Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #59 *ARREST*

[mom2chloe]

But the laws must be based upon some perceived danger or misuse. What possible reasons might Colorado have for making that gun illegal?

What are those guns typically used for?

Self defense in a big way because they’re powerful but easily concealed. Colorado has vast mountains and valleys and in an effort to keep people safe doesn’t want people running around with weapons that could easily harm innocent people especially when there are federal laws stating you have to have a stamp and registration for these types of weapons. IMO

 

[NWLady]

They're irrelevant in a strong case. How many capital murder cases have you watched where there were all these ancillary charges?

This reminds me of the Casey Anthony case in a lot of ways so far.

Have you heard of this case that's been going on for over 5 years? Not only are JW and 3 of his family members charged with 8 counts of murder, JW was also charged with unlawful sexual conduct, and most importantly, he has now recently plead guilty to all of the charges. My point being, other charges are added, sometimes regardless how irrelevant we think those charges are. If there is enough information and/or evidence to warrant filing of the additional charges, then why not? IMO, if nothing else, it sometimes shows the type of character the defendant truly is. JMO. And if the additional charges don't stick and defendant found not guilty on the additional charges, then so be it. Again, JMO.
Jake Wagner pleads guilty in Pike County massacre

 

[NuttMegg]

MOO kind strange to work your children into a marketing piece about successfully defending accused murderers.

Bizarre. What if the ad said "atty jane so-and-so specializes in defending men "wrongfully accused" of child\baby sexual molestation", as she has several young sons. And I hear the bullhorn not dog whistle in a specialty in defending college guys in their sexual assault charges on unconscious, drunk coeds. (reading between the lines, and reading current events) We've seen a few very wrong sentencings including brief parole after a few weeks in jail, even in cases where there were witnesses. I guess anyone can specialize in anything they want, but I don't have to respect it.

 

[Puzzles8]

maybe someone will answer re Colorado, but the states have a real mishmash of laws re guns, ammo, hunting, open carry etc. Then there might be different laws within a state if it is partly federal land. One small example, in Alaska small caliber rifles like 22's can't be used for big game because in effect if you shoot a moose with a 22, the moose will probably run away and eventually die of infection, whatever, and the meat is lost, and the hunter will just shoot other moose with the same pathetic gun and never even punch the game tag. . Then, on the other hand, why would a sawed off rifle be legal for game hunting? The bullet has a small chance of even hitting the target unless it is very close. And the rifle can be hidden under clothing just like in an "untouchables" movie. The really terrible aspect to local state gun laws, IMO, is that one densely populated state or city can try to protect citizens by outlawing handguns, yet would-be criminals can drive over a state line and buy all they want.

IMO, classic example of gun violence in Chicago and gun sales just over the border in Indiana.

Thanks for your explanation, it makes more sense now. Not much big game to shoot in Indiana, but plenty to hunt in Colorado.

But another question, why would anyone saw off the end of a rifle? Just to conceal it?

 

[SouthAussie]

<RSBM>
IMO, if nothing else, it sometimes shows the type of character the defendant truly is. JMO. And if the additional charges don't stick and defendant found not guilty on the additional charges, then so be it. Again, JMO.
Jake Wagner pleads guilty in Pike County massacre

Yes. The charges against BM show that he couldn't give two hoots about many aspects of the law. I feel that this will strongly play against him, in various ways.

(Allegedly)
Possesses an illegal firearm.
Murders his wife.
Votes in place of his wife.
Tampers with physical evidence.
Attempts to influence public servants.
Tampers with a deceased human.

They could probably go him for the PPP loan also ... if they investigate who these '9 employees' may be.
As well as filing for (and being granted) guardianship for the wife he murdered, which enabled him to do what he wished with her stake in any property.

 

[NuttMegg]

IMO, classic example of gun violence in Chicago and gun sales just over the border in Indiana.

Thanks for your explanation, it makes more sense now. Not much big game to shoot in Indiana, but plenty to hunt in Colorado.

But another question, why would anyone saw off the end of a rifle? Just to conceal it?

