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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, we can use the Webex feed ourselves-as in log in, watch and listen. It cannot be rebroadcast. If you’re watching it via a second source or watching it after the fact, you’re violating the order.

To be clear - any YT hosts choosing to rebroadcast BM's WebEx virtual court
hearing on 5/27 will be violating the court order entered today by Judge Murphy. In other words, please don't upload the youtube to WS.


View attachment 298291


@Sillybilly

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/11th_Judicial_District/Chaffee/cases of interest/21CR78/21CR78 Morphew Order Expanded Media.pdf

Correct, that's why I was wondering if the webex connection and call in will be published and each of us can individually listen to or watch as we did with another case here. Will wait and see!
 
Ah - it would be good if the many news articles about that night included that fact - young man's view seems to be lost in the mists of time.

But that's a good sign - it's possible that the young man could be called to the witness stand.

So if Barry first came, thinking the store was closed (not a very close observer of things, apparently - as two people were moving around inside, lights were still on, and surely at least one employee car still parked in back)...he goes through the trash. Is caught.

Thinks about it in his own Barry-way and comes up with, "I am here digging through the trash in order to tell them about my missing wife - I needed something to write on."

But he has no pen, so the lady gives him a pen and he writes what's uppermost on his mind (the items he used to stage the crime). At least. that's how I'm thinking about it now.

What a dope. True fact: research shows that people who are less competent at something are more likely to rate themselves higher on that task than "others." I'm sure it's because they need to think someone is worse than they are - but people who are truly good at the task usually say they frequently meet people who are higher on that task than they are.

Barry is no criminal mastermind and although I think he thought about killing Suzanne (and wanted to, maybe not 24/7 but often), he did not work out his alibi plan well at all. He focused all his energy on planning and carrying out the crime/body disposal as murderers so often, understandably, do.

But his alibi circle (going to a market he already knew, calling on the few people who he knew he could get to show up for a non-job, perhaps telling family members he was on training, etc) is very poor. I give him a D+. He didn't fail altogether - he did something that threw LE off (they've probably searched every place he stopped over a several day period and come up with nothing or not much). He also managed to convince key players in his own family of his alibi long enough to carry out his financial machinations.

And I think he spent an inordinate amount of time playing shell games with money and moving "assets" around and selling shell companies and paying people under the table while somehow getting approved to work for the State of CO, etc., etc.


But Barry was so sure in his own mind that everyone would believe him, as an upstanding Saliva citizen ,that he never thought his mountain lion story would be questioned. I think he really believed local L.E would take minimal time questioning him about his alibi and would take his word he was out of town and Suzanne went out on Sunday morning for a bike ride . I think he would have been totally shocked to have been prevented from entering his home and the subsequent LE investigation. He then was on the backfoot trying to cover up what happened over the whole weekend and answer questions he never thought he would be asked
 
The owner says to Lauren, "And someone knocked on the window and it was Barry Morphew."

Suzanne Morphew case: Husband Barry Morphew charged with murder, arrested in Chaffee County

It's about 3/4ths of the way down that article page.

I know it's hard to keep the smaller details straight. But he went out of his way to alert them that he was there - after the rummaging? At any rate, he does have a receipt in his hand and writes on it.

But he knocked on their window, he wasn't skulking or anything (not that you said he was - but some people are beginning to think this was some big secret operation of digging through trash).

As far as I can recall, I have the details straight. It was reported in MSM that he was seen going through the trash, then he knocked on the window after he was seen.

So yes I think he did that in CYA mode to make up some excuse as to why he was there, after hours, going through the garbage can. It couldn't have been a very big secret op since the trash can is directly in front of the store, in full view of the public.

Either way this all went down, I sure do hope we learn what the heck he was really doing there, and how or even if it means anything. It's just another very curious part of the puzzle that still doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense yet.

jmo
 
He was first confronted by a young man who worked in the store who came out and asked what he was doing in the trash. The employee went back inside after BM gave some mumbled response. I think BM was startled by that employee, because he thought the store was closed. He realized he needed to come up with something plausible so he then knocked on the door and gave them the issuing wife story and wrote the note.

Yep, that's exactly how I understood it as well.
 
Knowing what Suzanne's Christian faith meant to her as has been described by so many who knew her well, I have a hard time believing she'd ever tolerate anything at all like a fraudulant government loan, or any other illegal activity.

