Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #85

[marylamby]

Ok. This didn't occur to me until now, although I've mentioned it in past cases.

Genetic genealogy works by uploading offender DNA to a public genealogy website, like the most popular one, GED Match. That particular database includes DNA that people have uploaded from other services, which law enforcement cannot access (AncestryDNA for example).

From there, partial matches may be found which can then be used to develop a family tree, leading to the offender.

CODIS on the other hand, typically works on complete matches. That system is looking for the exact offender DNA, as opposed to a relative.

In most states, it is illegal for law enforcement to search CODIS for partial matches. Several states however, have no such restrictions.

Colorado is one of them.

Why searching a database like CODIS can be so helpful, is because crime tends to run in families. The offender may not be in there, but his father or brother might.

So our friend in Arizona did not leave that DNA, but someone related to him in some way did.

I imagine it's going to be time consuming and expensive to find someone who is ultimately irrelevant, but I guess it may be worthwhile in case the jury isn't capable of thinking on an average level.

Find him, and you shut another door to the defense, and it's "Gone Girl" again.

Very interesting. Didn't know most of this although we'd touched on this before.
I agree it would be very worthwhile for the prosecution to utilize their services. It would be, imo, more than worth the expense as opposed to the defense drawing out exuberantly lengthy court costs. And, you know they will. It's all they have to TRY to convince a jury that there's reasonable doubt.
The prosecution need to cut that off at the quick.

 

[marylamby]

This was August 30 after the Prelim had ended on the 24th, but before the Judge ruled on going to trial. I don’t think she said anything out of line, but would have to watch it again. It starts around 30 minutes in.
I will say I was surprised at her sparring with a couple of people in the comments. JMO

Thanks again, Cindizzi. Didn't read the comments but I just watched this again a week ago or so and agree that she didn't say anything that would be construed as inflammatory or defamatory. Matter of fact, she did say a few times that she could not respond to certain questions that might jeopardize the integrity of the case.

 

[MassGuy]

Very interesting. Didn't know most of this although we'd touched on this before.
I agree it would be very worthwhile for the prosecution to utilize their services. It would be, imo, more than worth the expense as opposed to the defense drawing out exuberant lengthy court costs. And, you know they will. It's all they have to TRY to convince a jury that there's reasonable doubt.
The prosecution need to cut that off at the quick.

The cool thing about this technology is that they may not have to. They may already know that this guy is going to be a brother or something, depending on how close the match is.

If it's more distant, then they will probably need expertise like that of Parabon.

It's so ridiculous, I hate that they may even have to explore this.

 

[marylamby]

The cool thing about this technology is that they may not have to. They may already know that this guy is going to be a brother or something, depending on how close the match is.

If it's more distant, then they will probably need expertise like that of Parabon.

Exactly, and it could be a more distant relative. Many people have half siblings - their fathers and sons/daughters and cousins. It's so vague at this point and may remain so. I doubt Barry's friends and associates (including his paramour) have been tested.
I've never heard of Parabon but I'm all for it. Whatever it takes.

 

[HongKongPhooey]

The cool thing about this technology is that they may not have to. They may already know that this guy is going to be a brother or something, depending on how close the match is.

If it's more distant, then they will probably need expertise like that of Parabon.

It's so ridiculous, I hate that they may even have to explore this.

Complete waste of time and money in my opinion and for what, ultimately? But hey..

 

[marylamby]

Complete waste of time and money in my opinion and for what, ultimately? But hey..

For what?
To squash the defense's only lame attempt to defend their client - how another person killed Suzanne other than the abusive man who she intended to divorce. Well worth the price instead of a drawn out trial full of suppositions. Everyone in that courthouse is making a salary. That's what.
Isn't the truth alone worth the nominal price? I sure as heck think so.

 

[Tiff23fr]

This thread is closed.

Please continue on Thread #86