Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o prejudice* #109

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
As an Aussie, I really cannot understand this US obsession with putting politics into everything. I don't know all 26 million Australians (now there's a surprise!), but I've yet to hear of even one who votes for law, local council, etc vacancies on the basis of their politics (their own or the nominees'). We vote for the person whom we think is best for the job. It just seems odd to me to do otherwise.
Truthfully, it doesn't matter what we vote for in any country in the world because we are almost guaranteed to make a balls of it.
Chaos is not confined to one continent, one country or one race.
 
Same defense that were already complaining of being overwhelmed at the length of the AA?
It is highly debatable whether they should have padded it with totally unnecessary and irrelevant information.
This is grasping at straws.
Her entire document is grasping at straws, weak arguments filed under no less than 12 claim groups!!!
Except the state can't have any witnesses or evidence they don't disclose in discovery unless it is to rebut a defense witness.
 
I cite Dan May because most of us know and respect him and his opinion is a qualified opinion.
The 'Grail' is a reference to Arthur and the knights.

The story of Parsifal is an old story that dates back to around 1130 AD. Many writers have referred to it as the “hero’s journey” [2, 4, 5], and it traces our path through the chapters of our career. The journey requires a period of Soul Searching (which is really about reconnecting to the call), and it finally leads to Enlightenment and Transformation. This journey is universal to each of us, and to our profession. We are in the time of reconnecting to the call. It is a time when we redefine our pursuit. It is a time of magnificent opportunity [6]. Man’s quest for the Grail* is about the journey of every person who searches to find what he or she is truly meant to be, and how their life has meaning. That is why we search for it so passionately. In the story, you may recognize yourself, or at least some pieces of yourself, in Parsifal. So, please, open your hearts and your imagination and most of all, remember that most wonderful of stories: the story that is you. . .


Did the end justify the means?
I don't believe it did which is why I agree with dan May's opinion.

Lama, IMHO, overstepped.

He is responsible because he is the authority in the court.
He also did it by taking the defense action without questioning it or even analysing it deeply.
And iMO he did the victim, Suzanne, and all women victims of DV a grave disservice.

He knew perfectly well the case could not continue.
It was petty and small minded.

But here we are.
It matters because there is a victim here, there are many victims, in fact.
And he had other options.
He just looks silly now, and retired..

Can't do a thing about the z if I'm using a GB English keyboard.
I do like it personally and I wouldn't eliminate it even if I did not, cos I'm no Lama...

Haha, I just mentioned the "z" thing because my spell checker kept telling me you misspelled "jeopardise" and "penalise," for example. I kept thinking "that isn't misspelled, it's just extremely old school!"

Have a great evening, Kitty!
 
Yeah, I think it will likely work out for the best in the long run. Finding Suzanne will help immensely. Fresh eyes on the case, more time to prepare and potentially a more experienced prosecutor will also help. Even if LS's office is the one to retry the case, hopefully the first attempt and the other experience they've gained in the last few years will help them.
It's given Barry years more freedom though. :(
 
Haha, I just mentioned the "z" thing because my spell checker kept telling me you misspelled "jeopardise" and "penalise," for example. I kept thinking "that isn't misspelled, it's just extremely old school!"

Have a great evening, Kitty!
US and UK keyboards quite different.
I am neither.
I just put up with it..lol.
 
Kitty, I'll try to answer your questions!...
P.S. You folks from across the pond and your aversion to the letter "z" :D
snipped for focus. @AugustWest
Re your P.S., yes.
Is that aversion to the letter Z balanced by embellishing words like colors and neighbors w a totally gratuitous letter U? J/K. ;)

TBH, I enjoy spelling & phrases coming from our members across the pond, DownUnder, or the others in the Commonwealth of Nations.

@kittythehare :)
 
As an Aussie, I really cannot understand this US obsession with putting politics into everything. I don't know all 26 million Australians (now there's a surprise!), but I've yet to hear of even one who votes for law, local council, etc vacancies on the basis of their politics (their own or the nominees'). We vote for the person whom we think is best for the job. It just seems so odd to me to do otherwise.
Couldn’t agree more.
 
SM's Texts & Verbal Stmts re BM's Abuse, DV. Hearsay? Admissible at Trial?
....Her words are not hearsay, they are evidence.
snipped for focus. @kittythehare
Presiding at Feb 2022 evidentiary hearing (for spring 2022 trial), Judge Lama said Nope (my paraphrasing;) ).

Prosecutors presented, per link below:*
--- Some of SM's texts.
- Text to Sheila O, "I wouldn't feel safe (alone) with him."
- Text to Sheila O, husband was unstable and he would change character like Jekyll and Hyde.
Judge L. ruled inadmissible at trial.

--- Verbal stmts.
"Some of the comments about possible domestic violence were made verbally, according to prosecutors and Oliver. Prosecutors said these conversations occurred after the couple moved to Colorado in 2018, but they couldn't give exact dates of when the alleged abuse happened, which was partly why Lama ruled that they would be inadmissible."

Presumably Judge L. will not preside at any future trial of BM.

Yes, judges have wide discretion in ruling on some evidentiary issues; yes, in some spousal homicide trials, the deceased victim’s texts & stmts about physical & other DV abuse have been admitted at trial.

In this case, I wonder if prosecutor will convince the judge to admit SM’s texts & verbal stmts to Sheila O. (and/or possibly other communications to others) at trial.

Heading off to CO Rules of Evidence.