Who knows... maybe she discovered the PPP loan (or something else we haven't found out about yet - I bet there's lots of that) and spoke up and spoke against what he'd done? Maybe that was all the motive he needed.
:(



I totally agree.I did not mean to imply in any way that Suzanne would condone anything shady in business paper work,rather that if everything was above board she would have been an asset to the business by sorting out Barry's paperwork.
 
It seems like there could be two scenarios. An interesting note about Poncha Market is that it’s a known hub for mountain bikers and a common place to leave a car so that it’s down there at the descent(shuttle takes you up). So there is some relation to BM’s fake mountain biking scenario.

https://www.ponchamarket.com/blank-page-1

1. He was looking for evidence that he planted. Or maybe was wondering if the bike helmet (and possibly jersey) he planted had been found and thrown away.

2. He was intentionally wanting to be seen so he could leave the note about the helmet and jersey.

But whatever he was doing, based on the note he left, his mind was on the additional planted evidence. Because he didn’t mention anything about what his wife looked like. And we know the helmet was found. It makes me think biking clothing was also found and hasn’t been disclosed yet.

I think the helmet was found on that Thursday. So whatever BM was doing was to further his fake bide ride scenario and the planted evidence.
You may have touched on this with retrieving evidence he planted. He may have reflected and decided that whatever he put there would have hurt his cause rather than helped it. He is a serial "planter"....bicycle, helmut, friending Andy's friends on facebook...He likely reconsidered and wanted to retrieve something that he decided wouldn't fly and would incriminate him.
 
I asked this before, but didn’t get an answer. I heard someone say CO meant a trial by Twitter. Is this true? No cameras for trials there? If the judge is denying this request for a matter much smaller than the trial, I’m assuming that also means no media streaming during the trial as well.?

Also, thank you for posting this.

Colorado Statute provides the court will consider authorizing expanded media coverage only for Advisements and Arraignments. Otherwise, it's trial (and hearing) by Twitter.

Special COVID procedures: Due to COVID and the court adopting the use of WebEx virtual hearings for safety reasons, we have a unique opportunity to virtually view not only Colorado criminal Advisements and Arraignments -- but also other hearings not typically authorized and/or available to the public virtually or streaming under normal, statutory, conditions. Permission seems to be on a court-by-court basis. Some counties only providing passwords by permission, and others allowing open log-in to the hearings.

Rule 3 - Media Coverage of Court Proceedings, Colo. Pub. Acc. Info. & Rec. 3 | Casetext Search + Citator
 
Last edited:
For those of us who believe BM killed Suzanne sometime Saturday night and disposed of her sometime overnight into the morning hours, before acting out the Broomfield part of his alibi...

What the heck was he really doing digging through the trash can in front of the Poncha Market, after hours, on the Tuesday following? We know he wasn't looking for her, since he knew exactly where she was. Was he checking to see if evidence he'd stashed there, had been located? I wonder what you all think he was really doing there.
I think the murder happened immediately after Suzanne's phone went dark. That would place it a bit earlier in the evening. She would never have given up her phone.
 
Correct, that's why I was wondering if the webex connection and call in will be published and each of us can individually listen to or watch as we did with another case here. Will wait and see!
At this time, it does not appear that Judge Murphy of Chaffee County is restricting public access to his virtual court hearings. At this time, his instructions do not call for a special passcode to enter.

Judge Murphy Virtual Courtroom
Join meeting in my Webex Personal Room

Meeting number (access code): 923 959 179

upload_2021-5-24_15-15-37.png

Join by phone
Tap to call in from a mobile device (attendees only)
+1-415-655-0001 US Toll
+1-720-650-7664 United States Toll (Denver)
Access code: 923 959 179 # #
Global call-in numbers

Join from a video conferencing system or application
Dial 173.243.2.68 and enter your meeting number.
If you are the host, you can also enter your host PIN in your video conferencing system or application to start the meeting.

