Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #23

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mysti88c

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Messages
548
Reaction score
2,319
A Chaffee County woman is missing after a neighbor said she went out for a bike ride Sunday and never returned
Chaffee County woman missing since Sunday after neighbor said she went out for bike ride

Media, Maps & Timeline thread (No Discussion)

Suzanne Morphew Case Archive (developed and maintained by WS member AmandaReckonwith)

Verified Experts/Professionals posting in this thread:

10ofRods is a Verified Anthropologist
Angleterre is a Verified LE from England
riolove77 is a Verified Attorney (prosecutor)
Alethea is a Verified Attorney (defense)
otto is a Verified Expert
Chomsky is a Verified Attorney
angelainwi is a Certified Trauma Counselor
gitana1 is a Verified Attorney
Cassidy is a Verified Attorney
lamlawindy is a Verified Attorney (former Prosecutor, now Defence)

Suzanne Morphew FB page
Suzanne Morphew Twitter page

Thread #1 Thread #2 Thread #3 Thread #4 Thread #5 Thread #6 Thread #7 Thread #8 Thread #9 Thread #10 Thread #11 Thread #12 Thread #13 Thread #14 Thread #15 Thread #16 Thread #17 Thread #18 Thread #19 Thread #20 Thread #21 Thread #22
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Permission has never been given for members to sleuth BM. In fact, at least 20 Admin posts (I stopped counting at 20) have specifically stated NOT to do so. Members have been told they may "discuss" what is contained in MSM or other approved sources. This is different that "sleuthing".

If members can't comply with TOS and Admin reminders, permanent thread bans or a lengthy Time Out will be issued.
 
Members are responsible for previewing their posts to make sure they appear correctly. When one member posts a broken quote and it gets requoted over and over, eventually it becomes impossible to know who originally said what as the wrong words get attributed to another member. Not nice !

The word QUOTE in square brackets starts the quote and the /QUOTE in square brackets ends the quote. Those words or symbols in square brackets are commands, html language that determines how your post will appear.

When you click on Reply, always remember to NOT type anything inside those square brackets. DO NOT MESS WITH SQUARE BRACKETS ;) You can avoid them entirely by going past that last set of square brackets that contain the /QUOTE, drop down a line or two and type your response.

If you don’t know how to quote properly, please private message a Mod or Admin and we will walk you through it. We’d rather spend a few minutes doing that than spend time trying to clean up the mess it makes, or having to close a thread so it doesn’t get even worse.
 
Major thread cleanup was required.

Please stick to discussing the case itself and move on from bickering over opinions, credibility, who's right/wrong, who owes who an apology, etc. This type of dissension is not productive in the discussion.


 
Can we mention the elephant in that video? I'm not sure, since it is a rumor, but it's discussed in an approved source. Gonna report myself.

I haven't had time to check out the precise wording re the "elephant" ;)

TD took a video with Barry. Period. He is not an expert and if he is presenting unsubstantiated information about the girls, it is rumor and should not be relied on. Unless he can tell people how he knows that information, I think it should be taken with a large pinch of salt. If it's about the girls and is not in MSM or from LE, please do not discuss.

Let's just rely on what the experts in the video have to say.

Clear as mud? ;)
 
Please STOP asking for or posting links to documents related to the property that was searched.

If you wish to sleuth privately behind the scenes, that's fine, but do NOT post about it on this public thread. These homeowners are entitled to their privacy.
 
Hey Everyone,

This post lands at random.

Some posts have been removed or modsnipped due to lengthy personal anecdotes.

We have to make these reminders occasionally.

Threads are dedicated to discussing the case at hand. We have many members and it is easy for a thread to get derailed with off topic personal posts and responses . Please do not make a post that is mainly about you. This thread is not about your life, where you’ve been, how you have been treated or your feeling about other posters or what people think or are saying about you.

Members and guests do not come to the thread to read about Websleuths members, they come to read about the case. If your post is mainly filled with I, Me, Mine, My, etc then there is a good chance the post is all about you instead of all about the case.

Do not take this personally. Of course we want your opinion on the known facts of the case, which translates into saying "my opinion," or "I think", or “I believe” ... and that is fine as long as it follows with something directly involving the case.

Please keep the focus on the case so it doesn’t turn the discussion to all about you.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

Sillybilly
WS Administrator


 
Read The Rules folks.

