Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #98

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
We know Suzanne was active on a variety of apps.

We know Suzanne brought her phone on vacations.

I wonder how many days prior to 5/10 saw Suzanne not engaging with her phone in approximation of waking.

I'm going to say zero.

It's the first thing most of us do every day!

Unless we're dead.

Suzanne's radio silence on MD morning says it all.

JMO
 
Last edited:
If Barry was in Broomfield, hard at work, with workers present, how'd he know Suzanne went for a morning "bike ride"?

Maybe she dropped her phone in the veggie stew and wasn't missing at all, was just shopping for clothes online and then went on her normal afternoon ride... well, I mean if she wasn't dead.

He didn't create a workable alibi for himself on either day. Nor did he create a credible storyline for Suzanne.

Double fail.

JMO
I was not under the impression from the interview with Barry that he intended to "work" on the Broomfield site on Sunday. It's somewhat "morphed" into he went there to work but his words as expressed in the AA were to get eyes on the site and determine what was needed (page 18): Barry stated that he was scheduled to travel to Broomfield on May 10, 2020, to get eyes on the site and fully determine what was needed. Barry stated Morgan was supposed to travel to Broomfield that evening and Cassidy was due to arrive Monday morning.
 
Barry himself said he was working, with workers present.

He didn't have to say that. but he did. If I'm not mistake, twice no less.

When he wasn't, in fact, working.
When there were no other workers present.
When he wasn't even at the worksite.

He was sitting in a hotel.

He remains his defense team's biggest problem.

JMO
 
I was not under the impression from the interview with Barry that he intended to "work" on the Broomfield site on Sunday. It's somewhat "morphed" into he went there to work but his words as expressed in the AA were to get eyes on the site and determine what was needed (page 18): Barry stated that he was scheduled to travel to Broomfield on May 10, 2020, to get eyes on the site and fully determine what was needed. Barry stated Morgan was supposed to travel to Broomfield that evening and Cassidy was due to arrive Monday morning.
Which brings us to the next question-I’ll play along. Why leave at 5 in the morning if you had no intention of working? For the HIE free breakfast? Did Barry intend to stay overnight in Broomfield, along with the three workers that would be there on Monday? Was there a purpose in removing a few blocks on Sunday, to determine what was needed on site? What kind of preparation work was required for that big Broomsfield (sic) job? Did he make any kind of arrangements for materials, etc, while in Broomfield? Why did he change his departure time to before daybreak, instead of going up later as he had planned?
 
Which brings us to the next question-I’ll play along. Why leave at 5 in the morning if you had no intention of working? For the HIE free breakfast? Did Barry intend to stay overnight in Broomfield, along with the three workers that would be there on Monday? Was there a purpose in removing a few blocks on Sunday, to determine what was needed on site? What kind of preparation work was required for that big Broomsfield (sic) job? Did he make any kind of arrangements for materials, etc, while in Broomfield? Why did he change his departure time to before daybreak, instead of going up later as he had planned?

Barry must not have had much confidence in his ability to size up a project he'd long known about if he blocked off a full 12 hours for sizing.

Seems like, in reality, he only needed 11 minutes...

As for the hotel -- two rooms. Barry, JP, and MG. Are we to believe Barry intended to share a room with JP?

And why JP anyway? Why didn't MG and CC suffice?

Whatever the reason, it wasn't accidental.

JMO
 
Barry must not have had much confidence in his ability to size up a project he'd long known about if he blocked off a full 12 hours for sizing.

Seems like, in reality, he only needed 11 minutes...

As for the hotel -- two rooms. Barry, JP, and MG. Are we to believe Barry intended to share a room with JP?

And why JP anyway? Why didn't MG and CC suffice?

Whatever the reason, it wasn't accidental.

JMO

Quoting myself -- I wonder how many rooms Barry would typically reserve for himself and two or three workers, one being female.

