Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #89

[MassGuy]

What I really would like to know more about is:
1. what was his usual activity like with his truck? When he gets home or just in the evening, maybe even loading for a job site work the following day, how many door events are typical? Is there usually 10 or 20? Was 80 really out of the normal range for say the previous 2 months?

2. What was his usual cell data like? Did he often use airplane mode? If so how often did he put it off and on a lot? Daily? Weekly?

3. How often did he decide to get a job going the day before by telling his workers last minute like this? When did he find out he had this job to do in the first place?

4. If they have cell movement data from the previous month or two, how often did he arrive home and start running around (shooting chipmunks/looking for turkeys, etc.), how often did he leave for work and turn the wrong way to go look for elk or whatever he said he did.. Even a month or two back, if he has NEVER done those things.. leaves and goes right toward town or does he often just drive around at 4 or 5am looking for animals?

We can tell a lot about someone in these circumstanital cases if what they say they did isn't normal or typical of their previous behavior. If he is always just aimlessly wandering around after animals, opening and shutting his truck or causing "events" nearly 100 times in an hour or so and his cell is always in airplane mode.. maybe his stories is odd, but true. (personally, I think it's a crock of crapola) But, if this day all the sudden everything he says he did is so out of the norm from what he has done every day for the last few months, then that really would say a lot I think to proove he's just telling a story to fit what he knows he already did and needs to cover up.

Exactly. It is crucial to understand baseline behavior for both Suzanne, and Barry.

For example, we do know, courtesy of the AA and PH, is that Suzanne's lack of activity was highly unusual on the day in question, and Barry's phone activity showed a massive spike on both the day preceding Suzanne's alleged death, and the day of.

 

[justtrish]

If Barry turned to follow a bull elk, regardless of it not being shed season, well okay, I will follow along. But Barry only remembered turning and following said elk when confronted with data that contradicted his story. That’s where I have the problem. Every time LE showed Barry that things could not have happened the way he said, he altered his statements to match the information he was presented with.

I think LE are also trained to notice these type of things. Not give much info at all and see what is said, then present just small tiny details that make the suspect think they need to edit something to match that detail.. then they wait and see if the person changes the story to fit. I think Barry repeatedly did this. I don't think it's out of the norm for someone to remember additional things after the first statement. I think when someone is really traumatized they often forget things and need to add some things they forgot later, but not the way he did.. he only added things once he was basically called out that something didn't add up. Then he had an answer for that or said I don't know.

 

[Boxer]

More about truck events.
A 4 door cab.
83 minutes.
80 events.
Doors open, doors shut, doors locking and unlocking, dome lights, seats adjustments.
If it was just a doors it would be one event every minute but its not.
I can easily see opening the back doors and shutting them multiple time as he added more things.
For every door opening there will be a door closing. 4 Doors in 83 minutes.
Just a really busy bee, not a ridiculous amount of events.

Big Lie.
He was loading the truck when he said he was asleep.

 

[Boxer]

I think LE are also trained to notice these type of things. Not give much info at all and see what is said, then present just small tiny details that make the suspect think they need to edit something to match that detail.. then they wait and see if the person changes the story to fit. I think Barry repeatedly did this. I don't think it's out of the norm for someone to remember additional things after the first statement. I think when someone is really traumatized they often forget things and need to add some things they forgot later, but not the way he did.. he only added things once he was basically called out that something didn't add up. Then he had an answer for that or said I don't know.

MOO His patching up the story answers always seem to be "I did something to an animal."

 

[justtrish]

I am finding it helpful to go back and listen to all these videos after having read the AA. IMO it solidifies the fact that from the beginning Barry was acting suspicious.

I think I'll do the same before the trial, just to re-read the AA and then listen to what was said/done in the early days and in interviews since then.

 

[MassGuy]

I think I'll do the same before the trial, just to re-read the AA and then listen to what was said/done in the early days and in interviews since then.

That's what I'm doing today, and I found something mildly interesting. Who knows exactly how many trips their wife has made in the past year?

A controlling man who knows his wife was engaged in affair, that's who.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

That's what I'm doing today, and I found something mildly interesting. Who knows exactly how many trips their wife has made in the past year?

A controlling man who knows his wife was engaged in affair, that's who.

