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

[GOBliaison]

If Barry has no money to pay her, he will be appointed a public defender.

Cheers! Huzzah! @Nikynoo !
That's the exclusive consequence I envisioned when formulating that IE Walk-Away #507 Post, supra.

With the expertise, experience and cogency of our ranks, why the deuce should I posit such a "what-if" and then proceed to answer it in the same breath? Hoping a sideways rhetorical question might trigger some fun-run of hypothesizing/wishful thinking/dream-catching during this glacial advance ...well, #507 is what I produced. Seems I forgot that hope is not a strategy....
__________________________
P.S.
And/but: Can you imagine the get-up-to-speed delay in the event fresh counsel is detailed?
(Hmm...maybe mortal coil longevity for the barr may figure in. And while vengeful Chippies may roam free and in numbers on hospice grounds, I doubt the attendants will oil and stack his arsenal.)
__________________________
As well, consider that $$B$M's$$, or lack thereof, is irrelevant.
IE can walk away for any/no reason(s).
Talk about Sunday Roast to beans on toast...

 

[Waxahachie1]

Cheers! Huzzah! @Nikynoo !
That's the exclusive consequence I envisioned when formulating that IE Walk-Away #507 Post, supra.

With the expertise, experience and cogency of our ranks, why the deuce should I posit such a "what-if" and then proceed to answer it in the same breath? Hoping a sideways rhetorical question might trigger some fun-run of hypothesizing/wishful thinking/dream-catching during this glacial advance ...well, #507 is what I produced. Seems I forgot that hope is not a strategy....
__________________________
P.S.
And/but: Can you imagine the get-up-to-speed delay in the event fresh counsel is detailed?
(Hmm...maybe mortal coil longevity for the barr may figure in. And while vengeful Chippies may roam free and in numbers on hospice grounds, I doubt the attendants will oil and stack his arsenal.)
__________________________
As well, consider that $$B$M's$$, or lack thereof, is irrelevant.
IE can walk away for any/no reason(s).
Talk about Sunday Roast to beans on toast...

In the spirit of your noble effort, I offer this:

My speculation, informed by experience, is that Morphew and his counsel have already had a serious conversation about the renewed potential that murder charges will be filed by a different prosecution team that has gone to school not only on the 11th JD case but also on the civil case, in which most if not all of Morphew's playbook is revealed. Of course, the probability that Morphew would have to invoke the Fifth Amendment in response to discovery and deposition questions would have come up, and I believe the merits of voluntarily dismissing the civil case or making a de minimus settlement offer had to be a subject of this conversation.

We'll see what they do, but my guess is that Bonehead Barry will decide to press on.

All speculation, of course. MOO

 

[Momofthreeboys]

You are certainly right about the strategy.

I think it's important to note that this appears to have been Stanley's strategy as well. The extraordinarily long and detailed arrest affidavit includes a great deal of inflammatory information that would not be admitted in evidence at a trial, including but not limited to attacks on Morphew's character as a husband and as a businessman. Stanley's media comments took place in the context of this affidavit's release and the press coverage it generated.

Judge Murphy pointed out the potential downside early in the case, and offered the prosecution an opportunity to amend the affidavit before it's release, to mitigate the likelihood that he would have to change venue or even dismiss the case because the inevitable pre-trial publicity could so taint the jury pool that Morphew could not get a fair trial. Stanley declined, and her public comments in the context of the publicity and its effect on the local jury pool provided Lama with the grounds to change venue. The prosecutor's PR strategy provided Eytan with the opportunity ethically to wage her own public relations campaign, in order to counter the prosecution's. We can debate whether she went too far, but the prosecution opened the door.

We may be seeing the beginning of a shift away from this approach in the Idaho case of State v Kohberger, where the arrest warrant was concise but compelling, and where the prosecution and defense jointly have asked the court to limit public access to the documents and even some hearings in the case to protect the defendant's right to a fair trial and, from the prosecution perspective, to assure that the people of the community where the murders took place get a chance to judge the guilt or innocence of the defendant (to the extent possible in such a sensational case).