I wonder if it was a mistake that Barry didn't check out of his room at 6 pm, family emergency, and reserve a different room for JP, one without wet towels, chlorine vapors and personal documents.

Oops.

Or was he planning to save the buck?

Sometimes being cheap can prove to be costly.

JMO
 
^^rsbbm

I disagree with Judge Lama's (and OP's) characterization of the presser on about May 6, which is linked in its entirety below.

While it's also clear OP has a negative opinion of DA Stanley, I believe relying on Judge Lama here is an unfortunate mistake.

Facts matter. I recommend all with doubt should relisten to the entire presser.

In the limited words by DA Stanley, she first emphasized that BM was presumed innocent and that SM is the victim here. Other statements were direct replies to attending reporters questions-- without commentary. Total sneak attack move by the defense with this one (and Judge Lama bought it-- hook, line, and sinker)!

From thread #91 -- I think @Tumbleweed said it best:

BBM above. Agree 100%.

The problem is that it did seem to stick with the judge. From the judge's order regarding Change of Venue he writes:


upload_2022-2-2_10-21-28-png.332315


I have multiple issues with his statement. (If I am wrong, please correct me.)

First, the pre-trial publicity order didn't go into effect until June 3, 2021. The press conference was held the day Barry was arrested, on May 6th. So how could she violate an order that wasn't in effect yet? But here he is saying she did the press conference in spite of the order. Just wrong.

Second, he says that DA Stanley told media that "he was not talking and requested a lawyer." Actually, she was very measured and appropriate in her response to being asked if Barry was answering questions or saying where Suzanne's body is. She answers, "He was taken into custody and he, when asked questions, he said he wanted a lawyer, so all questioning ended." Maybe it is subtle, but saying that when Barry requested a lawyer, LE stopped questioning him (which is the only appropriate response LE could make), is different than saying "he was not talking and requested a lawyer". "He was not talking" has a negative connotation to it, IMO. Which brings me to my third point.

IMO, the wording that he used was taken directly from Defense's motion for Change of Venue. It just sounds like them, doesn't it? If the judge is just going to be taking the defense lawyers at their word , and the prosecution is not able to point out their BS to the judge, I am very concerned about Suzanne seeing any justice here.



Still Missing - CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #91
This is fair comment, well said.

But I think if OP were a defense attorney making this kind of argument, ordinary folks would see it as an attempt to get DA Stanley off on technicalities.

It seems to me axiomatic the that reaction of the general public when the authorities make statements indicating the suspect has "lawyered up" and is not speaking to them is: "See, the guy must be guilty! What does he have to hide?"

We see that comment even on WS threads, where people follow true crime and are generally more knowledgeable about the justice system than the average citizen. DA Stanley may have attempted to mitigate this impact by reminding listeners of the presumption of innocence, but the harm was already done. That's what Judge L was reacting to and why he characterized the statement accurately IMO. It was unfairly prejudicial to the defense and a serious lapse of judgment.

As for the fact that the presser predated the issuance of the court order, please. Anyone who's been around law enforcement as long as LS knows these orders are issued when the case is filed. I think it's perfectly legitimate to see her presser as a crass attempt to beat the buzzer and get in a cheap shot that would endear her to the more atavistic members of the community who comprise a large part of her political base.

Judge L's reaction to this was completely justified, and to me it suggests another deficiency in the DA and perhaps her new staff: they don't know the judges they are working with.

This makes the presser and the use of a bloated and prejudicial AA seem even more foolish, IMO. It's sad that LS had to learn this lesson in the school of hard knocks, in one of the most high profile cases Chaffee County has ever experienced. Her lapses were a significant element of the judge's decision to deprive Chaffee County citizens of their proper role in the administration of justice for their community.

MOO.
 
To be clear, the prosecution again deferred to the Court for release of the AA, in the form the Court deemed appropriate.

However, the defense did not offer any redactions to the AA prior to release but instead wrote their own version of the AA, and then had the audacity to request the Court substitute the defense's version for public consumption -- most likely withholding and/or misstating the facts, per their usual tactic!

