Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o prejudice* *found in 2023* #115

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Momofthreeboys said:
True that the early arrest wasn't the primary issue, but in some ways it was an underlying issue to the issues that lead to this point. In my opinion it contributed to the poorly written AA, and the general disorganization and lack of planning. There were things that should have been in place prior to the arrest.
Click to expand...

^^ Do you really think waiting to arrest BM after the 11th Judicial District had the money, staff, and resources would have made the difference-- given the daughters had just graduated and BM was packing up?

Also, it's long known that Walker attested to the fact both in the affidavit and as a witness at the prelim that he started drafting the AA immediately after SM was reported missing (which was prior to LS being elected DA). LS couldn't be more clear when their office received the actual AA which was following BM's arrest.

Transcript from PE Choir Practice w/LS:

51:58
time but I do have one other kind of I think a pretty interesting question to
52:03
me anyway and that was Linda you had this case for a year talk about that
52:09
well we didn't really have it for a year remember I mean we just arrested him on the fifth
52:15
which I wanted to talk about a little bit by the way anyway but anyway um we arrested him on the fifth so we
52:20
didn't have it for you it wasn't given to our office to begin the prosecution until after he's arrested like I said
52:26
everybody starts sending all their stuff through our Discovery portal and we start going through all of it trying to
52:32
organize it Etc but we're all still have dockets we're all still in court [in four counties] every day as well
52:38
it's important that to remember that as well

GatorFL said:
She looks like she stepped off the set of Eddie and the Cruisers 40 years too late.
Click to expand...

^^Eddie and the Cruisers?? LS made plenty of mistakes as the DA but the fact that her wardrobe after a 16 hour day is a topic here amazes me.

First, the 11th District DA's Office is NOT located in Chaffee County (i.e., Salida) nor does LS reside in the County where BM was arrested -- it just happened to be one of four counties in the District.

But how noble to make fun of LS wardrobe, clothes she chose at 1:30AM--never expecting to address the pubic on that date.

I agree with @steeltowngirl -- "Yay," especially since we know how easy it is for a woman to leave the police force because she has young children she'd prefer to raise, and instead chose to drive a big rig for a US Mail carrier to attend law school at night-- just to throw it all away after serving as a public servant for for barely a decade.

well and you kind of mentioned you wanted to talk a little bit about that
52:44
go back and kind of revisit that for us well I I
52:57
think about that not that I care but it was it was just a little bit in my opinion anyway a little bit
53:03
um misguided so that people know I got a call late that night that the arrest
53:11
affidavit for Barry morphew was signed by the judge so we were going to go get him the next morning
53:16
so I had to set my alarm for 1 30 in the morning to drive up there and then wait for him
53:24
he did not leave at the time we thought he was going to early in the morning so I could have slept in for I don't know
53:30
another four hours or so but it I certainly was not going to be sitting there in a suit and I had no reason to
53:37
believe that it wasn't going to be just like Phillips where we arrested him and then we did the press conference the
53:43
following day but because it was right there on Highway 50. um and when the sun was up
53:50
so by the way you know before we even got back to the Sheriff's Office it was all over the place and so and I I said
53:56
to the public information officer there's no way I'm doing this right now and she said yes you are
54:02
so I did but it was cold that morning so I had my jacket on and I dress comfortable so I just want people to
54:09
know that normally I am in a suit every other time you've seen me but that day was a little different so for those who
54:16
are offended sorry not sorry I'm going to be comfortable at 1 30 in the morning I
54:22
have discovered that there's always someone that will have something to say about everything um and uh and I want you to know having
54:30
worked for prosecutors most of my career uh prosecutors when it's time to get
54:38
down and dirty and get out in the woods and help the officers especially on a
54:43
major case got to be able to get comfortable and go do their job and I was thrilled to see you that way and I

PE CHOIR PRACTICE #50
 
steeltowngirl said:
She tried to prosecute Barry, and failed miserably. I get it. It’s over for her. Not only over for Barry’s case, for all cases. She’s done. She has been disbarred. Her career wiped out. Now we can make fun of her clothing. Yay for us.

Meanwhile, Barry is living it up in Arizona or wherever he is.
He MURDERED his wife.

Seem fair to you?
Not so to me.

I’m angry.
Justice for Suzanne can’t come soon enough.

jmo
Click to expand...

I am reassured by this Judgement that the BM case is not much impacted

LS was not disciplined for some discovery violations - that is more incompetence for which you deserve to lose your job.

