Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #97

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
After reading the Defense Motions for Sanctions and the State's response, all I have to say is that E&N are spending a lot of BM's blood money for nothing. Good, wonder what his tab is up to these days? :p

They are so dramatic and over-hyped, often like the tornados they are compared to.

Cahill's statements were not discoverable here IMO. This case would have/still will move forward. It's like the old saying, 'throw a bunch of spaghetti against the wall and see what sticks' and seems like excessive overreaching.

Not for nothing, ole' BARE seems to have aged 30 years lately. Yikes!

MOO
 
I do wonder this morning as BM heads to court again what his innermost thoughts are. Does he believe he will be acquitted? Trial is getting close. You can count the people who believe him on one hand.

Even with all the discussion and back and forth that goes on here, most of us agree he is guilty. He knows he is. Yet I wonder what he is thinking deep inside.
I think about this a lot. I think he believes he will be acquitted. His family members and his lawyers have convinced him of it. I believe he has no remorse. If he does it is only that he plunked down lots of dough for a defense. I don’t try too hard to get into his head because I’ll never understand the mind of a killer.
 
more specific than the graph I saw between 8-9 am...It is safe to say she would have been riding in the high 30s to low 40s on a "morning ride".

I think those temperatures--high 30s to low 40s--would be considered "warm cool" for bicycling. My experience is it's the wind that gets you. If you ride hard and work up a serious sweat, you might not use my wardrobe, but I like to use wind blocking full finger gloves, a lightweight wind blocking jacket, and a band or beanie that covers my ears at those temperatures. I'd probably wear full length bottoms. I'm not the most serious bicyclist, but I've spent plenty of time riding at these temperatures. A serious cyclist probably wouldn't care about the temperature much, as long as he/she dressed appropriately. For myself, I like slightly warmer temperatures, and if I knew it'd be 60F later in the day AND if I had available time then, I'd ride later.
 
I think those temperatures--high 30s to low 40s--would be considered "warm cool" for bicycling. My experience is it's the wind that gets you. If you ride hard and work up a serious sweat, you might not use my wardrobe, but I like to use wind blocking full finger gloves, a lightweight wind blocking jacket, and a band or beanie that covers my ears at those temperatures. I'd probably wear full length bottoms. I'm not the most serious bicyclist, but I've spent plenty of time riding at these temperatures. A serious cyclist probably wouldn't care about the temperature much, as long as he/she dressed appropriately. For myself, I like slightly warmer temperatures, and if I knew it'd be 60F later in the day AND if I had available time then, I'd ride later.

It was a gorgeous day in Salida! I think Suzanne had every intention of riding that afternoon.

And would have. If she had lived that long.

JMO
 
It was a gorgeous day in Salida! I think Suzanne had every intention of riding that afternoon.

And would have. If she had lived that long.

JMO
When was the wedding (in Colorado time)? That might have caused her to have a different ride schedule than her usual. (Theoretically. Except that she didn't live to see that day.)

Where is this steep hill people are referring to? Her bike was found just off the road into her neighborhood, unless I misunderstood. It might have a gradient to it, but based on seeing the Trevor video, it's not super steep. Is it the road that parallels the highway that is steep?
 
I didn't find this episode very helpful. SR seems unprepared. He seems to be reading the documents for the first time, and he rambles. But you're right - he does have an interesting take on how the trial will go, and he remains very critical of the prosecution. Nonetheless, he doesn't think the judge will dismiss the case.

If anyone wants to understand better the position of the parties, I recommend the KKTV site article, Prosecution Responds to Defense Motion to throw out Barry Morphew Case. It has the motion and response embedded in the article, and they make interesting reading. I have the impression that there's a lot more drama than substance in the defense's tactics, and that the essential evidence will get to the jury.

IIRC, the prosecution stated last time that they intend to file a motion to exclude from the evidence at trial any reference to the foreign DNA found in SM's car. Judge L issued a ruling without hearing any evidence or argument, stating that the evidence would be allowed. However, he left the door open for the prosecution to show him why it should be rejected, and I hope they take the time to educate him (and us) about this topic by filing a motion.

Agree
We all know SR is a defense lawyer so he has an inherent bias, but on other cases he has seemed to look at both sides of the argument
From the start with this case he said that the DA jumped the gun
Which he will remind you of …again and again lol – there are lots of “As I told you early on”
Maybe he is right – he pretty much thinks that the DA has screwed up everything from the jump and continues to do so
Once he saw the length of the AA – He says if you don’t have it in under ten pages, then you don’t have it. He thinks Linda Stanley is “over her ski’s “ and shame on her for trying to make a name for herself
He spends the bulk of the time on the Defense’s motion ( annoyingly reading it seemingly for the first time while the cameras are running)He only becomes aware that the Prosecution’s answer is public after some viewers ask him about it in the chat
That is almost an hour in. He finds it online and then gives it a cursory look – and opines, Well, seems like the Prosecution is angry or something to that effect. He never makes it to the part about the dna. He is dismissive of the prosecution’s response, looks to see who was it’s author was and says Hurlbert was the lawyer who messed up the Kobe Bryant case.
There are many factual errors in his broadcast. I don’t think he has read the AA
This broadcast is from his airplane hangar ( look at me !) and he talks about how he is going to smoke a cigar –Really Scott?
He is a smart guy who, whether he is right or wrong about this case, has really done himself a disservice with his presentation. Someone called it an “infomercial for the D” on another platform which nails it.
AKA - A love letter to the Defense
IMO
 