Well I said "sawed off" rifle, but that may not be the right term re what the poster gator is saying, he\she knows more than I. Apparently they come with the short rifle barrel for assault, semi assault weapons originally designed for use in war, iirc.

But in the past it really was "sawed off " shotguns made for concealment. They really were sawed off, probably with a hacksaw?

ETA Harris and Klebold used "sawed off " shotguns for their massacre of school friends at Columbine.

 

[Boxer]

Self defense in a big way because they’re powerful but easily concealed. Colorado has vast mountains and valleys and in an effort to keep people safe doesn’t want people running around with weapons that could easily harm innocent people especially when there are federal laws stating you have to have a stamp and registration for these types of weapons. IMO

CO is a "must issue" conceal carry state.
BM easily could have a concealed handgun permit.
He would have applied and gotten the permit for himself.
The SR is kind of the reverse of the permit.
The concealable weapon the SR, needs the permit.

 

[Boxer]

IMO, classic example of gun violence in Chicago and gun sales just over the border in Indiana.

Thanks for your explanation, it makes more sense now. Not much big game to shoot in Indiana, but plenty to hunt in Colorado.

But another question, why would anyone saw off the end of a rifle? Just to conceal it?

Swing around easy.

 

[DizzyB]

Attorney question: is there anything that could have been done re: guardianship of Suzanne which would have stopped him from obtaining her assets? I understand that their children would not have objected-one adult child signed off on it-but as he was most certainly under investigation for his wife’s murder, how was he able to profit from it using the court system?

 

[ar3593]

IMO he hired 2 certain attorneys for specific reasons, two of which are their gender and appearance. Another reason would be some of the code words in the description re having young male children to protect, paraphrased. That concept has been brought forth with the recent changes in prosecuting accused sex offenders on campuses.

I don't say that any specific person in this case is referring to that phenomenon, but many people these days do think that young men on campus accused of sexual assault were just feeling their oats, and the female student should not have gotten herself so out of control drunk. OK for the guy to get himself out of control drunk, but not the woman. And the code words spill forth...we must protect our young men against charges that could change their lives, deny them jobs, carry life-long sex offender labels.

Every now and then I re-watch the excellent old movie "12 angry men". About jury deliberations. Not about the choice of counsel, but about influences on the jury and preconceived notions.

When we see people with white hair, we treat that person with disinterested politeness, at least at first. Same with seeing a person with a zillion tatts, piercings, etc. It's just the way it is, and always has been. IMO.

Great reply NuttMegg! My daughter just studied "12 Angry Men" in school, excellent old movie/play and lesson..

The Judge’s overheard speech sets the scene and immediately establishes the key questions at the heart of the play: what is reasonable doubt and can a group of men deliberate on a criminal case honestly and without prejudice? Throughout the play, the jurors’ personalities stand in contrast to the ideal vision of justice proposed by the Judge. Love the example!

 

[LietKynes]

So I finally had a chance to read some background info on BM’s attorneys. Sure, they have successfully defended a couple clients in recent high-profile cases, Tom Falllis and more recently, the infamous KK- evil Frazee’s accomplice. Every case is different with a different set of circumstances, and I personally don’t envy these attorneys having BM as their client that’s for sure, and have little doubt these capable attorneys are up to the challenge/task of defending, imo, the indefensible.

Stating the obvious, in the United States, BM is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, entitled to due process. I respect and understand his attorneys duty to the constitution to ensure their client receives a fair trial. I too, want BM to receive a fair trial so as to avoid future appeals etc. down the road, as others have pointed out. I won’t wish BM’s attorneys luck though, as I believe their client is responsible for Suzanne no longer being of this earth and want him to pay the ultimate price for his horrendous crime. More than anything, I want justice for Suzanne, his beautiful, innocent wife, his VICTIM.