As expected, without haste, Judge Murphy denied even the idea of the defense substituting their own version of the AA. MOO

ETA: A friendly reminder that the jurors will never see the AA, redacted, or any form of the document. Its purpose was only to support the arrest affidavit and will not be entered as evidence for trial.
The prosecution "deferring" to the court is clearly and unquestionably a failure to prevent the unfairly prejudicial effect of the release of irrelevant and otherwise inadmissible statements and information that was highly prejudicial to the defense.

Judge M's order closing the record temporarily alerted the DA to the problem and gave prosecutors the opportunity to correct it. They failed to take the opportunity he created, and the Chaffee County community has paid the price of that failure IMO.

I am sure Judge L will excuse for cause any juror who has actually read the AA, so you are right to remind us that the jury will not see it. I just wish that jury was comprised of Chaffee County residents.
 
if prosecution gets it together without losing much more of their case they might get by. I am still not convinced of the tranquilizer theory so very interested in how they handle that. I also can’t get on board with the tampering charge…I have always thought others were involved in the disappearance. I don’t think there was premeditation beyond the moment. I think CBI spent too much time on Indiana tips from disgruntled people who enjoyed telling their stories and not enough time looking closer to home especially because they knew characterization is rarely allowed but that is a dead end now since we are at trial so it is what it is. I don’t think Barry tossed the helmet on the way to Broomfield unless the telematics show something happening with a driver door or driver window. I also need to know if the bike was 95 feet or however many feet his truck moved or possible he walked or road the bike but that is lacking in back up info so purely speculative. I also think that they were both emotionally manipulative and physically aggressive and I suspect the girls sense that or suspect but the DAs walked softly with what they knew. Barry admitted it was embarrassing to him and given his macho tendencies I tend to believe that piece of all this.
Can you please explain/elaborate why you can’t get on board with tampering charge, and think others are involved in the disappearance? I’m not sure if you are saying that you think that others are fully responsible for killing SM and moving/concealing her body? Or if you think BM did the deed and hired and/or coerced someone else/others into removing and concealing the body?

Early on, I considered the possibility that BM might have
been covering up for someone in his close circle that did the deed and he got involved after the fact to clean up, and dispose of SM’s body. Or that he was possibly covering for someone he may have had sketchy business dealings with, owed/stole money from and wanted to teach him a lesson i.e., cross us again and your daughter’s will be next. But as the months went on and the more evidence that came out/was revealed and especially after reading the AA and learning about the digital forensics, BM’s many, many lies, ever changing stories and blaming animals (turkeys, chipmunks and bull elk, oh my!) every time he was confronted with more evidence and especially after learning about the glaring fact SM digital footprint ceased forever that Saturday afternoon on 5/9 while she was alone in BM presence never to be seen or heard from again, for me, it was the totality of everything all the evidence against BM that erased the possibility that he was covering for someone else and that he, BM, was the responsible perpetrator.

I do think BM possibly walked the bike over to the location it was found with his phone in his pocket as phone records showed his phone moved to area of the bike sometime in the 3am hour. As stated previously, IMO he concocted the leave for Broomfield 12 hours earlier than planned to create distance and to be seen/documented to have been somewhere else far away (‘alibi’) when SM ‘disappeared’/reported missing. (I think he planned on her being discovered to be and reported missing by his daughters much earlier in the day but his daughters running late threw a wrench into that plan), and he staged the bike and helmet to make it appear as though SM was still alive after he left that morning and went on a bike ride (proof of life), and to insert a 3rd party as being responsible for taking/harming Suzanne. The intention was to confuse, misdirect, mislead LE/LE investigation. Classic.
Let’s review all the 3rd parties BM accused of being the perpetrator mind you not a shred of evidence anything of the kind had occurred- Mountain Lion, abductors, sex traffickers, disgruntled former employee, someone SM knew well and had a run-in with, SD’s daughter and boyfriend, CBD Tim, member(s) of the Moorman family.
Have I forgotten anyone?

