Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o Prejudice* #103

[justtrish]

Unless the middle of the night movements were someone else moving her far far away in my opinion and why I don’t think they will try again until they have more evidence. I am more pragmatic than simply pessimistic given the realities from the first attempt preliminary.

The evidence doesn't support that thought because Barry's own words were he left his sleeping lightly snoring naked wife in the bed at 5am when he left for Broomfield. Also, this stranger would have had to open and close his truck and have Barry's phone AND have Suzanne's phone and charger AND take her bike and helmet and stage it. I think that scenario would have been believable if Barry didn't lie about nearly every thing he did that day and the previous day.

 

[Megnut]

We know there's a camera up by Monarch. And we know there's a camera (cameras) in Salida.

Is there a route circling Monarch Spur, Poncha Springs Market, the Fire Camp, Station 5 that avoids cameras?

 

[Momofthreeboys]

The evidence doesn't support that thought because Barry's own words were he left his sleeping lightly snoring naked wife in the bed at 5am when he left for Broomfield. Also, this stranger would have had to open and close his truck and have Barry's phone AND have Suzanne's phone and charger AND take her bike and helmet and stage it. I think that scenario would have been believable if Barry didn't lie about nearly every thing he did that day and the previous day.

There is no evidence that supports he had a place ahead of time to dispose of a body and no evidence yet that he took her somewhere at an elevation that was covered in snow this April. All we know for certain is telematics say his truck doors were opening and closing during the middle of the night so I am not wedded to any one theory but still think without evidence we aren’t aware of, there are still gaps and unanswered questions. The 95 ft move the best guess I have heard so far is so he could get the daughters vehicle out of the garage but that is also a guess. I am just not convinced that simply writing a strong 4 page arrest warrant and doing a better job at a preliminary without new info is enough.

 

[CGray123]

I am of the opinion that they will need some new evidence to get another arrest warrant and launch a new trial.

I agree, to an extent. There is much to learn from a study of E&N's arguments in this case.

The new evidence need not be the remains of SM. What DA LS will do if she is wise, is assign a top litigator to analyze the motions in limine and go back to investigators and experts for responsive evidence and opinion. BM's many motions provide a blueprint for subsequent inquiries and expert analysis. LS would be a fool not to do this, and to take her time to get it right, get it organized, and have it ready for the prosecution team to present. I have been critical of LS's decisions and attributed them to lack of experience. I believe she and the CCSO are capable of learning from experience and I believe they are determined to re-file the case when it's ready.

It would be a great coup if Spezee found SM's remains in a place associated with BM, and if her tissues contained traces of tranquilizer. But I don't think recovery of her remains is necessary to find the new evidence that will support the new arrest warrant.

My boys have a favorite saying from the Boy Scout Handbook, which I paraphrase - - wisdom comes from experience, and experience often comes from a lack of wisdom. I think LS and Sheriff Spezee learned from this experience. I believe both are hard at work getting ready for the next round with BM, IE and company.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

I agree, to an extent. There is much to learn from a study of E&N's arguments in this case.

The new evidence need not be the remains of SM. What DA LS will do if she is wise, is assign a top litigator to analyze the motions in limine and go back to investigators and experts for responsive evidence and opinion. BM's many motions provide a blueprint for subsequent inquiries and expert analysis. LS would be a fool not to do this, and to take her time to get it right, get it organized, and have it ready for the prosecution team to present. I have been critical of LS's decisions and attributed them to lack of experience. I believe she and the CCSO are capable of learning from experience and I believe they are determined to re-file the case when it's ready.

It would be a great coup if Spezee found SM's remains in a place associated with BM, and if her tissues contained traces of tranquilizer. But I don't think recovery of her remains is necessary to find the new evidence that will support the new arrest warrant.

My boys have a favorite saying from the Boy Scout Handbook, which I paraphrase - - wisdom comes from experience, and experience often comes from a lack of wisdom. I think LS and Sheriff Spezee learned from this experience. I believe both are hard at work getting ready for the next round with BM, IE and company.

I agree with a lot of what you say here but I do think they won’t get a new arrest warrant without curing the deficiencies and perhaps they can without new evidence…they certainly know more than I do about the case and like you said they have somewhat of a blueprint from the first attempt. I have mixed feelings regarding an attempt without a body.

 

[Seattle1]

I agree with a lot of what you say here but I do think they won’t get a new arrest warrant without curing the deficiencies and perhaps they can without new evidence…they certainly know more than I do about the case and like you said they have somewhat of a blueprint from the first attempt. I have mixed feelings regarding an attempt without a body.

