Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o prejudice* *found in 2023* #114

New Posts

Waxahachie1 said:
I have been following this and other local Colorado cases for several years now, but this is my first post on any social media.

I appreciate your succinct and accurate recitations of the evidence, your incisive opinions, and your balanced perspective. I will do my best to follow your example.

I disagreed with nearly all Judge Lama's rulings when they were made, and especially with the sanctions he imposed. Like Dan May, I wondered why the DA did not appeal them. I wonder even more when I hear Hurlburt's testimony that Lama's rulings were the worst he'd ever experienced. Lama's rulings were the final word on the case, but only because the DA accepted them and dismissed the charge voluntarily. To me, that lets Lama off the hook in this case even though I believe he was wrong.

Extraordinary sanctions against Stanley's 11th Circuit DA's office have now been upheld on appeal, and the so I am not inclined as others are to see this as a judge problem. Dismissal of cases is an extreme remedy but it seems both the judicial system and the attorney regulators are seeing a real problem with this DA's administration of justice. This issue - much more than anything Eytan has done - tends to undermine public confidence in institutions.

Although my eyes roll at Eyetan's over the top amateur theatrics and her client's clumsy approach to public relations, they only undermine public confidence in themselves IMO. Their legal claims of a great conspiracy to violate Morphew's rights are already falling apart, and I expect the defense of immunity will dispose of the remaining claims. If so, Eytan's public credibility will decline further as BM is forced to pay LE's attorney fees, with attendant publicity. If any of Morphew's civil case proceeds to the discovery stage, I expect DA Kelly will hold off filing charges until Morphew is deposed under oath (what a prosecutor's dream!).

With the discovery of substantial new evidence in the form of Suzanne's remains, there should be no legal obstacle to re-filing the charges. I expect that AG Weiser's special prosecutions unit will be providing substantial assistance, and that both the AG and the DA will make sure that the mistakes of the past are not repeated.

I would not want to be in Morphew's shoes. He will not be able to overwhelm the prosecutor this time.
Click to expand...
Welcome! Great post.
 
Love Never Fails said:
My goodness what an eye opener! I’m ready to wait as long as it takes to see if CO can clean the 11th and 12th districts of their judges and bad influences. I always wondered how much BM knew of this when deciding to kill Suzanne. Remember the citizen of Salida who said “These mountains have secrets”? Something to that effect? And I’m sure there is corruption is in any small town USA.

I remember a great Colorado DA who made sure Patrick Frazee didn’t get away with his murder. I’m waiting.
Click to expand...
That DA made a deal with the devil to get that win IMO. No one is perfect and decisions get made. I am in no hurry for another BM trial so if it’s takes awhile to sort out the players I am fine with it.
 
Waxahachie1 said:
I have been following this and other local Colorado cases for several years now, but this is my first post on any social media.

I appreciate your succinct and accurate recitations of the evidence, your incisive opinions, and your balanced perspective. I will do my best to follow your example.

I disagreed with nearly all Judge Lama's rulings when they were made, and especially with the sanctions he imposed. Like Dan May, I wondered why the DA did not appeal them. I wonder even more when I hear Hurlburt's testimony that Lama's rulings were the worst he'd ever experienced. Lama's rulings were the final word on the case, but only because the DA accepted them and dismissed the charge voluntarily. To me, that lets Lama off the hook in this case even though I believe he was wrong.

Extraordinary sanctions against Stanley's 11th Circuit DA's office have now been upheld on appeal, and the so I am not inclined as others are to see this as a judge problem. Dismissal of cases is an extreme remedy but it seems both the judicial system and the attorney regulators are seeing a real problem with this DA's administration of justice. This issue - much more than anything Eytan has done - tends to undermine public confidence in institutions.

Although my eyes roll at Eyetan's over the top amateur theatrics and her client's clumsy approach to public relations, they only undermine public confidence in themselves IMO. Their legal claims of a great conspiracy to violate Morphew's rights are already falling apart, and I expect the defense of immunity will dispose of the remaining claims. If so, Eytan's public credibility will decline further as BM is forced to pay LE's attorney fees, with attendant publicity. If any of Morphew's civil case proceeds to the discovery stage, I expect DA Kelly will hold off filing charges until Morphew is deposed under oath (what a prosecutor's dream!).

