Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #61 *ARREST*

[Deleted member 222031]

bbm
Great post, @Diddian !

I'll 2nd that! Really appreciate your knowledge & insight @Diddian.

 

[Boxer]

At the moment I think we are worrying needlessly. I feel that there is very good evidence,including biological,to incriminate BM.

I think the judge is well aware that BM's fancy lawyers will be looking at the smallest of things to proclaim an unfair trial or get him off on a technicality. The judge must be well aware of their previous cases and the way they work.

Destroying witnesses is how they work.

 

[Boxer]

A valid point @IRBHTX Without seeing and reading the AA, it’s hard for me to say the judge is “not focusing on the heinous nature of the crime...” Maybe the AA contains some very heinous evidence.

How could the two daughters be “more victimized” than losing their own mother to murder? Maybe revealing the evidentiary details of the murder itself is more heinous than just the “knowing” the murder took place. That to me is what nightmares are made of. MOO

They may not be the only victim / witnesses.

 

[Error505]

Destroying witnesses is how they work.

EXACTLY! Amen @Boxer!

 

[Deleted member 222031]

Well said. All of it. 100% agree.

Do we know if it was this judge who signed off on the AA? From his criticism of it, it appears unlikely. Is it possible to find out? MOO

 

[JosieMae]

Of course, we are all disappointed about the delay of the AA release. However, let's try to find some comfort that there was an arrest - something that seemed like wishful thinking a month ago.

 

[Hatch]

If anyone has bobcat knowledge, what’s a plate? Also, on the wall-would a bobcat be required to do the work? Would the inspector have to be scheduled ahead of time to review the wall work? Did an inspector show up at all?

I am thinking JP was talking about the bucket or the blade those are two different attachments. I got that impression from watching the motion of his hands. BM may have been adding a brace plate to his bucket if he was going to handle big boulders. JMO Or he had bent his bucket doing what he was doing(?) we don’t know what he had been doing or was planning to do. We don’t know and we hope to find out when the AA is released.

 

[Chelly]

I'm probably the only person following this case who doesn't believe most of what JP has said. To me, his story didn't sound credible from the beginning. I think JP got himself tangled up in a whale-of-a-tale. Once Daily Mail published that whopper of a story, JP was stuck with it. MOO.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Do we know if it was this judge who signed off on the AA? From his criticism of it, it appears unlikely. Is it possible to find out? MOO

I don't know if it was the same judge but I was agreeing with the point that a judge did sign off on the AA in the first place. I don't think it's possible to find out which judge gave the approval since that info will be on the actual AA itself. But maybe one of our lawyers can answer that more accurately.

 

[Ontario Mom]

I'm probably the only person following this case who doesn't believe most of what JP has said. To me, his story didn't sound credible from the beginning. I think JP got himself tangled up in a whale-of-a-tale. Once Daily Mail published that whopper of a story, JP was stuck with it. MOO.

Maybe the story didn't sound credible because the DM got the facts wrong from the jump, and now he's trying to make sure the actual course of events are told? Total speculation of course, but I'm sure detectives have checked out every word of his story.

Still, if he were making stuff up, wouldn't that have already come out, by way of MG or CC or LS reporting on it? You can make stuff up if it's just you because there's no one to confirm or deny, but once you involved other people, it's pretty easy to expose falsehoods, and I haven't seen anyone suggesting he's not credible.

Well, except BM with his now infamous "9 years in prison... meth head!" accusation.

 

[Seattle1]

The wording of the ruling is what bothered me. I’m okay with the AA not being released-I certainly want to read it but I do not see any great benefit to its release. It felt like the Judge went out of his way to criticize the AA, stating it was the longest ever, he never saw anything like it, and that there was much that did not go to probable cause-which is the point of the AA. It felt like an admonishment. It worried me, and made me feel that the prosecution had better get its act together and work toward a succinct presentation of the evidence-no bells and whistles, at the hearing so the Cat is bound over for trial.

From the beginning, the state has not opposed the release of the AA (after BM's arrest) but said they would defer to the Court's determination.

I agree about the Judge's attitude but I'm also seeing where the defense seems to have little wind of their own when arguing to keep the AA sealed or to limit public release when their biggest argument does not apply, and the other is not even the responsibility of a defense attorney.