There was no deficiency in BM's arrest warrant! He was in fact bound over trial. As to the Court allowing bail for the murderer, this was clearly the former agent Cahill not testifying on DNA as he was prepared by the DA's office.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

There was no deficiency in BM's arrest warrant! He was in fact bound over trial. As to the Court allowing bail for the murderer, this was clearly the former agent Cahill not testifying on DNA as he was prepared by the DA's office.

I disagree. For me, the deficiencies were that it was too long, contained hearsay, contained characterization and contained speculation that was not able to be proven at the preliminary. More people than just I think they need to tighten up the case if they try again.

 

[Seattle1]

I disagree. For me, the deficiencies were that it was too long, contained hearsay, contained characterization and contained speculation that was not able to be proven at the preliminary. More people than just I think they need to tighten up the case if they try again.

^^bbm

"I do think they won’t get a new arrest warrant without curing the deficiencies..."

Tightening up the case is one thing but it makes no sense for OP to suggest any prosecution ever gut the state's evidence [for a preliminary hearing], as the Statute intended and provided for.

Granted, the supporting affidavit to BM's arrest warrant need not be 130 pages but there's also nothing in the statute prohibiting the length and/or page count of the AA.

Again, an AA prepared in support of an arrest warrant is specifically for the Court's eyes only-- further used at the preliminary hearing to decide probable cause, and whether or not to bound the case over for trial.

Be reminded that the PH is where the defense gets to challenge the DA's right to bring charges against the defendant, and also challenge all of which OP objects to including hearsay, characterization, or speculation. Also, be reminded the AA will never be seen by the jurors.

Respectfully, it doesn't follow to suggest the prosecution sabotage the very purpose of the AA.

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

I agree, to an extent. There is much to learn from a study of E&N's arguments in this case.

The new evidence need not be the remains of SM. What DA LS will do if she is wise, is assign a top litigator to analyze the motions in limine and go back to investigators and experts for responsive evidence and opinion. BM's many motions provide a blueprint for subsequent inquiries and expert analysis. LS would be a fool not to do this, and to take her time to get it right, get it organized, and have it ready for the prosecution team to present. I have been critical of LS's decisions and attributed them to lack of experience. I believe she and the CCSO are capable of learning from experience and I believe they are determined to re-file the case when it's ready.

It would be a great coup if Spezee found SM's remains in a place associated with BM, and if her tissues contained traces of tranquilizer. But I don't think recovery of her remains is necessary to find the new evidence that will support the new arrest warrant.

My boys have a favorite saying from the Boy Scout Handbook, which I paraphrase - - wisdom comes from experience, and experience often comes from a lack of wisdom. I think LS and Sheriff Spezee learned from this experience. I believe both are hard at work getting ready for the next round with BM, IE and company.

BIB

Exactly. I think discussion incorrectly focusses on supposed weakness at the Prelim which in fact had nothing to do with the collapse of the case.

What they need is to have their expert evidence completely sorted out, and to come back to Court in good faith. They never promised to find the victim. So long as efforts were in good faith, that should suffice.

 

[mrjitty]

There was no deficiency in BM's arrest warrant! He was in fact bound over trial. As to the Court allowing bail for the murderer, this was clearly the former agent Cahill not testifying on DNA as he was prepared by the DA's office.

BIB - Yes this is worth repeating

They could file the same arrest warrant today. I really don't understand the focus on the AA which has nothing to do with the trial. Whether or not evidence was discussed in the AA or only included in supporting exhibits and affidavits is a rather inside baseball procedural discussion and was only relevant in terms of whether potential jurors might have read it.

 

[mrjitty]

Be reminded that the PH is where the defense gets to challenge the DA's right to bring charges against the defendant, and also challenge all of which OP objects to including hearsay, characterization, or speculation. Also, be reminded the AA will never be seen by the jurors.

Just to reinforce this specifically, the prosecution would have attempted to argue this material one way or the other. Therefore the hearsay/speculation etc would have been found in the exhibits, affidavits, testimony, pleadings etc one way or the other.

The Judge does not need to be protected from such evidence. He makes his decisions based on knowledge of the rules of evidence. In no way would he be influenced by hearsay.

Further, it is not unusual that things in the AA would turn out to be inaccurate compared to what experts argue at trial, or what is later becomes clear.

The AA really has nothing to do with the trial.

I guess because we never heard the prosecutions opening argument, people assume it would be the same as the AA?

 

[MassGuy]

I disagree. For me, the deficiencies were that it was too long, contained hearsay, contained characterization and contained speculation that was not able to be proven at the preliminary. More people than just I think they need to tighten up the case if they try again.

That does not matter. Irrelevant or inadmissible information didn't form the judge's opinion in regards to signing the warrant.

This idea that the the AA was too long or something is truly bizarre; it's almost as if people don't know what it is, or what it's purpose is.