The only other things for me at this point that remain in question- where he put Suzanne (I think strong possibility that he dumped her down abandoned mine shaft), and the possibility of whether someone(s) may have been involved after the fact either unwittingly or wittingly. Unwittingly- used MM2’s non-telematics RR to dispose of SM, or possibly helped himself to neighbor (Cushman) vehicle, or to a construction site vehicle he may have had keys/access to. Wittingly-someone(s) may know something due to BM possibly confided some things to them and they may be helping with the ongoing cover up by staying quiet because they were maybe paid by BM to keep their mouth shut and/or sworn to secrecy due to some sort of loyalty/favor owed to BM. (SD?).
Who knows, maybe someone that might know something that hasn’t been discovered or come forward yet, will turn on BM and muster up the courage to come forward (if they haven’t already since the PH’s), and start singing like a canary and agree to testify for the prosecution at trial and divulge what they know about BM’s secrets/nefarious acts that weekend. (Cue Nancy Grace-“Bombshell”!!! LOL).

I’m not sure I agree they were both emotionally and physically abusive. I believe BM most definitely was emotionally and physically abusive to SM on a much more regular basis than I could believe SM ever was to him. If SM lashed out at BM I picture it being because she was angry/provoked by BM or to defend herself against him. At any rate, BM is still alive and Suzanne is dead, concealed in a well hidden clandestine grave crying out to be found so she can be brought home and laid to rest properly by her family.
Regardless of SM having an affair, asking for a divorce, and to be paid back her inheritance, she did not deserve to die no matter how justified BM feels and thinks SM deserved it.

I don’t think BM truly loved SM the way he tried to portray that he did. IMO the bloom fell off that rose for both of them a long time ago, well before that fateful MDW. They were having marriage troubles for awhile and I think BM knew or at least suspected that SM was having an affair with someone. IMO he had stepped out on their marriage before and possibly still was (burner phone?) but BM didn’t want to get divorced, just continue the status quo as long as he could do whatever he wanted and continue to live the same lifestyle he was accustomed to and with Suzanne’s money. He knew SM meant it though when she sent him the “I’m done, we need to handle this civilly” message a mere three days prior and he wasn’t going to let her leave and take 1/2 the money-all her money with her. Most rational thinking people cut their losses get a divorce and move on. But noone leaves Barry and takes what he thinks is his/entitled to-$$$$$. So instead of granting SM an amicable/civil divorce and splitting the assets, he decided to do the unthinkable and silence her forever instead. BM’s not the first to have taken this route in lieu of getting divorced and unfortunately, won’t be the last.
IMO the motive was as old as time- greed/money. SM’s affair was an aggravating factor so to speak, but not the primary motive IMO.

Had BM just allowed SM to divorce him, he’d be much better off financially since now all of his AND SM’s money is going toward paying his high priced Attorneys so he’ll likely be poor as a church mouse after paying all E&N et al fees. Oh the irony.

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne
 
Last edited:
Quoting myself -- I wonder how many rooms Barry would typically reserve for himself and two or three workers, one being female.

I wonder if it was a mistake that Barry didn't check out of his room at 6 pm, family emergency, and reserve a different room for JP, one without wet towels, chlorine vapors and personal documents.

Oops.

Or was he planning to save the buck?

Sometimes being cheap can prove to be costly.

JMO
I don't think that will be a negative at trial or play a role. The manager already said the chlorine smell was from the pool and he obviously took a shower. The one piece of mail was nothing important or if it was we'll learn about it during trial. There were pictures of him bringing mail or paperwork into the hotel from the images. He knew he was putting a guy in the room so probably figured a pile of wet towels wouldn't matter.
 
My personal take is this won't really be a SODDI defence because the evidence for it doesn't exist.

The lazy bumbling prosecution will be on trial for railroading the accused instead of looking for the real killer.