She got caught leaking, and she went after a judge. Of course she is hardly the only DA in america to leak, but she got caught touching the hot stove. As for going after Lama - that was just dumb and bad and she deserved what she got IMO.

I say this as someone who agrees Judge Lama's decisions were outrageous. But your remedy is to appeal!
 
At least this ruling answered one of my main questions from the sanctions

In the motion for reconsideration, the state pointed out that IE had the expert reports all along ----> there was no detriment to BM here as regards the critical digital, CAST and BERLA evidence which was the guts of the case.

But i had wondered why the state was organised enough to show this after the critical hearing, but not at the hearing. We now know that due to failures in identifying critical documents, the state was not able to prove this to the judge, who prefered to go along with IE's claims. So the Judge got hoodwinked basically at the hearing basically, and then it was too late as he refused the reconsideration.

That is quite an epic failure. Indeed by comparison we've seen in the Delphi case how the prosecution has been able to defend against the same strategy by constantly pointing out in back and forth where stuff is, which creates a comms paper trail on these issues.

My uneducated understanding is that at least for these mission critical exhibits, the state sure needed to be able to stand up at the hearing and say to the Judge that IE definitely got these things and here's the paper trail (in the form of Identifier numbers).

So yeah - they simply were too disorganised on some very basic stuff, and didn't get their act together until the motion to reconsider which was some days too late to get on top of things because the Judge was done with it.

MOO
 
Remember how we were all shattered and dismayed when BM's case was dismissed (albeit without prejudice)? Given what has occurred since then, we can now see how it was for the best. God works in mysterious ways indeed.
 
Seattle1 said:
^^ Do you really think waiting to arrest BM after the 11th Judicial District had the money, staff, and resources would have made the difference-- given the daughters had just graduated and BM was packing up?

Also, it's long known that Walker attested to the fact both in the affidavit and as a witness at the prelim that he started drafting the AA immediately after SM was reported missing (which was prior to LS being elected DA). LS couldn't be more clear when their office received the actual AA which was following BM's arrest.

Transcript from PE Choir Practice w/LS:

51:58
time but I do have one other kind of I think a pretty interesting question to
52:03
me anyway and that was Linda you had this case for a year talk about that
52:09
well we didn't really have it for a year remember I mean we just arrested him on the fifth
52:15
which I wanted to talk about a little bit by the way anyway but anyway um we arrested him on the fifth so we
52:20
didn't have it for you it wasn't given to our office to begin the prosecution until after he's arrested like I said
52:26
everybody starts sending all their stuff through our Discovery portal and we start going through all of it trying to
52:32
organize it Etc but we're all still have dockets we're all still in court [in four counties] every day as well
52:38
it's important that to remember that as well



^^Eddie and the Cruisers?? LS made plenty of mistakes as the DA but the fact that her wardrobe after a 16 hour day is a topic here amazes me.

First, the 11th District DA's Office is NOT located in Chaffee County (i.e., Salida) nor does LS reside in the County where BM was arrested -- it just happened to be one of four counties in the District.

But how noble to make fun of LS wardrobe, clothes she chose at 1:30AM--never expecting to address the pubic on that date.

I agree with @steeltowngirl -- "Yay," especially since we know how easy it is for a woman to leave the police force because she has young children she'd prefer to raise, and instead chose to drive a big rig for a US Mail carrier to attend law school at night-- just to throw it all away after serving as a public servant for for barely a decade.

well and you kind of mentioned you wanted to talk a little bit about that
52:44
go back and kind of revisit that for us well I I
52:57
think about that not that I care but it was it was just a little bit in my opinion anyway a little bit
53:03
um misguided so that people know I got a call late that night that the arrest
53:11
affidavit for Barry morphew was signed by the judge so we were going to go get him the next morning
53:16
so I had to set my alarm for 1 30 in the morning to drive up there and then wait for him
53:24
he did not leave at the time we thought he was going to early in the morning so I could have slept in for I don't know
53:30
another four hours or so but it I certainly was not going to be sitting there in a suit and I had no reason to
53:37
believe that it wasn't going to be just like Phillips where we arrested him and then we did the press conference the
53:43
following day but because it was right there on Highway 50. um and when the sun was up
53:50
so by the way you know before we even got back to the Sheriff's Office it was all over the place and so and I I said
53:56
to the public information officer there's no way I'm doing this right now and she said yes you are
54:02
so I did but it was cold that morning so I had my jacket on and I dress comfortable so I just want people to
54:09
know that normally I am in a suit every other time you've seen me but that day was a little different so for those who
54:16
are offended sorry not sorry I'm going to be comfortable at 1 30 in the morning I
54:22
have discovered that there's always someone that will have something to say about everything um and uh and I want you to know having
54:30
worked for prosecutors most of my career uh prosecutors when it's time to get
54:38
down and dirty and get out in the woods and help the officers especially on a
54:43
major case got to be able to get comfortable and go do their job and I was thrilled to see you that way and I