I'm all about open courts and I "get" the idea that they are open technically (to locals) but after watching what happened publicly with the AA and all the obvious info in that AA that would never make it trial but still weighs heavy on the public's mind and in the public's chatter, I understand why judges and prosecutors show reluctance to broadcast and/or open all the documents in cases that grab the media fancy. It's a shame on some level but necessary to preserve justice as we currently understand it. My biggest question on my mind while we wait is more wondering what if anything would carry over in terms of motions and actions form the original attempt to get to trial.

 

[Waxahachie1]

I'm all about open courts and I "get" the idea that they are open technically (to locals) but after watching what happened publicly with the AA and all the obvious info in that AA that would never make it trial but still weighs heavy on the public's mind and in the public's chatter, I understand why judges and prosecutors show reluctance to broadcast and/or open all the documents in cases that grab the media fancy. It's a shame on some level but necessary to preserve justice as we currently understand it. My biggest question on my mind while we wait is more wondering what if anything would carry over in terms of motions and actions form the original attempt to get to trial.

It's clear enough to me that the 12th District Court will treat the newly filed charge as an entirely new case.

None of the rulings of Judge Lama or Judge Murphy will bind the court hearing DA Kelly's case.

IF DA Kelly gets expert reports lined up and all discovery organized for disclosure from the outset, she can defeat Morphew's original litigation strategy focused largely on discovery sanctions. She is too smart to seek political glory by public grandstanding, so the venue and fair trial issues will probably be mitigated - not that they won't be raised.

Very importantly, the new and likely female judge will have a chance to allow expert testimony about the behavior of domestic violence victims. I would expect a different outcome on Morphew's motion to exclude that evidence.

All MOO

 

[mrjitty]

The gist of the OARC charges against Stanley seem to be about neglect and malfeasance, not the kind of willful and malicious behavior that would abrogate her immunity from civil claims. Claims against the other defendants are very weak: they won't survive the motions to dismiss, either. As we have seen, the allegations are elaborate sophistries, intended to create the illusion of a corrupt investigation. If the judge is paying attention, he could dismiss them for failing to state a claim.

Even if some defendants remain in the civil case after the MTDs are decided, they can point to the empty chairs (Grusing and Harris) as the culpable ones, among many other defenses.

Despite its length and detail, Morphew's lawsuit is very weak IMO. I think any hope for an early settlement offer vaporized with the discovery of Suzanne's remains. But I think the lawsuit was part of a Morphew's PR strategy, to change the narrative about him that was created by the publication of the arrest affidavit. It has served that purpose even if there is no settlement offer from the defendants.

I certainly agree about the strategy, but I also suspect they hoped that the state would not want to go through the muck on this one after LS's various other disasters

15m was always nonsense of course. Is the state likely to be insured?

Sometimes it simply cheaper and politically expedient to quietly settle. Of course there is no chance of that now.

IMO

 

[GOBliaison]

Just finished watching closing arguments for the KR trial and knowing BM's defense has no burden to prove anything (as with KR's defense), I can't help wondering if BM's defense will intentionally go after the investigators and prosecutors-- using the allegations from their Civil lawsuit as their guide, all designed to promote reasonable doubt. It's not like they can promote proving BM being is innocent.

What will they do -- all in the name of promoting reasonable doubt:

• Call defense witnesses to promote distrust of the investigators, prosecutors, and "planted" evidence. There's at least one Brady letter I know of-- i.e., Cahill.
• IF LS is disbarred and resigns as DA, call witnesses about the OARC investigation, because IE is really going to want to take credit here.
• Call defense witness to support unknown DNA is the SODI.

While I know that the defense can't call witnesses to testify about evidence not in the trial, I don't know how this works under a once dismissed case.

More than anything, I can't help thinking that IE has had an idea about how she would tie the Civil lawsuit to BM's criminal trial, given she filed it so soon after the dismissal. It's really bugging me!