Having said that, I trust and have a lot of faith in DA Linda Stanley. She’s intelligent, an impressive background, seems to be a real spitfire too. When I watched and listened to her a couple weeks ago at the PC after BM’s arrest, when she emphatically stated, paraphrased, “I wouldn’t have filed charges and arrested him if I wasn’t confident”, and stated “this is about Suzanne”, the way she confidently and assuredly said it and her serious, determined stance, really made me feel confident that all LE involved and DA Stanley have worked diligently, methodically behind the scenes, crossed every “t”, and dotted every “i”. I believe they have the “goods” on BM to put him away for a long time. DA Stanley is certainly no slouch, prepared, capable, ready to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that BM is responsible for taking Suzanne from this world.

I feel confident the prosecution will be careful in the jury selection process and carefully vet/weed out those they feel are not “up to the task”, so to speak. I have faith and trust in the process and even though there’s always a risk that one juror isn’t convinced, I feel most jurors take their role very seriously and get it right more often than not.

I am also one who believes that once the AA is unsealed/gets released, it’s going to be even more horrifying than any of us ever imagined. There’s a reason the DA is confident,
because she has an airtight case, and hopefully BM’s attorneys after thorough review of the AA, which I believe will go toward exposing their client for the monster he is, will advise him the best course of action is to plea in exchange for Suzanne’s body/remains.

Amongst a host of other character flaws, I think BM is a morally corrupt, desensitized, disconnected individual that has shown blatant disrespect and total disregard for the rights of others probably for most of his life. After all, IMO, he made a conscious, premeditated decision to end Suzanne’s life, and disposed of her with such callous disregard, like yesterday’s trash, which is beyond heinous and cruel. I believe he really feels that he had a right to do so too. I’d go a step further and say in his sick mind, he blames Suzanne for “making” him do it, and feels 100% justified. He’s a scary, dangerous individual who I also believe is a danger to his daughter’s and to society if he ever gets out/walks free. I do have faith that won’t happen though.
If he doesn’t/refuses to plea/confess, which I highly doubt he will due to his huge ego, arrogance thinks he can beat this, then it will be a showdown between the attorneys in court, but in the end, after all the evidence against BM is methodically laid out by the DA for the jury, witness testimony, etc., all LE involved and DA Stanley’s hard work will prove to have payed off. That truth and justice will prevail, and Suzanne will ultimately get the justice she so rightfully deserves. And that after he’s convicted/sentenced, that BM fades into oblivion living in his new 6 x 8 digs, where all he has to look forward to are bologna sandwiches, love letters and marriage proposals from deranged, deluded, wannabe prisoner’s wives.

To echo DA Linda Stanley, this is about SUZANNE.
No truer words ever spoken.

Thinking about Suzanne’s daughter’s, Andy, Melinda, David, and the extended Moorman family as they digest all the charges. This is such a heartbreaking case, and my thoughts and prayers go out to each and every one of them.

All of the above IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne

bbm
This is the motive behind Barry's 26 second video "Plea".
"Oh, Suzanne..."

If only she hadn't reacted to him in ... what way ?
Fear ? Loathing for treatment she'd endured at his brawny hands ? Words said with finality, that she was leaving ?

Agreed with your post that he is corrupt, cruel, sick, and everything else laid out about who Barry truly is !
Thank you.

Imo.

 

[LietKynes]

Maybe he has a GF in another county he didn't want to upset by saying Suzanne was more beautiful than her

Thanks for bringing up what Barry might consider the 'elephant in the room' --as he tried to portray himself and a god-fearing and loving husband.
What if Suzanne had to die for one or more GF's ?
So that if 'even one person could be saved' ....
Heinous and sickening to think about, but without Barry's actions none of us would be here discussing this case.
MOO

 

[NuttMegg]

Great reply NuttMegg! My daughter just studied "12 Angry Men" in school, excellent old movie/play and lesson..

The Judge’s overheard speech sets the scene and immediately establishes the key questions at the heart of the play: what is reasonable doubt and can a group of men deliberate on a criminal case honestly and without prejudice? Throughout the play, the jurors’ personalities stand in contrast to the ideal vision of justice proposed by the Judge. Love the example!

TY. I just rented it again and see the movie was made twice, originally with Henry Fonda. But it would easily work as a play because there are only a couple of sets needed. Isn't that remarkable that something made so long ago is still so pertinent as a civics morality lesson and keen observation of our biases.