With the discovery of substantial new evidence in the form of Suzanne's remains, there should be no legal obstacle to re-filing the charges. I expect that AG Weiser's special prosecutions unit will be providing substantial assistance, and that both the AG and the DA will make sure that the mistakes of the past are not repeated.

I would not want to be in Morphew's shoes. He will not be able to overwhelm the prosecutor this time.
Click to expand...
@Waxahachie1 -- Welcome to WS! :)
 
Momofthreeboys said:
That DA made a deal with the devil to get that win IMO. No one is perfect and decisions get made. I am in no hurry for another BM trial so if it’s takes awhile to sort out the players I am fine with it.
Click to expand...
“That DA” was still awesome. Anytime a deal is made, the devil is always in it.
Patrick Frazee is still behind bars.
 
Waxahachie1 said:
I have been following this and other local Colorado cases for several years now, but this is my first post on any social media.

I appreciate your succinct and accurate recitations of the evidence, your incisive opinions, and your balanced perspective. I will do my best to follow your example.
Click to expand...

Thanks! Welcome to WS!

Waxahachie1 said:
I disagreed with nearly all Judge Lama's rulings when they were made, and especially with the sanctions he imposed. Like Dan May, I wondered why the DA did not appeal them. I wonder even more when I hear Hurlburt's testimony that Lama's rulings were the worst he'd ever experienced. Lama's rulings were the final word on the case, but only because the DA accepted them and dismissed the charge voluntarily. To me, that lets Lama off the hook in this case even though I believe he was wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes a number of us agree on that. It should have been appealed on principle IMO. But I wonder if they felt they had a good chance to find the body, so took the L - which did in fact pan out, if unexpectedly.

Waxahachie1 said:
Extraordinary sanctions against Stanley's 11th Circuit DA's office have now been upheld on appeal, and the so I am not inclined as others are to see this as a judge problem. Dismissal of cases is an extreme remedy but it seems both the judicial system and the attorney regulators are seeing a real problem with this DA's administration of justice. This issue - much more than anything Eytan has done - tends to undermine public confidence in institutions.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. I just have a personal bugbear with this behaviour. Lawyers are sworn to uphold the institution of the court. Where i come from they take an oath to put the court first. Not sure about Colorado! IE has seen the same evidence for us. So when she runs to two different court to claim that Grusing lied to BM and cruelly tricked him into incriminating statements, that is not just doing the best for her client. She is actively misleading the court IMO.

And then as we are seeing in many cases, they use pleadings and pressers to promote actual conspiracies. The failures of LS as DA are bad enough, without promoting conspiracies!

Waxahachie1 said:
Although my eyes roll at Eyetan's over the top amateur theatrics and her client's clumsy approach to public relations, they only undermine public confidence in themselves IMO. Their legal claims of a great conspiracy to violate Morphew's rights are already falling apart, and I expect the defense of immunity will dispose of the remaining claims. If so, Eytan's public credibility will decline further as BM is forced to pay LE's attorney fees, with attendant publicity. If any of Morphew's civil case proceeds to the discovery stage, I expect DA Kelly will hold off filing charges until Morphew is deposed under oath (what a prosecutor's dream!).
Click to expand...

I wish i shared your positivity. There won't be any consequences IMO. The next well heeled clients will form a queue to her door.

Waxahachie1 said:
With the discovery of substantial new evidence in the form of Suzanne's remains, there should be no legal obstacle to re-filing the charges. I expect that AG Weiser's special prosecutions unit will be providing substantial assistance, and that both the AG and the DA will make sure that the mistakes of the past are not repeated.

I would not want to be in Morphew's shoes. He will not be able to overwhelm the prosecutor this time.
Click to expand...

From your post to God's ears!

All MOO
 
mrjitty said:
Lawyers are sworn to uphold the institution of the court. Where i come from they take an oath to put the court first. Not sure about Colorado! IE has seen the same evidence for us. So when she runs to two different court to claim that Grusing lied to BM and cruelly tricked him into incriminating statements, that is not just doing the best for her client. She is actively misleading the court IMO.