I also think there might be a nod and a wink aspect to it. Maybe the accused really did it (e.g a jealous fight), but we can't really know what happened that night and maybe it wasn't murder. So you'll have to let him skate.
BBM.

Linda Stanley's own blunders have opened the door to this, IMO. During the investigation, Sheriff Spezze carefully avoided any action or public statement that could be problematic. Stanley has wasted his effort, and I bet he's seething about that.
 
Which brings us to the next question-I’ll play along. Why leave at 5 in the morning if you had no intention of working? For the HIE free breakfast? Did Barry intend to stay overnight in Broomfield, along with the three workers that would be there on Monday? Was there a purpose in removing a few blocks on Sunday, to determine what was needed on site? What kind of preparation work was required for that big Broomsfield (sic) job? Did he make any kind of arrangements for materials, etc, while in Broomfield? Why did he change his departure time to before daybreak, instead of going up later as he had planned?
Your guess is as good as mine. I just included what was reported in his interview and am assuming his interviews will be in evidence.
 
I was confused by Linda Stanley going on Profiling Evil (I like the host Mike) to begin with, then when BM was arrested a few days later it took on another red flag for me, a lack of discretion from her. Was that getting ahead of a victory lap for her? It was a head scratcher for me and from that point on made me less confident in her. IMO
 
Can you explain why you can’t get on board with tampering charge, and think others are involved in the disappearance? I’m not sure if you are saying that you think that others are fully responsible for killing SM and moving/concealing her body? Or think BM did the deed and hired and/or coerced someone else/others into removing and concealing the body?

Early on, I considered BM was possibly
covering up for someone in his close circle that did the deed and he got involved after the fact to clean up, and dispose of SM’s body. Or that he was possibly covering for someone he may have had sketchy business dealings with, owed/stole money from and wanted to teach him a lesson i.e., cross us again and your daughter’s will be next. But as the months went on and the more evidence that came out/was revealed and especially after reading the AA and learning about the digital forensics, BM’s many, many lies, ever changing stories and blaming animals (turkeys, chipmunks and bull elk, oh my!) every time he was confronted with more evidence and especially after learning about the glaring fact SM digital footprint ceased forever that Saturday afternoon on 5/9 while she was alone in BM presence never to be seen or heard from again, for me, it was the totality of everything all the evidence against BM that erased the possibility that he was covering for someone else and that he, BM, was the responsible perpetrator.

I do think BM possibly walked the bike over to the location it was found with his phone in his pocket as phone records showed his phone moved to area of the bike sometime in the 3am hour. As stated previously, IMO he concocted the leave for Broomfield 12 hours earlier than planned to create distance and to be seen/documented to have been somewhere else far away (‘alibi’) when SM ‘disappeared’/reported missing. (I think he planned on her being discovered to be and reported missing by his daughters much earlier in the day but his daughters running late threw a wrench into that plan), and he staged the bike and helmet to make it appear as though SM was still alive after he left that morning and went on a bike ride (proof of life), and to insert a 3rd party as being responsible for taking/harming Suzanne. The intention was to confuse, misdirect, mislead LE/LE investigation. Classic.
Let’s review all the 3rd parties BM accused of being the perpetrator mind you not a shred of evidence anything of the kind had occurred- Mountain Lion, abductors, sex traffickers, disgruntled former employee, someone SM knew well and had a run-in with, SD’s daughter and boyfriend, CBD Tim, member(s) of the Moorman family.
Have I forgotten anyone?