More specifically, the defense argues that much of the information in the AA is not relevant to the court's finding of probable cause, possibly not admissible at trial under the rules of evidence, yet the Court confirmed the People's position that there is no requirement for a probable cause affidavit to conform to the rules of evidence (see Order, page 5).

Second, a defense attorney is not charged with protecting the rights of the victims under Colorado law. Pursuant to Section 24-4.1-303 - Procedures for ensuring rights of victims of crimes, the responsibility falls on:

(1) Law enforcement agencies, prosecutorial agencies, judicial agencies, and correctional agencies shall ensure that victims of crimes are afforded the rights described in section 24-4.1-302.5.

Clearly, protecting the rights of victims here primarily falls on the district attorney's office and I think the DA might remind BM's defense to stay in their lane. I'm also reminded that it was BM who was ordered by the Court to be civil towards his daughters. MOO

Section 24-4.1-303 - Procedures for ensuring rights of victims of crimes, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-4.1-303 | Casetext Search + Citator

 

[Boxer]

I'm probably the only person following this case who doesn't believe most of what JP has said. To me, his story didn't sound credible from the beginning. I think JP got himself tangled up in a whale-of-a-tale. Once Daily Mail published that whopper of a story, JP was stuck with it. MOO.

Here is the thing, your employer's wife is missing and you are pissed off because he isnt coming back to job, helping, ordering or talking to you.

That does not track at all.

 

[Chelly]

Maybe the story didn't sound credible because the DM got the facts wrong from the jump, and now he's trying to make sure the actual course of events are told? Total speculation of course, but I'm sure detectives have checked out every word of his story.

Still, if he were making stuff up, wouldn't that have already come out, by way of MG or CC or LS reporting on it? You can make stuff up if it's just you because there's no one to confirm or deny, but once you involved other people, it's pretty easy to expose falsehoods, and I haven't seen anyone suggesting he's not credible.

Well, except BM with his now infamous "9 years in prison... meth head!" accusation.

Like you, I haven't yet seen anyone suggesting JP is not credible either. That's why I said I'm probably the only person following this case who does not believe most of what JP has said. I'll stick to that opinion for now. Time will tell.

 

[Deleted member 222031]

Folks, it is some comfort while we are waiting on release of the AA and on the prelim in August, Barry is eating jail food and losing his tan & probably his muscle tone. Care package food is going to get old, too....Doritos....yum! (if it hasn't already!). Let us remember the light that was Suzanne and pray for justice.

I'm still not ready to concede that the new law focusing on victim rights trumps release of what is definitely public information. Just as the accused has rights in our system of government, so too the public has rights enshrined in our constitution since the founding of this nation. When a premeditated murder has been committed many "3rd parties" are affected. This crime has a specific victim but is also a criminal affront to us all. Just because media attention is uncomfortable and "gawkers" have their say, is not a reason to withhold facts from the public.

Upholding the principles of freedom of information we hold dear should be given as much weight as any other rights, IMHO. And in an odd or maybe ironic way, is becoming another 3rd party victim, at least in the short term.

#JusticeForSuzanne

 

[OldCop]

Well I found another video of LS reporting with snippets of JP in it, mostly about the hotel room. Maybe we are mis-remembering that JP talked to BM about the job on Saturday? Maybe it was just that he “saw” him.
Remember how the Daily Mail reported “ BM ordered JP to Broomfield on Sunday” ? Lol More confused than ever now. Might have to look with fresh eyes in the morning. Good to see you, OC !

Puckett mentioned he saw Barry in person on Saturday, May 9, and described the work he’d been hired to do, a project involving fixing a wall.
Suzanne Morphew’s husband left Denver hotel, contractor claims room was “reeking of chlorine” | FOX21 News Colorado

I think there is another more detailed account of this, I’m still looking.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

I think this is dangerous because it is non-transparent.

For those who think this is fine because the details in the AA will eventually come out at trial, what makes you so certain of that?

This judge may disallow many of the facts alleged in the AA. And if that occurs in a non-transparent way as so much has so far, we may never know what facts were alleged or why the judge disallowed them. Is that transparent?