PE CHOIR PRACTICE #50
Click to expand...
I agree LS's dress attire debate was ridiculous and I doubt it would have happened to a male DA if he had shown up in something similar.

JMO
 
mrjitty said:
At least this ruling answered one of my main questions from the sanctions

In the motion for reconsideration, the state pointed out that IE had the expert reports all along ----> there was no detriment to BM here as regards the critical digital, CAST and BERLA evidence which was the guts of the case.

But i had wondered why the state was organised enough to show this after the critical hearing, but not at the hearing. We now know that due to failures in identifying critical documents, the state was not able to prove this to the judge, who prefered to go along with IE's claims. So the Judge got hoodwinked basically at the hearing basically, and then it was too late as he refused the reconsideration.

That is quite an epic failure. Indeed by comparison we've seen in the Delphi case how the prosecution has been able to defend against the same strategy by constantly pointing out in back and forth where stuff is, which creates a comms paper trail on these issues.

My uneducated understanding is that at least for these mission critical exhibits, the state sure needed to be able to stand up at the hearing and say to the Judge that IE definitely got these things and here's the paper trail (in the form of Identifier numbers).

So yeah - they simply were too disorganised on some very basic stuff, and didn't get their act together until the motion to reconsider which was some days too late to get on top of things because the Judge was done with it.

MOO
Click to expand...

Bearing in mind that Crim P. 16 calls for expert disclosures—thirty-five days before trial,
Jury selection was set to begin May 3, 2022, I believe another issue here was advancing the prosecution’s deadline for expert witness disclosures to February 14, 2022 (defense expert disclosures by March 7, 2022. (Nobody seems to remember the tardy defense disclosures).

I recall the case management arguments mid October 2021-- mostly driven by the defense to deviate from the Statutory deadline governed by Crim P. 16!

IMO, IE knew exactly what she was doing with that Order, while half of the prosecution team was working remotely, part-time, with hit and miss access to the Colorado Discovery network (Axon). And then Lindsey was gone, and Murphy was gone by December 30, 2021, and somewhere in the middle Edwards too! SMH... :oops:
 
Seattle1 said:
Bearing in mind that Crim P. 16 calls for expert disclosures—thirty-five days before trial,
Jury selection was set to begin May 3, 2022, I believe another issue here was advancing the prosecution’s deadline for expert witness disclosures to February 14, 2022 (defense expert disclosures by March 7, 2022. (Nobody seems to remember the tardy defense disclosures).

I recall the case management arguments mid October 2021-- mostly driven by the defense to deviate from the Statutory deadline governed by Crim P. 16!

IMO, IE knew exactly what she was doing with that Order, while half of the prosecution team was working remotely, part-time, with hit and miss access to the Colorado Discovery network (Axon). And then Lindsey was gone, and Murphy was gone by December 30, 2021, and somewhere in the middle Edwards too! SMH... :oops:
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree this was a strategy all along. As you've noted, IE was trying the same stuff with Judge Murphy. And I am sure you are correct re remote. This was the middle on the Omicron wave.
 
More instructive quote from page 53

The majority largely adopts Garnett’s assessments. Respondent was aware, from the timethe sheriff’s office delivered to her office a ten-terabyte hard drive of information, that the sheervolume of disorganized, unlabeled discovery promised to pose a problem for the prosecution.These issues were underscored by Judge Murphy’s order in summer 2021 that the prosecutionteam violated discovery rules. As the People concede, “discovery issues are somewhat commonand straight-forward to resolve,”266 but according to Garnett, Respondent, as the elected districtattorney overseeing this high-profile first-degree murder case, should have immediatelyintervened to assess the problem’s source and scope and then quickly mobilized resources torectify it. Instead, Lindsey testified, Respondent was mostly disengaged from the case until heresigned in October 2021. Even the 4th Judicial District Attorney’s administrative support thatRespondent eventually marshalled began the project of organizing discovery several months laterthan the administrative team’s availability dictated.
Click to expand...