The only other things for me at this point that remain in question- where he put Suzanne (I think strong possibility that he dumped her down abandoned mine shaft), and the possibility of whether someone(s) may have been involved after the fact either unwittingly or wittingly. Unwittingly- used MM2’s non-telematics RR to dispose of SM, or possibly helped himself to neighbor (Cushman) vehicle, or to a construction site vehicle he may have had keys/access to. Wittingly-someone(s) may know something due to BM possibly confided some things to them and they may be helping with the ongoing cover up by staying quiet because they were maybe paid by BM to keep their mouth shut and/or sworn to secrecy due to some sort of loyalty/favor owed to BM. (SD?).
Who knows, maybe someone that might know something that hasn’t been discovered or come forward yet, will turn on BM and muster up the courage to come forward (if they haven’t already since the PH’s), and start singing like a canary and agree to testify for the prosecution at trial and divulge what they know about BM’s secrets/nefarious acts that weekend. (Cue Nancy Grace-“Bombshell”!!! LOL).

I’m not sure I agree they were both emotionally and physically abusive. I believe BM most definitely was emotionally and physically abusive to SM on a much more regular basis than I could believe SM ever was to him. If SM lashed out at BM I picture it being because she was angry/provoked by BM or to defend herself against him. At any rate, BM is still alive and Suzanne is dead, concealed in a well hidden clandestine grave crying out to be found so she can be brought home and laid to rest properly by her family.
Regardless of SM having an affair, asking for a divorce, and to be paid back her inheritance, she did not deserve to die no matter how justified BM feels and thinks SM deserved it.

I don’t think BM truly loved SM the way he tried to portray that he did. IMO the bloom fell off that rose for both of them a long time ago, well before that fateful MDW. They were having marriage troubles for awhile and I think BM knew or at least suspected that SM was having an affair with someone. IMO he had stepped out on their marriage before and possibly still was (burner phone?) but BM didn’t want to get divorced, just continue the status quo as long as he could do whatever he wanted and continue to live the same lifestyle he was accustomed to and with Suzanne’s money. He knew SM meant it though when she sent him the “I’m done, we need to handle this civilly” message a mere three days prior and he wasn’t going to let her leave and take 1/2 the money-all her money with her. Most rational thinking people cut their losses get a divorce and move on. But noone leaves Barry and takes what he thinks is his/entitled to-$$$$$. So instead of granting SM an amicable/civil divorce and splitting the assets, he decided to do the unthinkable and silence her forever instead. BM’s not the first to have taken this route in lieu of getting divorced and unfortunately, won’t be the last.
IMO the motive was as old as time- greed/money. SM’s affair was an aggravating factor so to speak, but not the primary motive IMO.

Had BM just allowed SM to divorce him, he’d be much better off financially since now all of his AND SM’s money is going toward paying his high priced Attorneys so he’ll likely be poor as a church mouse after paying all E&N et al fees. Oh the irony.

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne

Your points are all good. But what the jury will hear, if the interviews are allowed as evidence, is Barry's protestations of his love for Suzanne and his daughters. We know now that the behavioral analysis won't be allowed so Grusings conversation with Barry about Suzanne won't so that is I think all off the table. I'm fine with that...the public has a very positive image of Suzanne and it would be sad to darken that image in anyway, the affair was quite enough IMO...they don't need it as the idea of divorce is enough of a motive to put forth.

I'm not 100% on board with the tampering because at this point...with only the partial information we have....I am not seeing how he accomplished the tampering. I do think something was going on at the house in the middle of the night because of the telematics of truck doors opening and closing if those prove to be accurate. I had the opposite reaction as you originally - I suspected he killed her in a fit of rage and someone helped him afterward. So when the charge of murder 1 and tampering came out I was surprised. The 95 feet makes me scratch my head unless he had to move the truck to get another vehicle out of the garage. I don't think it's enough feet to reach the bike site and come back. But it's kinda of a non issue since prosecution has charged Barry and Barry alone with both the murder and the tampering so I'll have to wait and see on the tampering. I do think he turned west to watch the Elk path but I'm not convinced he was the one who disposed of the helmet. The idea that he had help is just my own gut feeling. In particular his constant asking about the phone...so I've always been curious if he actually "knows" where Suzanne is and if he actually "knows" where her phone is. My gut says he doesn't and he's worried that phone will turn up and that he had help but I'll never have an answer since that isn't the charge... so again the tampering is a big question mark for me and we'll find out how that fits at trial. I think a jury could potentially find him guilty of the murder charge but not the tampering I guess...who knows.
 
