Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 #80 *arrest*

[dkryder]

no one here knew it was a material fact that SM was in an "affair" with JL prior to the PH, none of us know what other material facts may have yet to be released. people that say there is no evidence in reality have no idea if such evidence exists, or not, yet. MOO.

 

[Seattle1]

The other motivation for the defense to call JL is to gin up Barry's victimhood in all of this. He already isn't a sympathetic figure....I do think the defense will try to take the edge off of that through JL.

I think BM already gets a big break: BM has the benefit that character evidence of the defendant is not admissible under the rules of evidence until the penalty phase of the trial so the jury really won't get to hear about the real BM until he's convicted. MOO

 

[marylamby]

Regarding the tranquilizer ketamine's use in Colorado --
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/09/01/elijah-mcclain-grand-jury/

If a juror thinks ketamine was used on SM perhaps juror could have reasonable doubt about whether death was intended or whether she was only intended to be sedated. Possibly only relevant re difference between first degree and second degree. JMO.

Sedated for what reason, tho?

 

[DizzyB]

The "Gone Girl" defense doesn't jive with the planted bike and helmet. If she were to leave on her own...she had a car sitting in the garage with keys, and a husband dutifully working on an urgent jobsite in Broomfield....but she chose to check out on a bicycle in Colorado? Well, alrighty, then.

And let’s just say she took 70k from the garage safe. Why would she Gone Girl to start a new life, with only 70K? If they showed that she started those secret bank accounts, made deposits, and then withdrew it all the first week of May, then okay. But no. If you plan to never turn your phone on again, why take the charger? What would be the point of taking off, with a fraction of the money that you would easily get, leaving your fling behind without a word, your children who are your biggest blessing, your medical records, especially as a cancer patient. If there was no bike and helmet, maybe I could get on board with a potential suicide scenario. We still know that Barry murdered Suzanne, and Gone Girl/Suicide/Random Abduction make zero sense.

 

[marylamby]

Yet, many people do the opposite, especially if they are still in a marriage. Both affair partners in this case were still in their marriages. Neither had filed for divorce or managed a separation (although if they'd each gotten to the separate bedrooms phase, that counts, in terms of how I'd classify such an affair).

Sometimes the entire purpose of the affair is closer to "let's support each other as we divorce" and in that case, each party commiserates with the other for all the pain they're enduring in their marriage.

I still talk about my past relationship with my current partner, who completely understands that I have C-PTSD because of it, and go through phases where it all still comes back. While it's possible that your view is closer to the truth here, we just don't know. I find it hard to believe that Suzanne never spoke of Barry's meanness and if she didn't (ever) to JL, I don't think that looks good for the prosecution. The relationships that Suzanne and JL would be speaking of would not be past relationships.

And many adult bonds form without much attention to the "mood" that's needed for romantic-sexual attachment, many adult affairs are more focused on shared support and companionship. I have an aunt by marriage who began an emotional affair (that turned sexual) while my uncle was still alive (dying of cancer). I did not judge her. Ultimately, that affair turned into a 20 year long relationship (never married) and it was a complex relationship, it was forged as they both went through the deaths of a spouse due to cancer. She helped raise his son and he helped raise her daughter. They kept their finances separate (her idea) but she helped him out financially in many ways. It remained an "affair" from the point of view of most of my older relatives, up until the time this second partner (of more than 2 decades) died a couple of years ago. I don't think my aunt ever had a boyfriend/sexual relationship based purely on sexual attraction or romantic leanings, there was always something else going on.

At any rate, most of my friends who have successfully left abusive relationships did spend a lot of time talking about the abuse in the early days of all their next relationships - and many of those relationships transformed into very long term arrangements, indeed. It's okay to speak of the grief and the dilemmas of a disintegrating relationship and many people do. Suzanne may well not be one of them - in which case, your analysis is right on. Perhaps she and JL lived in a fantasy world where the consequences of what they were doing were kept strictly separate from talking about the people they were affecting (and possibly hurting) with their affair.

Perhaps both of them wanted to pretend that unhappy marriages had nothing to do with their longterm ("holding a torch") type of relationship. You could be right - but if not, then JL would have information about what Suzanne was thinking about Barry (she certainly seems to think that Barry was having affairs - but if she never mentioned any scary situations or DV to JL, that's a win for the defense).

As always, a terrific and introspective comment. Sorry to hear of your Aunt's so dying.

 

[marylamby]

^^bbm

....which begs the question, given that Colorado Rules of Evidence apply, why bother with JL just to confirm he received the last proof of life photo and/or communication from SM when phone records and phone experts can do that.