I mean, IE had to know that SM's body could/would be discovered at any time since it was in the Motion to dismiss -- albeit the location was incorrect.

I just don't think IE would have gambled on the spot she's in right now where BM is exposed to being called for 30+ depositions, if she didn't already have a plan in place for if/when SM's remains recovered.

And if it was only about the money, I still can't see where there would be a settlement offer without first deposing BM. MOO

Perchance @Seattle1, might it ramble on creatively about "...this case, rife with evidentiary inconsistencies." ??..

* * *​

In the civil case - with multiple respondents' pleadings, each seeking dismissal based on individual and particular averments (sworn), and now prepared for the record and presented through individual counsel, should portions of this potentially humongous entirety in the opinion of Ms. Eytan be 'at variance with her view of the case',
well...
...might not one expect IE would seek to convince whomever may be listening that:
"...they must address and resolve for themselves all of these evidentiary inconsistencies before concluding Mr. Morphew is culpable for anything...or merely, as I consider him, just another of these prosecutors' disadvantaged, beleaguered and maltreated innocents."

...Oy.​

______________________________________________

So I ask: May sworn and/or even unsworn documentation from unaccomplished cases - one civil, one criminal - be "bridged" in such a fashion, and later presented - limited to credibility/authenticity issues - at an eventual criminal proceeding, either as a general premise/practice in law, and/or pursuant to Colorado's procedural codes?

...being all, at its threshold, a pig's breakfast of hearsay ?? IMCO​

 

[Waxahachie1]

I certainly agree about the strategy, but I also suspect they hoped that the state would not want to go through the muck on this one after LS's various other disasters

15m was always nonsense of course. Is the state likely to be insured?

Sometimes it simply cheaper and politically expedient to quietly settle. Of course there is no chance of that now.

IMO

rbbm

The Colorado's self-Insured liability program provides insurance coverage to state departments and employees under the Risk Management Act (RMA), C.R.S. 24-30-1501 et seq.

Most cities and counties participate in a self-funded insurance pool authorized by statute, called the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency (CIRSA). Their coverage for law enforcement generally is described here.

Both programs contract with re-insurers like Lloyd's of London for coverage of claims that exceed a certain limit.

 

[Kemug]

I think it's high time we put that llama in the zoo, as I can't remember if we already have one. Any comments?

 

[Charlot123]

Yes - I've think we are seeing this in other big cases ripe with conspiracy. Defences are looking to Iris and at the KR trial to see how you can mobilise a broader public support if you have the right case

Key to it, is to use your filings and pressers (if not gagged) but especially surrogates to drive a broader narrative about the case - even if you can't ultimately get this evidence in at trial.

In some way the civil suit already did it's job, as well.

She's managed to elevate what are relatively boring (serious) administrative failings into allegations of corruption and fitting up. She directly accused the FBI especially of using 'fabricated' evidence to stitch Barry up. We know if isn't true, but it requires reading all the pleadings in detail which we know the media mostly won't do.

I think you are correct that she will be all in on it now. What else does she have?

IMO

MOO - in BM's case, an attempt to mobilize public support would be suicidal.
I can imagine how it could work for KR, because many women could easily put themselves in her shoes ("dumped by BF") and feel compassion.

With BM - try to mobilize public support, and you'll just spread awareness about the case! This huge bully obsessed with hunting, who "clipped" his wife's nose, who is not liked by anyone, has a few friends and is frankly terrifying! Women will see Suzanne as the victim of DV who was still going through chemo when he injected BAM into her port. Women would feel sympathetic towards Suzanne. Men will not want to see themselves in BM. Usually BM's support base could be patriarchal men, but from their standpoint, SM would look like an ideal, "3K", wife, and BM, like a fool who ruined everything he had for no reason.

I can't see a single man who would want to project himself onto BM. Maybe some budding SK, but that's a feeble support base.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

MOO - in BM's case, an attempt to mobilize public support would be suicidal.
I can imagine how it could work for KR, because many women could easily put themselves in her shoes ("dumped by BF") and feel compassion.