Need help? Go to http://help.webex.com

Colorado Judicial Branch
 
From the docket, it appears the court will hear both cases filed against BM on May 27 at 4pm:

Docket for: Chaffee County - Chaffee Combined Court
Showing 1 - 2 of 2 records


Date Len Appearance Name Hearing Type Case # Location Division

5/27/21
4:00 PM 1Hr VIRTUAL MORPHEW, BARRY Status Conference D82021CR85 Chaffee County Division 2

5/27/21
4:00 PM 1Hr VIRTUAL MORPHEW, BARRY Status Conference D82021CR78* Chaffee County Division 2

* five charges
 
I respectfully disagree. IMO, BM has a right to bail.

The Colorado Constitution establishes a right to bail except in "capital cases where proof is evident or presumption is great." Since Colorado abolished the death penalty last year, I doubt the capital case exception applies. There are a few other restrictions, but BM doesn't meet the criteria and the procedural requirement for an immediate hearing has not been met.

See if you agree. A statute, Section 16-4-101 of Colorado Revised Statutes, elaborates on the Constitution's description of bailable offenses:

§ 16-4-101. Bailable offenses - definitions

(1) All persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties except:

(a) For capital offenses when proof is evident or presumption is great; or

(b) When, after a hearing held within ninety-six hours of arrest and upon reasonable notice, the court finds that the proof is evident or the presumption is great as to the crime alleged to have been committed and finds that the public would be placed in significant peril if the accused were released on bail and such person is accused in any of the following cases:

(I) A crime of violence alleged to have been committed while on probation or parole resulting from the conviction of a crime of violence;

(II) A crime of violence alleged to have been committed while on bail pending the disposition of a previous crime of violence charge for which probable cause has been found;

(III) A crime of violence alleged to have been committed after two previous felony convictions, or one such previous felony conviction if such conviction was for a crime of violence, upon charges separately brought and tried under the laws of this state or under the laws of any other state, the United States, or any territory subject to the jurisdiction of the United States which, if committed in this state, would be a felony;

(IV) A crime of possession of a weapon by a previous offender alleged to have been committed in violation of section 18-12-108 (2) (b), (2) (c), (4) (b), (4) (c), or (5), C.R.S.;

(V) Sexual assault, as described in section 18-3-402, sexual assault in the first degree, as described in section 18-3-402, as it existed prior to July 1, 2000, sexual assault in the second degree, as described in section 18-3-403, as it existed prior to July 1, 2000, sexual assault on a child, as described in section 18-3-405, or sexual assault on a child by one in a position of trust, as described in section 18-3-405.3 in which the victim is fourteen years of age or younger and seven or more years younger than the accused.

(c) When a person has been convicted of a crime of violence or a crime of possession of a weapon by a previous offender, as described in section 18-12-108 (2) (b), (2) (c), (4) (b), (4) (c), or (5), C.R.S., at the trial court level and such person is appealing such conviction or awaiting sentencing for such conviction and the court finds that the public would be placed in significant peril if the convicted person were released on bail.

(2) For purposes of this section, "crime of violence" shall have the same meaning as set forth in section 18-1.3-406 (2), C.R.S.

(3) In any capital case, the defendant may make a written motion for admission to bail upon the ground that the proof is not evident or that presumption is not great, and the court shall promptly conduct a hearing upon such motion. At such hearing, the burden shall be upon the people to establish that the proof is evident or that the presumption is great. The court may combine in a single hearing the questions as to whether the proof is evident or the presumption great with the determination of the existence of probable cause to believe that the defendant committed the crime charged.

(4) Except in the case of a capital offense, if a person is denied bail under this section, the trial of the person shall be commenced not more than ninety-one days after the date on which bail is denied. If the trial is not commenced within ninety-one days and the delay is not attributable to the defense, the court shall immediately schedule a bail hearing and shall set the amount of the bail for the person.

(5) When a person is arrested for a crime of violence, as defined in section 16-1-104 (8.5), or a criminal offense alleging the use or possession of a deadly weapon or the causing of bodily injury to another person, or a criminal offense alleging the possession of a weapon by a previous offender, as described in section 18-12-108 (2) (b), (2) (c), (4) (b), (4) (c), or (5), C.R.S., and such person is on parole, the law enforcement agency making the arrest shall notify the department of corrections within twenty-four hours. The person so arrested shall not be eligible for bail to be set until at least seventy-two hours from the time of his or her arrest has passed.
Thank you for this post. It's very informative.
 