As a witness, character evidence is admissible and a morally bankrupt individual is of no value to the prosecution.

JL brings no material fact for the prosecution that BM murdered SM. JL brings no material fact to the defense to disprove that BM murdered SM.

Unless the prosecution calls JL, I don't think there's proper foundation for the defense to call JL as a witness. If they have foundation, would they really want to subpoena JL and treat him as a hostile witness just to dirty SM in front of a jury? I would think not. MOO

What else do they have? Shabby partial dna crapola? I think they may milk it for everything it's worth to try to suggest that if not this guy, why not other guys? Or, at least, make some jurors sympathetic to BM for a lesser charge.
This will be a very interesting trial.

 

[HistoryNut]

Like many others, I believe JL knew about SM’s problems with BM. Why else was he trying to help her break away from him? IMO, he knew she was afraid of BM and when he found out she was missing he had to have realized she was dead. After all, he never heard from her again and BM was the key suspect in her disappearance almost from the get-go. I believe the prosecution will use him as a witness, and his testimony will be very damaging for the defense.

 

[Error505]

I dunno. We are talking about BM -- the man famous for allegedly telling another guy to "control his wife." Given what we know about BM, what other reason would BM have to tranquilize his wife if not to scientifically disguise the time and manner of her death?

I also think by tranquilizing and probably smothering SM, BM was playing some kind of delusional, psychological game with himself that he didn't really kill SM. She just didn't wake up. MOO

BBM Interesting! WOW! I’m not posting much, but reading everyone’s great posts. It totally slipped by me BM had told someone to “control your wife!” I hate to ask, but can you refresh my memory. What an absolute jerk! Was this in IN or after moving to CO? TIA @Seattle1 great info!

 

[gliving]

And let’s just say she took 70k from the garage safe. Why would she Gone Girl to start a new life, with only 70K? If they showed that she started those secret bank accounts, made deposits, and then withdrew it all the first week of May, then okay. But no. If you plan to never turn your phone on again, why take the charger? What would be the point of taking off, with a fraction of the money that you would easily get, leaving your fling behind without a word, your children who are your biggest blessing, your medical records, especially as a cancer patient. If there was no bike and helmet, maybe I could get on board with a potential suicide scenario. We still know that Barry murdered Suzanne, and Gone Girl/Suicide/Random Abduction make zero sense.

The investigators didn't follow up on her secret bank account so we don't know how much money was there or if it was spent. We also don't know who deposited the money or how it was deposited.

SUZANNE MORPHEW: Preliminary hearing in Barry Morphew trial reveals new details | FOX31 Denver
The defense, despite the state’s objection, outlined how Suzanne opened up a secret bank account with GreenDot bank and Royal Compass Management. Eytan asked Harris if he looked into this, and he said he did not.

 

[Seattle1]

BBM Interesting! WOW! I’m not posting much, but reading everyone’s great posts. It totally slipped by me BM had told someone to “control your wife!” I hate to ask, but can you refresh my memory. What an absolute jerk! Was this in IN or after moving to CO? TIA @Seattle1 great info!

As told by Chris M (TIR), this was in IN when a woman confronted BM about how he allegedly threatened/talked to her son that was dating one of the daughters. MOO

 

[10ofRods]

Regarding the tranquilizer ketamine's use in Colorado --
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/09/01/elijah-mcclain-grand-jury/

If a juror thinks ketamine was used on SM perhaps juror could have reasonable doubt about whether death was intended or whether she was only intended to be sedated. Possibly only relevant re difference between first degree and second degree. JMO.

In CO, there are two degrees of 2nd degree murder. The more serious charge includes " knowingly performed an action that could lead to death, even if death wasn't intended." (Paraphrasing). The less serious form (4-24 years as a sentence) is "heat of passion, strong immediate reaction." Shooting someone with a tranq dart comes under the more serious charge, in my book. It's not like seeing your spouse in flagrante and reacting with the first thing that comes into your mind.

However, I do think the defense would somehow have to get evidence into court (without putting Barry on the stand) to show that shooting someone with a dart, with the intent of either sedating or killing them, is not in fact the basis of a first degree murder. What was the point of sedating her? Did she so jealously guard her journal that sedation was needed for him to sit and thumb through it? And then he decided to kill her?

Still pre-meditation, to me.

Sedated for what reason, tho?

To remove her from the house and have all forensic products of death be hidden and elsewhere.

 

[dkryder]

since the AA has been sealed i would guess that some evidence in the AA was not mentioned at the PH. not all evidence to back a particular charge, if included in the AA, needs to be put forward during the PH. so if someone, such as myself, was thinking , is this all they got? most likely, no. the evidence within the AA that was the motivation to seal the AA might also have been excluded from the PH either by order or agreement. MOO.

