Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #96

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure of other posters' work environments but I work in legal RE field and there are just so many incompetent employees in related fields like title, surveying, etc., it seems to me part of the problem is the fallout from the pandemic.
 
His alibi is remarkable. Of course by "remarkable," I mean "remarkably damning." It's actually pretty hilarious.

He leaves early for a job he can't perform.

He tells investigators he spent all day traveling from the hotel to the job site, despite spending minutes there during a lone trip.

He bizarrely changes shirts multiple times, carries boots to his hotel room to remove laces, and dumps trash 5 times, while not even remembering doing so.

He later claims that he looks at the wall, and has time to kill because he's going to have his workers perform this job, which is the reason he decided to clean out his truck.

Of course he really dumped trash 4 times prior to even going to the wall, so that doesn't remotely hold up.

He spends five plus hours in his hotel room, which blows apart his earlier claims that he was working all day.

The biggest, most damning lie however, is where Barry was when the Ritters call him. He tells them, and then tells investigators on multiple occasions, that he was at the wall (he told the Ritters with workers present), rushed back, and left his tools.

In reality, he leaves his room, goes to his truck, and then retrieves tools to sell that lie.

The following day he speaks to Morgan, and instead of saying "come back," he basically tells her to figure out how to perform that job.

His wife has been kidnapped and eaten by a mountain Lion, but he wants the work to continue.

I dunno about you, but it's almost as if he was trying to sell that alibi.

Can anyone who is remotely open to Barry being innocent explain all of this away?
I sure hope that the prosecutors use this information as their opening or closing with a slide presentation to highlight the incredulous lies told by BM.

Then, sum it up with asking, "What would motivate a person to lie to a police officer?"

Answer: "A person would lie to avoid arrest and punishment."

"Otherwise, there would be no reason to lie."

JMO.
 
Last edited:
Why would they not turn it over in a timely manner then? Is it incompetence or just too much going on? This is such a high profile case, I feel like they would want to make every effort to show they are trying to go by the book. If the evidence shows nothing significant then why withhold it so long? If it shows something, then why withhold it?

I have always wondered about the RR data. It will give us helpful info for sure. When did Suzanne use it last? When did Barry take the bike out of the trunk (he admitted to LE she asked him to remove it some time on Saturday and he did). Was the trunk opened in that 3am hour? It would definitely show us when someone took the bike out whenever that was. If it was sometime when Suzanne was sleeping then that says a lot since Barry was up and moving around well before 4am and he says she wasn't awake and he left her sleeping at 5am.
I tend to agree with the poster who suggested that if there was evidence in the RR data or laptop they would not have held it back from defense. There really is no explanation why they had to have the court set a deadline for delivery other than what they have said before that they are swamped and can’t keep up with the volume.
 
I sure hope that the prosecutors use this information as their opening or closing with a slide presentation to highlight the incredulous lies told by BM.

Then, sum it up with asking, "What would motivate a person to lie to a police officer?"

Answer: "A person would lie to avoid arrest and punishment. Otherwise, there would be no reason to lie."

JMO.
I think the biggest thing is lying immediately to the Ritters. There was no crime, no investigation, and he tells them he's at the wall.

It's as inexplicable as it is devastating.
 
I think the biggest thing is lying immediately to the Ritters. There was no crime, no investigation, and he tells them he's at the wall.

It's as inexplicable as it is devastating.
I guess that it was part of his alibi and why he couldn't call the police (as if he is out of the country or something). To me, it is so obvious. He has distanced himself from the crime and crime scene and has someone else call the police.

The entire scenario is hokey to me. He leaves early for a job on Mother's Day weekend. His kids call him because they can't reach their mother. He can't reach her. So, he calls a neighbor to check on her. She can't find her.

So, if he is that worried, why doesn't he just come home? His job is not due to start. Instead, he has his elderly neighbor continue to check and then call the police for him?? THEN, he comes home that night...j

No wonder the police immediately suspected something wasn't right...

JMO.
 
I guess that it was part of his alibi and why he couldn't call the police (as if he is out of the country or something). To me, it is so obvious. He has distanced himself from the crime and crime scene and has someone else call the police.

The entire scenario is hokey to me. He leaves early for a job on Mother's Day weekend. His kids call him because they can't reach their mother. He can't reach her. So, he calls a neighbor to check on her. She can't find her.

So, if he is that worried, why doesn't he just come home? His job is not due to start. Instead, he has his elderly neighbor continue to check and then call the police for him?? THEN, he comes home that night...j

No wonder the police immediately suspected something wasn't right...

JMO.
“why doesn’t he just come home?”
Because he had to take a nap at the HIE.
He didn’t get any sleep the night before.
 
That was my thinking too. We know after he got “the call,” he went to the truck to grab tools that he then left in the lobby.

This pic is from earlier in his day at the HIE. If this is a hammer he had used overnight, I wonder if he took it into the room to bleach clean it and then tossed it out in one of his trash runs.