It doesn't escape me that this is a new DA, elected the past year. And it was a contentious political fight. Is this a continuation of that political fight... an attempt to make this DA look like a failure? Is that why the judge seemingly admonished the investigators and prosecutors for the length of the AA? How can you know?

It seems to me the length of the AA has a lot to do with the lengths to which this defendant attempted to hide his crimes, intimidate those who cooperated with LE, and influence those who were investigating.

I'm not satisfied in any way with this decision and I think it bodes very poorly for justice in the 11th Judicial District of the state of Colorado.

ETA: Let me add that in the state of CO, a person charged with first degree murder is not generally granted bail. To support that, at least as I understand it, the law requires more than probable cause for that arrest, it requires presumptive evidence of guilt to hold the defendant until trial. So, one would expect an AA to be longer in such a case.

If there is information not admissible at trial then perhaps they are not facts…perhaps they are opinions, or are out of context, or hearsay, or easily refuted. I cannot accept given the judges message that everything in that lengthy document was “facts”. In which case we don’t have any need to know except to verify personal opinions or speculation or just because we want to know. I am certainly one who “wanted” to know how in a few short months this went from no case to an arrest warrant but I can live with whatever the courts decide.

 

[Seattle1]

Section 24-4.1-303 - Procedures for ensuring rights of victims of crimes

(1) Law enforcement agencies, prosecutorial agencies, judicial agencies, and correctional agencies shall ensure that victims of crimes are afforded the rights described in section 24-4.1-302.5.

(2) Upon request of a victim, all correctional officials shall keep confidential the address, telephone number, place of employment, or other personal information of such victim or members of such victim's immediate family.

(3) The district attorney's office, if practicable, shall inform the victim of any pending motion that may substantially delay the prosecution. The district attorney shall inform the court of the victim's position on the motion, if any. If the victim has objected, the court shall state in writing or on the record prior to granting any delay that the objection was considered.
(3.5) The district attorney's office, if practicable, shall inform the victim of any pending motion or decision by the district attorney to sequester the victim from a critical stage in the case. The district attorney shall inform the court of the victim's position on the motion or the district attorney's decision, if any. If the victim has objected, then the court, before granting the sequestration order, shall state in writing or on the record that the victim's objection was considered and state the basis for the court's decision.

(4) After a crime has been charged, unless inconsistent with the requirements of investigative activities, the district attorney shall consult, where practicable, with the victim concerning the reduction of charges, negotiated pleas, diversion, dismissal, seeking of death penalty, or other disposition. Failure to comply with this subsection (4) shall not invalidate any decision, agreement, or disposition. This subsection (4) shall not be construed as a restriction on or delegation of the district attorney's authority under the constitution and laws of this state.

(5) All reasonable attempts shall be made to protect any victim or the victim's immediate family from harm, harassment, intimidation, or retaliation arising from cooperating in the reporting, investigation, and prosecution of a crime. Law enforcement officials and the district attorney shall provide reasonable efforts to minimize contact between the victim and the victim's immediate family and the defendant and the relatives of the defendant before, during, and immediately after a judicial proceeding. Whenever possible, a waiting area shall be provided that is separate in both proximity and sight from that of the defendant, the defendant's relatives, and any defense witnesses.

[..]
[..]
[..] see expanded link

Section 24-4.1-303 - Procedures for ensuring rights of victims of crimes, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-4.1-303 | Casetext Search + Citator

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Folks, it is some comfort while we are waiting on release of the AA and on the prelim in August, Barry is eating jail food and losing his tan & probably his muscle tone. Care package food is going to get old, too....Doritos....yum! (if it hasn't already!). Let us remember the light that was Suzanne and pray for justice.

I'm still not ready to concede that the new law focusing on victim rights trumps release of what is definitely public information. Just as the accused has rights in our system of government, so too the public has rights enshrined in our constitution since the founding of this nation. When a premeditated murder has been committed many "3rd parties" are affected. This crime has a specific victim but is also a criminal affront to us all. Just because media attention is uncomfortable and "gawkers" have their say, is not a reason to withhold facts from the public.

Upholding the principles of freedom of information we hold dear should be given as much weight as any other rights, IMHO. And in an odd or maybe ironic way, is becoming another 3rd party victim, at least in the short term.

