Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o Prejudice* #102

[mrjitty]

I think the defence team have been good at using the pre-trial process to create a narrative where everything can be explained by bad luck and bad faith.

A jury will always be instructed to consider all the facts that it accepts as proven, before making reasonable and obvious inferences. So for example, if you consider the Broomfield run, there is only one obvious conclusion (IMO) if all facts are considered.

However if you speculate answers to each point individually you can come up with a potential answers

Though this is a form of logical fallacy, i do think the defence team has been good at creating a narrative where a potential juror might engage in that kind of thinking.

I also think this defence has a strong <wink> <wink> element. i.e, we all know he probably did it, but is it really proven ... and maybe there were reasons

 

[MountainDad]

I think the defence team have been good at using the pre-trial process to create a narrative where everything can be explained by bad luck and bad faith.

A jury will always be instructed to consider all the facts that it accepts as proven, before making reasonable and obvious inferences. So for example, if you consider the Broomfield run, there is only one obvious conclusion (IMO) if all facts are considered.

However if you speculate answers to each point individually you can come up with a potential answers

Though this is a form of logical fallacy, i do think the defence team has been good at creating a narrative where a potential juror might engage in that kind of thinking.

I also think this defence has a strong <wink> <wink> element. i.e, we all know he probably did it, but is it really proven ... and maybe there were reasons

It was easy to do when Judge Murphy grants bond and reasonable doubt based on unrealated, partial DNA found in one location not in a crime scene. Judge Llama cripples a murder case by not allowing expert witnesses as a form of punishment for late prosecution filings, then resigns the next day. Justice is elusive with such biased Judges

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Was this covered at the prelim? I don't know.

Personally I don't see it significant in that way.

The dart cap, 22 round, disposal of tranq RX, no obvious working tranq gun, missing charger cable, book in the fireplace, helmet and bike are most significant in terms of staging and the inability of the accused to give truthful, coherent explanation.

The prosecution does not need to explain the original timeline.

I disagree about “book in the fireplace” and think that is speculation by LE and not circumstantial as they cannot pinpoint when the Morphews had the fire in the fireplace or that a book/journal was actually burned and would be “staging”. Same for the door jam crack…speculation not circumstantial as they cannot pinpoint when it occurred.

 

[susiQ]

Personally, I’m not invested in the “gun” although I believe it is a good possibility given his darting around the house. It is equally plausible that he approached SM in an unthreatening manner and jabbed her. At his size and strength and her small stature, for him to walk up to her like he wanted to talk and then grab her quickly and thrust the needle into her is also possible. If she somehow wrestled herself free and began running, Barry was at her heels. He may be strong, but I‘d bet SM could out run him. She makes it to the bedroom and collapses, he body checks the door and the frame breaks. We had an attempted break in through our garage a number of years ago where we could see the boot print on the outside of the door, the door frame cracked, just like their bedroom door, but fortunately the door didn’t give way.

Why would BM own up to running around ”shooting” chipmunks, disposing tranquilizer material in Broomfield, tranquillizing deer from the breezeway to saw off their antlers and what all else he may have spun that we may not even know yet? First he lies about it and then when confronted with the circumstantial evidence, he spins a tale he “thinks” LE will buy. Unfortunately for him, LE wasn’t buyin’ his tale.

As well, just because there may be no known case where a killer used a dart gun or .22 (not sure about the .22) to immobilize their victim doesn’t mean it’s never been done. There are many unsolved cases out there. It certainly is a way to effectively move the actual act of murder to another location avoiding a crime scene at home.

JMHO

 

[charminglane]

In the bedroom where the live round was found on the floor next to Suzanne's side of the bed and the gun case was under the bed, does anyone know what is the floor covering in that room?
Hardwood, tile, or carpet?
Just wondering about the "roll" and noise factor of a dropped casing.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

In the bedroom where the live round was found on the floor next to Suzanne's side of the bed and the gun case was under the bed, does anyone know what is the floor covering in that room?
Hardwood, tile, or carpet?
Just wondering about the "roll" and noise factor of a dropped casing.