View attachment 330315

I think he suspected....hence wanting to see her phone when they were on vacation. Not many people spend their vacation glued to their phone. I don't think he knew for certain and I absolutely don't think he knew it was JL or there would have been phone confrontation most likely. He had already confronted him on the golf course or if I remember that was JL after the party back in the day when he and Suzanne were messing around together. But he never "forbade" her the trips so I'm not convinced he was as overbearing as some have portrayed.

 

[Lyanna]

But he never "forbade" her the trips so I'm not convinced he was as overbearing as some have portrayed.

Suzanne's own words are pretty damning though, and I'm inclined too believe her

 

[Boxer]

I hope the new judge is more energetic.
That old judge allowed the defense to introduce their own analysis of the cell phone movements, a report the defense said refuted the prosecutions report.
(It did not, it had a different vocabulary to make the detective look dumb.)

He should have shut that down that day, and let the defense go through the process of introducing the report properly.

Casting doubt on digital evidence. Is one prong of the attack style defense and will be a huge theme in their "narrative", followed by "incompetent police."

The main defense for BM is "someone else did it."

1. Work to discredit the digital evidence.
2. Work to discredit the police.
3. Work to discredit the victim, so the jury cares more about the living crying daughters before them than justice their mother who was having an affair.
3. Work in the best image of BM, by touching him all the time, having family gaze adoringly and supportively behind him.

They are bias miners.

They want jurors who hate tech, hate complicated things, easily scoff at evidence, hate police, hate women who cheat and are very visual oriented so that the pantomime stuff they see at the defense table overrides truths they hear in argument.

Hope the DA get some expert modern help countering these themes.

 

[MassGuy]

I think he suspected....hence wanting to see her phone when they were on vacation. Not many people spend their vacation glued to their phone. I don't think he knew for certain and I absolutely don't think he knew it was JL or there would have been phone confrontation most likely. He had already confronted him on the golf course or if I remember that was JL after the party back in the day when he and Suzanne were messing around together. But he never "forbade" her the trips so I'm not convinced he was as overbearing as some have portrayed.

Yes, I do not see evidence that he knew this man was JL. Barry couldn't have controlled himself had he known that, and we'd see an obvious sign.

We don't know if they fought before these trips, but it's clear that Suzanne was fighting back against his influence. Barry Tells us as much: "But she turned into a different person. She was working out. She was, she was never this fit. And this ballsy in her life."

Who uses that particular phrase, "...this ballsy?'

Someone who has had their authority subverted, that's who.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Yes, I do not see evidence that he knew this man was JL. Barry couldn't have controlled himself had he known that, and we'd see an obvious sign.

We don't know if they fought before these trips, but it's clear that Suzanne was fighting back against his influence. Barry Tells us as much: "But she turned into a different person. She was working out. She was, she was never this fit. And this ballsy in her life."

Who uses that particular phrase, "...this ballsy?'

Someone who has had their authority subverted, that's who.
View attachment 330319

Yup don't disagree. She was changing and he was caught off guard. I think most of us have seen a marriage breakdown like that where one spouse was blindsided....even though they maybe shouldn't have been blindsided. That is why I don't see prosecution spending a ton of time on the breakdown of their marriage....it's a pretty easy concept to get across fairly quickly and one that really can't be disagreed with. Even the judge was like -- move along the court gets that the marriage was dissolving.

 

[justtrish]

Suzanne's own words are pretty damning though, and I'm inclined too believe her

I agree. I think he liked to play games, he liked the hunt. He saw her as his trophy, he "let" her go, but what did she give up in return? He showed up on one occasion on the trip she was on.

I don't know for sure obviously, I just have been around people that are controlling and I see in him some things. He returned early from a trip and basically stalked her at their house, and it was scary enough they thought it was someone else. He shows up on a trip she is on. The way he spoke about things after she was gone also shows a lot about him. He referred to the CBD guy in a bad way, yet he went to get the meds for her at least once. I just don't think he was someone that thought every highly of her and when he said that he did, his actions spoke something else. They want to appear one way and then behind doors are another way and we can see that in Suzanne's words, actions, and his own actions after. Burning her diary? He couldn't have any evidence left that referred to him in a bad light. All appearances had to be good.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Lots of guys think of wives as “trophies” hence the term trophy wife. It is gross but it is certainly not unique to Barry. But I have not seen anything that supports him not thinking highly of her. Clearly he was puzzled by the new aggressive Suzanne but they didn’t go through twenty years of marriage in a constant state of marital tension in my opinion. I think it escalated after the move.

