, he would have lots of normal options like twine, twist wire etc without needing to resort to shoelaces... MOO
 
  • #139
Just got caught up on the last thread. Saw some discussion about the trash dumps and Men’s Wearhouse. @Seattle1 made a great post #972 that seemed to answer all our questions. Just wanted to add this with LS going over her notes from PH Day 3. She has mentioned in other videos that she used to live in that area and is vey familiar with the locations. She said the MWH store is surrounded by stores that have closed and are empty except for a toy shop and a workout place. JMO.. Maybe that’s why no surveillance video ? IMO both would be closed during Covid. The whole video is good and also talks about the swimsuit photo.

The trash dumps start around 39:00


EBM fix typo

Thanks for sharing this. Listening now and there are more details that I didn't get from just following the texts.
 
  • #140
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
140
Guests online
1,375
Total visitors
1,515

Forum statistics

Threads
632,356
Messages
18,625,248
Members
243,108
Latest member
enigmapoodle
Back
Top