Looked like carpet. More likely was in his pants pocket and fell out. Or was on the bed and rolled off.

 

[Boxer]

It was easy to do when Judge Murphy grants bond and reasonable doubt based on unrealated, partial DNA found in one location not in a crime scene. Judge Llama cripples a murder case by not allowing expert witnesses as a form of punishment for late prosecution filings, then resigns the next day. Justice is elusive with such biased Judges

MOO It would be the prosecution not sending the DNA info in the discovery.
Huge error, followed up by failing to meet deadlines.
IE as irritating and Super Karen as she is, did not shoot DA LS in the foot.
LS did that herself.
IMO the question is was she intentionally throwing the case or just not able to do the job.

 

[Trebor5591]

<snip>

I also think this defence has a strong <wink> <wink> element. i.e, we all know he probably did it, but is it really proven ... and maybe there were reasons

I disagree. I don't believe anyone on a jury would be willing to wink at BM's murder of SM. BM's knowledge that SM committed adultery is not a good reason to kill his spouse of 26 years and the mother of his two children. There are no good reasons to murder your spouse. The solution for unfaithfulness in marriage is divorce, not murder. Only a monster would think otherwise, IMO.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

I disagree. I don't believe anyone on a jury would be willing to wink at BM's murder of SM. BM's knowledge that SM committed adultery is not a good reason to kill his spouse of 26 years and the mother of his two children. There are no good reasons to murder your spouse. The solution for unfaithfulness in marriage is divorce, not murder. Only a monster would think otherwise, IMO.

A jury will weigh only the evidence that is admitted in deliberations and they receive very specific jury instructions prior to being released for deliberations. There was a far amount in my opinion that is discussed here that would not have been available to a jury had there been a trial.

 

[Boxer]

In the bedroom where the live round was found on the floor next to Suzanne's side of the bed and the gun case was under the bed, does anyone know what is the floor covering in that room?
Hardwood, tile, or carpet?
Just wondering about the "roll" and noise factor of a dropped ca

Funny, after furiously texting on the way home, he is suddenly bored, leaves his truck door open, inviting rodents of all types to come live in his rolling trash can, and immediately starts running through the house shooting at chipmunks with a .22.
Randomly a .22 bullet is found laying on the bedroom carpet.

I disagree. I don't believe anyone on a jury would be willing to wink at BM's murder of SM. BM's knowledge that SM committed adultery is not a good reason to kill his spouse of 26 years and the mother of his two children. There are no good reasons to murder your spouse. The solution for unfaithfulness in marriage is divorce, not murder. Only a monster would think otherwise, IMO.

MOO It's that a jealousy murder can be understood on some level; making it a "husband kills an unfaithful wife case" as opposed to "monster who kills the innocent wife case."

MOO she did not deserve to be killed, and he is a long term abuser, but the defense is the defense and they are going to use arguments that make sense on some level.

 

[Megnut]

Whelp, there it is.

P. 22 (24) of the AA. Barry said, in his interview on May 21, 2020, that Suzanne had friends she communicated with, that she kept from him. She told him it was private, none of his business. He called it very suspicious.

So, yeah, JL was no surprise. Maybe the L part, but he surely knew the J part by 5/8. Ergo Facebook. Either Suzanne did it to obfuscate or Barry did it in search of.

Can't help but wonder if Barry didn't try to extract J's whole name from Suzanne on 5/9.

Probably he was just parroting platitudes he'd heard in his lifetime, I've always wondered whether Barry might also have meant what he said, about Suzanne being okay with this all, if one life were saved.

He could've meant JL, but I don't think so.

He could've meant Suzanne's. He saved her from damnation, you know from her hateful, sinful, unloving ways.