 

[MassGuy]

As told by Chris M (TIR), this was in IN when a woman confronted BM about how he allegedly threatened/talked to her son that was dating one of the daughters. MOO

He’s so classy, and not controlling at all. If I didn’t know any better though, I’d say that he almost looks down on women.

 

[Willowwood26]

I have said before that attorneys can't really "stack" juries in favor of their side. The stereotypes used are demonstrably unreliable as predictors, and the system effectively thwarts this objective anyway. Both sides do get to excuse from service a limited number of jurors whose responses suggest they have adverse attitudes, but when these "peremptory challenges" are exhausted the attorneys must rely on the judge to excuse jurors who obviously cannot be fair and objective. In my experience (MOO) judges rarely do this: they always ask the juror - in a variety of ways - whether s/he can set aside personal issues and be fair to both sides. If the answer is yes, the juror stays.

But, from my study of psychology and law, there are some juror characteristics that may affect the outcome if the juror is allowed to serve.

First, it seems to matter whether a person believes that what you get in life is usually the result of (1) your own behavior (internal locus of control), or (2) forces outside your control (external locus of control). For example, in a sexual assault case involving "acquaintance rape" a juror whose worldview is internal control is more likely to blame the woman for putting herself in a position to be assaulted, and the "external control" juror is more likely to side with the woman.

A related element of a juror's worldview that may affect the outcome is whether or not the juror believes in a just world. Jurors who believe that generally, "People get what they deserve and deserve what they get" are more likely to derogate victims - that is, to believe that a women who has been raped probably did something to "bring it on herself". (Lerner, 1980, Nudelman, 2013).

Authoritarian belief systems may also affect the outcome in some cases. Authoritarian personalizes tend to have rigid, conventional beliefs. They identify with authority figures, and they are intolerant of weakness. They are punitive toward people who violate established norms and rules, unless the defendant is an authority figure. (Narby, Cutler, and Moran, 1993).

Some researchers argue that case-specific attitudes may have a moderate predictive effect, but I have not seen research results on this topic in a criminal law context. However, it would seem relatively easy to identify in jury selection a person who is cynical, biased, or prejudiced in some way.

Some researchers also believe that jurors who are similar to, or who can identify with, the defendant are less likely to convict. But again, there is a paucity of research on this topic and what research exists suggests it isn't that simple.

The most solid and consistent research outcome is that the strength of the evidence is the best predictor of jury decisions. (Devine, Buddenbaum, Houp, Studebaker, and Stolle, 2009). Also, that if juror personality factors influence the outcome, they have a marginal effect only in cases where the evidence is equivocal. (Kerr, Hymes, Anderson, and Weathers, 1995).

Soccer Mom duties and travels are taking most of my time these days, but I appreciate all the perceptive and knowledgeable comments and the continued interest in this case.

This is fascinating and made me look at myself and my biases…..Um. Thank you for posting and I always appreciate your expertise.

 

[marylamby]

I have said before that attorneys can't really "stack" juries in favor of their side. The stereotypes used are demonstrably unreliable as predictors, and the system effectively thwarts this objective anyway. Both sides do get to excuse from service a limited number of jurors whose responses suggest they have adverse attitudes, but when these "peremptory challenges" are exhausted the attorneys must rely on the judge to excuse jurors who obviously cannot be fair and objective. In my experience (MOO) judges rarely do this: they always ask the juror - in a variety of ways - whether s/he can set aside personal issues and be fair to both sides. If the answer is yes, the juror stays.

But, from my study of psychology and law, there are some juror characteristics that may affect the outcome if the juror is allowed to serve.

First, it seems to matter whether a person believes that what you get in life is usually the result of (1) your own behavior (internal locus of control), or (2) forces outside your control (external locus of control). For example, in a sexual assault case involving "acquaintance rape" a juror whose worldview is internal control is more likely to blame the woman for putting herself in a position to be assaulted, and the "external control" juror is more likely to side with the woman.

A related element of a juror's worldview that may affect the outcome is whether or not the juror believes in a just world. Jurors who believe that generally, "People get what they deserve and deserve what they get" are more likely to derogate victims - that is, to believe that a women who has been raped probably did something to "bring it on herself". (Lerner, 1980, Nudelman, 2013).

Authoritarian belief systems may also affect the outcome in some cases. Authoritarian personalizes tend to have rigid, conventional beliefs. They identify with authority figures, and they are intolerant of weakness. They are punitive toward people who violate established norms and rules, unless the defendant is an authority figure. (Narby, Cutler, and Moran, 1993).

