Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #14

[10ofRods]

In my experience, yes they would, especially if the owner of property signs the consent to search and is not a suspect. They do not have anything to lose at that point and they could potentially gain valuable evidence for their investigation.

Which could then be challenged by a defense attorney and perhaps thrown out of court. It's just standard LE in CO to get a warrant. Same in CA. And many other places.

 

[Dave F.]

@J.M. Bee Thanks! I believe that difference of opinion is the cornerstone of a discussion forum, so your point of view is not a problem to me. It's more like an opportunity. IMO

 

[Ontario Mom]

ITA - I'm not sure I've seen this level of hostility being vocalized before - at least so directly
IMO

I suspect it may have something to do with with the atmosphere in general society right now.
It's motivated me to be even more supportive of law enforcement, and appreciative for all they do, and all they risk, every day they put on that badge.
Civilians have no idea.

 

[J.M. Bee]

We don't know that.

We don't know if there were tire tracks, we don't know if there was damage, we don't know if she was ever on the bike. We don't even know where it was found--we have people alleging it was found in a certain location, but nothing confirmed.

I addressed the issue of damage to the bicycle in #655. As for what what we have (or do not have) regarding the bicycle, we do have Tyson Draper's interview with BM, and in that interview, BM discusses where and how the bicycle was found. No, that's not LE telling us where and how the bicycle was found, but it's BM telling us, and that is something.

 

[10ofRods]

Do we know if there’s been damage to the bicycle?

The nephew said something like "the brakes were jacked." This was the same statement where he said, "Go ask the police about the condition of the bike."

Since I had no reason not to believe the family member, I thought he was trying to say that she had had to brake suddenly. This was before we heard that the bike was "in a ravine" or "leaning under a bridge" or all those other things that are on CrimeOnline.

Then, some bicyclists mentioned that some people use a locking brake on their bikes to avoid having to have a heavy bike lock with them. The theory was that the bike was therefore not damaged, but perhaps the wheels were locked.

 

[Cassady]

I see you are new here - Welcome to WS! You may want to become verified as your posts seem to be stating things as fact rather than your opinion? @gitana1 is a verified attorney.
JMO

Submitted and waiting.

Techincally I am stating the basic law of SW's. Facts are distinct from the law.

 

[oviedo]

Agree completely. You'd never tear up someone's foundation without a warrant. You can just see it coming: the homeowner consents until they start calculating how much damage is being done to their new foundation or deck or whatever thing is being destroyed and then changes her mind.

@althea nice to see you checking in on her thread. and your knowledge is always so helpful iMO

 

[gitana1]

Not sure what happened there but I opted to delete that and then it didn't delete

But yes, that's exactly what I meant. We don't push the electrician out of the way and do it ourselves, but for some reason, we'd like to sit around and tell the police how to run an investigation. It doesn't make any sense.

I can try to delete if you would like.

 

[Cassady]

Sorry if I missed it, but I notice you say "in my experience" and I'm just wondering what your profession is, to have such experience?
I'm assuming you're also a lawyer?

20 years practicing law and former Adjunct Professor of Criminal Law and Procedure.

 

[CronesEye]

I think because BM is a good-looking man, and specifically because he is not businessman-like, more like a “nice neighbor next door” type, it might be harder to believe that he is implicated in SM’s disappearance. Especially since they both made such a handsome couple, and SM’s posts were nice, one wants to believe that she was happy despite all her life circumstances.

Here is the article that I am sure many have read. In 55% of cases it is an intimate partner, and 83% in total, it is someone the victim knew. So statistically speaking, the “stranger abduction” theory is not likely. And if it is not the husband, then one has to look at other people surrounding SM.

What really surprised me is nr. 1 some researchers list as nr 1 reason for killing an intimate partner.

The Twisted Reasons Why Some Husbands Kill Their Wives

This is an awesome article thanks for linking it. I would round up all those reasons to needing control in some form or another.

"...one wants to believe.."
It's so strange how what goes on inside doesn't always show on the outside, for me it is cognitive dissonance. In society humans work hard at making everything look right but for me that makes it hard to be honest about real issues that can often be worked out if they are put in the light, but we are taught to make it look right, rather than be "right".