It took almost 1 1/2 hours to clean up this thread simply because members disregarded The Rules about sleuthing individuals who are non POIs/suspects.


If this happens again, offending members will be banned from this discussion.
 
If Barry’s attorney told him to not comment in any way anywhere, okay. But why is no one speaking on Suzanne’s behalf? Isn’t there someone who can be the face of Suzanne’s family and friends? Why is there utter silence? Is every single individual that private?
 
I also think it was thrown down deliberately. I think it was a carefully thought out location that couldn’t be seen from the main road, would not be noticed immediately by passers by, (too soon?), but would be found rather easily after a search was begun. All done to validate the narrative of the MD bike ride.



Hi OldCop, I just posted on post 22 of this forum on page 55. I would hugely appreciate your input into this. I am pasting the post below. Thanks!


IMO the ‘personal item’ found on the first night, (not the bike) had to tie the suspect immediately to the scene. Did the suspect drop this item during staging ?
It would be great if OldCop could reads this post and give his informed opinion.
Why did LE stop cooperating with BM the first night? Is this typical?
I would think that LE would be comforting the family and sharing updates?
 
If an abductor stayed in an RV/Camping park, the one closest to SM's house appears to be Monarch Spur RV Park & Campground off of Hwy 50. $35 to $40 per night to hookup an RV or $20/night for a tent for 1 person. Think LE talked to the people at the area RV and camping parks? (I believe they did as part of their investigation).

Would a random drifter have a vehicle? How would this abductor manage to get SM and there's no sign of anything, no struggle, she didn't appear to fall off her bike and skin herself (remember K9s allegedly picked up no scent). Did the drifter think to wipe off SM's bike of all fingerprints (allegedly no fingerprints were found on the bike). Yes, I know about the Mickey Shunick case from many years ago. This isn't that case.

To me it doesn't seem a plausible scenario in this particular case, especially with SM's bike found so close to her home.

IMO
BBM Interesting! Do you have a link to this information? I am unaware of LE stating there were no fingerprints on the bicycle. TIA

edited for clarity
 
Last edited:
I don't know how legal the practice is, but based on an extensive viewing history of TV crime shoes the past month (summer boredom) cops are supposedly well within the law to just kick in doors if necessary to check out the welfare of anyone that may be inside if the LE dept has gotten a call that expressed concern about the health or whereabouts of someone who is not responding to attempts at contact. So, I've found myself wondering if the sheriff even needed a SW for the first search. My guess is they did need one for any subsequent search. Although maybe the first search was done after an initial check inside and therefore did need a SW. Total speculation. Also where's norm Pattis when you actually need him? I'm thinking if this case had happened in CT or NP could practice in CO then BM would at least be paraded in front of the microphones pretty much weekly at least while NP declared something. Stupid as to why his client should be allowed to go cut grass in peace cause there was no evidence. Once again total speculation and sarcasm but perhaps BM might also self destruct under NP watch. MOO.
In this case I believe that LE was given consent and/or access to the home the night Suzanne was reported missing. This would only be to check to see if the missing person was ill, injured, or deceased inside. That would have been the evening of May 10. Reports indicate that the home was sealed off when Barry returned from Denver and he was not allowed inside.
The first SW was served on May 20, 10 days later. This indicates that LE was building their probable cause during this time.
The second SW was served on July 9th. This indicates that LE received new information/evidence which gave them additional probable cause to search again.
As far as welfare checks, it can be a bit hazy. A lot depends on the entirety of the circumstances under which LE is asked to go to a home and check on someone’s welfare as to whether they are justified in breaking down the door. Consider these scenarios:
Caller informs 911 that they live out of state and haven’t been able to reach an elderly parent for several days.
Caller informs 911 that they live out of state and haven’t been able to reach their college student daughter for several days.
Caller informs 911 that he believes that his friend is suicidal.
Caller informs 911 that he hasn’t seen his next door neighbors for several days and fears something may be wrong at the home.
Caller informs 911 that her neighbor who is out of state has called and asked her to check on his wife who reportedly went on a bike ride and never came home.
I think you can see why you can’t justify warrantless searches on every welfare check. It must be decided on a case by case basis.
How would you feel if you went on a spontaneous mini vacation and came home to find your door broken in by the police? What if while they were in there they discovered the meth lab in your basement?
 