#JusticeForSuzanne

And the public will get it I suppose if he is bound over for trial in August so no ones rights have been infringed in my opinion. Need to know is a valid concept at this point when someone has been charged but not bound over for trial in my opinion. We’ll see if media lawyers can come up with a new argument in the next couple weeks or if they save themselves some $$ and wait like the rest of us.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

That was interesting that someone reminded of the fact that things like bleach and cleaners were hard to get due to Covid.
I'm wondering if the thought was that Chlorine was the next best thing.

Over here, in Australia, quite often one of the reasons a murderer is caught is a receipt from Bunnings where they bought things like tarps, cleaning stuff, gloves, shovels etc. All the sort of things that could be used for carting away and burying a body.

Bunnings is a DIY, Garden and Hardware store and it's amazing how many times it features in cases of missing people here.

Suzanne Morphew’s husband left Denver hotel, contractor claims room was “reeking of chlorine” | FOX21 News Colorado

 

[fcavanaugh]

Believe me I wanted to read the AA as much as anyone else and was disappointed to learn the news yesterday. At first, I couldn’t help but feel that the Judge’s decision almost felt like a win for BM, and still struggle with the issue of the public’s right to know aspect. Having said that, there are times when I’ve had to learn to trust the process and this is shaping up to be one of those times and have to have faith that everything taking place, decisions, rulings etc., at the end of he day, are to ensure that BM gets a fair trial and that his victim, Suzanne Morphew, receives ultimate justice.

The Judge signed off on the arrest warrant. To do so, means he felt there was enough probable cause warranting BM’s arrest. This fact in itself tells me the Judge felt that there’s enough damning evidence against BM, and he is sitting right where he should and deserves to be- stewing in his “cage.”

After having more time to think about and digest the Judge’s decision and keeping in mind the 180 multi-state interviews LE conducted just in the first 4. months of the investigation, and likely many more interviews that were conducted the past 7 months, without trying to sound flippant, I think LE and DA might have decided to throw everything but the kitchen sink into the AA, and without knowing their reasoning, I can only assume they thought it would help bolster their case against BM. Maybe they thought it would help/go toward proving the premeditation aspect of his crime.

Once BM and his defense team got their hands on the AA, they saw all the damning evidence and witness testimony and some testimony from all the many multi state interviews conducted by LE task force, that go to BM’s
less than desirable character which they absolutely do not want out in the public domain for obvious reasons not least of which is worried about tainting jury pool before going to potential trial. So whatever they can argue to get ruled as inadmissible as heresay or whatever, they absolutely are going to try to do as is common defense strategy. So my thinking is there’ll likely be a hearing down the road to see what defense can get ruled as inadmissible.

With regard to protecting victims and witnesses, the Judjge is adhering to the victim rights act. This is a high profile case, wants to ensure BM gets a fair trial, and the Judge is being extra careful here to prevent victim/witness tampering from media including social media, general public etc., from harassing victims and witnesses etc.
BM knows what’s been said about him as he’s seen the AA and the discovery against him.
He’s behind bars right now where he belongs, but he could still have “people” on the outside that could potentially try to tamper with/harm some victims and witnesses, with or without his influence.

Suzanne is the ultimate victim here no question. The daughters are victims via collateral damage of their Father’s reprehensible actions and decision to take
their Mother from them.
Too bad BM didn’t think of anyone else but himself before he decided to do the unthinkable.

All of the above IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne

Quoting my own post as noticed a response/question from someone who responded to someone else who had responded to my post with regard to BBM above.
To clarify, I didn’t mean to imply Judge Murphy was “the Judge” who signed the arrest warrant, but I can see where my post was interpreted that way. So I will rephrase to say “a Judge” signed the warrant as too late to edit my post.
AFAIK, with the AA remaining sealed, there’s no way to tell/know which Judge actually signed off on the arrest warrant.
Murphy is the Chief District Judge in the 11th District, and according to their website, in addition to Murphy, there are three other Judges who preside over the 11th district.

Regardless of whichever Judge signed the warrant, It is good enough for me knowing aJudge felt there was enough probable cause to arrest BM and that he is sitting where he deserves to be-in a “cage”, until his preliminary hearing in August.

Colorado Judicial Branch - 11th Judicial District - Judges and Staff

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne