Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #62 *ARREST*

[Deleted member 222031]

I'm going to swim against the tide here. While somewhat "iffy", I think he may go with Assisted Suicide. Claim that SM's quality of life was poor, she asked him to help her go out on her own terms, they sent the kids away so they would not see the end, she told him to tell everyone she was missing so he would not have to explain helping with the suicide and he disposed of the remains and concocted the Bike/Mountain Lion/Abduction theories and staged the bike scene so he would not have to go to jail for helping. Plead down to manslaughter 18-3-04 1.b.

The daughters' reported "happy" behavior in 2020 & failure to speak out about their Mom's disappearance could mean that is what they were told & believe. SM's cancer returning would have been a major stresser on all of them. Living far away from family & longtime friends in Indiana would have been, too. No matter how much she loved Colorado, not having the people who know you best & longstanding church community around to help you rally when times were tough had to be unbearable sometimes. But I still think this was a cold-blooded murder with one perp who maybe took advantage of another of his wife's vulnerabilities to try and wash his sins away, while keeping all the $$$. Show us the AA! Reveal the truth.

 

[Trackergd]

Self preservation tends to override all else... Jus sayin....

 

[dixiegirl1035]

IMO, the only way BM could have saved himself with the "it was an accident" defense was if he had called the cops on May 9, had them deal with the body as it lay in the house, and confess right there and then that he had slapped her and she hit her head on the fireplace or something. (This would only work if the wound fit with the story, of course.)

BM strikes me as a (1) panicky type, (2) a person who seethed inside ("I wish she was dead!") after SM survived cancer again, and when he actually did hit/kill her in a rage, he surprised himself and panicked. However, to claim it was an accident after a whole year of him acting like a petulant, thoughtless narcissist -- eh, he'll never get away with that. He would have to tell them where the body is, at least. But it is frankly way too late to claim it was an accident. BM has shown himself to be impulsive, domineering, and narcissistic; really, the only thing he seems to excel at is hiding a body. He can hardly expect a jury to now believe that it was all an accident and he's so, so sorry.

Umm, ummm, "The only way"???

For those of us who were here at WS for Caylee Anthony... she did exactly that and got away with it MOO. And other cases MOO...

 

[Goldenseal]

Umm, ummm, "The only way"???

For those of us who were here at WS for Caylee Anthony... she did exactly that and got away with it MOO. And other cases MOO...

The Caylee Anthony case WAS unbelievable, that's for sure. I'll never understand that one. I suppose BM could get away with it too, but I certainly hope he doesn't.

 

[Melsworld]

I highly recommend watching the video CM did on his YouTube channel, The Interview room, about how BM was raised. It explains alot! I will edit with the link in just a moment. Hope it helps.

EDIT:

Thank you so much, I'll check it out!! August can't get here soon enough. The no new news is killing me.

 

[CGray123]

I’d love to know everyone’s thoughts on what the defense will be.

IMO Barry would like to try to convince the jury that Suzanne is still alive and living with her secret boyfriend somewhere. They’ll reference the random facebook friending that happened (IIRC) Saturday night to show that Suzanne was trying to contact men. The DA will likely introduce overwhelming evidence that Suzanne is deceased and the defense will pivot to the alternate theory that the secret boyfriend, or one of the other men she arranged to meet, murdered her when she backed out of the plan to run away together. They’ll attack all the evidence and have an expert or two testify that LE mishandled the crime scene(s), rendering all the evidence tainted. They’ll claim that LE targeted Barry and never looked at anyone else. And, to thoroughly confuse the jury, they’ll repeatedly point out that Barry had “ex-con meth addicts” working for him.

The jury will be disgusted by the “blame Suzanne” tactics and find him guilty.

JMO

I agree. Assuming that the judge finds probable cause in August, I think the defense will then argue aggressively for the exclusion of evidence. Once the judge decides what will be admitted and what will not, the team will assess the best way to defend. They may simply rely on the presumption of innocence, and argue that the People have not proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Good post, and good line of discussion!

I agree with those who have said that both the character defense ("I'm a good Christian guy who loves Suzanne and she loves me, and it's inconceivable that I would do this.") and the alibi defense ("I was in Broomfield working when the alleged murder allegedly occurred.") could blow up in BM's face if they are offered. In fact, any defense that depends on BM's testimony would be a two-edged sword IMO.

It seems unlikely that SM was involved in an extramarital affair with another dangerous man, but who knows? If the police failed to inquire about this possibility or to follow up leads, the defense will argue that the CCSO developed tunnel vision at the beginning and railroaded BM. Same, IMO, if they failed to inquire as to who was in the nearby RV park (Monarch Spur?) during the period leading up to SM's disappearance, to determine whether any danger was apparent from that direction. Same for BM's disgruntled former employee. Anything and everything will be argued to characterize the investigation as unfair, incomplete, or incompetent whether it results in the suppression or not.

All MOO.

 

[CGray123]

I wouldn't think the victim's blood being found and identified through DNA would be Direct Evidence because it doesn't prove anything other than that person is the victim. You can still make inferences as to what happened and who the killer is.

I've always thought of DE as either a video camera catching the perp in the act, a witness observing the actual crime, or an audio confession. No inferences can be made as to who the person is or what they did.

All other evidence is circumstantial, or indirect.

GPS evidence wouldn't be DE because it does not lead to solving the case on it's own. They would still need physical evidence to prove Suzanne is dead.

IMO

MOO, the same piece of evidence can be both direct and indirect, depending on what fact it is offered to prove and whether an inference must be drawn to prove that fact.

"Direct evidence is any evidence that directly proves or disproves a fact. The most well-known type of direct evidence is a testimony from an eyewitness. In eye-witness testimonies the witness states exactly what they experienced, saw, or heard. Direct evidence may also be found in the form of documents. In cases that involve a breach of contract, the contract itself would be considered direct evidence as it can directly prove or disprove that there was breach of contract.

Circumstantial evidence, however, is evidence that does not point directly to a fact and requires an inference in order to prove that fact.

A common example of the distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence involves a person who comes into a building, when it may be raining. If the person declares, "It's raining outside", that statement is direct evidence that it is raining. If the person is carrying a wet umbrella, and he is wearing a wet rain coat, those observations are circumstantial evidence that it is raining outside."

E. Heeter, Chance of Rain: Rethinking Circumstantial Evidence Jury Instructions.

 

[MsBetsy]

MOO, the same piece of evidence can be both direct and indirect, depending on what fact it is offered to prove and whether an inference must be drawn to prove that fact.

"Direct evidence is any evidence that directly proves or disproves a fact. The most well-known type of direct evidence is a testimony from an eyewitness. In eye-witness testimonies the witness states exactly what they experienced, saw, or heard. Direct evidence may also be found in the form of documents. In cases that involve a breach of contract, the contract itself would be considered direct evidence as it can directly prove or disprove that there was breach of contract.

Circumstantial evidence, however, is evidence that does not point directly to a fact and requires an inference in order to prove that fact.

A common example of the distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence involves a person who comes into a building, when it may be raining. If the person declares, "It's raining outside", that statement is direct evidence that it is raining. If the person is carrying a wet umbrella, and he is wearing a wet rain coat, those observations are circumstantial evidence that it is raining outside."

E. Heeter, Chance of Rain: Rethinking Circumstantial Evidence Jury Instructions.

Yes, but I think in a murder case direct evidence is what proves the "ultimate" fact, which is the murder and who is responsible. I still don't believe GPS data alone is DE in this case, or physical evidence that Suzanne is deceased, because there are many inferences to be made based on that evidence alone. For example, we can infer that someone else killed Suzanne.

So in this case, I think the only direct evidence would be if the murder was captured on video, or if BM confessed and there is an audio recording. The only other thing I can think of is ballistics testing, to prove that a bullet came from a weapon he used in the crime, but I think that would only be if the bullet was found in her body.

IMO

 

[CGray123]

I will try not to go too far down this road because things frequently run off the rails with this topic-Barry was raised a Baptist. Salvation is a very important core principle. Barry can even believe that if he murdered Suzanne, he can ask for forgiveness and maintain his relationship with God.

Well, to the faithful God is capable of forgiving all - even murder, but unless BM's a member of The Church of Polymorphous Perversity dba a "Christian" denomination, asking forgiveness is only the first step on a long road to redemption. There is a process of acknowledgement, atonement, and reconciliation with God. BM has not even taken that first step AFAIK.

I don't read much into his statement to LS about one person being saved. In context, I think he was trying to describe his wife as a such a godly person that she would willingly give her life to save anyone, the ultimate act of Christian love. He definitely fumbled the delivery, as heads have been scratched and eyes have been crossed from the moment he said it. You can almost hear LS herself thinking, "Huh?"