I wish we knew whether anything was retrieved from any of his trash dumps by LE.

MOO IMO
BBM
I ask myself this every single day while I am reading here.
 
Whoever wrote this is my spirit animal.
Same
I'm so sick of hearing how intimidating and scary E&N are. The fact still remains they are representing a GUILTY client and the state has sufficient evidence to paint a picture of GUILTY beyond a reasonable doubt to the jury.

It's never been a slam dunk case, but 12 average Joe's can draw the conclusion there is no one else besides BARE that had motive, means and opportunity to disappear Suzanne beyond a reasonable doubt, not ANY DOUBT.

Bye Bye Bare!

MOO
 
I guess that it was part of his alibi and why he couldn't call the police (as if he is out of the country or something). To me, it is so obvious. He has distanced himself from the crime and crime scene and has someone else call the police.

The entire scenario is hokey to me. He leaves early for a job on Mother's Day weekend. His kids call him because they can't reach their mother. He can't reach her. So, he calls a neighbor to check on her. She can't find her.

So, if he is that worried, why doesn't he just come home? His job is not due to start. Instead, he has his elderly neighbor continue to check and then call the police for him?? THEN, he comes home that night...j

No wonder the police immediately suspected something wasn't right...

JMO.
Did Barry call the neighbor or did the neighbor call Barry? Would he have ever called anyone, or was he hanging around waiting for someone else to figure out that Suzanne was gone?
 
So, Cahill is not saying that the information in the AA is not accurate, just that he felt the arrest was premature -
Seems to me that Cahill’s position does not have the authority to decide when to arrest - he gives his opinion and then the DA/Speeze make a decision and the AA goes to the judge
Iris knew at the Prelim when Cahill testified that he had only read the first nine pages of the final version of the AA - and she also knew his signature was on the final version

So what's the big deal - how is any of this is exculpatory?

It's not. They're billing -- er, building an appeal arsenal.
 
And I just got a message from a friend vacationing in the Virgin Islands. She mentioned the "infidelity pool". I'm pretty sure that was supposed to be "infinity pool", but you never know...
Reminds me of my grandson at the zoo, when he was aged about 8: "Mum, just look at all the promiscuous monkeys!"
 
Barry thinks since he has a dream team and appeals peeps on the sideline he is all good. Barry doesn’t understand that they are collectively going to drain him dry of every single penny of his ill gotten gains. He won’t need a stash of cash in the future because he is going away for a long time if not forever. IMO It would he humorous if not for all the collateral damage he has inflicted on the family he claims to love. I hope he never scores a mountain lion but it would be sweet justice if one were to claim him. IMO
 
Why would they not turn it over in a timely manner then? Is it incompetence or just too much going on? This is such a high profile case, I feel like they would want to make every effort to show they are trying to go by the book. If the evidence shows nothing significant then why withhold it so long? If it shows something, then why withhold it?

I have always wondered about the RR data. It will give us helpful info for sure. When did Suzanne use it last? When did Barry take the bike out of the trunk (he admitted to LE she asked him to remove it some time on Saturday and he did). Was the trunk opened in that 3am hour? It would definitely show us when someone took the bike out whenever that was. If it was sometime when Suzanne was sleeping then that says a lot since Barry was up and moving around well before 4am and he says she wasn't awake and he left her sleeping at 5am.
<modsnip> IMO, BM is guilty. I don't know if the State. in this particular case, can meet its burden of proof without the body.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RSBM I agree the defense does not need to prove what happened to SM nor even have a plausible theory about it. But said:
Yes, if it is trustworthy data that can be replicated in that area of the country. It's like the cellphone data where they say he was chasing her. That's conjecture.
 
Then there's the human condition.
The juror is human. While the accused is presumed innocent, that doesn't mean they won't look to the defense to give them an otherwise reasonable explanation. If they can't produce one and the defense has a well constructed case then, I believe they'll blow their defense.
E&I will introduce the various scenarios, if the PHs are any indication. They don't have to but they will. That's all they've got. JL, who we know had nothing to do with Suzanne's disappearance will be front and center. She had SECRET bank accounts. She's a LIAR because she didn't tell SO of her seldom realized affair. Her texts and her daughter's own statements will be questionable. Maybe accusations, even from her own daughter, won't even be allowed in.
I'm getting ahead of myself here.

The reason I replied was to state my original sentence.
Then there's the human condition.

IMO
If they listen and accept the judges instructions, as they have sworn to do, they will realize the defense has to present nothing. IMO, the judge should issue a direct not guilty verdict immediately after the state rests their case when it is obvious the state hasn't met its burden. The main reason is because the jury won't accept or understand all the burden is on the state. When that is widely known, the judge should take it out of the jury's hands to avoid so many wrongful convictions. I'd estimate 5% of all convictions are wrongful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
153
Guests online
3,257
Total visitors
3,410

Forum statistics

Threads
604,144
Messages
18,168,293
Members
232,033
Latest member
TTibbits
Back
Top