Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w prejudice* #104

[Seattle1]

Some facts from the Aug 2021 PH:

Walker confirmed the arrest affidavit for Barry is 129 pages long and took weeks to put together. He said they started writing the document on May 11, 2020.

Barry Morphew preliminary hearing: Investigator confirms Suzanne was having a 2-year affair

Suzanne Morphew was having a two-year affair leading up her 2020 disappearance and alleged murder at the hands of her husband, an investigator said in Monday’s preliminary hearing.

www.thedenverchannel.com

ETA: Linda Stanley was sworn into office as the District Attorney for the 11th Judicial District mid-January 2021.

 

[Love Never Fails]

His objection wasn't to him reading the full AA (he did approve the arrest warrant after all), it was to the fact that the AA has to be publicly disclosed at some point. Including all of the extraneous, prejudicial information meant that either that information would be disclosed to the public or the court and the parties were going to have to spend a lot of time going back and forth with motions over what parts would be redacted and what parts wouldn't.

I think it's important to remember this whole case was on an accelerated timeline as soon as the prosecution filed their complaint. In a first degree murder case, it's quite normal for the defendant to waive their right to a speedy trial. Normally the defense is at a major resource disadvantage compared to the prosecution and they need the extra time to prepare for trial.

BM's lawyers quite cleverly don't appear to have waived that right. They seem to have gambled correctly that a compressed timeline (6 months) would be more of a problem for the prosecution than it would be for them.

I think that time pressure informs a lot of the judicial decisions in this case. Judge Murphy couldn't take the time he would have liked to properly redact the AA because they needed to get to the PH. Judge Lama couldn't just delay the trial to allow more time for the prosecution to prepare their expert witness reports and for the defense to read and respond to them, etc.

Actually Judge L just wanted it all over because he was in pain. It’s a shame he accepted the case in the first place. Removing the witnesses from the prosecution
list gave the prosecution no alternative other than to dismiss the case. A fast way out for Judge L.

 

[Love Never Fails]

^^rsbm
Thanks for your recollection @waldojabba. It wasn't until reading your post about AK (Curt) guiding for AWP that I finally recall AWP coming to Salida. IMO, I think AK and CCSO have some history that predates SM missing, and AWP got caught in the middle. Seems there's still much controversy over whether the blue shirt was tested or not as evidence. MOO

Do we know if AK is from the Saluda are? Can you discuss the history between AK and CCSO?

 

[Seattle1]

I can understand why the Judge would not want some stuff to go public, which he has powers to prevent, but I don't understand why the Judge himself didn't want to hear the full story?

Seems odd to me.

02c

There seems to be some confusion here over the Court denying testimony about DV in BM's trial.

To be clear, this was a decision made solely by Judge Lama in February of this year. There was never any hint DV would be disallowed during Judge Murphy's tenure and why the decision was shocking.

This decision stemmed from just one more motion by the defense to suppress testimony from SM's best friend that the defense likely held on to until they had a new Judge on the case.

I believe it was learned during discussions over this motion that Judge Lama hadn't read the AA. He clearly wasn't aware of the history or testimony from the PH. He did not want to know the history of the case. MOO

Judge will not admit prior acts of alleged domestic violence as evidence in Barry Morphew trial

The motion filed by prosecutors sought to introduce alleged acts of domestic violence as evidence when the trial starts in May

www.9news.com

 

[Seattle1]

Do we know if AK is from the Saluda are? Can you discuss the history between AK and CCSO?

AK is a youtube creator that is not WS approved.

 

[Love Never Fails]

There seems to be some confusion here over the Court denying testimony about DV in BM's trial.

To be clear, this was a decision made solely by Judge Lama in February of this year. There was never any hint DV would be disallowed during Judge Murphy's tenure and why the decision was shocking.

This decision stemmed from just one more motion by the defense to suppress testimony from SM's best friend that the defense likely held on to until they had a new Judge on the case.

I believe it was learned during discussions over this motion that Judge Lama hadn't read the AA. He clearly wasn't aware of the history or testimony from the PH. He did not want to know the history of the case. MOO

Judge will not admit prior acts of alleged domestic violence as evidence in Barry Morphew trial

The motion filed by prosecutors sought to introduce alleged acts of domestic violence as evidence when the trial starts in May

www.9news.com

Or he knew but didn’t care. I think he enjoyed siding with the defense.