 

[Cassady]

Yes, but I think in a murder case direct evidence is what proves the "ultimate" fact, which is the murder and who is responsible. I still don't believe GPS data alone is DE in this case, or physical evidence that Suzanne is deceased, because there are many inferences to be made based on that evidence alone. For example, we can infer that someone else killed Suzanne.

So in this case, I think the only direct evidence would be if the murder was captured on video, or if BM confessed and there is an audio recording. The only other thing I can think of is ballistics testing, to prove that a bullet came from a weapon he used in the crime, but I think that would only be if the bullet was found in her body.

IMO

The cited article above and the actual jury instruction from Colorado cited earlier, details the concept pretty clearly, though there is often confusion over the two types of evidence. This is why juries are instructed that both types of evidence are ok to consider.

Direct evidence is not restricted to video, audio or witnessing the actual alleged offense. The rules of evidence apply to all cases. Most cases rely on various pieces of "evidence" to meet the burden required. Whether any evidence is admissible is up to the Court.

Whether the evidence is direct, indirect and what weight and inferences can be drawn from it are up to the fact finder(judge or jury).

 

[CGray123]

I think the question of eligibility for bail has to be resolved before a request can be considered. There is no right to bail for "capital offenses when proof is evident or presumption is great," and Judge Murphy is treating the First Degree Murder charge as a capital offense. He indicated that one purpose of the hearing set for August is to decide this issue. If he decides the case meets this constitutional standard it is an exception to the general right to bail, so he cannot even consider a request. I suppose he could find probable cause and yet find BM is bail eligible, but I find that idea mind-bogglingly incredible. MOO

 

[fcavanaugh]

Snipped from the below Colorado Law Office link and BBM:

How does a court determine bail amounts?
A judge has the authority to set the bail amount for the defendant. Judges may elect to set no bail at all, or deny someone bail altogether. In severe cases, judges deny bail because the defendant is accused of a very severe, or violent crime. The rationale is that the defendant may be a danger to the community if released, or may try to flee the country. Many courts in Colorado use the Colorado Pretrial Assessment Tool (CPAT). This helps to determine the likelihood of an individual returning for their court date and whether or not they might commit another crime while released. The following factors contribute to this decision:

• Having a home or a mobile phone
• Renting vs owning a residence
• Contributions to residential payments
• Current or past substance abuse
• Past or present mental health problems
• History of revoked supervision or bond
• Having other pending cases
• Past jail or prison sentences
• Age of first arrest
• Having active arrest warrants or pending cases
• Whether or not the accused is currently on supervision

After the courts determine a score for an individual, they are assigned a risk category. The scale is 1-4, 1 being the lowest risk and 4 being the highest.
https://www.weedenlaw.com/bail-amount-by-crime/
How much is bail for felonies?
Felonies are more severe than misdemeanors. Therefore, they come with higher bond amounts and higher punishments.
Murder bail amounts
In many murder cases, there is no bail set. In this case, the person will not be released before trial. Sometimes, however, if it is a second degree murder charge, bail might be around $250,000. If the person is being charged as an accessory to first degree murder, it’s possible the cost will be doubled. In the case of first degree murder, bail will often be set around the $1,000,000 mark.
These cases often have no bail set, i.e. the person will not be released pending trial. If the charge is a 2nd-degree murder charge, the bail is typically around $250,000. If the person is charged as an accessory to 1st-degree murder, then the cost doubles to $500,000. For 1st degree murder, if bail is set, it is not uncommon for it to be near the $1,000,000 mark.

Bail Amount by Crime

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne

 

[10ofRods]

I'm going to swim against the tide here. While somewhat "iffy", I think he may go with Assisted Suicide. Claim that SM's quality of life was poor, she asked him to help her go out on her own terms, they sent the kids away so they would not see the end, she told him to tell everyone she was missing so he would not have to explain helping with the suicide and he disposed of the remains and concocted the Bike/Mountain Lion/Abduction theories and staged the bike scene so he would not have to go to jail for helping. Plead down to manslaughter 18-3-04 1.b.

And yet, in early media reports, it was said that they were celebrating that she was cancer free. Also, she had taken her bike in (on Thursday) to see about repairs, so it sure seems like she felt like riding. She had updated her LinkedIn profile not long before she disappeared and seemed to be thinking about a new career path.

So she was cancer free (again), and about to start maintenance chemo (much less debilitating, it's often only once a month, has way fewer side effects).