With BM - try to mobilize public support, and you'll just spread awareness about the case! This huge bully obsessed with hunting, who "clipped" his wife's nose, who is not liked by anyone, has a few friends and is frankly terrifying! Women will see Suzanne as the victim of DV who was still going through chemo when he injected BAM into her port. Women would feel sympathetic towards Suzanne. Men will not want to see themselves in BM. Usually BM's support base could be patriarchal men, but from their standpoint, SM would look like an ideal, "3K", wife, and BM, like a fool who ruined everything he had for no reason.

I can't see a single man who would want to project himself onto BM. Maybe some budding SK, but that's a feeble support base.

I would never agree that a pro Barry PR campaign is good thing to do but I do not agree with your assessment.They had a long standing marriage. Barry clearly made a good living enabling Suzanne to be a SAHM, she was free to travel and she seemed to have what she wanted in life in terms of affluent purchases. Being a hunter is not at all unique and being an affluent hunter is a whole additional genre. He didn’t want a divorce and she did. Together their net worth put them way high on the affluence scale. At this point with charges it’s a classic he said she said so really nothing to build a PR campaign on. When charges happen then we will see what each side thinks are the salient points.

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

I would never agree that a pro Barry PR campaign is good thing to do but I do not agree with your assessment.They had a long standing marriage. Barry clearly made a good living enabling Suzanne to be a SAHM, she was free to travel and she seemed to have what she wanted in life in terms of affluent purchases. Being a hunter is not at all unique and being an affluent hunter is a whole additional genre. He didn’t want a divorce and she did. Together their net worth put them way high on the affluence scale. At this point with charges it’s a classic he said she said so really nothing to build a PR campaign on. When charges happen then we will see what each side thinks are the salient points.

She did not “have what she wanted in life.” That is a disingenuous and erroneous statement because, after all, she is dead, murdered.

 

[al66pine]

What SM Wanted in Life?

She did not “have what she wanted in life.” That is a disingenuous and erroneous statement because, after all, she is dead, murdered.

@rainbowshummingbird

The post yours replied to said--- "she SEEMED to have what she wanted in life in terms of AFFLUENT PURCHASES"(<--- my CAPS for emphasis).
Speaking only to that one point in post by @Momofthreeboys.

I doubt that @Momofthreeboys was saying or suggesting that SM thought BM was a Dream Husband or that they had an ideal marriage.

Would anyone other than BM think he was a Dream Husband? Well, maybe daughters?

imo icbwrong

 

[kittythehare]

I would never agree that a pro Barry PR campaign is good thing to do but I do not agree with your assessment.They had a long standing marriage. Barry clearly made a good living enabling Suzanne to be a SAHM, she was free to travel and she seemed to have what she wanted in life in terms of affluent purchases. Being a hunter is not at all unique and being an affluent hunter is a whole additional genre. He didn’t want a divorce and she did. Together their net worth put them way high on the affluence scale. At this point with charges it’s a classic he said she said so really nothing to build a PR campaign on. When charges happen then we will see what each side thinks are the salient points.

'.. enabling her to be a SAHM..'
This grates on my nerves..
'cos it's no way to describe a DV victim who was a prisoner before her murder, subjected to the whims of a mad man..

There is nothing affluent in the reality of what her life was before he took it, having terrorised her for years.

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

What SM Wanted in Life?
@rainbowshummingbird

The post yours replied to said--- "she SEEMED to have what she wanted in life in terms of AFFLUENT PURCHASES"(<--- my CAPS for emphasis).
Speaking only to that one point in post by @Momofthreeboys.

I doubt that @Momofthreeboys was saying or suggesting that SM thought BM was a Dream Husband or that they had an ideal marriage.

