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

[GOBliaison]

So pleased 'money pinching' BM lost loads in his unsuccessful civil suit.
Can anyone estimate how much this cost him?

IMO, ZERO.
<-- this be Nominal Plaintiff Barr sticking his L. lingua out at us...

​

Odds-on, this was (1) a contingent fee case, (2) filed and funded by BM's legal team, (3) in his name, (4) nominally,
(5) with their respective firm's risks principally limited to their own costs, and (6) constituting a sadly not uncommon de facto judicial lottery.
Barry's material risk(s) were likely/fs: ZERO. !!
Of course, had there been recoveries from any defendants, Barry would presumably have shared in these to the extent provided in the aforementioned contract.
[kindly imagine a barf emoji.]

​

 

[Seattle1]

Yes I wonder what was going on with that quite frankly.

IIRC, Cahill was probably simmering and why he took or returned a call to IE on the eve of his testimony during the preliminary hearing. Who does that -- a State witness talking to the defense attorney before they testify at a hearing?

We know whatever agenda IE had in making contact worked because Cahill failed to testify as he'd been prepped by Hurlburt.

Did IE know about the internal investigation of Cahill and threaten him in advance with the civil lawsuit she ultimately filed more than a year later following the dismissal of the case?

Cahill's response to the civil suit was more of a "poor me" and how he tried to do right by BM.

IMO, Cahill was always a misfit. A disservice to all sides -- especially the side of justice for SM.

 

[Seattle1]

So pleased 'money pinching' BM lost loads in his unsuccessful civil suit.
Can anyone estimate how much this cost him?

My earlier response to OP was about the estimated cost of his criminal defense.

Relative to the civil suit, I doubt BM was out of pocket for much more than some legal costs advanced such as filing fees, etc., and where any professional fees for his team of lawyers here were all part of a contingency agreement. MOO

 

[Love Never Fails]

Tomorrow is Friday and we wait. It isn’t so hard on us now. Civil suits dismissed. Suzanne found and we know he put the BAM in her body. He is the one under the stress of waiting. He will pay a terrible price for what he did to Suzanne. His attorney should tell him to confess and get on with the rest of his life…in jail.

No one can bring Suzanne back. As for the prosecutor, I wouldn’t make any deals with BM. Let him confess but no deal. Ask for the maximum. He owes that to his daughters, his mother and his sister.

Oh Barry. If you had let her go peacefully, you might both feel free and happy.

Dumb, dumb, dumb decision you made!

 

[Seattle1]

It was Carol Mckinley's X post that named Iris, just a few pages back.

Iris and her unethical behaviour regarding this case should be looked at going all the way back to when Judge Murphy recused himself, thats imoo - am convinced the recusal was down to Iris taking advantage of certain relationships and I also think it was the reason why her and Dru parted ways. JMO

I had the good fortune to listen to the few hearings made available on WebEx in Judge Murphy's Court (advisement and arraignment). What I am certain about from listening to the hearings was that Judge Murphy had total control of his Courtroom, and no matter how many times team BM tried to manipulate and frustrate the Court, Murphy wasn't having it. I agree that team BM wanted Murphy gone from the get go.

Reading from my personal notes observing the Murphy hearings, it started with BM's advisement that coincided with the first appearance by BM's new legal team (IE/DN). At this hearing, IE introduced herself to the Court by attempting to get BM's charges reduced from 1st degree to 2nd degree murder, citing a sanction for discovery violation by the prosecution. Next, IE pulled her page from the US Constitution-- citing BM's civil rights were being violated.

But Judge Murphy wasn't having any of it. First, he corrected IE that she miscalculated her discovery deadline because the discovery clock she was incorrectly relying on to allege violation by the prosecution didn't begin on the date of BM's arrest, but on the date of the defendant's first appearance. Murphy further advised IE that civil rights under the US Constitution applied to all whether enjoying freedom or being held in custody, but in his courtroom, the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure governed, not the US Constitution.

I also recall Judge Murphy closing the preliminary hearing by responding directly to DN that he needed time to take in the three days of proceedings, he was not a robot, and he would not be making a decision on that date. (I believe Murphy said he took more than 20 pgs of notes).

Reviewing the summary posted upthread when Murphy delivered his ruling on probable cause, I think it's confirmation that Murphy was thorough, ruled on the law, and not the personalities.

I can't help but think had Murphy not been removed from this case, how different the outcome may have been for all the parties here. IMO, IE would not have been afforded the opportunity to to misstate the record-- including misrepresenting Murphy's own words.

One particular misstatement by IE that comes to mind was when Murphy was compelled to remind IE how the latest defense Motion calling for sanctions by citing they did not receive discovery from the prosecution was not the equivalent of having received discovery from the prosecution, but not being able to access what they in fact received.