I looked at a few cases yesterday and what struck me is how often a really blatant mistake is made. I know people call these something like "tells" but it causes me to wonder what state their brain is in when they make these mistakes. Denial, disassociation, exhaustion, delusion...I don't know, something is going on there because sometimes some of these predators are uncanny in their predation skills and just as there is a break to cause them to kill ("fight"), there also seems to be an error causing, break in their state of mind, to "flight". (I'm interested in brain biochemistry)

I am truly floored by how much evidence is needed to prosecute. Sometimes it seems like not even a video is good enough!

 

[Tate123]

20 years practicing law and former Adjunct Professor of Criminal Law and Procedure.

Welcome!

 

[Madeleine74]

If there was damage to the bicycle, one can safely assume that BM would have mentioned this to Tyson Draper in that interview given that BM is literally doing everything he can to suggest she was either abducted or taken by a mountain lion. BM does not mention any damage to the bicycle, however; therefore I think we can safely assume that there was no damage to the bicycle. JMO.

I don't assume this at this point.

 

[J.M. Bee]

I apologize if people have already spoken to this --- I didn't see any posts about it --- but what do people make of the fact that there's no reward listed on the new police flyer? What do people think we can infer from this? What might this mean?

 

[Ontario Mom]

I can try to delete if you would like.

No worries, it's fine. Thanks anyway

 

[Curiousobserver]

True. Unless the property owner was put on trial, fourth amendment rights of someone else would not apply to his property.

However, what if the property owner ended up being involved? I don’t believe that’s close to the case here but something like that could occur.

This wasn’t just a basic search of the property to see if they could locate a missing person: “Hey, we are looking for so and so. Can we take a look at your property to make sure she’s not there, injured somewhere?”

They used sonar and destroyed property during the search.

Maybe @riolove77 can give her a wisdom here when she gets a chance. As a prosecutor she’s going to know for sure.

I am not an attorney, just pretending to be smart here: I would be worried that even if the owner said they gave consent at the time perhaps the extent of what they consented to or motive for that consent came into question at the hypothetical trial. For example if they turned out to be an accomplice, or were in fact the guilty party.

"sure, go ahead and search over there"- that's where I buried the evidence that implicates BM. I'm the one who sent in the tip...

I bet they got a warrant to saw through the concrete even if the owner consented.

 

[Cassady]

BBM

They could lose a conviction.

How so? If the spouse of the missing person is charged and there is evidence from the job site search used to establish the charges, the spouse would not have standing to challenge the search at the job site whether it was a consent search or a SW search. The evidence from the job site would come in and the Defendant would not have a viable challenge to the search.

 

[Madeleine74]

20 years practicing law and former Adjunct Professor of Criminal Law and Procedure.

Ohhh goodie! Love the attorneys. Welcome!

 

[Ontario Mom]

20 years practicing law and former Adjunct Professor of Criminal Law and Procedure.

Yay, more lawyers!
My brain will melt but it'll be fun watching the legal experts lay it out.
I love the lawyers on WS

 

[Madeleine74]

I apologize if people have already spoken to this --- I didn't see any posts about it --- but what do people make of the fact that there's no reward listed on the new police flyer? What do people think we can infer from this? What might this mean?

To me it means this:

BM is not working in conjunction with LE. Further, BM made the reward contingent on a very specific and narrow condition: The safe return of SM, and that's it.

IMO SM is not safe, she's likely not alive and hasn't been this entire time, there has been no indication of a kidnapping nor demand for ransom (that we know of).

LE obviously doesn't believe SM is being held somewhere and also they have no indication she was attacked by a mountain lion.

 

[10ofRods]

In my experience, yes they would, especially if the owner of property signs the consent to search and is not a suspect. They do not have anything to lose at that point and they could potentially gain valuable evidence for their investigation.

Is your experience in Colorado? Just curious. Could be very valuable to us. I am assuming you do some criminal work.

At any rate, where I live (SoCal) no LE team would go for major evidence (which involves causing damage to property especially) without the cover of a warrant.

Too many property owners have said later that they felt coerced. Too many defense attorneys have exploited the situation. In a murder case, the stakes are too high for contemporary LE in many states to risk it.

Anyway - welcome to WS! The verification process can take a while.