BIB - the problem was not that prosecution was too early, but rather than due to the tendency for bulk discovery, the arrest triggered a mass discovery dump from law enforcement into the DA's office. It did not matter when BM was arrested. Rather, as soon as he was charged, the DAs office would only then have to contend with the vast amount of information.

So from Summer '21, LS's office had the task to deal with this issue, but it was simply never correctly resourced until far too late.

As a result, discovery issues, including accusations that the prosecution did not disclosematerial information, continued to plague the prosecution throughout the life of the Morphewcase. Indeed, in the majority’s view, the prosecution never truly had a command of the universeof discovery, which contributed in large measure to its failure to file compliant expertendorsements, Hurlbert’s in-court inability to identify the Bates numbers of expert reports thathad been disclosed in discovery, and Grosgebauer’s difficulties in finding information whendrafting the motion for reconsideration. Considering the progression of the case, Respondent failed to promptly make timely and reasonable efforts to facilitate the prosecution’s compliancewith its disclosure obligations, thereby losing, at a minimum, several precious months that couldhave been spent in labeling and categorizing discovery.
Click to expand...

In other words, there never was some conspiracy against BM as alleged by IE. Rather, the prosecution simply failed to organise the discovery universe adequately, and unfortunately the fatal mistake was failing to add the Bates numbers to the expert reports. The reports having been there all along (the critical ones existed before the prelim).

You can see how IE bamboozled the Judge into crippling the case - aided by a prosecution that simply was not organised enough to fight back.

MOO
 
Seattle1 said:
^^ Do you really think waiting to arrest BM after the 11th Judicial District had the money, staff, and resources would have made the difference-- given the daughters had just graduated and BM was packing up?

Also, it's long known that Walker attested to the fact both in the affidavit and as a witness at the prelim that he started drafting the AA immediately after SM was reported missing (which was prior to LS being elected DA). LS couldn't be more clear when their office received the actual AA which was following BM's arrest.

Transcript from PE Choir Practice w/LS:

51:58
time but I do have one other kind of I think a pretty interesting question to
52:03
me anyway and that was Linda you had this case for a year talk about that
52:09
well we didn't really have it for a year remember I mean we just arrested him on the fifth
52:15
which I wanted to talk about a little bit by the way anyway but anyway um we arrested him on the fifth so we
52:20
didn't have it for you it wasn't given to our office to begin the prosecution until after he's arrested like I said
52:26
everybody starts sending all their stuff through our Discovery portal and we start going through all of it trying to
52:32
organize it Etc but we're all still have dockets we're all still in court [in four counties] every day as well
52:38
it's important that to remember that as well



^^Eddie and the Cruisers?? LS made plenty of mistakes as the DA but the fact that her wardrobe after a 16 hour day is a topic here amazes me.

First, the 11th District DA's Office is NOT located in Chaffee County (i.e., Salida) nor does LS reside in the County where BM was arrested -- it just happened to be one of four counties in the District.

But how noble to make fun of LS wardrobe, clothes she chose at 1:30AM--never expecting to address the pubic on that date.

I agree with @steeltowngirl -- "Yay," especially since we know how easy it is for a woman to leave the police force because she has young children she'd prefer to raise, and instead chose to drive a big rig for a US Mail carrier to attend law school at night-- just to throw it all away after serving as a public servant for for barely a decade.

well and you kind of mentioned you wanted to talk a little bit about that
52:44
go back and kind of revisit that for us well I I
52:57
think about that not that I care but it was it was just a little bit in my opinion anyway a little bit
53:03
um misguided so that people know I got a call late that night that the arrest
53:11
affidavit for Barry morphew was signed by the judge so we were going to go get him the next morning
53:16
so I had to set my alarm for 1 30 in the morning to drive up there and then wait for him
53:24
he did not leave at the time we thought he was going to early in the morning so I could have slept in for I don't know
53:30
another four hours or so but it I certainly was not going to be sitting there in a suit and I had no reason to
53:37
believe that it wasn't going to be just like Phillips where we arrested him and then we did the press conference the
53:43
following day but because it was right there on Highway 50. um and when the sun was up
53:50
so by the way you know before we even got back to the Sheriff's Office it was all over the place and so and I I said
53:56
to the public information officer there's no way I'm doing this right now and she said yes you are
54:02
so I did but it was cold that morning so I had my jacket on and I dress comfortable so I just want people to
54:09
know that normally I am in a suit every other time you've seen me but that day was a little different so for those who
54:16
are offended sorry not sorry I'm going to be comfortable at 1 30 in the morning I
54:22
have discovered that there's always someone that will have something to say about everything um and uh and I want you to know having
54:30
worked for prosecutors most of my career uh prosecutors when it's time to get
54:38
down and dirty and get out in the woods and help the officers especially on a
54:43
major case got to be able to get comfortable and go do their job and I was thrilled to see you that way and I