IE needed to be policed but with the help of Ramsey Lama, she steered all eyes elsewhere. With no eyes on the defense, the prosecution buried in defense paper, IE was masterful in implementing her agenda. MOO

 

[Lyanna]

I had the good fortune to listen to the few hearings made available on WebEx in Judge Murphy's Court (advisement and arraignment). What I am certain about from listening to the hearings was that Judge Murphy had total control of his Courtroom, and no matter how many times team BM tried to manipulate and frustrate the Court, Murphy wasn't having it. I agree that team BM wanted Murphy gone from the get go.

Reading from my personal notes observing the Murphy hearings, it started with BM's advisement that coincided with the first appearance by BM's new legal team (IE/DN). At this hearing, IE introduced herself to the Court by attempting to get BM's charges reduced from 1st degree to 2nd degree murder, citing a sanction for discovery violation by the prosecution. Next, IE pulled her page from the US Constitution-- citing BM's civil rights were being violated.

But Judge Murphy wasn't having any of it. First, he corrected IE that she miscalculated her discovery deadline because the discovery clock she was incorrectly relying on to allege violation by the prosecution didn't begin on the date of BM's arrest, but on the date of the defendant's first appearance. Murphy further advised IE that civil rights under the US Constitution applied to all whether enjoying freedom or being held in custody, but in his courtroom, the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure governed, not the US Constitution.

I also recall Judge Murphy closing the preliminary hearing by responding directly to DN that he needed time to take in the three days of proceedings, he was not a robot, and he would not be making a decision on that date. (I believe Murphy said he took more than 20 pgs of notes).

Reviewing the summary posted upthread when Murphy delivered his ruling on probable cause, I think it's confirmation that Murphy was thorough, ruled on the law, and not the personalities.

I can't help but think had Murphy not been removed from this case, how different the outcome may have been for all the parties here. IMO, IE would not have been afforded the opportunity to to misstate the record-- including misrepresenting Murphy's own words.

One particular misstatement by IE that comes to mind was when Murphy was compelled to remind IE how the latest defense Motion calling for sanctions by citing they did not receive discovery from the prosecution was not the equivalent of having received discovery from the prosecution, but not being able to access what they in fact received.

IE needed to be policed but with the help of Ramsey Lama, she steered all eyes elsewhere. With no eyes on the defense, the prosecution buried in defense paper, IE was masterful in implementing her agenda. MOO

Agree that if Judge Murphy wasn't removed it could have been a different outcome. I liked him a lot. Not that that's of any importance lol but he was firm yet fair, took no messing and was honest and direct or that's how it seemed to me and Lama appeared to be too lazy to do any fact checking for himself instead relying on Iris's version of events, again jmo, creating this absolute farce along with some prosecutorial mistakes. Iris has been unethical, she's lied and made false statements, twisted facts to suit her game plan - don't see how that is much different to Linda's failings. And the difference between Linda and Iris, I believe, is Linda wanted to do the right thing, yes she was misguided, disorganised, had lack of oversight, may have been inappropriate on occasion but I believe she ultimately wanted justice for those victims, Iris doesn't appear to give a damn about anything except her own agenda, and will go to any lengths to get what she wants.

When Barry gets charged again, am interested to see who his defence attorneys will be. Don't think I could cope with watching Iris fawning all over him.

moo

 

[Charlot123]

Agree that if Judge Murphy wasn't removed it could have been a different outcome. I liked him a lot. Not that that's of any importance lol but he was firm yet fair, took no messing and was honest and direct or that's how it seemed to me and Lama appeared to be too lazy to do any fact checking for himself instead relying on Iris's version of events, again jmo, creating this absolute farce along with some prosecutorial mistakes. Iris has been unethical, she's lied and made false statements, twisted facts to suit her game plan - don't see how that is much different to Linda's failings. And the difference between Linda and Iris, I believe, is Linda wanted to do the right thing, yes she was misguided, disorganised, had lack of oversight, may have been inappropriate on occasion but I believe she ultimately wanted justice for those victims, Iris doesn't appear to give a damn about anything except her own agenda, and will go to any lengths to get what she wants.

When Barry gets charged again, am interested to see who his defence attorneys will be. Don't think I could cope with watching Iris fawning all over him.

moo

Iris is a defense attorney. And for the money, she did almost impossible - dragged BM out of jail. It is an entrepreneurial country, so I can't blame her for the reasonable attempt to earn more money for herself and her client. With all that she might have done wrong, I can't blame her of being unethical as she used the situation that already existed around this case. It was not beyond the reasonable doubt. Some untied ends, someone's impulsivity, true lack of detective manpower that probably existed in most states in 2021-2022, and the case looked hslf-baked. No body, disorganized prosecutor's office, lots of new information accruing towards the end of investigative case, it all worked for Iris and her client. I don't see it as unethical. Showy, dramatic, but Iris was within her right.

Mostly, her game was still played within the justice chamber and unlike the circus in another state, it did not include manipulation of public opinion. (Beyond upgrading her client's look and staging a couple of beautiful photos, perhaps.)

She merely didn't expect that the body would have been found. Would she have taken this case at all if there were the body? We'll never know, but i am not sure.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Iris is a defense attorney. And for the money, she did almost impossible - dragged BM out of jail. It is an entrepreneurial country, so I can't blame her for the reasonable attempt to earn more money for herself and her client. With all that she might have done wrong, I can't blame her of being unethical as she used the situation that already existed around this case. It was not beyond the reasonable doubt. Some untied ends, someone's impulsivity, true lack of detective manpower that probably existed in most states in 2021-2022, and the case looked hslf-baked. No body, disorganized prosecutor's office, lots of new information accruing towards the end of investigative case, it all worked for Iris and her client. I don't see it as unethical. Showy, dramatic, but Iris was within her right.

Mostly, her game was still played within the justice chamber and unlike the circus in another state, it did not include manipulation of public opinion. (Beyond upgrading her client's look and staging a couple of beautiful photos, perhaps.)

She merely didn't expect that the body would have been found. Would she have taken this case at all if there were the body? We'll never know, but i am not sure.

Whether she’s a good attorney or not, I can yield to your opinion. But she IS UNETHICAL. She knows he is guilty. It’s ok to earn money but she is greedy, as are the majority of people in the world today. No excuse for her.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Whether she’s a good attorney or not, I can yield to your opinion. But she IS UNETHICAL. She knows he is guilty. It’s ok to earn money but she is greedy, as are the majority of people in the world today. No excuse for her.

It is not unethical as a defense attorney to defend a client they think is guilty. It is ethical to zealously defend a client. It is also not unethical for a lawyer to want to earn money as many people like to do. If she engaged in unethical behavior related to her legal obligations she could be reported…just like LS was. One can dislike any person however.

 

[Charlot123]

Whether she’s a good attorney or not, I can yield to your opinion. But she IS UNETHICAL. She knows he is guilty. It’s ok to earn money but she is greedy, as are the majority of people in the world today. No excuse for her.

ETHICAL in the internet time = "not turning to creepy, sketchy bloggers, not creating major conspiracies in the courtroom", JMO, MOO, etc.

In this country everyone, right or wrong, even caught red-handed, has the right for a fair representation. I understood a lot from the movie "Bridge of Spies." Even in the situation when to our online community, logically and intuitively, it appears that BM is guilty, BM's choice was to find the best lawyer that the money could buy. Iris's job was, using her logical mind, to challenge the "beyond reasonable doubt" aspect. The fact that she took BM meant that from her experience, it was "not beyond reasonable doubt" case. I can compare it with a surgeon who has to operate on a sick person and the question whether his patient is a wonderful role model or a serial killer doesn't, and shouldn't, enter his mind. He is no judge. Ultimately, perhaps for Judge Lima, it looked that it won't be an open-and-shut case. All the rheutorics around it doesn't change the cornerstone facts.

The fact that law is essentially a very bureaucratized, paper-driven profession, that a good lawyer is not only a Cicero (and most often, not at all) but demands that all the boxes are checked, is why some of us can never practice it.

But I respect Iris because her case did not turn into another "free BM" campaign and we saw no creepy bloggers manipulating public opinion. Give or take, it is "ethical" law and she worked within limits.

That she wanted more was, essentially, a mistake, but such lawsuits happen all the time. We can make a list of lawsuits that look frivolous yet can be won because something has not been done right or in accordance with the local country's laws.

This being said, I am with you regarding BM and hope that the case will be reopened.

 

[Seattle1]

If you follow Colorado crime and/or their criminal courts, you know that criminal charges are almost exclusively by Complaint and Information, and not by Grand Jury Indictment.

There are exceptions to this popular rule, and I truly believe BM will only be recharged by GJ Indictment, removing all the political barriers that plagued his earlier charges, including the AA, and more importantly, eliminating the preliminary hearing.

SM's body was recovered last September. Statute provides that grand jury summons require the recipient to return the completed summons within 10 days, and if the selected as a juror for the grand jury, the term is for 12 months (service can be extended for up to 18 months).

IMO, I'd say we are probably getting close for a grand jury session of 12-23 residents to end, and I trust the jurors were not tainted by the politics of one defender who had the audacity to challenge that probable cause exists that BM murdered his wife -- then (initial arrest), or now.

Crim. P. 6.6;see also C.R.S. § 13-74-107(2); C.R.S. § 13-72-108.

During the indictment return hearing, the Court usually sets bond, issues the arrest warrant, and rules on any motion to seal indictment. And while the prosecutor typically tenders the indictment in this District, there is a provision in Crim. P. 6.6(a) where the full grand jury or the foreman of the grand jury could return the indictment in open court. Simply put, the Court does not control who will be returning the indictment in open court.1

That said, it appears that precedent has been set to exempt Grand Jury Indictment Returns from being live streamed in District Court. Here's hoping the 12th Judicial District can address the issues surround protecting the identity of the grand jurors, and any other concerns, in advance, to allow consideration for streaming the Indictment Return Hearing.

_______________
1Grand juror confidentiality is essential to the grand jury process, and grand juror confidentiality does not end when an indictment is returned.

Order Exempting Grand Jury Indictment Return Hearing

ETA: Knowing that a prominent Colorado defense attorney would go so far as to allege in U.S. District Court (Federal Court) that there was no probable cause to arrest BM, and throw shade at the Justice who ruled on this very subject to bound BM over for trial, should be a warning in itself to all Colorado Judicial Districts. I especially worry for these smaller districts, and hope they receive support from their larger neighbors to stop such defense antics, dead in their tracks. MOO

 

[Lyanna]

Iris is a defense attorney. And for the money, she did almost impossible - dragged BM out of jail. It is an entrepreneurial country, so I can't blame her for the reasonable attempt to earn more money for herself and her client. With all that she might have done wrong, I can't blame her of being unethical as she used the situation that already existed around this case. It was not beyond the reasonable doubt. Some untied ends, someone's impulsivity, true lack of detective manpower that probably existed in most states in 2021-2022, and the case looked hslf-baked. No body, disorganized prosecutor's office, lots of new information accruing towards the end of investigative case, it all worked for Iris and her client. I don't see it as unethical. Showy, dramatic, but Iris was within her right.

Mostly, her game was still played within the justice chamber and unlike the circus in another state, it did not include manipulation of public opinion. (Beyond upgrading her client's look and staging a couple of beautiful photos, perhaps.)

She merely didn't expect that the body would have been found. Would she have taken this case at all if there were the body? We'll never know, but i am not sure.

As a defense attorney no doubt she defended Barry.
But I believe she was unethical because she lied and misrepresented things wilfully, IANAL but I can't see how any attorney, prosecutor or defense can be allowed to do such things?
Also, I found her attitude towards Suzanne unethical - I feel that she publically humiliated and shamed a homicide victim, an abused woman who wanted a better life for herself and whether there was a body at the time or not, it was plainly obvious Suzanne had not ran off to Ecuador or was living homeless on the streets somewhere. I get she can give an alternate version, but there actually has to be a plausible train of facts etc for that does there not? There was nothing plausible about Suzanne shedding her former life to live on the streets of America and the link to Ecuador was tenuous at best.

moo

x

 

[fcavanaugh]

I believe in karma and what’s done in the dark/secret always comes to light.

IMO karma came for BM with the dismissal of his frivolous civil suits AKA cash grab, and will continue coming for him when the po-po come a knockin’ on his door in the (hopefully) not too distant future and then things get worse for him from there. Karma is a b, B.

Believe me, I want to see the cuffs on his wrists as much as anybody but also had to remind myself the other day that the next prosecution team must have all their ducks in a row on their ‘new’ case and confident they can win their case in court AKA secure a conviction. The ‘new’ case needs to be zipped up airtight and prosecutors need to bring their A game/team to present the case at trial. After the missteps and debacle of the 11th JD in the first attempt, I trust the 12th Judicial District and/or whomever they may ask/bring on board to assist (if they choose that route) in the prosecution of this complex high profile case, will ensure all their t’s are crossed and all i’s dotted before the next arrest/charges filed happens.
IMO the 12th’s DA/JD are keenly aware of the stakes here and imo will not arrest/bring charges until they are 100% ready and confident their case is winnable in court.

Personally I think it’s highly possible we may see a Grand jury indictment handed down versus the usual/more common in Colorado Information and Complaint and iirc, Grand Juries in CO can meet for up to a year and even be extended to 18 months if deemed necessary. So there’s that to consider also.

At any rate, as most are waiting with bated breath and anxious for the 12th to make their move (arrest/charges) asap, I think of the line from one of my all time favorite movies and in the aforementioned context seems apropos- “All in good time my little pretties”….

What’s done in the dark/secret always comes to light indeed,
we still see you BM!

Speaking of light, a reminder of why we’re here,
In support of this beautiful soul whose light shone/radiated off of her in life and continues to shine from beyond guiding the way to her rightfully deserved justice.

Suzanne will have the last word.

IMHOO

#JUSTICEFORSUZANNE

 

[Cindizzi]

Barry Morphew's malicious prosecution lawsuit over charges in his wife's death was dismissed

Barry Morphew filed a lawsuit seeking $15 million in damages in May 2023, a year after the charges alleging he killed Suzanne Morphew in May 2020 were dismissed.

www.cpr.org