Some researchers argue that case-specific attitudes may have a moderate predictive effect, but I have not seen research results on this topic in a criminal law context. However, it would seem relatively easy to identify in jury selection a person who is cynical, biased, or prejudiced in some way.

Some researchers also believe that jurors who are similar to, or who can identify with, the defendant are less likely to convict. But again, there is a paucity of research on this topic and what research exists suggests it isn't that simple.

The most solid and consistent research outcome is that the strength of the evidence is the best predictor of jury decisions. (Devine, Buddenbaum, Houp, Studebaker, and Stolle, 2009). Also, that if juror personality factors influence the outcome, they have a marginal effect only in cases where the evidence is equivocal. (Kerr, Hymes, Anderson, and Weathers, 1995).

Soccer Mom duties and travels are taking most of my time these days, but I appreciate all the perceptive and knowledgeable comments and the continued interest in this case.

Great comment and while I don't have time to research current statistical jury selection legalese, I don't think anything substitutes common sense when choosing a jury.
I understand how you only get so many passes within the pool but it's quite important to 'stack' your odds as much as possible, from both sides. Due diligence.

 

[marylamby]

In CO, there are two degrees of 2nd degree murder. The more serious charge includes " knowingly performed an action that could lead to death, even if death wasn't intended." (Paraphrasing). The less serious form (4-24 years as a sentence) is "heat of passion, strong immediate reaction." Shooting someone with a tranq dart comes under the more serious charge, in my book. It's not like seeing your spouse in flagrante and reacting with the first thing that comes into your mind.

However, I do think the defense would somehow have to get evidence into court (without putting Barry on the stand) to show that shooting someone with a dart, with the intent of either sedating or killing them, is not in fact the basis of a first degree murder. What was the point of sedating her? Did she so jealously guard her journal that sedation was needed for him to sit and thumb through it? And then he decided to kill her?

Still pre-meditation, to me.



To remove her from the house and have all forensic products of death be hidden and elsewhere.

Which would still prove premeditation, as you say.

 

[Seattle1]

2-year affair

By: Stephanie Butzer
Posted at 12:24 PM, Aug 09, 2021
and last updated 4:20 AM, Aug 13, 2021

CHAFFEE COUNTY, Colo. — Suzanne Morphew was having a two-year affair leading up her 2020 disappearance and alleged murder at the hands of her husband, an investigator said in Monday’s preliminary hearing.
[..]

Barry told authorities, “There’s not a more special, wonderful person in the world.” He said they did have “spats” about him working too much and he wanted her off a certain medication she was taking, but “it wasn’t like they didn’t make up,” Nielsen said.

[..]

Authorities didn't learn about this affair until November 2020 — six months after Suzanne went missing. There were hundreds of hours of phone calls, WhatsApp messages and other communication. The two met up at least six times in New Orleans, Michigan, Texas, and Indiana, and she didn't tell anybody about him, Walker confirmed.

Libler did not voluntarily come forward to help find Suzanne, Walker said. Law enforcement first spoke with him on Nov. 13, 2020. It's not yet clear what was discussed in that conversation.

[..]

The second witness of the preliminary hearing, Kenneth Harris, was brought to the stand around 11:30 a.m. Monday. He is one of two FBI Special Agents on the case and specializes in behavior analysis.

[..]

Harris said in some conversations picked up on Suzanne’s spy pen, you could hear her and Barry arguing about money. She was heard accusing him of telling her what she can do and what she can wear.

Another recording picked up a five-hour conversation with Jeff Libler, the man Suzanne was having an affair with, Harris said. It was at this point that investigators realized there was an affair involved, he said.

[..]

In the texts, Suzanne said her cancer had returned in May 2018 and her health was declining. She worried her marriage was only worsening it. Oliver responded, saying the toll of the couple’s fights was concerning.

Oliver also said while Barry might have called May 9 a “perfect night,” she knew the couple hadn’t had a "perfect night in a year and a half,” Harris said.

[..]

He said at one point, Barry put a gun to his head and asked, "Is this what you want?" He had also pinned her to the bed before. She said she'd call police.

Suzanne wanted to leave the marriage in 2019 and 2020, but also wanted to wait until their youngest daughter was out of the house, Harris said. Meanwhile, Barry was worried about how others perceived their marriage and always "wanted to come out looking good," Harris said.

Text messages between Oliver (Suzanne's good friend) and Suzanne show that Suzanne was confiding in her friend about the failing marriage. At one point, she said she hoped Barry would find somebody else and leave.