It can be overwrought and still provide enough evidence to justify Barry's arrest, which it was and did.

This vast majority of the inadmissible stuff didn't even come up up at the preliminary hearing.

ETA: Totally agree @mrjitty, you beat me to the punch.

 

[mrjitty]

That does not matter. Irrelevant or inadmissible information didn't form the judge's opinion in regards to signing the warrant.

This idea that the the AA was too long or something is truly bizarre; it's almost as if people don't know what it is, or what it's purpose is.

It can be overwrought and still provide enough evidence to justify Barry's arrest, which it was and did.

This vast majority of the inadmissible stuff didn't even come up up at the preliminary hearing.

ETA: Totally agree @mrjitty, you beat me to the punch.

I am not that familiar with Colorado prelim procedure, but isn't it the case that the key document is the indictment, and the prosecution's opening is the summary of the case?

ETA - its the Prelim opening available on YT? does anyone have the link for that?

 

[MassGuy]

I am not that familiar with Colorado prelim procedure, but isn't it the case that the key document is the indictment, and the prosecution's opening is the summary of the case?

ETA - its the Prelim opening available on YT? does anyone have the link for that?

I actually don't know if there was an opening, despite following a bunch of Colorado cases. I just looked back at an email @NoSI sent me (her prelim notes), and she starts with Commander Walker, with no mention of an opening.

ETA: Just looked back at the live blog of the Berreth case, and they jumped right to a CBI agent with no opening. It must not be standard procedure to have one.

 

[mrjitty]

It seems the DA files a "Complaint and Information" or "complaint" or "information", in Colorado - far as I can see (like an indictment).

I guess they just proceed on that at the Prelim.

 

[Seattle1]

I actually don't know if there was an opening, despite following a bunch of Colorado cases. I just looked back at an email @NoSI sent me (her prelim notes), and she starts with Commander Walker, with no mention of an opening.

ETA: Just looked back at the live blog of the Berreth case, and they jumped right to a CBI agent with no opening. It must not be standard procedure to have one.

How could you forget? -- Iris did all but cry big tears when begging Judge Murphy to allow her to give both an opening and closing at the PH. He wasn't having it! (Instead, the defense ate up more than their allotted clock time).

Covid or no covid (i.e., WebEx allowance), prelims are not allowed recorded in Colorado -- only advisements and arraignments.

 

[Seattle1]

It seems the DA files a "Complaint and Information" or "complaint" or "information", in Colorado - far as I can see (like an indictment).

I guess they just proceed on that at the Prelim.

Yes -- in Colorado, the majority of criminal cases are by the standard complaint or information-- which replaces the grand jury indictment.

 

[mrjitty]

Yes -- in Colorado, the majority of criminal cases are by the standard complaint or information-- which replaces the grand jury indictment.

Do we have access to that?

I presume the prelim case is tested against the complaint (i.e what has to be proved)? What relevance did the AA have at the prelim if any?

Sorry for so many questions!

 

[Seattle1]

Do we have access to that?

I presume the prelim case is tested against the complaint (i.e what has to be proved)? What relevance did the AA have at the prelim if any?

Sorry for so many questions!

^^bbm

Yes, to the Complaint and Information.

A preliminary hearing is limited to matters necessary to a determination of probable cause.

In my experience, generally, Colorado Criminal Courts tend to seal the AA, and/or suppress public access, until the Preliminary Hearing is concluded.

For BM's case, I believe Judge Murphy ordered the AA released about a week after the 4-day hearing so in this regard, no, we didn't have access to the AA document before or during the hearing.

You may recall the Media Consortium put up a fight for immediate access-- relying on revised Rule 55.1 that was effective May 10, 2021, but to no avail.

Here, the AA served somewhat as the index or agenda to the four-day preliminary hearing where the Court ruled the prosecution satisfied the burden to show probable cause, and the Court ruled the case was bound over for trial.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/11th_Judicial_District/Chaffee/cases%20of%20interest/21CR78/21CR78%20Morphew%20Amended%20Complaint%20051821.pdf

Rule 55.1 - Public Access to Court Records in Criminal Cases, Colo. R. Crim. P. 55.1 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Rule 55.1 - Public Access to Court Records in Criminal Cases, Colo. R. Crim. P. 55.1, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

ETA: Add Order to suppress AA from the public until 7 days after expiration of the Order.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/11th_Judicial_District/Chaffee/cases%20of%20interest/21CR78/21CR78%20Order%20Limit%20Public%20Redacted.pdf

 

[Seattle1]

Yes -- in Colorado, the majority of criminal cases are by the standard complaint or information-- which replaces the grand jury indictment.

Appending to my post to add the Preliminary Hearing replaces the grand jury. (DA files the charges by complaint & information). Sorry, my initial post was unclear.