If Barry’s attorney told him to not comment in any way anywhere, okay. But why is no one speaking on Suzanne’s behalf? Isn’t there someone who can be the face of Suzanne’s family and friends? Why is there utter silence? Is every single individual that private?
At this point, I think there’s no benefit to them talking. It does appear they have been asked not to comment on the case anyways.

If this was a potential abduction, then I’d be really shocked that no one was out there keeping her in the news.

I’ve got to believe they know what this is, but I’d love to know the specifics as to what they know, and how they know it.

Perhaps it was as simple as law enforcement telling them “we don’t believe Suzanne was abducted. Please don’t talk to the media while we work on getting to the bottom of this.”

I have seen this exact same behavior in murder cases before. The difference though is that those cases had a body.

So this is weird.
 
Well, Barry Morphew has been criticized for making too few public appearances. However, I'd be willing to bet that had he made "too many"
public appearances, he would be criticized for doing so. He's been taken to task -- both on WS and elsewhere -- for offering a $200,000 reward for Suzanne's safe return, supposedly because the "safe return" requirement is some sort of strategic loophole on Barry's part.

I get it: the guy is unlikable. So what? Until there's actual evidence linking him to Suzanne's disappearance, in my mind he's not guilty of anything except for not living up to our expectations of how a loving husband should behave when his wife disappears.

Maybe real evidence will be produced showing that Barry Morphew is involved. Until then, I'll keep an open mind & listen to alternative theories.
Extra Likes for this post!
 
Hi OldCop, I just posted on post 22 of this forum on page 55. I would hugely appreciate your input into this. I am pasting the post below. Thanks!


IMO the ‘personal item’ found on the first night, (not the bike) had to tie the suspect immediately to the scene. Did the suspect drop this item during staging ?
It would be great if OldCop could reads this post and give his informed opinion.
Why did LE stop cooperating with BM the first night? Is this typical?
I would think that LE would be comforting the family and sharing updates?
Hi, @TIGER0822. I think a lot of folks here on WS have been speculating as to why LE seemed to narrow their focus very early on in this case. First, to clarify a couple of things: LE has never admitted that they found SM’s bike on the night she was reported missing. That information came from BM’s nephew, TN. I believe the personal item you are referring to was actually found on the following Thursday, 10/15. That find, which LE did admit to, was discovered up near the intersection of Hwy 50 and Rte 225 and caused a large search to be initiated on the following day, Friday. That search resulted in Hwy 50 west towards Monarch Pass being closed off for a greater part of the day on Friday. To our knowledge no additional evidence was found during that search.
Going back to your original question, no one but LE knows at this point what compelled them to narrow the focus of their search so early. They were very quick to rule out accident and mountain lion attack. It seems they have also found no evidence of an abduction. The most common theories that we have come up with is that something about the bike itself was off early on. Perhaps it was un-rideable, perhaps it was staged at its location. Perhaps a neighbor reported something, a neighborhood video caught something on camera, or there was something very incriminating at the scene.
You are correct when you say you might expect LE to be reassuring and comforting to the family of a missing person and that they would stand with them to get find out what had happened to their loved one. BM has been vocal, (on the TD video), about his criticism on how LE handled this case from the beginning, but that may be a boisterous bluff. We don’t know what LE found out very quickly but it appears to have been quite incriminating.
 
Last edited:
In the now vanished ID report the neighbor of the job site said she awoke to noises of... This however was also run by LS a credible source.

She stated she was hard of hearing.

She said she went to the door and it stopped.

Considering she was hard of hearing, it could have been going for a while before it woke her.

IMO they were looking for items that belonged to SM or they had reason to believe they would uncover DNA, or even body parts, weapons or other incriminating items
MOO
 
In the now vanished ID report the neighbor of the job site said she awoke to noises of... This however was also run by LS a credible source.

She stated she was hard of hearing.

She said she went to the door and it stopped.

Considering she was hard of hearing, it could have been going for a while before it woke her.

IMO they were looking for items that belonged to SM or they had reason to believe they would uncover DNA, or even body parts, weapons or other incriminating items
MOO
Who is they?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
328
Guests online
3,964
Total visitors
4,292

Forum statistics

Threads
591,486
Messages
17,952,780
Members
228,506
Latest member
Coctha
Back
Top