[..]

By February 2020, Suzanne and Oliver are talking almost every day and the subject of leaving Barry is a frequent topic.

Harris said Suzanne was racked with guilt and wanted forgiveness from God. In texts, she said she wondered what the "young me" was thinking. Her relationship with her daughters was the center of her world, Harris said.

Harris then explained how Suzanne came to know Libler.

The two had gone to high school in Indiana and hooked up during the summer of 1989 at a house party. Barry was not at the party. Twenty years later, they hooked up again, Harris said.

The relationship started platonic — talking about books, movies, Suzanne's cancer — but by February 2019, the two met up in New Orleans and fooled around in a hotel. Harris said they did not have sex.

They met up a few other times in 2019 as well, he said. They started communicating via WhatsApp and LinkedIn when Barry became suspicious.

After Suzanne's disappearance and once authorities tracked down Libler to talk, he said Suzanne's marriage was not good. The couple argued a lot, he said, and she repeatedly said she wanted to leave. However, she also said she couldn't divorce Barry for "Biblical reasons."

Upon discovering she may have been abducted, Libler deleted his accounts because he said it'd negatively affect Suzanne's daughters, Harris said.

[..]

Eytan said Suzanne seemed to keep lots of secrets, noting that the affair was not a short-term fling.

[..]

Suzanne did not tell her sister or best friends about Libler, Eytan said.

Barry claimed not to know about the affair when investigators told him, Harris said. He said he thought she may have been having an emotional affair, but not a physical one.

[...]

Some of the messages between Suzanne and Libler were shown in court, such as: "Your heart, that's what I crave," "I love how you love me. I love how you think," and "You're the sweetest thing I've ever known."

Note: There was a brief technical complication at this point. Denver7 will work to fill in the gaps of what happened in this timeframe.

[Cellular connectivity issue reported by several reporters attending court].

[..]

They talked about moving to Ecuador where Suzanne could teach language, Eytan said.

On May 8, 2020, Libler messaged Suzanne saying, "You need to be my wife" and complimented her biking gear. The following morning, May 9, she texted him saying, "We need to be husband & wife."

Libler said the affair made him nervous and he didn't want to lose his job or his family. He said he didn't want Suzanne's legacy to be that she had an affair "with that guy."

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/ne...rs-confirm-suzanne-was-having-a-2-year-affair

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Like many others, I believe JL knew about SM’s problems with BM. Why else was he trying to help her break away from him? IMO, he knew she was afraid of BM and when he found out she was missing he had to have realized she was dead. After all, he never heard from her again and BM was the key suspect in her disappearance almost from the get-go. I believe the prosecution will use him as a witness, and his testimony will be very damaging for the defense.

Where did it come up that he was "helping her breakaway from him"?

 

[Seattle1]

In CO, there are two degrees of 2nd degree murder. The more serious charge includes " knowingly performed an action that could lead to death, even if death wasn't intended." (Paraphrasing). The less serious form (4-24 years as a sentence) is "heat of passion, strong immediate reaction." Shooting someone with a tranq dart comes under the more serious charge, in my book. It's not like seeing your spouse in flagrante and reacting with the first thing that comes into your mind.

However, I do think the defense would somehow have to get evidence into court (without putting Barry on the stand) to show that shooting someone with a dart, with the intent of either sedating or killing them, is not in fact the basis of a first degree murder. What was the point of sedating her? Did she so jealously guard her journal that sedation was needed for him to sit and thumb through it? And then he decided to kill her?

Still pre-meditation, to me.

To remove her from the house and have all forensic products of death be hidden and elsewhere.

Under Colorado law, a person commits the crime of murder in the second degree if the person knowingly causes the death of another person. The “knowingly” element distinguishes second-degree murder from the crime of manslaughter, which requires only that you act recklessly.

First-degree murder in Colorado requires proof of premeditation and deliberation, along with extreme indifference to human life in general. While a second-degree murder conviction requires proof that you acted intentionally, it does not require premeditation.

BM states that he's been hunting since the age of 9. I can't see any circumstance where BM using a tranquilizer, intended for the sedation of animals, on his wife, that ultimately aids in her death, can be anything other than 1st degree murder.

Second Degree Murder - Colorado Law - 18-3-103 CRS

 

[marylamby]

I suppose they could say SM planted the bike and helmet and staged her own disappearance, turned off the security cameras (her DNA on cables), took 70k cash from the safe. I'm stuck after that. IMO

They could try but then how did she get gone? Who picked her up? I think they'll throw out more than a few alternate theories.