______________________________

* Feb 11, 2022 Updated Sep 30, 2023 [not clear what the update was]

"Barry Morphew case: Judge won't allow mention of alleged domestic violence; trial to begin in April"
"I wouldn't feel safe (alone) with him," Suzanne Morphew told Oliver in a text message. She also texted Oliver that her husband was unstable and that he would change character like Jekyll and Hyde. None of those text messages will be discussed during the trial, the judge ruled Thursday."

 

Apologies, my use of the word "advises" might not be the best.

And it is true that Rule 16 leaves the remedy for discovery violations up to the judge's discretion.

Four choices "advise" the judge when determining the proper remedy.

I don't see a problem with first choosing to allow the prosecution time to fix the discovery violation. That choice is given in the plain text of the rule. Likewise, the rule allows a judge to "prohibit the party from introducing in evidence the material not disclosed." This option is also included in the plain text of the rule. Further, sanctions are considered by the plain text of the statute; the judge may "enter such other order as it deems just under the circumstances."

This shows that the legislative body that adopted the rule considered what would be fair as a remedy for discovery violations. I can't fault a judge for choosing a remedy that is specifically mentioned in the text of the statute.
 
SM's Texts & Verbal Stmts re BM's Abuse, DV. Hearsay? Admissible at Trial?

snipped for focus. @kittythehare
Presiding at Feb 2022 evidentiary hearing (for spring 2022 trial), Judge Lama said Nope (my paraphrasing;) ).

Prosecutors presented, per link below:*
--- Some of SM's texts.
- Text to Sheila O, "I wouldn't feel safe (alone) with him."
- Text to Sheila O, husband was unstable and he would change character like Jekyll and Hyde.
Judge L. ruled inadmissible at trial.

--- Verbal stmts.
"Some of the comments about possible domestic violence were made verbally, according to prosecutors and Oliver. Prosecutors said these conversations occurred after the couple moved to Colorado in 2018, but they couldn't give exact dates of when the alleged abuse happened, which was partly why Lama ruled that they would be inadmissible."

Presumably Judge L. will not preside at any future trial of BM.

Yes, judges have wide discretion in ruling on some evidentiary issues; yes, in some spousal homicide trials, the deceased victim’s texts & stmts about physical & other DV abuse have been admitted at trial.

In this case, I wonder if prosecutor will convince the judge to admit SM’s texts & verbal stmts to Sheila O. (and/or possibly other communications to others) at trial.

Heading off to CO Rules of Evidence.

______________________________

* Feb 11, 2022 Updated Sep 30, 2023 [not clear what the update was]

"Barry Morphew case: Judge won't allow mention of alleged domestic violence; trial to begin in April"
"I wouldn't feel safe (alone) with him," Suzanne Morphew told Oliver in a text message. She also texted Oliver that her husband was unstable and that he would change character like Jekyll and Hyde. None of those text messages will be discussed during the trial, the judge ruled Thursday."

Judge broke it.
helluva swansong..
 
I am reporting from yet another Hare Hole----

The incongruousness of Mr. Morphew’s claim he was looking for a turkey carcass (shot at least 5 days earlier, quite possibly still earlier) when he crept up on foot to their house on the day of Suzanne’s last communication was challenged in the post above (#724). But all is not as it seemed.

Published information cited in the post indicated the maximum elevation range for wild turkeys in the United States was 6000 feet (Morphew home is at 8760 feet). However, hunting web sites (HuntScore: Turkey Hunting in Colorado's Chaffee) shows the approximate wild turkey hunting area in Chaffee County includes elevations well above 7000 ft. The area outlined in white on the map below is the turkey hunting area, the area in blue is the County boundary. This figure, which is no doubt a crude approximation, nonetheless shows the far estimated edge of the turkey hunting area is near the former Morphew.
View attachment 451943
So, the takeaway is simply that his story can’t be dismissed on the turkey range information, but as pointed out elsewhere, it makes little sense to look for a carcass more than five days old since it will have been scavenged and even if found, unsuitable for taxidermy or other purposes. Additionally, turkeys wouldn’t be expected at the upper limit of their range early in the year. In any event, the turkey range information by itself does not appear to have much evidentiary value.

However, it still makes little sense that he had a reason to look for old turkey remains, much less that the search occurred mere hours before his wife’s disappearance.

I submit it makes much more sense that he was creeping up to his own home in order to try and catch his wife sexting with her boyfriend.
I posted this before but the wild turkeys who live in the Colorado high country are Merriam's Turkey and their habitat extends up to 10,000 ft. elevation. They are popular targets for hunters, and I even found an article that says hunting them is similar to hunting elk--BM's fave! Also, I will say again that despite this info, I am 100% certain that BM was nonetheless lying about the turkey.


I am happy to re-post this just as many times as I had to post that "mountain lions always drag their prey to a "safe" location away from the kill site to predate and leave conspicuous drag marks" way back in the early days of this case!
 
As an Aussie, I really cannot understand this US obsession with putting politics into everything. I don't know all 26 million Australians (now there's a surprise!), but I've yet to hear of even one who votes for law, local council, etc vacancies on the basis of their politics (their own or the nominees'). We vote for the person whom we think is best for the job. It just seems so odd to me to do otherwise.
MOO until a demogogue comes along.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
161
Guests online
445
Total visitors
606

Forum statistics

Threads
609,745
Messages
18,257,574
Members
234,751
Latest member
kjnn610
Back
Top