 

[tmar]

BM surprised me by having the PD represent him during his first 2 advisements. He’s known he was ‘suspect’ in her disappearance, he even told LS he was being targeted. And 2 FBI agents had just “met” with him in April about the vote fraud. Why wouldn’t he have had a defense attorney on speed dial when he was arrested? I’ll tell you why, he thought he was still going to get away with her murder. Even after being arrested he was still thinking he could get out of this. But....after having a look-see at the AA, he got his butt on the phone to a defense lawyer. That AA is going to be damning. MOO

I think the reason BM hired attorneys after his first advisements was to save his pennies.
As PD represented him, he did not lose money for their time, which, if he had his own team, he would need to pay.
As we have seen, he collects money, not spending unless inevitable.
I am pleased, finally BM will be broke, a pauper, which goes against his massive, macho ego: insufficient money for goodies in his 'comfortable,forever' cell.
Let us see, happenings, as BM crumbles.
Certainly looking forward to coming events.

 

[mom2chloe]

Attorney question: is there anything that could have been done re: guardianship of Suzanne which would have stopped him from obtaining her assets? I understand that their children would not have objected-one adult child signed off on it-but as he was most certainly under investigation for his wife’s murder, how was he able to profit from it using the court system?

This is an excellent question IMO and I hope we learn more. There need to be safeguards in place maybe on a Federal level to make sure these kinds of deals aren’t continued. I also wonder if Barry knew the differences between guardianship and gun laws. I doubt he just got lucky with this guardianship and financial maneuvering . IMO

 

[ToastIsUp]

Not much big game to shoot in Indiana, but plenty to hunt in Colorado.

Indiana, like most of the midwest, has a large deer hunt. I live in another midwestern state--no elk or moose but tons of white tail deer--and a large white tail can go over 250 lbs. Lots of hunting in Indiana.

 

[NWLady]

This is an excellent question IMO and I hope we learn more. There need to be safeguards in place maybe on a Federal level to make sure these kinds of deals aren’t continued. I also wonder if Barry knew the differences between guardianship and gun laws. I doubt he just got lucky with this guardianship and financial maneuvering . IMO

Yes, I agree with you. I know it's been said on here that BM being given the guardianship was all legal, but that doesn't mean we can't voice our concerns/complaints regarding it. I think there should at least be a waiting period before the guardianship is granted but then again there's probably a slim chance anyway that it might discourage the next BMs of being so quick to murder their wives if they knew all the funds wouldn't become theirs so easily and quick. Maybe they might instead think hmmm, maybe it would be better to just go through with the divorce and get it over with because that may only take a year or less, because otherwise, to wait to be given guardianship is a minimum of 2 years (for example). Yeah, I know, wishful thinking, but still IMO, it doesn't seem at all fair, let alone reasonable, that the same person who caused your demise can now use your share of the funds/assets to defend themselves for killing you! SMH in frustration. If I knew how to try and introduce something like this for consideration someday, I would certainly try and it would be called Suzanne's Law. She deserved so much more but yet she lost her life by the person who was supposed to love and protect her, and plus, he gets her share of assets that he can use for his defense! How messed up is that...

 

[TIGER0822]

Why would BM did not dispose of all weapons used in the crime? He could have easily hidden them in a mine shaft or somewhere in the wilderness where they would never have be discovered.


-

 

[TIGER0822]

Great point!

 

[Woodberry]

BM surprised me by having the PD represent him during his first 2 advisements. He’s known he was ‘suspect’ in her disappearance, he even told LS he was being targeted. And 2 FBI agents had just “met” with him in April about the vote fraud. Why wouldn’t he have had a defense attorney on speed dial when he was arrested? I’ll tell you why, he thought he was still going to get away with her murder. Even after being arrested he was still thinking he could get out of this. But....after having a look-see at the AA, he got his butt on the phone to a defense lawyer. That AA is going to be damning. MOO

I was surprised as well that BM didn't already have an defense attorney. I wondered if he thought it would look bad if he already had an attorney. But then again he doesn't seem to have been concerned about how people would perceive his not participating in searches or vigils. MOO