Thank you for that. Maybe I just needed a reminder of what can be done. You give her a lot of credit and you are probably correct. IMO.
I was always skeptical of her claims and did not believe they had a lead on Suzanne’s location.
One reason is it saves face but I really hope it's true.
I agree with @Seattle1's assessment on this, with an additional reason: this factual representation is not the DA's to make. It has to come from investigators, including Grusing, and from Sheriff Sneeze. Their honesty and competence is not called into question by the DA's troubles. Without knowing the information that led them to focus on this area, there's no way to determine the likelihood that they will find SM, but I believe the representation was made in good faith.
BBM. The model of a DA as legal administrator is certainly an alternative, but Dan May and many other elected DAs in Colorado are trial attorneys first and foremost. Most are former deputies, and they are elected for their visible success in that role. They love to take on the baddest guys, like Patrick Frazee, as lead counsel, and put them behind bars.I have great respect for term-limited Dan May. However, I also know that a successful DA does not stand alone, and surrounds her/himself with a smart, qualified team of prosecutors and staff -- the worker bees if you will. Jeff Lindsey, Deputy DA that resigned from this case last October, was Dan May's right-hand guy for 19 years.
IMO, I think there are some misguided opinions that the DA alone is responsible for singularly admitting evidence and cranking out all the motions for the case when in fact it's more likely that the prosecutors assigned to this case, fell short of their responsibilities. Naturally, the buck stops with the DA: the DA represents the state, and they failed under her watch.
Generally, the DA, an elected official, puts in their time on a case on the front end-- long before the perpetrator is criminally charged. They typically assist police in the investigation of criminal offenses, provide legal opinions to police relative to investigations, advise them on the drafting of criminal complaints, search warrants, and statements of probable cause. The DA ultimately evaluates the evidence and is responsible for deciding whether or not to prosecute the case.
And we can't forget that in addition to supervising the team of prosecutors for the Morphew case, LS is also responsible for supervising the prosecutors of Chaffee, Custer, Fremont, and Park Counties, and their caseload. (i.e., 11 Judicial District). MOO
Personally, I'd love to have a conversation with Jeff Lindsey!!
I have mentioned that I hope that was not a Hail Mary pass.
Her arrests while police officer might need a look.
I don’t believe that LS is essentially “bad” and I agree that LE has shown their competence in this matter. My concern is that, particularly as a Colorado resident, a murderer will go free from punishment. I’m 100% confident that Barry murdered Suzanne. When people assault, kill and murder it ultimately diminishes the quality of life for all of us, especially when the criminal’s behavior goes unpunished.
Linda Stanley is a perfect example of the Peter principle in full effect.
I wouldn't call it "bad"...poor performer, inattention to details, perhaps over her head in the job.... several other things. She failed with Morphew in getting the case to trial. We'll see if in her "absence" at the helm, anyone else is capable of putting a case together that can get to trial. She actually did the right thing from a DA's perspective in withdrawing the case with the ability to recharge or he most likely would have been acquitted by a jury or ended up with a hung jury. Will be interesting to see how they organize in the 11th Judicial in the interim while she gets her ducks in a row with the state licensing board.
I want to be very clear that my criticism of Stanley is about her suitability for the important position she holds and her adherence to professional standards, not about her personal character. They are my opinion as a reasonably well informed citizen and not as a professional lawyer myself. If my posts have led anyone to believe otherwise, let this post set the record straight.
To be clear, let me restate that the buck stops with DA Stanley, regardless of who failed, this happened under her watch, and LS won't disagree.
Not only a no body case…there enough of those…a case based on circumstantial evidence alone that while totally able to be done, in my opinion far more difficult for a jury who may be expecting the “how” and “where” with some forensic evidence. She had a steep hill to climb from the get go as a less seasoned prosecutor.
