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

[Trebor5591]

I wonder why BM hasn't been rearrested and charged with murder yet? I admit that I was skeptical of his guilt he first time around, but the discovery of Suzanne's body and the autopsy results showing animal tranquilizer chemicals in her remains has changed my mind.

I wonder if a complex case like this might be just too much for a local jurisdiction to handle? The unprofessional errors of the first prosecutor come to mind. Maybe it would be best if federal charges, like "violating SM's civil rights" would be filed. Such a course might be a more realistic option for putting Barry behind bars.

 

[MassGuy]

Judge seems incredibly skeptical of the argument that the defendants engaged in a conspiracy.

 

[Seattle1]

Boom! Defense for sheriff’s office just destroyed the argument saying that they were improperly holding evidence. He cites case law, then drops the bomb with some of that evidence being tranquilizer material and the autopsy showing that Suzanne was tranquilized.

For the criminal prosecution, they are giving us a hint they will fight the autopsy results! Unbelievable...

 

[fcavanaugh]

I tuned in late and my understanding of what I just heard from one of Morphew’s civil attorneys is team BM will be disputing the autopsy results at future trial. I believe if I heard correctly, her words were, “we highly dispute those findings!”. SMDH.

IMHOO

#JUSTICEFORSUZANNE

 

[MassGuy]

Judge says that he will be making a written order in the next couple of weeks. I'll believe that timeframe when I see it.

 

[MassGuy]

Hahahhahaha, it appears that Kelly told the defense that it's a "cold case." Even the biggest idiot in the world knows that's not true, especially considering the new information they received not long ago.

As for the dispute of the autopsy findings, I think it's just to play to the judge, and dampen the impact (regardless of truth).

 

[Seattle1]

Plaintiff lawyer wants Judge to clarify BM is not under investigation and this is a cold case. They are taking exception to defense attorneys (and the Court) reference to BM being under investigation. Yeah, ok...

 

[Megnut]

I tuned in late and my understanding of what I just heard from one of Morphew’s civil attorneys is team BM will be disputing the autopsy results at future trial. I believe if I heard correctly, her words were, “we highly dispute those findings!”. SMDH.

IMHOO

#JUSTICEFORSUZANNE

Well, LE anticipated that showdown and invited every jurisdiction to that autopsy so Team Barry can swansong all they like but the results are solid and they speak for themselves.

Suzanne intends and deserves to have the last word.

JMO

 

[Seattle1]

IE is relentless. She's not going to rest until she gets Hurlbert disbarred (i.e., manipulates OARC to order a hearing). MOO

 

[Seattle1]

IE strategy to shop for a Judge, and Ramsey Lama taking the bait, is being used against the Civil defendants. As I've cited before, BM's team weaponized Lama's biased rulings here just as they were used in complaints filed with OARC.

(Confirming Lama did not read and/or give consideration to the Prosecutors response prior to ruling-- a footnote in tiny print to his Order). MOO

 

[Monty Ma]

I tuned in late and my understanding of what I just heard from one of Morphew’s civil attorneys is team BM will be disputing the autopsy results at future trial. I believe if I heard correctly, her words were, “we highly dispute those findings!”. SMDH.

IMHOO

#JUSTICEFORSUZANNE

I believe what I heard her say was "hotly dispute that fact". She used the word hotly twice in reference to the autopsy results. She also referred to "the tranquilizer whatever material". I think this was Whitson talking, not Iris, can anyone confirm that?

I also noted that she referred to "exculpatory" information, then backed up to correct it to "highly exculpatory".

IMO

 

[Seattle1]

I believe what I heard her say was "hotly dispute that fact". She used the word hotly twice in reference to the autopsy results. She also referred to "the tranquilizer whatever material". I think this was Whitson talking, not Iris, can anyone confirm that?

I also noted that she referred to "exculpatory" information, then backed up to correct it to "highly exculpatory".

IMO

I agree this was Whitson. I joined late but only heard IE address Attorney Hurlbert's MTD.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Plaintiff lawyer wants Judge to clarify BM is not under investigation and this is a cold case. They are taking exception to defense attorneys (and the Court) reference to BM being under investigation. Yeah, ok...

IANAL but I doubt it is this judge’s responsibility to answer that question for the defense. And I don’t imagine that one would be interested in making any ruling as to BM being under investigation, or not. That would be a matter perhaps for the investigators, prosecutor, and distract attorney perhaps? But IMO they also owe no answers to this potential suspect. And needn’t IMO have to speak on the public record. Let the court filings speak for themselves. Maybe the defense and civil legal teams will want to watch the court docket for information on these topics?

Some of the tactics by this defense team and the civil suit. (Let me sit on my hands and finish my thoughts on that.) SMH.

IMO take your needed time investigators, prosecutors, and district attorney. One has to imagine that charges will come in due course.

Lastly……. a cold case. I’d use a laughing emoji, but don’t want to overuse or abuse that privilege. MOO

 

[Seattle1]

The statutory response time is 56 days. Finally found a link to post this.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1804248197918785615

 

[mrjitty]

For the criminal prosecution, they are giving us a hint they will fight the autopsy results! Unbelievable...

what choice do they have?

 

[Seattle1]

what choice do they have?

The choice to "hotly" dispute this evidence...

 

[mrjitty]

Boom! Defense for sheriff’s office just destroyed the argument saying that they were improperly holding evidence. He cites case law, then drops the bomb with some of that evidence being tranquilizer material and the autopsy showing that Suzanne was tranquilized.

oh dear!

 

[Seattle1]

I'm not clear on how the MTD hearing ended. Lawyers asked for an opportunity to respond and/or comment after last comments by Plaintiff's lawyer, and Judge agreed he would allow for some, not all, to respond, but then the hearing ended.

Since the Judge stated his plan was to issue a written ruling in a few weeks, my question is when will the attorneys have an opportunity to be heard on the record . I did not understand Judge will rule from the bench but I could be wrong. MOO

ETA: Surprisingly, Domenico stated he was informed, read all the briefs.

 

[MrsWatson]

Disputing the autopsy seems like a lose/lose for the defense. It makes them look desperate. Did they request their own autopsy? Did I miss that? Are they going to claim it's some sort of conspiracy to frame Barry? Can't quite wrap my head around how the defense could bend that to make it fit. Barry admits owning animal tranquilizer. Same animal tranquilizer found in his wife's remains, coincidentally when she asks for a divorce. End of.

moo

 

[MassGuy]

Disputing the autopsy seems like a lose/lose for the defense. It makes them look desperate. Did they request their own autopsy? Did I miss that? Are they going to claim it's some sort of conspiracy to frame Barry? Can't quite wrap my head around how the defense could bend that to make it fit. Barry admits owning animal tranquilizer. Same animal tranquilizer found in his wife's remains, coincidentally when she asks for a divorce. End of.

moo

They have to come up with some explanation for the BAM, so their only options are to blame a third party, or say that the testing was faulty.

Suzanne's remains were released to the family (although they didn't pick them up), so they're free to do their own autopsy and testing. I imagine they'll wait until Barry is charged, and then do their own testing. Sounds expensive.