Or he could've meant himself. I think he did think of marriage, as for life. He said, IF he ever cheated, it would merely have been an mistake, an accident (see how forgiving he is of his potential dalliances?!). So given his position, if Suzanne wanted out, one of them had to go. He offered up suicide (something I suspect he'd tried before -- idle threat designed for maximum manipulation, tugging on all of Suzanne's heartstrings)... I think his other observation is most illuminating however -- when talking about Suzanne, he literally said she did NOTHING. Stayed home. Barry was the worker, the provider, the ATM. He was more valuable than she. (In his mind.) IMO he underscored it throughout his interviews -- he still had a daughter to raise -- warned LE against jailing him, taking him away from that (like it'd be their doing, not his!). It's clear to me, he did the math. If one of them had to go, it had to be her. Barry, much too valuable.

All men need is the one thing. And he could get that elsewhere.

So absolutely dismissive of all the many things Suzanne was --

But Barry had a problem. So he got rid of it.

I can hear it echo through the mountains.

Oh, Suzanne, look what you made me do.

JMO

Colorado Judicial Branch - Chaffee - Cases of Interest - People of the State of Colorado v. Barry Lee Morphew

www.courts.state.co.us

 

[Trebor5591]

MOO It would be the prosecution not sending the DNA info in the discovery.
Huge error, followed up by failing to meet deadlines.
IE as irritating and Super Karen as she is, did not shoot DA LS in the foot.
LS did that herself.
IMO the question is was she intentionally throwing the case or just not able to do the job.

I vote for "just not able to do the job."

 

[Megnut]

Barry and his shorts.

I think we have to believe him on this one.

Barry's cheap.

He hung onto his shorts.

Any one piece of evidence, explainable.

Some evidence, red herrings.

But all the evidences together begin to tell a story, made all the worse by Barry's 'splanations.

If he'd disposed of the sheath in any one of his dumpster runs, if he'd thrown his shorts away, if LE hadn't locked the house down (allowing the occupants of the home to do additiinal laundry, discovering the sheath and discarding it), LE might never have had the clue to develop.

But there it was. Indicating that someone had taken a vial of something and used a needle syringe to extract that something... and having done it hundreds of times, probably pocketed the needle sheath, absent-mindedly. Force of habit.

The shorts that got laundered with the very sheets on Suzanne's to-do list. The very shorts he was wearing when captured on CCTV in town on the early afternoon of 5/9, while across town, Suzanne was still very much alive, perhaps even feeling more alive in that exact moment than she'd felt in years.

The very shorts the defense would have us believe were one of many pairs just like them. They would like us to conclude there were shorts in the dryer but not the shorts, as if we'd further conclude the sheath was in Barry's other shorts (from his nub-sawing event weeks earlier), as if Barry's tale was credible and Suzanne did a load of laundry every three weeks.

The stray bullet -- we saw the house. We saw Barry's garage, Barry's truck. Suzanne was meticulous. Bed made. Whoever made that bed would've practically had to step on that cartridge! So I'm left to conclude that the bed was made prior to the ammo landing on the carpet. Because Suzanne would have picked it up! Do I know that? Of course not. But I apply logic. She was fastidious. (Her car -- I'll bet she wiped it down -- even more so during covid -- unlike the dusty dashboard in Barry's dumpster on wheels.)

I don't know how the bullet factors into the crime, but as I said, it lends to a timeline. Bed was made first. Which suggests Saturday, over Sunday.

If there's a way to use/doctor a .22 to fire a dart, it makes sense that the chambered cartridge would have to be ejected. Makes sense a seasoned "hunter" would pocket it.

There's those shorts again.

All that on the same day Suzanne stopped communicating with everyone, anyone.

It remains possible that Suzanne tried to arm herself, that she retrieved the gun from the case beneath the bed and struggled to load it, dropping the cartridge before Barry was ever aware it fell...

He said people don't know the truth --

Which truth, Barry?