PE CHOIR PRACTICE #50
Click to expand...
Agree with you Seattle. Always have. But I was one of the ones to criticize how she was dressed the day of the arrest. I said it was unprofessional. And I got slammed for my comment, rightly so.
it’s easy to criticize when one doesn’t know the facts. Thank you for standing up for her.
 
@Seattle1 This is interesting in the dissent - and accords with our views on Lama's rulings.

(p76)

The decision by Judge Lama to exclude most of the prosecution’s expert witnesses for failing to provide reports was a very harsh sanction in this case. All but four of the reports were within the discovery already provided. Hurlbert did not anticipate an objection or the need to know the Bates numbers of the reports. He clearly testified that he typically does not provide reports a second time when they are in discovery. He testified that he has not had a problem with this practice.
Click to expand...

Tends to confirm IE always had the CAST, Berla and other digital evidence.

Indeed, Hurlbert's testimony that his disclosures of experts were consistent with disclosures he has made in multiple other criminal cases is crucial to my belief that his disclosure swere done in the manner that was generally accepted. Judge Lama issued a very harsh ruling and did not allow the prosecution team to supplement the record as requested. While Judge Lama was within his right to exclude these witnesses, this does not rise to the level of an ethical violation in my view. The absence of four reports of the listed potential experts also does not mean that an ethical violation was committed. These witnesses may never be called. In fact, a domestic violence expert was arguably not something that Judge Lama would have allowed the prosecution to call in light of his ruling excluding all of the previous allegations of domestic violence between the victim and the defendant. This is also not a violation of a court order. It is a readily accepted practice that witnesses who are not properly endorsed will probably not be allowed to testify. The prosecution team knew this. Was this a dereliction of duty or ethical violation? I believe not under these circumstances.
Click to expand...
 
mrjitty said:
More instructive quote from page 53

In other words, there never was some conspiracy against BM as alleged by IE. Rather, the prosecution simply failed to organise the discovery universe adequately, and unfortunately the fatal mistake was failing to add the Bates numbers to the expert reports. The reports having been there all along (the critical ones existed before the prelim).

You can see how IE bamboozled the Judge into crippling the case - aided by a prosecution that simply was not organised enough to fight back.

MOO
Click to expand...

Snipped and bbm

How many minions do you think Iris has poring over cases, not looking for errors of substance, but for paperwork errors to exploit and use to bamboozle in any way possible?

I think she’s a bamboozler deluxe. (Love that word, @mrjitty, it says it all.)

I do agree with @Kemug above, though. I am elated the case was dismissed and that BM can be rearrested and tried for the murder of SUZANNE. That was a gift.

BM’s attorney for Round Two, whoever it is, will not get away with bamboozling behavior.

Freight train of justice headed your way, BM.

IMO
 
mrjitty said:
@Seattle1 This is interesting in the dissent - and accords with our views on Lama's rulings.

(p76)



Tends to confirm IE always had the CAST, Berla and other digital evidence.
Click to expand...

Yes!

IMO, the most serious damage that befell this case all rests on the alternate facts (i.e., misstatements) cited in IE's defense Motions, and Judge Lama swallowing them whole -- to the point he footnoted in his ruling that he did not consider the State's response to the Defense Motions! As I've opined before, Ramsey Lama wanted to be Iris Eytan.

Unfortunately, IE used these outrageous rulings by Lama, in large font, in both her OARC Complaint against LS and the entire prosecution team, who IE vigorously seeks to have disbarred, as well as the Federal Lawsuit by BM.

IMO, Stanley lost her legal career to investigating a sitting Judge, and speaking out about a baby killer, a disciplinary decision I support, but I do understand why she did it, and have an idea how it happened.

I think the accumulated affect of Lama's rulings and his continued bias against the prosecution went over the top for LS where she honestly believed there had to be more to what was happening here than the games by team BM. And this came even after she heeded the advice of her team to make herself scarce from any BM hearings before Lama!