Your guess is as good as mine. I just included what was reported in his interview and am assuming his interviews will be in evidence.
Yup, like this one where he told several massive lies. Have you come up with a plausible explanation yet? Page 20.

Barry stated that he was at the job site at "ten o-clockish." He added, "It was just hotel and job, back and forth." Barry stated he drove to a McDonalds near the jobsite and cleaned his windshield. He then went back to the hotel room. He stayed in the room for about one hour and possibly watched television. Barry then returned to the jobsite.

Barry stated, in response to the question if he ate that day, "I kinda looked for something to eat." He said that he always keeps granola bars in my truck. He said, "I saw a McDonald's, pulled in there. I don't like crap food, so I thought, I'm not gonna eat here." He added, "So I just ended up eating granola bars."

While on the jobsite, Barry explained that his neighbor, Jeanne Ritter, called him
and explained' ___ _ still could not reach Suzanne. Jeanne, who has the access codes for the house, asked to go check the house. Jeanne discovered Suzanne's car was there; however, her mountain bike was not. Barry stated he had texted Suzanne, "Happy Mother's Day," earlier, as did their daughters. Barry stated his daughters had not received any replies from Suzanne. Also, Barry stated there is no cellular phone service at the house, unless the phone is on the Hughes Net Wi-Fi internet service.

Barry stated, "I was at the job site when Jeanne called me," adding that Jeanne called around 5:00 PM. Barry left the jobsite and drove to the hotel where he dropped the tools off in the lobby. He then drove directly back to Salida.28
 
Yup, like this one where he told several massive lies. Have you come up with a plausible explanation yet? Page 20.

Barry stated that he was at the job site at "ten o-clockish." He added, "It was just hotel and job, back and forth." Barry stated he drove to a McDonalds near the jobsite and cleaned his windshield. He then went back to the hotel room. He stayed in the room for about one hour and possibly watched television. Barry then returned to the jobsite.

Barry stated, in response to the question if he ate that day, "I kinda looked for something to eat." He said that he always keeps granola bars in my truck. He said, "I saw a McDonald's, pulled in there. I don't like crap food, so I thought, I'm not gonna eat here." He added, "So I just ended up eating granola bars."

While on the jobsite, Barry explained that his neighbor, Jeanne Ritter, called him
and explained' ___ _ still could not reach Suzanne. Jeanne, who has the access codes for the house, asked to go check the house. Jeanne discovered Suzanne's car was there; however, her mountain bike was not. Barry stated he had texted Suzanne, "Happy Mother's Day," earlier, as did their daughters. Barry stated his daughters had not received any replies from Suzanne. Also, Barry stated there is no cellular phone service at the house, unless the phone is on the Hughes Net Wi-Fi internet service.

Barry stated, "I was at the job site when Jeanne called me," adding that Jeanne called around 5:00 PM. Barry left the jobsite and drove to the hotel where he dropped the tools off in the lobby. He then drove directly back to Salida.28

I did see the inconsistency about where he said he was when Mrs. Ritter called. I do wonder why he felt he needed to say he was at the job site as it really would have made no difference where he was at the moment...being at the hotel at 5 was no big deal but he did make it an issue, agree.
 
I did see the inconsistency about where he said he was when Mrs. Ritter called. I do wonder why he felt he needed to say he was at the job site as it really would have made no difference where he was at the moment...being at the hotel at 5 was no big deal but he did make it an issue, agree.
That's not merely an "inconsistency," it's a massive, inexplicable lie.

There's no crime, no investigation, no reason to make that claim to the Ritters.

It's "consciousness of guilt," and a clear attempt at alibi building. He's just murdered his wife, and he needs to make sure that he's off the hook.

If he's hours and miles away doing work, then he's in the clear. His life and freedom depends on people believing this story.