If he does try this one, then he needs to spell out exactly how she died and where her body was placed. If it was left for animals to discover, I think it's likely some long bones or skull could be found if only the vicinity were known.

Odd that she was busy texting/FBing with friends, excited about the wedding on Sunday, and had accepted a role in the wedding...

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

And yet, in early media reports, it was said that they were celebrating that she was cancer free. Also, she had taken her bike in (on Thursday) to see about repairs, so it sure seems like she felt like riding. She had updated her LinkedIn profile not long before she disappeared and seemed to be thinking about a new career path.

So she was cancer free (again), and about to start maintenance chemo (much less debilitating, it's often only once a month, has way fewer side effects).

If he does try this one, then he needs to spell out exactly how she died and where her body was placed. If it was left for animals to discover, I think it's likely some long bones or skull could be found if only the vicinity were known.

Odd that she was busy texting/FBing with friends, excited about the wedding on Sunday, and had accepted a role in the wedding...

I agree. I think Suzanne was pretty healthy at the time she disappeared. In one of Barry’s interviews, he said that Suzanne rode her bike every day.

 

[Knox]

And yet, in early media reports, it was said that they were celebrating that she was cancer free. Also, she had taken her bike in (on Thursday) to see about repairs, so it sure seems like she felt like riding. She had updated her LinkedIn profile not long before she disappeared and seemed to be thinking about a new career path.

So she was cancer free (again), and about to start maintenance chemo (much less debilitating, it's often only once a month, has way fewer side effects).

If he does try this one, then he needs to spell out exactly how she died and where her body was placed. If it was left for animals to discover, I think it's likely some long bones or skull could be found if only the vicinity were known.

Odd that she was busy texting/FBing with friends, excited about the wedding on Sunday, and had accepted a role in the wedding...

Adding to all your points- Melinda intimated IMO, that Suzanne may have made the decision to leave Barry. Melinda did not outright say it, but that was my takeaway of the message Suzanne sent on the last day of her life (JMO). Clearly whatever Suzanne told her in that text message is going to be very damaging to Barry IMO, it will be a difficult piece of evidence to controvert.

 

[SouthAussie]

<RSBM>
If the police failed to inquire about this possibility or to follow up leads, the defense will argue that the CCSO developed tunnel vision at the beginning and railroaded BM. Same, IMO, if they failed to inquire as to who was in the nearby RV park (Monarch Spur?) during the period leading up to SM's disappearance, to determine whether any danger was apparent from that direction.

I recall reading that the police searched Monarch Spur RV Park. Presumably they also made inquiries about who was there during the relevant time period ... RSOs or such.
And whether or not the RV Park has CCTV, or if anyone there noticed anything unusual (or noticed BM or anyone else in the area).


Other searches have taken place in a reservoir, an area around County Road 225 and Highway 50, and the Monarch Spur RV Park, which is owned by Fred Porter and located near the Morphew home.
“It’s suspicious to me. I don’t know happened, nor does anyone else. Hopefully they will find her alive,” said Porter.
Finding Suzanne Morphew: Investigators Search Husband's Job Site Near Salida

 

[jakat]

If I were Barry, I would be very frightened of Melinda. She is composed, eloquent, and has damning evidence against Barry. She seems unshakeable. Nothing that she does seems to be out of anger-she believes in forgiveness and a higher power. I believe she will make a very compelling witness.

Yes, Melinda, and her bff in Indiana who she was texting with on Saturday, the very day she was murdered. I think the bff will be a star witness and her testimony will be damning.

JMO

 

[jakat]

I agree, but I hope they followed through on other leads as well. I know the defense is going to accuse the investigators of tunnel vision and only looking at poor BM, and not looking for sexual predators or hungry mountain lions.

Or Bob Cats.

 

[Boxer]

I agree, but I hope they followed through on other leads as well. I know the defense is going to accuse the investigators of tunnel vision and only looking at poor BM, and not looking for sexual predators or hungry mountain lions.

They looked for vehicles in and out of the area. Asked people to preserve their frontage footage 5/8-5/10.

 

[jakat]

I hope part of her legacy will be for family & friends to work harder to maintain ties with someone they fear increased isolation (of any kind) may endanger. Even if the outcome isn't as tragic as Suzanne's, living with DV of any kind is unacceptable. Let's all of us on this thread pledge to support victims of abuse in honor of a beautiful soul gone much too soon. MOO

How beautiful what you wrote.