 

[Seattle1]

Morphew Murder Trial Motions Hearing Continues, Judge Orders Potential Testimony of Domestic Abuse Excluded - by Jan Wondra - Ark Valley Voice

When the pretrial motions hearing for the Barry Morphew murder trial continues at 9:00 a.m. Thursday, Feb. 24, in the District 11 Cañon City courtroom,

arkvalleyvoice.com

2/23/22

There have already been dozens of motions reviewed and presented and rebutted in prior hearings. The most prominent court decision in the last, all-day motions hearing on Feb. 10 was the exclusion of evidence provided by Suzanne Morphew’s long-time friend, Sheila Oliver, that the relationship between the Morphews included domestic violence. The prosecution made motions P34 and P34A, to submit it as additional evidence, but provided no dates for the conversations and texts.

“Suzanne Morphew is not going to take the stand. Sheila Oliver, her best friend will,” said Prosecuting Attorney Weiner. He said the evidence provided by Oliver was an offer of proof of the domestic abuse, shared first by “the defendant admitted to them in March, 2021. He admits that physical violence. One time he hit her in the face and drew blood … she was fearful. She was afraid. She told this to Sheila Oliver and she had no motive to lie to Oliver.”

He went on to add, “the defendant portrays this as a Norman Rockwell marriage — he comes back from his alibi in Broomfield and said it was great… but he knew she was slipping away and that was his motive … her text says it …’ it’s over, can we work this out civilly?'”

Defense Attorney Iris Eytan objected, saying “there are no dates, we can’t talk to her, these are ‘alleged incidents.'” She also offered the theory that if Oliver was Morphew’s best friend, “why would she have kept her affair with a high school classmate a secret from her?”

The point was made that by admitting hearsay evidence, the prosecution still hadn’t proven that the prior acts described had actually happened, and they responded that defense was attacking the character of Suzanne Morphew when she wasn’t there to defend herself..

The judge ruled to exclude by P34 and P34A, eliminating the information from being presented during trial.

 

[Seattle1]

Or he knew but didn’t care. I think he enjoyed siding with the defense.

He wanted to be them! MOO

 

[Seattle1]

“Suzanne Morphew is not going to take the stand. Sheila Oliver, her best friend will,” said Prosecuting Attorney Weiner. He said the evidence provided by Oliver was an offer of proof of the domestic abuse, shared first by “the defendant admitted to them in March, 2021. He admits that physical violence. One time he hit her in the face and drew blood … she was fearful. She was afraid. She told this to Sheila Oliver and she had no motive to lie to Oliver.”

The prosecution made motions P34 and P34A, to submit it as additional evidence, but provided no dates for the conversations and texts.

Quoting myself to add that I truly believed that by BM admitting to FBI Agent Grusing that he struck and pinned SM as described by SO, the hearsay evidence would not be suppressed.

This is a reminder to victims of abuse how important it is to document the violence, file a police report, and leave a credible paper trail. I always remember Nicole Brown Simpson when I think of documenting the violence. Although her killer walked, at least her prior acts evidence was not suppressed.

IMO, the Court ruled to suppress this evidence because SO's evidence did not include specifics as to when the incidents occurred. In their response, the prosecution rightfully could not edit the text messages to make up the dates and times that the incidents occurred and could not satisfy the burden set by the court. In other words, the Court believed IE that these were only alleged incidents of domestic abuse.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Quoting myself to add that I truly believed that by BM admitting to FBI Agent Grusing that he struck and pinned SM as described by SO, the hearsay evidence would not be suppressed.

This is a reminder to victims of abuse how important it is to document the violence, file a police report, and leave a credible paper trail. I always remember Nicole Brown Simpson when I think of documenting the violence. Although her killer walked, at least her prior acts evidence was not suppressed.

IMO, the Court ruled to suppress this evidence because SO's evidence did not include specifics as to when the incidents occurred. In their response, the prosecution rightfully could not edit the text messages to make up the dates and times that the incidents occurred and could not satisfy the burden set by the court. In other words, the Court believed IE that these were only alleged incidents of domestic abuse.

I wonder sometimes if judges, bring human and all, are also guilty of violence and abuse and just don’t want to see another man jailed for it. When we put judges and politicians and leaders of any type above the normal every day citizen, we are making a huge error. In this case, I can’t help but feel that Judge M and Judge L, and even some members of WS, believe Suzanne deserved punishment for being unfaithful or that she should have stayed in the relationship with Barry and taken his abuse.

If Barry is ever charged again, I pray he will face the strongest prosecutor and a very fair judge and one who isn’t buddies with the defense team.

 

[Aloe]

I wonder sometimes if judges, bring human and all, are also guilty of violence and abuse and just don’t want to see another man jailed for it. When we put judges and politicians and leaders of any type above the normal every day citizen, we are making a huge error. In this case, I can’t help but feel that Judge M and Judge L, and even some members of WS, believe Suzanne deserved punishment for being unfaithful or that she should have stayed in the relationship with Barry and taken his abuse.

If Barry is ever charged again, I pray he will face the strongest prosecutor and a very fair judge and one who isn’t buddies with the defense team.

Like exponentially!

 

[mrjitty]

Quoting myself to add that I truly believed that by BM admitting to FBI Agent Grusing that he struck and pinned SM as described by SO, the hearsay evidence would not be suppressed.

This is a reminder to victims of abuse how important it is to document the violence, file a police report, and leave a credible paper trail. I always remember Nicole Brown Simpson when I think of documenting the violence. Although her killer walked, at least her prior acts evidence was not suppressed.

IMO, the Court ruled to suppress this evidence because SO's evidence did not include specifics as to when the incidents occurred. In their response, the prosecution rightfully could not edit the text messages to make up the dates and times that the incidents occurred and could not satisfy the burden set by the court. In other words, the Court believed IE that these were only alleged incidents of domestic abuse.

Yep

IMO the jury should make that decision - not the judge

For instance is it that important when precisely the "alleged incidents" occurred? The judge seems to have invented an idea that if they happened long ago, then they are not probative, but that is speculative on his part!

 

[mrjitty]

His objection wasn't to him reading the full AA (he did approve the arrest warrant after all), it was to the fact that the AA has to be publicly disclosed at some point. Including all of the extraneous, prejudicial information meant that either that information would be disclosed to the public or the court and the parties were going to have to spend a lot of time going back and forth with motions over what parts would be redacted and what parts wouldn't.

I think it's important to remember this whole case was on an accelerated timeline as soon as the prosecution filed their complaint. In a first degree murder case, it's quite normal for the defendant to waive their right to a speedy trial. Normally the defense is at a major resource disadvantage compared to the prosecution and they need the extra time to prepare for trial.

BM's lawyers quite cleverly don't appear to have waived that right. They seem to have gambled correctly that a compressed timeline (6 months) would be more of a problem for the prosecution than it would be for them.

I think that time pressure informs a lot of the judicial decisions in this case. Judge Murphy couldn't take the time he would have liked to properly redact the AA because they needed to get to the PH. Judge Lama couldn't just delay the trial to allow more time for the prosecution to prepare their expert witness reports and for the defense to read and respond to them, etc.

OK thanks - I agree with your take.

I suppose it brings me back to my original point that if the Judge didn't want the material in the AA to save time later - in what document should it go?

By far the most prejudicial content was the DV/DA allegations which were in fact subsequently ruled partially inadmissible, so the Judge would appear to be saying this material would only be disclosed from the stand and presumably the supporting exhibits during the Prelim?

But that would mean the Judge himself would not have known about this at the time of arrest, which seems an odd result.

My 02c is you are most likely correct - the Judge was frustrated/grumpy because of the work that potentially needed to happen, but personally I don't believe the AA needed to be redacted at all, because the very same allegations appeared in the public pretrial hearings and supporting documentation where no one is saying they needed to be redacted!

 

[mrjitty]

I saw some discussion recently on whether the "last proof of life" photo was really taken that afternoon at PP.