Innocent people do not do this, and it's one example of his countless lies. I think it's one of the most important ones, and irrefutable.
 
Can we all agree on this at least?

An inconsistency is when something is not the same. So you tell a story, but parts of it change.

A lie is when you say something that is not truthful.

If I'm on the phone with someone and they ask where I am and I tell them "the moon," when I'm really at the mall, that is a lie.

If I recount what I did on a particular day and my narrative changes, that is inconsistent.

Now, an inconsistency may not be a lie, as memory is fallible.

But you know what a lie is?

A fricken lie.

Can we please call it like it is, and not downplay an irrefutable falsehood?

We should be able to agree on basic definitions of words.
 
Last person to see her (alive)?
@justtrish sbm for focus. Just jumping off your post, not directing this to you.

BM is not the only hapless defendant to make this ^ admission but still insist that he has no idea what happened to spouse/MisPers.

Ex: In hypothetical LE interview of hypo. husband of empty-nest-couple, he says, we had ordinary, peaceful weekend at our house, then Monday 5:00 a.m. I drove to airport to fly (to city 500 mi. away for a one or two day business trip), so yeah, I was the last one to see her. Or he says, last one to see her alive.

Pretty much like sequence w BM. I can't think of any case names ATM, but we've seen this many times.

If wife has been reported missing (maybe by son or dau. not reaching her) how does hubs. know he was the last to see her?

What if, after he left home/headed to airport --
- UPS delivery required wife to sign for a package?
- A friend returned to wife a punch bowl borrowed for a baby shower that weekend?
- In walking down driveway to put birthday card into mailbox, wife & neighbor backing his car out of garage exchanged greetings?
- Nosy neighbor invited herself over to ask wife what was in UPS package?
- While still at mailbox, wife & jogger from next door said Hi to each other?
- The Schwan Food truck came by; driver rang door bell for possible order, but wife said, TY, not today.

Not saying any of these happened at PP home. Just saying, unless wife was already dead when BM/ husband left that a.m., he could/would not know that something similar could/did happen; he could not legitimately say he was the last to see her alive.

These kinds of events are inconsequential in day to day life. But in the context of a planned or unplanned homicide, any in-person contact w wife, like the ^, could happen.

If husband says, I was the last one to see her alive, then he must know her time of death and must know that none of those events did occur after he left the home. So she must already have been dead when he left.
Ironic? Yep imo my2ct.

Another thing I am curious about and maybe we will hear more about it at trial, but did anyone try calling Sheila? Did Barry ask the Ritter's if they saw her riding her bike that day? Did he or the daughters call anyone else to see if she was talking to anyone that day? The wedding was that day and I am curious if I didn't hear from my family member I likely would try to find out if they talked to anyone that day. I feel like Barry assumed she was riding her bike and went missing and first thing he asked was for the Ritter's to check for her bike. I mean didn't she attend church online on Sunday's as well? Why would he think she was riding from 8 to 9am? And even if that was the plan, I think her messaging with Sheila before that ride would be a given because Indiana was ahead of Colorado time and she would check in on her best friend on this huge day in her life. It makes no sense that he didn't try to narrow down when she went missing and with what we know, assumed it was from an early morning ride and not something later in the day.

I think he NEEDED the bike ride narrative to take off immediately so he planted the idea vs letting police investigate and determine she was riding her bike.

I don't think for a minute it would be "normal" for her to wake up alone on Mother's Day and not get online, call Sheila, check her snapchats and return messages, or check on her girls before that ride. She did none of that because she was dead long before she could wake up Sunday and go about her day. Barry knew that and he didn't allow the police to investigate the what happened part, he set the narrative with telling the Ritter's to look for her bike and then they called police and said she was riding her bike, then they find her bike. All too neatly packaged in my mind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
79
Guests online
3,132
Total visitors
3,211

Forum statistics

Threads
604,179
Messages
18,168,675
Members
232,115
Latest member
curtmarvin
Back
Top