 

[303gmf]

Lots of guys think of wives as “trophies” hence the term trophy wife. It is gross but it is certainly not unique to Barry. But I have not seen anything that supports him not thinking highly of her. Clearly he was puzzled by the new aggressive Suzanne but they didn’t go through twenty years of marriage in a constant state of marital tension in my opinion. I think it escalated after the move.

Agressive?
That sounds a bit dramatic
Possibly a bit more assertive than prior
BM seems to be the aggressive partner in the marriage and on job sites

 

[Lyanna]

I agree. I think he liked to play games, he liked the hunt. He saw her as his trophy, he "let" her go, but what did she give up in return? He showed up on one occasion on the trip she was on.

I don't know for sure obviously, I just have been around people that are controlling and I see in him some things. He returned early from a trip and basically stalked her at their house, and it was scary enough they thought it was someone else. He shows up on a trip she is on. The way he spoke about things after she was gone also shows a lot about him. He referred to the CBD guy in a bad way, yet he went to get the meds for her at least once. I just don't think he was someone that thought every highly of her and when he said that he did, his actions spoke something else. They want to appear one way and then behind doors are another way and we can see that in Suzanne's words, actions, and his own actions after. Burning her diary? He couldn't have any evidence left that referred to him in a bad light. All appearances had to be good.

Yes, totally agree. He appears very materialistic - and held that over Suzanne, telling her that he provides her with the nice house, nice cars etc. It appears the 'perfect' image was very important. I imagine he held a lot of things over her to ensure she 'toed the line' he drew for her.
He hasn't spoken nicely about her at all, insinuating she was influenced by drugs/alcohol - tried to put her in a bad light at quite a few turns.
He doesn't come across as a loving, doting, worried sick husband , and I don't consider his 30 second video as one made by a loving husband, I see it as one of a number of things he thought he needed to do to look innocent - 'make a homemade video showing I'm not guilty - CHECK!'
Not one of his actions that we have seen/read/heard about has implied that he has been at all worried about her and her mysterious disappearance, in fact quite the opposite, after all he is wealthy, footloose and fancy free. For now. jmo

 

[Seattle1]

The fellow Barry hooked up was the one who supposedly messed up the wall. SD's fiancé never worked for Barry. In fact I am curious why he (Frances Bach) is on the witness list for the Prosecution. Defense I could understand for the very reason Puzzles8 stated above but unless his testimony is that SD told him about the suspicious vehicle and asked him to please call it in as she was too busy, something along those lines, I'm not sure why the Prosecution wants him. That would also be a "Go directly to jail" card for Barry and possibly SD, IMO. Why else if he on the witness list?

View attachment 330302

FB alleged that he rode the trail Sunday that was supposed to be where SM rode. I imagine the prosecutor might want him to testify that what time he was on the trail and besides the vehicle that looked "out of place," if he saw any glimpse of SM. Perhaps they want him to testify on the condition of the bike trail on Sunday. I recall he learned later about SM missing and called the tip line. He might also testify what happened when he called in the tip -- how response LE was to his call including if he talked to a live person and/or what time they followed up on his call. We have the interview he gave in the Media file and I don't recall anything about FB calling in for SD -- he had his own sighting to report. JMO

 

[justtrish]

Yes, I do not see evidence that he knew this man was JL. Barry couldn't have controlled himself had he known that, and we'd see an obvious sign.

We don't know if they fought before these trips, but it's clear that Suzanne was fighting back against his influence. Barry Tells us as much: "But she turned into a different person. She was working out. She was, she was never this fit. And this ballsy in her life."

Who uses that particular phrase, "...this ballsy?'

Someone who has had their authority subverted, that's who.
View attachment 330319

That is a great point! Just using my own marriage as a reference, if my husband took an interest in fitness and was taking care of himself and finding new hobbies that they enjoyed and brought him joy, I definitely wouldn't think working out, getting fit would equal him being ballsy. I think it would equal him taking care of himself, making positive changes, feeling more confident and excited about life, especially if he had just had cancer treatments and so on. Ballsy would be the last thing I'd think to describe it.