Would anyone other than BM think he was a Dream Husband? Well, maybe daughters?

imo icbwrong

I know what she said, that it “SEEMED that she had what she wanted in life in terms of AFFLUENT PURCHASES.” This is an equally disingenuous statement. Obviously, it was not what Suzanne wanted in life, otherwise she would not have been looking to leave him.

The notion that she had what she wanted in life, in any respect, prior to BM murdering her, is repulsive.

 

[Charlot123]

'.. enabling her to be a SAHM..'
This grates on my nerves..
'cos it's no way to describe a DV victim who was a prisoner before her murder, subjected to the whims of a mad man..

There is nothing affluent in the reality of what her life was before he took it, having terrorised her for years.

Agree in general.

JMO. I think Suzanne was the prisoner of having been hit by her disease so early. The treatment in those days was brutal, radiation, chemo. As I imagine, Suzanne was told that she may never have kids, and in general, it must have been hard.
As I imagine, at that time, they were very different people, and Barry with all his athletic achievements was a little bit of an outlier, while Suzanne, definitely, wasn’t. I bet he came across as very loyal, never mind, we can adopt, let’s pray for children, I’ll always be with you. She likely valued Barry for his loyalty, and indeed, God provided, two children. I think she stayed with Barry for so long, and tolerated his quirks, and nasty personality, and tried to even out all problems because, indeed, her life (not easy at all! I would like people to remember- a cancer survivor, raising two kids, plus Barry) was an answer to her prayers. And I suspect Barry was mostly loyal till Suzanne got sick again. And when she got sick for the second time, there was no support from Barry, and Suzanne’s finding another man (and whom? Not a new well-off guy, but someone she knew from the school) was out of despair. I doubt she would have cheated, rather, she and Barry would have drifted apart, but that second bout of cancer and Barry, probably, slowly going mad (I think so) left no feelings towards him in Suzanne.

Just to remind, “I clipped her nose” is being said by Barry about his wife battling cancer. Domestic violence, and towards a very ill person, we should see it for what it is.

SAHM should not be a derogatory term, but much less so for a woman who was a cancer survivor and went on to have kids.

 

[Charlot123]

I would never agree that a pro Barry PR campaign is good thing to do but I do not agree with your assessment.They had a long standing marriage. Barry clearly made a good living enabling Suzanne to be a SAHM, she was free to travel and she seemed to have what she wanted in life in terms of affluent purchases. Being a hunter is not at all unique and being an affluent hunter is a whole additional genre. He didn’t want a divorce and she did. Together their net worth put them way high on the affluence scale. At this point with charges it’s a classic he said she said so really nothing to build a PR campaign on. When charges happen then we will see what each side thinks are the salient points.

Imagine the broad public reading, “this good provider and a devout Christian man put BAM in the chemo port of his cancer-stricken wife”, and ask who’d support Barry after that. No one. Maybe dr. Jack Kevorkian, if he were alive, could.

 

[Lyanna]

I would never agree that a pro Barry PR campaign is good thing to do but I do not agree with your assessment.They had a long standing marriage. Barry clearly made a good living enabling Suzanne to be a SAHM, she was free to travel and she seemed to have what she wanted in life in terms of affluent purchases. Being a hunter is not at all unique and being an affluent hunter is a whole additional genre. He didn’t want a divorce and she did. Together their net worth put them way high on the affluence scale. At this point with charges it’s a classic he said she said so really nothing to build a PR campaign on. When charges happen then we will see what each side thinks are the salient points.

She was caged - another trophy , and had been for a long time. We don't know what she wanted, other than she wanted to leave the marriage and be free of Barry - he took that away from her. Makes you wonder about what else he took away from her over the years. Don't really think we have to wonder that much considering Suzanne's own words shed some light on her life with him.

Moo

 

[FromGermany1]

I would like to know, if BM ever missed to have a first-born son or a son at all .... Maybe, his ego wasn't made for having a son, who in the future would have become a rival to himself? Fate was kind to him then.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I think it's high time we put that llama in the zoo, as I can't remember if we already have one. Any comments?

Snake