You may have touched on this with retrieving evidence he planted. He may have reflected and decided that whatever he put there would have hurt his cause rather than helped it. He is a serial "planter"....bicycle, helmut, friending Andy's friends on facebook...He likely reconsidered and wanted to retrieve something that he decided wouldn't fly and would incriminate him.

Yup. And if really was looking for a receipt, why not just say that is what he was doing. It furthers whatever false narrative he’d be pushing with finding a receipt. So why does he mention the helmet and clothes which at that point had not been found?

Total speculation; he could have been searching to see if SM’s phone that he disposed of in the trash can had been taken away yet.
 
I'm confused about the misdemeanor assault.

On Indiana case records for "Barry Morphew," there is one 2009 case between the State and BM, identified as an "infraction," that involves a CCS (... a criminal complaint and summons?... originally filed in Lawrence county) that was converted to an infraction and then dismissed. The summary information on the case records indicates you have to refer to the original CCS to see the original charge. Is that what you are referring to? Was that misdemeanor assault?

I'm also mystified why BM was not charged in the violent altercation that mason contractor, John Schmitz has reported occurred in May 2018. According to Schmitz, BM showed up 3 days early at the job site and started bullying Schimtz's workers to get out of his way and when Schmitz intervened to protect them, he and BM got into a physical fight. That assault appears on Schmitz's case records, but not BM's.

Maybe BM got it expunged? JMO
 
At this time, it does not appear that Judge Murphy of Chaffee County is restricting public access to his virtual court hearings. At this time, his instructions do not call for a special passcode to enter.

Judge Murphy Virtual Courtroom
Join meeting in my Webex Personal Room

Meeting number (access code): 923 959 179

View attachment 298294

Join by phone
Tap to call in from a mobile device (attendees only)
+1-415-655-0001 US Toll
+1-720-650-7664 United States Toll (Denver)
Access code: 923 959 179 # #
Global call-in numbers

Join from a video conferencing system or application
Dial 173.243.2.68 and enter your meeting number.
If you are the host, you can also enter your host PIN in your video conferencing system or application to start the meeting.

Need help? Go to http://help.webex.com

Colorado Judicial Branch
Thank you @Seattle1 I’m going to save this post for reference Thursday!
 
That would be a thing if he didn’t pay the health insurance premiums. He is self employed so it’s not as if things are deducted automatically from his paycheck. Who was filling out the docs for the PPP loans? Who did the day to day accounting for his business, not to mention his real estate portfolio? His stuff sounded pretty complicated. He/they still owned property in two states, Barry seemed to have independent contractors who would be require 1099s, he was involved in state projects that would have required proof of insurance and performance bonds. Even if he was not listed on the state jobs he would have had to provide docs as a sub. I hope LE has untangled Barry’s very messy web. I’m sticking with money as a motive.

PPP loans, as far as I can gather, started gathering applications in early April, 2020, a month before SM disappeared. He received an amount just shy of
$258, 000. We don't know when he applied for that loan; it could have been after Suzanne went missing. Who did he pay the money to? He was already on the outs with the 3 workers he hired sporadically. Perhaps Suzanne had asked the same questions.
 
PPP loans, as far as I can gather, started gathering applications in early April, 2020, a month before SM disappeared. He received an amount just shy of
$258, 000. We don't know when he applied for that loan; it could have been after Suzanne went missing. Who did he pay the money to? He was already on the outs with the 3 workers he hired sporadically. Perhaps Suzanne had asked the same questions.
RSBM
$258,000?????? source?
 
PPP loans, as far as I can gather, started gathering applications in early April, 2020, a month before SM disappeared. He received an amount just shy of
$258, 000. We don't know when he applied for that loan; it could have been after Suzanne went missing. Who did he pay the money to? He was already on the outs with the 3 workers he hired sporadically. Perhaps Suzanne had asked the same questions.
I’m doing a little light reading on PPP loans. It turns out an independent contractor without employees can indeed apply, the forgiveness portion is a calculation. He may have applied for it as it was easy money to get and he hoped to pay back a portion later when he had to. The smoke and mirrors part that seems to always be around Barry.
Self-Employed With No Employees? You Can Still Get a PPP Loan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
149
Guests online
524
Total visitors
673

Forum statistics

Threads
608,336
Messages
18,237,878
Members
234,343
Latest member
almsrq
Back
Top