marylamby
Former Member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2019
- Messages
- 1,921
- Reaction score
- 26,675
Interesting...
Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #96
- Thread starter Mysti88c
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
- Status
marylamby
Former Member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2019
- Messages
- 1,921
- Reaction score
- 26,675
Last edited by a moderator:
Iwondertoo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2019
- Messages
- 232
- Reaction score
- 2,202
This must have been a lot of work. Thanks @sk716 .
Maybe I don't understand these logs correctly. I just happened to notice one section where the truck was logged at the George Davis residence and the times don't make sense to me. (Sorry can't copy the section but it's line 8 through 13 here - Barry's Truck Events - Google Sheets).
His parking lights go off at GD's on May 7th at 23:13:31. I assume he just arrived and turned off his lights? He's there for 18 seconds and his parking lights come on again. 2 minutes and 57 seconds later, back at the GD residence, the lights again turn off but come back on 2 seconds later. Did he leave for a few minutes and then come back turn his lights off and on?
Then the next day on May 8th, the log shows his lights come on at 20:13:26 at the GD residence. So does that mean the truck was parked at the GD property overnight and in to the afternoon? Why is there no mention off his lights going off the previous night? Sorry if I'm dense, I've never really understood the telematics but I'm trying. (I am assuming his parking lights come on when the truck starts. Maybe I'm wrong to assume that idk.)
Am I interpreting this correctly? Anyone?
(Also line 8 and 10 seem to be almost duplicates.)
Interesting stuff
I really will be interested to see what else they can lift off the Truck computer and how they can shape this mysterious blackout of Truck data
+1
There always comes a time in these threads when I feel it is worth mentioning the practical difference between overall burden of proof in a criminal case, and evidential burden in relation to specific facts.
It is true (and boring) to say the accused does not need to prove his own innocence. But as a practical question, in many criminal trials it will be necessary for the accused to establish an evidentiary foundation*, sufficient to raise reasonable doubt. In the present case, that doubt needs to be a real possibility that someone else did it, not merely fanciful speculation.
As such, BM will need to be able to point to some facts at trial, that create a real possibility of an abductor. SM running away does not rise about fanciful IMO.
So we can therefore say, that defence counsel need to more than engage in wild speculation. They need to establish facts which
a) cast doubt on the prosecution case AND/OR
b) suggest an abductor
IMO the problem with discussion in recent weeks, is that the defence strategy in pre-trial motions does little to achieve either of those things - save the exclusion of the abuse testimony, which in itself it not critical to the prosecution version.
* one can engage in anorak debates as to whether this is unconstitutional due to the presumption of innocence.
Last edited:
Do you want to put him in a trap, boil him alive, or what?Heeyyy…do we have a lobster in the zoo yet?
Last edited:
I wonder if the "parking lights" are basically a proxy for "power on" - so you click the unlock button on the fob, and the lights flash on?
Do you want to put him in a trap, boil him alive, or what?
Put him in the aquarium ,we are a zoo not a restaurant!
I think the challenge for the prosecution is to have a simple story to connect all these dots that you raise.
For me that story is:
Suspiciously, BM was up at 3 o'clock in the morning, preparing to skip town, and claims his wife was asleep snoring in bed. Later that same day, her family discovered her missing. But she wasn't in bed snoring - actually she went missing 12 hours earlier ... here is how we know that. ...
[insert detail]
So we don't know exactly how BM did it, or where he hid her, but we do know he was lying when he said she was in bed snoring, and that means he murdered her.
That's my feeling as well
This case is much simpler and more obvious than the others I have followed to trial.
It's one reason I wonder why I am following it in the first place! It doesn't have a great deal of mystery to it, beyond where is SM.
McStay, Knox, Pistorius - these were much more complicated cases.
I think the RR is going to show no activity for the 9th and 10th until searchers open it.
That is why it hasn't been exhibited, and state is slow to discover it. It wasn't important to the case.
But as you point out, this would be bad for the defense
Oh, alright. If you insist.
FromGermany1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2021
- Messages
- 3,657
- Reaction score
- 27,847
My interest began, when I learned, BM/Suzanne were from Indiana. Immediately I saw Suzanne's portrait with her teal helmet. That seemed to be outstanding.
First I thought, Suzanne was abducted by a stranger or hit man.
Then the Sheriff started to say nothing, and I became curious, always in connection to IN in mind.
When BM made his little ominous video public, I started to suspect him or a hit man in his order, finally and rather irrevocable.
Name it intuition or something, Idk. I didn't think, he could be completely innocent.
Now, that we know of his strange behavior since MD/before/after, there is no way, IMO, he could be innocent. Why should he have behaved like he did? MOO of course
Last edited:
Were you on the Pistorius threads FromGermany? I think i remember you from that?
On that case it was the timeline that drew me in - it was obvious he was guilty, but there was so much to figure out in terms of exactly how he worked it.
I think this case is it a bit similar. He obviously did it because SM went missing fully 12 hours before he left the house.
But how he dd it, is kind of fascinating in a macabre way, even though i guess we will never really know.
all three of those cases at least had a crime scene found. This one doesn’t. I can’t think of any examples of a no body case guilty verdict without a crime scene, witness, confession or video. At least in the US.
I vaguely remember an Australian case where a footballer was convicted of killing his missing wife decades after she went missing without any of the above, but has it happened in the US?
IMO
Megnut
A piece of peace is peace enough.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 12,494
- Reaction score
- 215,887
Two thoughts (to fill in some of the gaps):
Maybe:
Barry was driving multiple vehicles. Friend's truck?