And then as we are seeing in many cases, they use pleadings and pressers to promote actual conspiracies. The failures of LS as DA are bad enough, without promoting conspiracies!
Click to expand...
Colorado attorneys take an oath that includes a pledge to follow the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct. In general, the Rules require a high degree of honesty and integrity while acknowledging the tension between those standards and the attorney's duties to his client. They specifically require that attorneys refrain from making claims and arguments that have no basis in law or fact, and they limit what an attorney can say about a pending case in any statement to the public.

IMO, Eytan has pushed the limits of the rules but hasn't crossed the line. Her public statements have referred to official pleadings for the factual allegations and legal arguments, which the rules allow, and expressed personal opinions like, "This is the worst prosecutorial misconduct I've ever seen," which is also allowed.

With respect to Grusing, in her civil complaint Eytan made the factual allegation that he lied to Morphew, which is true, and the legal argument that it was a violation of her client's rights, which does not describe the current law but which could be considered a good faith argument for change.

For a long time, Eytan has been a respected leader in the criminal defense bar seeking to correct a very real problem - widespread violations by prosecutors of their ethical obligations to disclose discoverable information. As public and over the top as she has been in this case, it has all been a good faith effort to address a real problem that undermines public confidence that our system treats criminal defendants fairly.

I respectfully disagree that Eytan is undermining public institutions by attacking Linda Stanley's ethical lapses and trying to make a case for civil damages. It is Colorado prosecutors who have created this problem that undermined the credibility of the judicial system, not critics who have pointed out their failures.

All MOO.
 
Waxahachie1 said:
Colorado attorneys take an oath that includes a pledge to follow the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct. In general, the Rules require a high degree of honesty and integrity while acknowledging the tension between those standards and the attorney's duties to his client. They specifically require that attorneys refrain from making claims and arguments that have no basis in law or fact, and they limit what an attorney can say about a pending case in any statement to the public.

IMO, Eytan has pushed the limits of the rules but hasn't crossed the line. Her public statements have referred to official pleadings for the factual allegations and legal arguments, which the rules allow, and expressed personal opinions like, "This is the worst prosecutorial misconduct I've ever seen," which is also allowed.

With respect to Grusing, in her civil complaint Eytan made the factual allegation that he lied to Morphew, which is true, and the legal argument that it was a violation of her client's rights, which does not describe the current law but which could be considered a good faith argument for change.

For a long time, Eytan has been a respected leader in the criminal defense bar seeking to correct a very real problem - widespread violations by prosecutors of their ethical obligations to disclose discoverable information. As public and over the top as she has been in this case, it has all been a good faith effort to address a real problem that undermines public confidence that our system treats criminal defendants fairly.

I respectfully disagree that Eytan is undermining public institutions by attacking Linda Stanley's ethical lapses and trying to make a case for civil damages. It is Colorado prosecutors who have created this problem that undermined the credibility of the judicial system, not critics who have pointed out their failures.

All MOO.
Click to expand...
I first stumbled on her writings back in the crazy days of Title IX years in the 20 teens when two of my "boys" were in college in Colorado and I was trying to understand how legally colleges were doing what they were doing (nationally). My boys all survived college fortunately. She's in a tough spot because she's fighting for a cause that on surface can feel repugnant but is based on being fair and just within our laws and ethics, and for that I cannot fault her. Nor can I fault her zeal and determination.
 
Cindizzi said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1803153637507735768
Click to expand...

I hoped that Mike King would be called as a witness-- and hope he's also given a chance to defend his Channel!

Given the time spent on this thread parsing the YT transcript by Stanley, looking for any crumb expressed by LS not already in the public domain, I imagine the Court did the same.

And when Judge Murphy failed to take this up, IE was too eager to Motion the same to Ramsey Lama where it seemed the best he could do was pounce on the name of King's program: "Profiling Evil."

And from what I've read of the hearing, It seems OARC did the same--parrot IE and Lama on the title.

WS follows Mike King's channel-- it's an approved source to post, and King is a frequent contributor to Tricia's program. But no, his message has never been about labeling any suspect or defendant as "evil."

Bad judgment on LS to participate as a guest on this forum during an open case? I think so but not because she revealed any information or violated any professional ethic rules by discussing what had already been long reported by MSM.