That Suzanne had become ballsy and stood up to you?

That Suzanne was hateful and unloving, because she'd decided she wanted a different life for herself?

That Suzanne fought back? The scratches? That Suzanne ran for a weapon and you wrestled for it?

I don't know how the bullet landed where it did, but that it was there, I have to weigh its significance.

JMO

 

[O.Incandenza]

Was this covered at the prelim? I don't know.

Personally I don't see it significant in that way.

The dart cap, 22 round, disposal of tranq RX, no obvious working tranq gun, missing charger cable, book in the fireplace, helmet and bike are most significant in terms of staging and the inability of the accused to give truthful, coherent explanation.

The prosecution does not need to explain the original timeline.

At the prelim Agent Grusing testified that the .22 could fire a tranquilizer dart, but in later hearings the prosecution admitted that was incorrect and it could not.

I agree that the prosecution doesn't have to explain the exact manner of the murder, but they do have to prove the deliberation/premeditation prong of first degree murder. The tranquilizer gets them there if the jury agrees it was used. It also helps explain the lack of blood evidence, etc.

 

[waldojabba]

MOO It would be the prosecution not sending the DNA info in the discovery.
Huge error, followed up by failing to meet deadlines.
IE as irritating and Super Karen as she is, did not shoot DA LS in the foot.
LS did that herself.
IMO the question is was she intentionally throwing the case or just not able to do the job.

Well one thing we can say for LS – she certainly appears to be a polarizing figure!

What happened at the DA’s office to cause the discovery violations ?

IMO I think that the “recipe for disaster” prob included

- A pinch of covid

-One gallon of Cahill

-2 cups LS

-One gallon the revolving prosecutors

And for the icing?

- one pinch Murphy and a bushel of Llama

Just IMO

 

[waldojabba]

At the prelim Agent Grusing testified that the .22 could fire a tranquilizer dart, but in later hearings the prosecution admitted that was incorrect and it could not.

I agree that the prosecution doesn't have to explain the exact manner of the murder, but they do have to prove the deliberation/premeditation prong of first degree murder. The tranquilizer gets them there if the jury agrees it was used. It also helps explain the lack of blood evidence, etc.

iirc it was mentioned that a little duck/duct tape could be used to modify the .22 so it could shoot the Tranq darts - anybody else recall that?

 

[Momofthreeboys]

iirc it was mentioned that a little duck/duct tape could be used to modify the .22 so it could shoot the Tranq darts - anybody else recall that?

If I recall I thought it was the barrel that was the wrong size so not sure how duct tape would fix that issue.

 

[Jayhawk]

Well one thing we can say for LS – she certainly appears to be a polarizing figure!

What happened at the DA’s office to cause the discovery violations ?

IMO I think that the “recipe for disaster” prob included

- A pinch of covid

-One gallon of Cahill

-2 cups LS

-One gallon the revolving prosecutors

And for the icing?

- one pinch Murphy and a bushel of Llama

Just IMO

I really think the DA needs some additional help piecing the time line and evidence into a convincing narrative. Barry is not smart enough to pull off an unsolvable crime. His work crew and other associates have to know more than we know.

 

[susiQ]

I really think the DA needs some additional help piecing the time line and evidence into a convincing narrative. Barry is not smart enough to pull off an unsolvable crime. His work crew and other associates have to know more than we know.

I think it’s altogether possible the DA and her team have the timeline nailed down. It’s very difficult for us to put all the pieces together because we don’t have them all. Surely there is much more evidence that we are unaware of that will be exposed during a trial. With any luck, we won’t have to wait too, too long and hopefully there will be no missteps. No doubt IE will drown them in more paperwork, but thankfully, there will be no ”Bushel of Lama.” MOO

 

[Cindizzi]

iirc it was mentioned that a little duck/duct tape could be used to modify the .22 so it could shoot the Tranq darts - anybody else recall that?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1509257469226217472