I wanted to raise it not because I think it is a useful theory, but because I think it shows something that incriminates Barry.

Even if SM sent a "thirst photo" out of her library rather than a fresh pic, what is most remarkable is the theory that this could have been Barry faking it just doesn't add up - because where are the further "proof of life" messages until bed time?

So it struck me, but in a new way, that Barry simply could not access SMs phone that afternoon/night for some reason.

Did she change her pass or add biometrics due to the escalating bad vibes?

But to me it is clear that Barry could not access her phone, and this was a major blunder in his plan, because it pin points the crime to the hour.

 

[Kemug]

I saw some discussion recently on whether the "last proof of life" photo was really taken that afternoon at PP.

I wanted to raise it not because I think it is a useful theory, but because I think it shows something that incriminates Barry.

Even if SM sent a "thirst photo" out of her library rather than a fresh pic, what is most remarkable is the theory that this could have been Barry faking it just doesn't add up - because where are the further "proof of life" messages until bed time?

So it struck me, but in a new way, that Barry simply could not access SMs phone that afternoon/night for some reason.

Did she change her pass or add biometrics due to the escalating bad vibes?

But to me it is clear that Barry could not access her phone, and this was a major blunder in his plan, because it pin points the crime to the hour.

Yes of course, you are brilliant Mr Jitty! I agree that Barry would certainly have sent more messages or photos as proof of life if he could have. Well done.

 

[girlhasnoname]

How frustrating is this wait? I know it's hard on all of us who have been committed to this case from Day 1.

However, I do believe with all my heart, BM is going to be retried and found guilty. The State was crippled with lousy evidential rulings by both Judges IMO. The State had nothing left to do but file a motion to dismiss without prejudice.

I can't explain why I feel so strongly about this, I was the same way in the Jayme Closs case, and the Kelsey Berreth case. I never gave up hope for justice against those evil monsters and I won't for Suzanne's either.

Tick tock BM.

MOO

 

[Momofthreeboys]

I wonder sometimes if judges, bring human and all, are also guilty of violence and abuse and just don’t want to see another man jailed for it. When we put judges and politicians and leaders of any type above the normal every day citizen, we are making a huge error. In this case, I can’t help but feel that Judge M and Judge L, and even some members of WS, believe Suzanne deserved punishment for being unfaithful or that she should have stayed in the relationship with Barry and taken his abuse.

If Barry is ever charged again, I pray he will face the strongest prosecutor and a very fair judge and one who isn’t buddies with the defense team.

I believe judges are human but generally practice their job through the guidance of the law and generally work to avoid situations that can be opened up for appeal. Like everyone perhaps they view situations through their own lens but they don’t have a ton of wiggle room with court actions in my opinion. I highly doubt the judge’s own divorce influenced his ruling. And any insinuations about his marriage in an appeal could easily be verified in my opinion.

 

[Love Never Fails]

I believe judges are human but generally practice their job through the guidance of the law and generally work to avoid situations that can be opened up for appeal. Like everyone perhaps they view situations through their own lens but they don’t have a ton of wiggle room with court actions in my opinion. I highly doubt the judge’s own divorce influenced his ruling. And any insinuations about his marriage in an appeal could easily be verified in my opinion.

I don’t know one thing about the judge or his marriage.
Until you just said it.
I’m not insinuating anything.
Just noting he is human.
Don’t appreciate you saying I’m insinuating anything.

 

[Seattle1]

dbm

 

[Love Never Fails]

I saw some discussion recently on whether the "last proof of life" photo was really taken that afternoon at PP.

I wanted to raise it not because I think it is a useful theory, but because I think it shows something that incriminates Barry.

Even if SM sent a "thirst photo" out of her library rather than a fresh pic, what is most remarkable is the theory that this could have been Barry faking it just doesn't add up - because where are the further "proof of life" messages until bed time?

So it struck me, but in a new way, that Barry simply could not access SMs phone that afternoon/night for some reason.

Did she change her pass or add biometrics due to the escalating bad vibes?

But to me it is clear that Barry could not access her phone, and this was a major blunder in his plan, because it pin points the crime to the hour.

Could he have broken her phone in anger?
Remember, he kept asking LE if they found her phone.