Agree
We all know SR is a defense lawyer so he has an inherent bias, but on other cases he has seemed to look at both sides of the argument
From the start with this case he said that the DA jumped the gun
Which he will remind you of …again and again lol – there are lots of “As I told you early on”
Maybe he is right – he pretty much thinks that the DA has screwed up everything from the jump and continues to do so
Once he saw the length of the AA – He says if you don’t have it in under ten pages, then you don’t have it. He thinks Linda Stanley is “over her ski’s “ and shame on her for trying to make a name for herself
He spends the bulk of the time on the Defense’s motion ( annoyingly reading it seemingly for the first time while the cameras are running)He only becomes aware that the Prosecution’s answer is public after some viewers ask him about it in the chat
That is almost an hour in. He finds it online and then gives it a cursory look – and opines, Well, seems like the Prosecution is angry or something to that effect. He never makes it to the part about the dna. He is dismissive of the prosecution’s response, looks to see who was it’s author was and says Hurlbert was the lawyer who messed up the Kobe Bryant case.
There are many factual errors in his broadcast. I don’t think he has read the AA
This broadcast is from his airplane hangar ( look at me !) and he talks about how he is going to smoke a cigar –Really Scott?
He is a smart guy who, whether he is right or wrong about this case, has really done himself a disservice with his presentation. Someone called it an “infomercial for the D” on another platform which nails it.
AKA - A love letter to the Defense
IMO

That's classic Scott R. He never has the facts straight. I gave up on him a long tome ago.
 
Agreed. BM was like a ticking time bomb. His anger and rages would build up and build up until he exploded. SM knew him. She had learned some tricks to diffuse the bomb, but they didn’t always work. I think she would sometimes calm him down with sex. She knew he had a strong sex drive and admitted to JL that she wouldn’t deny him sex. I think she might coax him into bed when he was angry. However, I think she was weary, she was tired of always being on edge, tired of walking on eggshells. She told SO that she was sorry she had let it go on so long.
Once SM told BM she was done, the fuse was lit. He tried sweet talking her, he threatened suicide, but she had finally made up her mind. As we have talked about before, BM was all about control. He was losing control of SM. That was not acceptable. He began his descent to the point of no return. MOO
Didn’t she just get her bike back from being worked on? So maybe taking it for a spin near the house to check everything was working correctly before driving to the trail? Why would she put on her camelback for that?

If I was the defense that is the tact I would take on the bike. The rest would be much harder to explain away.

IMO

Shhhhhh! Don't give them any ideas... ;)

Oh wait - there's the whole no one ever heard from Suzanne again after 2:38pm the day BEFORE this bike ride happened!

that's the thing with this case, could you make up a reasonably plausible explanation for every or at least most things? Probably, and I'm sure the defense will certainly try. But then you have to believe in a huge set of coincidences and very unlikely things happening all together in which poor Barry is the unluckiest guy on planet Earth on the 2 days in which his wife disappeared and was reported missing.

I know you don't really believe he's innocent, you're just worried about conviction, I get it. We can never say never of course, but I have faith in a jury will have the common sense to see the big picture.
 
Judge hears defense's case to dismiss murder charges against Barry Morphew - KRDO

Snipped BBM:

Morphew's attorneys are now arguing that he should've never been charged because one of the main investigators on the case, CBI Agent Joe Cahill, said that he believed Morphew was arrested too early, calling the timing of his arrest "the worst decision you can make."

On the stand Friday, Cahill testified to the fact that he felt the arrest was premature. When asked by the defense about what's changed between then and now, he said he didn't believe anything has changed, stating there's still no blood or body in the case.


#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne
 
Judge hears defense's case to dismiss murder charges against Barry Morphew - KRDO

Snipped BBM:

Morphew's attorneys are now arguing that he should've never been charged because one of the main investigators on the case, CBI Agent Joe Cahill, said that he believed Morphew was arrested too early, calling the timing of his arrest "the worst decision you can make."

On the stand Friday, Cahill testified to the fact that he felt the arrest was premature. When asked by the defense about what's changed between then and now, he said he didn't believe anything has changed, stating there's still no blood or body in the case.


#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne
Thank God he didn't work the Schelling case, if a body and blood are a requirement for him.
 
I hope I did this right! Bringing over from the previous thread,
Momofthreeboys said:
How would that fit with the prosecution case? I an understand why they were searching to see if he had a current affair going on because that would go to motive but I'm seriously not sure how hooking up for a one night stand if it's even true fits with the case. Prosecution has tons of first hand factual information that the marriage was failing and Suzanne wanted out. Not sure how anything else would fit the case. My guess is we won't see those claimants on the witness stand. They got interviewed probably as it looks like prosecution did follow through on many, many tips.

Wasn't the defense trying to say there was no proof that Barry was the one who downloaded/used the apps because it was a shared phone? If they have people that he actually hooked up with, I think that goes a long way to proving he did, indeed, use the apps.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
126
Guests online
1,488
Total visitors
1,614

Forum statistics

Threads
605,830
Messages
18,193,104
Members
233,579
Latest member
SeptemberDaffodil
Back
Top