It's also a fact the prosecution of BM suffered from tech problems (internet bandwith and cellular signal, etc.) unique to the geographic region of Chaffee County, while staff simultaneously tended to the docket of three additional counties. If I recall correctly, the welcomed help from the 4th Judicial District was in part responsible for the lack of earlier bates stamping which supports Hurlbert's claim before Lama.

With the exception of Edwards who settled with the OARC before he testified at LS's disciplinary hearing, the prosecutors subpoenaed to appear at the hearing are all under disciplinary review per IE's complaint.

And talk about an uncomfortable position to testify before the very board who holds your career in their hands, where you could very well be next if IE is given her way!

I say big respect for both Weiner and Hurlbert who still went on to testify that as prosecutors, they'd never experienced the level of disrespect as exhibited by Lama.

And bigger thanks to @mrjitty who scrubbed more documents for us here than I could handle.

And it's not going to stop -- IE is 2 down and 5 to go. She tasted blood taking LS down and likes it. She found that "springboard" she was looking for since her 2018 legislative efforts failed. IE's on a roll, and will have no time to defend BM. JMO

1726260159285.png

www.9news.com

Linda Stanley, lead prosecutor in the Barry Morphew case, disbarred

Linda Stanley, the Republican district attorney for Chaffee County who brought charges against Barry Morphew, has lost her law license for "dereliction of duty."
www.9news.com www.9news.com

9/10/24

Linda Stanley, the Republican district attorney for Chaffee County who brought charges against Barry Morphew, has lost her law license for "dereliction of duty."

[..]

Iris Eytan, Barry Morphew's attorney and founder of the group Protect Ethical Prosecutors, sent a statement on the ruling Tuesday afternoon.

"This was absolutely the right outcome," Eytan's statement read in part. "Linda Stanley will no longer be permitted to use 'wield significant power' as a prosecutor. PEP hopes that this case serves as a springboard to protect ethical prosecutors and also for more unethical prosecutors to be held accountable. This includes PEP’s goal to deter unethical prosecutors from committing misconduct by allowing people who have been harmed by prosecutors to sued them for the irreparable damage they cause."
 
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams

Shout -out to Lauren Scharf who truly took the wrath of IE for stepping out to report what many intentionally ignored -- facts. Like footnotes. I'll always be suspicious of IE's influence in getting Scharf pulled from covering the Sept 2021 search for SM led by her brother, Andy.

MOO
 
Momofthreeboys said:
I agree this is all an issue for the 12th. But the fault lands squarely on the original prosecution team. People can complain all they want about IE but she wasn't even in the picture when they arrested Barry prematurely. She just came along and figured out the issues quickly and took advantage of the weaknesses which she was paid to do. Novices like me saw issues early on and got flamed for it with zero regard to the issue of whether he is guilty or not guilty which legally and emotions aside at the point he was arrested he is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...
Au contraire mon amie ;)
No warrant would ever issue, nor would LE seek one, if all concerned had to surmount a presumption of innocence. Sworn information and belief establishing PC for the magistrate is the ticket - a lower bar than even "a preponderance" of...well..anything at all. Neither the pans of justice nor p-i-u-p-g are in play until the jury is seated for their IEarful.:eek:

Assuredly, nothing's changed - imo from years back - insofar as the Messrs Morphew & Tanner:
"Valdez ess kahming:mad:"

1726371512854.png​
 
www.9news.com

District Attorney Linda Stanley used taxpayer money from her office to fund failed legal defense for ethics violations

A branch of the Colorado Supreme Court took Stanley's law license away last week. Now she may have to repay $53,000.
www.9news.com www.9news.com
[Stanley paid tens of thousands of dollars in legal defense fees using taxpayer money. If she had won her case or if the charges were dismissed, that may not have been a problem. Since she did not, one of the counties that funds her office with taxpayer money wants the money back.
...
In June, Fremont County Commissioners sent a letter to Stanley warning her about using taxpayer money to fund her legal defense.
...
Jensen described the matter of her paying the legal fees as a “complex and unsettled legal issue.” He said that since she was found to have only violated certain parts of the ethics complaints, some of the legal bills should be paid for by her office budget.]
Note: Steve Jensen is LS lawyer who received the defense fees.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 169 more.
Total: 435 (members: 170, guests: 265)

Online statistics

Members online
170
Guests online
265
Total visitors
435
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,784
Messages
18,257,975
Members
234,759
Latest member
Delk
Back
Top