IMO, I think Prosecutors should take the approach by Sheriff Spezze who held a press conference to announce BM's arrest, and never talked to MSM again.

Appearing anywhere -- even next to the Sherriff, proved just an invitation for another defense Motion. A rookie mistake by LS does not make for prosecutorial misconduct. MOO
 
Seattle1 said:
I hoped that Mike King would be called as a witness-- and hope he's also given a chance to defend his Channel!

Given the time spent on this thread parsing the YT transcript by Stanley, looking for any crumb expressed by LS not already in the public domain, I imagine the Court did the same.

And when Judge Murphy failed to take this up, IE was too eager to Motion the same to Ramsey Lama where it seemed the best he could do was pounce on the name of King's program: "Profiling Evil."

And from what I've read of the hearing, It seems OARC did the same--parrot IE and Lama on the title.

WS follows Mike King's channel-- it's an approved source to post, and King is a frequent contributor to Tricia's program. But no, his message has never been about labeling any suspect or defendant as "evil."

Bad judgment on LS to participate as a guest on this forum during an open case? I think so but not because she revealed any information or violated any professional ethic rules by discussing what had already been long reported by MSM.

IMO, I think Prosecutors should take the approach by Sheriff Spezze who held a press conference to announce BM's arrest, and never talked to MSM again.

Appearing anywhere -- even next to the Sherriff, proved just an invitation for another defense Motion. A rookie mistake by LS does not make for prosecutorial misconduct. MOO
Click to expand...
I think it stems from that original awful partner who spewed nonsensical theories left and right. We can thank him for all the unfounded rumors that still pop up on social channels. Mike king separated from him thankfully but I can’t recall if it was before or after the LS episodes.
 
Momofthreeboys said:
I think it stems from that original awful partner who spewed nonsensical theories left and right. We can thank him for all the unfounded rumors that still pop up on social channels. Mike king separated from him thankfully but I can’t recall if it was before or after the LS episodes.
Click to expand...
It was after. He and Mike split, and [mod snip] first YouTube episode was teased as an interview with Barry. It consisted of a phone call and Barry hanging up on him.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MassGuy said:
It was before. He and Mike split, and that <modsnip - namecalling> first YouTube episode was teased as an interview with Barry. It consisted of a phone call and Barry hanging up on him.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure on this because I wouldn't have watched the episode if TIR dude was still appearing on Mike's YT. MSM, reporting on a LS complaint to OARC, cites the August 30, 2021 Choir Practice episode which was after the prelim concluded. I'll look for it now.

www.websleuths.com

CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 , MEDIA,MAPS,TIMELINE *NO DISCUSSION*

https://arkvalleyvoice.com/suzanne-morphew-murder-to-proceed-to-trial-barry-morphew-bail-set-at-500000/ 9/18/21 On Friday afternoon, Sept. 17, a series of decisions by District 11 Judge Patrick Murphy set the course of the murder trial for Barry Morphew, in the disappearance and presumed...
www.websleuths.com www.websleuths.com
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seattle1 said:
I'm not sure on this because I wouldn't have watched the episode if TIR dude was still appearing on Mike's YT. MSM, reporting on a LS complaint to OARC, cites the August 30, 2021 Choir Practice episode which was after the prelim concluded. I'll look for it now.

www.websleuths.com

CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 , MEDIA,MAPS,TIMELINE *NO DISCUSSION*

https://arkvalleyvoice.com/suzanne-morphew-murder-to-proceed-to-trial-barry-morphew-bail-set-at-500000/ 9/18/21 On Friday afternoon, Sept. 17, a series of decisions by District 11 Judge Patrick Murphy set the course of the murder trial for Barry Morphew, in the disappearance and presumed...
www.websleuths.com www.websleuths.com
Click to expand...
I worded that wrong. He and Mike Split in January of 2020. <modsnip - namecalling> did his interview with Barry then, which was months before he was arrested. Linda’s thing came after the arrest, with just Mike.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 353 more.
Total: 1,878 (members: 354, guests: 1,524)

Online statistics

Members online
354
Guests online
1,524
Total visitors
1,878
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
597,647
Messages
18,068,539
Members
230,418
Latest member
bluntzilla901
Back
Top