Barry wasn't at the beachsite Saturday morning. MG was. Working for him. He was there, but only by phone.
JMO
Love Never Fails
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2013
- Messages
- 13,033
- Reaction score
- 83,717
in the Heat of the Night is not the same as In the Still of the Night. Great old love song. Just in case no one corrected you already.
ETA: didn’t mean to correct you. But @OldCop really did say In The Still if The Night. Such a great slow dance song. Nice memories.
Last edited:
Megnut
A piece of peace is peace enough.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 12,494
- Reaction score
- 215,887
Question:
Why did Barry hang out at the hotel all afternoon? Why didn't he just sit in his beloved truck at the wall site?
He did seem to be trying to establish a visual alibi at the hotel. See me, I'm going back and forth to my work site, with workers present.
How many times do you suppose he said that to the kid behind the desk?
He did make multiple trips. Just not to the wall. To dumpsters near enough by it.
I'm curious to know if, at the 6 pm hour, when he made a show of carrying in tools, if he'd also exited by the side door and drove his truck from the side lot to the entry.
He says he knew there were cameras everywhere (and did nothing wrong at the hotel) but IMO he thought the side lot (where he tried to slink in for the free breakfast, as if) had no cameras. He was half right. Hotel didn't. Bank did.
Busted.
JMO
Why did Barry hang out at the hotel all afternoon? Why didn't he just sit in his beloved truck at the wall site?
He did seem to be trying to establish a visual alibi at the hotel. See me, I'm going back and forth to my work site, with workers present.
How many times do you suppose he said that to the kid behind the desk?
He did make multiple trips. Just not to the wall. To dumpsters near enough by it.
I'm curious to know if, at the 6 pm hour, when he made a show of carrying in tools, if he'd also exited by the side door and drove his truck from the side lot to the entry.
He says he knew there were cameras everywhere (and did nothing wrong at the hotel) but IMO he thought the side lot (where he tried to slink in for the free breakfast, as if) had no cameras. He was half right. Hotel didn't. Bank did.
Busted.
JMO
Megnut
A piece of peace is peace enough.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 12,494
- Reaction score
- 215,887
Theory, mine:
I think Barry used bromide over MDW.
I think it caused irritation. I think it left him smelling like chlorine, something he hadn't anticipated. I think HE smelled like a hot tub and didn't even realize it until his first recorded trash stop. I think bromide might also have stained his skin.
I think he parked along the side of the hotel specifically to avoid hotel cameras. Wanted to bypass the front desk because HE WAS RANK. I think, had another hotel guest unwittingly let him in (assuming Barry was a paid guest), Barry would have showered in the pool shower. How ever many times and towels it tool.
He was forced, however, to pivot. Had to come in through the front door. I'd like to see that footage. I'd like to hear his first conversation at the front desk. Accounting for his stench, if he had to.
I really don't think the hotel was supposed to feature so strongly in his day. He had evidence to discard, he had a job site he wanted to use as an alibi.
I think the hotel became a necessary detour because of, first, the need to shower repeatedly and, two, The Call was delayed.
Otherwise, I think Barry would've spent his time between the wall and trash runs. Busy, busy B. Remove a capstone, dump a bag, remove a capstone, dump a bag.
IMO it's the lather/rinse/repeat in between that messed that up.
Because IMO he planned to show up at the hotel ONCE. To leave tools. Early afternoon. Like 1.
Didn't get a lot of work done because he wasn't there long enough. As if.
Wouldn't need to adjust reservation/check-in. Show up once, having actually come from his work site.
Since IMO he was forced to get to the hotel early (to shower, over and over), he tried to use it to his advantage. Convince the person behind the desk he was working hard, back and forth to his worksite, with workers present.
I don't mean to belabor the point.
I mean to belabor bromide.
JMO
I think Barry used bromide over MDW.
I think it caused irritation. I think it left him smelling like chlorine, something he hadn't anticipated. I think HE smelled like a hot tub and didn't even realize it until his first recorded trash stop. I think bromide might also have stained his skin.
I think he parked along the side of the hotel specifically to avoid hotel cameras. Wanted to bypass the front desk because HE WAS RANK. I think, had another hotel guest unwittingly let him in (assuming Barry was a paid guest), Barry would have showered in the pool shower. How ever many times and towels it tool.
He was forced, however, to pivot. Had to come in through the front door. I'd like to see that footage. I'd like to hear his first conversation at the front desk. Accounting for his stench, if he had to.
I really don't think the hotel was supposed to feature so strongly in his day. He had evidence to discard, he had a job site he wanted to use as an alibi.
I think the hotel became a necessary detour because of, first, the need to shower repeatedly and, two, The Call was delayed.
Otherwise, I think Barry would've spent his time between the wall and trash runs. Busy, busy B. Remove a capstone, dump a bag, remove a capstone, dump a bag.
IMO it's the lather/rinse/repeat in between that messed that up.
Because IMO he planned to show up at the hotel ONCE. To leave tools. Early afternoon. Like 1.
Didn't get a lot of work done because he wasn't there long enough. As if.
Wouldn't need to adjust reservation/check-in. Show up once, having actually come from his work site.
Since IMO he was forced to get to the hotel early (to shower, over and over), he tried to use it to his advantage. Convince the person behind the desk he was working hard, back and forth to his worksite, with workers present.
I don't mean to belabor the point.
I mean to belabor bromide.
JMO
Last edited:
- Status