 

[justtrish]

Yes, totally agree. He appears very materialistic - and held that over Suzanne, telling her that he provides her with the nice house, nice cars etc. It appears the 'perfect' image was very important. I imagine he held a lot of things over her to ensure she 'toed the line' he drew for her.
He hasn't spoken nicely about her at all, insinuating she was influenced by drugs/alcohol - tried to put her in a bad light at quite a few turns.
He doesn't come across as a loving, doting, worried sick husband , and I don't consider his 30 second video as one made by a loving husband, I see it as one of a number of things he thought he needed to do to look innocent - 'make a homemade video showing I'm not guilty - CHECK!'
Not one of his actions that we have seen/read/heard about has implied that he has been at all worried about her and her mysterious disappearance, in fact quite the opposite, after all he is wealthy, footloose and fancy free. For now. jmo

He wanted the image that he was a great husband, he said what he thought would make him appear to be the worried husband.. but instead what it did was proove the opposite. He provided these digs at Suzanne to try to make her look bad, while trying to make himself look good. That is not how a loving husband behaves. That is how a husband that harmed his wife and thinks she got what she deserved behaves. The only thing he was worried about was how to get away with it.

 

[Seattle1]

I hope the new judge is more energetic.
That old judge allowed the defense to introduce their own analysis of the cell phone movements, a report the defense said refuted the prosecutions report.
(It did not, it had a different vocabulary to make the detective look dumb.)

He should have shut that down that day, and let the defense go through the process of introducing the report properly.

Casting doubt on digital evidence. Is one prong of the attack style defense and will be a huge theme in their "narrative", followed by "incompetent police."

The main defense for BM is "someone else did it."

1. Work to discredit the digital evidence.
2. Work to discredit the police.
3. Work to discredit the victim, so the jury cares more about the living crying daughters before them than justice their mother who was having an affair.
3. Work in the best image of BM, by touching him all the time, having family gaze adoringly and supportively behind him.

They are bias miners.

They want jurors who hate tech, hate complicated things, easily scoff at evidence, hate police, hate women who cheat and are very visual oriented so that the pantomime stuff they see at the defense table overrides truths they hear in argument.

Hope the DA get some expert modern help countering these themes.

I disagree. The PM was not a trial and the defense had equal time as the prosecution to present evidence or testimony to challenge the state's case. FBI Agent Grusing who was the witness for the state is not a phone forensic expert and he did not testify in the manner of an expert. I believe the defense and state used the same software (Cellbrite) to analyze the discovery but chose a different analysis option.

Actually, I think the defense helped the state here because they will be better prepared during the trial. I also think there's some truth to how the same data produced different results given the lack of phone signal in the area of the Morphew's former residence.

PE's Mike King conducted an experiment with his own phone-- leaving it on his desk. The initial phone forensic report also seemed to indicate his phone was moving in a quick pattern when it did not move at all from his desk-- I'm recalling something about the phone trying to pair to a device or search for a tower signal. MOO

 

[justtrish]

Reading the AA again, and the first thing I note is this very first encounter Barry had with LE about Suzanne's disappearance and this is what he said:

Suzanne recently gained an interest in mountain biking.
She biked daily
She wore a turquoise bike helmet and windbreaker jacket
She took her iphone with her when biking

Also, this page details them getting a call from Mr. Ritter alerting them that Suzanne was missing. In a note at the bottom, it says Barry told Mr. Ritter he was at a worksite with workers present when he (Mr. Ritter) called him. Barry also told investigators several times that he was at a worksite when Mr. Ritter called him and he had to drop tools at the hotel and then head home.

No workers were with him then even if he was at a worksite. He was not at a work site because cameras proove he was at the hotel. This is not something you get confused and it isn't something you lie about to make yourself look better.. there is no reason to lie about where he was unless he was guilty of something and trying to hide the truth. He had to be working that day because that is why he went there on Mother's Day, instead of spending it with his wife.. but that was all a lie. He needed to be out of town because he killed her and he couldn't work so he laid up in his hotel room for hours. What other reason is there to lie about that? He didn't forget where he was.. he hadn't been at the work site that day since like noon.. he didn't forget and how does one even forget where they actually are when they find out their spouse is missing?

So just in this first encounter we see Barry setting up this narrative. That was the only thing noted that he said. He didn't want there to be any other narrative other than she went for a bike ride and for them to look for her bike. That phone call was at 7:10 and that detective and another went to the house and found the bike laying down a ravine just after 7:30. Zero sign of a crash, no break skids, no debris, no blood, no matted down grass, nothing, just a bike.